CelticRambler wrote: » I agree with MrMusician18, who echoes remarks made by RobMc59 and others: England will not become a "failed state" in any modern sense - take Scotland and NI out of the mix and you're left with a bog-standard, two-party, sort-of democratic-ish, somewhat elitist political class that will continue to run the country for their own amusement, and a general population that (for the most part, based on the last several decades) couldn't really give a fig or a f**k about what their elected representatives do. You'd have to go back about a hundred years to find Russia at the height of its standing in the world. For your 30-years-ago analogy, you'd have to replace the word "UK" with "the Soviet Union" instead of Russia. The CCCP back then was in no way comparable to the UK of today, other having one big country at its heart that had annexed some smaller countries in the past, and then lost them. So yes, the UK will break up. NI will re-join the EU as part of a United Ireland, Scotland will almost certainly achieve independence and probably join the EU on a faster track than Albania. Some weird stuff might happen with places like Gibraltar, Shetland, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, maybe even Cornwall ... but there'll still be enough of England & Wales left, with enough cross-border (and cross-cultural) connections to ensure the territory's survival as an economic entity. Whether an amputated UK can justify maintaining a permanent seat on the UN's Security Council, however, is another matter entirely. Taking the U out of the UK and the G out of GB to leave a less politically relevant EW gives every wanabee superpower a strong argument in favour of taking over the chair. I think it'd be the ultimate irony (and/or humiliation) if Britain were to be replaced by India at the Security Council.
ThePanjandrum wrote: » How long before the Republic applies to become a member of the UK again? The answers are probably very similar.
MrMusician18 wrote: » A failed state is one that doesnt have an effective government
reslfj wrote: » Is it this?https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/henry-mckean-on-the-hard-shoulder/britains-identity-live-identity-brexitday-belfast Lars
NIMAN wrote: » Not sure if posted yet but thought Naomi Long's leaving speech was very good at the European Parliament (even if it was interrupted)
Gintonious wrote: » https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398 Not much to add to this, didn't know Davidson was a gammon.
Quin_Dub wrote: » Given his entire career, you weren't really expecting him to be a champion of Multi-culturalism ,Feminism and Globalisation were you?
Gintonious wrote: » Not quite, but I wouldn't have put him as a Farage sock puppet either
Quin_Dub wrote: » Davidson would be right up the typical Brexit voters street though. I'd have thought that Jim Davidson would take a paid gig off anyone that would consider having him at this stage even if he wasn't a big fan. I somehow doubt his agent is stressed handling all the offers coming in
johnnyskeleton wrote: » Unfortunately, those sneaky EU bureaucrats have twigged this and have included fisheries in their own negotiating strategy. If the UK won't agree to Common Fisheries, then the UK may not agree tarriff and quota free market access for fish from the UK. While the fishing industry and fish consuming consumers are important to the EU, its paramount concern is preserving fishing stocks. So without agreement that the UK will not overfish, the EU will have no choice but to stop buying their fish.
seamus wrote: » This does open the door for next week (or any time in the next few months), the EU arranging a cross-EU co-operation effort to airlift EU citizens from affected Chinese cities if they have no other means of getting out. British people will arrive to register for assistance and will be turned away.* When you make massive changes, you always get hit with consequences you never really considered. The same will be true if there's an evacuation of EU embassies from a country where war has broken out.*I actually don't think the EU is so hard-nosed, that's more of an American thing. Most likely they will include British citizens in any evacuation, in the queue behind EU citizens, and will retroactively bill the UK for it
RobMc59 wrote: » That sounds incredibly petty,especially in view of the UK attitude to the same problem.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/asia-pacific/coronavirus-three-irish-people-to-be-evacuated-from-wuhan-1.4156521
WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: » easy answer to that Never.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » Barnier is set to recommend an Association Agreement as the preferred negotiating framework, along the lines of the current relationship with Ukraine:https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/eus-barnier-eyes-loose-association-deal-as-basis-for-new-british-ties-idUSKBN1ZS1P1
ThePanjandrum wrote: » Thank you. You're the first to see the obvious answer.
eire4 wrote: » The last line struck me there when he talks about the implementation of the withdrawal agreement. Probably rightly so there is a lack of trust on the EU side.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Wonderful mood music so far. All good friends and jolly good company. However, it's important to remember that, as these negotiations evolve, a fundamental existential imperative for the EU is that Britain cannot be better off outside the EU.
RobMc59 wrote: » You`ed probably have a point if the UK government had a clue what they`re doing-beyond a few `taking back control` mantras this lot don`t seem to know what day it is,let alone pose a credible threat to the EU post brexit
SantaCruz wrote: » The difference is that England enslaved and raped Ireland and its people and left us a famine-ridden, impoverished, backward, post-colonial dump. Conversely, the EU saved the UK from economic ruin and allowed it become one of the most successful economies in the world. That you would conflate these scenarios speaks volumes.