Will Italy be the next country to leave the EU?

First topic message reminder :


Italexit campaign ‘No Europe - For Italy’ launches on Thursday with advice from Farage

ITALY will officially launch a campaign to unshackle itself from the EU on Thursday as the Mediterranean country looks to follow in Britain's Brexit footsteps






https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1312247/Italexit-latest-campaign-Gianluigi-Paragon-Italy-leave-EU-Nigel-Farage

Victorismyhero wrote:quill
1)we are talking here about the instability of the EU
2) whilst the pandemic may have a bearing, in as much as it provides a catalyst, it is otherwise irrelevant
3)whether we have a stake or not is irrelevent

So you say, Vic. Who made you god-in-charge of the fences around threads? Why is the thread about the 'instability of the EU', and not about the instability brought about by the pandemic, or the economic reasons for the EU in the first place? Who said? YOU? The arrogance of anyone saying ‘you’re forbidden to talk about that’, is manifest. Why not just say STFU, and make yourself clear?

Threads are supposed to be meandering, going hither and yon, depending on the creative thought of posters. That's what makes forum life interesting.

The 'stick-to-topic' rule was an ingenious trick devised by those who want to censor others. All posts go wander into other subjects, or the thread dies of boredom.

oh put a sock in it you pompous old niggard.

you may wander whither you will, but it changes not one iota the facts i outlined above

your supposition that amexit has in any way any relevance is false,, since it obtains from entirely different causes.
the EU has been unstable for years, inefficient, corrupt and ineffectual
the pandemic has not caused this situation, but has highlighted many of the strains due to such inefficiency and corruption, (not to mention many national interests that exist which are in fact incompatible with such an entity)
and finally your inference that since we no longer have a stake in the eu we should be disinterested is pure baloney.

meandering along in a thread is great, as long as the meanderings are relevant, and actually in the end contribute to the whole with reference to the OP...anything else is NOT "meandering" but deflection, which tactic is not good for the thread or debate in general, and is only used by the perpetrator to advance his/her own agenda or pet subject (amexit?)

YOU may not be particularly interested in europes internal self inflicted indigestion, but equally most here are not interested in your national identity crisis either.....
brexit is a fact....amexit exists only in the over excitable, hyper active imagination of such as yourself, people of little influence and power, low in relative numbers and well out numbered by economic interests that will crush any such attempt should it become anything but a fringe idea

which paragraph goes to show that I have as little interest in it as you have in europe and likely that the level of understanding of the situation is as miniscule both ways.

You're still criticizing the poster. Which raises my question again...who made you god?

There is no Amexit outside of Quills imagination. There has been talk of Californis splitting into multiple states.

I wasnt criticizing a poster until my last post above....
I was criticizing the grounds for your argument....there is a difference...

and...why are you trying to deflect the thread into being about me?

as for being god?? i realized that was in fact true when i was praying once....and realised i was talking to myself....

Maddog wrote:There is no Amexit outside of Quills imagination.  There has been talk of Californis splitting into multiple states.  

All of the institutions of the world started with imagination. Don't get cocky.

Victorismyhero wrote:I wasnt criticizing a poster until my last post above....
I was criticizing the grounds for your argument....there is a difference...

I think you were arguing in support of a fictitious form of censorship.  If you can impose a rule, and then invent the meaning of the rule, your role amounts to judge and jury, or authoritarian-in-chief.  That's what you do when you can invent the circumscription or meaning of a thread.

Face facts: you are dictating what people can say.

what you think, and what I was doing are obviously at great variance.

that would indicate incipient paranoia on your part....
perhaps you should learn to read whats printed, rather than what you imagine was printed.

As the principle in british law states, when referring to the meaning that should be attached to words

" The meaning of the word shall be the plain meaning in English" it also i believe refers to the use of the OED in cases of doubt.

Victorismyhero wrote:what you think, and what I was doing are obviously at great variance.

that would indicate incipient paranoia on your part....
perhaps you should learn to read whats printed, rather than what you imagine was printed.

As the principle in british law states, when referring to the meaning that should be attached to words

" The meaning of the word shall be the plain meaning in English"  it also i believe refers to the use of the OED in cases of doubt.

But why do you confine comments to "within the meaning" of titles? Are you trying to squelch creativity in posters' answers? Thinking outside the box is what has led to that computer on which you are communicating. What's the obsession with not drawing outside the lines?

Nobody is stopping you creating any thread you want about anything you like, and posting what you want to talk about there...

Tommy Monk wrote:


Nobody is stopping you creating any thread you want about anything you like, and posting what you want to talk about there...

Start a thread for him where he can talk about whatever he likes, to whomever want's to listen.

He can color outside of the lines and demonstrate his boundless creativity.

Good idea...