slowoldman - Member

Well there is a viable solution perhaps. Re-align the border along the line of the leave/remain vote. Then stick up concrete and barbed wire.
[img] [/img]

That map view sums it up perfectly. Britain's attempts to ethnically and culturally cleanse Ireland, still bearing bitter, poisonous fruit 460 years later.

Annoyingly those Ulster Scots couldn’t even vote the same way as the real Scots.

It's really the only viable solution. A hard border can't be implemented unless it's policed

Leaving aside the massive cost of establishing border infrastructure along a difficult frontier, the complete lack of HMRC / Border Agency staff to man the border and the risk considerable risk to life to anyone representing the Crown at the border and the general deterioration in peace, the EU will not want a porous hard border which will open them and probably the UK to various tax and duty frauds, which those in the area have ripped the arse out of in years gone by, and the RoI isn't going to waste millions policing a border which is a UK cock up if it can avoid it.

Brexit is a big nail in the coffin of a divided Ireland

Or the other way round Kilo - NI is a big nail in the coffin of Brexit

UK politicians dgas about selling the north out if it gets in the way of brexit, as seen by bribing the dup despite the adverse effects of that on GF agreement and their woeful record of squandering millions ( one billion wasted on RHI)

the conservative and unionist party propped up by the DUP is not going to lose NI to the irish/break up the UK under any set of circumstances

to argue otherwise is to ignore 400 years of history - whatever side of the divide you sit

True. But "no surrender" still seems to be the mantra which doesn't allow the any solution to the NI border issue. NO isle of man deal ( sticks to all EU stuff without being a member thus tariff free trade) or HOng Kong solution which would be similar.

Excluding fairy borders an unicorn crossings Sweden and Norway managed to get an acceptable solution in place so there is precedent.

Yes, they're both in Schengen.

I think the most ridiculous way this whole thing could end is if the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal but was forced to join Schengen.

Junkyard - lazarus
the conservative and unionist party propped up by the DUP is not going to lose NI to the irish/break up the UK under any set of circumstances

to argue otherwise is to ignore 400 years of history - whatever side of the divide you sit

Sell out as in they've been happy with an "acceptable level of violence" in the past no reason they will sacrifice brexit to keep peace on course.

Johnson and Gove basically threatening may and making it clear she has no control over them
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/12/michael-gove-and-boris-johnson-send-secret-brexit-letter-to-may

Barnier drawing up plans for talks collapse
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/12/eu-planning-for-collapse-of-brexit-talks-says-michel-barnier

I thought this was quite poignant

[img] [/img]

At least it beats treacherous farridges effort..

[img] [/img]

A man who recently addressed a neonatal rally in Germany.

A man who recently addressed a neonatal rally in Germany.

Barnier drawing up plans for talks collapse
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/12/eu-planning-for-collapse-of-brexit-talks-says-michel-barnier

If you imagine it will take at least a year for businesses and governments to determine policies and put in place legislation or procedures then having no agreement or sign or agreement means that it is only sensible to plan for all eventualities including no deal.

Getting them young?

Auto correct, sorry that should be Neo Nazi.

Although it's an ironic mistake, that is indeed how they get them.

Good to see that Barnier is also preparing for all scenarios - despite those ^ who argue that is a waste a time. Plus he confirms the Brexit date which also falsifies the idea that Brexshit is dead. It isn’t. It’s happening.

The EU needs to believe that the UK will leave in order for them to abandon their stupid posturing

is your argument that up until today they did not believe this and now they will capitulate and change tact now the "believe" us?

What evidence do you have to suggest they will move on thei criteria - what was is it in his speech that made you think he was about to change? I cannot see anything because there was **** all it was all about what we had to do to move it forward

One sided THM but at least your one side was accurate.

What a balls up.

The EU clearly did not believe that the UK was actually planning on leaving... This is why in they started accepting bids for relocation of the EMA and EBA in June of this year...

Their tactic always was going to be extract as much from the UK as possible and make sure we are not an equal competitor so that they can control the relationship. It is exactly what we are trying to do to see if we can improve our position from that of a member state.

Is it me or are the Express starting to question Brexit?

Its in the process of being sold to the trinity mirror at the moment according to reports. So they might already be switching editorial stance since I doubt Desmond would be paying much attention now.

The chance of us leaving is looking the most unlikely since the advisory referendum.

It's utter suicide.

“Leadership is about confronting the great challenges. But Brexit is the biggest challenge we have faced since the second world war. So I intend to devote my speech, in four parts, to this alone.

“First, I want to explain why I voted remain – because for all its faults, the European Union has been a force for good in Europe and in the UK. I believed that our future prosperity and security, and opportunities for our young people, would be enhanced by staying in. Second, I want to explain why, nonetheless, I was something of a reluctant remainer. The truth is, there is a lot wrong with the EU. So though I voted remain, I was not starry-eyed. I was determined that, had we won, we would also fight for reform.

“Third, I want to explain why I have been trying so hard to deliver the Brexit the people voted for. It was a close result. But leave won. I felt strongly that it was my duty to deliver the only Brexit that I believed could meet the demands of the majority of leavers – out of the single market and the customs union, out of the European court of justice.

“But precisely because I have a profound sense of duty, I want to tell you the absolute truth as I see it. It cannot be done. Yes, you can shout. You can storm out. But I have looked at it every which way. And, as your leader, I have concluded that it cannot be done without enormous damage to our economy, to your living standards, to our public services, to our standing in the world. This is damage I am not prepared to inflict. The cost is too high.

“I will publish the legal advice that I have the right to unilaterally revoke article 50, and if you look behind me you will see the backdrop has gone and instead there is onscreen the letter I will be sending to Donald Tusk and the EU 27 heads of government later today.

“I say to Boris, to Michael, to Liam, and to their acolytes, it is decision time. If you feel you don’t wish to listen to the arguments I will make, then you know what you have to do. I am ready for any challenge, confident that finally I will be able to fight for what I believe is the right course for Britain, and confident that once the public have the proper debate we failed to have during the referendum and the election, that my view can prevail in the country.

“The Labour party will also have to make up its mind. Most Labour MPs support the position I am setting out today, though their leadership may need to be persuaded. We may need a general election to settle this. At some point we may need a referendum to reverse the outcome of the first one. I am aware I am launching something here, the course of which is unpredictable. I am prepared to take all the risks attached to that. For I am no longer willing to pretend. I am no longer willing for the delusions of the few to dictate a strategy for the many, when so much is at stake.

“I will also be publishing the sectoral advice papers we have received on the impact of Brexit on all aspects of our national life, so MPs can debate these fully. I know many of you think I might be ill. I feel a lot better now. Because what has been making me ill is the reality of which I have been certain more each day … that Brexit is a disaster, a potential catastrophe for our country. That my duty now is to steer the country to the only sensible decision I can see – a rethink, a change of course: not hard Brexit or soft Brexit, but no Brexit at all.”

Theresa May

That could be her best strategy.

Alternatively she could just say - "sorry you lot, you're too thick to understand, we were only joking about respecting the outcome, now STFU, your views don't matter, just do as you're told."

Yours, nanny

I doubt she is as rude as you

Either version would get my vote.

Yes imagine a tory politician putting the needs of the nation ahead of her back bench and shockingly being honest. It would help her case for brexit if she could be honest about the likely outcomes

"sorry you lot, you're too thick to understand, we were only joking about respecting the outcome, now STFU, your views don't matter, just do as you're told."

That's pretty much how Tories treat the nation in just about any other issue, so why not this one?

I think the most ridiculous way this whole thing could end is if the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal but was forced to join Schengen.

"sorry you lot you're too thick to understand we were only joking about [b]all the awesome possibilities post brexit, the money and the making stuff better. [/b][s]respecting the outcome, [/s]now STFU, your views don't matter, just do as you're told [b]we have some laws to quietly get rid of"[/b]

And fify

That's pretty much how Tories treat the nation in just about any other issue, so why not this one?

I think he's right you know. They don't give a shit about our views unless they can use it to suit their own purposes. 1% of brexiters using the other 99%

sorry you lot, you're too thick to understand

A large portion of them are indeed too thick, and many others are as you like to put it too lazy to understand.

You can't seriously believe that leavers voted on carefully considered and rational grounds? I've read before that the problem with economists is attempting to model humans as rational actors, so perhaps you do think that 😉

^^ winky smiley

I do love this concept that democracy is a once and forever idea.

A second referendum once the lunacy of leaving the EU becomes even more evident is the obvious answer

What if they had a referendum every year - "do you want to increase NHS funding?"

I bet it'd be yes every time. But they wouldn't do that, would they?

I do love this concept that democracy is a once and forever idea.

It's a childlike interpretation of democracy.

