Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Why the north outside EU changes everything for the island
Options
Comments
-
I was taken in as well. I find your manic rants entertaining and I've obviously made the mistake of taking them seriously. I should have known better when you mentioned DeValera and the fetish of observing protocol.Deleted User wrote: »Hehe. Triggered once again. It's too easy.0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »I'm not sure whether I phrased that badly, or you read it wrongly - but I meant that the people don't all want ever closer union.
I agree that the political elite put their own interests first, second, third - (and probably several more steps for good measure), while ignoring the people.
I believe Brexit was largely caused by that - and I suspect that the good citizens of more than one EU Country are watching the results carefully, to see how it works out.
The politicians in quite a few Countries have a tiger by the tail.(ie. An increasingly resentful electorate!).
It will be interesting to see how it all works out.
Brexit was caused by that ?
Brexit is that.
The elites caused brexit because they are the ones paying for the lies. This wasn't people standing up against a delusion of rich people getting everything this was very rich people paying for lies to be told to a people under the impression immigrants were causing all their woes.
The EU countries are looking on alright in a sense that they will concede nothing to the UK because the type of infantile nonsense that's come from this whole independent spiel doesn't deserve any rewards.
They were never not independent that's one of the lies propagated in this very thread even by some poster who claims to have voted remain.
More of the lies that was told so a slim amount of already wealthy individuals can make more money and not be impacted by the EUs off shore tax directives coming in next year.
That's what it's all about ultimately.
And yes the north is going to get hammered economically and yes Scotland will exit the union in a few years. This is the result of lies. Well done all round to a small community of rich individuals protecting their off shore money and the assistance of a large eastern power set on Dismantling the largest longest peaceful trade block the world as seen .
Long may the EU continue0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »
And perhaps it might have been better for your beloved British Empire to have been more "isolationist" given its role as chief apologist for, and supporter of, Nazi Germany - in British foreign policy in the 1930s, the Nazis were far more preferable as a bulwark against Communism, although your history books very quickly whitewashed that after WWII to portray you as noble principled opposers of fascism - until it finally got the courage in September 1939 to stand up to Nazi Germany, a full four years after the Nuremberg Laws and numerous Nazi invasions of other countries. You didn't cover yourselves in glory in the Èvian Conferance in July 1938 either with your refusal to take more Jewish refugees.That, too, is whitewashed out of your "We entered WWII to save the Jews" propaganda.
If anyone was a Nazi sympathizer it was good ole' Dev.
Anyone who was an enemy of the hated Brits was good enough for him.
Ireland harboured Nazi refugees during and after WWII, but refused to take Jewish refugees and need I mention Dev sending his warmest and most heartfelt condolences following Hitler's death?
The Brits where fighting the Nazis while Ireland hid behind neutrality.
If it wasn't for those pesky Brits you would be speaking German today. Instead you speak, well, ahem, how shall I say this...the Queen's English.
Einen schönen Tag wünsche ich ihnen noch, der Herr.0 -
Calling Dev’s policies of political and isolationism exactly hat they were ain’t a rant, it is stating a well known and often expressed opinion.
Three people have now asked you to defend that "opinion" with historical facts. Alas, all you seem to be capable of doing is repeating the claim and exploding at anybody who challenges it. That is strange behaviour, in fairness.Your response is the very epitome of ad hominem, in that you attack a poster’s nationality rather than try and address anything relevant to the thread. When someone attacks someone based on their nationality, calling them a bigot is a reasonable thing to do.
Like I said, you are an embarrassment to boards and to your country.
Ah, I see; you read things in posts that aren't actually there and then go nuts because, for instance, you deem an attack on the views of Brexit-loving, Empire defenders such as yourself to be an attack on the English/British. Newsflash: there are millions of British people who are not supporting Brexit or any of the other jingoistic stuff that you get so decidedly tetchy about when it's challenged. Ken Clarke and similarly intelligent, open-minded and decent English people must throw you completely over the edge with rage.
As insults go "an embarrassment to your country and to Boards" is genuinely funny so well done for that.0 -
indioblack wrote: »I find your manic rants entertaining and I've obviously made the mistake of taking them seriously. I should have known better when you mentioned DeValera and the fetish of observing protocol.
