Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

If that was the plan all along, then when you look back on what's happened, you'd have to either think it's the most fortuitous series of coincidences or a very clever plan.

I think it is one of those plans where no matter what happens the authors will claim its exactly what they intended.

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think it is one of those plans where no matter what happens the authors will claim its exactly what they intended.

Except the "Do or die" promise can't be whitewashed away.

hill16bhoy

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think this analysis is incorrect. There is no change in British identity of there is Sara border. It already exists for SPS and it's ridiculous for unionists to claim they don't want a divergence from the rest of the UK when they were happy to block SSM and abortion that the rest of the UK has.

They also wanted a lower corporate tax rate to rival the ROI that was different than GB.
So it's clear that divergence is acceptable.

But an inland border is definitely a break in the identity fundamentals that unsub the GFA.
What you are aluding to is that the DUP sense of Britishness is to ignore the wider community and what is best for it.
They should actually recognize that SF are inwardly pleased about the prospect of a hard brexit that will drive reunification sooner

There's a big difference between autonomy in some areas for the constituent parts of the UK, which in NI's case was voted for democratically via the Good Friday Agreement referendum, and being told you are diverging from the rest of the UK through no choice of your own.

I think in many areas the DUP's bigotry leads them to adopt positions which are very bad for society as a whole.

But despite their extremely stupid campaigning for Brexit and their often toe curlingly awful rhetoric, I think in reality they've remained reasonably steadfast in their wish to keep both the current north-south and east-west circumstances intact.

I suspect you may be right about a lot of people in SF, or at least a lot of their supporters, secretly desiring a hard border as a sort of disruptive event that proves a catalyst for a united Ireland, sadly, even though they would publicly deny this.

But that's by the by, and Sinn Fein have no power in this situation. The DUP have now all but joined them in that boat.

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

Except the "Do or die" promise can't be whitewashed away.

If necessary, he will go down fighting and show that he tried to do or die, but was stabbed in the back by traitors.

This is not the end! Back me, and I will fight on in the coming election, and if necessary, win the next referendum!

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If necessary, he will go down fighting and show that he tried to do or die, but was stabbed in the back by traitors.

This is not the end! Back me, and I will fight on in the coming election, and if necessary, win the next referendum!

Yes. But he can't say the outcome = the plan. Because he nailed his colours to the 31st October.

hill16bhoy

CelticRambler wrote: »

Point of order, Mr. Speaker!





Don't go citing the Corsicans as examples of a model of how the DUP should behave! :eek: There is a very active independence movement in Corsica, quite happy to accidentally set fire to any building associated with French rule on the island. They would love nothing more than a change to the status quo, especially if that meant having a shiny new border with France and being allowed speak their own language in their own regional government.

A quick internet search indicates that there's nowhere near a majority in favour of Corsican independence.

Fr Tod Umptious

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I'd say their weddings and funerals are great craic.

I'm sure they are fine.

Apologies for not towing the "drink is essential for good fun line" that most Irish believe.

joe40

fash wrote: »

Correct: it is true that a border in any location changes the status quo, however a land border is more disruptive than a sea border. Furthermore, the DUP campaigned for brexit (i.e. to change the status quo) and supported a particularly hard brexit which requires a border (again to change the status quo).
What right do they have to complain that the status quo is now changing?

Exactly. I would have sympathy for NI unionist if they had campaigned against Brexit and shouted about the border issue loudly in the HoC. The average British person including government ministers are largely clueless. They think 20 years of peace mean everything is fine.
The DUP were in a unique position to warn against the danger Brexit posed in Ireland.

Instead the actively campaigned for Brexit in a blatant attempt to undermine the GFA and bring the north closer to Britain, by distancing themselves from Europe but really from Ireland.

So I have very little sympathy if there is a ni only backstop they have themselves to blame.
The really crazy thing is a prosperous and peaceful northern Ireland guarantees the Union with Britain.

jm08

hill16bhoy wrote: »

There's a big difference between autonomy in some areas for the constituent parts of the UK, which in NI's case was voted for democratically via the Good Friday Agreement referendum, and being told you are diverging from the rest of the UK through no choice of your own.

I think in many areas the DUP's bigotry leads them to adopt positions which are very bad for society as a whole.

But despite their extremely stupid campaigning for Brexit and their often toe curlingly awful rhetoric, I think in reality they've remained reasonably steadfast in their wish to keep both the current north-south and east-west circumstances intact.

I suspect you may be right about a lot of people in SF, or at least a lot of their supporters, secretly desiring a hard border as a sort of disruptive event that proves a catalyst for a united Ireland, sadly, even though they would publicly deny this.

But that's by the by, and Sinn Fein have no power in this situation. The DUP have now all but joined them in that boat.

