Posted on 10/20/2019 5:39:23 AM PDT by FRinCanada2
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDdMl55c7Q
UK PM Boris Johnson sends UNsigned letter to EU asking for delay. Followed by a SIGNED letter asking the EU to NOT approve the DELAY requested in the unsigned letter.
If we follow the logic that the PM can be FORCED to sign a letter that he disagrees with because the parliament demands so. Can’t the people rise up against the parliament and demand that the parliament respect the PM who is doing what the super majority of the citizens are demanding of their Government?
2. "can't the people rise up against parliament.." - of course they can.
"the super majority" -- what super majority? only 37% of the total electorate voted LEAVE. And there is not even a simple majority for No-deal.
No, Ireland would be in a worse, a far worse position.
What does Ireland want? they don't want a border on the island of Ireland because that's the Good Friday Agreement that ended violence in Ireland.
Whenever they negotiated in the past with the UK, they got the worse of it as the smaller, dependent party.
For the Irish it makes sense to negotiate as part of the club with 26 other members rather than be bullied by a much larger UK
I understand in very broad terms the differences however in both countries is it not the Will of People expressed through their system of elected officials that should be respected? In the USA there is an impeachment process. Not sure what that process looks like in the UK. Or if there is a process at all that gives the PROPLE a process to deal with a government that is going exactly in the opposite direction that the citizens demand.
We know what this looks like in a dictatorship but in a system where leadership in government are elected by the PEOPLE it is within reason to compare how that process works in the USA to how that process works in UK or EU.
The USA hasn't offered.
The Good Friday agreement was between the UK and Ireland but with the USA and the EU as guarantors of peace.
So then what you run the risk of is the tyranny of the MINORITY. Ironically if the whole of the EU will do what is in the best interest of
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoiseach
Despite the economic effects on the rest of the EU then doesn’t that in essence make the majority slave to the minority? Rather than just giving the minority fair and equal representation what ends of happening is the “minority rights” reign supreme and the “minority” becomes tyrannical economically speaking of course. Not talking about WAR and bloodshed The minority rights seize and drain the economic wealth of the majority simply by playing the victim card so much that they never grow out of being the victim.
I can’t help but think about the USA divorce from British rule in the 1700’s. 200 years later the USA is doing ok without paying taxes to the King and has good shared economic and security cooperation. Yes?
Is there any doubt that President Trump is in the “deal making” business when it comes to foreign policy ?
Is there any doubt that President Trump is in the “deal making” business when it comes to foreign policy ?
I take it 37% reflects the total electorate that is eligible to vote. But like many other nations low voter turnout?
Or can you explain how that 37% figure is derived ?
In the parliamentary system, the will of the people was expressed in electing parliament
impeachment is there for a Presidential form of government where the executive is clearly separated from the legislative. For the parliamentary system, the parallel is the no-confidence motion.
Parliament can vote no confidence in the PM
People can vote to recall their MPs.
There is a fundamental difference between the parliamentary and the presidential form - come on, you live in Canada, you don't vote for your PM directly. You vote for a seat and that determines the legislature that elects one of their own to be PM
In the case of Boris he was selected by the party itself - so analogous to as if Obama resigns in 2015 and not Biden but Buttgieg or some other Dem gets elecyted by the Democratic party as President. See - that doesn't make sense. Similarly one can't take the presidential form and push it over to the parliamentary
Out of that 52% voted "a type of leave"
That means only 37% voted for "a type of leave" in an advisory referendum
Fine - that was the conditions of the referendum. But don't tell me there was a supermajority - there isn't a majority for ANY option in the UK: not a simple majority for no-deal, not a simple majority for no brexit, not a simple majority for anything.
The conditions for the deal for the Irish are:
1. Ireland wants the UK to live up to it’s oath as per the Good Friday agreement for no hard border on the island of Ireland
2. Ireland overwhelmingly (something like 80%) wants to remain in the EU and the customs union.
the only solution was this northern ireland remaining in the customs union.
Rather it’s about sticking for its members.
If you belong to a club and the club regularly fails its weakest members, then that club won’t last
and as to the economic effects - most of the economic pain that the EU will feel will be felt by the Republic of Ireland in any case
Explain further your assessment of the “pain” produced to EU members come FROM Ireland? Can you give a few examples ?
Would a fair comparison be like in the USA there are only 50 states however in addition to to 50 States that have 2 elected Senators in Congress there are various US territories around the world that have an elected representative in the US House of Representatives but are NOT allowed the 2 US Senators with a higher level of debate influence in congress. For example 1 US Senator can hold the Senate with unlimited debate power. That power does not exist in the House.
For purposes of discussion let’s assume the US Representative from Guam is holding the entire US Government hostage to their interest by claiming minority rights that do not exist. Is that essentially what Ireland is doing to the EU?
And the EU is unwilling to act in the best interest of the EU out of fear that they will be accused of failing to protect the best interest of Ireland. Kinda like if GUAM holds the entire US government hostage economically by demanding that the US Government drain the resources of all other States and territories to provide Guam with “minority rights”.
...or in this hypothetical case if the economic drain on the USA is too much to sustain the economy of guam then some discussion needs to occur that limits the economic assistance provided to Guam in order to avoid a full scale economic collapse of the entire US Government?
I know this hypothetical is extreme but I am just trying to understand exactly how much of an economic drain Ireland is to while of the current EU Vs how much it will be post Brexit if we actually get there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement
Just finished reading this wiki page. Does it accurately capture the issue?
As I understand it the EU will have the authority to create and enforce a border between NI under UK rule and mainland Ireland which will remain EU post Brexit.
Bottom line. Just because the EU will have authority to enforce a border they are under no obligation to do so and that should be if no concern to UK post Brexit. Correct? Or am I missing something?
> 4. As I pointed out - the response is “You forgot to sign this”
OK but has tusk actually taken this step yet? (dunno myself one way or another)
> 1 & 2 -> it was a cross-party law passed. That’s the system they have. Boris could have resigned or refused. Instead he played games
to me, parliament forcing negotiations and especially an extension aka delay premised on no meaningful progress is even more of a game
> 3. Then the other countries would be acknowledging that the British PM is no longer in charge and the UK does not have a functioning government
The other side of the coin is that the EU pledged earlier to await meaningful progress. It is difficult to characterize the Benn Act as meaningful progress. In essence, the Benn Act is in fact meaningless delay. Forcing the PM to send a letter had the effect of the PM calling this to the EU’s attention in so many words.
IOW the EU should be by their own words awaiting something positive, not awaiting something that is merely non-negative. There is a distinction and to me it is not a subtle distinction.
What am I missing.
4. As I pointed out - the response is “You forgot to sign this”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.