Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Calina

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's their problem. An orderly, long transition would give Ireland time to find new markets and to steal some of the UK's service industry. It would be great if the UK stayed and became committed to the cause but I can't see that happening. If they stay, they will continue to cause trouble.

I tend to agree here. Even in the remain lobby there is still an attitude of Britain's desires being right/best. They remain apart, they will fix the EU problems but they are still other. Tye idea of shared responsibility/mutual support has not got through. It is still Britain and the EU not the EU. That the EU is not perfect but Britain will fix it.

In many respects this is not any more helpful than the Brexit position. It seems to me a period of reflection within the UK is still called for.

Water John

I have no doubt that there is 30% supporting a Crash out Brexit if necessary fro their POV. Then they can support UKIP candidates if they wish.
There are various anti EU parties, both right and left across the EU.

Professor Moriarty

Calina wrote: »

I tend to agree here. Even in the remain lobby there is still an attitude of Britain's desires being right/best. They remain apart, they will fix the EU problems but they are still other. Tye idea of shared responsibility/mutual support has not got through. It is still Britain and the EU not the EU. That the EU is not perfect but Britain will fix it.

In many respects this is not any more helpful than the Brexit position. It seems to me a period of reflection within the UK is still called for.

I think the only hope would be a proper debate based on reality and centered around a second referendum. Unfortunately, there are two chances of that happening and Slim just left town.

Water John

TM might swivel to a 2nd Ref after losing her HoC vote. She'd use a public vote for her Deal to persuade the MPs to vote for it.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

TM might swivel to a 2nd Ref after losing her HoC vote. She'd use a public vote for her Deal to persuade the MPs to vote for it.

I think if there was to be a second referendum then Remain would win. However, that won't end division nor stop the UK causing trouble in the future. The question the other 27 need to ask themselves is it now time to cast them adrift.

Water John

If there are indications of UK taking a step closer to the EU than TM's Deal, an Ext of Art 50 is available.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

If there are indications of UK taking a step closer to the EU than TM's Deal, an Ext of Art 50 is available.

The problem with that is there are elections coming up next year so the EU would probably offer a few months extension at best. Plus all 27 countries would have to agree.

Water John

A few months is all that is needed to hold a Ref or rework the negotiations with UK staying in the CU. All the options come into play after Dec 11th.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

A few months is all that is needed to hold a Ref or rework the negotiations with UK staying in the CU. All the options come into play after Dec 11th.

Dunno. The elections are end of May. There is no way that the EU will want Brexit discussions and Brexiteers muddying the waters. If I were Tusk and Juncker, I would not agree to any extension.

RobMc59

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think if there was to be a second referendum then Remain would win. However, that won't end division nor stop the UK causing trouble in the future. The question the other 27 need to ask themselves is it now time to cast them adrift.

I hope your wrong regarding the UK causing trouble if they remain-the old saying "you don't realise what you've got till its gone"would hopefully be the UK attitude-also,the EU has behaved impeccably in all this despite having to deal with a UK unwilling or unable to face facts that the days of old have gone-a good side effect of Brexit(whichever way it goes)will be to show other restless countries that the grass isn't always greener.

Professor Moriarty

RobMc59 wrote: »

I hope your wrong regarding the UK causing trouble if they remain-the old saying "you don't realise what you've got till its gone"would hopefully be the UK attitude-also,the EU has behaved impeccably in all this despite having to deal with a UK unwilling or unable to face facts that the days of old have gone-a good side effect of Brexit(whichever way it goes)will be to show other restless countries that the grass isn't always greener.

Exactly. The EU cannot allow the UK to be better off outside the EU. Nothing personal, the UK must be an example pour encourager les autres. It's a crucial existential matter for the EU project.

Infini

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think if there was to be a second referendum then Remain would win. However, that won't end division nor stop the UK causing trouble in the future. The question the other 27 need to ask themselves is it now time to cast them adrift.

In fairness its not worth throwing the whole country under the bus because of the pig ignorant stupidity of a certain amount of people. However it does show that the UK if they manage to dodge this bullet NEEDS heavy reform of its political structures.

Professor Moriarty

Infini wrote: »

In fairness its not worth throwing the whole country under the bus because of the pig ignorant stupidity of a certain amount of people. However it does show that the UK if they manage to dodge this bullet NEEDS heavy reform of its political structures.

Well, I'm looking at it from an Ireland/EU perspective. There isn't time for such reform as it would take years. Plus they are throwing themselves under the bus. If they don't do it now they will do it sometime in the future. In the interim they will continue to crap all over the EU. A long amicable separation, where Ireland isn't damaged too much, is probably best now.

keane2097

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. The EU cannot allow the UK to be better off outside the EU. Nothing personal, the UK must be an example pour encourager les autres. It's a crucial existential matter for the EU project.

