Article 50/Brexit Negotiations

[goalmole]

I like your gif's, by the way. Keep them coming.

 

[CitizenTID]

They are not your countries but a voluntary union created by an Act of Parliament. Regardless of when the Union was constituted it is still a union. It's why the Loyalists in Northern Ireland are referred to as Unionists and the DUP is the Demoratic Unionist Party and why the full name of the Tory party is the Conservative and Unionist Party. It's why the Scots would have been entitled to become independent had they voted Yes in the referendum.
You might want to get your facts straight before you start calling people bellends.

You're falling into the nuances of word use here where they can be applied in different context and still showing a clear misunderstanding of what the UK is. Where are you from out of interest?

Countries are useful terms to apply to the home nations in respect of their history but mainly as, for example, Scotland being a country of land - in the same way someone might say "out in the country" meaning a broad area of land. There are cultural nuances as to why it is referred to as a country in other respects. It is not however a country in the political sense remotely prior to devolution. Despite devolution, it has not been a political country on the international stage for 310 years - which is the proper use of the term that we are discussing here. This is a trouble of language, if there was another accurate word to distinguish between the two senses of "country" it would help explain. I avoided saying NI and Scotland are "part" of our country to avoid the comparison to actual countries politically united such as by the European Union. The EU is just an organisation in any case, despite some within it clearly wanting otherwise. Therefore, yes, NI and Scotland are this country - the UK. England does not exist outside of the regional sense (we are merely discussing political matters and avoiding sporting decisions here). These are facts, the misinterpretation of peoples/regions within the UK, revivalism of old cultures (at the beginning of which was often very inaccurate) and political organisations have led to a reimagined sense of these regions within the UK that are the home nations. I am dealing with legal facts alone here, not perception, which is widely available for your own study.

Unionists are called so because they want to stay united as a territory of the UK. NI and Ireland as a whole has it's own barrel of considerations aside. It is not a union, both English and Scottish parliament passed legislation that dissolved the political regions (Kingdoms at that time, from which modern European countries were conceived) into a single entity. The crowns of each kingdom were already possessed by a single ruler for 104 years, it was a formality that had been resisted until then. After that point there was no political distinction until devolution in Scotland 20 years ago.

To have some German bureaucrat have the audacity to think of involving himself in the intricacies of my country, he definitely doesn't have a fcking clue about, bellend was the most polite term I could use for him on here.

 

[Manc in London]

What you have described is 'no deal' not a bad deal

That's what we do not want, but the odd loon seems to think it's an option, it really isn't

I read somewhere yesterday that Brexit was more likely to put the "Little" in "England" rather than put the "Great" in "Britain"

Sounds about right to me.

 

[goalmole]

You're falling into the nuances of word use here where they can be applied in different context and still showing a clear misunderstanding of what the UK is. Where are you from out of interest?

Countries are useful terms to apply to the home nations in respect of their history but mainly as, for example, Scotland being a country of land - in the same way someone might say "out in the country" meaning a broad area of land. There are cultural nuances as to why it is referred to as a country in other respects. It is not however a country in the political sense remotely prior to devolution. Despite devolution, it has not been a political country on the international stage for 310 years - which is the proper use of the term that we are discussing here. This is a trouble of language, if there was another accurate word to distinguish between the two senses of "country" it would help explain. I avoided saying NI and Scotland are "part" of our country to avoid the comparison to actual countries politically united such as by the European Union. The EU is just an organisation in any case, despite some within it clearly wanting otherwise. Therefore, yes, NI and Scotland are this country - the UK. England does not exist outside of the regional sense (we are merely discussing political matters and avoiding sporting decisions here). These are facts, the misinterpretation of peoples/regions within the UK, revivalism of old cultures (at the beginning of which was often very inaccurate) and political organisations have led to a reimagined sense of these regions within the UK that are the home nations. I am dealing with legal facts alone here, not perception, which is widely available for your own study.

Unionists are called so because they want to stay united as a territory of the UK. NI and Ireland as a whole has it's own barrel of considerations aside. It is not a union, both English and Scottish parliament passed legislation that dissolved the political regions (Kingdoms at that time, from which modern European countries were conceived) into a single entity. The crowns of each kingdom were already possessed by a single ruler for 104 years, it was a formality that had been resisted until then. After that point there was no political distinction until devolution in Scotland 20 years ago.

