Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
The Telegraph is asking “will Russia invade Finland”
I strongly suspect the answer is No, but still. Disquieting
In a small, sick way it would be hilarious to see them try. The Finns would be in St Petersburg in days.
The more that Putin appears to be an impotent fool the more dangerous it gets. Funny as the Russian failure is, we still need to offer them a way out. Forcing them into a corner where the only exit is themo-nuclear would be unwise.
Way out: Pull out of Ukraine. All of it including Crimea.
The obvious compromise is Crimea as an independent neutral state. Of course Russian delusions of grandeur mean they aren't prepared to accept this yet.
Russia isn't prepared to accept that it's possible for a neighbour to be an independent neutral state.
The Telegraph is asking “will Russia invade Finland”
I strongly suspect the answer is No, but still. Disquieting
In a small, sick way it would be hilarious to see them try. The Finns would be in St Petersburg in days.
The more that Putin appears to be an impotent fool the more dangerous it gets. Funny as the Russian failure is, we still need to offer them a way out. Forcing them into a corner where the only exit is themo-nuclear would be unwise.
Way out: Pull out of Ukraine. All of it including Crimea.
The obvious compromise is Crimea as an independent neutral state. Of course Russian delusions of grandeur mean they aren't prepared to accept this yet.
Finland is one of those - neutral. They don't plan to remain so. Neutral states get invaded. It would either have western backing or be under permanent threat. RoI is soon going to look like a quaint anomaly, tolerated only because we all know the UK would never allow her to go undefended.
Some neutral states get invaded, some don't. The record is mixed in WWII.
A little known fact is Britain invaded neutral Iceland in 1940. Operation Fork. We had good strategic reasons but regardless it was an invasion of a neutral country.
I knew that. One of those "No means yes, yes means anal" situations I've always thought, and it certainly facilitated Icelandic independence.
In other unnoticed news, it seems as though the Euro is heading for parity with USD.
People in the UK like to think that the UK is a special basket case where everything is going wrong, yet look across the channel and suddenly our economy doesn't seem so bad. There's an economic disaster unfolding very quietly across Europe and just as over here, people are watching the alarms go off but don't seem to care that no one's at the wheel.
The last Eurozone crisis was a disaster for the whole continent and that was done during a time of benign monetary conditions so the ECB printing money and buying up debt from Med countries wasn't particularly controversial. How they might do that with inflation running at 10% is a question to which no one has an answer.
Fundamentally European (including the UK) economies seem broken. A decade of QE and asset price inflation has impoverished the productive young and now every country has got huge structural deficits with no easy way of cutting spending and an environment of rapidly rising debt servicing costs.
As I said this morning, the answer will be wealth creation at the bottom and preventing a concentration of wealth at the top. Whoever figures out how to achieve it should run to be God Emperor of Europe.
Italy is especially on tic toc alert I think.
The youth unemployment rate in Spain is 31%, and that is the best it's been in 15 years. Italy is 25%. Greece 27%. It is getting to two lost generations in a row.
And yet, I’m in Greece right now. Yes, one of the more prosperous touristic islands but still. Greece. In the middle of covid I went to mainland Greece
It doesn’t feel like a doomed, totally dysfunctional society. Far from it. People are poorer than Western Europeans but they are certainly not dirt poor. Society manages and many (most?) Greeks have a pretty decent quality of life
It's easier to be poor when you have good weather. I am sure a big part of the productivity of Northern Europe is because, most of the year, its hard to just enjoy the outdoors without some sort of activity.
That said, it's also easier to be rich in good weather. One of the reasons Americans are all moving to the Carolinas, Georgia, Texas etc.
Provided there is air conditioning. One reason summer power outages & brownouts are problem whenever they happen in the summer time in US, esp in Southeast and Southwest.
The Telegraph is asking “will Russia invade Finland”
I strongly suspect the answer is No, but still. Disquieting
In a small, sick way it would be hilarious to see them try. The Finns would be in St Petersburg in days.
The more that Putin appears to be an impotent fool the more dangerous it gets. Funny as the Russian failure is, we still need to offer them a way out. Forcing them into a corner where the only exit is themo-nuclear would be unwise.
Way out: Pull out of Ukraine. All of it including Crimea.
The obvious compromise is Crimea as an independent neutral state. Of course Russian delusions of grandeur mean they aren't prepared to accept this yet.
Finland is one of those - neutral. They don't plan to remain so. Neutral states get invaded. It would either have western backing or be under permanent threat. RoI is soon going to look like a quaint anomaly, tolerated only because we all know the UK would never allow her to go undefended.
Some neutral states get invaded, some don't. The record is mixed in WWII.
A little known fact is Britain invaded neutral Iceland in 1940. Operation Fork. We had good strategic reasons but regardless it was an invasion of a neutral country.
The Telegraph is asking “will Russia invade Finland”
I strongly suspect the answer is No, but still. Disquieting
In a small, sick way it would be hilarious to see them try. The Finns would be in St Petersburg in days.
The more that Putin appears to be an impotent fool the more dangerous it gets. Funny as the Russian failure is, we still need to offer them a way out. Forcing them into a corner where the only exit is themo-nuclear would be unwise.
Way out: Pull out of Ukraine. All of it including Crimea.
The obvious compromise is Crimea as an independent neutral state. Of course Russian delusions of grandeur mean they aren't prepared to accept this yet.
Finland is one of those - neutral. They don't plan to remain so. Neutral states get invaded. It would either have western backing or be under permanent threat. RoI is soon going to look like a quaint anomaly, tolerated only because we all know the UK would never allow her to go undefended.
Some neutral states get invaded, some don't. The record is mixed in WWII.
A little known fact is Britain invaded neutral Iceland in 1940. Operation Fork. We had good strategic reasons but regardless it was an invasion of a neutral country.
In other unnoticed news, it seems as though the Euro is heading for parity with USD.
People in the UK like to think that the UK is a special basket case where everything is going wrong, yet look across the channel and suddenly our economy doesn't seem so bad. There's an economic disaster unfolding very quietly across Europe and just as over here, people are watching the alarms go off but don't seem to care that no one's at the wheel.
The last Eurozone crisis was a disaster for the whole continent and that was done during a time of benign monetary conditions so the ECB printing money and buying up debt from Med countries wasn't particularly controversial. How they might do that with inflation running at 10% is a question to which no one has an answer.
