It's quite clear if you read the post I was responding to.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Art.50 has nothing to do with it, this article simply stipulates that if you want to leave you just have to formally express it and after two years of transition all deals with the EU are voided.
It is not a UK based problem. It involves two current EU member states and it provides for the most open border in the entire bloc. If it is the legal right for any member state to leave then A50 should provide for something as significant as that. Lets face it the EU are not short on drumming out legislation. It was overlooked and therefore there should be some room for refinement of the backstop to allow the UK get a WA and avoid crashing out and a hard border.
The British person that drafted Article 50 probably should have thought of these things.
It is totally the UK's problem. If they don't want to break the GFA they have to stay in the CU which seemingly parliament wants to do anyway.
The Irish border isn't only the border between the UK and Ireland but the border between the EU and the UK. Thought the UK wanted control of all their borders, or only when it suits the UK.
It involves two states, but it is overwhelmingly a UK based problem.
As for the rest of what you said, that's ridiculous. Article 50 should have provided a solution to putting at risk a peace agreement that took many years and incredibly fraught negotiations by those involved? Just in case the UK ever decided to commit economic suicide and leave a union it had been part of for 40 years?
How goddamn self-entitled has our stupid, vainglorious country actually become?! We have morons and deluded idiots all across parliamentary leadership, we expect other people to solve all our problems for us, and when it all goes to shit, apparently its always someone elses fault. It's pathetic.
That may be the case. But if we are democrats then we should make every effort to see that it is respected. If NI or Scotland, Wales were given a referendum to leave the UK and won then there would be as many saying they were stupid to leave. Would they be?
You expect A50 to account for every treaty one of the 28 member states might have with another country? How do you think that's possible? You just negotiate dozens or hundreds of new agreements just incase one of the members might want to leave? What would even be the point if a country opts out of the very same EU guidelines when its leaving?
You either have regulatory alignment or you have a hard border. You're just joining May and Corbyn in their refusal of simple logic and simple realities and demand some magical form of refinement when there is no way to refine the rules of logic.
People say that Brexit is stupid because they see a net benefit in being an EU member, not because they think that leaving any union is stupid.
Scotland, Wales or NI leaving the UK to eventually join the EU would be the literal opposite of Brexit.
Last edited:
What if the Soviets had nuked the UK in the eighties and turned it into a smoking wasteland, who's responsibility would it be to keep the border open and find a solution?
What if Aliens had invaded and forced us all to join in worshipping their God Emperor, who's responsibility would it be to keep the border open and find a solution?
In both these cases as in yours there likely would not have been a GFA.
If your argument revolves around that the fact if things had been different then they would have been different you're really showing the weakness of the position you are holding.
And May's deal would end up being that by default. But she can't call it that. Labour know that will be the result of May's deal, it is what they are advocating anyway but they won't vote for it for political reasons.
The reason they don't want to be in the CU is because they conned the British public into thinking that they're going to have all these fantastic individual trade deals. Which is why Corbyn has come up with the same impossibilities because he wants to be in a CU but doing his own trade deals, the same as the Tories did in 2016.
The EU have given three solutions to this problem and the UK have turned them all down.
How's everyone's stockpiling going? How many weeks supplies are you buying?
I've done my weekly Lidl shopping if that's what you're asking.
I have guns, whisky and my Silver Jubilee mug. Sorted.
It is ironic that the issue of the Irish border is now dominating the Brexit discussion and politics.
Maybe I missed it but was this problem made clear during all the discussions prior to the referendum vote.
Maybe I missed it but was this problem made clear during all the discussions prior to the referendum vote.
It was by the Irish.
It has been mentioned prior to the referendum, leavers didn't care and clearly remainers didn't too because they failed to focus on that point. But it was still mentioned.
Of course not. They’d still have all the economic upsides of being a member of the EU. So it’s not comparable.
I guess they’d also lose some upsides from being a member of the UK. So they’d to consider these very carefully before making their decision. They should make sure the electorate are properly informed, then get a chance to vote on a specific plan for their future outside the UK.
Basically do what the tories didn’t do before the Brexit referendum. Learn from their mistakes.
