"I don’t know a single unionist who is not pissed of with the protocol. I am sure there are a few out there somewhere but I have not met them."
You must only associate with hard-liners then, any I know who bang on about the protocol are hard-liners. Most Unionists i know aren't that bothered about it, most people are concerned with having petrol in their cars and food on their shelves and don't want to swap such luxuries for the virtual removal of a virtual line.
Every time you post an article extolling a bigot or bigoted view you claim victimhood. We're all adults here DC, take responsibility for the views you push forward.
LOL
Still waiting to be enlightened
1. How does the protocol impact unionists negatively but not nationalists ?
2. How would scrapping the protocol benefit unionists?
Obviously these 2 questions have a sectarian slant. The questions really are "how does the protocol impact ANYONE in the North negatively and what would be the benefit to ANYONE of scrapping it?"
They are posed that way as that is what has been suggested here.
I await clarification...
What is being relayed here is that the EU can unilaterally end the TCA with 12 months notice.
And no, the role of the ECJ is not a valid circumstance under which to initiate Article 16. Article 16 is about dealing with unforeseen problems, which the role of the ECJ obviously doesn't fall under, it being part of the agreement. Increased trade between North and South does not fall under legitimate usage of Article 16 either. There is a video of Frost saying that that is the "problem" that needs to be fixed.
If the EU do not see any solution to the NIP problems ie. neither can move on the role of the ECJ, then it is perfectly reasonable to start suspending parts of the TCA or the entire thing, since its operation relies on the WA and NIP.
A terrorist group in Northern Ireland using a Latin phrase from the 5th century does not prohibit a European politician from using it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_vis_pacem,_para_bellum
A fairly amazing statement from an EU diplomat to the Daily Telegraph last night, “we are ready for peace but prepared for war”. Remarkable, reckless, naivety, to play on the notorious message contained in many Uvf murals. A silly bit of throwing down gauntlet that could cost lives. To use the word war in this context is breathtaking. In fairness to Leo or even sf, they have not used that word
I don’t completely understand this. I understand art 16 is a legitimate tool within the NIP which can be initiated in specified circumstances. So Uk can legitimately invoke art 16. Is there anything within it that allows for either party to ‘scrap everything’ which seems to be what some in roi are threatening?
so if everyone carries out their implied threats, am I correct that Uk will have operated within the constraints of the NIP and EU will have breached it? Am I missing something?
..
Can't delete the link on mobile.
We've been dealing with spiteful, hateful, unionism for centuries with all the misery and death it has caused in Ireland. This NIP stuff is nothing. Keep going though, as every single wrong move Unionism makes widens the Irish Sea and stitches our country together. We have never had such unified people in Ireland while the UK tears itself apart.
Full on, along with others here, trying to sectarianise it. As you say it's a trade agreement, if it bad for one it should be bad for all, and it plainly isn't.
The protocol puts the North in a unique advantageous position.
You do realise that unlike yourself a trade agreement does not pigeonhole a business into Nationalist or Unionist?
Your quote that you ask me to challenge is actually extremely insightful. The poster obviously knows what he or she is talking about.
Why would anyone with the best interests of the people in the North be "pissed off with the protocol?"
Why?
Reports in twitter that the UVF are now fracturing and imploding. Billy Hutchinson due to make a statement tomorrow. It will hardly be that they are disbanding and pursuing exclusively peaceful means.
Scroll back to what kicked off this nonsense line.
I simply said that unionists were up for the bumpy road as it will be minor compared to 30 years of Ira sectarian onslaught.
maybe you think this didn’t happen and the Ira were an honourable bunch, but we’ll agree to differ bigstyle on that one.
I will trust your are genuine.
I don’t know a single unionist who is not pissed of with the protocol. I am sure there are a few out there somewhere but I have not met them.
we have a thread full of people referring to unionists in a derogatory manner. Yet you only challenge when I say most of them are unhappy with the protocol.
why not challenge the posters who lambast one of my communities and its leaders. Here’s an example that you did not feel the need to challenge just a few posts ago
“Of course now once again Unionist politicians do what Unionist politicians do. F uc k prosperity. Fu ck opportunity. F uc k businesses in the North. We want LESS opportunity cos using our warped logic, 2 markets will make us less British. The stupidity and insecurity is jaw-dropping. Its moronic.”
Because your "innocent remark" is anything but. Nice to see the denial of civil rights gets conveniently overlooked in your simplistic moral compass.
Twist and spin all you like. I was very clear that in the eyes of most unionists UDR/RUC/BA were the defenders. Let me go a little further - not just in the eyes of unionists, but in reality they were the defenders standing between the terrorists and the people. The Uvf and the ira etc were the terrorists, but in the eyes (and warped mentality) of their supporters they are defenders.
and I’ll say it before you do Every police force and army in the world has bad apples and gets it wrong sometimes - from the guards to the ruc
not sure what is annoying you about this or why you took an innocent little remark down this route.
