• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaking of Northern Ireland, their politics are the future of the UK as a whole thanks to liberal utopianism.
 
At least that's true, he does have a gut
I would say "Poor Melania" - but she probably hasn't allowed it near her in a decade or so; TBH he's probably not been interested either, prefers them no more than half his age, and famous for porn.
 
Speaking of Northern Ireland, their politics are the future of the UK as a whole thanks to liberal utopianism.

Er Northern Ireland politics is what happens when you get 2 sides in a highly charged situation unprepared to compromise or live together properly. Maybe you Americans should pay attention to what happens when a bunch of fundamentalist nutters split the country down the middle.
 
Er Northern Ireland politics is what happens when you get 2 sides in a highly charged situation unprepared to compromise or live together properly. Maybe you Americans should pay attention to what happens when a bunch of fundamentalist nutters split the country down the middle.
One side more than the other, let's be honest.

Currently there is no government in NI because the DUP refuse to have the Irish language on road signs, Sinn Fein are willing to allow Ulster Scots as well but the DUP would rather refuse half the region the right to their own culture and history than promote their own. This continuous the DUP's and the parties from which it was formed prestigious past of trying to make Irish nationalists in NI feel as unwelcome as possible, prior to this it was simply their two tier class system enforced through gerrymandering which essentially gave nationalists the decision of becoming a teacher to teach in under funded nationalist schools, living in fear that your land would be taken from you at any moment or getting the **** out. All this is correct while the Unionists in NI are literally foreign rulers, the Ulster plantation was literally King James I planting the staunchest protestants he could find in Scotland and allotted them the land of Irish Chiefs he'd ran out of their homes in the years previous. There is only really one side unwilling to compromise here, the other is standing their ground to the point where to compromise any further risks their people becoming second class citizens.

The record length of time without a government is unsurprisingly not the biggest political issue facing NI right now, and as mentioned this would be the border. @TRF_heineken (Mentioning you here as it has yet to be covered in depth) The border shouldn't, and likely won't, be put up. It would see the end of the Good Friday agreement which is the staple of peace in the north. Part of that agreement is power sharing between nationalist and unionist, not having a border, the decommissioning of weapons held by the IRA as well as numerous institutions to promote communication and peace between the two sides. If the border goes up, this breaks apart, so despite what the DUP say (And Dumb American in reply to your question) it is in the best interest of everyone in the UK that no border is put in place because otherwise the will North of Ireland descend into civil war again, as well as many economic reasons, the EU can sustain a country where 70% of workers are publically employed while post Brexit UK will not.

I honestly think the best result that could come from Brexit is the break up of the union. If no border is put up in Ireland then the Scots will get out, they want to be part of the single trade area and customs union and won't stick around if they're being treated differently to NI. If the Scots go there is a sound chance the North follows considering that their cultural links with Britain are almost exclusively Scottish. Without Scotland and NI, Westminster can forget about the portion of their population that is radically different to them. Ignoring language and culture Wales have historically been far closer to England than Scotland or Ireland, they are the same legal jurisdiction, they have the least established (I recognise the irony here) devolved government of the three "celtic" statelets and most importantly they voted for Brexit. Having only England and Wales to deal with is certainly preferable for everyone in those two countries and likely more prosperous. After the initial hits to trade all countries will experience this leaves everyone with what they wanted and NI and Scotland in the far more prosperous positions of being in the EU.

Speaking of Northern Ireland, their politics are the future of the UK as a whole thanks to liberal utopianism.
You realise you're literally advocating a segregated warring society by saying this?
 
When May's deal gets voted down in a couple of weeks there will either be a general election or another referendum. The Tories big wigs won't let her fight another election after the last one and so her best hope of staying in power is to get Parliament to approve another referendum which is far more likely given that most don't like the current deal. A general election won't necessarily solve anything as it merely passes the same problem to a new Government and the division within the Tories and country continues. The second referendum gets sold (politically) to the electorate on the basis that they have reached impasse and crashing out with no deal would be too catastrophic. The three voting on the final referendum options should be:

1. Accept the current deal
2. Leave with no deal
3. Remain

Parliament would not get another vote on the current deal if it wins the second ref. The Remainers will vote Remain while Brexiteer vote will be split between 1 and 2 meaning that Remain wins and the union is preserved. Simples.
 
Last edited:
Having only England and Wales to deal with is certainly preferable for everyone in those two countries and likely more prosperous. After the initial hits to trade all countries will experience this leaves everyone with what they wanted and NI and Scotland in the far more prosperous positions of being in the EU.

