Brexit Thread V - The Final Countdown?!?

[Kyriakos]

That the irish will be left to fend for themselves or suffer is not at all unlikely. Those imagining that the eu hard line is to protect ireland are just deluded and havent been paying attention or just willfully myopic.
I certainly hope ireland wont suffer. Yet it should prepare instead of relying on the eu.

 

[Oerdin]

May is betraying the voters and voting againat brexit. She has been a traitor from the start.

 

[Silurian]

May is betraying the voters and voting againat brexit. She has been a traitor from the start.

She voted for Brexit yesterday. The ERG voted against Brexit.

 

[Arakhor]

May is betraying the voters and voting againat brexit. She has been a traitor from the start.

She voted for Brexit yesterday. The ERG voted against Brexit.

You can say what you like about the foolish, incompetent, stubborn, dictatorial, xenophobic woman, but she has tried to fulfil the referendum promise (in her own way). That is absolutely without question.

 

[Oerdin]

Same question that inno failed to answer : what were the "unreasonable" requirements of the EU that weren't simply inherent to "well, you're not in the EU anymore so you can't benefit from being in the EU" (which is normally, you know, the entire point) ?

I'm still waiting.

Please stop being daft and disingenuous. The attempts to physically break up the UK snd violate its territorial integrity are and qlways has been nothing but a poison pill by the EU showing they were not interested in fair and equitable trade just punishmeny for daring to tell it no.

That is why no deal truly is the only option and it actually is a very good option despite what the liars of project fear would have one think.

 

[Silurian]

Please stop being daft and disingenuous. The attempts to physically break up the UK snd violate its territorial integrity are and qlways has been nothing but a poison pill by the EU showing they were not interested in fair and equitable trade just punishmeny for daring to tell it no.

That is why no deal truly is the only option and it actually is a very good option despite what the liars of project fear would have one think.

How was the EU making "attempts to physically break up the UK snd violate its territorial integrity".

 

[Arakhor]

Please stop being daft and disingenuous.

So, after having your last ridiculous pronouncement disproved in just ten words, you're straight back again, telling other people not to be "daft and disingenuous"?

 

[Akka]

Please stop being daft and disingenuous.

The attempts to physically break up the UK snd violate its territorial integrity are and qlways has been nothing but a poison pill by the EU showing they were not interested in fair and equitable trade just punishmeny for daring to tell it no.

That is why no deal truly is the only option and it actually is a very good option despite what the liars of project fear would have one think.

That's rich. I'm asking a very simple question : "what were the "unreasonable" requirements of the EU ?". Should be easy to answer if it's so blatant, right ?

And yet, you're answering with a rant completely devoid of anything informative (just the usual "blabla tyrants blabla conspiration blabla they are out to get us blabla") and then telling ME that I am the one being "disingenuous" (despite you unable to provide any fact) and "daft" (despite you being the one dabbling in conspiracy BS) ?

Stones, glass houses, pot, kettle and all that.

I'm was attempting to explain to you that while your question might make sense directed at the likes of May, it does not make sense directed at the many people who all along defended an exit without any "exit agreement" as the default choice. If the process is about doing a new deal with the EU it only makes sense to sign a treaty when both parties are convinced they«'ll benefit, which was obviously not the case given the preconditions didn't overlap.

So you're basically saying "they want a no-deal Brexit to begin with, which means that any compromise would be by essence unacceptable" ?
Because then I wonder why there was all these clownish negociations that wasted time for two years.

 

[Lexicus]

Because then I wonder why there was all these clownish negociations that wasted time for two years.

Inno has indeed been characterizing the negotiations, or at least such negotiations as took place after it was clear that the "red lines" of both parties would not permit any real agreement, as more-or-less a waste of time.

 

[ori]

Moderator Action: a friendly reminder to stay with the topic without resorting to personal attacks.

 

[Takhisis]

I actually liked the UK's reaction to that: we don't obey your rulings, get stuffed.

It's not as if Mauritius has any legitimate claim to those islands either. It is ridiculous that Mauritious is claiming different inlands more than 2000km away because at one point they were administered as part of the same colonial domain. It would be similarly ridiculous to claim "self-determination" for a small archipelago that could not possibly be self-sufficient in any way. This was just Mauritius' government doing a land grab. It takes a lot of gall to claim those islands because "self-determination" while at the same time offering to sell other islands to India. Apparently self-determination can be ceasing to be part of the British Empire and becoming part of an Indian Empire. And this is not even getting into the issue of politics within Mauritius, and Indioa's repeated meddling there...