It's not really 'can't allow them to be better off', it's more 'can't allow them the perks of the club out of the club'.

I mean, if it turned out a random EU country would be way better off out of the EU for some particular reason I wouldn't expect the EU to try and **** them over on the way out to make them worse off.

It just happens to be the case that without the perks of being a member the UK will be much worse off. The EU isn't doing anything particularly unnecessary to make it worse for them.

Professor Moriarty

keane2097 wrote: »

It's not really 'can't allow them to be better off', it's more 'can't allow them the perks of the club out of the club'.

I mean, if it turned out a random EU country would be way better off out of the EU for some particular reason I wouldn't expect the EU to try and **** them over on the way out to make them worse off.

It just happens to be the case that without the perks of being a member the UK will be much worse off. The EU isn't doing anything particularly unnecessary to make it worse for them.

I would encourage the EU to make it as difficult as possible. Two reasons. As an example to others and to wound them as much as possible without inflicting economic self-harm. If the opportunity presents itself, you should wound a competitor.

CelticRambler

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would encourage the EU to make it as difficult as possible. Two reasons. As an example to others and to wound them as much as possible without inflicting economic self-harm. If the opportunity presents itself, you should wound a competitor.

That's the same mentality that feeds religious fundamentalism. Fortunately, the EU does not engage in such nonsense.

RobMc59

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsTech/status/1068636806017662977

I'm re-watching the West Wing and they refer to dumping the bad news stories that aren't a big deal as dumping the garbage. This is what happening here. Remember when losing access to the Galileo project either wouldn't happen or would be such a outrage the it would be an international incident. Well now they are adopting the bender (of Futurama fame) attitude we'll build our own satellites and rockets with black jack and hookers

The minister for science resignation is another nail in the coffin for the TM deal-she's digging a massive hole for herself which she's not going to be able to get out of-but she showed how out of touch she was when she called the last GE which resulted in humiliation for her.

Professor Moriarty

CelticRambler wrote: »

That's the same mentality that feeds religious fundamentalism. Fortunately, the EU does not engage in such nonsense.

So making business difficult for a competitor equates to religious fundamentalism? You'll have to explain that.

I think it's naive in the extreme to think that the EU will treat the UK in any way other than in a clinical manner that puts the needs of the EU first and foremost.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would encourage the EU to make it as difficult as possible. Two reasons. As an example to others and to wound them as much as possible without inflicting economic self-harm. If the opportunity presents itself, you should wound a competitor.

I think this would be an ultimately dangerous approach. It would encourage the UK (in this instance) to agitate behind the scenes and suggest to Spain/Italy/Poland or whoever that the EU is not in their best interest and why don't they break free and join some new alliance.

I think the stability in Europe in terms of armed conflict has been positively influenced by the EU (albeit not removed completely) I don't think it is draconian to suggest that more acrimony and division could encourage some to consider flexing their muscle.

Since humans arrived there has been armed conflict, given the greater technology now available in that area, encouragement of it should be avoided at all costs.

I do know there are still many cases of EU countries partaking in military actions (particularly in the middle east) but forgive me for thinking that is not an excuse to say it has to happen more locally.

Did anyone think in 1918 that there would be another more destructive world war in their lifetime?

Angela Merkel made a very valid point when she said that we will know have we truly learned the lessons from the last World War when all those that existed during it have passed. It's in our nature to be aggressive, unity needs to be encouraged to temper this trait.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So making business difficult for a competitor equates to religious fundamentalism? You'll have to explain that.

I think it's naive in the extreme to think that the EU will treat the UK in any way other than in a clinical manner that puts the needs of the EU first and foremost.

I agree that the EU will put the needs of the EU first but I hope that they continue to have a somewhat conciliatory tone such as the words from Tusk, Barnier and Juncker in the last weeks suggesting that this is a moment of sadness. Not "good riddance to the Brits".

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

I agree that the EU will put the needs of the EU first but I hope that they continue to have a somewhat conciliatory tone such as the words from Tusk, Barnier and Juncker in the last weeks suggesting that this is a moment of sadness. Not "good riddance to the Brits".

Absolutely. All good friends and jolly good company. However, once they leave, Britain will compete with the EU. You only have to glance at the attitude of the their press over the past twenty years to know that the vilification of the EU will intensify. Being nice to the UK hasn't worked out that well so far. It's not in the EU's interest to make an enemy of the UK but operating on the basis of sentiment would be self-defeating. Without damaging itself, the EU should seize every opportunity to take business from the UK. It's already happening anyway.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

I think this would be an ultimately dangerous approach. It would encourage the UK (in this instance) to agitate behind the scenes and suggest to Spain/Italy/Poland or whoever that the EU is not in their best interest and why don't they break free and join some new alliance.