I recall an elderly man once summarising an unsurprising view from his political opponent with the remark 'What can one expect from a pig but a grunt.'. It seems apposite now.0 -
Advertisement
-
Many people in Eire have become comfortable for a long time with NI being a foreign country. Getting the 6 back with the 26 just isnt an issue for them. Particularly since the peace, and effectively its free and peaceful travel to have the north as part of their daily activities whether business, family, friends, shopping, tourism, sporting etc.
But for any in the south for whom a restored 32 is still a goal and matters to them, they are faced with two choices now :
1) Play the waiting game. Let the north move further adrift in Brexit, economically, with travel restrictions or controls, be outside the EU and the loss of all the integration and commonality that that brings, and be a backward step. But hope that in the longer term, the 6 decide that joining the 26 is the best option to restore EU membership, leave a downward spiral post-Brexit UK, with a sufficient number of protestants deciding giving up the Union Jack is then a price worth paying.
or
2) Moving that the 26 join the UK. ie. that southerners make the hard step and decide that sticking with the 6, whatever downside Brexit may bring, and join the UK. Reckoning that rejoining the UK is a price worth paying to keep the island as integrated as possible.
Its a tough choice. But one exercising the minds of all people for whom a unified 32 county Ireland is still important.0 -
Intelligent creatures, pigs.Deleted User wrote: »I recall an elderly man once summarising an unsurprising view from his political opponent with the remark 'What can one expect from a pig but a grunt.'. It seems apposite now.
"Pigs treat us as equals".0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,771 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 89011
It's not a tough choice.The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »2) Moving that the 26 join the UK. ie. that southerners make the hard step and decide that sticking with the 6, whatever downside Brexit may bring, and join the UK. Reckoning that rejoining the UK is a price worth paying to keep the island as integrated as possible.
Its a tough choice. But one exercising the minds of all people for whom a unified 32 county Ireland is still important.0 -
Capt'n Midnight wrote: »It's not a tough choice.
To some it is. And rejoining the UK is, understandably, difficult for many in the south to stomach given the mythology that has been built up about those responsible a hundred years ago for leaving it in the first place. While the wait and hope option has its merits too, it is too a great extent, out of our hands. The only one southerners can truly act on, is to go for the reunification option. But leadership of all political parties seem very reticent on it so far. With Westminster so confused on Brexit anyway, let alone a coherent policy for a deal, it probably wouldbe jumping the gun to be openly advocating for it. But it is worth opening the conversation in the south at least, and when the Brexit outcome (if not called off) is clearer, it can be brought more to the foreground.0 -
listermint wrote: »Brexit was caused by that ?
Brexit is that.
The elites caused brexit because they are the ones paying for the lies. This wasn't people standing up against a delusion of rich people getting everything this was very rich people paying for lies to be told to a people under the impression immigrants were causing all their woes.
The EU countries are looking on alright in a sense that they will concede nothing to the UK because the type of infantile nonsense that's come from this whole independent spiel doesn't deserve any rewards.
They were never not independent that's one of the lies propagated in this very thread even by some poster who claims to have voted remain.
More of the lies that was told so a slim amount of already wealthy individuals can make more money and not be impacted by the EUs off shore tax directives coming in next year.
That's what it's all about ultimately.
And yes the north is going to get hammered economically and yes Scotland will exit the union in a few years. This is the result of lies. Well done all round to a small community of rich individuals protecting their off shore money and the assistance of a large eastern power set on Dismantling the largest longest peaceful trade block the world as seen .
Long may the EU continue
Who on earth claimed Brexit was "people standing up against a delusion of rich people getting everything"?
I certainly didn't!
The reality is, people were told lies by the political elite - on both sides.
Brexiteers promised Utopia, Remainers spent years blaming the EU for every unpopular decision, whether deservedly, or not.
Your definition of "Independent" must be different to mine, because when the laws of a Sovereign Country can be dictated by foreign Governments, they are not Independent.
Whether they signed an accord, or not - the minute any other Country can dictate policy, be that on Immigration, Legislation, or pretty much anything else - that Country is no longer Independent.
