Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

LuckyLloyd

Well, to be blunt, the exchange above is probably typical with a few million of that baying mob: facts about financial crisis are “remoaner” nonsense.

Angry bird

prinzeugen wrote: »

No. The EU vote was a UK one and the result was leave. Scotland and NI are NOT recognised independent countries.

The UK voted leave. The final deal was brought up on BBCs Question Time on Thursday night.

All parties agreed, that prior to the EU referendum, the future UK/EU relationship was an unknown.

The question was asked and the people said leave. End off.

Its going to happen. And 720,000 people that don't recognise the democratic process won't change that.
p
You can protest, bitch and moan. The UK is leaving the EU. Tuff tits.

Of course the UK is leaving. That happens regardess of any deal or no deal. And the UK is very much divided, still, over this decision.

At this point, the UK is outstaying her welcome. No one really knows how this is going to pan out, but the rise of English nationalism is already putting a huge strain on the union and this will continue until resolved, one way or another.

First Up

Strazdas wrote:

Agree on that, but I suppose one implication of the march today is that it may stiffen EU resolve even further against the Brexiteers. They know they are dealing with a hard right / far right cabal who may be under siege as we speak.

Not really. The EU knows there could be a pro Brexit march next week. We know the UK is split but the EU deals with sovereign governments.

The EU's energy is going into looking after the interests of its members. There is already enough resolve for that.

Rhineshark

Leroy42 wrote: »

JRM is telling TM to start to plan for a no deal properly as otherwise it could cause financial chaos.

Very smart move from JRM, the line they are going to take is that Brexit would have worked out fine if it wasn't for those pesky leaders in government. So now we have the leader of the biggest group of Brexiteers in the HoC, the ERG, has in the recent months stated that any benefits to Brexit may take 50 years to but actually understood and that he now acknowledges the very real threat of significant financial hardship that will come from a hard brexit.

Yet there are millions still happily cheering the likes of JRM and Johnson on to push for the hardest Brexit possible.

You just have to read the exchange previous to see it will work on some, unfortunately.

From a distance of say thirty years in the future, this whole period of northern anglosphere politics will be a fascinating study in national gaslighting. Hopefully we'll have figured out some safeguards by then, because it's an appallingly stupid way to run a country.

Both the Tories and Republicans have "divide and conquer" down, but neither side have the charisma, will (or love of country) enough to manage "unite and rule".

Seth Brundle

prinzeugen wrote: »

If Ireland was not in the EU I would say that the UK would be bending over backwards to help Ireland.

In fairness, when in our joint history have the UK ever bent over backwards to help Ireland and what makes you think that they will suddenly start helping now?

Seth Brundle

prinzeugen wrote: »

The question was asked and the people said leave. End off.

You talk about democracy but were the UK voters allowed make an informed decision?

Rhineshark

Seth Brundle wrote: »

In fairness, when in our joint history have the UK ever bent over backwards to help Ireland and what makes you think that they will suddenly start helping now?

I read the original comment and thought "I have a bridge to sell you across the Irish Sea".

The UK do not give a good goddam how their decision impacts anyone else and has spent two years being belligerent, threatening, celebratory or superior about collateral damage. Ireland is pure collateral damage but, as May commented, is far less important a country so who cares.

RobMc59

Seth Brundle wrote: »

prinzeugen wrote: »

The question was asked and the people said leave. End off.

You talk about democracy but were the UK voters allowed make an informed decision?

If you bought something or used a service which turned out to not be what you were led to believe it was you are entitled to change your mind or return it-why should such an important decision like brexit be any different?The UK voters were hoodwinked and lied to so a final informed decision should be made on that basis.

Imreoir2

prinzeugen wrote: »

When did you put an X on a ballot paper to elect an EU president? Never.

When have you put an x on a ballot paper to elect the Taoiseach? Never.
How about the people of the UK, have they ever directly elected a prime minister? No. How about their head of state, no she neve got a single vote either. There is obviously a serious democratic defecit in the UK.

The EU is not the US, last time I checked the eurosceptics did not want it to be.

Imreoir2

prinzeugen wrote: »

Eh.. The party leader is usually the PM.

Did you vote for Donald Tusk? Did you vote for his party? No. So how is he now the ruler of the EU when not one EU citizen voted for him?

USSR Mk2.

Tusk is not the "ruler of the EU", he is president of the European Council, appointed by that council which is made up of the heads of government of each member state. His appointment is then confirmed or rejected by the European Parliament. He is not a ruler, he takes his orders from the elected heads of Europe.

I find it strange that the people who dislike the EU the most also seem to be the least informed on how the EU actually works.

Call me Al

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You talk about democracy but were the UK voters allowed make an informed decision?

They were promised so many great outcomes from Brexit. Their politicians were going to negotiate the best of both worlds? Why? Because the EU needed the UK and their services and their money. The politicians were arrogant and simplistic in their attitude.
Unfortunately 17million people didn't analyse the soundbites they were fed with any depth to realise that the structural integrity of the EU (its 4 pillars) and the 27 member's needs are ultimately what moves the union forward and dictate its schedule and priorities.

Right now Ireland has an equal voice to their demands (democracy if you will) and they don't like it, not one little bit.

joe40

prinzeugen wrote: »

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It was the Irish government who brought up the whole issue of the border first, not the EU.

