They are one of our biggest trading partners. It would be a disaster to be trading on WTO rules with them, or anyone. The chlorinated chicken thing is just an example of our new 'lesser' status in terms of power and influence now that we've left the EU, no longer have the clout that comes from being part of that bloc and are desperate for friends. Unfortunately for us, we are acting like a bunch of cunts and friends are going to become harder and harder to find (breaking international law generally isn't a smart move).
@Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese gave you a sensible response to your good points raised - but I will add to it...
There needs to be recognition that the UK has now left the EU and if it is to be able to achieve success as an independent state it needs to be able to manage its own affairs and priorities.
Perpetual subservience to EU policy cannot be accepted - so LPF, ECJ arbitration and other such fundamental constraints must be non-starters.
The ability for the UK to determine its own policies and manage its own implementation of those policies has been badly undermined by the administrations of both Cameron and May.
Cameron's undermining of the UK was less serious because it was done pre-referendum and although he handed over negotiating leverage to the EU in his 'supposed negotiations' in the way he broadcast how bad leaving the EU would be and how he marshalled the POTUS, head of the IMF and a parade of other 'worthies' to try and defeat a Leave outcome - it did not undermine the 'future' of the UK in a post-Brexit world.
May's undermining of the UK - along with the actions of the EU's sycophants at Westminster has resulted in the potential for major and perpetual damage to the UK through tying the UK to the EU's controls - wrapped up in the WA that the EU/Robbins/May produced.
The UK needs to break free of the negotiating leverage that May has handed to the EU - and the potential for a US/UK trade deal at the moment is just part of that leverage.
We have had years of the EU callously making use of the Ireland/N.I. border issue - pulling Varadkar's strings - to leverage that issue to either prevent Brexit or gain more controls in the WA - they would have drank much champagne when May/Robbins fell for the obscenity that was the unfettered backstop. And during this time we had Pelosi and others over from the US to reaffirm their 'commitment to Ireland' and clearly state that a TA will not be agreed if.....
Much is made of the fact that Johnson signed off on May's WA - minus the unfettered backstop - but that WA was indeed the product of years of control by the EU over Robbins/May. Out of the blue - the clouds parted and Johnson was given a stonking majority and 5 years to use it.
I have always said that:
"We will not see movement from the EU unless and until they are faced with the prospect of a viable walk-away option – and the political will to use it”
And it has always been true - which is why some posters try to demean it.
I think that a decision was made to simply lose no more time in trying renegotiations with the EU - they love to string them out for years - and to exit the transition period with or without a deal end 2020 - and a deal could not include the EU having the ability to control and constrain the UK beyond transition. Hence the PD has been thankfully jettisoned and robust action is being signalled to prevent the 'veiled threat of machinations' by the EU to inappropriately exploit the protocol
What will be will be - the EU will either reach a deal with the UK on the basis of our red lines or not - but there is no point wasting more months and years sitting around a table which is what the EU wants to do - ideally until the next election
Johnson's government has 4 years to implement policies that deliver on his manifesto promises to level up in the Midlands and the North - that is how he will be judged in 2024 and the clock is ticking. None of those 4 years can be wasted in more deliberate delay with the EU - and by extension - what will be in the US will be - it looks like the Democrats will win so that would also be years wasted on negotiations on a TA with Ireland again being used as a gambit.
The Remainer focus is all on trade - yes it is important - but the UK needs significant and direct investment in the UK - investment that the EU will seek to stymie because it will impact the significant benefits they get from the current trading position with and their controls over the UK.
I still think a deal can/will be secured - because the EU very badly need one as well - but it must not include continued controls by the EU over the UK.
My mantra has always been correct - but if we end up with no-deal - then better sooner rather than later
