nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit Discussion Thread VI

johnnyskeleton

Hi folks, as Theresa May has won the vote of no confidence and we are heading into Brexit day early next year, I thought for the new thread people might give their summary of their views on Brexit to date before we get into the more day to day discussions.

So what do you think about what has happened so far? Who has come off well, who has come off badly?

Where do you think Brexit is going? What is going to be the likely impact on Ireland, Northern Ireland, the rest of the U.K. and the E.U. respectively?

Both this thread and the Mark V thread will remain open simultaneously for the next day or so and Mark V will be closed as it gets closer to the server busting 10,000 mark. Hopefully we can set down a solid foundation now for a top quality thread to come!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Captain Obvious

I think Corbyn is just prepping for a hard Brexit. He is giving everyone on the Tory side a chance to fly their colours so they can't claim innocence when the economy dips after a hard exit. They will have to own their support of May and her deal.

J Mysterio

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/who-does-leo-varadkar-think-he-is/

A must read for everyone the above quote is just one of half a dozen such gems

That is an absolutely disgraceful article. Unbelievably this repugnant buffoon is very often on Sky's Press Preview. 'The Editor of Spiked Online'.

Edit: also snap.

Captain Obvious

J Mysterio wrote: »

That is an absolutely disgraceful article. Unbelievably this repugnant buffoon is very often on Sky's Press Preview. 'The Editor of Spiked Online'.

Edit: also snap.

It never ceases to amaze me how little they understand the border.

Tell me how

J Mysterio wrote: »

That is an absolutely disgraceful article. Unbelievably this repugnant buffoon is very often on Sky's Press Preview. 'The Editor of Spiked Online'.

Edit: also snap.

The male version of Kate Andrews. Says stuff so blatantly misguided, you have to rewind to confirm they actually said it.

[Deleted User]

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I think Corbyn is just prepping for a hard Brexit. He is giving everyone on the Tory side a chance to fly their colours so they can't claim innocence when the economy dips after a hard exit. They will have to own their support of May and her deal.

While at the same time living his own personal dream of seeing the UK out of the EU

Shelga

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/who-does-leo-varadkar-think-he-is/

A must read for everyone the above quote is just one of half a dozen such gems

Urgh. I need to scrub my eyeballs after reading that. Fortunately I started zoning out halfway, such utter rubbish that it is.

[Deleted User]

Shelga wrote: »

Urgh. I need to scrub my eyeballs after reading that. Fortunately I started zoning out halfway, such utter rubbish that it is.

He is right when he mentions "The Irish chattering classes, virtually all of whom are uncritically pro-EU"

There is often a lack of critical analysis of the EU from the two main parties in particular.

Hurrache

Captain Obvious wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me how little they understand the border.

Peasant O'Neil's stance may be financially lead. The article really is something.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/us-billionaires-hard-right-britain-spiked-magazine-charles-david-koch-foundation

That Spiked magazine’s US funding arm received $300,000 from the Charles Koch Foundation suggests a hidden agenda.
...
The organisation the Charles Koch Foundation has chosen to fund is at first sight astounding: a US organisation established by an obscure UK-based magazine run by former members of a tiny Trotskyite splinter group. Some of its core contributors still describe themselves as Marxists or Bolsheviks. But the harder you look at it, the more sense the Koch donations appear to make. The name of the magazine is Spiked. It emerged from a group with a comical history of left factionalism. In 1974, the International Socialists split after a dispute over arithmetic in Volume 3 of Das Kapital. One of the new factions formed the Revolutionary Communist Group. In 1976 it split again, and one of the splinters formed the Revolutionary Communist Tendency. It was led by a sociologist at the University of Kent called Frank Furedi. In 1981 it changed its name to the Revolutionary Communist party.

Professor Moriarty

A wonderfully typical example of Brexiteer behaviour in the face of facts. It's only two minutes and well worth watching: https://news.sky.com/video/tory-mp-goes-on-phone-during-heated-brexit-debate-11584336

Hurrache

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A wonderfully typical example of Brexiteer behaviour in the face of facts. It's only two minutes and well worth watching: https://news.sky.com/video/tory-mp-goes-on-phone-during-heated-brexit-debate-11584336

Fair play to Burley, I laughed at her comment right at the end as he walked off. But what a disgraceful level of debate over there.

listermint

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A wonderfully typical example of Brexiteer behaviour in the face of facts. It's only two minutes and well worth watching: https://news.sky.com/video/tory-mp-goes-on-phone-during-heated-brexit-debate-11584336

Follow the money.

These people aren't doing this for ****s and giggles.

Its always financial and always greed.