Ha... no thank you!

Westminster's continual overlooking of Wales will only get worse if we're left on our own in a UK of "EnglandandWales"

The sheer size difference between the two countries will always lead to Welsh projects being put on the backburner if they're in direct competition with likely multiple English projects - as we see time and time again now.

You only need to look at how Wales (and Scotland) has been shut out of the Brexit negotiations to see how little regard we're given by the UK Government. They've even stripped the devolved powers that the Welsh people voted for in various referendums (the latest being held in 2011), so can't help but laugh at whenever May and co go on about "the will of the people" as clearly the Welsh people's will doesn't matter that much to them! That said, Welsh Labour rolled over far too easily and voted with the Tories and UKIP to allow the devolved powers to be stripped...

Personally I struggle to see Brexit being beneficial to Wales in the slightest - our ports like Holyhead are likely to be hit hard by the loss of a lot of EU trade, and I simply cannot see Westminster matching the development funds and grants that come to Wales from the EU either.
 
Didn't you Welsh muppets vote for Brexit (like us English muppets)?
 
Unfortunately enough of us did - Turkeys voting for effin Christmas. Still can't get my head around it.
Well we are dragging you down with us, Scotland and NI earned their right to escape by showing they have two brain cells.
 
I am coming round to UK just joining EFTA post transition period. Yes UK will have to abide by EU rules, including but at least there is:

Article 112 of the EEA treaty allows us to suspend freedom of movement, for an unspecified period and unilaterally, due to "serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties".

No CAP or Fisheries policy and ECJ has no jurisdiction. And as I understand it also sorts out the NI border issue.

For me it's the best compromise and UK are out of the EU as the referendum asked and for me returns the UK to what we originally signed up for: a European Free Trade Area.
 
I am coming round to UK just joining EFTA post transition period. Yes UK will have to abide by EU rules, including but at least there is:

Article 112 of the EEA treaty allows us to suspend freedom of movement, for an unspecified period and unilaterally, due to "serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties".

No CAP or Fisheries policy and ECJ has no jurisdiction. And as I understand it also sorts out the NI border issue.

For me it's the best compromise and UK are out of the EU as the referendum asked and for me returns the UK to what we originally signed up for: a European Free Trade Area.

Careful. Conventional wisdom on TRF is that we must stay in the EU completely or else face an apocalypse.
 
I am coming round to UK just joining EFTA post transition period. Yes UK will have to abide by EU rules, including but at least there is:

Article 112 of the EEA treaty allows us to suspend freedom of movement, for an unspecified period and unilaterally, due to "serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties".

No CAP or Fisheries policy and ECJ has no jurisdiction. And as I understand it also sorts out the NI border issue.

For me it's the best compromise and UK are out of the EU as the referendum asked and for me returns the UK to what we originally signed up for: a European Free Trade Area.

What serious economic, societal or environment issues are cause by immigration from immigration from the EU? Latest figures show immigration from EU in the past 12 months was less than a third of all net immigration as EU citizens from Eastern Europe return to their own improving economies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-46384417

The irony of leaving the EU on a partially racialised vote (thank you Gareth Southgate for saying something that will potentially hamper your career) is that immigration will largely be around the same, but the proportion of immigrants that are white, Christian and has a good grasp of English (e.g. from a European education) will be lower than in recent years. Voting to leave because someone told you a fairytale about Turkish EU membership and then you wake up to more "brown faces" praying to false idols. You couldn't write it.

Also, my understanding is that EFTA was primarily part of a fledgling Europe in a non-globalised world in the 60s & 70s. It is worth noting that zero, or close to zero European states want a simple EFTA arrangement in the present day, presumably as their business sectors demand staying competitive in the battle to attract multinational employers.

The UK begged to join the EU. It's not been foisted in them. De Gaulle wanted the UK to get lost because he thought they were more hassle than it was worth (one of the few things he ever got right). But he didn't veto their joining after diplomatic efforts by the UK.

The only thing the UK is a victim of in Europe is of their own dithering and indecision.
 
What serious economic, societal or environment issues are cause by immigration from immigration from the EU? Latest figures show immigration from EU in the past 12 months was less than a third of all net immigration as EU citizens from Eastern Europe return to their own improving economies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-46384417

The irony of leaving the EU on a partially racialised vote (thank you Gareth Southgate for saying something that will potentially hamper your career) is that immigration will largely be around the same, but the proportion of immigrants that are white, Christian and has a good grasp of English (e.g. from a European education) will be lower than in recent years. Voting to leave because someone told you a fairytale about Turkish EU membership and then you wake up to more "brown faces" praying to false idols. You couldn't write it.

