brommy

Cameron knows that it's only by luck of timing that he or another Conservative PM didn't make exactly the same decisions.

It's a process that will take years with a result that will last decades so I'm patient enough to wait for one. After all, the plan to enter the EU took a while to formulate.

The job of leaving the EU!

One should realise that the UK government's decisions wouldn't have been any different under either of the two major parties. Whatever the report had concluded there would be those who see it as nothing more than a 'lessons learnt' summary and those who would see it as a reason for political upheaval.

I don't think it's unexpected to any of the leave voters I have spoken to. None of them were thinking the job could be completed without financial market issues and without short and possibly medium term economic downturn. I'm not surprised the pound is down at the moment. I am surprised the stock markets aren't a lot lower at the moment.

I think we need to expect a rocky economic road for the next few years. I've as much clue as an economic advisor in 2006 who couldn't see a World crash less than 18 months away (no wonder they were doubted this time!), whether we'll be better or worse off economically in the long term but I'm optimistic we can get through this.

I'll guess what happened in less than 2.6 million words. Military intelligence (I once had a badge that said it was a 'contradiction in terms') had unconfirmed information that Iraq was capable of producing WMD. A few months and dozens of high level management meetings later, this went though the 'yes but what if...' process. If they could have WMD they probably do have WMD. All set to a back drop of atrocities being committed by the Iraq government on it's own people, evidence of which made it easier to 'sell' military intervention. Unfortunately, the U.S. and many of the governments of Europe were too quick to believe the military intelligence and were listening too hard to the advice being given that action would be reasonably swift, save lives in the long term and free millions from tyranny, whilst the financial cost could be partially offset by oil control gains. In summary, don't just consider advice from those whose who are set to gain (military budgets and power) from their advice being followed. Weigh up the gain of saving hundreds of thousands from tyranny and torture against the possibility of several million spending a generation or more attempting to cope with a vacuous society - freedom for some, hell for others. I hope the benefits of hindsight are heeded for generations to come.

Guidelines? I thought being a bloke meant never reading instructions. Probably why my IKEA wardrobe looks like a spice rack. I'll take the current lack of corrective action as a sign I've not transgressed on this occasion.

Etiquette has never been my strong point and I'm never quite sure whether rules 'are rules' or 'are there to be broken'!

My post from the 'ISIS' thread that might be better suited here. Originally asked in a slightly mischievous manner, I will be interested in any serious responses, presumably from those who have a faith. What makes one old book of prophecy better than another? Is the Old Testament best because it is older and more 'original' than subsequent teachings? Is the New Testament better because it is updated and corrects the bugs of the Old Testament? Or is the Quran more modern and therefore better? So is Judaism, Christianity or Islam the best? Then which sect to follow? Or should one turn to a newer, perhaps cooler religion? Then again, my big belly might suit Buddhism. Someone new to religion could easily be confused.

I'd still be interested in any serious answers to my earlier 'what makes one old book of prophecy better than another?' post. It might have already been asked in the religion thread but I feel it's time to debate it again so I'll copy it over to there. Apologies in advance if that's not the done thing on VT.

I really hope RDM and staff are the ones to finally remove Traore's constant 'raw' tag line.

We won't need to be worried about being too limited.

According to the poll that has a few percent error margin so I suppose it could be as many as 1 in 7 or as few as 1 in 100. I think this has already been highlighted though.

That still doesn't explain the criticism Corbyn has faced because of the referendum result. Labour voters backed their party's stance as much as SNP voters.

I think she's plotting to oust you.

Corbyn was asked to put a number out of 10 on what he thought of the EU. His score 7 to 7.5 reflected that he was in favour of being in the EU but it wasn't perfect and needed some reform. Pretty much what most of the Conservative party campaigned to Remain on.

Looking at those statistics, if Corbyn is under pressure to resign due to the 'performance' of Labour voters in the referendum, why isn't Sturgeon under pressure to resign after more than 1 in 3 SNP voters went against her?

No worries, I'm happy to take advice from anyone.

The old 'My form of religion is better than yours'. On a slightly not unrelated matter, what makes one old book of prophecy better than another? Is the Old Testament best because it is older and more 'original' than subsequent teachings? Is the New Testament better because it is updated and corrects the bugs of the Old Testament? Or is the Quran more modern and therefore better? So is Judaism, Christianity or Islam the best? Then which sect to follow? Or should one turn to a newer, perhaps cooler religion? Then again, my big belly might suit Buddhism. Someone new to religion could easily be confused.

But wouldn't it be like Catholics bombing the Vatican at Easter?

I think Daesh don't give a hoot whether it's Ramadan or not. EDIT: alternatively, most people get moody when they are hungry.

The government were stupid enough not to plan for something that could and did happen so it doesn't surprise me that we need to spend some time gathering a suitable team. I'm aware that Article 50 keeps us in the EU for up to 2 years from when it has been submitted but, other than 'being urged', is there an actual time limit for submitting Article 50? What's to stop us spending a year or so gathering our team together before submitting and therefore gaining the full 2 years to negotiate a good deal for us?

Most posts are constructed from what people believe is happening or should happen. If it were up to me, I would make all education religion-free from now so there would be no hypocrisy from me.

Indeed. It is time governments across the world stopped pandering to the immediate demands of 'big business' and started thinking of the long term benefits of education in the hope of a more stable world.