@rembrandt said in Brexit:
@crucial 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.
Isn't the problem with this the same concept as pandering to radical Islamists as discussed at length in the other thread? i.e. law-abiding people having to modify their behaviour / restrict freedoms because other people want to break the law / threaten violence?
I know its a very emotive issue for some people, not trying to wind anyone up, my wife is Irish and British so I'm cognisant of the historic issues.