I definitely would have, since I'm Irish.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Alright - either would have surrendered the Falklands, or would have sided with Argentina in the debate.I definitely would have, since I'm Irish.
Basically, it’s nutty if you think the U.K should firmly protect its citizens and offer no discussion on the matter, but not if you call Brits pirates and illegal occupiers (straight out of Argentina’s propaganda list).
I'd be surrendering nothing because they weren't mine?
Spain have seen an opportunity to negotiate something they've been eyeing up for years and your government has folded. Advantage them, I reckon.
I know .. when I made that comment I was referring to the Brits in the thread (although tbf I imagine there are very few).
I agree totally. We have a spineless government who I do not trust to not make further concessions.
Scoxit.
Breaking: May gives Britain away as a Christmas present, in order to keep her job.
Would not at all blame Scotland if they voted to leave now. It’s a huge shame (from my perspective) but the situation we’ve put them in is that there is less and less incentive to remain.
This country is in a real mess. Praying a heroic leadership figure emerges from nowhere but with the state of British politics I highly doubt it. Country could do with somebody with the presence of a Churchill to rally around right now.
This country is in a real mess. Praying a heroic leadership figure emerges from nowhere but with the state of British politics I highly doubt it. Country could do with somebody with the presence of a Churchill to rally around right now.
They should campaign for a second indy referendum but ask the whole of the UK
Do you want to keep subsidising Scotland?
Yes put up with them
No... Boot them out... Rebuild the wall and make them pay
Independence almost guaranteed for Scotland... And a long way to skewing the Westminster maths very much in favour of the conservatives.
Perhaps she could get her deal on brexit through on the backs of the snp in a trade of for indy ref2 ?
It's a shame the UK is being so badly governed that it may result in the break up of the UK. Not sure there's that much of an economic benefit to Scotland departing though.
On a lighter note, has anyone already posted this? Only came across it this morning and nearly had a heart-attack laughing. Jeremy Cornflake and No Breakfast.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Burgon rips off his mask to reveal he was Gove all along.
Isn't that the point though, right now they don't want it and no one is suggesting it. If at some point in the future if for whatever reasons Spain does suggest it then leave it to the people of Gibraltar to decide its possible by then there will be a shift of opinion. I get what you're saying mate but there's no need to get worked up and talk about going to war with an ally over a situation that hasn't yet and may never happen.
At least we’d be free to make our own mistakes instead of constantly being outvoted by a country with ten times our population. Win or lose, it would be because of us and not anyone else. Happy to be a partner with England, but we aren’t partners. Westminster decides and that’s pretty much that.
If scotland departed the UK, what would be the border situation and would i, being born in England, be able to get a scottish passport without having scottish blood?
"The age of the experts is over..."
Translation : "...unless they happen to endorse our amateurishness and expediency. "
Translation : "...unless they happen to endorse our amateurishness and expediency. "
Is there a simpletons guide to the pros and cons of the deal? Still can't find anything that breaks everything down without the waffle of one sided groups personal interests getting involved
No one can answer these questions because they would have to be defined by Scotland as an independent country.
True. It's interesting that for the 2014 independence referendum they chose residence as the qualification for voting rather than ancestry. People with Scottish parents, born in Scotland and raised in Scotland, but who lived outside Scotland couldn't vote. It would be mildly amusing if the likes of Sean Connery, long-time supporter and financer of the Scottish Independence movement was denied a Scottish passport. Personally I'd want them to take the birthplace of parents and grandparents into account, like football, and I'd be in.
It won't - but in that case we need to accept that we ourselves are putting Gibraltar at an inherent disadvantage, considering the vast majority of Gibraltar voted to remain. Saying we need to safeguard them and talking about how many of them want to remain as part of the UK comes across as inherently silly when we're quite literally in the process of making a major decision that none of them really want.
He'd probably get a passport even if he can't get a vote but Connery can go feck himself - despite his acting chops a fairly shite person, and a tax dodger as well. An immigrant living and working in Scotland and paying their fair way is far more deserving of a vote than he is.
If the EU have signed off this deal so easily surely that suggests that it’s in their favour
I think it was never going to be otherwise. Given the future of the Union is more important politically than the 'best' deal that could be made, the UK was always going to pay a heavy price for Brexit.
Both sides sign it, otherwise there wouldn't be a deal.
The Uk aren't going to get a better deal, so it's as it always has been - take what the EU offers, remain or crash out with no deal.
Cherries and cake have always been off the menu.
Also I remember reading a poll of Tory members in England with a clear majority saying that the break-up of the UK is a price worth paying for Brexit.
EDIT: Here it is
EDIT: Here it is
It has nothing to do with politics, there was no "best" deal due to practical and legal reasons.
My point is that those practical and legal reasons are political reasons. And if there was some hypothetical amazing deal possible for the UK then that would not be politicallt feasible due to the EU's position (which has always been constant) that the single market, the Union, and the customs union cannot be compromised, as doing so could encourage other states to leave.
And the UK started in 2016 with next to no negotiators (as all UK negotiators and trade experts are based in Brussels) and for far too long thought the EU's position was a starting point in negotiations, rather than simply their position. Now we are in a state where half the UK is pissed off we are leaving and the other half will be pissed off when the economic shock of Brexit is felt in the years to come.
