Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

Doctor Roast

Were the Irish government even consulted about the EUs original decision?

It seems more and more we're becoming a mere state.

swampgas

Doctor Roast wrote: »

Were the Irish government even consulted about the EUs original decision?

It seems more and more we're becoming a mere state.

More and more? What nonsense is that? Whether they were consulted prior or not, they were listened to afterwards. And be realistic, Ireland has far more say in the EU than we would have outside it, and far more say than the Scots or the Welsh have in the UK

Doctor Roast

swampgas wrote: »

More and more? What nonsense is that? Whether they were consulted prior or not, they were listened to afterwards. And be realistic, Ireland has far more say in the EU than we would have outside it, and far more say than the Scots or the Welsh have in the UK

They were listened to when sh!T hit the fan and they were getting it from all angles, they can't really afford to be creating more EU sceptics, be realistic here the EU is quite willing to throw Ireland under the bus when it suits

FrancieBrady

Doctor Roast wrote: »

Were the Irish government even consulted about the EUs original decision?

It seems more and more we're becoming a mere state.

Compare and contrast, we intervene - We hold out for special status and deal for Ireland, EU does our bidding in negotiations = Result in our favour

EU Commission acts - we intervene - Art 16 revoked = Result in our favour.

Contrast to life in the UK.

Nationalists intervene = taken out of the EU despite convincing the electorate where they live to stay.
Unionists intervene = Irish Sea Border imposed regardless.

Which Union would you rather be in?

Mav11

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Compare and contrast, we intervene - We hold out for special status and deal for Ireland, EU does our bidding in negotiations = Result in our favour

EU Commission acts - we intervene - Art 16 revoked = Result in our favour.

Contrast to life in the UK.

Nationalists intervene = taken out of the EU despite convincing the electorate where they live to stay.
Unionists intervene = Irish Sea Border imposed regardless.

Which Union would you rather be in?

Regardless of the preferred union (EU BTW), bit arrogant / stupid of the EU Commission to act in this manner without consultation with the member state most directly impacted..

McGiver

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

The EU created an absolute shambles today drawing condemnation from within and abroad. At least they won't "overlook" it again. Extraordinary.

So the EU drafts a proposal and includes a fully legal measure as per the international law (namely the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Security Agreement), which was likely included by error and/or lack of scrutiny, removes rectifies the error within hours, and you and your ilk are yelling here, raising alarms, agitating your anti-EU propaganda.

But the UK actually confirmed the intention to actually break the international law (namely the Withdrawal agreement), proposed and passed a legislation to that end and publicly defended that position for weeks and you were quiet.

Incredible double standards.

And stepping back to a more abstract level - your point is exactly what with these agitations?

As a known eurosceptic of a National-Socialist sort (based on your posts), what is exactly your concern with the EU (which by default includes the Republic of Ireland as its member state and stakeholder)?

What do you propose exactly to changed with the EU and how exactly and to what end?

FrancieBrady

Mav11 wrote: »

Regardless of the preferred union (EU BTW), bit arrogant / stupid of the EU Commission to act in this manner without consultation with the member state most directly impacted..

Mistakes can be made. It's are you willing to take the criticism and revoke/fix the mistake, that is important.

Junkyard Tom

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which Union would you rather be in?

Scotland must be thinking 'jeez, wouldn't it be nice if we made a phone call to Whitehall and had them reverse something that pissed us off, instead we get sneered at and belittled'.

FrancieBrady

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Scotland must be thinking 'jeez, wouldn't it be nice if we made a phone call to Whitehall and had them reverse something that pissed us off, instead we get sneered at and belittled'.

It really does shut up those who think 'the EU' is some disembodied sinister grouping.

Mav11

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Mistakes can be made. It's are you willing to take the criticism and revoke/fix the mistake, that is important.

Yes, how you respond and fix is important, but there are mistakes and there are stupid mistakes, the EU commission principals are being paid enough to avoid the latter.

FrancieBrady

Mav11 wrote: »

Yes, how you respond and fix is important, but there are mistakes and there are stupid mistakes, the EU commission principals are being paid enough to avoid the latter.

Nothing actually happened...apart from some knickers twisting.

Kermit.de.frog

McGiver wrote: »

So the EU drafts a proposal and includes a fully legal measure as per the international law (namely the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Security Agreement), which was likely included by error and/or lack of scrutiny, removes rectifies the error within hours, and you and your ilk are yelling here, raising alarms, agitating your anti-EU propaganda.

