-
@rembrandt said in Brexit:
@crucial It is very much in the US interest to help Britain here and I'm sure on a personal level Trump would really love to get one over German Hillary.
And Britain are experts at negotiating deals.....
Good luck to British farmers looking for access to the US.
-
So you go to another referendum and the people vote leave again? What do you do then? Continue the grand tradition of the EU and just ignore the vote or continue until they get the result they want?
Other than the pathetic screams of certain remoaners the biggest idiots here are the Tories. They went to an election promising a vote (albeit cynically to kneecap UKIP) and should have had a plan in place in the event of a yes vote. At the very least they could have handed the process over to Brexiteers rather than have the process controlled by a staunch remainder. Let the Brexiteers put up or shut up.
-
@rembrandt said in Brexit:
@crucial It is very much in the US interest to help Britain here and I'm sure on a personal level Trump would really love to get one over German Hillary.
And Britain are experts at negotiating deals.....
Good luck to British farmers looking for access to the US.
This is one of the more absurd arguments - that there is no one in Britain who is able to negotiate deals. No apparently, the entire nation is fucked without some Spanish guy who is the only person in the world who can make it all happen. What a complete load of crap. There may be compelling reasons for remaining with the EU but that is definitely not one of them.
-
Seriously, for those advocating no deal, what’s your plan for Northern Ireland?
Soft Border with the extra protections described in the link. Make it public that is Britains intention, if the EU kick up a stink then it is totally on them. They are the ones in real trouble here, do they really want to piss off another member?
-
@rembrandt said in Brexit:
Seriously, for those advocating no deal, what’s your plan for Northern Ireland?
Soft Border with the extra protections described in the link. Make it public that is Britains intention, if the EU kick up a stink then it is totally on them. They are the ones in real trouble here, do they really want to piss off another member?
I’m sorry but that is one of the most facile things I have read on the issue. Reducing the Irish problem to “trade arrangements” is either disingenuous or deluded. The problem isn’t moving goods and services, it is, and always has been, the expectations of the populations of two separate nations occupying one island.
Some (the republicans) demand free movement throughout the island. They have proven over the course of decades that they will resort to murder and terrorism to bring that about and they only stopped because of the Good Friday Agreement. And that was only possible because mutual membership of the EU made the border effectively redundant.
But you have others (the loyalists) who are rabidly pro unionist. They will not stand for a border of any description between Ulster and the mainland and their parliamentary representatives, the DUP have already expressed that. There’s no border between Wales and England, so why do Northern Irish get second class citizenship status, being made to feel like non-UK citizens? And loyalists have been just as violent as the republicans in the past.
Note how, though, the UKIP mouthpieces you linked to avoid mentioning that altogether, yet without it how the fuck will the UK ever be able to stem migration - which let’s face it a majority of Brexit voters wanted ahead of everything else -when anybody who sets foot in Ireland can walk across the soft border to NI then make their way to the mainland at their leisure without further checks?
This though: “Although there is no explicit obstacle to a hard border in the Good Friday Agreement, it could be seen, and is certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit, as being contrary to the ‘Spirit of Concord’ and the undertaking to remove security installations, though the latter refers specifically to military installations and not civil ones.
A hard border, then, is not prohibited by the peace agreement, though it is undesirable and, more to the point, completely unnecessary.“ ... This takes the cake. No it’s not prohibited. The UK can impose it whenever it wants. But it comes with bombs, carnage and murder, same as it did for 80 years. But hey, someone has to be prepared to take one for Team UK, it’s for the greater good and fuck ‘me, they’re only Irish eh?“certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit”. No, it’s being presented as a barrier by angry madmen with guns who will murder or maim your children in a heartbeat. UKIP can reduce it to ideology if they want. But the suggestion that this can be overcome through goodwill is laughable. These people have never shown goodwill in their lives.
Utter, utter bollocks.
-
@rembrandt said in Brexit:
No deal all the way for me (from the safety of Australia with my UK pension transferred to NZ and my UK bank accounts emptied). Bring on the chaos!
Things will work out, it will hurt for a while and will take time and it means the UK is going to actually have to treat papa Trump with due respect. The alternative in my mind is a much scarier prospect, the end of democracy in Britain.
End of democracy? What bollocks.
As for the “hurt for a while” situation, yep it will certainly be a while and how does bowing to papa Trump provide the sovereignty the people wanted? He’s hardly Mr free trade and will have all the negotiating power over a desperate GB.
I’m not that averse to Brexit if that is what people want, just think it is really stupid to go about it in the way it has happened and the way some dreamers seem to think will be fine.
What on earth was wrong with telling Europe that when we are ready we will trigger article 50 instead of setting a timetable that put all the power with them?Trump actually is a massively in favour of free trade. You have proof otherwise? Because all the trade fights he has kicked off are because free trade is not being allowed.
I think the UK has been weak, they should have made it clear to the EU that if they dont negotiate n good faith, it will hurt both sides. May was pathetic, and the EU are fluffybunnies. It is going to end badly no matter what now.
