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 VII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

This thread is for the discussion of the United Kingdom's upcoming exit from the European Union, known more popularly as Brexit.

Please bear the following in mind before posting:

Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
Please do not be uncivil to other posters
Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Seth Brundle

Is this indicating a complete softening of the UK Gov position?

https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1098234368840159233

Panrich

This is going to make the Brexit endgame fascinating viewing. There are none too subtle hints of more defections to follow and it's going to be interesting how this affects Mays next movements. Can she double down on ERG/DUP positions and risk these defections? If the stakes for this country were not so high, it would be popcorn time. In any event, there's finally a group that the majority of remainers can feel are representing their views.

kunst nugget

BonnieSituation wrote: »

What was the fabrication?

Presumably they're taking about the claims of antisemitism that plague the Labour party.

BonnieSituation

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Much stronger, though shouldn't be surprising: they have clear genuine positions on Brexit and lament the loss of the Cameron / Osborne platform whereas the Labour rebels were trying to sell a fabricated non issue as their main reason for leaving.

What was the fabrication?

LuckyLloyd

Strazdas wrote: »

That was a fantastic press conference by Soubry, Allen and Wollaston. They came out with all guns blazing......made the Labour rebels press conference look like a damp squib in comparison.

Much stronger, though shouldn't be surprising: they have clear genuine positions on Brexit and lament the loss of the Cameron / Osborne platform whereas the Labour rebels were trying to sell a fabricated non issue as their main reason for leaving.

Strazdas

VinLieger wrote: »

Sturgeons comment absolutely nails them both

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1098198173657583617

Yes, two quite terrible leaders, both committed to implementing Brexit.

BonnieSituation

VinLieger wrote: »

Sturgeons comment absolutely nails them both

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1098198173657583617

She's just quality all the way through.

Quin_Dub

boggerman1 wrote: »

Was listening to pmq's today (I know how sad!) and it was the most downbeat one I've heard in a while.both the maybot and Jeremy the commi sounded like beaten dockets.same old same old stuff.rule out no deal,vote for the deal ,re open talks on the backstop etc.whatever about our country's history with the UK and while I may take a little bit of delight in their comeuppance this is sad to watch a country tearing itself to shreds over a perceived greatness and empire

##Mod Note##

Cut out the silly nicknames please.

VinLieger

Sturgeons comment absolutely nails them both

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1098198173657583617

BonnieSituation

Strazdas wrote: »

That was a fantastic press conference by Soubry, Allen and Wollaston. They came out with all guns blazing......made the Labour rebels press conference look like a damp squib in comparison.

I take back my crocodile tears comment from last week re Soubry.

The resignation letter hit the nail on the head.

I'm looking forward to hearing the presser.

Call me Al

blackwhite wrote: »

Most Irish people have grown up exposed to more UK television channels than Irish ones.

That's always going to have a slant on viewpoints as well TBH.

We are extensively exposed to UK media, and yet we can see what their general populations are blind to.... that they've been lied to.
This indicates to me that that the media isn't solely to blame for the political dilemma they've found themselves in (And I appreciate you never said it was!).
Maybe the media is stoking the divisions but I think there are more intrinsic causes at play. Their electoral system, school systems as well as the elites they create, their colonial past and the selective editing in that regard, amongst others things.

Nody

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That's like saying driving off the cliff is the most viable option because it is less effort than truning the wheel or hitting the brakes.

"Viable" literally means possible by extension from "able to live". Driving off a cliff is not viable just because it is easy - it is lethal.

Yes but we're talking about a parliament that's taken every opportunity to NOT take any responsibility or provide any guidance on Brexit. They don't like it but refuse to do anything about it and since anything but hard crash out requires them to actually make a decision with majority the most viable route is crash out based on their actions to date. Yes they will bitch and moan about it but when asked to actually step up and do something they shirk their responsibility and will drive off the cliff blaming anyone and everyone for it.

Strazdas

That was a fantastic press conference by Soubry, Allen and Wollaston. They came out with all guns blazing......made the Labour rebels press conference look like a damp squib in comparison.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Mod: Back on topic, please.

