20 hours ago, khunken said:

No it's not an invention of Merkel & May. It arose during negotiations between the EU & the UK because of May refusing to allow the UK to stay in the customs union.

 

And, no, it's not there to frustrate the exit but to prevent the border between Ireland & NI being reinstalled (as it was prior to joining the EU in 1983).

 

Ireland doesn't want a border but is preparing to set one up in the event of no agreement over Brexit.

UK can't be in the CU, because that and everything that goes with it, is what we voted to be out of as Leave the EU. The EU proposed 'backstop' was rejected by the UK and a Free Trade Area proposal made, which would have avoided border infrastructure but was rejected by the EU.

After Mrs May paid a visit to Mrs Merkel last December, she came back with her agreement including the EU backstop again, as her deal or no deal. Between Merkel and May, they are still trying to keep the UK in the EU, or intrinsically tied to the EU, by all manner of trickery including the backstop and dodgy Withdrawal Agreement. The NI border is not the be all/end all it is purported to be, and must be resolved by UK and Ireland, without EU interference. 

 

A border as an imaginary line has been there for years now. UK does not want or need a hard border. Ireland does not want a border, but talks a lot about making one. If you don't , then don't, never mind the EU. We won't complain.

On 2/1/2019 at 2:39 AM, samran said:

Why should the Irish government have to put up a border to deal with a problem that wasn’t theirs? 

 

 

The Irish government have repeatedly stated that they have No intention of creating a border. The same can be said about the U.K government. Unfortunately the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels seem intent on keeping the U.K shackled into this so called Union. With this in mind, they are now prodding the Irish government, into a corner, probably with the intention of Ordering the R.I to implement an instruction, to actually build a hard border. 

 You have to realise that should the U.K leave without a deal, the country that will be hardest hit, will be the R.I.

2 hours ago, Loiner said:

The NI vote was comprehensively to stay? OK a 91.2k majority but the lowest turnout in the UK at only 62.7%. The majority of NI - 470,000 couldn't be arzed either way to even go out and vote. Its obvious that the NI rural districts are in subsidy land, sucking at the EU teat, while the urban industrial districts have felt the full effects of the EU folly.

 

 

How can little Englanders be both Distant and overbearing, hasn't got to be one or the other?

How about distant in that you are ambivalent to the fact that your country's wishes were rejected by other members of this so called union (thanks Nontabury, will use this term with more regularity as it is entirely appropriate), and overbearing in that you demand that we must follow your path despite the vast majority of my country rejecting it?

56 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

How about distant in that you are ambivalent to the fact that your country's wishes were rejected by other members of this so called union (thanks Nontabury, will use this term with more regularity as it is entirely appropriate), and overbearing in that you demand that we must follow your path despite the vast majority of my country rejecting it?

Your country voted out.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

How about distant in that you are ambivalent to the fact that your country's wishes were rejected by other members of this so called union (thanks Nontabury, will use this term with more regularity as it is entirely appropriate), and overbearing in that you demand that we must follow your path despite the vast majority of my country rejecting it?

It was a whole UK (actual, not so called union) referendum. It was not country exclusive, or by each voting area. In Scotland 38% voted to Leave, so it was not everybody in Scotland's wish to Remain.
The rules were set from the beginning, the majority vote would be the decision for all of us. No special get out for you this time, no matter what your munchkin says. You had your own referendum in 2014 and decided to stay in the UK, so stick with us and enjoy the ride.

12 minutes ago, Loiner said:

It was a whole UK (actual, not so called union) referendum. It was not country exclusive, or by each voting area. In Scotland 38% voted to Leave, so it was not everybody in Scotland's wish to Remain.
The rules were set from the beginning, the majority vote would be the decision for all of us. No special get out for you this time, no matter what your munchkin says. You had your own referendum in 2014 and decided to stay in the UK, so stick with us and enjoy the ride.

