Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Boris.
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 18258

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

asturm wrote:
So he is just very stupid, or is he pretending to be stupid to make his lies palatable? Which of these two options do you prefer in a prime minister? ;)
Setting aside the false premise, the obviously correct answer is neither. Why settle for anything other than all knowing and infallible.
_________________
Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1032
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Muso wrote:
asturm wrote:
Muso wrote:
Is it possible that he thought it was an EU rule? And if so, that doesn't make it a lie, it makes it a false statement. To be a lie it must be known to be false.

He actually went out of his way to bring a specimen on stage. So he is just very stupid, or is he pretending to be stupid to make his lies palatable? Which of these two options do you prefer in a prime minister? ;)


I don't care. I just don't like the use of the term "liar" being applied incorrectly.

Why can't you dislike the term liar being applied incorrectly, and care about the stupidity of world leaders? It's not like those two things are mutually exclusive.

(Not that I think Boris is stupid.)


Because I don't give a toss? My opinion of 99.99% if all politicians is in the toilet.
_________________
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2020 is the year of the Linux Desktop!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7331
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
(Not that I think Boris is stupid.)

Although you could be forgiven thinking that of someone comparing the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland to the one between Camden and Islington.

Muso wrote:
I don't care. I just don't like the use of the term "liar" being applied incorrectly.

In his career he was already sacked twice for lying; does that in your eyes then just make him too stupid to cover up?
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1032
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

asturm wrote:
Muso wrote:
I don't care. I just don't like the use of the term "liar" being applied incorrectly.

In his career he was already sacked twice for lying; does that in your eyes then just make him too stupid to cover up?


I have no idea about that, as I really do not care. All I noticed was that you pointed out that he said something false, not that he had lied. Now, I know that English is not your first language so I just tried to explain the difference between stating a falsehood and lying. If you have actual evidence of him lying (stating a falsehood while knowing it is untrue), you probably should have led with that.

Just my $0.02.
_________________
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2020 is the year of the Linux Desktop!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Name a politician that has never been less than honest
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 1032
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
Name a politician that has never been less than honest


Hillary Clinton :lol:
_________________
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" ~ Dorothy Parker
2020 is the year of the Linux Desktop!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2601

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
Name a politician that has never been less than honest
Obviously Winston Churchill and Dwight Eisenhower. 8)


In all seriousness, Trump and Boris probably come closest. Both of them make incredibly public gaffs and own them. It is very humorous for the media to cling to something then have them say "well, yes I was wrong. So what?" Also how they keep writing about Trump's tweets as he implements his policy agenda. Maybe Boris can use a similar tactic to deliver Brexit? Tweet about how bad Muslim rape gangs are, let the media roast him, and then point out the UK left the EU a week ago while they where whining about his bad words.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7331
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow.
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2601

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, look at the competition....
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
Naib wrote:
Name a politician that has never been less than honest
Obviously Winston Churchill and Dwight Eisenhower. 8)


In all seriousness, Trump and Boris probably come closest. Both of them make incredibly public gaffs and own them. It is very humorous for the media to cling to something then have them say "well, yes I was wrong. So what?" Also how they keep writing about Trump's tweets as he implements his policy agenda. Maybe Boris can use a similar tactic to deliver Brexit? Tweet about how bad Muslim rape gangs are, let the media roast him, and then point out the UK left the EU a week ago while they where whining about his bad words.


To be fair I have been thinking something similar for quite some time. The media and celebs get themselves worked up over a few tweets white trump meticulously unpicks Obama's influence. Every now and again something he actually does gets their attention but most of the time they are having a hissy fit over what he wrote
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:



In all seriousness, Trump and Boris probably come closest. Both of them make incredibly public gaffs and own them. It is very humorous for the media to cling to something then have them say "well, yes I was wrong. So what?"

When did trump say this?

(Although I agree with your larger point.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Today on Sky a Tory minister of Boris' crew declared the Theresa May Brexit deal for its Backstop again as a no-go.

Can some englisch forum user explain to me, a german, why not? You could dismiss the deal two years later, when the Backstop would begin, and then do Brexit with no-Deal.
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
Today on Sky a Tory minister of Boris' crew declared the Theresa May Brexit deal for its Backstop again as a no-go.