Dress it up how you want. It's still a union voluntarily entered into and can be voluntarily exited as nearly happened last year.

 

[CitizenTID]

Dress it up how you want. It's still a union voluntarily entered into and can be voluntarily exited as nearly happened last year.

No, Scotland can voluntarily secede if the UK government allows it to do so. That is not a union. Scotland did not enter into, but dissolved itself into a new entity with another kingdom. The IndyRef was in 2014 not last year and was a referendum with zero power to make a decision - a decision is made by the UK on what to do about how the people feel, which in our country, would be respected by Govt (you hope).

Compare that to the UK and EU. Can the EU stop the UK leaving the EU? No it can't. Can the UK stop Scotland seceding? Yes it can.

I'm not dressing it up any way other than using legal distinctions. All that matters is the legality, not perception. There are different perception because the history that led to the formation of single political entity in these isles is complicated, there are many myths surrounding and requires dedicated study to understand accurately. Political activities and their perceptions within do not change the legalities of it, unless they manage to impact upon those. SNP want an independent Scotland, using the correct legal acknowledgements does them no favours so they have to dress it up in a way that helps them, as they have, very inaccurately, yet in a way they've convinced many of.

You didn't tell me where you're from?

 

[Juan King]

Whatever the posturing, we will never be allowed to leave IMO. I may be wrong but we will see how much a referendum is actually worth. I think we will get the chance to vote again for the "correct" verdict.

 

[goalmole]

Would that be the same Geoffrey Howe whose criticism was famously likened to "being savaged by a dead sheep"?

I can see why you admire him when you've simultaneously wet your pampers before negotiations have started in earnest and cum prematurely at the prospect of their failure.

You're in good company though so carry on salivating.

Good night.

Good Morning.
Another one that doesn't get his facts right before making a statement.
It wasn't his criticism of Thatcher that was likened to being "savaged by a dead sheep"
It was Denis Healey, the Labour former cabinet minister who made the "savaged by a dead sheep" comment. But it was in 1978.
The "broken bats" speech wasn't made till 1990.

 

[goalmole]

No, Scotland can voluntarily secede if the UK government allows it to do so. That is not a union. Scotland did not enter into, but dissolved itself into a new entity with another kingdom. The IndyRef was in 2014 not last year and was a referendum with zero power to make a decision - a decision is made by the UK on what to do about how the people feel, which in our country, would be respected by Govt (you hope).

Compare that to the UK and EU. Can the EU stop the UK leaving the EU? No it can't. Can the UK stop Scotland seceding? Yes it can.

I'm not dressing it up any way other than using legal distinctions. All that matters is the legality, not perception. There are different perception because the history that led to the formation of single political entity in these isles is complicated, there are many myths surrounding and requires dedicated study to understand accurately. Political activities and their perceptions within do not change the legalities of it, unless they manage to impact upon those.

You didn't tell me where you're from?

I don't mind telling you where I'm from if you tell me why that is important.

 

[BobKowalski]

The government went into the Brexit negotiations in bad faith. That was the plan from the beginning. They tried to get the smaller Eastern European states onside in a bid to divide and rule. They tried to drive wedges between members in the hope of creating a domino effect, with our right wing press banging on about which country would be the next to exit. Would it be Frexit, Nexit or Auxit. We weren't just going to leave home, we were going to knock the house down as well. The EU, quite understandably didn't like it very much. This is what Elmar Brok, a German MEP said about it: “The British government tries to divide and rule,” he said. “They believe they can take members of parliament out of certain nations … to win support by dividing us. If they try to negotiate while trying to interfere in our side then we can do that too. We can make a big fuss over Scotland. Or Northern Ireland.” Not really the way to win friends and influence people, is it.

True. The question is why we did not realise that it was a tactic likely to backfire. Our political class seem to have little comprehension as to what the EU is, how it works or how the continental Europeans view the EU. I know we have been a semi detached member but I didn't realise how ignorant we had become and ignorance in any negotiation can be fatal. Today was a classic case of Davis posturing for months and then climbing down within 5 minutes. But why posture? Cheap headlines in the Mail? Is that the basis of our negotiating strategy? Playing to the gallery?