The British people rejected the EU. They were fully entitled to make that decision.
I hope it works out for them, though I have little doubt that the EU will make it as difficult as possible, because a successful Brexit might encourage other Countries to leave.The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »Many people in Eire have become comfortable for a long time with NI being a foreign country. Getting the 6 back with the 26 just isnt an issue for them. Particularly since the peace, and effectively its free and peaceful travel to have the north as part of their daily activities whether business, family, friends, shopping, tourism, sporting etc.
But for any in the south for whom a restored 32 is still a goal and matters to them, they are faced with two choices now :
1) Play the waiting game. Let the north move further adrift in Brexit, economically, with travel restrictions or controls, be outside the EU and the loss of all the integration and commonality that that brings, and be a backward step. But hope that in the longer term, the 6 decide that joining the 26 is the best option to restore EU membership, leave a downward spiral post-Brexit UK, with a sufficient number of protestants deciding giving up the Union Jack is then a price worth paying.
or
2) Moving that the 26 join the UK. ie. that southerners make the hard step and decide that sticking with the 6, whatever downside Brexit may bring, and join the UK. Reckoning that rejoining the UK is a price worth paying to keep the island as integrated as possible.
Its a tough choice. But one exercising the minds of all people for whom a unified 32 county Ireland is still important.
There's nothing remotely difficult about that decision.
The UK hasn't shown any great interest in the North, or how Brexit will destroy it economically. They have shown no interest in the wishes of the Scots, or N. Irish, wish to remain part of the EU.
They'd be even less likely to care about how Ireland fared, and, as I've already said, we've been there, done that - and we've no desire to go back for more.0 -
Advertisement
-
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »To some it is. And rejoining the UK is, understandably, difficult for many in the south to stomach given the mythology that has been built up about those responsible a hundred years ago for leaving it in the first place. While the wait and hope option has its merits too, it is too a great extent, out of our hands. The only one southerners can truly act on, is to go for the reunification option. But leadership of all political parties seem very reticent on it so far. With Westminster so confused on Brexit anyway, let alone a coherent policy for a deal, it probably wouldbe jumping the gun to be openly advocating for it. But it is worth opening the conversation in the south at least, and when the Brexit outcome (if not called off) is clearer, it can be brought more to the foreground.
The only ones that would advocate for that would be you and an insane homeless fella called mad Mickey that lives down on the boardwalk0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »Who on earth claimed Brexit was "people standing up against a delusion of rich people getting everything"?
I certainly didn't!
The reality is, people were told lies by the political elite - on both sides.
Brexiteers promised Utopia, Remainers spent years blaming the EU for every unpopular decision, whether deservedly, or not.
Your definition of "Independent" must be different to mine, because when the laws of a Sovereign Country can be dictated by foreign Governments, they are not Independent.
Whether they signed an accord, or not - the minute any other Country can dictate policy, be that on Immigration, Legislation, or pretty much anything else - that Country is no longer Independent.
The British people rejected the EU. They were fully entitled to make that decision.
I hope it works out for them, though I have little doubt that the EU will make it as difficult as possible, because a successful Brexit might encourage other Countries to leave.
There's nothing remotely difficult about that decision.
The UK hasn't shown any great interest in the North, or how Brexit will destroy it economically. They have shown no interest in the wishes of the Scots, or N. Irish, wish to remain part of the EU.
They'd be even less likely to care about how Ireland fared, and, as I've already said, we've been there, done that - and we've no desire to go back for more.
Laughable stance amongst other laughable stances.
The UK represents itself in drawing up directives .
This utter crap about having no sovereignty is more of the inane waffle that Facebook plebs spout around the place.
This country amongst others in the EU would be nothing without it.
I'd say it annoys the ****e out of you that Irish people continually reject the notion of irexit.
Sent farage packing last year too.
The polls don't lie. Only idiots or agenda morons call for the break up of the EU.0 -
This.Deleted User wrote: »There's nothing remotely difficult about that decision.
The UK hasn't shown any great interest in the North, or how Brexit will destroy it economically. They have shown no interest in the wishes of the Scots, or N. Irish, wish to remain part of the EU.
