Brexit Schmexit

[zahidf]

Twat

[eFestivals]

the top story at The National right now is about a yougov poll saying people are turning against brexit ....

But the yougov site hasn't got a poll on its site asking that for the last month and i can't find another reference to a newer poll at google, and the nat doesn't reference it's source.

I'm hoping it's more than shit journalism, and that something a month old isn't what counts as current affairs at that publication.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

the top story at The National right now is about a yougov poll saying people are turning against brexit ....

But the yougov site hasn't got a poll on its site asking that for the last month and i can't find another reference to a newer poll at google, and the nat doesn't reference it's source.

I'm hoping it's more than shit journalism, and that something a month old isn't what counts as current affairs at that publication.

Yeah, I can't find it anywhere else either, but the National does claim that ..."The poll was conducted earlier this week against a backdrop of developments about growing tension in the government over Brexit. "

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, LJS said:

Yeah, I can't find it anywhere else either, but the National does claim that ..."The poll was conducted earlier this week against a backdrop of developments about growing tension in the government over Brexit. "

just done another google, and another visit to yougov's site. Zilch, nada.

I guess a month old is current affairs for nats.

[zahidf]

Brexitters going crazy

 

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Brexitters going crazy

as i mentioned a week or two ago, the UK is not going to bend to the threats of Ireland - and most-particularly when the Irish threat is so fucking stupid. After all, want to tell me where the threat to the UK is in Ireland threatening to cause themselves the worse outcome they can have?

There's an awful lot of bollocks talked by the brexiters, but they're dead right when they've been saying the status of the border will be decided via whatever deal (or no deal) the EU and UK agree in trade talks. 

Anything the UK might "promise" now is meaningless - despite Ireland's demands - because it's dependent on EU agreement.

[ThomThomDrum]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

as i mentioned a week or two ago, the UK is not going to bend to the threats of Ireland - and most-particularly when the Irish threat is so fucking stupid. After all, want to tell me where the threat to the UK is in Ireland threatening to cause themselves the worse outcome they can have?

There's an awful lot of bollocks talked by the brexiters, but they're dead right when they've been saying the status of the border will be decided via whatever deal (or no deal) the EU and UK agree in trade talks. 

Anything the UK might "promise" now is meaningless - despite Ireland's demands - because it's dependent on EU agreement.

Its not as if the UK Government were not warned about this. The Irish border question is not suddenly new as the clock ticks by, and was one of the 3 strands that was highlighted to be agreed upon before phase 2 started. It wasnt taken seriously it seems and now a lot of folk are getting their knickers in a twist over it all with some very unwelcome comments from politicians. 

[zahidf]

19 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Its not as if the UK Government were not warned about this. The Irish border question is not suddenly new as the clock ticks by, and was one of the 3 strands that was highlighted to be agreed upon before phase 2 started. It wasnt taken seriously it seems and now a lot of folk are getting their knickers in a twist over it all with some very unwelcome comments from politicians. 

exactly. The UK govt envoked article 50 without thinking about it. They are the ones who fucked up

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Its not as if the UK Government were not warned about this. The Irish border question is not suddenly new as the clock ticks by, and was one of the 3 strands that was highlighted to be agreed upon before phase 2 started. It wasnt taken seriously it seems and now a lot of folk are getting their knickers in a twist over it all with some very unwelcome comments from politicians. 

but the uk govt did always point out that stuff like the irish border needs the talks about a future trade deal to get sorted.  The UK agreed to go along with the EU talks structure - because that was the only structure on offer - but always pointed out it was an arse (and obvs hoped to change it).

And now the irish PM has thrown in the most diplomatically-amateur and stupid of threats... which looks like cementing that border at its hardest, when just about anything that might be agreed would be better than what Ireland is deciding for everyone.

There's more than just a brexiting UK that can be an arse.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

exactly. The UK govt envoked article 50 without thinking about it. They are the ones who fucked up

It depends what you call a fuck up and how consistent you are at identifying fuck-ups.

Putting aside what the UK has already done, what the Irish PM is doing fucking stupid too. He didn't have to do it, but he's choosing to punch himself and the rest of Ireland in the face.

The UK is not going to change its stance because of Ireland's threats. Anyone who thought that was the way to go never did diplomacy school.

And by Ireland denying talks on creating a softer border or no border at all, Ireland is deciding to have the hardest of borders.

Talk about giving the tories a free pass in the eyes of the UK electorate. Corbyn at his worst couldn't have done it better.

[ThomThomDrum]

Without looking at it economically demanding a guarantee of no return of a border between the two countries makes sense to him, as we cant forget everyone born in Northern Ireland now and post Brexit has/and will still have a right to EU citizenship if they so wish and we obviously dont want to forget what the re-installation of a border on the island could do potentially wrt to "troubles"........