Can some englisch forum user explain to me, a german, why not? You could dismiss the deal two years later, when the Backstop would begin, and then do Brexit with no-Deal.

for starters it was rejected by Parliament three times - it was not going to get through parliament, it was dead
Second it could not be dismissed in two years THAT is the problem.

This "deal" is to capture how the UK and EU are to act for the next two years while the real deal is thrashed out ( NOTE: the deal actually captures that the EU are in violation of Art 50 by not having any trade deal in place by the time the exit occurs). So this deal to govern how both act while a new deal is created has the backstop and this backstop basically states that *IF* no deal is reached in two years the UK is to still be bound to the EU and thus the UK cannot just walk away.

If a trade deal was struck in the 2year period then its fine but we are not dealing with happy days, we are dealing with rainy days and legally there was means to keep the UK tied to EU indefinitely with no means to leave - what if the EU never agreed a deal? what if a remain parliament never agreed a deal. While both sides verbally agreed that they would have a deal in 2years, do you believe them (you should never believe politicians) plus while they might have every intent this 1st part has already overrun 2years and still not completed AND this is just liabilities

In short the backstop is there in the event of the 2year negotiation failing ... It is the indefinite tie-in. It doesn't end after two years, if whatever the new deal was and that wasn't accepted the Backstop legally kicks in with all the associated baggage
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/11/the-top-40-horrors-lurking-in-the-small-print-of-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/

Quote:
In summary: The supposed ‘transition period’ could last indefinitely or, more specifically, to an undefined date sometime this century (“up to 31 December 20XX”, Art. 132). So while this Agreement covers what the government is calling Brexit, what we in fact get is: ‘transition’ + extension indefinitely (by however many years we are willing to pay for) + all of those extra years from the ‘plus 8 years’ articles.

Should it end within two years, as May hopes, the UK will still be signed up to clauses keeping us under certain rules (like VAT and ECJ supervision) for a further eight years. Some clauses have, quite literally, a “lifetime” duration (Art.39). If the UK defaults on transition, we go in to the backstop with the Customs Union and, realistically, the single market. We can only leave the transition positively with a deal. But we sign away the money. So the EU has no need to give us a deal, and certainly no incentive to make the one they offered ‘better’ than the backstop. The European Court of Justice remains sovereign, as repeatedly stipulated. Perhaps most damagingly of all, we agree to sign away the rights we would have, under international law, to unilaterally walk away. Again, what follows relates (in most part) for the “transition” period. But the language is consistent with the E.U. imagining that this will be the final deal.

560+ page draft deal document, while the controversial backstop provision has taken most of the criticism, many of the deal's finer points remain deeply suspect.

_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very easy thing first:
Quote:
But we sign away the money. So the EU has no need to give us a deal, and certainly no incentive to make the one they offered ‘better’ than the backstop.
Boris Johnsons havy loaded argument to hold the 40B Euros back is pure nonsense:
That would be regarded as piracy and punished and would cost the UK more on a monthly/quaterly basis
(I am not sure nor interested in exactly the figure)

Now to the real question. If Boris Johnson asks the EU:
Quote:
Now and promptly we are gonna go brexiting with a No-Deal situation,
or
Do we get the Theresa May deal with the extra option for the UK of a No-Deal Brexit in two years time?
(In the Sky interview the new minister only referred to the Backstop as an obstacle. And someone in Brussels is watching british TV and knows chances of Boris to survive the next general elections in the UK. Everybody is interested in postponing again. Isn't everybody?)

I predict the future:
Boris will get his "formal" Brexit. Which he will use in the needed election. But really "on the ground" nothing changes for the people nor economics.
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end


Last edited by ulenrich on Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2601

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That 40B was negotiated under May with certain strings attached. Boris can certainly claim the EU did not live up to their end and refuse to pay. Which is what he should do. The UK has said the deal offered is unacceptable and the EU refuses to negotiate. Right there is grounds to say the UK is willing to work with the process and the EU is acting like a dictatorship.

RE: Trump admitting a mistake? The boarder wall. He campaigned on a solid concrete wall "from sea to shinning sea" and later changed to hardening only select points on the boarder with a barrier, not a wall, since the department of homeland security said that would work better for them. He is quite open that he changed his position when new information came in and laughs at anyone who suggests the shift is a problem.

