Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You do have to giggle all the same

https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1094544746062712832

People are misinterpreting what he is saying. When he says I am the EU, he is saying that the EU speaks with one voice on the backstop and he happens to agree 100% with that voice.
If Trump came to Ireland on an official visit and Varadkar came out and said "Ireland welcomes you Donald Trump", It is debatable whether he is right or not because not all people would welcome him and he does not necessarily speak for Ireland on that issue, but when there is a general EU consensus that the backstop is a requirement, he is right, he is the EU, or less clumsily articulated, he is a custodian of that particular consensus.

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Now look at why the IRA got popular support back in the day? Discrimination, pogroms against communities and so on? Do you foresee this happening in a UI? I know I don't and I also know that they fear revenge for past sins. From this I don't foresee a mass rebellion vs a United Ireland. Indeed Dublin would be very conscious of offending them.

Obviously, if it came to a United Ireland, the talks on what that state would look like should be conducted in a spirit of peace and reconciliation.

But what would happen if the representatives of British Unionism at the time were absolutely taking the p*ss with what they wanted out of the bargain? At what point would a backlash come from the rest of Ireland of the view that certain people in the north were being difficult for the sake of it?

I take the point that within the younger generations, Unionism is more moderate, but they always seem to elect people like Arlene Foster, who are uncompromising people. Would the question of a United Ireland be settled by a border poll for someone like Arlene? The jury's out on that one, for me.

downcow wrote:

I have been awol for 24 hours but reading some catchup stuff it seems I should stay away long. It seems a fairly strong concenses has developed in my absence on here that there is no significant threat to peace going forward. What I have been trying to argue for some time. It would be really helpful if Irish pm would come out and say this dnd we could all have a more honest discussion going forward eg the real purpose of the backstop.

The real purpose of the backstop is to enable the UK government deliver its commitment on an open border until such time as they come up with another way of doing it.

Why do you find that so hard to understand and why does it alarm you so?

Macy0161 wrote: »

A border poll or independence referendum are binary question. Brexit wasn't, with (still) so many versions of what it actually meant or should mean.

It being a non-binary question was just one of the problems with the Brexit referendum. There's also that story of the guy confronting David Cameron and saying, "Not even my golf club changes its rules on a simple majority."

And to the first point, people in the UK can't even seem to agree if the Brexit question was binary or not. Leavers like to protest that they knew exactly what they were voting for.

downcow wrote: »

Fair point but I see no significant violence. It would though be quite legitimate for the 1million unionists to do all they wish within the law to oppose a UI and a campaign for Northern Ireland independence would seem very likely. Which I imagine would lead to devolution for NI.

Well, if a UI did come about, I would include some option of a referendum to become independent at a later date, or to rejoin the UK. Although in the latter case, the rest of the UK would have to hold their own referendum on whether to re-admit it.

briany wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Now look at why the IRA got popular support back in the day? Discrimination, pogroms against communities and so on? Do you foresee this happening in a UI? I know I don't and I also know that they fear revenge for past sins. From this I don't foresee a mass rebellion vs a United Ireland. Indeed Dublin would be very conscious of offending them.

Obviously, if it came to a United Ireland, the talks on what that state would look like should be conducted in a spirit of peace and reconciliation.

But what would happen if the representatives of British Unionism at the time were absolutely taking the p*ss with what they wanted out of the bargain? At what point would a backlash come from the rest of Ireland of the view that certain people in the north were being difficult for the sake of it?

I take the point that within the younger generations, Unionism is more moderate, but they always seem to elect people like Arlene Foster, who are uncompromising people. Would the question of a United Ireland be settled by a border poll for someone like Arlene? The jury's out on that one, for me.

It's an interesting one because how hard would a British negotiation team bat on behalf of unionists who show no signs of detailing anything beyond their union.

downcow wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

I think the answer is in the past. Do they have the wherewithal to organise a 1912 style UVF? Do they have the wherewithal to organise a strike like in the 70s to bring the province to a halt? No is the answer to both.

Now look at why the IRA got popular support back in the day? Discrimination, pogroms against communities and so on? Do you foresee this happening in a UI? I know I don't and I also know that they fear revenge for past sins. From this I don't foresee a mass rebellion vs a United Ireland. Indeed Dublin would be very conscious of offending them.

I have been awol for 24 hours but reading some catchup stuff it seems I should stay away long.
It seems a fairly strong concenses has developed in my absence on here that there is no significant threat to peace going forward. What I have been trying to argue for some time.
It would be really helpful if Irish pm would come out and say this dnd we could all have a more honest discussion going forward eg the real purpose of the backstop.

Backstop is to protect the peace process. It's as if one side really thought about the Brexit vote, informed themselves on their priorities and their negotiation tactics and the other side waved flags and stuff and little else.

