Comments by "Taint ABird" (@taintabird23) on "DW News"
channel.
-
71
-
22
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ Abominable Snowman: Brexit is a game changer. The UK is a odd political entity, but there has been no demos there in recent years - devolution has shown us the way the wind is blowing.
The Scots have a well formed sense of national identity and have none of the issues the English have with the EU. The final deal with the EU will set the tone of the Scottish response. It seems to me that when the time is right the Scots will leave the UK and join the EU, as the idea that the Scots cannot have what they want because there are more English voters will prove to be untenable in the long term. Scotland is a nation.
Northern Ireland is unlike the rest of the UK and its nationalist population is now close to be being a majority. 56% of people in NI voted to remain because they understand the social, economic and political consequences on the island of Ireland as a whole - not because they want a united Ireland. While Brexit is incredibly divisive in NI, once the subsidies stop rolling in and the full economic impact becomes obvious it is likely that unity will become attractive.
Wales should be naturally pro-EU, but its sense of nationalism is less developed that in Scotland. With a large number of English retirees living in Wales, one has to wonder how solid the Welsh vote to leave is. Interestingly, the Welsh speakers tended to vote to remain - they seem to feel their culture is secure in the EU. Again, once the subsidies to the Hill farmers, and the passing trade of Irish trucks cease, we will see how much commitment there is to following the English in the long term.
And who is to say the English will not be the first to seek independence from the UK?
The break up of the UK is inevitable, its just a matter of time.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@markaxworthy2508 It is covered by the GFA, it is the whole point of one of the strands of the relationships outlined in it. One of the roles of Dublin is to use its position to represent the best interests of Irish nationalists with London. Unionists would not trust Dublin to represent their interests with London, and why would they? They view the Irish as the cause of all their problems through existing. See the strand that deals with Dublin -London relationships (east-west I think it is called in the agreement). I think it is strand 3.
It is difficult to see how how Dublin and Brussels could have saved the DUP from themselves when they explicitly sought the hardest of hard Brexits, a view that was not in keeping with the majority - NI voted to remain after all. Remember, the DUP did not support the backstop, which would have avoided all of this nonsense. They never supported the GFA either, but its the agreement that is saving them from being abandoned by London.
I guarantee you Dublin did not 'forget' the unionists. We watched them, awestruck, as they continued to dig a deeper hole for themselves and increased their hostility towards Dublin for having the cheek to defend the open border in Ireland. They provided confidence and supply to the May government and enjoyed their influence, thumbing their nose at civic nationalists. Their strategy was to get that border hardened at a time when nationalists were at the cusp of becoming a majority, it didn't cost them a thought. It was a major strategic error and now the DUP is on its last legs, by the look of it, because it all backfired when Boris lied to them.
There is nothing wrong with the Protocol in terms of the Act of Union, the British courts have told us that. The problem is Brexit and the decision to leave the Single Market and Customs Union. It means in NI there has to be a loser and that makes it incompatible the constructive ambiguity of the GFA. Tories are too thick to know about stuff like that, but the DUP knew. Some moderate unionist voted to remain because of it.
One of the characteristics of Brexit, or at least its supporters, is that the problems it throws up are always for somebody else to solve. The problem with it is that others who had nothing to do with it are required to sacrifice their best interests in order for it to work smoothly. Either the EU sacrifices its Single Market or Ireland leaves it. Nobody in Ireland or the EU voted for that. It won't happen.
'The newly introduced fly in the ointment was the EU's requirement to protect its internal market, which required border checks regardless of the Agreement.'