Fundamentally European (including the UK) economies seem broken. A decade of QE and asset price inflation has impoverished the productive young and now every country has got huge structural deficits with no easy way of cutting spending and an environment of rapidly rising debt servicing costs.
As I said this morning, the answer will be wealth creation at the bottom and preventing a concentration of wealth at the top. Whoever figures out how to achieve it should run to be God Emperor of Europe.
Point of order, the US dollar has been rising fairly strongly against all sorts of currencies over the past few weeks. GBP, JPY, AUD, CAD, EUR, INR, CNY, the lot.
Of course - when people get scared, the US dollar goes up. It is the ultimate safe haven trade.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
Me too! I was trying to put it to Brexiters in 2015/2016. Total blanking.
Quite right too.
If the shoe was on the other foot would you say that Ireland couldn't exit?
Not a priori, cos it;s asymmetrical. It's not as if the three counties were tying to join the UK.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
No no no
Our original entry into the EEC was on a false prospectus. “No fundamental loss of sovereignty”. These false promises continued for decades “we promise you a referendum on the treaty, and on the constitution! - wait no we don’t because you might vote NO, sorry, fuck off”
It is therefore only right that Remainers and europhiles are forced to eat crow - as we now Leave the EU on a similar pack of lies, thus completing the cycle with an impressive and delicious irony
There is a lesson to politicians of all sides here: Don’t lie to voters. It comes back to haunt you
An unexpected admission that Leave was a pack of lies.
I am looking forward to the haunting phase of this, I have to say.
But it's all the original lying ECophiles fault so in Brexiteer loonball world they're entirely justified with their pack of lies.
I always find YOO STARTED IT a most persuasive argument.
I dunno
As we bombed the shit out of Berlin and Hamburg YOO STARTED IT was indeed persuasive
Remoaners and EUrophiles = Nazi Germany or at least their sympathisers? Great that you've moved on.
Lol. You guys still haven’t gotten over Culloden
Not relevant. More of a dynastic struggle.
That certainly isn't how it is viewed across the Highlands. It is definitely a "evil Brits vs good, decent Scots" narrative. Just like the Clearances, which was primarily Scots lowlanders kicking out Scots highlanders.
Neither is true, so you're also making up history.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
I am on the opposite side, but agree. The only positions that make sense are properly in or properly out.
As far as neutrality in WW2 is concerned, none other than Winston Churchill said of Sweden :
“(she) ignored the greater moral issues of the war and played both sides for profit"
The story of Swedish neutrality from 1940-45 is complex and nuanced as the military and geo-political realities fluctuated.
Henning Mankell would often hark back to the duality of Sweden’s WW2 and after history in his Wallander books (not the bollocks effort with Branagh on tv).
I think for the Swedish left it is a difficult part of their history around elements of pro-nazi sentiment in Sweden and for the Swedish right maybe the neutrality of the Cold War period is tricky.
I imagine Stuart Dickson can give better insight or correct me but from this and talking to Swedish friends it’s quite a complicated neutrality.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
Agree. The only thing worse than the Brexit campaign was the Remain one. The Brexit campaign was mostly snake oil salesmen, the Remain one was badly conducted on behalf of usually decent politicians who for 40 years had forgotten some fundamental principles of democracy in their desire to follow a respectable project.
The Remain campaign was a disgrace, just so poor. I don't think the EU is especially undemocratic, or perhaps more accurately I can see why people feel that way about it and I don't think it is perfect in that regard but I think whenever you cooperate politically across a larger and larger number of people you surrender some of your freedom to act in order to have more collective power, security and prosperity, and I think in leaving the EU we have lost more than we have gained. Especially as our own democracy is so shabby and debased.
In other unnoticed news, it seems as though the Euro is heading for parity with USD.
People in the UK like to think that the UK is a special basket case where everything is going wrong, yet look across the channel and suddenly our economy doesn't seem so bad. There's an economic disaster unfolding very quietly across Europe and just as over here, people are watching the alarms go off but don't seem to care that no one's at the wheel.
The last Eurozone crisis was a disaster for the whole continent and that was done during a time of benign monetary conditions so the ECB printing money and buying up debt from Med countries wasn't particularly controversial. How they might do that with inflation running at 10% is a question to which no one has an answer.
Fundamentally European (including the UK) economies seem broken. A decade of QE and asset price inflation has impoverished the productive young and now every country has got huge structural deficits with no easy way of cutting spending and an environment of rapidly rising debt servicing costs.
As I said this morning, the answer will be wealth creation at the bottom and preventing a concentration of wealth at the top. Whoever figures out how to achieve it should run to be God Emperor of Europe.
Point of order, the US dollar has been rising fairly strongly against all sorts of currencies over the past few weeks. GBP, JPY, AUD, CAD, EUR, INR, CNY, the lot.
Commodities price in dollars essentially.
reliant on imported raw materials with low interest rates and/or no structural trade surplus?
see ya later.
We are somewhat insulated, because we still have a reasonable quantity of domestically produced hydrocarbons, but for countries like Italy and Japan, it's going to be an extremely serious challenge.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
I am on the opposite side, but agree. The only positions that make sense are properly in or properly out.
Logically, yes, but when the country is split 50/50 perhaps a messy compromise would at least bring us back together. Right now it feels like the government is spitting in our face every day.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
Agree. The only thing worse than the Brexit campaign was the Remain one. The Brexit campaign was mostly snake oil salesmen, the Remain one was badly conducted on behalf of usually decent politicians who for 40 years had forgotten some fundamental principles of democracy in their desire to follow a respectable project.
The Remain campaign was a disgrace, just so poor. I don't think the EU is especially undemocratic, or perhaps more accurately I can see why people feel that way about it and I don't think it is perfect in that regard but I think whenever you cooperate politically across a larger and larger number of people you surrender some of your freedom to act in order to have more collective power, security and prosperity, and I think in leaving the EU we have lost more than we have gained. Especially as our own democracy is so shabby and debased.
But perhaps not as great a disgrace as the Leave campaign, which was effective.
In other unnoticed news, it seems as though the Euro is heading for parity with USD.