Yes, but no - they are picking the argument to bolster their position. As has been said, if the result went the other way there's no way they would be going on about respecting the will of the people.

if democracy was a once and forever option then we voted to join the EU once before

We also get to change our minds about who governs us every few years

Well it would be perfectly in keeping with EU tradition if we simply kept on having votes until the so-called “correct” decision was delivered

Democracy by attrition

Molgrips - given the BS that is constantly spouted by remoaners, normally to suppress debate and education (see yesterday’s Theresa May thread for a prime example) your comments are “surprising”. But the “too thick to be counted” narrative is another tradition of those who seek to depress democracy to suit their own ends.

teamhurtmore - Member
Well it would be perfectly in keeping with EU tradition. If we simply kept on having votes until the so-called “correct” decision was delivered

Democracy by attrition

The Borris/Gove letter was almost an attempt to get fired to trigger a Brexie Take over of the tories and install the real believers.

Whats the chances on her winning the vote?

Well it would be perfectly in keeping with EU tradition. If we simply kept on having votes until the so-called “correct” decision was delivered

Yes after a few adjustments, democracy. Ask people if they like something, listen, change, then ask if people are happy.

Sorry if you would rather have a Tory fiefdom, but some of us prefer something else. IT would be helpful if the media was actually truthful and politicians held to account for contempt of parliament.....

don't feed the troll. there is no point in argueing ith him.

Thou shalt do as the Minister of Truth commands.....

Alternatively you or any brexiteer could come up with a credible plan that doesn't complete **** the country. You've had a year and a half so far, so what's keeping you?

Alternatively you or any brexiteer could come up with a credible plan that doesn't complete **** the country. You've had a year and a half so far, so what's keeping you?

Reality!

Which ministers are telling the truth...

teamhurtmore - Member
Well it would be perfectly in keeping with EU tradition if we simply kept on having votes until the so-called “correct” decision was delivered

And presumably then stop yes?

So if you had a few votes on membership of the European club and then you got one that went your way and you decided to stop there, that would be what you say is a bad thing not respecting democracy?

So a bit like what the Brexies are trying to convince us is a good thing?

Let you argument play out on what has actually happened - you’ll get there eventually. 😉

[quote=thecaptain ]Alternatively you or any brexiteer could come up with a credible plan that doesn't complete **** the country. You've had a year and a half so far, so what's keeping you?

too busy trolling on here

you’ll get there eventually.

Capitan, I can’t speak for the Brexshiteers and I have yet to see any analysis that suggests the country will be ****ed. In fact as the BoE noted the economy has been surprisingly resilient. Inconvenient facts

Of course the biggest threat remains uncertainty and given that the EU refuse to negotiate properly then that will continue to the detriment of us all. Oddly, remoaners support their tactics despite the fact that this is one area where you can point to actual causality of harm.

Odd world. Anyone would think people are “too thick to understand” 😉

More likely too busy suppressing debate.

Oddly, remoaners support their tactics despite the fact that this is one area where you can point to actual causality of harm.

More sensibly we could negotiate the terms under which the Uk would continue to have access to the single market and vice versa. Important issues from which the rest follows.

But that would be far too sensible and grown up

Nope the important issues for the senior partner were laid out and agreed to by the UK. What does that tell you about the UK position. Given the shit progress so far I'd guess the eu were right to tackle the hard stuff first. Patriotism is not very useful here, logic and reasoning is.

What if they had a referendum every year - "do you want to increase NHS funding?"

What if they had a referendum every year - "do you want to increase NHS funding?"

We already get them every four years so not that big a leap.

I think the real comparison here is the McGregor mayweather fight, uk is the plucky McGregor who really knows he is only doing it for the money, the UK general public are the ones who gave up jobs and flew to Vegas to see the fight of the century and bet the house on the wrong guy.. The eu just wander around and win with very little real effort. Like everyone predicted.

As was the follow up where people kept saying of the rules were different it would have been different. Well don't agree to the rules that mean you lose.

your views don't matter, just do as you're told

How about if, instead, we…

kept on having votes

[b]?[/b]

Oh, hang on, nearly missed the line that will be quoted at the 2017 troll of the year awards…

More likely too busy suppressing debate.

Do we hell.

We get to change government, we don't get to tell them government what to do. Huge difference.

But the “too thick to be counted” narrative is another tradition of those who seek to depress democracy to suit their own ends.

Hah, not in the least.

I've given this plenty of thought. I have been fair to both sides of the aisle in the past, I am perfectly able to appreciate the concept of small government and moderate Toryism even if I am whole heartedly opposed to it, for example.