You cannot have access to the Single Market and have regulatory divergence at the same time. World trade is more about aligning regulations than removing tariffs these days. On of the fundamentals of world trade is the requirement of checks with third countries. This was not 'newly' introduced, Brexiters in their pompous arrogance believed they could have their cake and eat it. They engage in whinging victimhood when they discover they can't have their cake and eat it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
'you have to understand most nationalist dont want to be part of a banana republic like the irish republic :)'
I don't agree that Ireland is a banana republic, but I was assuming that was a given that any United Ireland would be a new, agreed one: new flag, anthem, perhaps new institutions, new constitutional arrangements and a new way of doing things. Equally, people in NI would have to learn to work increasingly in the private sector - especially as Brexit England will in all likelihood seek ways of reducing its taxpayers money going to the periphery of the UK. They will have to learn the practice of 'normal politics' which exists in the Republic, with none of the sectarian bullshit. Southerners would have to get used to the possibility of Unionists frequently holding the balance of power. Who knows...
However, your argument is based on the premise that there are not external factors that will change things - in other words, everything will stay the same. I contend that there are external factors which will begin to become apparent only after Brexit that will sooner or later result in a United Ireland: I suspect these changes will be economic, political and/or constitutional.
We'll see, I suppose.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
flip inheck 'It is a historical fact that Ireland (Free State) left the UK creating the partition, your ignorance of historical fact is obvious'
You owe Bush Ranger and apology.
Partition took place on 3 May 1921 under the Government of Ireland Act 1920. The smaller of the two, Northern Ireland, was duly created with a devolved administration and forms part of the United Kingdom today, but the larger one, intended as a home rule jurisdiction to be known as Southern Ireland, failed to gain acceptance. The territory instead became independent and is now a sovereign state also named Ireland and additionally described as the Republic of Ireland.
The Act of 1920 was intended to create two self-governing territories within Ireland, with both remaining within the United Kingdom. It also contained provisions for co-operation between the two territories and for the eventual reunification of Ireland. However, in 1922, following the War of Independence (1919–1921) and the Anglo-Irish Treaty, the southern and western part became the Irish Free State, while Northern Ireland exercised its option to remain in the United Kingdom.
Therefore, partition occurred before the creation of the Irish Free State. Incidentally, Irish nationalists were not consulted on partition or the Government of Ireland Act, 1920. The British government only consulted Ulster Unionists who took the opportunity to abandon their brethren in Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan in order to ensure a larger Protestant majority in their truncated province.
2
-
flip inheck So now you claim partition never happened until 1937? Odd that, the DUP are already talking about commemorating the centenary of the creation of Northern Ireland later this year...
Contrary to your claim, Ireland left the United Kingdom following the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921, becoming the Irish Free State. Partitioned in 1920, the Boundary Commission cemented the border in 1925. In 1923, the Irish Free State joined the League of Nations, and with the adoption of the 1937 Constitution following a plebiscite, the name of the state changed to Eire and it elected a Head of State. In 1949 the state became Ireland, left the Commonwealth and declared itself the Republic it was in all but name.
Contrary to your other claim, Ireland was universally recognised as an independent country, with any doubts being removed following the 1938 Anglo-Irish Agreement which saw the removal of the three RN bases. Irish independence and neutrality was recognised during WW2 when the UK and the rest of the Commonwealth declared war on Germany.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ P S
Who is going to erect a hard border.
Both Ireland and UK will have to erect a hard border.
Ireland will erect a hard border to protect the Single Market, the UK will be required to deploy checks for WTO purposes.
Another hard border will be erected by the UKs denial of Irish identity and the EU rights of Irish citizens in NI in contravention of Article 1 (vi) of the Belfast Agreement. The UK has provided no solutions to this problem either. Dissident IRA have already set off a bomb in County Fermanagh this week (Fermanagh is on the border) and so armed security will in due course be returning to the border.
I told you that there is a diminishing UK demos - what part of that do you not understand?. Most Leave voters are English and identified as such in the 2011 census, or as English first and British second. There is a direct co-relation between the pattern of leave voters and the expression of English identity in the 2011 Census. Brexiters don’t care about the UK, and we know from recent polls of members of the Tory party that they want Brexit more that they want to maintain the United Kingdom. The only reason the backstop is an issue is because the Tories are stuck depending on the DUP to keep Corbyn out of power. Brexit is a product of an English identity crisis and a Tory party at war with itself. Both the Scots and Northern Irish voted to remain and the fact that they are leaving is indicative of a democratic deficit in a union that is no longer fit for purpose. Therefore, your comment, is disingenuous.