People in the UK like to think that the UK is a special basket case where everything is going wrong, yet look across the channel and suddenly our economy doesn't seem so bad. There's an economic disaster unfolding very quietly across Europe and just as over here, people are watching the alarms go off but don't seem to care that no one's at the wheel.
The last Eurozone crisis was a disaster for the whole continent and that was done during a time of benign monetary conditions so the ECB printing money and buying up debt from Med countries wasn't particularly controversial. How they might do that with inflation running at 10% is a question to which no one has an answer.
Fundamentally European (including the UK) economies seem broken. A decade of QE and asset price inflation has impoverished the productive young and now every country has got huge structural deficits with no easy way of cutting spending and an environment of rapidly rising debt servicing costs.
As I said this morning, the answer will be wealth creation at the bottom and preventing a concentration of wealth at the top. Whoever figures out how to achieve it should run to be God Emperor of Europe.
Look at the differentials between where US interest rates are headed and where EUR rates are headed. Somethings got to give. FFS where's the bottom of the euro versus the US dollar here?
10% inflation? That could be a conservative estimate.
Don't forget that 10% inflation in the Eurozone would do a terrific job of inflating away some of that indebtedness.
Thank you for all the kind comments and likes on the last thread. Is there any way of seeing more than just the last 10 likes (not a problem I usually have)? It would be nice to see all the usernames that liked my comment.
It appears that walking without crutches is a piece of cake, walking without the boot not so much.
It also appears that my shoe is now too small for me. I also have nerve damage and can't feel the outside part of my foot. I knew this but it wasn't to noticeable in a boot. It is noticeable in a normal shoe. I'm now told that as there hasn't been any improvement that is likely to be permanent. I don't think it is going to bother me.
Re @Selebian's observation, no I am not a Nordic Lumberjack. In terms of my desire to do certain things:
a) Driving - speaks for itself b) Skiing - I had given this up but I had intended to give it another go this May/June with some easy glacier skiing. I have loved skiing particularly yellow run ski routes for the exhilaration, solitude, views, and après ski. c) Ladder - I have several hundred metres of hedges that I enjoy cutting with power tools, plus an Orangey that I have to get on top of to clean. d) Chopping wood - I love it, particularly when frustrated. I end many a gardening day with a session. We have 3 stoves and I have never bought any wood in over 10 years. I get plenty from my garden (the February storm provided about a 2 year supply that I am dying to get into) and also I chop wood for neighbours in exchange for a share of it. An axe a wedge and sledgehammer is all you need to take out your frustrations. e) Cycling - I do a lot less now but I do like the big trips and I was planning to cycle down the Loire in May/June (next to rather than in). I hope I can do it in September. Myself and a friend cycle greenways. I think it is comparable to @BlancheLivermore but on wheels rather than foot. Again solitude, but then also meeting great people plus lots of great food and booze.
Thanks @Applicant but I think it only lists out the last 10 and there doesn't seem to be a scroll function. Would love to be proved wrong. @rcs1000 any ideas please Robert?
GBP EUR has been one of the more stable currency pairs recently. Crypto has turned to shit, the dollar has been strong, the ruble strongest.... Controlling basic resource such as wheat and hydrocarbons which both the USA and Russia do is where the underlying strength is. You don't want to be reliant on the kindness of strangers right now. Europe is - I think ounterintuitively sterling would be tracking USD more closely if we were in the EU mind..
Developing basic resources like hyrdocarbons and wheat is where the underlying strength is.
Britain has plentiful supplies of one of these. But Net Zero, innit.
We don't have plentiful supplies of economically viable hydrocarbons, and if you think we do, then you're an idiot.
Now sure, we could produce more oil & gas than we do, but it would be mostly offshore and through remediation of existing fields.
But it is far from clear that shale gas in Lancashire (or anywhere else in the UK) is economically exploitable.
Footballs going well. If you bet against Arsenal. 🤫
Paging Stodge and and Malc. I’m at the Knavesmire on Friday, what do you fancy from the card? I’m on every race, on what I can’t decide yet!
I’m slightly hamstrung with a dozen guests, drinking since noon, partying whilst trying to stop partner kickboxing the tv to death over a cheating spurs side (all looked fair and square to me). She should just turn it off.
Posting this because I sympathise - but also to note the linked poll, which suggests the Supreme Court’s judico-political activism might be a very large factor in the mid term elections.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1524790303386902528 Now, we care. Now we fucking care. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ON THE BALLOT EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS AT LEAST BUT NOW WE FUCKING CARE. They've been promising to do this for DECADES and now they've done it AND NOW WE CARE!?
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
But people like Le Pen aren't successful. Farage has proved more successful than Le Pen. He got his Brexit and fully UKIPed the Tory Party. Le Pen is just a three times loser. The last time by almost 60/40
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
Thank you for all the kind comments and likes on the last thread. Is there any way of seeing more than just the last 10 likes (not a problem I usually have)? It would be nice to see all the usernames that liked my comment.
It appears that walking without crutches is a piece of cake, walking without the boot not so much.
It also appears that my shoe is now too small for me. I also have nerve damage and can't feel the outside part of my foot. I knew this but it wasn't to noticeable in a boot. It is noticeable in a normal shoe. I'm now told that as there hasn't been any improvement that is likely to be permanent. I don't think it is going to bother me.
Re @Selebian's observation, no I am not a Nordic Lumberjack. In terms of my desire to do certain things:
a) Driving - speaks for itself b) Skiing - I had given this up but I had intended to give it another go this May/June with some easy glacier skiing. I have loved skiing particularly yellow run ski routes for the exhilaration, solitude, views, and après ski. c) Ladder - I have several hundred metres of hedges that I enjoy cutting with power tools, plus an Orangey that I have to get on top of to clean. d) Chopping wood - I love it, particularly when frustrated. I end many a gardening day with a session. We have 3 stoves and I have never bought any wood in over 10 years. I get plenty from my garden (the February storm provided about a 2 year supply that I am dying to get into) and also I chop wood for neighbours in exchange for a share of it. An axe a wedge and sledgehammer is all you need to take out your frustrations. e) Cycling - I do a lot less now but I do like the big trips and I was planning to cycle down the Loire in May/June (next to rather than in). I hope I can do it in September. Myself and a friend cycle greenways. I think it is comparable to @BlancheLivermore but on wheels rather than foot. Again solitude, but then also meeting great people plus lots of great food and booze.