Indeed. There was never any reason for a leaving member to get a deal that was more favourable towards itself than the EU. No negotiator in any political or business situation would take such an approach and we should've known that from the start. Our own pompous attitude and arrogance regarding the whole process hasn't exactly helped things either.
The issue is that your first paragraph is wrong and it's the probably the main issue in all of this, it's the voluntary confusion of the EU and its member states. Those hypothetical amazing deals for the UK are damaging for the other countries from an individual standpoint, for us it's a matter of survival, it's not political, it's not an act. If France gets into a border and custom issue it's going to be infinitely different to anything the UK can imagine, it's going to cost us infinitely more than you can imagine, most of the EU members aren't on islands, the SM and CU are essential to us from a practical standpoint.
Sometimes I feel that you are using your british perspective to other members not realizing where you geographically are.
I think we may be talking around each other a bit.
I wasn't trying to confuse the EU and the MS to be fair. I addressed the EU as an institution in its own right with its own priorities. And it has been clear even before the referendum, even before the Lisbon, Amsterdam and Maastricht Treaties that the EU (as a political actor) has placed the security of its own future as an institution above offering bespoke deals to MS.
There are of course individual issues for the MS - the Irish Border, the Visigrad Four and their concerns about freedom of movement and so on and so on. And yes, for individual MS there are of course interests which relate to the structure of the EU, the Eurozone and EU law (and others) which are (using your terms) matters above politics.
On your point about the UK being an island - that has influenced UK foreign policy for hundreds of years. But even today there are a large number of UK politicians who support Leave who miss the point that we are no longer an island, and we will have a land border with the EU. That may have shaped many of the proposals from the Leave campaign that were political non-starters.
I'm not sure I follow the last sentence entirely though?
The number of posts confidently predicting the future seems to have dropped a bit over the last couple of days for some reason, so I'll start:
May will make parliament's vote on approval of the withdrawal bill a free vote, which will help to protect her from any more letters going in, and also pressure Corbyn to do the same. Corbyn will remain as confused as he is now, and Labour MPs will actually vote independently, and faced with the fact that withdrawal in March is already written into both EU and UK law their choice will effectively be soft brexit or hard brexit, and against all the predictions enough of them will back the withdrawal bill for it to pass. Yeah, I know the world and his dog say May won't get the numbers, I think otherwise.
May will make parliament's vote on approval of the withdrawal bill a free vote, which will help to protect her from any more letters going in, and also pressure Corbyn to do the same. Corbyn will remain as confused as he is now, and Labour MPs will actually vote independently, and faced with the fact that withdrawal in March is already written into both EU and UK law their choice will effectively be soft brexit or hard brexit, and against all the predictions enough of them will back the withdrawal bill for it to pass. Yeah, I know the world and his dog say May won't get the numbers, I think otherwise.
I know you do not mean a war.
I imagine that this whole situation has put people on nerves and these debates end like this.
About pirates and illegal occupation ...I think that our history books say very different things.
Besides,you underestimate our military power.
A simple scratch and our three planes will turn the island into a great golf course
I don't think you're too far wrong except I don't think Corbyn is confused, just that his cunning plan wasn't very cunning. Gutless politicans to the fore. BINO.The number of posts confidently predicting the future seems to have dropped a bit over the last couple of days for some reason, so I'll start:
May will make parliament's vote on approval of the withdrawal bill a free vote, which will help to protect her from any more letters going in, and also pressure Corbyn to do the same. Corbyn will remain as confused as he is now, and Labour MPs will actually vote independently, and faced with the fact that withdrawal in March is already written into both EU and UK law their choice will effectively be soft brexit or hard brexit, and against all the predictions enough of them will back the withdrawal bill for it to pass. Yeah, I know the world and his dog say May won't get the numbers, I think otherwise.
And that's the issue, you addressed the EU as an institution when you are in a situation where it's the 27 other members that you are facing, that's a fundamental issue. They are the ones that don't want to compromise the institution, institution that they created that they control and is the voice of the EU council. Just a reminder, Barnier gets his instructions from the capitals, they are the ones telling him what to do and not do.
Also I'm not sure about what you mean concerning bespoke deals for member states, there are plenty of them, basically every member state with overseas territory has one, France had one regarding its relation with Monaco and you can see them in pretty much every EU treaties. As long as they have no negative consequences on other member states, bespoke deals aren't an issue.
Agreed but ironically, freedom of movement will continue under her deal unless she can figure out how to leave the SM & CU and still leave the Irish border invisible.
It was the politest word I could think of. Corbyn could still change the course of events by putting forward a bill requesting another referendum, but he'd need to persuade enough Tories to back it, and instead I think he'll gamble on May losing the approval vote and then somehow losing a no confidence vote as well. Can't see that myself.
This. The price was always going to be massive in the short term to safeguard the eu going forward. Anyone who said otherwise is just deluded about the importance of UK to Europe and vice versa. This always had to be a change for the long run, next 10 year's or so will be painful
Agreed but the only point of another referendum would be to get a Remain win which I don't think Corbyn wants. I think whatever he does, he loses.
Is that what Spain wants out of this? A great golf course?
Jesus.Also I remember reading a poll of Tory members in England with a clear majority saying that the break-up of the UK is a price worth paying for Brexit.
EDIT: Here it is