Texas is not at all like NI, it is true, but neither is any other part of the UK for that matter. NI can vote to leave the UK at any time and its citizens are entitled to plural identities. The citizens of say, Somerset, do not have this right and cannot claim an identity that is Irish, British, both or neither.
You have never read the Belfast Agreement, and neither have your Brexiter leaders. The EU is mentioned in relation to the development of cross border relationships, their funding etc, in relation to Strand Two. These cross border relationship (Agriculture, Education, Transport, Environment, Waterways, Social Welfare, Tourism, Inland Fisheries, Aquaculture, Health and Urban development) will be disrupted or halted as the UK will be outside the EU. This is significant for the island of Ireland.
The people of NI did not vote for this.
While Northern Ireland remains part of the UK, the BA states that no changes to status of NI can be carried out unless the people NI vote for it. NI nationalists did not vote to lose their EU rights that come with their Irish identity which they are permitted to have under the Belfast Agreement.
So, your argument is baseless and pointless.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ Charlie
No it is not.
Some Scots hate the English, who utterly dominate them. Who else do they hate? Nobody. Irish and English friends in Scotland have told me stories about the hostility some Scots have for the English, and both have found it shocking. It is not something you would ever see in Ireland, not since it took its place among the nations of the world, although some English I find on this media insist I that I hate them because the are English - or more accurately, because I am Irish.
The English also insist on speaking on behalf of the various Celtic nations, claim to know what is best for them - your statement that the Scots 'wrapping themselves up in an EU blanket won't make them feel any better' indicates that tradition is still alive in you. In my opinion, it also points to your insecurity - the English still need the Celtic nations in order to feel secure in their identity.
This will change over time. English nationalism is still in at nascent stage, and it is relatively incoherent. It make sense to me that you should be confident as the world is full of Englishness: football, rugby, cricket, the English language, Common law etc. English culture is everywhere and is easily identifiable, a product of an imperialism that was a vehicle for English nationalism for hundreds of years. And yet Brexiters still feel that the EU threatens their identity. This is because the post-Imperial English are still trying to find their place in the world.
Irish identity and culture has thrived and its nationalism has matured since joining the EU, in a large measure because it is not dominated by England to the same extend anymore. Irish people are also more confident than they used to be, as we have an equal voice in the EU, unlike the experience of the Union Ireland left in 1922. In short, membership of the EU has done more for Irish identity than independent isolation did previously. The Scots understand this, and the English fear it.
This brings me back to a point I've made before. The real problem the English have with the EU is the equality that it offers. The English don't feel equal to anyone, they feel they are exceptional because of what they achieved in the past and this is a reliable indicator of can be achieved in the future. They want exceptions to be made for them as they are particularly special. You can see it clearly in the Brexit 'negotiation strategy' of the UK government, UKIP and the like.
You are right, Brexit is the least of the EUs problems, and I think that overlooking that has been a strategic error of the exit strategy. 'They need us more than we need them' has proven to be an unreliable hook to hang the Brexit strategy on.
British Eurosceptics have been predicting the end of the EU since they joined in 1973. It won't happen, it will merely continue to evolve.
Can the same be said for the UK? That remains to be seen.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gary637 'How would everyday Irish people be affected by a customs post in France?'
1) Because the Irish understand that it would mean they would have to leave the Single Market. This is not good for the Irish economy. Why should the Irish pay the price for Brexit? It was not an Irish idea. When the Irish government put this to the other EU member states and to the US State Department, the White House and not to mention the Irish Caucus on Capitol Hill, they fully understood.
2) This would bring the Republic of Ireland back inside the UK sphere,. Ireland has always suffered economically and politically in that unequal relationship.
'The fact is that, Ireland is signed up to the peace agreement. If they want to maintain the fundamental principle of consent for both sides of the agreement and respect the wishes of the people of NI to remain in the UK, then, they too will have to make small sacrifrices.'