They'd be even less likely to care about how Ireland fared, and, as I've already said, we've been there, done that - and we've no desire to go back for more.
We tried being part of the UK. It was an unmitigated disaster in every possible way.
Then we tried an interesting experiment where part of the country stayed within the UK, and the other part became independent. We've been running that experiment for nearly a hundred years now, and the results are pretty well unarguable.
And, if that wasn't enough, we look at how Scotland and Wales get treated in a union with England and think, "yeah, no thanks".0 -
No matter how often this is shown to be bull$hit it keeps getting posted on Boards.dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »... need I mention Dev sending his warmest and most heartfelt condolences following Hitler's death?
The way the story goes is that Dev, upon hearing of Hitler's suicide, put on his top hat and tails, jumped in the state car which, flanked by the Blue Hussars, drove to the German embassy. There, after giving the Nazi salute, de Valera signed a book of condolence for his fallen facist comrade.
Guess what? Complete bullsh1t!
De Valera's government had expressly stated that they would only accept an ambassador from Germany who was not a Nazi party member. Given that two of Dev's closest friend were Jews this was not out of character, nor was the fact he wrote a European constitution that recognised the Jewish faith, in the bloody 1930s.
The Nazis acquiesced to de Valera's demands and appointed non party member Eduard Hempel to the role. However, one year later the Nazi's forced Hempel to join their party or else leave the German diplomatic corps.
During the war Hempel acted impeccably, accepting Ireland's neutrality. This was in sharp contrast to the USA ambassador of the time, David Gray.
While Dev had a fractious relationship with Gray, his assocciations with Hempel were amicable. The Americans and British demanded the German delegation be removed from Ireland, even though the state was neutral. This is something which worried the German ambassador as the war drew to a close.
With Germany's complete defeat now imminent, de Valera paid a visit to Hempel's residence, not the embassy. He never signed a book of condolence as one never existed.
Instead, Dev informed Hempel that he need not worry about being handed over to the Allies. In the end the Allies never accused Hempel of anything and eventually he returned to West Germany.
Years later, Hempel's now widow, was paid a visit by an Irish journalist, who asked her about the book of condolences de Valera signed at the German embassy. Her reply was basically, "what the fcuk are you talking about?".
In 1966 the Eamon de Valera Forest was planted in Nazareth as a mark of respect to a European politician who specifically protected Jews in his personally drafted constitution.0 -
Duckworth_Luas wrote: »
No matter how often this is shown to be bull$hit it keeps getting posted on Boards.dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »... need I mention Dev sending his warmest and most heartfelt condolences following Hitler's death?
The way the story goes is that Dev, upon hearing of Hitler's suicide, put on his top hat and tails, jumped in the state car which, flanked by the Blue Hussars, drove to the German embassy. There, after giving the Nazi salute, de Valera signed a book of condolence for his fallen facist comrade.
Guess what? Complete bullsh1t!
De Valera's government had expressly stated that they would only accept an ambassador from Germany who was not a Nazi party member. Given that two of Dev's closest friend were Jews this was not out of character, nor was the fact he wrote a European constitution that recognised the Jewish faith, in the bloody 1930s.
The Nazis acquiesced to de Valera's demands and appointed non party member Eduard Hempel to the role. However, one year later the Nazi's forced Hempel to join their party or else leave the German diplomatic corps.
During the war Hempel acted impeccably, accepting Ireland's neutrality. This was in sharp contrast to the USA ambassador of the time, David Gray.
While Dev had a fractious relationship with Gray, his assocciations with Hempel were amicable. The Americans and British demanded the German delegation be removed from Ireland, even though the state was neutral. This is something which worried the German ambassador as the war drew to a close.
With Germany's complete defeat now imminent, de Valera paid a visit to Hempel's residence, not the embassy. He never signed a book of condolence as one never existed.
Instead, Dev informed Hempel that he need not worry about being handed over to the Allies. In the end the Allies never accused Hempel of anything and eventually he returned to West Germany.
Years later, Hempel's now widow, was paid a visit by an Irish journalist, who asked her about the book of condolences de Valera signed at the German embassy. Her reply was basically, "what the fcuk are you talking about?".
