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

Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

1…6364666869…330

Comments

  • #1952
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,756 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    funkey_monkey wrote: »
    Conservative members.

    Wow they've collectively lost their marbles..

    The 'union' is quite clearly a sham at this stage


  • #1953
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,542 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    funkey_monkey wrote: »
    Conservative members.

    Link: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye
    Conservative members are probably saying they would accept these outcomes - breakup of the UK, end of the Tory party - as a result of Brexit precisely because they don't seriously expect that any of them would result from Brexit. So it costs them nothing to claim to be willing to accept them.

    The one outcome that they think could happen - a Corbyn premiership - is the one they say they wouldn't accept.

    And in fact this is Brexit in a nutshell. Brexiters support Brexit despite all the damage it could do simply by refusing to believe in the damage it could do.


  • #1954
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    funkey_monkey wrote: »
    I'm still not sure that a 2nd referendum would put sufficient daylight between the sides to comprehensively draw a line under this mess.


    Nothing will ever put a line under it, but it would be far, far less damaging for for the UK to remain in the EU while squabbling with itself about Brexit than to leave and squabble with itself outside.


  • #1955
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Because if we allow it today, the resulting hard border is not permanent: UK is in desparate need of a deal and there is leverage to get it to agree and commit to to the measures needed to restore the open border.

    Varadkar's "infinite patience" is misleading, and I wonder how deliberate that is. It suggests that others like Macron have lost patience and just want Brexit to be over. This is a much nicer thing for the UK to believe than the truth, so Varadkar may be trying to sugar coat it.

    Macron thinks No Deal is OK not because it will mean Brexit is over, but because he thinks the UK are currently living in a fantasy land and as long as they keep getting extensions they will stay there.

    No Deal will be a short, sharp shock - an international ice-bucket challenge, and when they return to ask the EU for a deal, they will have woken up in the real world and realized that they are in a very bad place.

    And realizing that, they will be in an extremely weak negotiating position, which will suit the EU (and Macron) very well.


  • #1956
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Varadkar's "infinite patience" is misleading, and I wonder how deliberate that is. It suggests that others like Macron have lost patience and just want Brexit to be over. This is a much nicer thing for the UK to believe than the truth, so Varadkar may be trying to sugar coat it.

    Macron thinks No Deal is OK not because it will mean Brexit is over, but because he thinks the UK are currently living in a fantasy land and as long as they keep getting extensions they will stay there.

    No Deal will be a short, sharp shock - an international ice-bucket challenge, and when they return to ask the EU for a deal, they will have woken up in the real world and realized that they are in a very bad place.

    And realizing that, they will be in an extremely weak negotiating position, which will suit the EU (and Macron) very well.

    Which all sounds great. The problem is we'll end up most likely being the collateral damage in that scenario. I just hope there's something planned on the EU side to stop our economy tanking in the event of a No Deal.


  • Advertisement
  • #1957
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    Why would the EU open up talks? A no deal just increases the EUs leverage.

    A no deal Brexit will do a hell of a lot of damage to the rest of the EU and they want to avoid that at all costs. I've every confidence in Boris when it comes to these negotiations. I hope/expect that he'll take a Trumpian approach and we'll see a change in tact from the EU when that happens. The UK is not going to sail into economic nothingness, if it leaves on a no deal Brexit. People are forgetting that!
    Infini wrote: »
    Reversing Brexit does put the issue back in the box its just that while Ireland can have infinite patience the rest of Europe might not and that's the thing. If the UK crashes out the Border becomes a serious problem and only reunification will remove that issue as the UK and the DUP failed their voters by selling politically defective and idiotic policies...

    The border has only ever been and will only ever be a serious problem because the RoI and the republican movement, to be more specific, want to make an issue out of it. Everyone on the UK side of Brexit has been very clear about their willingness to avoid a hard border on the island. A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession. The RoI will end up as collateral damage no matter what form Brexit takes. The harder the Brexit, the worse that damage will be.


  • #1958
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,394 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Berserker wrote: »
    A no deal Brexit will do a hell of a lot of damage to the rest of the EU and they want to avoid that at all costs. I've every confidence in Boris when it comes to these negotiations. I hope/expect that he'll take a Trumpian approach and we'll see a change in tact from the EU when that happens. The UK is not going to sail into economic nothingness, if it leaves on a no deal Brexit. People are forgetting that!



    The border has only ever been and will only ever be a serious problem because the RoI and the republican movement, to be more specific, want to make an issue out of it. Everyone on the UK side of Brexit has been very clear about their willingness to avoid a hard border on the island. A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession. The RoI will end up as collateral damage no matter what form Brexit takes. The harder the Brexit, the worse that damage will be.

    You're spot on. If Johnson behaves like Trump, there will be a change in the EU's tact.


  • #1959
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Berserker wrote:
    A no deal Brexit will do a hell of a lot of damage to the rest of the EU and they want to avoid that at all costs. I've every confidence in Boris when it comes to these negotiations. I hope/expect that he'll take a Trumpian approach and we'll see a change in tact from the EU when that happens. The UK is not going to sail into economic nothingness, if it leaves on a no deal Brexit. People are forgetting that!
    I'd have thought this Brexiteer delusion had been well and truly debunked by now.
    Berserker wrote:
    The border has only ever been and will only ever be a serious problem because the RoI and the republican movement, to be more specific, want to make an issue out of it. Everyone on the UK side of Brexit has been very clear about their willingness to avoid a hard border on the island. A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession. The RoI will end up as collateral damage no matter what form Brexit takes. The harder the Brexit, the worse that damage will be.

    Nothing to do with a UI. Its about the integrity of the Single Market. The Irish border is the EU's border and the other 26 members are entitled to (and will get) the same protection there as anywhere else.


  • #1960
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Professor Moriarty wrote:
    You're spot on. If Johnson behaves like Trump, there will be a change in the EU's tact.

    Oh really? What do you expect that will be?


  • #1961
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,394 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    First Up wrote: »
    Oh really? What do you expect that will be?

    Yes really. If Johnson takes a belligerent attitude with the EU then they will not be as tactful as they have been. Berserker inadvertently made a good point.


  • Advertisement
  • #1962
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,792 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    Berserker wrote: »
    A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession.



    We'll be in deep recession? Who is leaving the EU again? 😂

    Economic predictions from Brexiters thus far..... 🙄

    NI will not be able to fund itself, UK will break up and cut off the NI sponges.


  • #1963
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    First Up wrote: »
    I'd have thought this Brexiteer delusion had been well and truly debunked by now.

    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.
    First Up wrote: »
    Nothing to do with a UI. Its about the integrity of the Single Market. The Irish border is the EU's border and the other 26 members are entitled to (and will get) the same protection there as anywhere else.

    So the EU will implement a hard border to protect it's borders. I just hope that republicans will direct their angst at the EU and not the UK when the border appears.


  • #1964
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,106 ✭✭✭Christy42


    Berserker wrote: »
    A no deal Brexit will do a hell of a lot of damage to the rest of the EU and they want to avoid that at all costs. I've every confidence in Boris when it comes to these negotiations. I hope/expect that he'll take a Trumpian approach and we'll see a change in tact from the EU when that happens. The UK is not going to sail into economic nothingness, if it leaves on a no deal Brexit. People are forgetting that!



    The border has only ever been and will only ever be a serious problem because the RoI and the republican movement, to be more specific, want to make an issue out of it. Everyone on the UK side of Brexit has been very clear about their willingness to avoid a hard border on the island. A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession. The RoI will end up as collateral damage no matter what form Brexit takes. The harder the Brexit, the worse that damage will be.

    Errrr which will be worse off after a no deal brexit? It really is threatening the EU that it will get blood on its clothes the EU had better give in and stop the UK shooting itself.

    Sure damage will be done to both sides but it is entirely ignoring the scale of the damage done to both sides to suggest this.

    The UK has lied about being willing to avoid a hard border. It has months left and the best they have is "alternative arrangements". Since they have not gone into further detail I am beginning to suspect they are lying. No backstop or time limited backstop = hard border until they have incredibly detailed proposals telling us how to avoid it. There is no reason for us to sign up to a hard border.


  • #1965
    Dytalus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 459 ✭✭Dytalus


    Berserker wrote: »
    The border has only ever been and will only ever be a serious problem because the RoI and the republican movement, to be more specific, want to make an issue out of it. Everyone on the UK side of Brexit has been very clear about their willingness to avoid a hard border on the island. A UI is not a goer at this moment in time; I see no real demand for it in the general population and it will certainly be off the table in the event of a hard Brexit because the RoI will be in a deep recession. The RoI will end up as collateral damage no matter what form Brexit takes. The harder the Brexit, the worse that damage will be.

    Nothing to do with the republican movement wanting a UI, and everything to do with international agreements and law. I've explained this before, but simply not wanting a hard border isn't enough for there to not be one. Let me extract the relevant bit:
    As to why this would be required:
    Contrary to what a lot of people say, there is no specific rule among the World Trade Organisation's laws that say countries must put up borders between each other, HOWEVER the WTO has a rule known as the "Most favoured Nation" (which is a horrible misnomer, in my opinion). This is essentially a non-discrimination rule for members of the WTO. It means that the UK cannot give favourable treatment to one nation over others outside of mutually agreed upon trade agreements (this is why such agreements are very difficult to negotiate and take a long time. The EU's recent trade deal with Singapore took eight years to complete).

    This would mean: Outside of any existing trade agreements (which the UK has none of currently), the UK must treat all nations equally per WTO rules. While the WTO cannot force a nation to do anything, it does act as a kind of 'court' for member nations. If one of the other members takes issue with how the UK is handling its borders, then they are liable to face legal repercussions and trade sanctions from other WTO members.

    If the UK wants to keep the Irish border open while outside of the EU, they must keep every one of their borders equally open or face a whole heap of trouble from fellow WTO members. Most-Favoured-Nation and all that jazz.

    They can't just wave their hands and be done with it. Nor can we, nor should we want to. Getting in trouble with our fellow EU member states for not protecting the Single Market will only compound any post-Brexit trouble we face.


  • #1966
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,394 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Berserker wrote: »
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.



    So the EU will implement a hard border to protect it's borders. I just hope that republicans will direct their angst at the EU and not the UK when the border appears.

    If the nationalist community is angry, their anger will be directed at the British government. Funny you think otherwise.


  • #1967
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    If the nationalist community is angry, their anger will be directed at the British government. Funny you think otherwise.

    Angry at the British government because the EU decided to build a hard border on the island? It's the EU building the wall not the British government.


  • #1968
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,088 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Berserker wrote: »
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.



    So the EU will implement a hard border to protect it's borders. I just hope that republicans will direct their angst at the EU and not the UK when the border appears.

    Given that the border exists in the first place solely because of British imperialism i see republicans and Nationalists (this one included) being pretty irate anyway towards the UK. The EU (of which Ireland is a constituent member) won't register at all to being a cause of any angst.


  • #1969
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,394 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Berserker wrote: »
    Angry at the British government because the EU decided to build a hard border on the island? It's the EU building the wall not the British government.

    Nah. Nationalists in the North will rightly feel betrayed by the British government and the Unionist community. I'm amazed you don't understand that.


  • #1970
    Dytalus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 459 ✭✭Dytalus


    Berserker wrote: »
    Angry at the British government because the EU decided to build a hard border on the island? It's the EU building the wall not the British government.

    The British government (will have) left the EU, forcing the situation on all parties. Ireland, the UK, and the EU all must comply with WTO rules absent any agreement and the UK voted for Brexit in spite of this and without due consideration to the problems that would be encountered.

    I cannot see anyone more deserving of the blame.


  • #1971
    54and56
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,862 ✭✭✭54and56


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Macron thinks No Deal is OK not because it will mean Brexit is over, but because he thinks the UK are currently living in a fantasy land and as long as they keep getting extensions they will stay there.

    No Deal will be a short, sharp shock - an international ice-bucket challenge, and when they return to ask the EU for a deal, they will have woken up in the real world and realized that they are in a very bad place.

    And realizing that, they will be in an extremely weak negotiating position, which will suit the EU (and Macron) very well.

    Plus with Merkel retiring soon and troubles at home it absolutely suits Macron to be projecting himself as the tough guy in Europe who finally decides the UK have had enough time to stare at their navels and it's time to move on from Brexit which has hijacked the EU agenda for the last 3 years.


  • Advertisement
  • #1972
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Berserker wrote:
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.


    A very short game with a very familiar result. I hope for the UK's sake that behind the bluster and nonsense he has thought about what happens next.


  • #1973
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 72,887 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Berserker wrote: »
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.

    Boris currently tells us he truly believes in it. We haven't got a clue if he actually does.


  • #1974
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,756 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Berserker wrote: »
    Angry at the British government because the EU decided to build a hard border on the island? It's the EU building the wall not the British government.

    EU decided to do nothing. It's the UK leaving the trading bloc.

    Seriously it doesn't still need saying does it? :rolleyes:


  • #1975
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Berserker wrote: »
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.

    Johnson might think he's started a new game, everyone else in the EU, and the rest of the world looking on, will still be playing the original game and looking on in despair.


  • #1976
    trellheim
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,170 ✭✭✭trellheim


    If the UK had no problem with an open border the backstop would have been signed ages ago , that it has not tells you all you need to know, and much about its credibility in any future state

    Its also worth noting that the UK AGREED TO THE BACKSTOP. LETS REPEAT THAT - THE UK AGREED TO THE BACKSTOP. The Government of the United Kingdom worked it out with the European Commission and that is what they came up with. The Government had every chance to say no - and did not. (Boris Johnson resigned as foreign secretary just after it had been agreed, not before )


    The missing part was/is Parliament ratification .


  • #1977
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,542 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Berserker wrote: »
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.
    It really doesn't. The rules of the game don't depend on the identity of the players. A late substitution of May, T. by Johnson, B in the dying moments of the match is not going to make any difference.


  • #1978
    PeadarCo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,027 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    Berserker wrote:
    Debunked? TM was not a Brexiteer. Boris truly believes in it. New game starts when he goes to Brussels.

    He doesn't believe in Brexit. It just suits his political needs. Remember this is a guy who apparently wrote two columns one for remain and one for leave. If the wind had being blowing a different direction on the day he made his mind up he would have went with remain.


    And so what if he really believes in Brexit. It doesn't change anything. The economic consequences are still the same. Which means a no brexit just means that the UK comes back to the table with even less negotiating power. It's an empty threat. Just because Brexiters don't believe in the consequences of a no deal brexit doesn't mean they won't happen which the last few years show.


  • #1979
    kuro68k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 261 ✭✭kuro68k


    trellheim wrote: »
    Its also worth noting that the UK AGREED TO THE BACKSTOP. LETS REPEAT THAT - THE UK AGREED TO THE BACKSTOP. The Government of the United Kingdom worked it out with the European Commission and that is what they came up with. The Government had every chance to say no - and did not. (Boris Johnson resigned as foreign secretary just after it had been agreed, not before )

    And the fact that Boris now wants to go back on that agreement is exactly why the EU will never allow a time limit on the backstop. They have to old any future leader to it, no waiting it out or just walking away.


  • #1980
    First Up
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,823 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    robinph wrote:
    Johnson might think he's started a new game, everyone else in the EU, and the rest of the world looking on, will still be playing the original game and looking on in despair.


    Not despair, just a recognition of reality. Brexiteers forget that the EU has been dealing for years with chaotic and dysfunctional countries on its borders. Nothing new here.


  • Advertisement
  • #1981
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Oh dear!

    How can this guy keep his position?

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/20/greenpeace-activists-target-philip-hammond-speech-in-climate-protest

    Mark Field urged to quit as minister after grabbing climate protester
    Video shows Foreign Office minister manhandling female demonstrator
    The Conservatives have been plunged into controversy after a video showed a minister grab and manhandle a protester who disrupted the chancellor’s Mansion House speech.

    Police began looking into the incident on Thursday night after footage showed Mark Field pushing the female Greenpeace activist against a pillar and grabbing her neck. There were calls for Field to lose his position as a Foreign Office minister. In a statement, he apologised to the woman and said he would refer himself to the Cabinet Office over the incident.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement