British Politics

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

Your tried and tested,

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/brexit-vote-leaves-uk-on-brink-of-recession-economists-say

Why are you now linking to another article?  This has nothing to do with your claim that the original article was evidence for a guy being wrong. You really aren't very good at this.

[Dazey]

So it's okay to leave with no deal and kill of our manufacturing and agriculture industries because we can strike the easiest trade deal ever with the USA.

Except we can't because US congress has just said they will block any trade deal as a result of a Brexit that threatens the good Friday agreement. 

Now who could have seen that coming? Hint. Anybody. 

Any future US-UK trade deal would almost certainly be blocked by the US Congress if Brexit affects the Irish border and jeopardises peace in Northern Ireland, congressional leaders and diplomats have warned.

Boris Johnson has presented a trade deal with the US as a way of offsetting the economic costs of leaving the EU, and Donald Trump promised the two countries could strike “a very substantial trade agreement” that would increase trade “four or five times”.

Trump, however, would not be able to push an agreement through a hostile Congress, where there would be strong bipartisan opposition to any UK trade deal in the event of a threat to the 1998 Good Friday agreement, and to the open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/31/brexit-mess-with-good-friday-and-well-block-uk-trade-deal-us-politicians-warn

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Why are you now linking to another article?  This has nothing to do with your claim that the original article was evidence for a guy being wrong. You really aren't very good at this.

You love these semantic word play arguments. They are tedious beyond belief and rather oblique to the matters at hand. It would be better if you educated yourself on the EU, the UK and Brexit and then when you require your customary ''morning argument'', religious bashing having lapsed, we could have a proper discussion.

Edited August 3, 2019 by DieselDaisy

[DieselDaisy]

2 minutes ago, Dazey said:

So it's okay to leave with no deal and kill of our manufacturing and agriculture industries because we can strike the easiest trade deal ever with the USA.

Except we can't because US congress has just said they will block any trade deal as a result of a Brexit that threatens the good Friday agreement. 

Now who could have seen that coming? Hint. Anybody. 

 

 

Good Friday Agreement?

There is a quasi-case to made that the EU are breaking international law by insisting on the Irish Backstop. Theresa May didn't invoke this so it hasn't been tested.

[Dazey]

7 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Good Friday Agreement?

There is a quasi-case to made that the EU are breaking international law by insisting on the Irish Backstop. Theresa May didn't invoke this so it hasn't been tested.

The Irish backstop was an EU concession requested by the UK. The EU aren't breaking anything because they're not the ones looking to leave. If the UK leaves without a deal the backstop doesn't apply so I don't see where you're going with that line of argument.

A no deal Brexit puts a hard border and customs checks in Ireland. This violates a fundamental principle of the Good Friday Agreement.  

Edited August 3, 2019 by Dazey

[SoulMonster]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

You love these semantic word play arguments.

It is not semantics to point out that an article you presented doesn't prove your point at all. It isn't semantics to point out that an article which you claim is evidence for a guy being wrong, isn't evidence for that at all. It isn't semantics to point out you are wrong.

But more importantly, it isn't semantics to demonstrate that you can't be trusted in your argumentation, that you either through incompetence or through deliberate misrepresentation would claim an article supports your conclusion when it simply doesn't.

And it is interesting to see that when I point out you are wrong, you respond by trying to muddy the waters, claim I can't read and that I am stupid, or shift the goalposts. What worries me is that someone who claim to have an academic background would be so dishonest in their argumentation.

I think it is important that people know this, and keep it in mind when reading your posts.

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Dazey said:

The Irish backstop was an EU concession requested by the UK. The EU aren't breaking anything because they're not the ones looking to leave. If the UK leaves without a deal the backstop doesn't apply so I don't see where you're going with that line of argument.

You misunderstand me. There is a half way decent case that the Backstop contravenes the Vienna Accord on the Law of Treaties (23rd May, 1969). 27/28 EU member states are parties (France, the exception) and most countries worldwide are signatories. It stipulates that a country can not include a clause prohibited by another country; considering the Backstop would keep Northern Ireland in the customs union it would contravene both the Government of Ireland Act (1920) and the Anglo-Irish Treaty (1921) as it would create a severance between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

[Dazey]

5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You misunderstand me. There is a half way decent case that the Backstop contravenes the Vienna Accord on the Law of Treaties (23rd May, 1969). 27/28 EU member states are parties (France, the exception) and most countries worldwide are signatories. It stipulates that a country can not include a clause prohibited by another country; considering the Backstop would keep Northern Ireland in the customs union it would contravene both the Government of Ireland Act (1920) and the Anglo-Irish Treaty (1921) as it would create a severance between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

But surely this is irrelevant as the agreement would be entered into voluntarily by the UK and if they chose to object they have the option to either leave with no deal or remain. 