Ireland is a member state, the UK is not. What is the EU if not to protect the interests of it's members?

Fine. No deal. But the EU is using NI to punish the UK when similar deals were done in Gibraltar and Cyprus.

The EU are done. I hope it will cease to exist in its current form and become the EEC again.

The left love the Eu as its as democratic as the USSR.

You do realise there are border controls at both these locations. That is what we are trying to avoid.
Except of course the DUP who would love a border again. Remember this party campaigned against the gfa, a fact that seems to have been forgotten.

Imreoir2

prinzeugen wrote: »

He is President of EU ? Is he not? He is calling the shots over britex is he not? Leo is repeating what Tusk says!

Can you recommend a EU funded establishment where I can be "reducated" to the party way?

I will visit room101 also!

There are three presidents in the EU. The President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, the President of the Comission, Juncker, and the Preisdent of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani. Both the president of the Council and the President of the Commision are appointed by the heads of Government of the member states and that appointment must be confirmed by the parliament. The president of the parliament is not appointed by the European Council and is directly elected by Parliament.

Calling Tusk the "president of the EU", or worse the "ruler of the EU" clearly shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

LuckyLloyd

Andrew Marr in microcosm:

Tony Connelly comes on and provides a detailed yet concise summary of where things are an why it makes Rabb's Sunday Telegraph article rather bizarre and unrealistic. Essentially pinpoints where the key part of negotiations are going forward.


Quickly followed by his fellow panelists focussing on the emotions around Theresa May and yesterday's march. Nothing concrete, nothing specific, nothing focussed and realistic.

EDIT: Connelly just made that very point: the Westminster politicking is irrelevant and entirely disconnected from the actualities and gravity of the negotiations themselves. Good stuff from him as always.

Call me Al

Nathalie Loiseau talking to Marr now.
She's very direct. The ball is in London's court. They agreed all this last December. Give us a proper answer and we can discuss.

Anthracite

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Calling Tusk the "president of the EU", or worse the "ruler of the EU" clearly shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

It is a very useful characteristic though in telling us whether a poster is worth listening to.

ancapailldorcha

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

EDIT: Connelly just made that very point: the Westminster politicking is irrelevant and entirely disconnected from the actualities and gravity of the negotiations themselves. Good stuff from him as always.

I highly recommend his book by the way.

20silkcut

joe40 wrote: »

You do realise there are border controls at both these locations. That is what we are trying to avoid.
Except of course the DUP who would love a border again. Remember this party campaigned against the gfa, a fact that seems to have been forgotten.

And they described the withdrawal of the British army in 2007 after 38 years as premature.

And now they say there is no fear of violence starting up again and accusing varadkar of over exaggeration of the threat.

There are many on the extremes of both sides in Northern Ireland who would welcome a return to the troubles in a heartbeat.

BonnieSituation

Another "heavyweight" episode of Marr.

Connelly was great as always. Good to see Starmer on too.

Now to see what Raab says...

LuckyLloyd

He gives all of these Brexiteers - whether it be Johnson, Davis, Gove, JRM, May or now Raab such an easy ride imo.

It is completely delusional that the transition period can be a mere two years or so. This is precisely why the backstop is required.

Panrich

Raab is going to cut the EU off without a deal by the sounds of that interview.

J Mysterio

I keep seeing this everywhere: all media outlets. It's so stupid it makes my brain hurt:

'Brexit: UK would extend transition period if backstop demand dropped'

zapitastas

J Mysterio wrote: »

I keep seeing this everywhere: all media outlets. It's so stupid it makes my brain hurt:

'Brexit: UK would extend transition period if backstop demand dropped'

I think the British cabinet must have absorbed that scene in blazing saddles where the sheriff points a gun at his own head and fools the townsfolk . Must be hoping for a similar outcome. Bizarre reasoning

Dyr

Panrich wrote: »

Raab is going to cut the EU off without a deal by the sounds of that interview.

That'll show them, by God.




I have no idea who the May and Raab are trying to bluff at this stage, their own party, the DUP or the EU

Sam Russell

Bambi wrote: »

That'll show them, by God.




I have no idea who the May and Raab are trying to bluff at this stage, their own party, the DUP or the EU

Themselves.

Professor Moriarty

If there is a heave against May, and apparently 46 letters have already gone in to Brady, then the chances of a hard Brexit will increase greatly considering the front runners to replace her are Brexiteers.

LeinsterDub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If there is a heave against May, and apparently 46 letters have already gone in to Brady, then the chances of a hard Brexit will increase greatly considering the front runners to replace her are Brexiteers.

Remind me again what's the magic number for a push?

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Remind me again what's the magic number for a push?

48

Call me Al

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If there is a heave against May, and apparently 46 letters have already gone in to Brady, then the chances of a hard Brexit will increase greatly considering the front runners to replace her are Brexiteers.

In which case our insistence on the backstop is moot. It will be a hard border by default.

Itssoeasy

Call me Al wrote: »

In which case our insistence on the backstop is moot. It will be a hard border by default.

And watch when there is a hard border the confusion amongst British politicians over why it's there. They really have made a complete mess of this. I'm sure that some of the crowd yesterday were people who voted to leave the EU but didn't vote for the utter mess they are in now.