Here is another fact - consent works both ways. There is no majority in the Republic or Northern Ireland in support for Brexit. The DUP tried to put a hard border on the island of Ireland, assuming along with the ERG that the EU would throw Ireland under the bus and 'make the Irish put a border in Ireland'. It backfired. Why should the Irish people pay a price of any kind because of vote on the other island?
It is a fact also that Ireland signed up for a peace agreement, but it is the English voter that is changing the status quo, without a plan and with absolutely no mention of NI in what passed for pre-referendum debate in your country. Of the 17.4 million votes for Brexit, 15.1 million of them were cast in England.
Northern Ireland remains in the UK despite Brexit. The idea that NI has left the UK or is in any way diminished in its membership of the UK is a ridiculous notion that exists only in the imaginations of unionists. 'The people of NI' has traditionally been a term used by Unionists to refer to themselves. It is about time people remembered there is another community in NI also which never gave its consent to Brexit, but for which there is no democratic account in the archaic democracy that is allowed to pertain in the UK.
Ireland has broken no agreement, nor has is it responsible for any change in the status quo in NI agreed in 1998. That's all on people like you. Ireland will make no sacrifices Brexit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrpath99 The EU is nothing more than a collection of laws, regulations and treaties. This allows for the smooth running of the EU, though is it up to member states to make the most of laws, regulations and treaties in order to increase the prosperity of the citizens of member states. Member states tend to use the EU as a scape goat for national shortcomings, with the UK and Italy being most guilty in this regard.
The EU was always intended as more than just a trading bloc. Everybody knows this, though the English claim they did not. However, the possibility of the USE ever coming into being is highly unlikely now. Support for the concept has diminished, particularly in the founding states of the Netherlands and Italy. The idea that you could bring 27 different states with their different agendas, economies and aspirations together into one federal unit seems more and more unlikely over the last 10 years. A multi-speed Europe is the most likely outcome now.
The Single Market is the jewel in the crown of the European Union, something Brexiters do not understand. Maintaining that market is the greatest source of prosperity for EU citizens, while the bloc itself will continue to serve as a bulwark against the predatory inclinations of the US, China and, dare I say, it the UK for as long as it lasts, in the century ahead. The bloc will not break up because it runs against the interests of all member states, and it will continue to evolve into the future. There is strength in numbers. Brexit has also demonstrated the benefits of unity against threats from outside the bloc. The EU is made up of countries, half of whom are smaller than Ireland. Membership of bloc brings with it security for its membership and the knowledge that their neighbours will stand with them in times of crisis. The pandemic revealed a gap security which will now be covered by future laws, regulations and treaties going forward.
To sum up, the EU will not cease to exist. It will continue to evolve in a manner that suits the membership, while the UK will slip into a three independent states and federal Ireland (which will probably return to the Commonwealth).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ Charlie
You're half right with the facts and half right with the analysis.
Firstly, the argument for the Scottish opposition to Brexit is an odd one. In 1973 80% of Irish exports went to the UK, joining the EU has reduced that figure to 13.5% over all (granted, the majority of Irish agri-products still go there). One of the arguments for Scotland being independent but a member of the EU is that it would over time allow the Scots a greater measure of economic independence from the England. While some Scots that I know surprised me by voting for Brexit, they did so thinking it would make Scottish independence easier to achieve, while the overwhelming support to remain in the EU in 2016 suggests that they are quite comfortable with EU membership and lack none of the identity issues of the plague the English. You argument for the dependence of Scotland on the UK single market does not take into account the dependence of the Scots for EU funding and subsidies, particularly for the farming sector.