UK economic growth for Q4 of 2018 expected to have been 0.3%, down from 0.6% in Q3:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/10/uk-economic-growth-expected-halve-final-quarter-2018-brexit-worries

I don’t think any of this UI, peace stuff etc will be a real factor when it comes to the wire. Pragmatism will take over and a compromise will happen - no one will be extatic about it (except as usual the bankers etc) and we will all just live with it as we will have no other choice

listermint wrote: »

You say that because it's your own personal desire and outcome.

The reality that you have to admit is Westminster won't have the finances to sustain he North outside the EU . The recession will hit the UK hard , very hard. It will struggle as it does today to keep its own northern areas of England ticking over.

The lack of economic sustainability will bring about whole new attitudes, including your own.

The pocket is a very powerful thing.

Are we not guilty of the same crime? I mean in my circle of anti-Brexit friends, a common theme is that the UK when it leaves is going to end up very badly off, will go into recession and anger at that prospect will be directed against the leave campaign.

But isn't this the same kind of wishful thinking and optimism that the Brexiteers suffer from? Don't get me wrong, I do think from a purely factual basis the UK will probably suffer more than the EU, but I'm not sure either party is going to come out of it all smelling of roses, I think Ireland will be particularly vulnerable, and I'm not at all sure that a level of suffering will convince the UK to change course easily.

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I do think from a purely factual basis the UK will probably suffer more than the EU, but I'm not sure either party is going to come out of it all smelling of roses, I think Ireland will be particularly vulnerable, and I'm not at all sure that a level of suffering will convince the UK to change course easily.

The difference is that for the last two years, those with the power to mitigate the effect on Ireland have treated Brexit as potentially very damaging for Ireland, and made appropriate arrangements and contingency plans. Those who believe in Brexit refuse to accept that there's any negative side ... apart from the 50-odd years or so that JRM said it would take to recover.

downcow wrote: »

I don’t think any of this UI, peace stuff etc will be a real factor when it comes to the wire. Pragmatism will take over and a compromise will happen - no one will be extatic about it (except as usual the bankers etc) and we will all just live with it as we will have no other choice

Look you believe there will be pragmatism and that compromise will happen but what do you base this on? Look at Westminster, look at how May goes round saying talks are continuing but yet nothing is shown beyond vague promises that dont stand up to scrutiny. Even look at the article there from RTE about Tusks statement. Look at the context and the meaning behind the words not just the word "hell".

Even people in Europe are starting to come to the conclusion there's going to be a chaotic crash out Brexit. That the reasoning behind his words: He's trying to push the point that these people are wanting to commit a damaging act of foolishness on everyone without a plan and its the UK that will suffer the worst of it. There doesn't seem to be a realization of the reality that the UK do not have any hand to play and that some even think your country should crash out ignoring the consequences of committing such a damaging and incompetent act. They're not being pragmatic and realistic they're demanding thing's and are when they cant get their own way they're trying to hurt as many as possible out of spiteful arrogance even though the UK suffers the worst of the damage.

Let's also be clear I don't believe they're gonna agree in Westminster unless at the very least it's article 50 withdrawal on the table vs no deal because withdrawing A50 keeps everything the UK currently has with no conditions bar one: It has to be genuine no cancelling to restart the process. The WA is unpalatable but it's the only deal on the table and it's been made clear that's the deal take it or leave it. It's also so unpalatable I believe that between that between that and a no deal Brexit there will be too much ideology and ignorance clouding their views to the point they fail to agree and crash out by default.

Let's take a UI for example. This isnt an echo chamber that's bandied around too much by some people who get annoyed when they cant win their argument's because they dont put facts that stand up to scrutiny to back them. Most of the argument's for this aren't because we wish it its because for someone like myself and other's here have agreed it becomes the most effective damage limiting option in the event of a chaotic Brexit aka the worst option. It's not simply a question of wishful thinking remember there's been links to polls on this supporting this in the event of a chaotic Brexit. In that context:

1) Do you really believe that there wont be a UI in that event?
2) What do you think of the DUP in all this? Do you really think they're representing you and your friends or themselves and an outdated ideology that doesn't stand up to scrutiny? What other group there do you feel better represents you politically?
3) Do you fear this? If so why? or would you consider this an opportunity for yourself if it does happen? Remember a UI might be ideologically opposed for some unionists but would it be really that bad considering that it could be economically beneficial for you and others?
4) If a UI become's an inevitability what would YOU want out of it. Forget wether it will or wont happen for a moment and consider that it's going to happen: What guarantees or conditions would you like from this that satify's you?

What have you been smoking lately? TM is never going for that option, voluntarily.