One of the many lies that were told to the Scots during indyref1 was that the only way to remain in the EU was to remain in the UK. Like virtually every other promise that was made, that one has proven hollow. 

 

But I am not opposed to an English Brexit. I think it would provide a very elegant solution to both problems - half of Scots don't want to be in a union with England and more than half of Scots want to remain in the EU. Let England furrow its own isolationist path if it wants, but don't impose that on an unwilling Scotland. Dissolve the union and you try to stand on your own two feet for once. 

33 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Your country voted out.

No, I am neither English nor Welsh. 

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

One of the many lies that were told to the Scots during indyref1 was that the only way to remain in the EU was to remain in the UK. Like virtually every other promise that was made, that one has proven hollow. 

 

But I am not opposed to an English Brexit. I think it would provide a very elegant solution to both problems - half of Scots don't want to be in a union with England and more than half of Scots want to remain in the EU. Let England furrow its own isolationist path if it wants, but don't impose that on an unwilling Scotland. Dissolve the union and you try to stand on your own two feet for once. 

 

is there an estimate of the degree of overlap between the remainer-scots and the separatist-scots?

 

46 minutes ago, Loiner said:

It was a whole UK (actual, not so called union) referendum. It was not country exclusive, or by each voting area. In Scotland 38% voted to Leave, so it was not everybody in Scotland's wish to Remain.
The rules were set from the beginning, the majority vote would be the decision for all of us. No special get out for you this time, no matter what your munchkin says. You had your own referendum in 2014 and decided to stay in the UK, so stick with us and enjoy the ride.

Geez, proving my point. Sounding more and more like the Brussels bureaucrats that you love to hate. 

11 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

is there an estimate of the degree of overlap between the remainer-scots and the separatist-scots?

 

I have seen nothing definitive, but I read that around 30% of independence supporters were also pro-Brexit so the picture is far from clear. But things are coming round:

 

Almost 60% of Scots think independence better than no-deal Brexit – poll

More than half of Scotland believes independence would be better for the country than remaining in the UK after Brexit, a new poll has indicated.

Almost three in five (59%) said leaving the UK would benefit Scotland more than staying in, if there was a no-deal Brexit.

47 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

No, I am neither English nor Welsh. 

You're nonetheless in Thailand on one of these as per your fellow countrymen inc me:

 

4 hours ago, nontabury said:

The Irish government have repeatedly stated that they have No intention of creating a border. The same can be said about the U.K government. Unfortunately the Unelected Bureaucrats in Brussels seem intent on keeping the U.K shackled into this so called Union. With this in mind, they are now prodding the Irish government, into a corner, probably with the intention of Ordering the R.I to implement an instruction, to actually build a hard border. 

 You have to realise that should the U.K leave without a deal, the country that will be hardest hit, will be the R.I.

Well you can’t gave your precious independence and not have borders. I though that is what you lot wanted...

 

 

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

One of the many lies that were told to the Scots during indyref1 was that the only way to remain in the EU was to remain in the UK. Like virtually every other promise that was made, that one has proven hollow. 

 

That wasnt a lie, because it was true and correct at the time .

9 minutes ago, sanemax said:

That wasnt a lie, because it was true and correct at the time .

hardly, disagree

 

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

hardly, disagree

 

Wouldnt a Scotland leaving the UK had meant that they would have had to leave the

E.U as well and then having to apply for E.U. membership , (which they would have been unlikely to be granted )?

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Wouldnt a Scotland leaving the UK had meant that they would have had to leave the

E.U as well and then having to apply for E.U. membership , (which they would have been unlikely to be granted )?

 

It would be politically impossible for EU not to allow Scotland becoming a member,

that would be contrary to everything EU stands for and works for.

 

 

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

It would be politically impossible for EU not to allow Scotland becoming a member,

that would be contrary to everything EU stands for and works for.