EDIT: Like I said before, comparing Trump and Boris to politicians in general is a very low bar to set.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
That 40B was negotiated under May
was in nature purely the kind of an accounting the balance. As british officials witnessed the correctness of the sum in that process every international court will get this self proving evidence. And Europe will not deal anything with the British who don't pay their bill. No chance, no opportunity but a Boris Johnson nothing burger we all have heard many before. His older sister just said about his lying: "But he is polite to everyone"
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end


Last edited by ulenrich on Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2601

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
I predict the future:
Boris will get his "formal" Brexit. Which he will use in the needed election. But really "on the ground" nothing changes for the people nor economics.
Probably worth pointing out here this is a legal impossibility. October 31st the UK leaves. There can be no general election, etc. etc. in that time frame so Boris is the brexit pm and he won't back down from this.

Just prior to the departure you are likely to see a last minute agreement on the movement of persons, aircraft, boats, etc. Ireland will probably get a hard boarder constructed and maned by the UK army in a few hours until a more permanent one can be established as required by international norms. The EU will have to reciprocate.

Brussels doesn't hold the cards here. The UK does. And since Trump is a brexiteer the US will support the UK through the process with trade agreements and probably more direct aid if needed. I'm specifically thinking of things like medicines currently imported from the EU. Love him or hate him Trump is involved here.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
Very easy thing first:
Quote:
But we sign away the money. So the EU has no need to give us a deal, and certainly no incentive to make the one they offered ‘better’ than the backstop.
Boris Johnsons havy loaded argument to hold the 40B Euros back is pure nonsense:
That would be regarded as piracy and punished and would cost the UK more on a monthly/quaterly basis
(I am not sure nor interested in exactly the figure)

Now to the real question. If Boris Johnson asks the EU:
Quote:
Now and promptly we are gonna go brexiting with a No-Deal situation,
or
Do we get the Theresa May deal with the extra option for the UK of a No-Deal Brexit in two years time?
(In the Sky interview the new minister only referred to the Backstop as an obstacle. And someone in Brussels is watching british TV and knows chances of Boris to survive the next general elections in the UK. Everybody is interested in postponing again. Isn't everybody?)

I predict the future:
Boris will get his "formal" Brexit. Which he will use in the needed election. But really "on the ground" nothing changes for the people nor economics.


why are you moving the goalposts? you asked why we couldn't just dismiss the deal in two years when the backstop would begin and then do brexit with no deal...

I explained *IF* the deal was accepted as it is (with the backstop) we could not legally just revoke the existence of the backstop. Likewise for the backstop to kick in the present deal would have expired because the conditions of the deal were not met, that is to run for 2 years for a deal to be formed.

Why do you now discuss what Boris is saying about the legal commitments?. The divorce bill outlines the details of what needs to be paid and already 15% has been paid. It however doesn't really stipulate by when...
As the EU stated... Nothings agreed until all is agreed. The only thing that is formally agreed is the manner in calculating what is owed. What hasn't been agreed is future trade deal which is outlined in article 50
Quote:
The EU admits, in Art. 184, that it is in breach of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which oblige it to “conclude an agreement” of the terms of UK leaving the EU. We must now, it seems, “negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship.” And if the EU does not? We settle down to this Agreement.


So why does the UK have to pay immediately? Likewise putting that on the table and equally actually doing that are two very different things...
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
Just prior to the departure you are likely to see a last minute agreement on the movement of persons, aircraft, boats, etc. Ireland will probably get a hard boarder constructed and maned by the UK army in a few hours until a more permanent one can be established as required by international norms. The EU will have to reciprocate.
The UK has ratified the international "Good Friday Agreement". This is so severe that it was a war starting point in previous times. This time around it would produce sanctions just like a Napoleonic blockade and certainly bombs in british towns.
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Just prior to the departure you are likely to see a last minute agreement on the movement of persons, aircraft, boats, etc. Ireland will probably get a hard boarder constructed and maned by the UK army in a few hours until a more permanent one can be established as required by international norms. The EU will have to reciprocate.
The UK has ratified the international "Good Friday Agreement". This is so severe that it was a war starting point in previous times. This time around it would produce sanctions just like a Napoleonic blockade and certainly bombs in british towns.
the IRA has continued to be active since the good friday agreement... Ireland has been in violation of the good friday agreement since then.
To associate brexit with activity from the IRA is a slippery slope analogy. Just like when French fishing boats attacked legally fishing british boats, it was stated this is due to Brexit YET the french have been doing this for decades.
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king