If you defend the British Empire's right to genocide then I hope you'll at least pipe down on your accusations of ‘IMPERIALISM’ whenever anybody contradicts what RT tells you to believe regarding politics in the American continent.

And I said opinion, not ruling. Which once again proves you haev at best a hazy idea of what you're talking about.

That the irish will be left to fend for themselves or suffer is not at all unlikely. Those imagining that the eu hard line is to protect ireland are just deluded and havent been paying attention or just willfully myopic.
I certainly hope ireland wont suffer. Yet it should prepare instead of relying on the eu.

I am definitely sure that the EU will not cancel Ireland's membership, even if the UK still does not consider Ireland to be foreign soil.

 

[uppi]

No deal is amazingly unpopular in the Commons, they won't let it happen.

No deal is chaos, and the EU won't let that happen - they've as much as said that should it look like no deal is about to happen they will automatic ally grant an extension so that it can't happen.

It is a dangerous assumptions that the EU won't let a no deal happen. I suspect that if the UK requests an extension without a believable reason what the extension is good for, there is a decent chance that the EU will deny it and say "This is bad, but it is not going to be better, let's get this over with".

A no deal is bad, but more weeks months or even years of uncertainty followed by a no deal are worse.

 

[Lexicus]

Revocation of article 50 is simply out of the realm of the possible: they can't do it without cover of a new referendum and didn't even manage to get the courage to call one.

I agree that there will be a strong reluctance to revoke Article 50 without the "democratic" cover of a second referendum, but I am not convinced this will not be overcome by their aversion to Brexit generally and a no-deal Brexit in particular.

 

[Akka]

Inno has indeed been characterizing the negotiations, or at least such negotiations as took place after it was clear that the "red lines" of both parties would not permit any real agreement, as more-or-less a waste of time.

That's what he said in the last previous posts.
But it was so buried under the formulations that either implied or openly said "the EU is bullying the poor UK which had no choice but to courageously stand against oppression" that it takes a very, very charitable mind to actually be able to read the former into the latter.

 

[Arakhor]

Meanwhile, the PM has apparently suggested that Norn Ireland be brought under direct rule once again in the event of a no-deal Brexit. I don't see that working well, even by the rock-bottom standards of the last few years.

 

[Lexicus]

That's what he said in the last previous posts.
But it was so buried under the formulations that either implied or openly said "the EU is bullying the poor UK which had no choice but to courageously stand against oppression" that it takes a very, very charitable mind to actually be able to read the former into the latter.

My only point is that agree or disagree with it, his position is fundamentally consistent and has been for at least the last few months.

 

[really]

Please stop being daft and disingenuous. The attempts to physically break up the UK snd violate its territorial integrity are and qlways has been nothing but a poison pill by the EU showing they were not interested in fair and equitable trade just punishmeny for daring to tell it no.

That is why no deal truly is the only option and it actually is a very good option despite what the liars of project fear would have one think.

The UK's solution to not being able to agree to treat NI differently is to treat NI differently.

 

[Takhisis]

My only point is that agree or disagree with it, his position is fundamentally consistent and has been for at least the last few months.

No it's not unless you only read this thread. Somebody who decries ‘imperialism’ while proclaiming the UK's right to keep its empire is not being consistent but a mere hypocrite.

 

[Hrothbern]

Revoking Art 50 is not in the P table of JPMorgan for their risk assessment..
May putting her deal to a vote for a third time is.
The Speaker Bercow can forbid that (!?), but the rules on that are outside my judgment.

LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. investment bank JPMorgan reduced the probability of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union on the terms of Prime Minister Theresa May’s defeated deal to 35 percent from 45 percent but said it was still the most likely option.

JPMorgan raised the probability of a second referendum to 20 percent from 15 percent and the probability of a general election to 15 percent from 10 percent.

It left the probability of a no-deal exit unchanged at 10 percent and the probability of a long extension to Brexit unchanged at 20 percent.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-the-most-likely-brexit-option-idUSKBN1QU11A

 

[AmazonQueen]

MPs have voted to take no deal off the table by 312 to 308. Very narrow vote which means I suspect that there won't be a majority for any alternative to no deal. Spelman amendment.

Voted against seeking to delay Brexit until May 22 by 374 to164 which was pretty decisive.

Its still a mess.