Relaxed Muscle
Member
I'm sure US will be friendly with UK, but just after first being friendly with EU.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union
- Thread starter Spring Drive
- Start date
- Status
I hope things end up fine.
Boy Wander
Member
It does actually. A remain vote was already pretty much priced in to the value of the pound.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
We'll certainly make deals with the UK. Though without the backing of the EU protecting your end, we're definitely not giving you as favorable a deal. You'll get our demands, see that they're much worse than they were, try to negotiate, we'll laugh and threaten to walk to the EU, you'll have to cave (since as a now-isolated nation, you clearly have very little leverage), and that's it.
A lot of people think we have some special relationship with the UK; like we're friends or something. I can assure that isn't true; to quote the Commodore from the Pirates franchise, "It's just good business."
There are some downsides, there is also the issue of Ireland changing their rules, its not a super easy decisions, some countries demand military service for being a citizen, others dont allow you to be in the Military of the other country or take office.
But that being said i am 90% sure I will apply because the benefits of being in the EU are very real.
On the other hand if they take the hardest line possible it just reinforces many of the fears within member states about a federal Europe run by distant political elites trying to control everyone. It makes them look like bullies instead of people who want the best solution for all. Punishment is the best solution for their 'project' as they like to call it. It's not best for people living and working in member states, it's not good for their own economies either.
The more mature response would be to form relevant free trade agreements, which would almost certainly involve free labour movement undermining many Leave votes anyway, and say should the UK ever wish to rejoin that it must adopt fully without special case vetos. Then leave that door open. That's the mature response to all of this, if you legitimately care about the future of Europe and the people who have to work for a living there.
It wasn't rhetoric?
Like, I know that your mental model relies on Obama being a liar here in order to intimidate UK voters, but as Obama has said multiple times, as President of the United States, he doesn't bluff. The UK is an important trade partner with the US but it's not more important than the rest of Europe. Why do you expect special treatment?
Obama wasn't saying 'back of the queue' as some sort of punishment. UK leaving EU just means UK has less bargaining power, less of a priority.. not punishment, just fact of life. He can't drop everything to work on trade deal with UK.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Nah, I just meant voting matters wise.
This is silly, the US relies massively on UK intelligence and infrastructure. Who do you think helped the US spy on Merkel?
RedSparrows
Member
Yes, 'independence' means that in the dictionary. But when a politician says 'this is our Independence Day', that means rather more than that dry description. It's a deliberate evocation of other Independence Days, which, generally speaking, are of far more significance vis the freedom gained, and the price paid, than this farce. Saying that there is no absolute repetition is... for what? We can compare, and I reject, utterly.
Boy Wander
Member
Is this your opinion or are you in politics? Also, you come off as arrogant. As if the UK should be punished for making a democratic decision. Makes you sound like a bit of a prick.
jellies_two
Member
I'm genuinely curious about this because in saying that it is a "realistic potential" is actually saying that it is not possible for a country of 65m to survive and grow in the world unless it is in some kind of legal monetary and political union with other countries of various kinds. When the UK joined the EU, Asia was undeveloped and transport links for exports worried about distance. So there was all this "huge market on our doorstep" stuff (and protectionism was common worldwide).
Now everyone in America buys everything from China (and isn't in an EU with China) and exports everything worldwide. Australia has to strike deals with every trade pact (and is much smaller than the UK) and the list goes on.
So it just is not clear to me why withdrawal means something other than an adjustment period (and yes even technical recessions are sometimes necessary) then decent growth again. It isn't clear why it means permanent recession and a fade to obscurity, unless the UK is a basket case like Greece that only survives from EU handouts and is propped up by EU infrastructure.
It does mean we'll have less power in any future TTIP negotiations (read up on why the TTIP is heinous), but the EU are in the process of adopting that anyway.
You'll have to explain to me where the idea that head of state saying something is always spun as some kind of move in a game or something.
I'm asking you because you've seen this multiple times and I hope you have an answer.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
That is exactly what the european far-right wants to happen, that UK gets the EEA treatment. It would validate their rethoric.
No, sorry, UK will have to take the L and abide to what they voted. And EU members and citizens will be fine with that, surely.
Fair enough, I don't want to get into conspiracy theories, but UK is the US's Five Eyes in Europe. It's just ridiculous to suggest that the "Special Relationship" will be significantly affected by this.
Boy Wander
Member
I don't expect special treatment. But I also think Obama was trying to influence a vote which was fuck all to do with him.
Led_Zeppelin
Member
Also without the death weight of the EU the UK could come out of the a recession faster than if it was inside the EU and had to worry about the rest of the members that are bringing the EU down.
The president of the US definitely has something at stake in the UK leaving the EU.
...you sound insane. UK is a major ally. Obama and the US obviously have an interest in what happens to the UK. UK leaving EU also effects EU, and the US clearly as an interest there, too.