Serious question here and I really don't mean it to sound either condescending or insulting but...
Do you really exist from day to day in such a blinkered sectarian mindset?
In every single discussion why do you insist in simplifying absolutely everything into "us and them"?
Could perhaps it not be reasonably possible for the protocol to be advantageous to garden centres, paint distributors, tomato importers, etc etc etc ... you know just ordinary UNLABELLED people.
Could perhaps some ordinary normal small business owners be happy with it regardless of which of your 2 distinct boxes you want to put them in??
You don't have the energy or can't hide behind the lie?
You claim to be here for discussion but look at the language you deliberately use - The UVF/UDR/RUC/BA are the defenders whereas the republican 'line' and "onslaught" is dismissive and devoid of depth. Again, it is telling; the position you claim is lacks any depth of history and deliberately blinkered.
Also known as "inconvenient truths".
Lies, damned lies, and statistics come to mind.
What I mean is northern nationalists and roi residents seem happy with current situation. Unionists are unhappy. So any change can only really be either the same or negative for nationalists, yet could be with positive or negative for unionists. That’s all. Seems logical
The statistics, as ever, tell a different story. The demographic least likely to be killed during the conflict were Protestant civilians, so the 'sectarian onslaught' is a blatant lie and inversion of reality. The PIRA's conflict was directed against the British State's security forces while unionist paramilitaries murdered Catholic civilians in the hundreds-and-hundreds.
So basically you are admitting that your opinion is not very complex and tending to victimhood by comparing it to feelings you clearly disregard and look down on.
I dont have the energy for this particular petty skirmish. I was very clear i was presenting a unionist feeling of what the conflict was ie an IRA sectarian onslaught which the UVF etc retaliated against and the UDR, RUC and BA defended against. I have also declared that i understand the feelings of republicans are very different, something along the lines of, those big bad brits were bad to us
A fair wee bit of arrogance in this post. Now how would we know what the young people of Britain will think? Let me also remind you, we are europe as well, as are mainland GB - The arrogance
.......and is it you or is it just a friend?
When campaigning for Brexit began Unionist politicians did what Unionist politicians always do. They didn't ask how a Leave vote would affect their constituents in terms of prosperity, opportunity etc. Only 1 agenda mattered ... Will Brexit separate us from them-uns down there and make us feel more British?
The Leave vote won.
5 years later and the North has HIT THE JACKPOT! After decades of being the place of little investment and opportunity suddenly the stars have aligned and the North have access to TWO markets UK AND EU !!
What a result!
Of course now once again Unionist politicians do what Unionist politicians do. F uc k prosperity. Fu ck opportunity. F uc k businesses in the North. We want LESS opportunity cos using our warped logic, 2 markets will make us less British.
The stupidity and insecurity is jaw-dropping. Its moronic.
Can you imagine British citizens in Gibraltar insisting on more stringent border checks after Brexit just to feel more British? Of course not. It would harm their wellbeing.
The UK had & retains full control: UK politicians promised that there were hundreds of different ways of achieving a soft border & given opportunity by EU of a backstop until they got ironed out the kinks in those amazing British technologies - but instead elected for a front stop. The UK freely chose (& hence had full control over & not only its government but also its citizenry chose) this extremely elegant border solution - a solution which it copied from various places around the world - such as Busingen am Rhein in Germany and also used in Gibraltar. Are you suggesting that the various other examples of this solution are wrong? Are you suggesting the UK & the British people were wrong?
The British people voted to leave the EU - they are gone. The British people endorsed Boris' WA. Who are you to say they are wrong? In any case if you do have problem with the British people, never forget you have other options.
The startling thing about that post is the equivalence drawn and the depth of the victimhood complex.
The message is that everyone is against Unionism. Classic 'victimhood' in other words. If the Protocol is bad then as it is a trade measure, it should be equally bad for everyone. But the fact is (and it cannot be refuted whenever you ask) that it is bad in an abstract way for a subset of insecure and consequently belligerent Unionists
"Unionists have potential gains"
Please explain what you mean by this statement
"The penny has dropped for you" - you've put down a blatant (and self confessed lie) about the NI conflict and have the audacity to follow up with that?!
You're, continuous, intention is to muddy the waters whilst pretending to be 'moderate'. The faux "I'm not sure how it works" and continuous denial of the truths presented are beyond ignorance, it's extended trolling at this stage.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7c96e2329b3b29f4a7590b78e75e1224.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bed6f1d088326d5eb21c0139847332c7.svg)