I think the stability in Europe in terms of armed conflict has been positively influenced by the EU (albeit not removed completely) I don't think it is draconian to suggest that more acrimony and division could encourage some to consider flexing their muscle.

Since humans arrived there has been armed conflict, given the greater technology now available in that area, encouragement of it should be avoided at all costs.

I do know there are still many cases of EU countries partaking in military actions (particularly in the middle east) but forgive me for thinking that is not an excuse to say it has to happen more locally.

Did anyone think in 1918 that there would be another more destructive world war in their lifetime?

Angela Merkel made a very valid point when she said that we will know have we truly learned the lessons from the last World War when all those that existed during it have passed. It's in our nature to be aggressive, unity needs to be encouraged to temper this trait.

I'm not suggesting that the EU goes to war with the UK or that they punish Britain unnecessarily. Nor would I suggest destabilising the country. All of those actions would be self-defeating. Brexit should be seen by the EU as the existential threat that it is and also as an opportunity to hamstring a competitor wherever it is in their interest.

20silkcut

Tell me how wrote: »

I think this would be an ultimately dangerous approach. It would encourage the UK (in this instance) to agitate behind the scenes and suggest to Spain/Italy/Poland or whoever that the EU is not in their best interest and why don't they break free and join some new alliance.

I think the stability in Europe in terms of armed conflict has been positively influenced by the EU (albeit not removed completely) I don't think it is draconian to suggest that more acrimony and division could encourage some to consider flexing their muscle.

Since humans arrived there has been armed conflict, given the greater technology now available in that area, encouragement of it should be avoided at all costs.

I do know there are still many cases of EU countries partaking in military actions (particularly in the middle east) but forgive me for thinking that is not an excuse to say it has to happen more locally.

Did anyone think in 1918 that there would be another more destructive world war in their lifetime?

Angela Merkel made a very valid point when she said that we will know have we truly learned the lessons from the last World War when all those that existed during it have passed. It's in our nature to be aggressive, unity needs to be encouraged to temper this trait.

It is incredible and a dire reflection on the English education system that so many people over there to this day chalk down World War Two as a great victory and for it to continue to fuel such a sense of entitlement .

Tell me how

20silkcut wrote: »

It is incredible and a dire reflection on the English education system that so many people over there to this day chalk down World War Two as a great victory and for it to continue to fuel such a sense of entitlement .

Agree.
Also, as an aside, one of the reasons why I am glad the decision in Ireland to not make History be mandatory for the junior cert is being reviewed.

Strazdas

Dr North over at the eureferendum website seems to have completely lost the plot, predicting that Brexiteers will turn to terrorism and civil war if Brexit is not implemented

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the EU goes to war with the UK or that they punish Britain unnecessarily. Nor would I suggest destabilising the country. All of those actions would be self-defeating. Brexit should be seen by the EU as the existential threat that it is and also as an opportunity to hamstring a competitor wherever it is in their interest.

I do agree the EU has to be steadfast in competing for its interests. I would hope that even so, after the UK leaves that the tone would continue to be one of being open to them returning at a later date.

If they leave, this will not happen for a generation I suspect but I hope it does eventually.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

Dr North over at the eureferendum website seems to have completely lost the plot, predicting that Brexiteers will turn to terrorism and civil war if Brexit is not implemented

Jacob will simply retire to his villa on the Riviera.

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Jacob will simply retire to his villa on the Riviera.

I suspect the idea is totally overblown anyway. When you look at the demographics, it makes the idea of civil war seem very unlikely. Yes, support for Leave was strongest in working class communities in the north of England etc but the vast bulk of that support came from the over 55s and over 65s.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

I suspect the idea is totally overblown anyway. When you look at the demographics, it makes the idea of civil war seem very unlikely. Yes, support for Leave was strongest in working class communities in the north of England etc but the vast bulk of that support came from the over 55s and over 65s.

Completely overblown. Despite FPTP Britain, with the exception of NI, remains a democratic and stable society. I do think that much of the UK's eurosceptism will wash out through the generations but that will take, well, generations.

Tell me how

Strazdas wrote: »

I suspect the idea is totally overblown anyway. When you look at the demographics, it makes the idea of civil war seem very unlikely. Yes, support for Leave was strongest in working class communities in the north of England etc but the vast bulk of that support came from the over 55s and over 65s.

Virtually nonexistent threat at this point I suspect given that all major parties support upholding the democratic vote of the referendum.
But, there may be some fringe activists such as Tommy Robinson and his ilk who try to instigate some form of anarchy.

But, while there might be a non-existent threat at this point, the impact of Brexit on UK society has the potential to promote a much more agitated and divisive society.

(As an aside, if you asked me to predict whether the US or UK is closer to civil war, I'd go with the former given the influence of gun culture and the NRA to manipulate.)