Thanks @Applicant but I think it only lists out the last 10 and there doesn't seem to be a scroll function. Would love to be proved wrong. @rcs1000 any ideas please Robert?
Phew: I could probably query the database directly. But that's non-trivial.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
Thank you for all the kind comments and likes on the last thread. Is there any way of seeing more than just the last 10 likes (not a problem I usually have)? It would be nice to see all the usernames that liked my comment.
It appears that walking without crutches is a piece of cake, walking without the boot not so much.
It also appears that my shoe is now too small for me. I also have nerve damage and can't feel the outside part of my foot. I knew this but it wasn't to noticeable in a boot. It is noticeable in a normal shoe. I'm now told that as there hasn't been any improvement that is likely to be permanent. I don't think it is going to bother me.
Re @Selebian's observation, no I am not a Nordic Lumberjack. In terms of my desire to do certain things:
a) Driving - speaks for itself b) Skiing - I had given this up but I had intended to give it another go this May/June with some easy glacier skiing. I have loved skiing particularly yellow run ski routes for the exhilaration, solitude, views, and après ski. c) Ladder - I have several hundred metres of hedges that I enjoy cutting with power tools, plus an Orangey that I have to get on top of to clean. d) Chopping wood - I love it, particularly when frustrated. I end many a gardening day with a session. We have 3 stoves and I have never bought any wood in over 10 years. I get plenty from my garden (the February storm provided about a 2 year supply that I am dying to get into) and also I chop wood for neighbours in exchange for a share of it. An axe a wedge and sledgehammer is all you need to take out your frustrations. e) Cycling - I do a lot less now but I do like the big trips and I was planning to cycle down the Loire in May/June (next to rather than in). I hope I can do it in September. Myself and a friend cycle greenways. I think it is comparable to @BlancheLivermore but on wheels rather than foot. Again solitude, but then also meeting great people plus lots of great food and booze.
Thanks @Applicant but I think it only lists out the last 10 and there doesn't seem to be a scroll function. Would love to be proved wrong. @rcs1000 any ideas please Robert?
@kjh you appear to be making progress which is good news. I am sure you will be fine without the boot soon 👍
"I just wonder whether Johnson is trying to create a fuss in order to divert attention from his own troubles with the law"
...and the UK slowly becomes a banana republic.
In an emerging banana republic none of Johnson’s idiocy or foul-ups would be reported.
Hyperbole doesn’t really help win arguments.
It doesn't, and I don't agree we are becoming a banana kingdom even with the grubbiness and lack of care Boris shows for institutions and protections, among other things, but I would nonetheless question your first statement. I think in an emerging republic things would still get reported, they just wouldn't lead to consequences - only when a transition had occurred would things not be reported.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
I thought EFTA did contain some FoM provisions?
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Edit to add 2: of course, the EFTA countries are all (a) rich, and (b) mostly a lot smaller than the UK, so the practical effect of FoM with EFTA would be minimal.
Thank you for all the kind comments and likes on the last thread. Is there any way of seeing more than just the last 10 likes (not a problem I usually have)? It would be nice to see all the usernames that liked my comment.
It appears that walking without crutches is a piece of cake, walking without the boot not so much.
It also appears that my shoe is now too small for me. I also have nerve damage and can't feel the outside part of my foot. I knew this but it wasn't to noticeable in a boot. It is noticeable in a normal shoe. I'm now told that as there hasn't been any improvement that is likely to be permanent. I don't think it is going to bother me.
Re @Selebian's observation, no I am not a Nordic Lumberjack. In terms of my desire to do certain things:
a) Driving - speaks for itself b) Skiing - I had given this up but I had intended to give it another go this May/June with some easy glacier skiing. I have loved skiing particularly yellow run ski routes for the exhilaration, solitude, views, and après ski. c) Ladder - I have several hundred metres of hedges that I enjoy cutting with power tools, plus an Orangey that I have to get on top of to clean. d) Chopping wood - I love it, particularly when frustrated. I end many a gardening day with a session. We have 3 stoves and I have never bought any wood in over 10 years. I get plenty from my garden (the February storm provided about a 2 year supply that I am dying to get into) and also I chop wood for neighbours in exchange for a share of it. An axe a wedge and sledgehammer is all you need to take out your frustrations. e) Cycling - I do a lot less now but I do like the big trips and I was planning to cycle down the Loire in May/June (next to rather than in). I hope I can do it in September. Myself and a friend cycle greenways. I think it is comparable to @BlancheLivermore but on wheels rather than foot. Again solitude, but then also meeting great people plus lots of great food and booze.
Thanks @Applicant but I think it only lists out the last 10 and there doesn't seem to be a scroll function. Would love to be proved wrong. @rcs1000 any ideas please Robert?
If you look on the main site on a proper computer (rather than vanilla on a phone) and click on the posts "likes", it shows who "liked" it.
Thank you for all the kind comments and likes on the last thread. Is there any way of seeing more than just the last 10 likes (not a problem I usually have)? It would be nice to see all the usernames that liked my comment.
It appears that walking without crutches is a piece of cake, walking without the boot not so much.
It also appears that my shoe is now too small for me. I also have nerve damage and can't feel the outside part of my foot. I knew this but it wasn't to noticeable in a boot. It is noticeable in a normal shoe. I'm now told that as there hasn't been any improvement that is likely to be permanent. I don't think it is going to bother me.
Re @Selebian's observation, no I am not a Nordic Lumberjack. In terms of my desire to do certain things:
a) Driving - speaks for itself b) Skiing - I had given this up but I had intended to give it another go this May/June with some easy glacier skiing. I have loved skiing particularly yellow run ski routes for the exhilaration, solitude, views, and après ski. c) Ladder - I have several hundred metres of hedges that I enjoy cutting with power tools, plus an Orangey that I have to get on top of to clean. d) Chopping wood - I love it, particularly when frustrated. I end many a gardening day with a session. We have 3 stoves and I have never bought any wood in over 10 years. I get plenty from my garden (the February storm provided about a 2 year supply that I am dying to get into) and also I chop wood for neighbours in exchange for a share of it. An axe a wedge and sledgehammer is all you need to take out your frustrations. e) Cycling - I do a lot less now but I do like the big trips and I was planning to cycle down the Loire in May/June (next to rather than in). I hope I can do it in September. Myself and a friend cycle greenways. I think it is comparable to @BlancheLivermore but on wheels rather than foot. Again solitude, but then also meeting great people plus lots of great food and booze.