But the UK actually confirmed the intention to actually break the international law (namely the Withdrawal agreement), proposed and passed a legislation to that end and publicly defended that position for weeks and you were quiet.

Incredible double standards.

And stepping back to a more abstract level - your point is exactly what with these agitations?

As a known eurosceptic of a National-Socialist sort (based on your posts), what is exactly your concern with the EU (which by default includes the Republic of Ireland as its member state and stakeholder)?

What do you propose exactly to changed with the EU and how exactly and to what end?

A what?

I'm not euro sceptic at all. I just want an end to "ever closer union" and our country to remain one of the world's 195 independent countries. Nothing extreme about my position.

Kermit.de.frog

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nothing actually happened...apart from some knickers twisting.

The only people delighted are the Jim Allister mould of unionist in the North. Moral high ground surrendered to them.

McGiver

FrancieBrady wrote:

Mistakes can be made. It's are you willing to take the criticism and revoke/fix the mistake, that is important.

Exactly.

Incredible double standards.

The UK regime has been making a series of mistakes (if you don't consider them a malice) in the last 12 months - OK, no problem, quiet.

The EU makes a typo in a proposal text - the EU is shambles, dictatorship, throwing Ireland under the bus etc!

Pathetic, disgusting and disgraceful given the current situation. But that's the europhobe's playbook - just like Farage, Salvini, Le Pen and other fascists, buffoons and charlatans - just keep spitting, lying and poisoning the well, with the hope that it will eventually cut through.

EU too strong!
EU too weak!
EU too fast!
EU too slow!
EU too protectionist!
EU too freemarket!

McGiver

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

I'm not euro sceptic at all. I just want an end to "ever closer union" and our country to remain one of the world's 195 independent countries. Nothing extreme about my position.

Reply my questions - one by one. Thanks.

Kermit.de.frog

McGiver wrote: »

Reply my questions - one by one. Thanks.

I just did.

FrancieBrady

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The only people delighted are the Jim Allister mould of unionist in the North. Moral high ground surrendered to them.

Oh yeh...Jim was just about to change his opinion on the EU and de south...such a shame the Commission ruined a Paulian moment.

ancapailldorcha

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The only people delighted are the Jim Allister mould of unionist in the North. Moral high ground surrendered to them.

What on earth are you on about? You've spent years pumping out hyperbole on this site and I've no idea why.

Ditto for the weird ever closer union trope above.

Amirani

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nothing actually happened...apart from some knickers twisting.

100% this. Nothing tangible actually happened.

This is one of those things that journalists love and try to make a lot out of, but there's feck all in it.

Mav11

Amirani wrote: »

100% this. Nothing tangible actually happened.

This is one of those things that journalists love and try to make a lot out of, but there's feck all in it.

Not actually sure about that. Arlene & Co have gained a higher moral ground to push their agenda, so that happened! We'll have to wait to see if there are implications.

FrancieBrady

Mav11 wrote: »

Not actually sure about that. Arlene & Co have gained a higher moral ground to push their agenda, so that happened! We'll have to wait to see if there are implications.

Arlene and Ian have been neutered you mean.

How can they now ask for Art 16 to be invoked and keep a straight face, it's beautiful. You'd almost think they got played.

Mav11

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Arlene and Ian have been neutered you mean.

How can they now ask for Art 16 to be invoked and keep a straight face, it's beautiful. You'd almost think they got played.

Whether they have been neutered or gained more credibility for their position is a matter of opinion. But you can't say that and argue that nothing happened as a result.

McGiver

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

I'm not euro sceptic at all. I just want an end to "ever closer union" and our country to remain one of the world's 195 independent countries. Nothing extreme about my position.

Well, then I would like to remind you that the "ever closer union" is to be be found right at the beginning of the Treaty of Rome 1957, establishing the predecessor of the EU and is since then an essential element of the EU Treaties. Furthermore, the "ever closer union" was already mentioned in the Schuman declaration of 1951.

If you object to this principle, you are objecting essentially to the foundation of the EU as a whole and its stated long term objectives, which, contrary to your statement, in fact, puts you to the extreme end of the eurosceptic spectrum, because you essentially deny an essential element of the EU, and by denying that you then basically assert that the foundation is invalid and hence the EU itself is invalid and should be disbanded or Ireland leaving it.