Anyway Im not here to defend or support Varadkar and his rhetoric, as my point is really that angry, arrogant political commentary on this issue will not be beneficial at all. People pushing Brexit really need to begin offering up proper solutions to the mess they have on their hands rather than saying silly things that will just get peoples backs up, cause tensions and stall progress.......  

Edited November 27, 2017 by ThomThomDrum

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Without looking at it economically demanding a guarantee of no return of a border between the two countries makes sense to him, as we cant forget everyone born in Northern Ireland now and post Brexit has/and will still have a right to EU citizenship if they so wish and we obviously dont want to forget what the re-installation of a border on the island could do potentially wrt to "troubles"........

So UK policy should be dictated by what some potential terrorists might do? Can't see that one winning much support in the UK, myself.

The rest are better arguments, the sort of things the Irish PM should be saying.

You win the argument with a good argument, and this is an easy win for Ireland ... unless Ireland forces itself to lose by being the one to decide the hardest of borders, as this diktat does.

 

19 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Anyway Im not here to defend or support Varadkar and his rhetoric, as my point is really that angry, arrogant political commentary on this issue will not be beneficial at all. People pushing Brexit really need to begin offering up proper solutions to the mess they have on their hands rather than saying silly things that will just get peoples backs up, cause tensions and stall progress.......  

If Ireland wants "proper solutions" it has to allow the space for them to (perhaps) be achieved. If Ireland demands the solution is what Ireland says and another sovereign state has to follow Ireland's diktat, that's no proper solution.

I'm damned sure today's Ireland wouldn't jump to the UK's tune just because the UK was demanding it should. Why does Ireland think it might work the other way?

I can't really see what mutual solution there might be, but I'm damned sure that the UK is not going to cancel brexit because of anything Ireland demands ... and that means Ireland gets the hardest of borders if it remains intransigent over trade talks.

[ThomThomDrum]

17 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So UK policy should be dictated by what some potential terrorists might do? Can't see that one winning much support in the UK, myself.

No, it should be dictated to by the potential negative social affects that a border could have on some of its citizens. The Irish border issue is much much bigger than an economic, customs, trade issue and should be dealt with accordingly IMO. Up till now fuck all has been seriously done about it and I get the impression its viewed as a nuisance issue by Brexiters rather than a serious fallout from what they wanted, voted on and got. 

Edited November 27, 2017 by ThomThomDrum

[eFestivals]

41 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

No, it should be dictated to by the potential negative social affects that a border could have on some of its citizens.

most brexiteers are wise to the fact that there's plenty of negatives about brexit, but it's what's happening anyway cos it's worth it. I thought the EU had accepted that, too.

So why are Ireland slow on the uptake? Just cos you don't like it doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

41 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

The Irish border issue is much much bigger than an economic, customs, trade issue and should be dealt with accordingly IMO.

it only becomes a single issue within a single sovereignty. It's not that.

Whatever our personal views might be, simple facts says that two different entities can have different ideas, and they can diverge just as they can come together.

It might feel more of a shit on your side because you're not the ones changing things right now, but if NI stayed within the SM/CU then you would be the ones changing things and forcing it on the other, forever more. There's more than one side to all of this.

 

41 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Up till now fuck all has been seriously done about it and I get the impression its viewed as a nuisance issue by Brexiters rather than a serious fallout from what they wanted, voted on and got. 

I don't doubt it.

But in the scheme of things it IS a minor issue. And if Ire/NI don't like how things pan out there's already the right to choose other changes and get what would be the more important one Ireland.

I'm not trying to claim the UK is right with anything I've said, I'm just facing the reality of what the UK is and how it's likely to act. A border between GB & NI is no more suitable or sensible than a border between Ireland & NI.

[zahidf]

[zahidf]

 

[eFestivals]

18 minutes ago, zahidf said:

it takes two to impose a border.

The UK is still saying it doesn't want a border.

Ireland is saying it will impose the hardest border.

Who wants the border?

And either we accept that sovereign states are able to act in a sovereign manner, or we might as well give up the concept of sovereignty ... but if you choose that second one, get back to us when Ireland is giving it up too, so a mutual agreement *can* be made.

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

if Lammy had been paying attention, he'd know he's being a lying ignorant twat, playing the party line instead of anything resembling truth.

There was no Parliamentary instruction to publish them unedited, and Davis made clear they would need to be edited to be in a format that made coherent sense.

(of course, that doesn't rule out tory game playing via editing, but that's not what Lammy said).