I do not think Brexit represents a good example of democracy. We have representative democracy for exactly this reason - because the people simply don't know enough. It's very obvious that the electorate did not act rationally. How can you claim otherwise?

And if the electorate do not act rationally how can they make specific decisions?

Democracy is not what you think it is.

EU refuse to negotiate properly

It's rather difficult to negotiate when you don't know whose in charge of the other side, nor what they they actually want.

To repeatedly blame the delay on the EU is fatuous in the extreme......

In fact as the BoE noted the economy has been surprisingly resilient.

Yes, few people expected the strong growth in the Eurozone this year, or our increasing exports to the EU.

Inconvenient facts

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2017-11-13/from-lost-decade-to-golden-years-euro-economy-picks-up-the-pace

Indeed.

Obviously. What you are suggesting is the antithesis of democracy. Starting with understanding what “demos” means would be a start.

You may be confusing representative government as one form of democracy with democracy itself. Whether deliberately or not is unclear. Either that or just a typo.

I suggest you read the word democracy in a dictionary - unsurprisingly it no longer means exactly what it meant in ancient Greek

democracy
d??m?kr?si/Submit
noun
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Or as usual thm doesn't get what the public are on about, news feeds to the ivory tower are slow and the inner tory is conflicted

Mike. The public were clear. We had a vote on it. Did that news not travel to Aus?

Lol again he keeps banging on about it... The public were very undecided they hardly made a decision. The outcomes described are not achievable a nd public opinion is changing. The leavers continue with their bs and hopes with no chance of delivering. Utilising still you seem to want it to happen and have resigned yourself to the shit house situation that will follow. Says more about you than others.
One vote and respect it? We joined the eu. Take your pompous crap and explode your mind on that one for a minute.

52/48 is far from clear.

Do we have to wait for the brexiteers to prove it was bullshit and lies before doing something different?

I genuinely thought that THM and Jambalaya were one and the same person - is that not the case?

Well I reckon they must both be part of the 100k tory party members who think they own the UK's future. #democracy

The public were clear.

Clear on what? Norway style exit, Switzerland style exit or the North Korea style exit we are currently heading for?

I'm sure I heard a lot about Norway and Switzerland during the debates, but very little going over the cliff.

Mike. The public were clear. We had a vote on it. Did that news not travel to Aus?

Repeat it again it might make it true

mikewsmith - Member
Repeat it again it might make it true

definitely will.

Jubilee line WiFi 😉

Brexshit means giving up membership. The means of access still have to be negotiated. That is if the Eu ever get round to that. They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk. We are trying (in vain at the moment) to negotiate a deal suited to uk interests. Odd that so many wish to oppose that.

They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk. We are trying (in vain at the moment) to negotiate a deal suited to uk interests. Odd that so many wish to oppose that.

Rather than live in a fantasy Britania rules the waves moment maybe take a proper look, you tell us you have been preparing for months now

THM deliberately misses the point again or is too thick to get it.

he is trolling

There isn't even a coherent "We" in the cabinet still less the country.

Team - you seem well read on all this. How would you solve the Northern Irish issue? (without asking the Republic to (re)join the UK?

How would you solve the Northern Irish issue?

Hello darkness, my old friend
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence

There is no easy solution which is why the EU have it as a precondition. Both sides have stated that the terms of the GFA need to be respected but unsurprisingly neither side have a solution

As always it will require a compromise/fudge something that the EU is normally very good at. Equally unsurprisingly they want something definitive now. Odd that, isn’t it? (Well not at all when you think about it)

Mike. Hardly missing the point. Simply sticking to it. Those who hide behind the troll insult continue to ignore th difference between membership of and access to the single market

There is only one key point now. Under what type of arrangement will we continue the have access to the EU and vice versa. WTO, existing FTA arrangements or a specific FTA. Despite all the remoaner BS, we are working towards the latter. But making very little progress. That’s the point as you seem to either have missed it or want to deliberately ignore it

They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk.

Well that’s true. The EUs number #1 focus is the cash and #2 no one else better follow suit

slowoldman - Member

They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk.

I thought the couple were still arguing about the divorce settlement and we hadn't got onto the access issues yet.

Correct slow old man. NO talks on any future arrangement can be done before the 3 key issues are settled. Its just a simple fact that there is no possibility of a bespoke deal due to the short timescales left. this is the reality.

any bespoke deal would take years to negotiate and would need agreement of all 27

there has been zero discussion of the future relationship and there will not be until the 3 key issues are solved.

Mays preconditions have also put huge barriers in the way of any future deal