Last edited by Naib on Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2601

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
That 40B was negotiated under May
was in nature purely the kind of an accounting the balance. As british officials witnessed the correctness of the sum in that process every international court will get this self proving evidence. And Europe will not deal anything with the British who don't pay their bill. No chance, no opportunity but a Boris Johnson nothing burger we all have heard many before. His older sister just said about his lying: "But he is polite to everyone"
Ulenrich, there is no such thing as an international court as you imagine it. They exist purely as a forum and are routinely ignored because they have no power. Also, there are none with any authority over such a matter anyway. The EU can kick and scream but after brexit the UK is not bound by any legal structures to the EU. So yes, Boris can easily claim that agreement is void because the EU abandoned on their side of the agreement.

International law does not exist. It is merely a buzz word and is written and discarded with impunity when convent.

The EU has no choice but to deal with the UK. Like it or not. The agreement between May and the EU is dead. A new one has to be negotiated and the EU refusing to do so is beyond childish. Also, note that Boris said paying the sum is contingent on the EU doing just that. Why would the UK pay a sum of money that was promised assuming a trade deal if none was delivered?
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
why are you moving the goalposts? you asked why we couldn't just dismiss the deal in two years when the backstop would begin and then do brexit with no deal...

I explained *IF* the deal was accepted as it is (with the backstop) we could not legally just revoke the existence of the backstop. Likewise for the backstop to kick in the present deal would have expired because the conditions of the deal were not met, that is to run for 2 years for a deal to be formed.
Yes, probably I was "moving the goalposts". Instead I should have acknowledged you having the deeper insight in the details !

I was moving by thinking:
Who the heck of both parties would like the chaotic No-Deal Brexit now. I come to the conclusion that both parties will agree on postponing: Instead frightening the Brits with the Backstop, allow them to brexit in Theresa May style with a No-Deal Brexit opprtunity in two years time.
Boris Johnson rightly assumes the EU will re-negotiate this in the coming weeks. Because in effect it is a post-poning of chaos in a simple manner. For both sides chances are to manage things the next two years. And Boris formaly having his Brexit on time.

PS: @The Doctor - not so fast please!
Don't I acknowledge in parts your arguments with this post?
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
ulenrich wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Just prior to the departure you are likely to see a last minute agreement on the movement of persons, aircraft, boats, etc. Ireland will probably get a hard boarder constructed and maned by the UK army in a few hours until a more permanent one can be established as required by international norms. The EU will have to reciprocate.
The UK has ratified the international "Good Friday Agreement". This is so severe that it was a war starting point in previous times. This time around it would produce sanctions just like a Napoleonic blockade and certainly bombs in british towns.
the IRA has continued to be active since the good friday agreement... Ireland has been in violation of the good friday agreement since then.
....
What do you refer to when saying "ireland"
- Republic of Ireland
- North Ireland
- The Unionists
- IRA

Not so into it (the Ireland issues) I would characterize the agreement as kind of a process in which every now and then there are "violations to be processed", wasn't that anticipated with the agreement?
But nobody of these parties nor the UK has canceled the agreement yet. But when the UK establishes an hard border in Ireland they violate international law ratified by themself some 20 years ago!

And by the way the agreement is pretty unjust in case of a Brexit: Every english man can settle in Northern Ireland and get his passport of the Republic of Ireland to enter the EU.
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1405

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
ulenrich wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
That 40B was negotiated under May
was in nature purely the kind of an accounting the balance. As british officials witnessed the correctness of the sum in that process every international court will get this self proving evidence. And Europe will not deal anything with the British who don't pay their bill. No chance, no opportunity but a Boris Johnson nothing burger we all have heard many before. His older sister just said about his lying: "But he is polite to everyone"
Ulenrich, there is no such thing as an international court as you imagine it. They exist purely as a forum and are routinely ignored because they have no power. Also, there are none with any authority over such a matter anyway. The EU can kick and scream but after brexit the UK is not bound by any legal structures to the EU. So yes, Boris can easily claim that agreement is void because the EU abandoned on their side of the agreement.

International law does not exist. It is merely a buzz word and is written and discarded with impunity when convent.