Off topic posts deleted.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Back on topic, please.

Harry Palmr

WW2 also secured the internal structure of the CCCP . Stalin was fighting more than one war at the time.

We may have drifted off topic here!

blackwhite

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think a lot of Irish people actually know/knew about the British input to the 2nd WW because they took part in it - both fighting in British uniforms and working in the munitions factories. Also, the Irish authorities were neutral on the side of the Allies, providing them with valuable intelligence - in particular the vital weather forecast before D-Day.

Many people in Ireland have relations in the UK and know a lot about the UK.

Most Irish people have grown up exposed to more UK television channels than Irish ones.

That's always going to have a slant on viewpoints as well TBH.

blackwhite

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

And also substantial destruction of infrastructure and natural resources on vast expanses of homeland, something the US avoided almost completely. Quite the sacrifice.

I'm not sure that "sacrifice" ("give up (something valued) for the sake of other considerations") is the appropriate word.

I'd always consider a sacrifice as something you choose to do/give up in order to serve a greater good.

The USSR was quite happy to hop into bed with Nazi Germany up until the point the Nazi's double-crossed them and attacked Soviet forces in Poland.
They didn't enter the war to try and defeat Fascism or the Nazis - their initial position was to try and seize territory in Eastern Europe, then to repel an invasion, and finally the combined goal of crippling Germany to prevent risk of future invasions, whilst also revisiting the first goal of a land-grab.

"Sacrifice" always strikes me as far too altruistic a description to associate with Soviet involvement in WWII.

Imreoir2

seamus wrote: »

Off-topic, I always feel bad for Russia in WWII history. I'm no fan of them, but their contribution in WWII was completely whitewashed by the West during the cold war. Between 9 and 10 million Soviets died fighting in WW2. Of which Russians alone account for nearly 7 million. The UK and US combined lost less than a million.

Never mind losses suffered, if you look at the losses inflicted on the German military, it is clear that the Soviets did the vast bulk of the lifting when it came to defeating the Garman Army. Had the Soviets been defeated without much fuss in 1941 the Anglo-American alliance would not have had a snowballs chance of liberating Western Europe.

Sam Russell

downcow wrote: »

Will I dont t think roi people know very much about the British input to the 2nd world war. But why should they
Tbh why should any of us be expected to take an interest in history that doesn’t interest us.
Less history and more looking forward would be helpful

I think a lot of Irish people actually know/knew about the British input to the 2nd WW because they took part in it - both fighting in British uniforms and working in the munitions factories. Also, the Irish authorities were neutral on the side of the Allies, providing them with valuable intelligence - in particular the vital weather forecast before D-Day.

Many people in Ireland have relations in the UK and know a lot about the UK.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Well at the risk of going off-topic had the Brits just said "Oh well" then what would have stopped the Germans from winning? There's different ways of phrasing and thinking about it. The Brits probably did the most to stop the Germans winning. The Russians and Yanks were what won it in the end but there wouldn't have still been a war but for the Brits.

The point is that WW2 was a very nuanced affair and the British are those who are least able to understand that, as the graph shows. Education should temper that but it doesn't, the myths persist.
Compare that to how we understand our own conflicts and wars and it is very different, all the nuances are expressed and are unhidden. I.E. the current major doc with Cillian Murphy narrating which is largely a warts and all look at our decade of conflict/war.

boggerman1

Was listening to pmq's today (I know how sad!) and it was the most downbeat one I've heard in a while.both the maybot and Jeremy the commi sounded like beaten dockets.same old same old stuff.rule out no deal,vote for the deal ,re open talks on the backstop etc.whatever about our country's history with the UK and while I may take a little bit of delight in their comeuppance this is sad to watch a country tearing itself to shreds over a perceived greatness and empire

LuckyLloyd

seamus wrote: »

Off-topic, I always feel bad for Russia in WWII history. I'm no fan of them, but their contribution in WWII was completely whitewashed by the West during the cold war. Between 9 and 10 million Soviets died fighting in WW2. Of which Russians alone account for nearly 7 million. The UK and US combined lost less than a million.

And also substantial destruction of infrastructure and natural resources on vast expanses of homeland, something the US avoided almost completely. Quite the sacrifice.

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Judging from this, the people of Britain seem to have an opinion on WW2 that they are totally alone in holding.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/05/01/Britain-America-disagree-who-did-more-beat-nazis

Off-topic, I always feel bad for Russia in WWII history. I'm no fan of them, but their contribution in WWII was completely whitewashed by the West during the cold war. Between 9 and 10 million Soviets died fighting in WW2. Of which Russians alone account for nearly 7 million. The UK and US combined lost less than a million.

[Deleted User]

seamus wrote: »

To be fair, Sinn Fein and their seats is an issue of subtlety that requires explaining 100 years of Irish history to make sense. I wouldn't expect a foreign journalist to get it unless their specific area of focus was Irish politics.

Journalists tend to consider foreign parliaments as one contiguous governing body, but domestic parliament is a mish-mash of warring factions. They forget that other parliaments have their own opposition parties, bun fights and historical squabbles. This is as true of the BBC as it is of RTE.

That said, it would be fair to say that the Irish know a lot more about UK politics than the British know about Irish politics. Given the close relationship between the two countries, it seems more than a little bit incompetent for a UK political commentator to not understand the basics.

He was caught out playing to the gallery of imbeciles who know nothing and don't want to know anything about what happens beyond British shores.

LuckyLloyd

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

The UK is in major trouble, it's clear from PMQ that Corbyn has not a single notion of a plan either.

Did you actually watch it? It's fairly clear what his plan is! He wants to rule out No Deal and agree to a permanent Customs Union. Dropping that Red Line would offer much greater flexibility to the EU and allow the WA to be reopened, particularly the section on the Backstop.

You can debate the rights and wrongs of that plan, but it's definitely a plan of action. By contrast, May continues to offer no flexibility on her red lines and talk about unicorns. From an EU perspective, Corbyn would be far easier to deal with.

10000maniacs

Shelga wrote: »

Finally, three Tories have had enough and defected to the Independent Group:

Three Tory MPs join Labour breakaway group http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47306022

Great news, they just need another 100 or so to join them now.

In terms of Brexit, there is going to be a hard Brexit in 37 days time and you may ask how is this even possible when the majority of the House of Commons don't want it.
Both remainers and leavers who don't want a hard Brexit don't want to run the risk of the other side being the ones to get the concessions, whether it a customs union or removal of the backstop, so May has no chance of getting her deal through. So that leaves no Brexit or no deal.
76% of Tories in the HOC would prefer a no-deal to remaining. And 65% of Labour constituencies voted for no-deal. So if you were a Labour remainer in one of those constituencies, you would reject any Article 50 amendment or be out of work after the next General Election. So after Mays new deal is rejected, Yvette Coopers Article 50 amendment vote will be retriggered and rejected.
What's next after that?

Strazdas

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think it is a little bit more significant than you suggest. A labour splinter group is one thing and largely insignificant in the shceme of things, but that they have been able to attract dis-satisified members from both sides makes them a much bigger threat if you ask me. They have 10 MPs now, the same number as the DUP, they could possibley be a kingmaker for a softer Brexit deal.

EDIT: The article says 8 former labour MP's, I thought there was only 7? Does that bring them up to 11?

Totally agree, if this was just about one party imploding, it could be dismissed as a stunt but when it's happening to the two major parties, it's a huge story.

Strazdas

joeysoap wrote: »

‘Confident’

https://www.joe.ie/news/kate-hoey-confident-ireland-leave-eu-659076

Hoey is now one of the most extreme MPs in the Commons. If she was in the ERG, she would be one of their most hardline members (ditto with Sammy Wilson).

LeinsterDub

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

The UK is in major trouble, it's clear from PMQ that Corbyn has not a single notion of a plan either.

PMQ's is nothing but a clown show. I don't know why anyone puts any stock in it . Nothing ever comes out of it . The media and everyone else should ignore it until such time as the circus is ended