Igotadose

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A wonderfully typical example of Brexiteer behaviour in the face of facts. It's only two minutes and well worth watching: https://news.sky.com/video/tory-mp-goes-on-phone-during-heated-brexit-debate-11584336

Hm.... recession didn't happen post-Brexit vote, so all facts are wrong appears to be the Welsh PM position. Which he just looped and looped on. Loved the mention by the moderator of how Davies walked off in front of the camera. After getting kicked out by the moderator.

I wonder if the UK realizes just how deep the doo-doo it's in if this is what passes for discourse in politics there. And the loud screaming in the background sure as heck shows the local's ain't pleased with the state of things.

bilston

Hurrache wrote: »

Fair play to Burley, I laughed at her comment right at the end as he walked off. But what a disgraceful level of debate over there.

It's starting to get quite posionous. The politicians are at each others throats. Social media is just full of insults from both sides (well the insults tend to mainly come from one side).

It's nasty stuff...and I can only see it getting worse at the moment.

ilovesmybrick

bilston wrote: »

It's starting to get quite posionous. The politicians are at each others throats. Social media is just full of insults from both sides (well the insults tend to mainly come from one side).

It's nasty stuff...and I can only see it getting worse at the moment.

I'm actually quite shocked at such blatant ignorance from a senior politician. It's frankly astounding, you can understand that people have quite emotional and entrenched views on both sides, but to literally act like a spoiled teenager on national television is a new kind of low. If this is how they act on television you would have to wonder how any type of compromise is possible in the coming months, because ultimately politics is the art of compromise.

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

I said backstop. Not border. Backstop ensures no border. I am amazed that most on here read ‘border’ when I type ‘backstop ‘. &#55357;&#56832;

Yes. But backstop is just a word to describe a fall back position that ensures no border. Regardless of the outcome. So I really don't understand your use of the word in this context. What kind of backstop are you describing and how would it operate?

briany

VinLieger wrote: »

They will fight tooth and nail against a split in either party. Because if one splits and the other doesn't the two new smaller parties and their members will be out of power for several election cycles thanks to the archaic FPTP system.

I definitely see your point, but the way things are going it's going to become a joke where you have MPs staying in the same party while disagreeing on such a fundamental issue. They just can't seem to reconcile it at all. You have MPs like Soubry being openly hostile towards the likes of Mogg. I'm sure that both being Conservative, they have things they can agree on, but what they cannot agree is becoming much more prominent and probably the defining issue of this era of British politics.

The parties may not split officially, but if Farage gets his new party off the ground, you will have a party that is unitedly pro-Brexit, and will present much the same problem as the Conservatives had in the run up to 2015 which was having MPs defecting. Maybe not a split into four parties, but a split into three could be on the horizon.

RobMc59

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Republic of ireland is just a description of the the state's form of government. Like calling the UK the constitutional monarchy of Great Britain and North Ireland and don't get me started on the BBC using Irish republic

Does it really matter?Someone mentioned football teams earlier and commented the UK or Great Britain or England or whatever it`s called does`nt have a national football team which is incorrect but hardly worthy of pulling someone up on.

LeinsterDub

RobMc59 wrote: »

Does it really matter?Someone mentioned football teams earlier and commented the UK or Great Britain or England or whatever it`s called does`nt have a national football team which is incorrect but hardly worthy of pulling someone up on.

In the grand scheme of brexit now of course not. It just grinds my gears.

Capt'n Midnight

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/who-does-leo-varadkar-think-he-is/

A must read for everyone the above quote is just one of half a dozen such gems

Captain Obvious wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me how little they understand the border.

Or that we had a civil war over accepting a hard border.

Or that they are laying this game at the lowest difficulty as FG the side that agreed to stop the War of Independence and accept the border is in power now.

It might have been a lot harder if FF "soldiers of destiny" "the republican party" who wanted to keep fighting had been in power. And in the long run FF are one of the most successful political parties in Europe if you judge by the years in control of the government.

Or worse an FF / SF coalition with each half trying to out do the other.

Other Irish political parties are leftist so for a Tory government this is really as easy as it gets.

Russman

Apologies if this is in the wrong thread or has been beaten to death in previous Brexit threads, but with regard to a no deal crash out, we’ve all seen/heard about the major potential consequences - planes grounded, Dover at a standstill, Euratom issues, supply chains, food shortages etc etc etc. I’m just wondering why any sane person would even risk that happening, never mind willingly allowing it. Is there something we’re missing or overlooking in all this i.e. are those predictions wrong ? Or are the ideologues just firmly in charge over there and to hell with the consequences ?
It just makes no sense.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1074774046540218368

The motion of no confidence may become a motion of no confidence. And that completely nonsensical sentence is just more brexit meaning brexit

bilston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1074774046540218368

The motion of no confidence may become a motion of no confidence. And that completely nonsensical sentence is just more brexit meaning brexit

Waste of time doing it now.

The ERG and DUP have supposedly indicated they will vote against Corbyn's vote of no confidence in the PM, so it is safe to assume they will definitely go against a No Confidence vote in the government.