So everyone should be just tolerant of their bigotry?

20silkcut

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1171447467755229186


A lot of talk recently of the NI only backstop being revived and maybe slight polished . The ERG would of course reject this but you might get some labour rebels on board. Is this a realistic proposal or just the last viable hope of no deal being trashed out before being killing reality being force upon it.

Why would the ERG reject a NI only backstop?
Surely they don’t give a flying flamingo about NI.

hometruths

prawnsambo wrote: »

If that was the plan all along, then when you look back on what's happened, you'd have to either think it's the most fortuitous series of coincidences or a very clever plan.

Like how do you convince the opposition to not vote your government out of office when you haven't the numbers to stop them?

I think the plan all along was to force the election, try and win it without the DUP, then put the border down the Irish sea.

The wheels came off the plan when the opposition turned down the choice of election.

However as it turned out by that stage his majority was so shot, he was no longer reliant on the DUP anyway!

Crack on with Plan A so!!

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

Why would the ERG reject a NI only backstop?
Surely they don’t give a flying flamingo about NI.

The (plausible, IMO) suggestion is that the ERG are backed by those who will make a financial killing from a no-deal Brexit. As such they will use any convenient excuse to reject whatever withdrawal agreement is on offer.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

A quick internet search indicates that there's nowhere near a majority in favour of Corsican independence.

I don't think he said they were a majority.

20silkcut

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The DUP are

But shouting at unionists that there is going to be a united Ireland in the next 20 years whether they like or not is not the best way to bring it about, and neither is dismissing their concerns about being forcibly taken out of the customs union of what, remember, is still currently their own country.

t.

That’s brexit for ya. They voted for it.

Can’t they join the remain alliance and fight to keep the union together.

They are a unionist party after all.

20silkcut

swampgas wrote: »

The (plausible, IMO) suggestion is that the ERG are backed by those who will make a financial killing from a no-deal Brexit. As such they will use any convenient excuse to reject whatever withdrawal agreement is on offer.

The nature of the future trade deal will be unknown. Surely the potential of a Canada style deal with a NI back stop is the holy grail of a hard brexiteer.
Did the EU offer that at one stage??

CelticRambler

hill16bhoy wrote: »

A quick internet search indicates that there's nowhere near a majority in favour of Corsican independence.

A not-so-quick life in France indicates that the Corsicans voted to send 3 "Independence" candidates out of 4 députés to the Assemblée Nationale, and that the regional government is led by a (majority) coalition made up of candidates seeking autonomy/independence from France.

There's also a very similar attitude amongst the "mainland" French towards their Corsican fellow-citizens as there is amongst the "mainland" British towards those-who-identify-as-British in NI: i.e. they're Corsican, not French - same as unionists are Irish (to the English), not British.

Part of me wonders if this will be the one thing that persuades Macron to agree to another extension. He's doing well in the polls at the moment, and the last thing he needs is any kind of outcome that pushes Scotland towards independence. While it's great for us that poor wee Ireland is being well looked after in the face of so much bullying by its former colonial master, it's not a great message to sending to other small nations who have a gripe with their colonial masters. It's a delicate line for the EU to tread too.

hill16bhoy

jm08 wrote: »

So everyone should be just tolerant of their bigotry?

See, where have I said anything about tolerating the DUP's bigotry?

I said nothing of the sort, and I do think they're a crowd of hateful, bigoted wee shltes, to use Northern terminology.

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

Respecting Irish/British/both identities is the cornerstone of the Good Friday Agreement.

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

The nature of the future trade deal will be unknown. Surely the potential of a Canada style deal with a NI back stop is the holy grail of a hard brexiteer.
Did the EU offer that at one stage??

A hard Brexit, without a transition period would cause chaos, and chaos is where a certain type of predatory "investor" can make a fortune. A Canada style deal will no doubt be a fall back, but I fear that the likes of Rees-Mogg and others are heavily invested in no-deal and may even incur losses if it doesn't happen.

If that's the case (and who knows for sure) then the ERG will reject any deal on whatever spurious grounds they find most convenient.

is_that_so

LeinsterDub wrote: »

That certainly isn't going to happen in less than 52 days.

Well it is 52 days with feck all else to do and it might even progress somewhere!

hill16bhoy

CelticRambler wrote: »

A not-so-quick life in France indicates that the Corsicans voted to send 3 "Independence" candidates out of 4 députés to the Assemblée Nationale, and that the regional government is led by a (majority) coalition made up of candidates seeking autonomy/independence from France.

There's also a very similar attitude amongst the "mainland" French towards their Corsican fellow-citizens as there is amongst the "mainland" British towards those-who-identify-as-British in NI: i.e. they're Corsican, not French - same as unionists are Irish (to the English), not British.