With regards to the "remain independent country" statement - the Republic of Ireland is an independent, sovereign country and there is no indication that it will not be in near to medium future. The federalisation of the EU is a hypothetical scenario which may likely happen given the "ever closer union" clause mentioned above, but a) it is not on the agenda in near future and b) once it is on agenda only member states interested will proceed based on a popular vote. Hence your point is irrelevant as of yet and largely a red herring.
Because you essentially propose to leave the EU now and cause diplomatic, security and economic damage to the country only because of a hypothetical future scenario which may not occur for decades. This is a Farage tactic.

Still waiting for your reply to my question on how do you propose to achieve your objective and to what end.

ancapailldorcha

Mav11 wrote: »

Not actually sure about that. Arlene & Co have gained a higher moral ground to push their agenda, so that happened! We'll have to wait to see if there are implications.

No, they haven't. They've predictably bleated the same thing they've been sheepishly bleating for years with a minor tweak.

If it weren't for the clue in the name, I doubt anyone over here would even know where NI is.

McGiver

Amirani wrote: »

100% this. Nothing tangible actually happened.

This is one of those things that journalists love and try to make a lot out of, but there's feck all in it.

What is worse is that the BBC left an article about this, a long one, for 12 hours until this morning (about 9am), with no update to reflect the facts. They are becoming a propaganda machine.

Now they claim "EU reverses NI vaccine move after uproar", which is manipulative at best. It wasn't because of uproar but because the error was spotted and Martin asked them to fix it.

Mav11

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No, they haven't. They've predictably bleated the same thing they've been sheepishly bleating for years with a minor tweak.

If it weren't for the clue in the name, I doubt anyone over here would even know where NI is.

Agreed they have been bleating the same old line for years, but now, and lets see how long it will be, before they start bleating "we told you so".

ancapailldorcha

Mav11 wrote: »

Agreed they have been bleating the same old line for years, but now, and lets see how long it will be, before they start bleating "we told you so".

Why? They have no clout whatsoever. Boris Johnson was able to guarantee them in 2018 and then screw them over in 2019 with no difficulty whatsoever.

McGiver

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Arlene and Ian have been neutered you mean.

How can they now ask for Art 16 to be invoked and keep a straight face, it's beautiful. You'd almost think they got played.

Well, this incident shown the true colours of many. Foster and the DUP are a good example, they never wait to start fuming and spitting, so silly and childish, but they just don't learn. Her statement of "hostile act" clearly indicates what's going on in their heads. Any standard, democratic, civilised politician would say something like "This is a rather severe measure" and would call on to the EU to clarify.

Mav11

She's on the RTE news just now bleating and remember who her audience is? I'm pretty sure that this will do nothing to strengthen NI desire to remain in the EU. The DUP are delighted.

Kermit.de.frog

McGiver wrote: »

Well, then I would like to remind you that the "ever closer union" is to be be found right at the beginning of the Treaty of Rome 1957, establishing the predecessor of the EU and is since then an essential element of the EU Treaties. Furthermore, the "ever closer union" was already mentioned in the Schuman declaration of 1951.

If you object to this principle, you are objecting essentially to the foundation of the EU as a whole and its stated long term objectives, which, contrary to your statement, in fact, puts you to the extreme end of the eurosceptic spectrum, because you essentially deny an essential element of the EU, and by denying that you then basically assert that the foundation is invalid and hence the EU itself is invalid and should be disbanded or Ireland leaving it.

With regards to the "remain independent country" statement - the Republic of Ireland is an independent, sovereign country and there is no indication that it will not be in near to medium future. The federalisation of the EU is a hypothetical scenario which may likely happen given the "ever closer union" clause mentioned above, but a) it is not on the agenda in near future and b) once it is on agenda only member states interested will proceed based on a popular vote. Hence your point is irrelevant as of yet and largely a red herring.
Because you essentially propose to leave the EU now and cause diplomatic, security and economic damage to the country only because of a hypothetical future scenario which may not occur for decades. This is a Farage tactic.

Still waiting for your reply to my question on how do you propose to achieve your objective and to what end.

I'm not getting in to this. I have made my position clear before.

I don't want there ever to be a federal Europe or anything of the sort. A common market is what I want which is what we have.

I am an Irish citizen and I will never ever accept the taking of my nationality away from me by Europe and if you believe I am somehow unique among Irish people you are seriously mistaken.

At this moment there is no fire but we can see how the fire starts down the road.

Yes to a common market, no to a country called Europe.

It can't be made any more straight forward.