-
I’m sorry but that is one of the most facile things I have read on the issue. Reducing the Irish problem to “trade arrangements” is either disingenuous or deluded. The problem isn’t moving goods and services, it is, and always has been, the expectations of the populations of two separate nations occupying one island.
Some (the republicans) demand free movement throughout the island. They have proven over the course of decades that they will resort to murder and terrorism to bring that about and they only stopped because of the Good Friday Agreement. And that was only possible because mutual membership of the EU made the border effectively redundant.
But you have others (the loyalists) who are rabidly pro unionist. They will not stand for a border of any description between Ulster and the mainland and their parliamentary representatives, the DUP have already expressed that. There’s no border between Wales and England, so why do Northern Irish get second class citizenship status, being made to feel like non-UK citizens? And loyalists have been just as violent as the republicans in the past.
Note how, though, the UKIP mouthpieces you linked to avoid mentioning that altogether, yet without it how the fuck will the UK ever be able to stem migration - which let’s face it a majority of Brexit voters wanted ahead of everything else -when anybody who sets foot in Ireland can walk across the soft border to NI then make their way to the mainland at their leisure without further checks?
This though: “Although there is no explicit obstacle to a hard border in the Good Friday Agreement, it could be seen, and is certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit, as being contrary to the ‘Spirit of Concord’ and the undertaking to remove security installations, though the latter refers specifically to military installations and not civil ones.
A hard border, then, is not prohibited by the peace agreement, though it is undesirable and, more to the point, completely unnecessary.“ ... This takes the cake. No it’s not prohibited. The UK can impose it whenever it wants. But it comes with bombs, carnage and murder, same as it did for 80 years. But hey, someone has to be prepared to take one for Team UK, it’s for the greater good and fuck ‘me, they’re only Irish eh?“certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit”. No, it’s being presented as a barrier by angry madmen with guns who will murder or maim your children in a heartbeat. UKIP can reduce it to ideology if they want. But the suggestion that this can be overcome through goodwill is laughable. These people have never shown goodwill in their lives.
Utter, utter bollocks.
That is such a good post. Dispelling one of the many, far too many, myths floating around about this split.
I would say this though on the border and people crossing issue. It's not too big a deal really, as currently UK/Ireland still do border controls for each other. And it's already been agreed that UK/EU will still be visa free access, so stopping people coming in on that front won't change. If Merkel gives 2 mm refugees passports then they will still be able to walk through borders into the UK no problems. They just won't be able to work, setup shop, claim benefits etc.
Now, the tricky part is obviously where the immigration rules are different for the UK/EU. But given that each country has always allowed it's own rules for those outside the EU, there is little change here.
Hence, I don't think the entry is that much of a deal.
-
May should survive tonight's challenge (just) with it clear that she only survives on the basis of it adding more crazy to the situation if she goes.
Corbyn spouting off as usual as all he wants is a collapsed govt so he can have an election. What is crazy is that no one seems to want to/be able to get him to say how he expects to improve the situation or deal. He is happy to snipe away saying that May has failed to deliver but what is he going to do different and what makes him think that Europe would give him a better deal? Labour would have to go no deal and hopefully he would be forced to admit as much.
-
@majorrage said in Brexit:
@crucial Labour would withdraw article 50 without a doubt.
Sure. Then flounder around for ages trying to work out their next move. If they were to have that as part of their manifesto how many votes would they lose?
As much as a balls up this has been, I have to give May some credit for at least trying to make a silk purse from a pig's scrotum. It has been the process and vagueness around what 'out' really means that has been the killer. Imaging voting for something that wasn't defined but would have a major impact? -
@majorrage said in Brexit:
@crucial Labour would withdraw article 50 without a doubt.
Sure. Then flounder around for ages trying to work out their next move. If they were to have that as part of their manifesto how many votes would they lose?
As much as a balls up this has been, I have to give May some credit for at least trying to make a silk purse from a pig's scrotum. It has been the process and vagueness around what 'out' really means that has been the killer. Imaging voting for something that wasn't defined but would have a major impact?Yes. Imagine that. A ridiculous thought.
-
@majorrage said in Brexit:
Too late to talk about the way it should have been handled.
Obviously you can't change the past - but the current situation shouldn't be divorced from how we got here. Once the ballot was taken and results known there have been obstructionists, people acting in bad faith and parties completely willing to intentionally sabotage the negotiations in order to get a revote.
To sit back and say "look at the mess we are currently in, let's take the easy way out" actively rewards the forces that actively sandbagged and worked against the will of the nation.
-
@catogrande said in Brexit:
@majorrage said in Brexit:
@crucial Labour would withdraw article 50 without a doubt.
Sure. Then flounder around for ages trying to work out their next move. If they were to have that as part of their manifesto how many votes would they lose?
As much as a balls up this has been, I have to give May some credit for at least trying to make a silk purse from a pig's scrotum. It has been the process and vagueness around what 'out' really means that has been the killer. Imaging voting for something that wasn't defined but would have a major impact?Yes. Imagine that. A ridiculous thought.
As the Australian republic vote and NZ flag vote show this is the most effective strategy to dilute overall majority support for an idea by forcing it to coalesce behind a single form of brexit/flag/republic.
-
@majorrage said in Brexit:
Too late to talk about the way it should have been handled.
Obviously you can't change the past - but the current situation shouldn't be divorced from how we got here. Once the ballot was taken and results known there have been obstructionists, people acting in bad faith and parties completely willing to intentionally sabotage the negotiations in order to get a revote.
To sit back and say "look at the mess we are currently in, let's take the easy way out" actively rewards the forces that actively sandbagged and worked against the will of the nation.
Can you name these obstructionists etc? Who has intentionally sabotaged negotiations?
-
@majorrage said in Brexit:
I’m sorry but that is one of the most facile things I have read on the issue. Reducing the Irish problem to “trade arrangements” is either disingenuous or deluded. The problem isn’t moving goods and services, it is, and always has been, the expectations of the populations of two separate nations occupying one island.
Some (the republicans) demand free movement throughout the island. They have proven over the course of decades that they will resort to murder and terrorism to bring that about and they only stopped because of the Good Friday Agreement. And that was only possible because mutual membership of the EU made the border effectively redundant.
But you have others (the loyalists) who are rabidly pro unionist. They will not stand for a border of any description between Ulster and the mainland and their parliamentary representatives, the DUP have already expressed that. There’s no border between Wales and England, so why do Northern Irish get second class citizenship status, being made to feel like non-UK citizens? And loyalists have been just as violent as the republicans in the past.
Note how, though, the UKIP mouthpieces you linked to avoid mentioning that altogether, yet without it how the fuck will the UK ever be able to stem migration - which let’s face it a majority of Brexit voters wanted ahead of everything else -when anybody who sets foot in Ireland can walk across the soft border to NI then make their way to the mainland at their leisure without further checks?
This though: “Although there is no explicit obstacle to a hard border in the Good Friday Agreement, it could be seen, and is certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit, as being contrary to the ‘Spirit of Concord’ and the undertaking to remove security installations, though the latter refers specifically to military installations and not civil ones.
A hard border, then, is not prohibited by the peace agreement, though it is undesirable and, more to the point, completely unnecessary.“ ... This takes the cake. No it’s not prohibited. The UK can impose it whenever it wants. But it comes with bombs, carnage and murder, same as it did for 80 years. But hey, someone has to be prepared to take one for Team UK, it’s for the greater good and fuck ‘me, they’re only Irish eh?“certainly being presented as a barrier by those ideologically opposed to Brexit”. No, it’s being presented as a barrier by angry madmen with guns who will murder or maim your children in a heartbeat. UKIP can reduce it to ideology if they want. But the suggestion that this can be overcome through goodwill is laughable. These people have never shown goodwill in their lives.
Utter, utter bollocks.
That is such a good post. Dispelling one of the many, far too many, myths floating around about this split.
I would say this though on the border and people crossing issue. It's not too big a deal really, as currently UK/Ireland still do border controls for each other. And it's already been agreed that UK/EU will still be visa free access, so stopping people coming in on that front won't change. If Merkel gives 2 mm refugees passports then they will still be able to walk through borders into the UK no problems. They just won't be able to work, setup shop, claim benefits etc.
Now, the tricky part is obviously where the immigration rules are different for the UK/EU. But given that each country has always allowed it's own rules for those outside the EU, there is little change here.
Hence, I don't think the entry is that much of a deal.
That’s only partially true. The border only effectively exists if you fly in, but that’s just airport security really. There are nearly 300 roads (which are the routes that matter most to people on the island) that enter NI from Eire and none of them have border checks. I drove there a bit in the early 90s and was stopped by the army for a random ID check but there haven’t been any border posts or checks since the GFA. It is in practice an open border.
I’m not sure what your point is re the immigration rules. At present there are, as you say, different rules for those outside the EU. But with a hard Brexit there will effectively be no rules in place for movement of EU citizens to the UK, because that’s all part of the May agreement.
In any case, if nothing changes I suspect almost all Brexit voters will deem any implementation a failure as stemming migration was a central theme in the Leave campaign.
-
May should survive tonight's challenge (just) with it clear that she only survives on the basis of it adding more crazy to the situation if she goes.
Because she's lost the confidence of a bunch of shit stirring, spineless tosspots who when presented with 'let's see you do better' crawl back to their holes.
Fair play to May to go all in.
And I'm not a May or Conservative supporter, but admire her grasping the poisoned chalice.
-
@jc which what part of what I said is false?
People are confusing visitors with migration. The border is still open for EU visitors - nothing is changing there.
Anybody who enters Ireland via a legitimate method will pass the same checks they do now.
Brexit