 

 

There are certain rules and regulations Countries need to adhere to , before becoming a new member of the E.U. , like having the Euro for a currency 

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

There are certain rules and regulations Countries need to adhere to , before becoming a new member of the E.U. , like having the Euro for a currency 

yes there are,

you need to have recognised borders

ability to defend them

recognised currency

a working democratic setup

police/law/courts etc in order

a bunch of issues, which Scotland would meet

 

Euro, to the extent you meet the criteria, however, not before you become member but as 

part of the membership

 

 

On 2/1/2019 at 2:03 PM, samran said:

yes, but my point was simply that at the end of the day - at the pointy end of it - it was the north that largely had to deal with the consequences. 

 

Now with the GFA, a largely integrated island of Ireland, all that is gone. 

 

People are doing their best to avoid it, except those in Westminster, particularly those sitting on the treasury benches, who are tone deaf to local wants and needs. 

quote "yes, but my point was simply that at the end of the day - at the pointy end of it - it was the north that largely had to deal with the consequences."

 

Perhaps you should read this on Wikipedia about the IRA bombings on the British mainland and in Southern Ireland as well.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bombings_during_the_Northern_Ireland_Troubles_and_peace_process

 

 

Well that's one of the 'few days' gone.

 

Any news of the promised proposal?

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well that's one of the 'few days' gone.

 

Any news of the promised proposal?

A United Ireland. Problem solved

1 minute ago, Bannoi said:

A United Ireland. Problem solved

Could unite the whole of the UK with Ireland ?

10 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

A United Ireland. Problem solved

You are assuming the Eire and N Ireland will accept each other.

 

If the North or the South says no where do you go from there?

 

That goes back around 90 odd years and they are still not united yet.

 

Problem NOT solved.

 Ireland would be better off United, North and South ,  within the EU .

 

 

Edited February 2, 20197 yr by elliss

2 hours ago, elliss said:

 Ireland would be better off United, North and South ,  within the EU .

 

 

But is that in any way a given? A united Ireland, that is?

I have next to no knowledge on the subject and won't insult anyone's Intelligence by pretending I do, but the (very few) Irish I have consulted on the issue seemed to think a united Ireland is a non starter. Any input from Irish posters I would find helpful on this matter.

Edited February 2, 20197 yr by baboon

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

But is that in any way a given? A united Ireland, that is?

I have next to no knowledge on the subject and won't insult anyone's Intelligence by pretending I do, but the (very few) Irish I have consulted on the issue seemed to think a united Ireland is a non starter. Any input from Irish posters I would find helpful on this matter.

No it's not a given. The desire for a united Ireland has dissipated in the Republic over the years. Many feel that the Republic can't afford to take on a NI which is heavily subsidised by the UK.

I do suspect that, if there was a vote in NI, there would be a majority for unity. But there's no plan whatsoever for a referendum and it is not an answer to the Brexit mess which has been created totally by a disunited UK as well as an incompetent UK government.

The 'leave at any cost' gang just continue to deflect blame towards the EU, which is not in any way forcing Ireland to make preparations for a reinstated border as a contingency against no agreement.

Yes, I'm Irish.

The answer to this issue is obvious - Irish re-unification.

13 hours ago, elliss said:

 Ireland would be better off United, North and South ,  within the EU .

 

 

How do you know what is in the best options for both countries, or is it just your opinion?

 

Are you Irish, from the North or the South?

 

Have you done a survey to check the feelings of the people on both sides of the border?

There has always been contention over the Irish boarder.

 

Oh, the OP said border, well, that too.

On 2/1/2019 at 6:21 PM, thequietman said:

No, is isn't!

 

Ireland is Ireland is Ireland. There is the north of Ireland and the south of Ireland. The fact that the British government took it by force is neither here nor there.

 

Ireland is Ireland is Ireland.

 

There are two countries on the isle of Ireland - the Republic of Ireland (Eire) and Nothern Ireland which is part of the UK.

 

Simple really.