Thanks @Applicant but I think it only lists out the last 10 and there doesn't seem to be a scroll function. Would love to be proved wrong. @rcs1000 any ideas please Robert?
Phew: I could probably query the database directly. But that's non-trivial.
When I right click on the likes for that comment and "open in new tab" it opens
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
I thought EFTA did contain some FoM provisions?
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Given the 4 other EFTA countries all have very small populations and are all substantially richer than the UK per capita I suspect those opposing freedom of movement for various spurious reasons would not have found much to argue about with EFTA FoM.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
I thought EFTA did contain some FoM provisions?
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Given the 4 other EFTA countries all have very small populations and are all substantially richer than the UK per capita I suspect those opposing freedom of movement for various spurious reasons would not have found much to argue about with EFTA FoM.
If you refresh, you'll find I added that to my post
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
Ooh, a delegation.
That delegation isn't going to do anything, other than express their 'concern' and that the Good Friday Agreement must be respected.
Once the Protocol is abrogated/A16 is invoked, the USA still won't do anything other than express 'concern' and insist that the Good Friday Agreement must be respected.
Once the EU fails to install a NI/Republic land border, because they're not actually crazy, that will be the end of the matter. The EU will be upset, but so what? The GFA will be respected, there won't be an NI/Eire border, there won't be a GB/NI border either.
Time will move on, and the USA will stop caring, because the Troubles are not coming back over "the integrity of the Single Market".
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Posting this because I sympathise - but also to note the linked poll, which suggests the Supreme Court’s judico-political activism might be a very large factor in the mid term elections.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1524790303386902528 Now, we care. Now we fucking care. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ON THE BALLOT EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS AT LEAST BUT NOW WE FUCKING CARE. They've been promising to do this for DECADES and now they've done it AND NOW WE CARE!?
To be honest assuming I've understood the sentiment correctly it sums up what is wrong with American politics. No attempt to persuade those on the other side of the debate to change their minds, instead a desperate plea to their own side to care more. Because politics is a battle of wills and the side that cares more will win.
Except we each only get one vote and how strongly you feel doesn't make a difference.
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Or a technical solution
The DUP/TUV don't want a technical solution, they want the sea border gone.
Whilst the Brexit vote holds up...no one seems to have changed their mind (let alone the new Tory core voters- white, ill educated men),,,The Tories will pull this kind of bullshit all day long whether or not it fucks off Biden
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Or a technical solution
Or none of the above.
No border in the sea, no border on the land, no alignment, no solution.
We have an open border where we aren't aligned, but the border remains open anyway.
Solves every issue. Except "integrity of the Single Market" but that's their concern, not ours, so let them come up with a solution.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
I thought EFTA did contain some FoM provisions?
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Given the 4 other EFTA countries all have very small populations and are all substantially richer than the UK per capita I suspect those opposing freedom of movement for various spurious reasons would not have found much to argue about with EFTA FoM.
If you refresh, you'll find I added that to my post
Much confusion here! No-one sane ever proposed EFTA membership without also signing up to EEA membership, which would have meant full EU FOM and automatic alignment with much EU law.
Theresa May got this right. It was impossible to get much of a coherent picture from the Leave vote, but the one unambiguous message from voters was a rejection of FOM.
What we need to do is abruptly switch sides and attack America, with Putin’s help
Totally blindside everyone. Perfidious Albion at her best
Except the US like Russia has more nuclear weapons than we do.
7 countries we can never attack are China, the USA, France and Russia, India and Pakistan and North Korea as they all have nuclear weapons. You can probably add Israel too as they almost certainly have them as well
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Or a technical solution
Or none of the above.
No border in the sea, no border on the land, no alignment, no solution.
We have an open border where we aren't aligned, but the border remains open anyway.
Solves every issue. Except "integrity of the Single Market" but that's their concern, not ours, so let them come up with a solution.
They have a solution, but you're going to complain no end when they implement it.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
That's why England is so shit at cricket.
Cowdrey made 22 Test centuries for England and Crawley made 171 not out in one of his first tests v Pakistan
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
In whiuch case - Brexit does not exist.
Stop trying to defend Mr Johnson's and Ms Truss's lack of logic.
I can't believe we haven't come up with a new name for rape seed.
I'm slightly amused to discover that it comes to English from the Latin 'rapum', which means turnip.
Genuinely heard a drunk farmer saying the other day, about the harvesting-ploughing-planting sequence, that "the thing is with rape, to get it in as fast as possible."
The Americans call it Canola oil, which seems sensible.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
That's why England is so shit at cricket.
Cowdrey made 22 Test centuries for England and Crawley made 171 not out in one of his first tests v Pakistan
Shame he averages (what feels like) 1.71 in all other innings.
Edit - yes this is a joke. I actually think he's a good batsman, but he hasn't yet consistently come good as I hoped and expected.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
That's why England is so shit at cricket.
Cowdrey made 22 Test centuries for England and Crawley made 171 not out in one of his first tests v Pakistan
Shame he averages (what feels like) 1.71 in all other innings.
I didn’t know he’d improved recently? I think throughout his career he’ll always be known as John Crawleys son, even though he’s not.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
That's why England is so shit at cricket.
Cowdrey made 22 Test centuries for England and Crawley made 171 not out in one of his first tests v Pakistan
Shame he averages (what feels like) 1.71 in all other innings.
Edit - yes this is a joke. I actually think he's a good batsman, but he hasn't yet consistently come good as I hoped and expected.
The danger is the John Barnes effect. Barnes is remembered for the astonishing goal against Brazil, and that makes people think he was better than he was. That 171 made Crawley look like the answer, but it is probably misleading. He’s decent, but needs much more consistency.
Revealed: The great private school cricket arms race Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Zac Crawley and the Cowdreys were at Tonbridge where I was at school. Certainly some of the best cricketers went to public school
That's why England is so shit at cricket.