Part of me wonders if this will be the one thing that persuades Macron to agree to another extension. He's doing well in the polls at the moment, and the last thing he needs is any kind of outcome that pushes Scotland towards independence. While it's great for us that poor wee Ireland is being well looked after in the face of so much bullying by its former colonial master, it's not a great message to sending to other small nations who have a gripe with their colonial masters. It's a delicate line for the EU to tread too.

Scotland elected 56 SNP MPs out of 59 to Westminster in 2015 but they didn't vote for independence.

Show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans favour independence from France.

And show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans want to be taken into a different customs zone to France.

20silkcut

swampgas wrote: »

A hard Brexit, without a transition period would cause chaos, and chaos is where a certain type of predatory "investor" can make a fortune. A Canada style deal will no doubt be a fall back, but I fear that the likes of Rees-Mogg and others are heavily invested in no-deal and may even incur losses if it doesn't happen.

If that's the case (and who knows for sure) then the ERG will reject any deal on whatever spurious grounds they find most convenient.

I think if they vote against such a deal their position (which is ridiculous anyway) will go to the furthest ends of absurdity. Being offered a hard orderly brexit and refusing it. After three years of hell. They will be shown up for being truly unpatriotic and would be castigated by hard brexiteers, brexit party etc. I’d imagine.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Scotland elected 56 SNP MPs out of 59 to Westminster in 2015 but they didn't vote for independence.

Show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans favour independence from France.

And show me a poll that says the majority of Corsicans want to be taken into a different customs zone to France.

Again. He never said it was a majority of Corsicans.

McMurphy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I'm sure they are fine.

Apologies for not towing the "drink is essential for good fun line" that most Irish believe.

I'm sure it's not just because they don't drink alcohol that the poster implied there would be a lack of craic at a dup wedding - many of them are also creationist nutters and Free Presbyterian zealots who belong in the dark ages.

serfboard

hill16bhoy wrote: »

they've remained reasonably steadfast in their wish to keep both the current north-south and east-west circumstances intact.

If that's the case, they should have campaigned for Remain.

hill16bhoy

prawnsambo wrote: »

Again. He never said it was a majority of Corsicans.

I'm not really sure what his point is then.

If a majority of Coriscans want to remain part of France, or even if there was a majority in favour of autonomy, there's a majority in favour of keeping the exact same trading arrangments with France as pertain now.

Which is similar to NI, where a majority want to keep the exact same trading arrangements with both the Republic and Britain.

Which is basically my point about the NI only backstop.

Leroy42

You can sympathise with the DUP or unionist position but the reality is that Brexit, at it's very core, is about changing the status quo. For NI that means that have to accept that the open borders are no longer viable.

The question they needed to ask themselves was whether their sense of unionism should come before the democratic wish of the voters. They, and I do not blame them for this, opted to put unionism at the top.

But that very adherence to unionism means I have little sympathy should their accepted leaders decide that the best course for the union is to diverge NI away from it. It is, after all, the very core of their belief that London should be in charge.

Would I be mad if it was me, you betcha. But such is the deal they signed. This is the price you pay.

swampgas

20silkcut wrote: »

I think if they vote against such a deal their position (which is ridiculous anyway) will go to the furthest ends of absurdity. Being offered a hard orderly brexit and refusing it. After three years of hell. They will be shown up for being truly unpatriotic and would be castigated by hard brexiteers, brexit party etc. I’d imagine.

I agree, the problem is they and their backers may not care. If they make out like bandits, they can walk away from politics having cashed in.

hill16bhoy

serfboard wrote: »

If that's the case, they should have campaigned for Remain.

They should have, yes.

But if they had they'd still be in the exact same position as they're in now.

NI's votes did not make the difference in the referendum.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

What I do respect is their right to their British identity and their opposition to an NI backstop on that basis, as I do with all unionists who oppose it.

Respecting Irish/British/both identities is the cornerstone of the Good Friday Agreement.

And there is nothing in the suggested NI backstop that would affect that. Comparing that to the possible hard border in Ireland is a false equivalence. There would be nothing like the level of imposition of a border that the latter would require. There would be practically no difference to the average unionist and their British identity. This is just another version of the nonsensical 'undemocratic' backstop that Boris was wittering on about.

But seeing as you're making the claim, please feel free to point to the equivalence.

prawnsambo

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I'm not really sure what his point is then.

If a majority of Coriscans want to remain part of France, or even if there was a majority in favour of autonomy, there's a majority in favour of keeping the exact same trading arrangments with France as pertain now.

Which is similar to NI, where a majority want to keep the exact same trading arrangements with both the Republic and Britain.

Which is basically my point about the NI only backstop.

Well perhaps you should re-read his first post then. Because you clearly didn't read it properly the first time.