In 1966 the Eamon de Valera Forest was planted in Nazareth as a mark of respect to a European politician who specifically protected Jews in his personally drafted constitution.
That is an interesting version to this controversial story. It is as controversial like the very character of Dev himself and the way he run things. On the one hand, Ireland was maintaining her neutrality and German military personnel were kept in PoW camps til the end of the war. On the other hand British military personnel were turned a blind eye if they tried to escape such camps to cross the border to NI and thus rejoining the British Forces. Some were even not brought to camps but directly brought to the border. Whether this was done on 'request' of the Western Allies is some matter to itself. Fact is, that Irelands neutrality policy had its special dealings. I don't blame Dev for that as I think that every effort to help the Western Allies against Nazi Germany was the right Thing to do.
Mr Hempel was told by the German govt to accept Irelands neutrality and imo there is no personal credit to him that acted accordingly, being told to do so. Whether there really was a book of condolence at the German Mission in Dublin at the end of the war I am not sure about it. Anyway, there wouldn't have been too many from other missions who would bother to condole on the death of Hitler. Your post depicts Dev going to the German Mission to convey his condolence on Hitler's death as a more private matter by himself. The media at that time made a big deal of that and the Americans were as much outraged by that story like the British as well. Dev claimed that he was merely following diplomatic protocoll which makes your as private matter depicted visit to Mr Hempel an official one and this was the way the issue was dealt with.
The interview of Hempels widow who knew nothing about that condolence book proves nothing to me. She might not have know about this at all, given that she really was present there at the time. From what I recall about this matter, Dev didn't went to the German Mission a few days after Hitler's death hit the Headlines on international newspapers, he went there a couple of days afterwards, if I am not wrong shortly after Germany had surrendered unconditionally. This was the point which caused much irritation among many people. More so after the horrors committed by the Nazis and their collaborators across German occupied countries emerged in due course of the Allies advance into those countries and Germany itself. To even consider to condole on the death of a mass murderer is really beyond any reasonable conduct.0 -
There is absolutely no chance of the 26 Counties rejoining Britain .
And there is no chance of Britain staying in the Eu . If Democracy were to fall in Britain and the Country was kept in the Eu against the Democratic will of the people there would a Violent Uprising to Protect Democracy .
Democracy is far more important than the Eu .0 -
If democracy were to fall in Britain there might well be a violent uprising. (Or even a Violent Uprising.)There is absolutely no chance of the 26 Counties rejoining Britain .
And there is no chance of Britain staying in the Eu . If Democracy were to fall in Britain and the Country was kept in the Eu against the Democratic will of the people there would a Violent Uprising to Protect Democracy .
Democracy is far more important than the Eu .
However, if the British were to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU, and did remain, that wouldn't be democracy falling. It would be the opposite, in fact. In that scenario the British could certainly remain in the EU without a violent uprising.
If the British are not allowed to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU after all then, obviously democracy has already fallen. In that event there may well be a violent uprising, and I confidently expect that blinding will join it.0 -
There has been a democratic decision to leave ; 17.4 million Voters followed by a general election where parties that promised to respect the referendum got 84% of the Vote .Peregrinus wrote: »If democracy were to fall in Britain there might well be a violent uprising. (Or even a Violent Uprising.)
However, if the British were to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU, and did remain, that wouldn't be democracy falling. It would be the opposite, in fact. In that scenario the British could certainly remain in the EU without a violent uprising.
If the British are not allowed to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU after all then, obviously democracy has already fallen. In that event there may well be a violent uprising, and I confidently expect that blinding will join it.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »
If democracy were to fall in Britain there might well be a violent uprising. (Or even a Violent Uprising.)There is absolutely no chance of the 26 Counties rejoining Britain .
And there is no chance of Britain staying in the Eu . If Democracy were to fall in Britain and the Country was kept in the Eu against the Democratic will of the people there would a Violent Uprising to Protect Democracy .
Democracy is far more important than the Eu .
However, if the British were to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU, and did remain, that wouldn't be democracy falling. It would be the opposite, in fact. In that scenario the British could certainly remain in the EU without a violent uprising.
