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

Peregrinus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

You may be right except the polls say that Brexit for example was down around a few percent of the reasons people voted.

People voted on the people of Ireland and issues around them. Not what goes on around the world which has nothing to do with them and they cant alter.

People are concerned about homeless people on the streets and all the other social issues like health etc.

Yes. And they are not concerned about the issues that animate Trump/Brexit supporters, like immigration and the idea of leaving the EU to assert "freedom".

Peregrinus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

. . . Ok I dont want to upset Tom and let him think I only read the Mail and Express. So heres an Irish version I think. Appears he wasnt in touch with the UK public as well as his own........ https://www.irishpost.com/news/leo-varadkar-sparks-outrage-saying-britain-must-another-brexit-vote-172122

How does that show that Varadkar was out of touch with UK voters? He's reported as saying that "the will of the UK public is to have a second referendum", but that "their political system isn't able to give them that choice".

We now know that he was completely correct. At the general election which followed about two months afterwards, a majority of voters went for parties whose manifesto included a second referendum. But they didn't get a second referendum. Why not? Because the political system put Johnson's Conservatives in office, despite the fact that the majority against them was rather larger than the majority against EU membership at the 2016 referendum.

In other words, what Varadkar said a majority in the UK wanted lines up precisely with what a majority in the UK voted for two months later. Far from showing that Varadkar was out of touch with the UK public, what this shows is that the people who are out of touch with the UK public are those who think that what Varadkar said was wrong, offensive or inflammatory. It was a simple statement of objective truth, subsequently validated by the vote of the people of the UK.

Boredstiff666

Peregrinus wrote: »

How does that show that Varadkar was out of touch with UK voters? He's reported as saying that "the will of the UK public is to have a second referendum", but that "their political system isn't able to give them that choice".

We now know that he was completely correct. At the general election which followed about two months afterwards, a majority of voters went for parties whose manifesto included a second referendum. But they didn't get a second referendum. Why not? Because the political system put Johnson's Conservatives in office, despite the fact that the majority against them was rather larger than the majority against EU membership at the 2016 referendum.

In other words, what Varadkar said a majority in the UK wanted lines up precisely with what a majority in the UK voted for two months later. Far from showing that Varadkar was out of touch with the UK public, what this shows is that the people who are out of touch with the UK public are those who think that what Varadkar said was wrong, offensive or inflammatory. It was a simple statement of objective truth, subsequently validated by the vote of the people of the UK.

I couldn't care less how much somebody who cant accept the result keeps banging on about what these figures mean and what those people said.

The result is people voted for Brexit and no matter how much you dont like it. Brexit has happened and is happening and your highly selective massaging of fugures and facts havent changed a thing. Just as your claims of predictions on the future will be just as wrong as well.

Its a bit like listening to some potty football fan whose team has just lost 6-0 and them sitting in the pub telling everyone that their team was the better one that day.

The whole pub is laughing at you as you convince no one but yourself.

Mate most of the UK didnt know who the man was. Just somebody from Ireland telling them what they must do. A president and a Prim Minister may register in some UK peoples brains. A 'Teshuk'? They probably think somebody sneezed in the interview. So how you think he would have any relevance with them is beyond me.

cryptocurrency

Ireland can't mock elections in the UK or the US now..Sinn Fein, Jeysus.

Peregrinus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

I couldn't care less how much somebody who cant accept the result keeps banging on about what these figures mean and what those people said.

The result is people voted for Brexit and no matter how much you dont like it. Brexit has happened and is happening and your highly selective massaging of fugures and facts havent changed a thing. Just as your claims of predictions on the future will be just as wrong as well.

Its a bit like listening to some potty football fan whose team has just lost 6-0 and them sitting in the pub telling everyone that their team was the better one that day.

The whole pub is laughing at you as you convince no one but yourself.

Mate most of the UK didnt know who the man was. Just somebody from Ireland telling them what they must do. A president and a Prim Minister may register in some UK peoples brains. A 'Teshuk'? They probably think somebody sneezed in the interview.

Possibly your belief that the British people are as stupid as you seem to think they are is necessary to sustain you in your dismissal of their democratically expressed wishes?

You're the guy who came in to say that Varadkar had behaved offensively; you're the guy who posted a link to this report in support of your view. If you don't want that view challenged, it's probably unwise to post it to a discussion board. And, if you do post it to a discussion board and it gets challenged, it's not a good look to ignore the challenge and just go off on a rant. It makes your position look very, very insecure; that's probably not the look you're reaching for.

Varadkar's view that the British people wanted a second referendum is validated by the fact that they voted for one. If you're not prepared to address that, you'd serve the Brexit cause better by not posting at all.

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Ireland can't mock elections in the UK or the US now..Sinn Fein, Jeysus.

Sure we can. Boris Johnson, Jeysus!

See? Piece of cake!

