Maybe we should look to the Swiss model then?
As I said, it is just as facile a suggestion as insisting on PR as the "only true democracy".
Quite. I don't need to imagine, I can see the reality and it isn't pleasant.
What’s wrong with EU army ?
If this trade partnership turns into something that the population doesn't like, then we can have a referendum and leave. Perhaps some lessons can be learnt as to where that line is.
The other side of the coin being that the UK is the first country to be brave and clever enough to depart from a political and trade grouping which it did not like, did not believe was working to its overall advantage, and did not like the future path it was treading. Other opinions are also available.
So you admit brexit was about immigration and pretty much that was it .
There is no other side .
The UK didn't decide. A narrow majority of those who voted did. Which is a minority of the total eligible electorate. We can never know, of course, how those who didn't vote would have. That's just how elections work. But lets not pretend that that Brexit had a ringing endorsement from the population at large. There's been no vote since 2016 on the issue to tell us how people feel about it now and, whilst as I said previously they're extremely dubious, the general elections since have not managed to find a majority of the population in favour of Brexit supporting parties.
I don't disagree with anything that you have said.
When the EU army comes knocking on its own citizen's doors, then come and tell me that's still fine.
You seem to have been taught some strange things in your primary school, certainly in comparison to mine. I certainly wasn't taught that having a trade agreement with another country needed them to be physically next door, or in the same ocean. Isn't that what boats and aeroplanes are for bridging [taught in physics at secondary school?] . Nor was human rights track records taught in any of my geography lessons. Must have been asleep then.
An agreement that the UK threatens to tear up whenever its inherent contradictions (particularly on Northern Ireland) become obvious, or when our government wants to distract people from its own incompetence.
That is as maybe, but the EU membership agreement was not drawn up to make Exit an easy task, for quite understandable reasons. There is bound to be politicking, on both sides, for quite some time.
Which is another reason leaving was a bad idea.
That doesn't make leaving a bad idea, that just shows our government is incompetent. If leave had been handled by competent people, it would have ended up being better than it is now.
While I entirely agree with this in theory, remember that the referendum was effectively overridden by a party capitalising on the majority in a general election.
It is as likely to knock on my door as UK's Army .
So very likely then (I don't trust governments).
You won’t be safe anywhere in the world then .
The problems resulted from red lines set by the government. Arguably they were incompetent to do so. Arguably they were incompetent to want Brexit in the first place, since it's clearly a stupid idea by any rational analysis.
If the opposition parties had got their act together and had better leaders. 2019 was the epitome of choosing the party you disliked least, rather than any positive choice.
Until you realize the EU is basically the Tower of Babel.....
Brexit only makes sense if it is treated as a religion not a policy.
Not particularly. Just close cooperation on the wide range of issues which effect all European nations which is best facilitated by some level of supranational organisation. Doesn't need a full on United States of Europe. To be honest what the EU had settled on seemed roughly appropriate. Not without its flaws to be sure. But I never saw a need for it to go much further than it had nor to go much further backwards either. Thankfully when we were in the EU we always held a veto power over any closer integration. Now that we're out of course who knows how it will develop.