Anyway we spent months working on member states, to divide them and get support for our parallel approach and make progress without triggering the Article 50 countdown clock. We don't get very far so we trigger Article 50 and the clock starts ticking. And then what do we do? Waste 2 months by calling a GE. Not before we trigger the countdown but after. Seriously what the fuck was that all about? Not content with wasting valuable time we then end up with a weakened Govt. Fanfuckingtastic.

 

[CitizenTID]

I don't mind telling you where I'm from if you tell me why that is important.

Because if you're not from the UK and especially not from within these isles then I think you have some cheek to lecture me on what my country is, especially since it has one of the most complex histories, and b) chastise people here on their political decisions relating to national sovereignty of powers in their own country.

Here's an easier to grasp example for you. Is Rheged a country? It was annexed by Northumbria in the same way as the union of the crowns of Scotland and England, through inheritance. Northumbria was disputed by Scotland and England but later anyhow the Normans conquered the entire region now known as England. Wales was also conquered by Norman rulers. What about all the other kingdoms that have existed in Britain? Are they all countries?

If you want to consider perceptions, written from the late 13th Century onwards, one of the most famous pieces of Welsh literature (Welsh Triads) referred to all of Britain outside of the highlands (Alban) and south eastern England as Cymry, where the South East was Lloegyr. Wales was conquered in 1283 - it is part of the Kingdom of England. There have been several inceptions of state since then too, yet in society, people still think of it as a country. What they don't know of is the Celtic League (and prior political organisations) that has promoted self-determination of these areas based upon the false notion that they were a common peoples that English aren't.

Is this still the calibre and level of understanding you expect from people who voted for Brexit?

 

[Bewar3them00n]

instead of bumbling on like a sad robot mumbling "strong and stable" fucking up the Brexit negotiations on day one, (that is, after doing a Devon Lock in the election) May should do another classic U-Turn, say, the referendum was only 2% off a 50/50 split, and that she has misjudged the public in the wake of Manchester, London, Grenfell, call a 2nd referendum,resign and let Labour have a crack, which will either backfire spectacularly in Corbyn's face, or he will lead us into a new golden era.

 

[goalmole]

Because if you're not from the UK and especially not from within these isles then I think you have some cheek to lecture me on what my country is, especially since it has one of the most complex histories, and b) chastise people here on their political decisions relating to national sovereignty of powers in their own country.

Here's an easier to grasp example for you. Is Rheged a country? It was annexed by Northumbria in the same way as the union of the crowns of Scotland and England, through inheritance. Northumbria was disputed by Scotland and England but later anyhow the Normans conquered the entire region now known as England. Wales was also conquered by Norman rulers. What about all the other kingdoms that have existed in Britain? Are they all countries?

If you want to consider perceptions, written from the late 13th Century onwards, one of the most famous pieces of Welsh literature (Welsh Triads) referred to all of Britain outside of the highlands (Alban) and south eastern England as Cymry, where the South East was Lloegyr. Wales was conquered in 1283 - it is part of the Kingdom of England. There have been several inceptions of state since then too, yet in society, people still think of it as a country. What they don't know of is the Celtic League that promoted self-determination of these areas based upon the false notion that they were a common peoples that English aren't.

Is this still the calibre and level of understanding you expect from people who voted for Brexit?

You can stand down Corporal Jones. I'm a Yorkshireman

 

[CitizenTID]

You can stand down Corporal Jones. I'm a Yorkshireman

You used odd word usage in relation to NI and Scotland before. In any case I hope you'll see that countries are only black and white when it comes to the legal wording and that the home nations are largely a retrospective ideal. Satisfied by my facts now or do you want the hundreds of sources I've studied?

 

[goalmole]

You used odd word usage in relation to NI and Scotland before. In any case I hope you'll see that countries are only black and white when it comes to the legal wording and that the home nations are largely a retrospective ideal. Satisfied by my facts now or do you want the hundreds of sources I've studied?

Go on list all your sources then.
I can tell you want to.
Then I'll list mine.

 

[Vic]

You're falling into the nuances of word use here where they can be applied in different context and still showing a clear misunderstanding of what the UK is. Where are you from out of interest?

Countries are useful terms to apply to the home nations in respect of their history but mainly as, for example, Scotland being a country of land - in the same way someone might say "out in the country" meaning a broad area of land. There are cultural nuances as to why it is referred to as a country in other respects. It is not however a country in the political sense remotely prior to devolution. Despite devolution, it has not been a political country on the international stage for 310 years - which is the proper use of the term that we are discussing here. This is a trouble of language, if there was another accurate word to distinguish between the two senses of "country" it would help explain. I avoided saying NI and Scotland are "part" of our country to avoid the comparison to actual countries politically united such as by the European Union. The EU is just an organisation in any case, despite some within it clearly wanting otherwise. Therefore, yes, NI and Scotland are this country - the UK. England does not exist outside of the regional sense (we are merely discussing political matters and avoiding sporting decisions here). These are facts, the misinterpretation of peoples/regions within the UK, revivalism of old cultures (at the beginning of which was often very inaccurate) and political organisations have led to a reimagined sense of these regions within the UK that are the home nations. I am dealing with legal facts alone here, not perception, which is widely available for your own study.

Unionists are called so because they want to stay united as a territory of the UK. NI and Ireland as a whole has it's own barrel of considerations aside. It is not a union, both English and Scottish parliament passed legislation that dissolved the political regions (Kingdoms at that time, from which modern European countries were conceived) into a single entity. The crowns of each kingdom were already possessed by a single ruler for 104 years, it was a formality that had been resisted until then. After that point there was no political distinction until devolution in Scotland 20 years ago.

To have some German bureaucrat have the audacity to think of involving himself in the intricacies of my country, he definitely doesn't have a fcking clue about, bellend was the most polite term I could use for him on here.

Because if you're not from the UK and especially not from within these isles then I think you have some cheek to lecture me on what my country is, especially since it has one of the most complex histories, and b) chastise people here on their political decisions relating to national sovereignty of powers in their own country.

Here's an easier to grasp example for you. Is Rheged a country? It was annexed by Northumbria in the same way as the union of the crowns of Scotland and England, through inheritance. Northumbria was disputed by Scotland and England but later anyhow the Normans conquered the entire region now known as England. Wales was also conquered by Norman rulers. What about all the other kingdoms that have existed in Britain? Are they all countries?

If you want to consider perceptions, written from the late 13th Century onwards, one of the most famous pieces of Welsh literature (Welsh Triads) referred to all of Britain outside of the highlands (Alban) and south eastern England as Cymry, where the South East was Lloegyr. Wales was conquered in 1283 - it is part of the Kingdom of England. There have been several inceptions of state since then too, yet in society, people still think of it as a country. What they don't know of is the Celtic League (and prior political organisations) that has promoted self-determination of these areas based upon the false notion that they were a common peoples that English aren't.

Is this still the calibre and level of understanding you expect from people who voted for Brexit?

Oh, now I get the distinction between "union" as in "Act of Union" and in "European Union". It's union, Jim, but not as we know it.

 

[CitizenTID]

Go on list all your sources then.

If I had any confidence you're interested in reading them I would PM you some to get you started. But then again you have to study them objectively to an academic standard too.

Well what you just brought to the table were not sourceable facts but comments on political movements that are reflective of the perceptions and opinions of members within society which count for squat. In fact you used them incorrectly in the context anyway.

 

[CitizenTID]

Oh, now I get the distinction between "union" as in "Act of Union" and in "European Union". It's union, Jim, but not as we know it.

You're actually on the money there. The EU is a union of individual parts. The UK is a unified whole, occurring from two previously individual parts. Completely different things.

 

[goalmole]

If I had any confidence you're interested in reading them I would PM you some to get you started. But then again you have to study them objectively to an academic standard too.

Well what you just brought to the table were not sourceable facts but comments on political movements that are reflective of the perceptions and opinions of members within society which count for squat.

If you're going to list them then list them on here so everybody can see them and compare your academic acheivement and mine. I'm sure you are far more academc than I ever could be. You come across as a quite an clever chap.

 

[BobKowalski]

You're actually on the money there. The EU is a union of individual parts. The UK is a unified whole, occurring from two previously individual parts. Completely different things.

Que?

 

[goalmole]

Que?

That's a Spanish word isn't it? You'd better tell him where you're from before you start to question him. I had to. Apparently you're only allowed to argue on the Brexit thread if you're from the UK.