Secondly, your analysis of the Irish 'Celtic Tiger' economy needs work. The Celtic Tiger expired, ceased to be, joined the crowd invisible in 2008 - nobody uses the term for the current economic growth. While it is true that 26% GDP growth rates are a result of the distortion of US FDI companies filtering their profits through Ireland, it remains the case the the Irish economy is in rude good health by any standard: in 2017 GDP grew by 7% - strip out the Corporation tax and the figure is 4%, the highest in the Eurozone, and much higher than that of the UK. Incidentally, the UK is leaving the EU with a debt to GDP ratio that is higher than that of Ireland and with a lower GDP per capita. Indeed, NI has an average household income that is 50% lower than that of the republic as it stands. The economic powerhouse on the island of Ireland has historically been Belfast, but it has been Dublin for the past two decades or more. The Republic must be doing something right, as NI is seeking to lower its Corporate Tax to match that of the Republic in order to benefit from those profits generated elsewhere.
Thirdly, your simplistic view of the level of economic activity in the Republic is as a result of hanging too much on multi-national FDI. For example, Ireland is the 10th biggest economic investor in the US, where Irish multinationals employ over 100,000 people; its the 6th biggest beef exporter in the world; its the world leader in aircraft leasing. Ireland has an open economy.
Finally, your analysis of Irish emigration needs updating - those who left during the crash are returning in large numbers as the economy approaches full employment. The Irish workforce is highly mobile, even during the Celtic Tiger period young people left to broaden their minds by choice, while economic emigrants from the 1980s returned in their tens of thousands at the same time. Most who chose to emigrate today are those who work in the public sector jobs market, particularly health professionals and educators - tight controls on public spending by the current government means more money and experience can be found abroad. They are travelling in smaller numbers to the UK and US than previously, the Middle East and Australia seem to be more alluring these days. And British people emigrate to Ireland too - just over 100,000 according the 2016 census. You will find English accents in every economic sector in the Republic, from retail to company CEOs, from the trades to public services.
There a lot of talk about a united Ireland as the moment - too much talk in my view - and most of it in the media. It leads to insecurity among Unionists in NI and the rehashing of the old comfort blanket that the Republic could not afford unity. However,, this argument seems less plausible now than it did in the past.
1
-
@ Charlie,
Again, you're kind of all over the place here. Allow me to elaborate:
There may be no financial independence when you throw your lot in with the Eurozone but if an independent Scotland was to peg its new currency to Sterling, it would be in an even more dependent position. On balance though, the membership of the Single Market and Customs Union would open up huge opportunities for an independent Scottish economy. But EU membership is not all about economics for the Scots, I suspect. Its also about having an equal voice with its European neighbours as a sovereign nation, something that will enhance their sense of national identity and confidence.
Tax policy remains the competence of member states, and at present ten EU states oppose the harmonisation proposal including at least two of the founder members of the EU. Ireland's policy is to wait until the OECD rules on subject and then all countries will jump together...in the meantime, Ireland has its veto.
Many countries have opt outs on various EU decisions, including the EU army. The UK has availed of more opt-outs than any other member country, as you know, and Ireland secured its opt-out in that renegotiated treaty passed in the second Lisbon referendum - the one which Brexiters like to claim Ireland was 'made' take again by the EU. Personally, I would support Irish participation in an EU Army but I would be in a minority in my country.
Regarding Scotland's debt, it would have to get its act together in order to join the EU, but it would have less to do than other past accession applicants who are now members. Sometimes the desire to be independent trumps the short term pain of austerity and a lower standard of living: it was such in Ireland a century ago following independence and hard-core Brexiters will tell you the same in relation to their ambitions.
There are many differences between Scottish and English nationalism, but my statement was with regard to identity: the English-outside-London are particularly afflicted by it. However, Scottish and English nationalisms are indeed different: English nationalism and identity is binary, it cannot accept the invitation to adopt an EU identity along with its own national identity. The English cannot accept they are nation themselves at all - they cannot view themselves as equal to other nations - they are exceptional because of their history - British history - as Britishness in the United Kingdom was the main conduit of English nationalism in the past.
