Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Xizor]

Bruce, and all the other Remainer posters, here’s a question for you. Would you accept a deal that effectively manages our complete exit from the EU.?.....or do you just want to reverse the result ?.......in your own time......

I'd have accepted a deal that left us in a Soft Brexit position that retained membership of the Single Market and Customs Union. You might not consider it so, but we would be out of the political structures of the EU and still get to enjoy the economic benefits and the personal freedoms. It's a sensible compromise position that could be revisited in a generation but would detach us from the ideal of 'ever closer union'.

But, the Leavers were in no mood to compromise, and so a Hard Brexit became not Hard enough, and how a significant percentage of the population are getting raging boners at the thought of the impending disaster. So in the spirit of giving two fingers to the idea of compromise, I'd now just have to say screw your overly vague vote that didn't really mean anything, you had no idea what you were voting for and let's go full on Remain.

 

[Ruairi77]

£154Bn of no issue......

no, you were asking what would happen to the assets if the EU collapsed. I don't see it collapsing so I dont think it's an issue. Also, according to that link from the house of lords, 94% of assets are liquid and I presume were covered in the withdrawal agreement, so, no, not an issue.

 

[Ruairi77]

Simple question.....

Stop being a disingenuous plonker.

 

[Ruairi77]

I can accept this as no one wants the border reimposed, but can you not accept that both the ROI and the EU are using this as a way to keep the whole of the U.K. within the EU ?.....

I believe the primary motivation of the RoI is to avoid a return to violence.
I believe the primary motivation of Johnson is to use the border as a chess piece in a larger game as he doesn't understand the border. He showed this by comparing it to that of two london boroughs.

 

[peteblue]

I'd have accepted a deal that left us in a Soft Brexit position that retained membership of the Single Market and Customs Union. You might not consider it so, but we would be out of the political structures of the EU and still get to enjoy the economic benefits and the personal freedoms. It's a sensible compromise position that could be revisited in a generation but would detach us from the ideal of 'ever closer union'.

But, the Leavers were in no mood to compromise, and so a Hard Brexit became not Hard enough, and how a significant percentage of the population are getting raging boners at the thought of the impending disaster. So in the spirit of giving two fingers to the idea of compromise, I'd now just have to say screw your overly vague vote that didn't really mean anything, you had no idea what you were voting for and let's go full on Remain.

I actually think that most Leavers would have accepted a leave position where we were out of Brussels control. But since the EU really stitched us up, and the Remainer groups have done everything to reverse the decision, I think Leavers have just hardened their position......

 

[peteblue]

Stop being a disingenuous plonker.

It was a simple yet serious question, and it would be nice if he, not you, actually answered it as opposed to his usual middle finger response.....

 

[peteblue]

I believe the primary motivation of the RoI is to avoid a return to violence.
I believe the primary motivation of Johnson is to use the border as a chess piece in a larger game as he doesn't understand the border. He showed this by comparing it to that of two london boroughs.

Why would the ROI be motivated to avoid a return to violence as it almost all took place within the U.K. and not the ROI ?

I agree with you about Johnson.....

 

[Xizor]

I actually think that most Leavers would have accepted a leave position where we were out of Brussels control. But since the EU really stitched us up, and the Remainer groups have done everything to reverse the decision, I think Leavers have just hardened their position......

Hang on... what? The red lines that were put in place years ago that inevitably led to this mess were put there by May at the behest of her arch-Leaver advisers. If Leavers would truly have been happy with that outcome they would have absolutely no problems with the backstop. Try again Pete, and see if an ounce of reality works its way into your thinking this time.

Leavers. Always the victims, never their fault.

 

[Jebus_lives]

And who owns the European Union.....

If only you took the time to read the thread.

It's a union of members, it's not owned by anyone.

But someone must own the assets, who ?....

The Union own the assets. A Union comprised of it's member states.

Who owns the USA? It's a union of states.

You only had to read back 10 pages, which is ironic considering your opinion in February.

When you asked the question, you only had to read back about ten pages max. I don’t like lazy posters......

I suppose like the cabinet you reserve the right to change your mind about things.

 

[Xizor]

Why would the ROI be motivated to avoid a return to violence as it almost all took place within the U.K. and not the ROI

You cannot be serious.

 

[peteblue]

Hang on... what? The red lines that were put in place years ago that inevitably led to this mess were put there by May at the behest of her arch-Leaver advisers. If Leavers would truly have been happy with that outcome they would have absolutely no problems with the backstop. Try again Pete, and see if an ounce of reality works its way into your thinking this time.

Leavers. Always the victims, never their fault.

It was the Remainers who voted against May’s deal.....did you miss that bit.....even Boris Johnson and Rees Mogg did.....

 

[peteblue]

If only you took the time to read the thread.




You only had to read back 10 pages, which is ironic considering your opinion in February.

I suppose like the cabinet you reserve the right to change your mind about things.

Any chance of you trying to answer my question about ownership of EU assets?......

 

[peteblue]

You cannot be serious.

It’s a question ? ......

 

[Bruce Wayne]

So in spite of a vote, you want it reversed ?, is that it ?.....

It's an outcome I disagree with, so yes, of course.

 

[Ruairi77]

Why would the ROI be motivated to avoid a return to violence as it almost all took place within the U.K. and not the ROI ?

I agree with you about Johnson.....

The fact that you have to ask this question shows how out of touch you are on the issue of the border.
It also doesn't do anything for your pro leave stance.
There is, of course, the chance you know why the RoI would be motivated to avoid violence and you're just wuming
If it's the latter, it's fairly sensitive ground to be winding people up for the sake of points in an argument.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's a genuine lack of knowledge.

maybe because nearly half the population north of the border are citizens of the RoI.
maybe because a return to violence would mean a serious hit to cross border trade.
maybe because there would be a huge negative effect on tourism Island wide.
maybe because of the threat of violence to the border counties south of the border.
maybe because of the increased cost of policing and military activity.
maybe because of the global damage that would be done to Irelands reputation.
and on and on and on