Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo

Infini wrote: »

More people are coming to the conclusion the Brits are going to blindly and foolishly crash out chaotically and are planning based on this. Their politicians are being hopelessly unrealistic or even deluded and simply dont seem to have the national interest at heart, only party politics and factless views.

Even the Tusk remarks are an unfortunately realistic view of the UK by the EU that they'll likely crash out with one source beleving the chances of it happening are at 60%. Noone knows what's ultimately gonna happen but the risks are rising and time is growing short.

The thing about Tusk's remarks that the outraged have missed is that he's a noted Anglophile and absolutely wanted the UK to remain in the EU, as much, if not more than anyone else. He has completely given up on this and now firmly believes that there's no way back for the UK. That's a sobering thought.

Also, according to Tony Connelly, the last straw was a tweet from the inestimable Nadine Dorries stating that no backstop was the only way forward. No time limit, no alternatives, just no backstop.

Infini

prawnsambo wrote: »

The thing about Tusk's remarks that the outraged have missed is that he's a noted Anglophile and absolutely wanted the UK to remain in the EU, as much, if not more than anyone else. He has completely given up on this and now firmly believes that there's no way back for the UK. That's a sobering thought.

Also, according to Tony Connelly, the last straw was a tweet from the inestimable Nadine Dorries stating that no backstop was the only way forward. No time limit, no alternatives, just no backstop.

To be honest the way the UK is looking these days it's likely to break up over the next decade as Brexit utterly rides roughshod over both NI and Scotland. If they crashout and eventually rejoin it wont be as the UK but likely as seperate countries with NI the first to return via reunification and likely Scotland a few years later should they go Independent. England/Wales would probably come back at some point but not without serious changes and reforms to their society. Brexit is the manifiestation of the UKs failures to address its own weaknesses. Only way this doesnt come to pass is if Brexit doesnt happen...

downcow

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Firstly in terms of the text I made bold, do you really believe that it was truly democratic when the leave campaign is shown to have cheated by using foreign undeclared money?

This is one you gotta let go off. You can claim lots of things but you cannot Clain the the UK people did not vote democratically to leave.
This was achieved in the face of both sides stretching the truth - which is only to be expected. But additionally big business, banks, government, opposition, all telling them to vote remain. £2 spent on remain for every £1 spent on leave. Government coercion docs passed though every subjects door, etc, etc.
All the rest of you arguments become questionable when you question that the will of the people was not to leave

Leroy42

Yeah, but what does leave mean? Leave everything, leave the GFA agreement, leave the security cooperation? Does it mean making totally new regulations or just some? Does leave mean all UK citizens lose their rights in other EU countries.

The problem is that Leave is something different to nearly every person.

TM deal has the UK leaving the EU, yet it was voted down by a historically large margin. Are those MP's that voted against the deal going against the will of the people?

VinLieger

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, but what does leave mean? Leave everything, leave the GFA agreement, leave the security cooperation? Does it mean making totally new regulations or just some? Does leave mean all UK citizens lose their rights in other EU countries.

The problem is that Leave is something different to nearly every person.

TM deal has the UK leaving the EU, yet it was voted down by a historically large margin. Are those MP's that voted against the deal going against the will of the people?

Literally every brexiteer prior to the election has some form of quote saying "of course we arent going to leave the SM or CU" or "Nobody is voting to leave with no deal" and yet now they all claim that's exactly what all 51.9% voted for

breatheme

The hijack by the Leavers is completely appalling. Even worse is that Theresa May gave them red lines she shouldn't have given them at all.

EdgeCase

This is the problem though. They wanted 'a Brexit' which is an undefined quantity and seems to encapsulate mostly a load of nationalist emotions and very little practical ideas about what it might be.

What Brexit is has morphed from just leaving the EU with a full trade deal and staying in the customs union to absolutely hardcore tabloid jingoism that requires all bridges to be burnt.

downcow

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, but what does leave mean? Leave everything, leave the GFA agreement, leave the security cooperation? Does it mean making totally new regulations or just some? Does leave mean all UK citizens lose their rights in other EU countries.

The problem is that Leave is something different to nearly every person.

TM deal has the UK leaving the EU, yet it was voted down by a historically large margin. Are those MP's that voted against the deal going against the will of the people?

No. They are going against the backstop because they are afraid the people won’t wear it

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

No. They are going against the backstop because they are afraid the people won’t wear it

What people? The people voted to leave, the deal has them leaving.

A No backstop wasn't on the voting paper.