That all may be. But instead kick and screaming the EU can act like a dictator. When dealing with african countries they did: Parts of the farming culture is kicked off there. And the EU has no interest in dealing with a third country not paying the bill. That sum of 40 billons is a nothing burger in terms of EU economics over a longer than a week period.

We all know how badly the british public with numbers, think of the enormous 160 millon pounds to argue the Brexit referendum. Next Boris will promise to his people: "If you agree on a No-Deal Brexit also there will be a loss in BIP of 33% for a shor year, I promise you a win the next year in BiP of up to 50% ! Think of the win for all this will be !" For the british voters to give the correct answer they first have to study the Gentoo Forum Thread Shortest IQ
_________________
the thread ain't easily find an end


Last edited by ulenrich on Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5759
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ulenrich wrote:
Naib wrote:
why are you moving the goalposts? you asked why we couldn't just dismiss the deal in two years when the backstop would begin and then do brexit with no deal...

I explained *IF* the deal was accepted as it is (with the backstop) we could not legally just revoke the existence of the backstop. Likewise for the backstop to kick in the present deal would have expired because the conditions of the deal were not met, that is to run for 2 years for a deal to be formed.
Yes, probably I was "moving the goalposts". Instead I should have acknowledged you having the deeper insight in the details !

I was moving by thinking:
Who the heck of both parties would like the chaotic No-Deal Brexit now. I come to the conclusion that both parties will agree on postponing: Instead frightening the Brits with the Backstop, allow them to brexit in Theresa May style with a No-Deal Brexit opprtunity in two years time.
Boris Johnson rightly assumes the EU will re-negotiate this in the coming weeks. Because in effect it is a post-poning of chaos in a simple manner. For both sides chances are to manage things the next two years. And Boris formaly having his Brexit on time.

PS: @The Doctor - not so fast please!
Don't I acknowledge in parts your arguments with this post?

You are forgetting one thing and that is politicians are bottomfeeders... they will do what they need todo to stay in their job and that is a job governed by the electorate.

Overwhelmingly the country has rallied behind leaving, NOT remaining... London is hard remain, scotland is actually borderline ( Louis Stedman-Bryce a Brexit Party MEP won scotlands seat so let that sink in...). The Brexit party did annoyingly well. Labour is hemorrhaging support and so is the tories.. The Tories are in power and if the point of politicians are to stay in their job they need to do something to keep their seat.

If they postpone, as you believe they will, the Tories will be destroyed at the next election
If they revolk Art50, the tories will be destroyed at the next election

*IF* they stand a chance of any form of future existence as a party they need to deliver by Halloween. *THIS* is why it has to happen whether it is with a trade deal (no time) , an interim deal (may's deal but no backstop) or no deal. The fallout is unknown and that is why the usual suspect's have been all doom and gloom with PROJECT FEAR because it is unknown... The UK could rise up, the UK could sink into oblivion, like could carry on as normal... Investors HATE unknowns hence their push for the status quo.

The EU does not want the UK to leave because
1) it needs the ever rising inward £££ ( UK is the 2nd largest NET and this years contribution actually rose due to UK economy doing soo much better than expected DESPITE BREXIT)
2) the lesser economies cannot afford to increase their payments, especially as the EU is unable to actually scale back... EVEN at the height of austerity the EU cannot cut spending. Cameron came back lording it up that he convinced the EU not to increase when all counties in deep recession due to the financial crisis... It should have gone down IF every single member had local financial problems
3) Germany is in a technical recession and is about to declare a formal recession... Suddenly losing easy access to its biggest export market will hurt in the present climate of recession, US tarrifs, BREXIT
4) The EU is about to be hit with a MASSIVE US tarriff due to the illegal state aid of Airbus. The formal WTO ruling is due this september and will green light across the board multi-billion $ worth of tarrifs so the US can claw back the advantage EU gov'n gave Airbus
5) The EU does not want other countries to leave. If it is shown that there is life outside the EU, who would want to stay?

Italy has NEVER seen growth since it joined the Euro. UK has never seen an increase in productivity since it joined the EEC. France has never balanced its books since it joined the Euro.

Right now there is billions in state funds being moved into German banks because when the next crisis hits... be it because of Brexit, the Tarrifs, Turkey, Italy AND Germany is suddenly on the like for multi-trillion euros worth of debt, they will suddenly pull out and reprint the Deutschmark. The money held in the German banks will suddenly get a massive increase in value
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 2 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum