EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 210
| Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11546 Posts
On July 14 2016 05:56 Lord Tolkien wrote: You mean the guy who called Obama a "part-Kenyan President" who harbors an "ancestral dislike of the British Empire", and Clinton a "sadistic nurse"? Wait, are those actually things that guy said? Nvm, i googled it. The fuck. How does someone like that become a foreign minister? Isn't the main qualification of being a foreign minister to be good at diplomacy? Pissing of everyone you deal with for no reason whatsoever does not seem like a good idea. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18831 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States42884 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:06 farvacola wrote: That's correct, there are numerous examples of public behavior on the part of BJ that directly and negatively implicate his foreign policy qualifications. Nevertheless, they don't seem to have swayed some. There aren't so many public figures in the Conservative party with exceptional qualifications, especially when the mandate for leadership is as weak as May's. She could hardly have brought in a cabinet of new blood. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18831 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:08 KwarK wrote: There aren't so many public figures in the Conservative party with exceptional qualifications, especially when the mandate for leadership is as weak as May's. She could hardly have brought in a cabinet of new blood. I realize that you've been discussing this tangentially for a while now, but why is it exactly that the Conservative party is so lacking in capable leadership? Is it a related to the party's politics, a generational thing, an odd see effect of the Brexit, or what? This chair game that y'all play from time to time can seem like a whirlwind of difficult to parse political maneuvering to an American more used to the sometimes annoyingly regimented and for the most part very predictable US party structure. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6231 Posts
If he wasn't given an important post, he could stand outside the inevitable fubar, claim Brexit was a good idea but such-and-such aspect was done poorly, and then make a move. If he's foreign minister, he's utterly complicit in whatever goes down, so he's prevented from distancing himself to his advantage. Of course, a side consequence of him being foreign minister is that a fubar becomes even more inevitable. I'll also concede that he might not be much of a threat in the first place. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
Britain and its allies should accept that Bashar al-Assad’s forces are best placed to lead a ground assault against Islamic State in Syria because David Cameron’s claims about 70,000 moderate opposition forces are “exaggerated,” Boris Johnson has said. In remarks that may be seized on by Labour opponents of the airstrikes in Syria, Johnson says that “Assad and his army” may be the allies’ best chance of removing Isis because the 70,000 figure includes groups that are ideologically little different from al-Qaida. more of the same http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/03/27/bravo-for-assad--he-is-a-vile-tyrant-but-he-has-saved-palmyra-fr/ will he backtrack?. Edit: it looks like a war based on if you're not with me you're against me could start, shifting geopolitical metas. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
On July 14 2016 05:26 bardtown wrote: Breaking news: the Bulgarian guy who's been flaming everyone who supported Brexit doesn't like Boris Johnson! I think that judging that Johnson is a disastrous choice for foreign minister doesn't require to be a flaming anti-Brexit bulgarian. Have you seen the reaction from foreign diplomats and officials? They were oscillating between laughter and disbelief. The state department spokesman actually almost burst out laughing when he learnt the news on camera, and issued a statement basically implying they couldn't have made a worse choice ("what matters is not who they chose and personalities, we will always be allies" - that's basically the diplomatic equivalent of "are you fucking kidding me what is this idiot doing there") : http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/14/maybe-the-brits-are-just-having-us-on-the-world-reacts-to-boris-johnson-as-foreign-minister That people can like Johnson, ok, why not. He has charisma, and a lot of qualities I guess. But to consider he is a good choice as country top diplomat is completely beyond me. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
Considering UK will be doing some of the harshest and most important negotiations of its recent history with other European nations, and will be negotiating with a gigantic disadvantage, things are looking even gloomier now than they did before BJ's appointment. I am sincerely completely puzzled by May's choice. Nominating a goat wouldn't have been worse. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On July 14 2016 22:05 Biff The Understudy wrote: I think that judging that Johnson is a disastrous choice for foreign minister doesn't require to be a flaming anti-Brexit bulgarian. Have you seen the reaction from foreign diplomats and officials? They were oscillating between laughter and disbelief. The state department spokesman actually almost burst out laughing when he learnt the news on camera, and issued a statement basically implying they couldn't have made a worse choice ("what matters is not who they chose and personalities, we will always be allies" - that's basically the diplomatic equivalent of "are you fucking kidding me what is this idiot doing there") : http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/14/maybe-the-brits-are-just-having-us-on-the-world-reacts-to-boris-johnson-as-foreign-minister That people can like Johnson, ok, why not. He has charisma, and a lot of qualities I guess. But to consider he is a good choice as country top diplomat is completely beyond me. Bear in mind that the Guardian is the leftist equivalent of the Daily Mail. The guy smiled when he heard that Boris had been appointed. Who wouldn't? Have you seen Boris? The rest is your interpretation. I personally don't see it, and filling an article with random tweets is BuzzFeed tier journalism. Boris has always been a bit controversial and polarising. I'm sure there will be gaffes, but he may yet surprise you positively, too. The Foreign Office is a complicated machine, and there's potential for a healthy dynamic with Boris primarily as a friendly figurehead which, again, is what I think we need for developing closer international ties. Popular perception is of underrated importance in IR. As for his Obama remarks, it's worth bearing in mind that Obama's interactions with the UK have been a series of slights and that there is a general feeling that there's no love lost, there. You also seem to be missing the fact that there are two new departments for dealing with Brexit. Boris will almost certainly be focused on the US/Asia/commonwealth. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10751 Posts
Seriously, this choice is either so brilliant that absolutely no one from the outside can see it or its mindblowingly stupid. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
On July 14 2016 22:40 bardtown wrote: Bear in mind that the Guardian is the leftist equivalent of the Daily Mail. The guy smiled when he heard that Boris had been appointed. Who wouldn't? Have you seen Boris? The rest is your interpretation. I personally don't see it, and filling an article with random tweets is BuzzFeed tier journalism. Boris has always been a bit controversial and polarising. I'm sure there will be gaffes, but he may yet surprise you positively, too. The Foreign Office is a complicated machine, and there's potential for a healthy dynamic with Boris primarily as a friendly figurehead which, again, is what I think we need for developing closer international ties. Popular perception is of underrated importance in IR. As for his Obama remarks, it's worth bearing in mind that Obama's interactions with the UK have been a series of slights and that there is a general feeling that there's no love lost, there. You also seem to be missing the fact that there are two new departments for dealing with Brexit. Boris will almost certainly be focused on the US/Asia/commonwealth. It has nothing to do with the Guardian, all the newspapers, going from Le Temps to Le Monde to the NYT or BBC news talk about how negatively foreign officials and diplomats had reacted to the announcement. And Boris is not "a bit controversial and polarizing". He is the one most controversial and polarizing character in the conservative party and especially abroad. If you think that Merkel refusing to react at all and Ayrault calling him a liar is a good sign for his start as Britain's top diplomat, you are wrong. Also, European relations are not only about Brexit, and obviously, Johnson will be dealing with those people who despise and reject him on a daily basis, representing the UK. I was not expecting May to be a good PM, but that's one clusterfuck of a start. What the hell is she even thinking. Start by making a huge finger to countries that hold you by the balls and with whom you'll have to enter in terribly hard negotiations. | ||
|
Banaora
Germany234 Posts
So if they succeed all is fine and if they don't succeed to get a good deal May can get rid of them all together. So it could be a clever coup by May. Now BoJo and Davies have to deliver. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
On July 14 2016 23:09 Banaora wrote: I've read that May put people from her party that were supporting Brexit in positions so they could do the negotiations. If they can't succeed to get a good deal who will, was the question. So if they succeed all is fine and if they don't succeed to get a good deal May can get rid of them all together. So it could be a clever coup by May. Now BoJo and Davies have to deliver. If in such grave time, May put people at key position not because they will be the best at their job, but because she calculate that she might get rid of a rival once they have failed in a few year, she is not only a crap PM but basically a traitor. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On July 14 2016 22:57 Biff The Understudy wrote: I was not expecting May to be a good PM, but that's one clusterfuck of a start. What the hell is she even thinking. Start by making a huge finger to countries that hold you by the balls and with whom you'll have to enter in terribly hard negotiations. I can only hope you will be so emphatic in apologising if you are proved wrong. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
On July 14 2016 23:25 bardtown wrote: I can only hope you will be so emphatic in apologising if you are proved wrong. Sure. I'll write a letter to nr10 Downing Street to apologize for being totally wrong on a Starcraft forum about that decision if Johnson ends up being a great, successful and respected minister of foreign affairs. I'm not risking much. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
it's teh Great Britain we're talking about here. putting pro-bexiters in charge could simulate a commitment towards a certain direction... | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On July 14 2016 23:29 Biff The Understudy wrote: Sure. I'll write a letter to nr10 Downing Street to apologize for being totally wrong on a Starcraft forum about that decision if Johnson ends up being a great, successful and respected minister of foreign affairs. I'm not risking much. Exactly my point. You're overflowing with confidence because you'll never be held to account. Calm down, be dignified and measured. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
On July 14 2016 23:33 xM(Z wrote: i'm fairly confident that UK will try and get some leverage, on an international/geopolitical scale; no way they'll go into negotiations like scrubs, crying and begging for scraps from EU(or sit in line for US agreements lol). it's teh Great Britain we're talking about here. Problem is that without a successful deal with the EU, the UK is fucked. It's not about crying and begging it's about finding a deal that prevents an enormous blow to the british economy, because the country does a huge majority of its trade with continental Europe. | ||
| ||