[zahidf]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

if Lammy had been paying attention, he'd know he's being a lying ignorant twat, playing the party line instead of anything resembling truth.

There was no Parliamentary instruction to publish them unedited, and Davis made clear they would need to be edited to be in a format that made coherent sense.

(of course, that doesn't rule out tory game playing via editing, but that's not what Lammy said).

Because steve baker said the opposite in parliament?

[sjseabass]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

it takes two to impose a border.

The UK is still saying it doesn't want a border.

Ireland is saying it will impose the hardest border.

Who wants the border?

And either we accept that sovereign states are able to act in a sovereign manner, or we might as well give up the concept of sovereignty ... but if you choose that second one, get back to us when Ireland is giving it up too, so a mutual agreement *can* be made.

I thought you were against people (Labour, mostly) having their cake and eating it? And yet you repeat the UK saying it doesn't want a border as if it means something, when there's no way of actually achieving it while leaving the single market and customs union. It's not a valid negotiating position.

The UK can act in a sovereign manner and insist on leaving the EU, but it has to accept the consequences of that - breaking the Good Friday agreement. In no way is that on the Republic's head.

Edited November 27, 2017 by theevilfridge

[Comfy Bean]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

if Lammy had been paying attention, he'd know he's being a lying ignorant twat, playing the party line instead of anything resembling truth.

There was no Parliamentary instruction to publish them unedited, and Davis made clear they would need to be edited to be in a format that made coherent sense.

(of course, that doesn't rule out tory game playing via editing, but that's not what Lammy said).

For me, a general expectation that these would be published unedited. Parliamentary instruction or not.

Bizarrely you claim Lammy is a lying ignorant twat for highlighting this issue and make out that Davis is really just changing the format to help us thickos understand the big numbers. We should thank him I suppose :-)

How long have we been waiting on these edited reports ?

Seems this started months ago.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Comfy Bean

[LJS]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

it takes two to impose a border.

 

No it doesn't

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, zahidf said:

Because steve baker said the opposite in parliament?

I pointed out what Davis had said.

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, theevilfridge said:

I thought you were against people (Labour, mostly) having their cake and eating it? And yet you repeat the UK saying it doesn't want a border as if it means something, when there's no way of actually achieving it while leaving the single market and customs union. It's not a valid negotiating position.

It takes two to negotiate.  The UK can ask for something, no more or less than the EU or Ireland can.

Both sides have asked for something, and both are telling the other they can't have what they've asked for. 

How come you've decided that only the EU's ask can be valid? That's not a valid negotiating position, either.

I'm not claiming the UK's position is smart, I'm pointing out that The 'threat' of Ireland is at least as fucking stupid.

If Ireland refuses to discuss a softer border, Ireland is deciding all by itself that it wants the hardest of borders.

 

Quote

The UK can act in a sovereign manner and insist on leaving the EU, but it has to accept the consequences of that - breaking the Good Friday agreement. In no way is that on the Republic's head.

The GFA is broken (if it is) by the post-EU new border arrangements, not by the fact of leaving the EU. 

Ireland's 'threat' makes that clear. Otherwise Ireland wouldn't be able to make that threat, a threat about the UK having left the EU where Ireland say it doesn't break the GFA if the UK does what Ireland says.

If Ireland are the ones imposing the new border arrangements without allowing anything but that hardest of borders, it's Ireland's choice alone.

If Ireland wants to shift responsibility back to the UK, Ireland has to show willingness to talk rather than refusing to.

Edited November 28, 2017 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

8 hours ago, LJS said:

No it doesn't

Ultimately, it does.

But if you want to play it your way and it only takes one, that one is Ireland alone. 

Cos Ireland are the ones saying - and they are - "we'll impose the hardest border", they're the ones imposing that hardest border. Not the UK.

We could see a post-brexit situation where the UK puts up no border controls but Ireland does what it says. Who has created the hard border then?

Go on, tell me how that would be the UK imposing that hard border.

The EU is just as responsible for the choices about its rules and wants as the UK is for its own. I accept the right of the EU to change its wants and rules (as it has done, a lot... else we probably wouldn't be here); I similarly accept the right of the UK to do the same. That's an acceptance of sovereignty.

But anyway ... if it only takes one and that one is the country leaving the EU, you need to go and revise countless Scottish indy posts you made, to state that an iScotland (which by becoming iScotland puts itself outside of the EU, don't forget) would be by-default imposing a hard border with rUK.

Oh dear. You've just raped all you've said about the wonders of an indy Scotland.

All i'm saying to Ireland is "you need to allow talks". If Ireland decides intransigence is better than talks, Ireland gets exactly what its intransigence demands.

Edited November 28, 2017 by eFestivals