It also means optimistic or positive, especially in a seemingly bad or difficult situation. Which is why I used the word sanguine, but not actually especially cognisant of the possibility of bad of difficult arising anyway. Sabre rattling never won any battles.
I think the language ability required is only B2 on the European scale for language assessment, which is hardly fluent. It is what pupils here need to get for the Bac, for instance.
I also don't spend any time thinking about it. it's been a long held philosophy of mine that 'if you can't influence it don't waste time on it'. "Que Sera Sera" and all that. My opinion ?.... I can't see it ever happening as there are too many vested interests & too many snouts in the trough. If the GB Gov. can fiddle the average French temperatures it'll be a doddle to fiddle this ;-)
I think the threat of leaving the EU is a bit of impractical populist nonsense, used as a rallying flag for all the cheesed-off by all sorts of political parties (Europe-wide) who don't have any other proper policies - I don't think it is likely to happen because of the massive amount of irritating side-effects such a move would have; but as I have had dual nationality all my life it isn't a problem that directly concerns me and it isn't something I spend time thinking about.
I think the big difference is Debra that SFN members are generally quite an intelligent lot and thus take a fairly sanguine approach.
And....people (generally) respect the dinner party code and thus you are unlikely to witness that type of 'heated' discussion here. We hope.... :)
The EU Law blog is at least showing the positives. The possible problems are hypothetical at present. As it is, following a referendum the UK would not be out next day but would have to withdraw with a complicated set of negotiations. That they would take the risk of having around two million people return, with a couple of hundred thousand with no capital and already cut off from benefits by having spent an entire working life in a European country, would suggest they would negotiated that carefully. Losing too many EU people would not be beneficial for the UK in many senses. The whole EFTA/EEA freedom of movement for employment principle undermined as well, which is what would actually be really the only way to achieve what ukip are saying, would be a disaster. My wife was part of Swiss in Wales, which is naturally partner to Swiss in England, Swiss in Scotland and (I think) Swiss in Ireland, where my point is that it is a large number of non-EU but EFTA citizens and their second referendum on migrant labour last week (that those grating to reduce lost) alone would see thousands of people not included in the EU number out too.
So, I think there is so much calling bluff involved. Would Farage really like to see his German wife only able to work with a permit? It would be such an almighty mess that would, despite the claims otherwise, industry, commerce and banking leaving the UK. Two US banks alone have said they would take European HQs from the City to probably Frankfurt, a third is threatening to seriously consider it and a number of others are advising the UK to stay in. Does any politician seriously wish to take that risk?
I am far more sanguine about it. I do not think people should be built up to a state of panic by the likes of the Loire site, yes that is scaremongering, without clear political agendas and a referendum that clearly says UK out with at least polls before such an event giving reason for concern. What will really happen in 2017? It is pretty well even odds on nothing at present. However, despite vocal threats from parties with sabres to rattle, opinion polls have suggested around 60% would not vote to leave simply because they fear changes could be far too negative for the UK to survive.