Boredstiff666

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Ireland can't mock elections in the UK or the US now..Sinn Fein, Jeysus.

There you go mate. You hit the nail on the head.

These lot are obsessed with Trump and Brexit and are never too slow to tell everybody in those countries how wrong they are.

Then their own people elect a loony left so called 'ex' political wing of a terrorist organisation whose aims will just leave the country in ruins and probably start the whole mess up over again.

Can you just see a 'united' Ireland and the protestants taking orders from Sinn Fein in the Dail?

Boredstiff666

Peregrinus wrote: »

Possibly your belief that the British people are as stupid as you seem to think they are is necessary to sustain you in your dismissal of their democratically expressed wishes?

You're the guy who came in to say that Varadkar had behaved offensively; you're the guy who posted a link to this report in support of your view. If you don't want that view challenged, it's probably unwise to post it to a discussion board. And, if you do post it to a discussion board and it gets challenged, it's not a good look to ignore the challenge and just go off on a rant. It makes your position look very, very insecure; that's probably not the look you're reaching for.

Varadkar's view that the British people wanted a second referendum is validated by the fact that they voted for one. If you're not prepared to address that, you'd serve the Brexit cause better by not posting at all.

That statement is a bit like saying....if you put your finger in the fire it wont hurt too much. The result is you still burnt your finger.

Peregrinus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

That statement is i a bit like saying....if you put your finger in the fire it wont hurt too much. The result is you still burnt your finger.

This is . . . boldly meaningless.

Boredstiff666

Peregrinus wrote: »

This is . . . boldly meaningless.

Thats what I mean. You are arguing over the result of what has already happened. But you are only arguing with yourself because everybody else has gone home.

I did know someone once who bet on the result of a boxing match they were watching on video. The boxing match was about 3 years old.

You remind me of him.

Peregrinus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Thats what I mean. You are arguing over the result of what has already happened. But you are only arguing with yourself because everybody else has gone home.

I did know someone once who bet on the result of a boxing match they were watching on video. The boxing match was about 3 years old.

You remind me of him.

I'm responding to a comment that you made, BS, and to a link that you posted. If you believe that my response to your comments is irrelevant because they related to past events, does that not suggest that you also believe your own comments were irrelevant, for the same reason? Which raises the question, why did you post them?

This is why I suggest that your postings are not doing the Brexit cause much good. You post comments, but then when somebody takes issue with them you run around yelling "I don't care! It's not relevant! You lost, loser!" rather than defend your own comments. Can't you see how insecure this looks?

cryptocurrency

Ireland's youth voting for the ra has lost them any credibility now in upcoming negotiations

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Ireland's youth voting for the ra has lost them any credibility now in upcoming negotiations

I don't think the ra are slated to take part in any upcoming negotiations. Negotiating isn't really their thing.

cryptocurrency

Peregrinus wrote: »

I don't think the ra are slated to take part in any upcoming negotiations. Negotiating isn't really their thing.

Sinn Fein/IRA may well be the next irish government

Leroy42

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Ireland's youth voting for the ra has lost them any credibility now in upcoming negotiations

Who should they have voted for?

In

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Sure we can. Boris Johnson, Jeysus!

See? Piece of cake!

I recall when the US elected Trump so soon after Brexit and there was the joking doing the rounds:

UK: "Watch us do something completely stupid"
US: "Hold my beer...."

I think we can now add:-

Ireland: "pah, amateurs"

gmisk

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Ireland's youth voting for the ra has lost them any credibility now in upcoming negotiations

You mean under 65s? (The age breakdown showed clearly it wasn't just 18-25 yos that preferred Sinn Fein)
I am a youth hurrah!

gmisk

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Sinn Fein/IRA may well be the next irish government

Even the DUP don't really refer to them as that...it might be time to move on

theological

I agree with Leroy42 on this. It would be hypocritical for us to insist that the Brexit vote be respected and not insist on the Irish vote being respected.

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Sinn Fein/IRA may well be the next irish government

Sinn Fein may be in the next Irish government. They won't be the next Irish government. Spot the difference?

And, since Sinn Fein have been in all Northern Ireland executives since 2007, the notion of Sinn Fein forming part of a government is not novel or particularly shocking or something to which the British can reasonably take exception.

Overlooking these facts (or, worse, ignorance of them) coupled with the hyperventilation about "Sinn Fein/IRA" - thats so 1990s, Crypto - suggest that your objections to the "credibility" of the next Irish government may not really be motivated by the prospect of Sinn Fein's participation.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Sinn Fein may be in the next Irish government. They won't be the next Irish government. Spot the difference?

And, since Sinn Fein have been in all Northern Ireland executives since 2007, the notion of Sinn Fein forming part of a government is not novel or particularly shocking or something to which the British can reasonably take exception.