If the UK leaves the EU, they won't be a party to TTIP, I believe, so they should definitely expect less negotiating power on that one. That was most of the point Obama was making. We're literally in the middle of a huge trade agreement with the EU. You don't get the benefit of that agreement if you leave!
I kind of blame Hollywood. People just have weirdly cinematic ideas of what politicians actually do. Witness the constant suggestion that Obama just needed to negotiate better with the Republicans to get all the stuff he wanted, as if we could convince the GOP to support a higher minimum wage by tricking them into getting into a lamp they couldn't get out of.
I think people find it boring to accept that most of international diplomacy is just like all other communication -- you have to be consistent, explicit, and direct all the time so that other people can build good mental models of you. The main difference is that there are a lot of nuclear weapons involved.
That said, I mean, I do think Obama's statement was intended to influence the vote -- he said "back of the queue," after all, and Cameron pretty clearly asked him to say something about it. But that doesn't make it a lie. The best way to get people to listen to you is to be right about things.
EatinOlives
Member
The President of the US is giving his opinion because the UK leaving the EU affects the global economy and yes, the US economy as included in that as well.
What are you talking about? You have no insight into how diplomacy works or what the current or future US government will act in any future trade negotiations. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Because Leave was a bad choice for US, EU and UK.
He wanted to avoid a lose-lose situation.
"Special relationship". I'm honestly surprised that Europeans are that naive. Why do you think the US was so upset that UK left the EU?
Sure it did; It was in the United States' best interests to have the UK remain in the EU.
Boy Wander
Member
TTIP is a shit-show. Its going to be about 5 years late and is intensely unpopular with many European worker unions. It could even be we're better off negotiating our own deal, even if that takes time.
I mean, it's just obviously false that this vote had nothing to do with other countries. You are right now talking about how countries are going to sort out trade deals post-Brexit. This plausibly has major implications for the future of the EU as an institution and certainly impacts the EU to some extent, which of course matters to US foreign policy. Also today stock markets around the world lost significant value, so, like, lots of Americans have already lost real money because of this vote. Obama's remarks were explicitly about how the vote would impact US-UK trade, and he was clear that he was trying to clear up what the US would do in the event of Brexit. This is obviously very important information for voters and he's obviously just about the most qualified person there is to speak on it.
The UK leaving the EU doesn't just affect the UK man.
InsaneZero
Member
Of course he was trying to influence the vote, the US doesn't benefit from an unstable Europe.
Of course, now that it happened despite his influence, why do you think that he'll prioritize the UK over the EU?
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Boy Wander
Member
It was a UK referendum for UK citizens. He was trying to influence the outcome. He should have butted the fuck out.
The UK will likely be punished because it made a decision that weakened its trading status. Arrogance and being a prick really have little to do with it.
Every country will seek to maximize the benefit it can derive when trading with other partners, as their first concern is their own self interest.
I get that but shouldn't the leak of the internal diplomatic documents of the US put a wrench into that magical thinking that everything happens like in a Hollywood movie?
I mean sure my elected officials (France) are incompetent morons who may fall for this kind of BS (believe me I know they do).
But shouldn't open minded curious individuals like the good people of Gaf know the reality of the matter after having so many proofs that the world just doesn't work that way?
Or am I way more optimist than I should be?
BlastProcessing
Member
Leave was putting words in his mouth and he was directly asked about it. And one look at the DOW should tell you that it actually has a good deal to do with us.
Alcoholics.
Boy Wander
Member
He was trying to scare people into voting to Remain. Which had the opposite effect.
Are you new to the concept of democracy?
Well, you know us Americans, always butting in.
Again, it was pretty obvious Cameron asked him to make a statement about the inaccurate claims made by the Leave side. But it's a little unclear to me why you're offended by that. They were the ones who went around saying America would happily make a special trade deal with the U.K. right away! If your politicians are making claims about the decisions Obama will make, doesn't it make sense for Obama to explain that their claims are wrong? Or would you rather just wait til afterwards to find out they were lying? Don't facts matter?
This is not a mature way to think about world politics.
Boy Wander
Member
There are French elections next year and the far right could conceivably do very well. Perhaps he should go over to France and tell the French what to do and see how that goes.
It still has an effect on the world. What are you not understanding. Look at the aftermath right now. Lmao. This decision is and was bigger than just the UK.
It's not at all clear that what he did was counterproductive. I'm not sure why you're asserting that. Regardless, obviously this was something Cameron was okay with and I'm not going to fault Obama for deferring to his judgment on a matter of UK politics.
But, yes, he was trying to explain to voters that there were costs to voting Leave that they were not taking into account. He was specifically concerned that UK voters had the wrong idea about what the country that he himself runs would do if Leave won. Why is this a bad thing?
- Status