Cowdrey made 22 Test centuries for England and Crawley made 171 not out in one of his first tests v Pakistan
Shame he averages (what feels like) 1.71 in all other innings.
Edit - yes this is a joke. I actually think he's a good batsman, but he hasn't yet consistently come good as I hoped and expected.
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
It's quite hilarious watching English Tories trying to bully the Irish, as they have done for centuries, only to discover that the Irish now have both the EU and the US on their side. 🍿🍿🍿
As long as there is no hard border in Ireland there is nothing for the US to complain about if the Irish Sea border is removed
Hardly taking back control of our borders is it though!
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Or a technical solution
So why haven't the genuis Brexiter government worked it out yet? The same party that can't understand that electrified railways need the wires to run all the way, so you don't need diesels in the locomotives?
The US will bleat a bit but will do nothing. It’s hardly going to let this impact our defence and security relationship and no trade deal is on the table anyway. Frankly, I also think some Eastern EU and Baltic states may moderate EU actions at the minute.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
The US will bleat a bit but will do nothing. It’s hardly going to let this impact our defence and security relationship and no trade deal is on the table anyway. Frankly, I also think some Eastern EU and Baltic states may moderate EU actions at the minute.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
And what happens if the Tories' favourites kick off? They'll have to be bribed all over again.
The US will bleat a bit but will do nothing. It’s hardly going to let this impact our defence and security relationship and no trade deal is on the table anyway. Frankly, I also think some Eastern EU and Baltic states may moderate EU actions at the minute.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
And what happens if the Tories' favourites kick off? They'll have to be bribed all over again.
Oh I wouldn’t start from here, and the DUP are way past the point that any U.K. Gvt should be telling them to piss off and grow up.
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
EFTA membership would of course have returned democratic control of laws to the UK. Membership of EFTA does not require accession to any more external laws than membership of NATO. Nor would it have required freedom of movement unless we had also sought to join the EEA. A move I was personally in favour of.
I thought EFTA did contain some FoM provisions?
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Given the 4 other EFTA countries all have very small populations and are all substantially richer than the UK per capita I suspect those opposing freedom of movement for various spurious reasons would not have found much to argue about with EFTA FoM.
If you refresh, you'll find I added that to my post
Much confusion here! No-one sane ever proposed EFTA membership without also signing up to EEA membership, which would have meant full EU FOM and automatic alignment with much EU law.
Theresa May got this right. It was impossible to get much of a coherent picture from the Leave vote, but the one unambiguous message from voters was a rejection of FOM.
That's not true. EFTA is a small European trading bloc, albeit one that also done a lot of heavy lifting with trade agreements.
However... I don't think it would be particularly simple for us to join, and just inherit those agreements. The reality is that those who did deals with EFTA did so on the basis that it was four small rich countries, who were prodigious purchasers of products from around the world, and who would be unlikely to threaten any of their domestic industries. If the UK were to join, I don't think their free trade partners would just say 'yay' and let us cosign the treaties. On the contrary, I think they'd want us to enter into a long and boring negotiation process.
Whilst the Brexit vote holds up...no one seems to have changed their mind (let alone the new Tory core voters- white, ill educated men),,,The Tories will pull this kind of bullshit all day long whether or not it fucks off Biden
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
There were, as I suggested earlier 17million reasons people voted for Brexit. Some voted for what I consider to be a faulty argument over Parliamentary sovereignty, which in my view we retained throughout our time in the EU. Although in all fairness you have conceded the main reason was immigration. How's that going at present?
Mrs May understood the contradiction between the GFA and Brexit, and she tried for a compromise. It was rubbish, but she tried. Johnson on the other hand has stored up his own brand of trouble and either he doesn't understand Irish and Anglo-Irish history, or he doesn't give a ****. Johnson's faulty premise of Brexit in relation to the GFA will not just go away by pissing off the EU, Dublin or the Nationalists.
The US will bleat a bit but will do nothing. It’s hardly going to let this impact our defence and security relationship and no trade deal is on the table anyway. Frankly, I also think some Eastern EU and Baltic states may moderate EU actions at the minute.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
And what happens if the Tories' favourites kick off? They'll have to be bribed all over again.
Oh I wouldn’t start from here, and the DUP are way past the point that any U.K. Gvt should be telling them to piss off and grow up.
If Boris is 6 short of an overall majority after the next general election, he would lick Jeffrey Donaldson's shoes if it meant he got to stay in No 10. We all know that!
Once you overlook the political slants, one true thing which remains is this: No-one really believes that separating out NI from GB in terms of trade agreements and relationships (ie the border being in the Irish Sea), removing the integrity of the UK single market, is really within the spirit of the GFA; just as imposing a border within the island wouldn't be either.
For myself I support a united Ireland, and as soon as possible. But others don't. What is missing in the debate, whether from the EU, DUP, Labour, LDs, the USA or the RoI is: what, with detail, is the plan which would work, be democratic, and respect the Brexit vote and the GFA? What do you want. They are not telling us, while blaming Boris.
If there isn't something coherent they want, there is little point in blaming Boris, who is left hold a Rubiks cube with no solution.
There's every point in blaming someone who a) campaigned for Vote Rubik's Cube in 2016, and laughed off claims that it would be jolly difficult to solve and b) ripped the cube out of someone else's hands saying her solution was rubbish.
Point taken to that extent. But what is the solution all parties are happy with he is now avoiding? Yes, Boris is part of the problem. But I am unclear what solution the other parties want.
The problem is fairly intractable, as opponents of Brexit have always pointed out. How do you take the UK out of the EU SM and CU while keeping NI inside it and fully integrated with the UK? That's a piece of geometry that doesn't really work. The solution that Boris Johnson signed up to puts barriers up in the Irish Sea - so NI is no longer fully integrated into the UK. If he doesn't like it then why did he sign up to it? It's not like the problem wasn't raised at the time. There are two solutions that work in terms of geometry - a United Ireland (which the DUP object to), or the UK returns to the SM and CU (which the Tories object to). The fact that this whole mess was created by the DUP and Tories' support for Brexit is one of the ironies of the situation.
Point taken. On a historical note, the (terrible) Remain campaign never campaigned on the basis that Brexit is a logical impossibility because of the island of Ireland and the GFA and that there was no solution. They were keen really to say we can leave but shouldn't.
My support for Brexit - somewhat reluctant - was because it was difficult to achieve in 2016 but would become impossible as time went on, and that would build a democratic deficit into a system we could not solve. The unsatisfactory chance had to be taken. There would never be another.
Fair enough. I think even Remain didn't really understand how intractable the Irish border issue was, because the English have always paid less attention to Ireland than they should (especially given they are still occupying part of it). I wouldn't have minded if the Leave campaign had said "Brexit will create a big mess and we will be poorer but it will still be worth it." That is a position that I can respect and understand. But they won on a false prospectus and have continued lying ever since. That is something that is unforgivable.
I understood, and I'm a f*****' idiot.
Boris Johnson must have known that either a border in the North Channel or at Dundalk would trigger one side or the other. If he didn't understand that, where has he been for the last fifty years?
I suspect the reality is neither Johnson nor his hard Brexit henchmen cared not one jot. Perhaps their most disingenuous assertion since 2016 has been that the GFA is faulty because it never took account of a potential Brexit.
They understood alright!
In a sense that, if true, is beside the point. Where we had got to in 2016 was that being in the EU was not a solution; there was sufficient momentum behind the anti EU movement. If that is true, there was and is no satisfactory way forward, including the way forward to doing nothing. Only a choice of unsatisfactory ones. Of those outcomes I backed, and still back, EFTA for now. Like all the others, unsatisfactory.
EFTA would have pretty much kept a lid on the NI problem.
No one voted Remain because they thought the EU was awesome, it just seemed considerably less sub- optimal than any alternative. Then, of the seventeen million versions of Brexit people voted for, Mrs May settled for a bad one and Johnson plumped for one which was even worse.
The primary reasons people voted for Brexit were democratic control of laws and controlling immigration. EFTA addressed neither. May and Johnson, despite their flaws, were smart enough to understand if you didn't address the reasons behind a vote you just store up trouble. The europhile mindset of "let's just address the minimum technicalities needed" is why people like Le Pen are so successful.
But people like Le Pen aren't successful. Farage has proved more successful than Le Pen. He got his Brexit and fully UKIPed the Tory Party. Le Pen is just a three times loser. The last time by almost 60/40
No more salt in that particular wound please. Almost, sob.
Posting this because I sympathise - but also to note the linked poll, which suggests the Supreme Court’s judico-political activism might be a very large factor in the mid term elections.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1524790303386902528 Now, we care. Now we fucking care. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ON THE BALLOT EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS AT LEAST BUT NOW WE FUCKING CARE. They've been promising to do this for DECADES and now they've done it AND NOW WE CARE!?
Critical thing to understand is how that splits by party. It could well be the GOP voters want to cement the win in the court with a Federal victory on the law books as well.
Biden's an Irishman until it comes time to fucking their economy over, then he's an American.
Ultimately, I don't think it's going to make a difference what the Americans say.
The difference it will make is that the UK government is still pretending (absurdly, but it's a religious belief of the Brexiteers) that there's some great UK-US trade deal coming down the road, and reneging on the Protocol would very publicly blow that idea out of the water.
Bollocks, the USA will do whatever is in the USA's interest, just as it did with the tax reforms.
Besides if the UK voids the Protocol, as we are legally entitled to do based upon the Protocol's own safeguarding article, what is the USA going to care about that years later once the bluff has revealed that doing so was no threat to GFA?
Once the EU's bluff is called and no checks are done on the border of Ireland, why would America care about that at all?
The EU is far more important to the US's interests than the UK.
Hmm, that's not really true though is it. The UK is far more important to the US because we have wholly aligned interests, the EU keeps banging on about "strategic autonomy". Do you think that hasn't gone unnoticed in DC?
Well, indeed - the US knows that the UK has forfeited any ability to have "strategic autonomy" and so the US can pretty much do what it likes with us. With the EU, which is far bigger, there is always going to be more of a negotiation.
Ukraine has thrown the conventional wisdom about strategic autonomy out of the window so this is outdated thinking.
Talking about Ukraine's innovation, this thread on the artillery targeting and fire control app developed by an Ukranian dev using the Uber model of linking demand to nearest by available assets is mind-boggling. It's a long thread, but well worth the read:
The Telegraph is asking “will Russia invade Finland”
I strongly suspect the answer is No, but still. Disquieting
In a small, sick way it would be hilarious to see them try. The Finns would be in St Petersburg in days.
The more that Putin appears to be an impotent fool the more dangerous it gets. Funny as the Russian failure is, we still need to offer them a way out. Forcing them into a corner where the only exit is themo-nuclear would be unwise.
Way out: Pull out of Ukraine. All of it including Crimea.
The obvious compromise is Crimea as an independent neutral state. Of course Russian delusions of grandeur mean they aren't prepared to accept this yet.
Finland is one of those - neutral. They don't plan to remain so. Neutral states get invaded. It would either have western backing or be under permanent threat. RoI is soon going to look like a quaint anomaly, tolerated only because we all know the UK would never allow her to go undefended.
Some neutral states get invaded, some don't. The record is mixed in WWII.
A little known fact is Britain invaded neutral Iceland in 1940. Operation Fork. We had good strategic reasons but regardless it was an invasion of a neutral country.
My father was there for a couple of years in 1941-43. After the horrors of France and Norway it was a pleasanter expedition. The locals were very friendly and the British army there actually had quite a nice time. A few married local girls.
The US will bleat a bit but will do nothing. It’s hardly going to let this impact our defence and security relationship and no trade deal is on the table anyway. Frankly, I also think some Eastern EU and Baltic states may moderate EU actions at the minute.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
And what happens if the Tories' favourites kick off? They'll have to be bribed all over again.
Oh I wouldn’t start from here, and the DUP are way past the point that any U.K. Gvt should be telling them to piss off and grow up.
If Boris is 6 short of an overall majority after the next general election, he would lick Jeffrey Donaldson's shoes if it meant he got to stay in No 10. We all know that!
Six short, he wouldn't need a coalition partner, there would be no chance of a stable alternative.
Comments
“(she) ignored the greater moral issues of the war and played both sides for profit"
The story of Swedish neutrality from 1940-45 is complex and nuanced as the military and geo-political realities fluctuated.
Disgraceful.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24572145
Paging Stodge and and Malc. I’m at the Knavesmire on Friday, what do you fancy from the card? I’m on every race, on what I can’t decide yet!
I think for the Swedish left it is a difficult part of their history around elements of pro-nazi sentiment in Sweden and for the Swedish right maybe the neutrality of the Cold War period is tricky.
I imagine Stuart Dickson can give better insight or correct me but from this and talking to Swedish friends it’s quite a complicated neutrality.
I don't think the EU is especially undemocratic, or perhaps more accurately I can see why people feel that way about it and I don't think it is perfect in that regard but I think whenever you cooperate politically across a larger and larger number of people you surrender some of your freedom to act in order to have more collective power, security and prosperity, and I think in leaving the EU we have lost more than we have gained. Especially as our own democracy is so shabby and debased.
...and the UK slowly becomes a banana republic.
It comes from the French "gants de Suède" (gloves of Sweden)
Hyperbole doesn’t really help win arguments.
Now sure, we could produce more oil & gas than we do, but it would be mostly offshore and through remediation of existing fields.
But it is far from clear that shale gas in Lancashire (or anywhere else in the UK) is economically exploitable.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1524790303386902528
Now, we care. Now we fucking care. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ON THE BALLOT EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS AT LEAST BUT NOW WE FUCKING CARE. They've been promising to do this for DECADES and now they've done it AND NOW WE CARE!?
'With the UK government poised to table legislation next week which could revoke parts of the protocol, arrangements are being made for at least half a dozen representatives from the US Congress to fly to Europe for a series of meetings in Brussels, Dublin, London and Belfast.
The delegation will be headed by the influential chair of the ways and means committee, Richie Neal, which has significant power over future trade deals'
So much for those who didn;t think US politics would notice the UKG's abrogation of a treaty.
Edit to add: since 2002 and the Vaduz Convention, the EFTA treaties have allowed for FoM between members states. However it is at a very significantly less onerous level than in the EU. There is no requirement - for example - to pay benefits to immigrants from other EFTA countries.
Edit to add 2: of course, the EFTA countries are all (a) rich, and (b) mostly a lot smaller than the UK, so the practical effect of FoM with EFTA would be minimal.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/react/comment/like?id=3922812
which then says
"Permission Problem
You need to enable javascript to do that."
Can anyone else with better javascript enabled than me see it?
That delegation isn't going to do anything, other than express their 'concern' and that the Good Friday Agreement must be respected.
Once the Protocol is abrogated/A16 is invoked, the USA still won't do anything other than express 'concern' and insist that the Good Friday Agreement must be respected.
Once the EU fails to install a NI/Republic land border, because they're not actually crazy, that will be the end of the matter. The EU will be upset, but so what? The GFA will be respected, there won't be an NI/Eire border, there won't be a GB/NI border either.
Time will move on, and the USA will stop caring, because the Troubles are not coming back over "the integrity of the Single Market".
Either we have a border in the sea, a border on the land, or alignment with the EU.
Independent schools’ desperation to secure the next generation of talent has led to the creation of a football-style battle for talent
https://twitter.com/i/events/1524687996863275013
Remain 56%
Leave 44%
Except we each only get one vote and how strongly you feel doesn't make a difference.
Totally blindside everyone. Perfidious Albion at her best
No border in the sea, no border on the land, no alignment, no solution.
We have an open border where we aren't aligned, but the border remains open anyway.
Solves every issue. Except "integrity of the Single Market" but that's their concern, not ours, so let them come up with a solution.
Theresa May got this right. It was impossible to get much of a coherent picture from the Leave vote, but the one unambiguous message from voters was a rejection of FOM.
7 countries we can never attack are China, the USA, France and Russia, India and Pakistan and North Korea as they all have nuclear weapons. You can probably add Israel too as they almost certainly have them as well
They're all three obviously, anxiously waiting for news. The maternity sister comes in looking concerned.
"I'm afraid to say that we've mixed up all three babies and we don't know who is whose"
Being a joke we don't need to go into why such a stupid system was devised, but they decided to let the fathers decide on which baby was theirs.
Obviously, as is God's will, the Englishman went first.
After a few moments he came out carrying what was, quite obviously, the Pakistani baby.
The Pakistani father was understandably angry and complained.
The Englishman replied,
"Well one of those two kids is Scottish, and you can't take any chances"
nnnnnnight
Stop trying to defend Mr Johnson's and Ms Truss's lack of logic.
Edit - yes this is a joke. I actually think he's a good batsman, but he hasn't yet consistently come good as I hoped and expected.
I think throughout his career he’ll always be known as John Crawleys son, even though he’s not.
As ever though, what’s most likely is some good old fashioned last minute EU brinkmanship, aided by a U.S. nudge, and a deal done.
But I like it that the nationalities are interchangeable to suit the teller and the situation.
https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1524837072074330128
! Rand Paul just unilaterally blocked swift passage of Ukraine aid. He wanted the rest of the Senate add language to the bill he plans to vote against anyway bc debt/inflation.
He has this power because the Senate runs on *unanimous consent*, not nearly unanimous consent.
https://twitter.com/MrMichaelSpicer/status/1524647364195147778?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
Welcome to the machine
However... I don't think it would be particularly simple for us to join, and just inherit those agreements. The reality is that those who did deals with EFTA did so on the basis that it was four small rich countries, who were prodigious purchasers of products from around the world, and who would be unlikely to threaten any of their domestic industries. If the UK were to join, I don't think their free trade partners would just say 'yay' and let us cosign the treaties. On the contrary, I think they'd want us to enter into a long and boring negotiation process.
Mrs May understood the contradiction between the GFA and Brexit, and she tried for a compromise. It was rubbish, but she tried. Johnson on the other hand has stored up his own brand of trouble and either he doesn't understand Irish and Anglo-Irish history, or he doesn't give a ****. Johnson's faulty premise of Brexit in relation to the GFA will not just go away by pissing off the EU, Dublin or the Nationalists.
https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1523828151251517441
PS for some reason this is taking you to 37/41 in the thread. Scroll up to the top and start at 1/41
Savings will allegedly go into helping with the cost of living crisis . More pandering to the angry mob !
You can’t just fire people overnight so this is the latest pile of nonsense to dupe the plebs .