I cannot see how you can square this and cry that the people must be respected when you don't even know what it is the people voted for.

Exactly what did leave mean? And why doesn't TM's deal, which has the UK leaving on 29th March, meet that?

eagle eye

lawred2 wrote:

yeah... by the UK

VinLieger wrote:

Who will screw us over as shes already done countless times during the negotiation which is why we need the backstop.

Seth Brundle wrote:

The UK has so far been prepared to screw over the RoI. They have also shown a preparedness to ignore legally binding treaties. What makes you think that they won't screw us over if we were to "deal with TM"? Anyhow, for us to "deal with TM" would mean that we leave the EU. I honestly don't think the Irish people, on the whole, would be that stupid.

Leroy42 wrote:

ROI are getting screwed over by TM. Simple as.

Teresa May is representing the UK in their Brexit negotiations. The EU is representing us.
It's up to the EU to look after us, not TM.
Honestly I'm aware of how stupid the politicians and are in the UK but we are citizens of Europe and our side have to find a way to get a soft border.
You can blame TM all you want for everything that's going on but the ultimate responsibility to ensure our financial health rests with the EU.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Hi folks. This is the Brexit thread. Let's keep it about Brexit. We already have an active Border Poll thread for anyone interested in talking about the prospects of a unification.

Thanks

downcow

Leroy42 wrote: »

What people? The people voted to leave, the deal has them leaving.

A No backstop wasn't on the voting paper.

I cannot see how you can square this cry that the people must be respected when you don't even know what it is the people voted for.

Exactly what did leave mean? And why doesn't TM's deal, which has the UK leaving on 29th March, meet that?

Because it is not leaving if it has an indefinite backstop. Can you see that?

Call me Al

downcow wrote: »

Because it is not leaving if it has an indefinite backstop. Can you see that?

But there's border technology. Do you not believe what Brexiteers are saying about technology?

Enzokk

eagle eye wrote: »

Teresa May is representing the UK in their Brexit negotiations. The EU is representing us.
It's up to the EU to look after us, not TM.
Honestly I'm aware of how stupid the politicians and are in the UK but we are citizens of Europe and our side have to find a way to get a soft border.
You can blame TM all you want for everything that's going on but the ultimate responsibility to ensure our financial health rests with the EU.

So the EU should look after us by giving in to the UK? What if looking after us includes going hard after the UK and not giving in to their demands as it would weaken the EU?

The EU is looking at it from what is better for the union and not giving the UK a sweetheart deal is better for the EU, even if it meant short term pain for one of the members. It is then incumbent on those that came to this conclusion to help that member minimize the damage if it is in the interest of the EU.

Leroy42

Yes, the responsibility rests with the EU, and that responsibility extends to not tearing up the very rules that have driven the EU for the last 40 years and made it in to such a powerful position.

Giving UK what they want, would seriously damage Ireland in the long term. Why would any FDI invest in Ireland when they can get best of both worlds in the UK?

The EU have put forward a credible plan to make a deal, one which the democratically elected PM of the UK, and the Cabinet of the UK have both agreed to.

But despite the wishes of the majority to leave, the MP's have taken it upon themselves to decide what that actually means. To such an extent that even the idea of asking the people to decide on the final position is seen as undemocratic.

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

Because it is not leaving if it has an indefinite backstop. Can you see that?

Of course it is. The UK will no longer be in the EU.

Anything after that is purely speculation and a projection of your own feelings on the vote.

downcow

downcow wrote: »

Because it is not leaving if it has an indefinite backstop. Can you see that?

The UK voted to leave the EU. The backstop does that.

Beechwoodspark

downcow wrote: »

Because it is not leaving if it has an indefinite backstop. Can you see that?

Don’t worry DC there’s technology that Boris and Rees mogg have up their sleeves

Infini

downcow wrote: »

No. They are going against the backstop because they are afraid the people won’t wear it

Only the DUP were the ones against it for NI and the backstop initially was purely for NI due to checks on goods at the border being far more prohibitive both by costs and logistics rather than at Air and Sea Ports. May gets it UK wide but then the Hard Brexiteers whinge about it on ideological grounds not practical ones.

This has nothing to do with the people as you call it its rather vested interests like the DUP and Moggs and co who dont like it because they cant burn peoples rights and conditions or purely ideolgical perceptions with no basis in reality. Lest not forget buisnesses and farming communities are well in favour of it as it preserves their trade and supply lines.

downcow

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK voted to leave the EU. The backstop does that.