Also, my understanding is that EFTA was primarily part of a fledgling Europe in a non-globalised world in the 60s & 70s. It is worth noting that zero, or close to zero European states want a simple EFTA arrangement in the present day, presumably as their business sectors demand staying competitive in the battle to attract multinational employers.

The UK begged to join the EU. It's not been foisted in them. De Gaulle wanted the UK to get lost because he thought they were more hassle than it was worth (one of the few things he ever got right). But he didn't veto their joining after diplomatic efforts by the UK.

The only thing the UK is a victim of in Europe is of their own dithering and indecision.

Immigration has never been the causes of Britain's issues. The problem is that it's easier to blame someone else and even easier to blame someone else when they look different or speak differently to you.
 
What serious economic, societal or environment issues are cause by immigration from immigration from the EU? Latest figures show immigration from EU in the past 12 months was less than a third of all net immigration as EU citizens from Eastern Europe return to their own improving economies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-46384417

The irony of leaving the EU on a partially racialised vote (thank you Gareth Southgate for saying something that will potentially hamper your career) is that immigration will largely be around the same, but the proportion of immigrants that are white, Christian and has a good grasp of English (e.g. from a European education) will be lower than in recent years. Voting to leave because someone told you a fairytale about Turkish EU membership and then you wake up to more "brown faces" praying to false idols. You couldn't write it.

Also, my understanding is that EFTA was primarily part of a fledgling Europe in a non-globalised world in the 60s & 70s. It is worth noting that zero, or close to zero European states want a simple EFTA arrangement in the present day, presumably as their business sectors demand staying competitive in the battle to attract multinational employers.

The UK begged to join the EU. It's not been foisted in them. De Gaulle wanted the UK to get lost because he thought they were more hassle than it was worth (one of the few things he ever got right). But he didn't veto their joining after diplomatic efforts by the UK.

The only thing the UK is a victim of in Europe is of their own dithering and indecision.

The thing is the EU referendum asked the question: "Do you want the UK to remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?" It never mentioned do you want to leave the EU and end free movement of people? The latter part has been used by Brexiteers as the reason for leave winning. It may be one of the reasons, but it was not the question asked and no mandate has ever been given by the referendum result to end free movement.

Article 112 is there more to appease those who did vote who did vote for this reason; whether it has ever been used in practise by the current members I don't know.

And UK never begged to join the EU as it is in its present format, back in 1975 it was the EEC, which has morphed into the EU as it is today through subsequent treaties.

I, for one, and more than happy to return UK to what it originally envisaged the EU to be which is economic free trade area, rather than the ever closer political union the EU is and is heading towards. If only to end the stalemate which will invariably ensue in the next few months. I know EFTA/EEA is not perfect, but it's the best compromise imo.
 
And UK never begged to join the EU as it is in its present format, back in 1975 it was the EEC, which has morphed into the EU as it is today through subsequent treaties.

Treaties which the UK subsequently negotiated and signed.

I, for one, and more than happy to return UK to what it originally envisaged the EU to be which is economic free trade area, rather than the ever closer political union the EU is and is heading towards. If only to end the stalemate which will invariably ensue in the next few months. I know EFTA/EEA is not perfect, but it's the best compromise imo.
It's just not that and it's not becoming that. The sheer number on European institutions ensures that there is enough separation of power for the EU ever to become an effective political tool.

The criticism that the EU legislation has received is for the most part brainless. The directives and regulations they introduce are the least intrusive laws you could possibly imagine, they're the sort of laws that if a jurisdiction didn't have they'd be considered archaic. The reason for it is primarily to ensure the European Convention on Human Rights is followed and that member states company, employment, banking and consumer protection laws are similar to allow the free trade area run seemlessly. The EU rarely concerns itself with defence and security (the CFSP is beyond basic and more a tool to prevent violent rule in the union) or criminal law and the like because it's a union whose focus is to protect the individual and forming and maintaining an economic union greater than the sum of its parts. Even if the UK remain in the trade area, the advantages it brings you are going to constantly become less and less advantageous over time as they "make their own laws" which they're extremely excited about despite the fact they already do!
 
Can't wait to move to Japan and leave all this behind.

End of the day despite what some think the EU did a lot of the damage to the relationship, the British politicians just used that mess as a smokescreen for the UK issues, (Ala Argentine's and the Falklands).

The british public was taken for mugs by the Leave campaign but they only had to fan the flames of the fire that EU had already created.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top