If the British are not allowed to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU after all then, obviously democracy has already fallen. In that event there may well be a violent uprising, and I confidently expect that blinding will join it.
That is all well put and I can only add that the tensions in the UK for which the growing polarisation in their Society due to this Brexit idiocy is responsible makes it more likely that either way, there will be years of discontent which can easily lead to violent erruptions across the country. That goes for Brexit itself and it goes for the aftermath when the UK has exited the EU and Scotland is pressing for IndyRef2. If the result of IndyRef2 is a majority in favour of Scotland's Independence, the Unionists in Scotland will get furious, such as they are already whenever an independent Scotland is the topic of discussions. UK unionists in Scotland are often as fierce in their convictions like the Brexiteers are in theirs. That means that no reasonable and rational Argument can convince them of being wrong in clinging on to a Union past Brexit which will drag the whole of the UK into the economical and financial decline because of the no deal Brexit which will eventually be the result of this hazardous folly.
I am always for non-violence but I cannot dismiss the real possibility that frustration and anger that comes from that and with that will plunge the UK into domestic unrest and violence on the streets.0 -
There has been a democratic decision to leave ; 17.4 million Voters followed by a general election where parties that promised to respect the referendum got 84% of the Vote .Peregrinus wrote: »If democracy were to fall in Britain there might well be a violent uprising. (Or even a Violent Uprising.)
However, if the British were to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU, and did remain, that wouldn't be democracy falling. It would be the opposite, in fact. In that scenario the British could certainly remain in the EU without a violent uprising.
If the British are not allowed to take a democratic decision to remain in the EU after all then, obviously democracy has already fallen. In that event there may well be a violent uprising, and I confidently expect that blinding will join it.
How surprising is that considering that the Maybot has lost her secure majority in the Commons which Cameron provided for her in his last GE which he won but the Maybot was gambling and greedy to even top that but lost in the end and is now depending on the backing of her tiny majority by the nasty DUP. Your stance is as dogmatic like that of any other Brexiter.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, but there was no box on the ballot paper to tick saying"we renounce forever the right to review or reconsider this decision".There has been a democratic decision to leave ; 17.4 million Voters followed by a general election where parties that promised to respect the referendum got 84% of the Vote .
If there was a democratic decision to leave in 2016, there could be a democratic decision to remain (or indeed to leave) in 2019. And those who oppose the right of the people to take such a decision are obviously the enemies of democracy, and deserve to be crushed without mercy in a Violent Uprising. Wouldn't you agree?0 -
17.4 million in the Referendum .
84% voted for Parties that said in their General Election Manifestos that they would respect the Brexit Referendum Vote .
If Brexit does not happen Democracy will have fallen .0 -
There is no present Democratic Mandate for Brexit not to happen . Were Brexit not to happen in the present Democratic Circumstances ; Democracy will have fallen .Peregrinus wrote: »Yes, but there was no box on the ballot paper to tick saying"we renounce forever the right to review or reconsider this decision".
If there was a democratic decision to leave in 2016, there could be a democratic decision to remain (or indeed to leave) in 2019. And those who oppose the right of the people to take such a decision are obviously the enemies of democracy, and deserve to be crushed without mercy in a Violent Uprising. Wouldn't you agree?0 -
Your needle is stuck in a groove, blinding. You accidentally reposted a point you made some time ago, instead of responding to more recent posts. I'm sure it's not your intention, but it makes you look like an enemy of democracy who deserves to be crushed without mercy in a Violent Uprising.
The Solution
After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers' Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
- Bertold Brecht.0 -
listermint wrote: »Laughable stance amongst other laughable stances.
The UK represents itself in drawing up directives .
This utter crap about having no sovereignty is more of the inane waffle that Facebook plebs spout around the place.
This country amongst others in the EU would be nothing without it.
I'd say it annoys the ****e out of you that Irish people continually reject the notion of irexit.
Sent farage packing last year too.
The polls don't lie. Only idiots or agenda morons call for the break up of the EU.
I really wish you wouldn't misquote me.
Here's a hint. Try to find where I used the word Irexit, or called for the breakup of the EU?
Stating that the British people I spoke to resent not being in control of their own policies is quite simply a fact.