Am I missing something? The DUP are pro-Bexit but don't want a hard border? They seem a bit confused, if so.
They’re not the only ones.
Not really, except perhaps by those directly affected on the island of Ireland, like many other things it did not come under a lot of scrutiny in the referendum. Even the GFA itself was not voted on in a people's vote throughout the UK, though it affected a 'border issue'. The fact of the matter is there is no deal to be done on Brexit that favours the UK in relation to leaving the EU, we either leave or we remain and there are grave implications either way. Once we leave we can set about seeking a trade deal, but as the EU reminds us constantly, not until we've left. A Second referendum gets us nowhere, whatever the result, because the June 2016 outcome has not been acted upon and therefore whichever side loses will believe its has a right to continue to agitate for a third, or even fourth referendum.
What Brexit has shown is that in the world we now live in, the UK can no longer rely on precedent we need a written constitution. This might be the only good thing to come out of all of this, a second Magna Carta moment in history?
It was brought up and discussed on here prior to the referendum.
Yep. It's particularly odd as Brexit only makes a future move towards a United Ireland more likely. The Tories & DUP could do more to further the breakup of the union than Sinn Fein managed in half a century or so.
If Article 50 date is extended, do we keep all of our current standings within the EU? For example I understand that if Article 50 is revoked before the 29th March our status in the EU would be as though the referendum never happened, however would that still be the case if Article 50 extended, is the date simply arbitrary as opposed to a date when we live or die?
Secondly if breakfast is extended, does that mean I have to wait longer to be able to buy the lunch menu at McDonald's?
Secondly if breakfast is extended, does that mean I have to wait longer to be able to buy the lunch menu at McDonald's?
They say publicly they don't want a hard border, but i think secretly most of them would be delighted if it happened.
Have we always been this insular?
Looking like the brexiteers are buttering up to May's deal cause they are scared the whole thing is going to pot.
Chris Williamson.
Chris Williamson.
Last edited:
Hi Peter. I don't doubt that. I was referring more to the actual debates prior to Brexit.
I have a copy of the government literature that was sent out prior to the referendum and the issue of the Irish border was not mentioned.
It may have been spoken about at some stage but I really cannot recall that being a major issue to be considered.
I do recall Liam Fox saying that the Irish border was simply a 'sideshow'.
They aren't the only ones who are confused. So many contradictory views.
Even the dreaded 'Brexit means Brexit' means different things to different people.
And no doubt "Geronwithit" does too.
Peter?
Yes it didn't get enough coverage as it should have.
Although like everything else that was pointed out would happen if Brexit went ahead, it was all dismissed as not true or scaremongering.
Hunt been pushing for a time limit on the backstop at Cabinet today. I can't decide if they're idiots themselves or just trying to please the idiots and irresponsibly allowing it to run down the clock.
All the actions coming out now could and should have been done months ago.
All the actions coming out now could and should have been done months ago.
A friend who works for Sainsbury says Sainsbury's plan is to call upon the military to maintain law and order during the scramble for groceries in the days immediately after Brexit.
What sort of things are they thinking people are going to hoard?
Banana republic.
Yes, we have no bananas.
if i can't still order from Amazon i'll be pissed.
also, the missus is supposed to be going to London at the start of April for the weekend, which was going to be a lovely free weekend for me. If she can't go now, shit's going down, Westminster.
also, the missus is supposed to be going to London at the start of April for the weekend, which was going to be a lovely free weekend for me. If she can't go now, shit's going down, Westminster.
Which part of "the backstop cannot have an expiry date" doesn't he understand.
More pointless amendments like the No deal one
And this is what the Dromey/Spelman amendment says:
At end add “and rejects the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without a withdrawal agreement and a framework for the future relationship”.
They're all living in an alternative universe.
Sorry. Paul.
Quite agree. We have quite understandably become mistrustful of pretty much anything we are told; be it lies or so called fake news.
I have long stopped buying a newspaper and even the major news channels are accused of bias.
It is now about taking a balanced view of the information we are supplied with then making up your own mind.
Too often people want someone else to make their mind up for them.
I am too old to make much use of 'social media' except for this forum which I see as challenging my views and not agreeing with everything.