This is why there is no devolved government for England, the English can't seem to accept they need it and that they are equal to the Scots, Welsh and the Northern Irish. The English reaction to the concept of an EU identity is to invent an oppressor in the EU instead - creating the 'Them and Us' required by any nationalism; Nobody is oppressing the English, certainly not the EU, but Breixters - and most of them are English - think otherwise. 62% of Scots appear to understand that shared EU identity concept and feel no threat by it, alongside 56% of Northern Irish. In response, the English are turning to Empire 2.0 - the Commonwealth - where it will feel more comfortable. Brexit is a English Nationalist Mental Breakdown.
In the event of unification in Ireland, there would be short-term pain but long term gain and several economic studies support this view. Do I take it you think only the English have the stomach to suffer economically in the national cause? of course there would be concern about it, but I can guarantee you it will be a different issue that will dominate discussion in the Republic: reconciliation. The nightmare scenario would be, say, a 52% majority in NI in favour of unification without reconciliation first.
'The UK is a large net contributor to the EU, it receives no net funding from the EU at all. And as I have noted previously, Scotland receives a large fiscal transfer from the UK. Any dependence is with the UK.'
Tell that to the farmers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as they don't feel reassured. EU subsidies kept many if not most UK farmers viable - especially in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - helping to maintain rural communities and provide food security. After Brexit, the UK is intending to pursue a cheap food policy from abroad which will destroy this. Today, Ireland elected a Northern Ireland Unionist farmer, a former member of the Northern Irish Farmers Union, to the Irish Senate, the parliamentary upper house, in order to provide some influence for NI farmers in a parliament that will continue to deal with the EU.
The UK may be a net contributor to Brussels, but there is no evidence that it intends to distribute its largess for the benefit of British farmers - or, famously, the NHS either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ Rural Rebel Tory
Ireland will not put up a hard border. It simply cannot be done, politically or physically. It seems to me that the Irish government and the EU are working on some other arrangement, an imposition on Ireland caused by Brexit, that will protect the EU and prevent a hard border.
Tactically, Dublin knows that “no deal” is only “no deal” for now. The UK must eventually do a trade deal with the EU because of all of that trade you listed with EU countries in your post. No matter what the political and economic fallout, the UK will be back at the table soon. The more chaos at British ports, the shorter the self-imposed mercantile lockout. The suppression of the Impact Assessments indicate that this chaos will be more serious than Brexiters can admit and they don't trust their divided society to accept whats coming to them.
When the UK returns to the negotiating table, they will be handed the WA and a pen.
Ireland has been far more successful in diversifying from the UK than the UK has been in diversifying from Ireland. Today, Ireland remains the UK’s fifth largest export market and as you can see from your list, the UK exports more to Ireland than it does to China with its population of 1.4bn.
Furthermore, the UK runs a large trade surplus with Ireland — in fact, its second-largest trade surplus after the US. Strangling Ireland would hurt UK business much more than the other way around.
What Brexiters don't understand is that the EU is not all about the big countries and what they want. Most of the countries in the EU have smaller economies and even populations than Ireland. They are watching how the EU behaves when one of its smaller members is confronted by a larger bully. Standing up to the UK is the greatest PR coup the EU has had and it will help to strengthen the bloc going forward.
Trading on WTO rules is a primitive form of trade, a mere safety net. No advanced economy depends on it. With India and other emerging economies prioritising their pending trade deals with the EU and the United States engaging in national chauvinism, the UK will not have its choice of trade deals. Other countries will copy the USA and take the opportunity to hit up the UK for a trade deal at time when it is weak.
Any deal the US gives you will see the UK as rule taker. Democrats in the Senate will get enough Republicans of Irish extraction to back blocking the deal and its a Democrat House already.
Meanwhile, the UK will be in turmoil, politically, socially, economically and probably constitutionally going forward. While the UK is deeply divided over Brexit, there is consensus in Ireland and across the EU in relation to the UK leaving.
The Troubles will erupt again in Northern Ireland as Brexit has removed all the ambiguities that the Belfast Agreement put in place. Peace was possible because of those ambiguities. The first bomb exploded on the border in Fermanagh this week.
By the way, can you think of any promises Brexiters made that actually came to pass?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1