An Ciarraioch

bilston wrote: »

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1074774046540218368

The motion of no confidence may become a motion of no confidence. And that completely nonsensical sentence is just more brexit meaning brexit

Waste of time doing it now.

The ERG and DUP have supposedly indicated they will vote against Corbyn's vote of no confidence in the PM, so it is safe to assume they will definitely go against a No Confidence vote in the government.

Would force Labour to back a second referendum, as per party conference.

briany

Russman wrote: »

Apologies if this is in the wrong thread or has been beaten to death in previous Brexit threads, but with regard to a no deal crash out, we’ve all seen/heard about the major potential consequences - planes grounded, Dover at a standstill, Euratom issues, supply chains, food shortages etc etc etc. I’m just wondering why any sane person would even risk that happening, never mind willingly allowing it. Is there something we’re missing or overlooking in all this i.e. are those predictions wrong ? Or are the ideologues just firmly in charge over there and to hell with the consequences ?
It just makes no sense.

Brexiteers regard the potential issues caused by a no-deal as overblown. They concede there'll be hardships for a time, but don't believe that it'll render Britain a dystopia. They can peddle that belief because Britain's treading into uncharted territory and there aren't really any concrete comparisons being that no country has yet left the EU. They say, "Well, experts predicted that the economy would crash as soon as we voted out, but that hasn't happened, so maybe it won't happen when we actually leave either."

They also believe that any hardship endured will be a price worth paying for Britain not to have to take any orders from Brussels, and regain their sovereignty and control of their borders. They also will invariably blame hardships caused on the EU attempting to punish Britain for not playing ball with what Brexiteers see as the EU's agenda, i.e. globalism or simply a power-grab by Germany and France - the auld enemies of Albion.

Mancomb Seepgood

Hurrache wrote: »

Peasant O'Neil's stance may be financially lead. The article really is something.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/us-billionaires-hard-right-britain-spiked-magazine-charles-david-koch-foundation

Spiked/Living Marxism/Revolutionary Communist Party has a poisonous agenda and media outlets would do well to let viewers and listeners know what their agenda is (and their past as apologists for Slobadan Milosevic,among others).

George Monbiot has produced some first rate coverage of this group of people over the years.

fash

Russman wrote: »

I’m just wondering why any sane person would even risk that happening, never mind willingly allowing it. Is there something we’re missing or overlooking in all this i.e. are those predictions wrong ? Or are the ideologues just firmly in charge over there and to hell with the consequences ?
It just makes no sense.

A crisis is a wonderful opportunity that one should not waste- just ask Erdogan. The Tories will blame those evil Europeans while they dismantle the state and state protections, the far left wing of labour think they can get in and implement a socialist utopia while blaming the Tories. Mogg just wants a catastrophe to make money on the carcass. The crisis is felt by other people, not the people controlling it. Aside from those actually willing it or who don't care about it, others are paralyzed by dysfunction- pulling in different directions.

WomanSkirtFan8

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A wonderfully typical example of Brexiteer behaviour in the face of facts. It's only two minutes and well worth watching: https://news.sky.com/video/tory-mp-goes-on-phone-during-heated-brexit-debate-11584336

Have to say, just watched that there, and that is absolutely pathetic. When you see behaviour like that from both sides, its no wonder that britain is in the mess they're in at that moment.

Brexiteers just can't handle the facts. Both sides really need to stop that bickering before they lose everything but the tragic thing is that they probably won't. :eek:

WomanSkirtFan8

bilston wrote: »

It's starting to get quite posionous. The politicians are at each others throats. Social media is just full of insults from both sides (well the insults tend to mainly come from one side).

It's nasty stuff...and I can only see it getting worse at the moment.

certain is and its the same on youtube as well. sad and tragic situation. :cool:

Thargor

Tell me how wrote: »

They've been able to so partly because of the ineptitude of the Labour Party.

The actions of 7 people have led this to be the absolute sh*tstorm which it has turned out to be.

Nigel Farage, David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg, David Davis, Jeremy Corbyn

Of all of them, Theresa May is the only one who I think has been in any way motivated about what is in the best interest of the country in trying to honour the vote and still having some form of a workable relationship with the EU on the 30th of March.

She did many many things wrong. But, I think she did them for 'somewhat' understandable reasons.

The rest of them? Entirely self motivated and Corbyn deserves as much blame as the rest.

This post makes no sense?

Please outline the steps that Action-Corbyn could have taken to prevent the current mess?

awec

Thargor wrote: »

This post makes no sense?

Please outline the steps that Action-Corbyn could have taken to prevent the current mess?

Nothing, which is part of the problem.

Corbyn and his party are an irrelevance. They are not strong enough to provide any meaningful opposition. Even this no confidence was a wishy washy half-arsed attempt.