Overlooking these facts (or, worse, ignorance of them) coupled with the hyperventilation about "Sinn Fein/IRA" - thats so 1990s, Crypto - suggest that your objections to the "credibility" of the next Irish government may not really be motivated by the prospect of Sinn Fein's participation.

It does beg the question though, does this break the GFA?

When the DUP gave the Tories their vote of confidence, the shinners were crying that this breaks the GFA as the government is no longer an honest broker.

If SF go into government with FF, can the unionists throw a tantrum as well?

Snickers Man

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

These lot are obsessed with Trump and Brexit and are never too slow to tell everybody in those countries how wrong they are.

Then their own people elect a loony left so called 'ex' political wing of a terrorist organisation whose aims will just leave the country in ruins and probably start the whole mess up over again.

Not quite equivalent, is it? We haven't elected a Sinn Fein government. We probably haven't even elected a "Sinn Fein-led" government. They have only about a fifth of the total seats in the Dail so they are going to be pretty well diluted, even assuming Big Mac becomes our first woman Taoiseach.

My guess is that any potential partners will be highlighting issues like climate change, housing, health and welfare way ahead of border polls and compulsory teaching of all the words of Sean South of Garryowen to primary school kids.

We don't have the same spoils system at play here as they do in the AngloSaxon "bipolar disorder" democracies.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

It does beg the question though, does this break the GFA?

When the DUP gave the Tories their vote of confidence, the shinners were crying that this breaks the GFA as the government is no longer an honest broker.

If SF go into government with FF, can the unionists throw a tantrum as well?

No, they can't, because the Irish government doesn't have the role in NI that the GFA confirms for the UK government.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, they can't, because the Irish government doesn't have the role in NI that the GFA confirms for the UK government.

Maybe you could point to the specific piece of the GFA?

volchitsa

Aegir wrote: »

It does beg the question though, does this break the GFA?

When the DUP gave the Tories their vote of confidence, the shinners were crying that this breaks the GFA as the government is no longer an honest broker.

If SF go into government with FF, can the unionists throw a tantrum as well?

Since your logic is that this has already been done by the DUP joining a Westminster coalition, presumably the harm was done at that point, and not now?

Can't really blame anyone who subsequently ignores an already broken rule in a treaty. Bit like Trump blaming the Iranians for breaking the treaty he pulled out of.

volchitsa

volchitsa wrote: »

Since your logic is that this has already been done by the DUP joining a Westminster coalition, presumably the harm was done at that point, and not now?

Can't really blame anyone who subsequently ignores an already broken rule in a treaty. Bit like Trump blaming the Iranians for breaking the treaty he pulled out of.

I don't for one minute believe the GFA was broken though, all I am trying to do is understand how the Sinn Fein supporters on here who were crying foul, can balance this one out.

Or is it, as I suspect, just another example of their blatant hypocrisy?

Leroy42

How would it break the GFA, the government in the ROI have no role in the running of NI and as such SF being in government here does nothing to alter the running of NI?

It may well make the DUP feel less comfortable, that it highly likely, but can't see how us having different reps in our government makes any real difference.

What part of the agreement to you think it breaks?

Boredstiff666

Snickers Man wrote: »

Not quite equivalent, is it? We haven't elected a Sinn Fein government. We probably haven't even elected a "Sinn Fein-led" government. They have only about a fifth of the total seats in the Dail so they are going to be pretty well diluted, even assuming Big Mac becomes our first woman Taoiseach.

My guess is that any potential partners will be highlighting issues like climate change, housing, health and welfare way ahead of border polls and compulsory teaching of all the words of Sean South of Garryowen to primary school kids.

We don't have the same spoils system at play here as they do in the AngloSaxon "bipolar disorder" democracies.

You could be right as I heard someone on Pat Kenny this morning explaining that a lot of things in the Republic have higher payments than NI. So if there was a united Ireland desired by some, not only is the sub actually 12 billion now and not 10 billion as it was. Dublin would have to find another 3 billion in pensions and other money as well. Because you walk away, then you walk away.

The 12 billion pounds is about 14.5 billion euros. Is that about 3000 euro per year for every single person including babies of the Republic to pay for a dream of a few fanatics. Let alone other costs on top.

NI are just too expensive for anybody.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

How would it break the GFA, the government in the ROI have no role in the running of NI and as such SF being in government here does nothing to alter the running of NI?

It may well make the DUP feel less comfortable, that it highly likely, but can't see how us having different reps in our government makes any real difference.

What part of the agreement to you think it breaks?

Which part did the confidence and supply agreement with the DUP did the British Government break? If you can show me, then I can answer your question.

Leroy42

Aegir wrote: »

Which part did the confidence and supply agreement with the DUP did the British Government break? If you can show me, then I can answer your question.

What? Your question was a RoI breaking the agreement. That discussion, about HMG, has been had many times over.

You asked a question, were given a response. You raised the possibility the SF in government in RoI would break the GFA. On what grounds are making that assertion?