I know there are many of you responding similarly to the above. But we already discovered several pages back that there was not one of you who would accept a similar arrangement for your country i.e. locked into an international agreement that you know sizeable numbers of your citizens seriously dislike and that you could never escape from if any one of 27 nations decided not to let you.
Therefore it is difficult to take your recent comments seriously on the backstop.

downcow

How would you guys feel about this.

TMs deal but with the option of UK getting out of backstop in the future provided people agreed it in UK referendum. Would that help?

eagle eye

Enzokk wrote:

The EU is looking at it from what is better for the union and not giving the UK a sweetheart deal is better for the EU, even if it meant short term pain for one of the members.

So you are saying we are just cockroaches in the eyes of the European Union? Let's not worry about the Irish?
Did we sign up for that? I don't think so.

Adamcp898

downcow wrote: »

TMs deal but with the option of UK getting out of backstop in the future provided people agreed it in UK referendum. Would that help?

You mean you essentially want the whole of the UK to vote on whether to keep the GFA or not? What??

lawred2

downcow wrote: »

I know there are many of you responding similarly to the above. But we already discovered several pages back that there was not one of you who would accept a similar arrangement for your country i.e. locked into an international agreement that you know sizeable numbers of your citizens seriously dislike and that you could never escape from if any one of 27 nations decided not to let you.
Therefore it is difficult to take your recent comments seriously on the backstop.

Right... but then this 'straight jacket' is entirely a construct made and delivered by TM and her 'negotiators'. Just because a lot of English people don't like something their government negotiated is not reason for the EU to do anything. The EU can only negotiate with HMG. Nobody else. And they have agreed a deal with HMG.

I can not understand why you have difficulty with this.

What is your plan to deliver a frictionless border on this island?

Or would you prefer to forego trade with the EU?

Imreoir2

downcow wrote: »

How would you guys feel about this.

TMs deal but with the option of UK getting out of backstop in the future provided people agreed it in UK referendum. Would that help?

We are demanding an open border in all circumstances, you are offering an open border unless you don't feel like it. Not good enough.

downcow

downcow wrote: »

Therefore it is difficult to take your recent comments seriously on the backstop.

The ones where I use absolute facts, like the Backstop removing the UK from the EU? I'm not surprised it's hard for you since it's so different to your daily diet of Express bullshlt.

downcow

Adamcp898 wrote: »

You mean you essentially want the whole of the UK to vote on whether to keep the GFA or not? What??

Thats old ground. I thought we had accepted that there were at least four perspectives on GFA - all of which have potential substance
1) No backstop contravenes GFA
2)Backstop in place contravenes GFA
3) both contravene GFA
4)neither contravene GFA

I was trying to move beyond that and asking would it be enough of a safety measure for you if the whole of the UK could vote to get out of backstop. I could also accept an NI vote releasing us.

downcow

Imreoir2 wrote: »

We are demanding an open border in all circumstances, you are offering an open border unless you don't feel like it. Not good enough.

You are demanding it, but threatening to close it at the same time. I don't get it

Skelet0n

eagle eye wrote: »

Enzokk wrote:

The EU is looking at it from what is better for the union and not giving the UK a sweetheart deal is better for the EU, even if it meant short term pain for one of the members.

So you are saying we are just cockroaches in the eyes of the European Union? Let's not worry about the Irish?
Did we sign up for that? I don't think so.

Can you please stop framing your bizarre “let’s give the U.K. everything they want” argument as if it’s pro-Irish?
How you can see what the EU have done for us and think that must involve an incredible amount of mental gymnastics, be careful you don’t damage your brain.

Calina

downcow wrote: »

I know there are many of you responding similarly to the above. But we already discovered several pages back that there was not one of you who would accept a similar arrangement for your country i.e. locked into an international agreement that you know sizeable numbers of your citizens seriously dislike and that you could never escape from if any one of 27 nations decided not to let you.
Therefore it is difficult to take your recent comments seriously on the backstop.

We did not vote for this. Change is demanded by the UK for the UK. Demanding that Ireland screws itself up to facilitate the UK not having to make the hard actions linked to the changes demanded by the UK is the height of arrogance. We had no part in this clustermess.

Over pages and pages you have made it clear that you do not care about Northern Ireland's choice, only the UK as a whole. Well the backstop or a special economic status for NI is one of the consequences of that choice the UK has made because of the GFA. The alternative is economic armageddon, self inflicted, for the UK.

It looks like the UK is going to get it anyway. And frankly, it is a touch of a beautiful irony to see the UK's demands wrecked by the actions of a previous UK government, 100 odd years ago.