Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 13:48:22 GMT
Might help if our "government" had an agreed position to negotiate from. They don't because the hard right whithin their own party prevents them getting a position through Parliament. The same group, many of whom have been causing issues for decades, that forced Cameron's hand What is your obsession with the 'hard right'? To be honest, there is no such thing as a 'hard right' in the Tory Party! So Johnson and Rees-Mogg have not met and discussed UK politics and Europe with Steve Bannon? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 13:53:24 GMT
What is your obsession with the 'hard right'? To be honest, there is no such thing as a 'hard right' in the Tory Party! So Johnson and Rees-Mogg have not met and discussed UK politics and Europe with Steve Bannon? Give me strength. JRM and Johnson cannot ever be described as 'Hard Right'. You're clutching at straws here. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 14:11:53 GMT
So Johnson and Rees-Mogg have not met and discussed UK politics and Europe with Steve Bannon? Give me strength. JRM and Johnson cannot ever be described as 'Hard Right'. You're clutching at straws here. Did they meet with Steve Bannon? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 14:16:15 GMT
Give me strength. JRM and Johnson cannot ever be described as 'Hard Right'. You're clutching at straws here. Did they meet with Steve Bannon? I have no idea. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Whatever, that doesn't make them 'hard right'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 15:15:15 GMT
Did they meet with Steve Bannon? I have no idea. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Whatever, that doesn't make them 'hard right'. They did. Google Steve Bannon if you don't see the relevance? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 15:18:39 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 15:21:03 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 15:33:14 GMT
Oh for God's sakes! JRM has his picture taken next to a bloke, who, five years later spouts a lot of crap! Are you seriously seriously expecting us to think that this must be 'linked' ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 15:35:53 GMT
C'mon Oldie. You must be better than this. Surely. |
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Ultra on Oct 3, 2018 15:49:16 GMT
*WOW*
One persons view of Borris.
|
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Ultra on Oct 3, 2018 16:11:07 GMT
So, going by your logic, if someone is photographed with a peado say 10 years ago, that automatically makes them a peado? Correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Oct 3, 2018 16:17:53 GMT
So, going by your logic, if someone is photographed with a peado say 10 years ago, that automatically makes them a peado? Correct?
 Nah.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 17:05:38 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 17:18:33 GMT
I give up Oldie. If these links are the basis for your position, then there really isn't much to debate is there? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 17:22:37 GMT
I give up Oldie. If these links are the basis for your position, then there really isn't much to debate is there? Just pointing out what he said Nobby. And then from the bowels of the Tory Party, very recently "The former Conservative minister Damian Green, an ally of Theresa May, said he feared Johnson was “being turned into a martyr by the alt-right”, which would be “a disaster for him and the Conservative party”. He wrote in the Mail on Sunday: “I am particularly concerned by reports that President Trump’s sacked adviser Steve Bannon is forming a Europe-wide far-right campaign group – and has been in touch with Boris. I hope that no Conservative politician, including Boris, is taking advice from him about how the Conservative party should behave.” So, who is making it up? |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,548 
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 3, 2018 21:30:12 GMT
I think the hard border meaning a resumption of the Troubles is a bit misleading (incidentally Quantocks, I very much disagree with your interpretation of events) but it being a totem for those with a different agenda and a focal point for resentment. Wherever a hard border would be it is likely to lead to a quicker plebiscite for Irish unification than mere demographics would and no British Prime Minister would want to be the modern day Lord North. In the 1973 Referendum in Northern Ireland, which asked if NI should merge with the South, 98.9% of all votes cast were to stay as part of the UK. The majority of the North do not want to be part of the South, and we, as a democracy, should do all we can to support and defend those people. Demographics has a higher birth rate amongst the nationalist community so many see it as a matter of time before they become the majority and if this isn't done well even some of the unionists may decide to go with the Republic. People change their minds (just look at our own Europe referenda in 1975 and 2016) and circumstances change now that the South have softened a lot of their social policies. Besides, the 1973 vote was boycotted by nationalsis led by the SDLP and the result is likely to have been closer to 57/43. I agree with your last point though. |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,548
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 3, 2018 21:35:43 GMT
I didn't think the speech was that bad, bearing in mind what happened last year and who the real audience was. The speech wasn't aimed at the likes of us, but the party wings, her tone and comments were aimed at the Rees-Mogg side that want out regardless,the other side that want a Norway style deal or Brexit in all but name and everyone with the comments about how bad Labour (or more specifically Jeremy Corbyn) would be. Back me with a bespoke compromise or get nothing (WTO or a second referendum depending on your point of view) or even worse, lose power. We just cannot have a second referendum. Why is it that the people calling for a second referendum will not abide by the result of the first referendum! What makes the result in the second referendum any different than the first result? It's not democracy, it's bullying. I'm not totally comfortable with a rerun by the back door, but I have said before that this should have been a two stage process, in fact one if the few things which JRM and I would agree on. In the context of my post I was referring to the nuclear option being threatened to reign in the dissenters to Chequers or whichever deal is finally agreed. For Remainers it would be WTO and for Brexiteers it would be another referendum. |
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,548
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 3, 2018 21:38:43 GMT
I didn't think the speech was that bad, bearing in mind what happened last year and who the real audience was. The speech wasn't aimed at the likes of us, but the party wings, her tone and comments were aimed at the Rees-Mogg side that want out regardless,the other side that want a Norway style deal or Brexit in all but name and everyone with the comments about how bad Labour (or more specifically Jeremy Corbyn) would be. Back me with a bespoke compromise or get nothing (WTO or a second referendum depending on your point of view) or even worse, lose power. I agree the speech was aimed at themselves, with a few bits aimed at countering proposals made by Labour. The one that caught my eye (Or ear) was the plan to allow local councils to borrow money against their revenue account to build houses. So 35 years after Thatcher obliterated local democracy and prevented councils from raising their own funds, which led to the collapse of local authority house building and directly to today's housing crisis, they reverse. Jesus. Agreed, shame it didn't happen years ago. Nothing wrong with Right to Buy and my sister benefited from it, but replacement homes should have been built with the money. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Oct 3, 2018 23:07:30 GMT
Back onto the subject of the hard border, and why it is so important.
The economies of NI and the Republic are totally intertwined. Free movement is everywhere. Businesses trade in both countries. People shop in both countries. Tradesmen drive freely between both countries.
To stop all that and to put up a customs border would severely damage the local and perhaps national economies of both. Customs checks, vehicle checks, tariffs, limitations on goods.
The only answer I can see is the one rejected by the Loyalists in NI, which is to push the border out to the Irish Sea, which they see as the first step to a United Ireland.
But the effect on the NI economy of an Irish Sea border would be nothing compared to the hard border between the Republic and NI.
However, with the government being propped up by the DUP at the moment, the logical step to avoid a sticky situation gets ever more sticky as we approach the deadline towards leaving. A government getting into bed with the DUP was never going to be a happy marriage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 9:33:40 GMT
Haha. So i detest murdering terrorists, you don’t. Good on you. I value peace & prosperity. I also understand that if you do not understand history you cannot accurately define the present. But you know, lazy pseudo nationalism is the standard refuge for the insecure Watch you don’t fall off that high horse of yours it’s a long way down. As for understanding history, Croke Park? I read all about that years ago, watched documentaries so understand a tiny bit of the events, so the point you are making is? How about innocent shoppers on mainland Britain being blown to pieces by the IRA? Men, women and children really deserved that didn’t they! |
|