Also Northern Ireland voted to remain so I don't think they'd be that bothered about severing themselves from GB at this point.

Edited August 3, 2019 by Dazey

[DieselDaisy]

8 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

It is not semantics to point out that an article you presented doesn't prove your point at all. It isn't semantics to point out that an article which you claim is evidence for a guy being wrong, isn't evidence for that at all. It isn't semantics to point out you are wrong.

But more importantly, it isn't semantics to demonstrate that you can't be trusted in your argumentation, that you either through incompetence or through deliberate misrepresentation would claim an article supports your conclusion when it simply doesn't.

And it is interesting to see that when I point out you are wrong, you respond by trying to muddy the waters, claim I can't read and that I am stupid, or shift the goalposts. What worries me is that someone who claim to have an academic background would be so dishonest in their argumentation.

I think it is important that people know this, and keep it in mind when reading your posts.

Rich considering you haven't apologised to me for the lies you fabricated pertaining to migration and multiculturalism. 

[SoulMonster]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Rich considering you haven't apologised to me for the lies you fabricated pertaining to migration and multiculturalism. 

Huh? Are you talking about my suggestion that you are not a fan of multiculturalism which you tried to counter by, and not by simply saying you are, but by stating you speak Japanese and like foreign food? Yeah, I think the jury is still out on that one 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Dazey said:

But surely this is irrelevant as the agreement would be entered into voluntarily by the UK and if they chose to object they have the option to either leave with no deal or remain. 

No. It would basically be against international law for the EU to even insist on a Backstop in the first place if the UK successfully appealed to the VCLT. VCLT incidentally is a sort of arbitrator between states, ensuing fair dealings on treaties. 

There are actually problems with it but these concern the nature of the EU. 27/28 member states are parties of the Vienna Convention. The EU, so it claims, isn't a state and isn't itself a party. So it would contravene the 27 individual states bilaterally.

As I said, ''it is a half way decent case''. Nobody has invoked it (yet) so it hasn't been tested. 

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Huh? Are you talking about my suggestion that you are not a fan of multiculturalism which you tried to counter by, and not by simply saying you are, but by stating you speak Japanese and like foreign food? Yeah, I think the jury is still out on that one 

Again. You are lying. I offered you a multifaceted reply as to why I am a participant of multiculturalism.

[DieselDaisy]

Anyway, I'll leave you croissant munchers for a nice game of thoroughly English cricket. 

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

I offered you a multifaceted reply as to why I am a participant of multiculturalism.

By living in a multicultural society we are all participants of multiculturalism, aren't we? The claim was that you were opposed to it, more specifically opposed to cultural dilution as a result of substantial immigration.

[Padme]

The UK Parliament could turn Brexit into a thriller. If Tories keep losing special elections

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/02/boris-johnson-warned-he-could-lose-control-of-parliament

[SoulMonster]

What? Not only is Brexit expected to hurt the UK economy, it fucks up with Norway's economy, too!

Source: https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/estimating-the-impact-of-brexit-on-european-countries-and-regions/

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by SoulMonster

[Len Cnut]

30 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

What? Not only is Brexit expected to hurt the UK economy, it fucks up with Norway's economy, too!

 

Source: https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/estimating-the-impact-of-brexit-on-european-countries-and-regions/

 

ahaha, wankerrrrrr

[SoulMonster]

13 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

ahaha, wankerrrrrr

Now I need to get involved in this! 

[Dazey]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

Now I need to get involved in this! 

@SoulMonster ‘s attitude to Brexit.  

 

[Len Cnut]

19 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Now I need to get involved in this! 

The amount of work you've done chewing it over with Dies' its only right that it have some bearing for you, it'd be awful for all that exertion be to over something that has nothing to do with you

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

The amount of work you've done chewing it over with Dies' its only right that it have some bearing for you, it'd be awful for all that exertion be to over something that has nothing to do with you

Shit, I did this to myself.

[Dazey]

10 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Shit, I did this to myself.

When are you in Manchester next fuckface?  

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Dazey said:

When are you in Manchester next fuckface?  

Don't know, have to ask my brother what games we got tickets for. I will let you know before I come.

[EvanG]

Jesus christ, -3,162 for my country? You brits better buy us dinner first before you fuck us that hard...

[bucketfoot]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

What? Not only is Brexit expected to hurt the UK economy, it fucks up with Norway's economy, too!

Source: https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/estimating-the-impact-of-brexit-on-european-countries-and-regions/

 

Every cloud has a silver lining, as they say.

 

[DieselDaisy]

7 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

By living in a multicultural society we are all participants of multiculturalism, aren't we? The claim was that you were opposed to it, more specifically opposed to cultural dilution as a result of substantial immigration.

''Your lie'' you mean.