Making assumptions doesn't make you have any idea what I believe about the EU, or Irexit.
Belonging to a Union of Countries necessarily requires giving up some Independence. The fact that you react so strongly to something so obvious, is puzzling.
I wish the British people the best of luck with Brexit, while simultaneously being quite certain that Ireland needs to look out for her own interests, and that those interests require a good relationship with Britain - which is not remotely suggesting we join them.0 -
There is no present Democratic Mandate for Brexit not to happen . Were Brexit not to happen in the present Democratic Circumstances ; Democracy will have fallen .Peregrinus wrote: »Yes, but there was no box on the ballot paper to tick saying"we renounce forever the right to review or reconsider this decision".
If there was a democratic decision to leave in 2016, there could be a democratic decision to remain (or indeed to leave) in 2019. And those who oppose the right of the people to take such a decision are obviously the enemies of democracy, and deserve to be crushed without mercy in a Violent Uprising. Wouldn't you agree?
That is very simplistic which doesn't address the reality just like in this linked article below:
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0807/983518-brexit/Ms Sturgeon also called for "constructive and genuine" engagement with the Scottish government following a report by a committee of MPs that criticised UK government engagement with the devolved administrations.
She added: "The UK government has launched a power grab on the Scottish Parliament and now even a House of Commons committee says Whitehall takes little account of the realities of devolution in the UK.
"It cannot carry on like this and the UK government needs to start listening to the views of the people of Scotland, end the power-grab and start respecting the Scottish Parliament."
Democracy is very much more than just voting in referendums, but apparently not for the Brexiteers. For them Democracy ends with the referendum result that fits them.0 -
In the General election after the Brexit Referendum parties that said they would respect the Result of the Referendum won 84% of the Vote .That is very simplistic which doesn't address the reality just like in this linked article below:
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0807/983518-brexit/
Democracy is very much more than just voting in referendums, but apparently not for the Brexiteers. For them Democracy ends with the referendum result that fits them.
Democracy is a beautiful thing .0 -
In the General election after the Brexit Referendum parties that said they would respect the Result of the Referendum won 84% of the Vote .That is very simplistic which doesn't address the reality just like in this linked article below:
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0807/983518-brexit/
Democracy is very much more than just voting in referendums, but apparently not for the Brexiteers. For them Democracy ends with the referendum result that fits them.
Democracy is a beautiful thing .
You're repeating yourself and it already has started to get boring. Very boring indeed.0 -
This. An awful lot of Brexiteers seem to regard a referendum as a kind of off-switch for democracy.Democracy is very much more than just voting in referendums, but apparently not for the Brexiteers. For them Democracy ends with the referendum result that fits them.
This probably has to do with the fact that the referendum is a relative constitutional novelty in the UK, and they haven't quite worked out what the role or effect of a referendum is. In other democracies, where the referendum has an established place, they generally get that the referendum is just one more tool in the democratic toolbox. You use it when it's the right or necessary tool for the job. But it's a tool, not a magic wand. Your wish that the result of a referendum will stand for a generation without question will not necessarily be made real.0 -
Advertisement
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »I really wish you wouldn't misquote me.
Here's a hint. Try to find where I used the word Irexit, or called for the breakup of the EU?
Stating that the British people I spoke to resent not being in control of their own policies is quite simply a fact.
Making assumptions doesn't make you have any idea what I believe about the EU, or Irexit.
Belonging to a Union of Countries necessarily requires giving up some Independence. The fact that you react so strongly to something so obvious, is puzzling.
I wish the British people the best of luck with Brexit, while simultaneously being quite certain that Ireland needs to look out for her own interests, and that those interests require a good relationship with Britain - which is not remotely suggesting we join them.
You peddle sovereignty nonsense over and over yet can't back it up with real examples.
Ergo it's nonsense.
The UK makes the laws of the EU the UK had more outs than ins than any other members.
Your sovereignty ballax is just that ballaxology , repeating it over and over and suggesting that Ireland 'look after itself' doesn't make sovereignty nonsense true. It's just you repeating false claims.
And if it didn't come across as a call for irexit then I suggest you stop framing it that way.
Any facts to go with your nonsense?0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement