jimmycrackcorm wrote: » Context is different though. In the era of mass loyalist civil dissent, NI was effectively a bitterly divided war zone. It was easy then to go out and protest as if you're defending your side in " the war". But having secured a peace and especially after setting a working model of power sharing, its going to very difficult for many unionists to go out and protest to the same level. It's hard to see how someone can rise up in unionist circles to the level now to become a focus point to lead such discord. Historically Gerry Adams became the face of republicanism because of the treatment of nationalists, and Big Ian the focal point of a response to IRA violence, both extreme positions. The fact that SF have basically stayed quiet on the issue just points out to unionists that they don't have their traditional enemy to blame and to go out and protest is just a signal to the Tories that they are troublesome and the tories should go ahead and lance the British boil by instigating a border poll.
liamtech wrote: » First of all i should like to re-iterate that i am very much in agreement with most posters on this site, including those quoted - il nutshell this to avoid ramblingBrexit is a terrible idea, and the fact the Leave side blatantly lied in the referendum should never be forgotten The deal if implemented is going to be economically damaging to both the UK, and NI - and ireland in fairness Finally its true that no one in northern ireland got what they wanted given the ref result, and the negotiations - and the fact that BoJo is not gonna give a second ref to remedy this The problems as i see them and in contrast to you guys would be as follows - this is mainly hypothetical but it is not without precedent, hence i feel discussing it is perfectly valid - so here goes 1. Yes the hard border on the 6 counties was avoided in this deal, and i commend that. What i merely highlight is the fact that NI is locked into the CM/CU while the rest of the UK leaves, and if you can play devils advocate for a moment, and look at this from a Unionist POV, you will see the problem - the union is altered - now we may all believe this is not only beneficial in avoiding trouble on the border, but also beneficial economically, and i believe this is true! But we need to accept that economics is not the primary motivating factor for many in Northern Ireland. The 'Other Community' i was referring to was of course the Unionist/Loyalist population of the North. If they behave pragmatically, accepting the trade off, acknowledging the benefits, this deal will function adequately. This will require the broad Unionist community to effectively vote with their heads when ever given the opportunity. The genuine problem is i don't see them doing this. Unionists have for the most part voted DUP knowing full well that they originally opposed the GFA, and are the most extreme Unionist faction on the ballot paper (lets forget Jim Allister shall we). Said Party does not co-operate in power sharing, even when they were in GVT before the RHI Collapse. 2. The fact is that there is likely to be large scale protests if this deal goes ahead. I wouldnt be against peaceful protests, but in all sincerity, one must ask the question. Do the DUP, and their supporters know what a peaceful protest is? The Flag fiasco demonstrates that they dont, and that was only over the flag. What we are talking about here is by definition the biggest change in the status of Northern Ireland since partition. One could argue this was inevitable given the UK Decision on Brexit, more so their decision to do a Hard 'Leaving CU/CM' deal. I studied the troubles in college as part of an International Relations Degree and i can tell u that the Sunningdale Agreement, along with previous attempts at reconciling the problem of the north led to not just protests, but civil disobedience, wide spread strike, and violence. Hard core loyalism wont accept this deal. And all you need is a new 'Paisley' or 'Bill Craig' to whip up general opposition against this deal, and it will all happen again. Moderate Unionists will be incensed into taking sides, and those that dont could eventually fall into line by way of coercive tactics. The UVF used violence to enforce a Unionist strike against Sunningdale, so again nothing is unprecedented in this scenario. Unionism always behaves in Tribal fashion and when push comes to shove, the union will be the issue that unites them 3. Finally i have to conclude by saying its DEFINITELY not black and white. Despite the fact that Ireland and the EU behaved in the only way they could, with respect and genuine sincerity towards the UK, the narrative is already being spun that this 'violation of the union' is our fault. This narrative has existed all along with accusations of Dublin using the EU, and vice versa, to hold Ulster hostage etc - it doesnt matter that this is not the truth, this is the narrative that is being spun - and it will be where the rage is directed if this deal actually comes in to force. Even if ireland wished to say 'not our problem' at that point, it will in short order become our problem Happy to discuss further, respectful as always
schmittel wrote: » Surely with extension agreed, No Deal is off the table until January 30th. Can Labour credibly refuse an election in December today? Their conditions for backing an election have been met.
A Dub in Glasgo wrote: » Johnsons conditions are ridiculous, give me an election and I will let you have a look at the bill
briany wrote: » In that case, they can never agree to a general election because there's no point in the near future (that I can see) where they're going to gain seats. The longer they block an election, the more unpopular they become, so it may be better to take a bad licking now than an execution later.
bazermc wrote: » What time is the vote on election motion due at?
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » But having secured a peace and especially after setting a working model of power sharing, its going to very difficult for many unionists to go out and protest to the same level. It's hard to see how someone can rise up in unionist circles to the level now to become a focus point to lead such discord. Historically Gerry Adams became the face of republicanism because of the treatment of nationalists, and Big Ian the focal point of a response to IRA violence, both extreme positions.The fact that SF have basically stayed quiet on the issue just points out to unionists that they don't have their traditional enemy to blame and to go out and protest is just a signal to the Tories that they are troublesome and the tories should go ahead and lance the British boil by instigating a border poll.
Russman wrote: » I broadly agree with you here, but it also highlights two things for me: 1) They’re still in the realm of unicorns re the Union being altered. It’s simply not possible to have as hard a Brexit as TM wanted and not change the Union to some degree or other. Whether they realised that in 2016 or not is neither here nor there. It’s like voting to cut your arm off because your finger is sore, but demanding you still have two arms, and insisting it’s up to the doctor to compromise. 2) the inherent hypocrisy of the DUP. When it’s pointed out that NI voted remain they insist it was a UK wide vote and that’s what needs to be respected. Yet when the UK parliament decides on a withdrawal agreement for the “good” of the UK as a whole they scream bloody murder about their wishes not being respected. I don’t know how it plays out, but I suspect it’ll take the hardship biting hard to bring sense to them both up there and across the water via the farmers, traders and any normal people, because the hard core aren’t for learning and if they’re pandered to further it damages us in the republic.
liamtech wrote: » The situation in the HOC is insane. We now have an extension but Labor wont vote for an election. Labor have moved from 'Get extension and have a GE' to 'Got extension, get brexit sorted and then GE' - For anyone in any doubt on my nature as a leftie read my previous posts. Corbyn is ruining Labors chances now. They will sink further in the polls with this latest round of nonsense. And wasnt Corbyn supposed to be the great campaigner?
Water John wrote: » At least the students will get their vote, not be disenfranchised as per the Tories. The GE on the 9th as opposed to the 12th.
jaykay74 wrote: » Whats the significance of the 9th as opposed to the 12th ? Sorry if its been answered before.
Joe_ Public wrote: » 12th could also be critical in terms of restricting whether new parliament could actually convene before xmas recess. Very limited time in january to get things together as clock winds down. Thats a very conspiratorial view but with this administration, couldnt rule anything out. Those 3 days are obviously critical and that might be just one reason why.
It emerged that Lidl’s Irish business has told British suppliers they will have to cover any EU import tariffs imposed on goods crossing borders after Brexit.
Water John wrote: » Universities break fro Christmas on the 9th, all gone home by the 12th. Actually could be quite important in Johnson's own Oxbridge constituency. Young inclined not to vote Tory. Lb candidate in Oxbridge is young and a recent graduate also.
gooch2k9 wrote: » He's just made a written statement that he'd recommend reconvening on the 23rd December.
Headshot wrote: » Labour would be signing their own death warrant
briany wrote: » Labour's position is more and more resembling an M.C. Escher drawing. It's all fine to say 'get Brexit sorted', but how? What's the big proposal? Where's the 2nd referendum? I don't see one. It's crazy Groundhog day stuff. I keep hearing that Labour's position is to have a second referendum, and then I see headlines saying Corbyn 'may' back a 2nd referendum. What? I thought it was Labour's official position. What the hell is going on when one day it's your official position, and the next day it's a rumour? That's a total joke is what that is. Can anyone nail down what's going on with Labour? Can the party even nail it down themselves?
liamtech wrote: » Corbyn hasnt got a leg to stand on anymore. Thats exactly it. Labor COULD be the party properly opposed to Brexit. They could be attacking the very essence of what Brexit Is.How devisive and damaging it is to GB and NI How even a soft Brexit will harm britains economy, and the fact that GB would then become the rule taker as opposed to a rule maker How a Hard Bojo Brexit is even more damaging, and highlighting the ridiculous nature of banking on foreign trade deals, which as of yet cannot be agreed How corrosive Brexit is to the Union - Northern ireland is only one part of this - Scotland will leave (regardless of whether you agree with scottish independence or a United Ireland this argument is credibly against Brexit) How the No Deal brexit that some prefer, would be the mother of all disasters for the UK, effecting the economy, jobs, trade, and britains standing within the G7 and the world as a whole The icing on the cake to these arguments would be to highlight the benefits of EU membership, and the lies that led people to vote the way they did in 2016 Instead we have Jeremy Corbyn. He fancies his chances of negotiating a brexit, and wants his chance. He would then allow the majority of the Labor Party to vote against this deal. He wants a general election when no deal is off the table and an extension has been given.. oh.. wait.. i mean.. He wants a general election once brexit is sorted??????? ??????? Lets be clear Jeremy wants an election the moment Labor start to increase support in the polls, and the Tories start to slip - period He wont co-operate fully with other Anti-Brexit parties, which will only serve to divide the remain vote. And in all honesty his opinion on a second referendum is questionable given his own comments. Its a sad fact but the moment TM started to highlight her Hard brexit leaving the CU/CM - Labor needed to elect a remainer as leader of the party. Corbyn, who is clearly Euro-skeptic, should have stepped aside. He didnt - and here we are now. Corbyn is banking on BoJo's support slipping the longer he is held powerless in Number 10 - ok its a tactic - is it country First or party first??? And refusing a GE, because Labor is low in the polls.. is that country or party first???
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23cbe5e5e50cebb31e4a86160a77c62d.svg)
