Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

    Later on I’ll show you a video which reports that Bobby Sands had a protestant father and a Catholic mother. The man is one of my heroes. Over 100,000 Irish attended the funeral of sands
    Why is he one of your heroes ?

    Leave a comment:


  • CarpeDiem
    replied
    Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

    Later on I’ll show you a video which reports that Bobby Sands had a protestant father and a Catholic mother. The man is one of my heroes. Over 100,000 Irish attended the funeral of sands
    Your video would be incorrect.

    http://www.irishnews.com/news/2014/0...r-sands-94597/

    HIS son is an icon of republicanism but yesterday there were no Sinn Fein representatives at the funeral of Bobby Sands's father.

    Family and friends of John Sands gathered in west Belfast to pay their last respects to the 91-year-old, who passed away peacefully in hospital on Saturday. Requiem Mass was celebrated at St Agnes's Church on the Andersonstown Road.
    Note the highlighted bit.
    For further information St Agnes' is a Catholic Church.
    http://www.stagnesbelfast.com/?page_id=50

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post
    Bobby Sands was in the IRA and supported their terrorist campaign. His father was Catholic.
    Ireland has, thankfully, for the most part ditched the poison that is religion. Northern Ireland is still crippled by it. Their economy is still a basket case. There’s no shortage of cars (and we have electricity and plumbing and we don’t live in thatched cottages).
    Later on I’ll show you a video which reports that Bobby Sands had a protestant father and a Catholic mother. The man is one of my heroes. Over 100,000 Irish attended the funeral of sands

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post
    I'm not sure. It's not as if the UK and the EU are not aligned now.
    Well they're aligned now, because you're still in a "transition period" and were a full member of the EU for 50 years, untill a few months ago.

    so I guess its possible that there will be an agreement in some areas but not others..
    Eh, that is by far the most likely outcome (of any negotiation), I agree

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
    If anything is agreed on by 31/12 it will be a "skeleton agreement" - to be improved on in future years...
    I'm not sure. It's not as if the UK and the EU are not aligned now.

    Though, interestingly there are 11 different negotiations going on simultaneously so I guess its possible that there will be an agreement in some areas but not others

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post

    There was no ban. Guernsey, which is independent of the UK, merely required French fishermen fishing their waters, to acquire a permit to do so. From 01/01/2021 they will require a licence - French skippers who behave naughtily need not apply.
    That has a lot of sense. fisheries are best managed as locally as possible.
    the French may wish to review the St Pierre and Miquelon agreement
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...-boundary-case

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post
    Fortunately there are only months.
    There will be new months after these months, there are always are

    There will be 10 "rounds" of negotiations, 4 days each, from Monday to Thursday, alternating between London and Brussels.

    After each "round" there will a press conference, then we'll know more no doubt, around the end of May.

    https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/02...eu-vk-duiding/

    Note that even a "deal" is not the end of the affair, CETA for example, is only in force "provisionally" atm. while various "small issues" are settled and new problems discovered.

    CETA entered into force provisionally on 21 September 2017, meaning most of the agreement now applies.
    https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/

    If anything is agreed on by 31/12 it will be a "skeleton agreement" - to be improved on in future years...
    Last edited by Snowygerry; 02 Mar 20, 07:51.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post
    You're a bit obsessed aren't you
    Calm down, you will wear yourself out, this can take years….
    Fortunately there are only months.

    But sovereignty is a fundamental issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    You're a bit obsessed aren't you

    Those "mandates" are just each sides prelude, like an opening bid in a card game, in no negotiation one side comes away everything they "demand"…

    Calm down, you will wear yourself out, this can take years….

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

    You do understand that a trade deal is a binding international legal agreement which would, by its nature, limit or restrict the UK in the context of that agreement, just as it would limit and restrict the EU? Saying that such restrictions are somehow a surrender of sovereignty is just wrong.
    Childish hyperbole doesn’t add anything meaningful to the discussion.
    Clearly you have been paying little attention.

    "First and foremost, the EU wants the UK to sign up to strict rules on fair and open competition, so if British companies are given tariff-free access to the EU market, they cannot undercut their rivals.
    <>
    Most importantly, its negotiating directives, adopted on 25 February 2020, say a future partnership must "ensure the application" in the UK of EU state-aid rules on subsidies for business.
    <>
    The UK would also be required to stay in line with the EU's rules on environmental policy and workers' rights in a way that would "stand the test of time".
    <>
    One late addition to the EU's negotiating document is the demand that the UK should stick close to EU rules on food safety and animal health,
    <>
    Now, the EU is demanding the ECJ be given a legal role in policing any free-trade agreement.
    <>
    The EU wants to "uphold" existing access on both sides to fishing waters -
    <>
    [EU] wants the court to be able to issue binding rulings on disputes between the two sides, when they "raise a question of interpretation of [European] Union law".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51657084


    "The UK aims for a relationship based on “friendly cooperation between sovereign equals” with both sides respecting each other’s “legal autonomy”.

    It will not abide by EU rules and states the UK “will not negotiate any arrangement in which the UK does not have control of its own laws”, will not accept any “obligations” to be aligned with EU laws, or the “EU institutions, including the court of justice”.


    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post

    You've got it! The UK wants both a free trade deal and sovereignty.

    If forced to choose, I expect the UK will choose sovereignty.
    You do understand that a trade deal is a binding international legal agreement which would, by its nature, limit or restrict the UK in the context of that agreement, just as it would limit and restrict the EU? Saying that such restrictions are somehow a surrender of sovereignty is just wrong.
    Childish hyperbole doesn’t add anything meaningful to the discussion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Karri View Post

    Yes, everything.
    You've got it! The UK wants both a free trade deal and sovereignty.

    If forced to choose, I expect the UK will choose sovereignty.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post
    Exactly, the UK wants a lot of things, but the question is specifically what kind of relationship it actually wants with the EU after leaving.


    I've pointed you in the direction enough times. There must be something wilful in your refusal to acknowledge it.
    Perhaps you just can't get past your prejudices.

    Anyway
    "4. The vision for the UK’s future relationship with the EU has already been set out, successively, in the manifesto on the basis of which the Government won the 12 December 2019 General Election, and, subsequently, in the Prime Minister’s speech in Greenwich on 3 February and his written Ministerial statement on the same day.

    5. It is a vision of a relationship based on friendly cooperation between sovereign equals, with both parties respecting one another’s legal autonomy and right to manage their own resources as they see fit. Whatever happens, the Government will not negotiate any arrangement in which the UK does not have control of its own laws and political life. That means that we will not agree to any obligations for our laws to be aligned with the EU's, or for the EU's institutions, including the Court of Justice, to have any jurisdiction in the UK.


    Leave a comment:


  • E.D. Morel
    replied
    Bobby Sands was in the IRA and supported their terrorist campaign. His father was Catholic.
    Ireland has, thankfully, for the most part ditched the poison that is religion. Northern Ireland is still crippled by it. Their economy is still a basket case. There’s no shortage of cars (and we have electricity and plumbing and we don’t live in thatched cottages).

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonewall_Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by E.D. Morel View Post

    Unlikely any time in the next 20 years.

    Northern Ireland is economically and socially generations behind Ireland and the gap is getting bigger. Despite the fact that Sinn Féin did well in the recent election here (or maybe because of it) there is little real appetite for the reality of a united Ireland.
    The Good Friday Agreement requires a majority vote in both Northern Ireland and Ireland for reunification.
    Well I heard that during the times of the troubles the economy was very bad in Belfast but now in the modern times more northern Irishman have motor vehicles and then they did in the 1980s. So what about the economic improvement of Northern Ireland since the times of the troubles what would you say to that?


    As for the unification of northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. What about the vision of the united Irishman under the leadership of the Protestant Wolfe Tone and the Catholic Father John Murphy ? Such a beautiful vision but why was it not followed by the Irish Catholics and Irish protestants of northern Ireland during the times of Bobby Sands? Surely you know the name Bobby sans the IRA militant turned hunger strike or who died for his beliefs in a united ireland. Well Sands had a Protestant father and he had protestant friends growing up playing soccer in Ireland in the 1960s...Something very bad tore apart the Irish protestants and Irish Catholics by the late 1960s northern Ireland. Do you think there will ever be another push among Irish protestants and Irish Catholics for a united Ireland as their was in 1798. Isn’t it amazing that the 1798 Irish rebellion saw Irish protestants and Irish Catholics fighting on the same side but that the troubles of the 1970s saw Irish Catholics fighting against Irish protestants. Although the ulster Protestant militias of the 1970s had some disagreements with the British gov. The British government would use their own military to assist the protestant Irish paramilitaries at times during the troubles but not all of the time

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X