Johnson scuppering Brexit deal he signed with EU

Centralscrutinizer said:
It's not a good look for the UK. Breaking a recently signed international treaty and another brokered by the USA :sick:
Click to expand...
It's been a stream of bad looks for the UK lately.

This is kind of what saddens me with the whole sorry affair. I know a lot of people on here don't understand patriotism or think it strange but I like it. I like having pride in your heritage and the land you come from. Sadly that is being eroded as Brexit is simply making us look stupid. The union jack had some cachet in the world. Apparently luxury goods in Chine sometimes had one on as a symbol of quality, and BMW still put them in the tails lights of some fo their cars. I fear that's going to disaster though. On an international stage we must look so petty, insular and backward. we are going to end up a poor little backwater country and it saddens me greatly.
 
I think its further fuel to the fire that Johnson will resign once Brexit is 'accomplished'. He never sticks around to solve the messes he creates - nights out, crooked articles, marriages - so I don't know why screwing over the country would be any different.

One last metaphorical restaurant to smash up before making off with the cigars.

Come February the UK's poor international reputation, simmering resentments in Northern Ireland, border chaos here, and the vultures in the US, China and India circling won't be his problem.
 
I always thought it was common knowledge that Johnson was always going to trash the withdrawal agreement and said this weeks ago on the F**k the EU we have everything we need right here, thread. My only surprise, is the surprise people have that Johnson thinks he can ignore an international agreement.
 
A deal will never be made whilst Barnier is in charge of the EU negotiations. He was appointed to keep the UK subservient to Brussels and not to come up concessions.
He has succeeded in his aim and No Deal is the result.
 
Lottowyn said:
A deal will never be made whilst Barnier is in charge of the EU negotiations. He was appointed to keep the UK subservient to Brussels and not to come up concessions.
He has succeeded in his aim and No Deal is the result.
Click to expand...
The opposite. He has suggested possible routes of compromise on the two major remaining areas of concern. The UK had no intention of negotiating.
 
Makes no odds really this bunch think they have the backing of half the country, there will be a few out of work now as a result of the pandemic, a no deal will add to this. I was interested to read the road haulage think we are miles away from being set up and organised.

Its only 6 weeks time and then another 10 before we begin exporting and importing, with the govt track record so far and the confidence of their voters, if this turns into years of disaster I wouldnt be the least bit surprised. Thats when we can turn on them and their voters.
 
The UK might, just might weather the economic affects resulting from Covid. But with no deal added, it will sink like a stone.
Let's hope he's trying yet another pointless bluff.
 
"But then, if Johnson really plans to say today that a “No-deal can be a good outcome”, it seems the best thing for the EU to do is let him get on with it. When it doesn’t turn out to be so good, he can then explain to the nation why he got it so completely wrong. "
 
I would have thought that a hard brexit may banish the Tories for decades, not sure that is what they want, as some have mentioned the incompetence is a worry.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
A trade deal with the UK and international law are both the USA's business.
Click to expand...

That wasn't what I was referring to. How is it any business of the US what happens with the Good Friday agreement. I am genuinely curious as, right now, what benefit does it give them whether its in place or not?
 
One theory being out forward on the BBC is that this rhetoric is aimed at his eurosceptic back bench lunatics to keep them quiet ahead of him climbing down and reaching a compromise.

In "normal" times Id say there's no chance our government would do such a monumental act of self harm in the midst of everything else happening. But these aren't normal times. Anything is possible. Throw Cummings who sees himself as the "great disrupter" into the mix and anything is possible. He'd probably be happy to upset the Apple cart just to see what happens.
 
BaronSmoggie said:
That wasn't what I was referring to. How is it any business of the US what happens with the Good Friday agreement. I am genuinely curious as, right now, what benefit does it give them whether its in place or not?
Click to expand...

I think it's because the Irish lobby in the US is enormous. There are over 30m Americans of Irish ancestry of whom a number are Irish citizens. There is an Irish congressional Congress with members who have huge constitutencies of Irish-Americans. The B/GFA is hugely important to these people and anglophobia is rife. A massive number of American politicians, both sides of the aisle, need to be seen to care about Ireland's welfare. The easiest way to do this is take cues from Dublin.
 
There's a very balanced article in the FT by Peter Foster.
Probably better to go here

Peter Foster@pmdfoster
 
LaPennaBianca said:
I think it's because the Irish lobby in the US is enormous. There are over 30m Americans of Irish ancestry of whom a number are Irish citizens. There is an Irish congressional Congress with members who have huge constitutencies of Irish-Americans. The B/GFA is hugely important to these people and anglophobia is rife. A massive number of American politicians, both sides of the aisle, need to be seen to care about Ireland's welfare. The easiest way to do this is take cues from Dublin.
Click to expand...

Interesting thank you. As always, its politics.
 
BaronSmoggie said:
That wasn't what I was referring to. How is it any business of the US what happens with the Good Friday agreement. I am genuinely curious as, right now, what benefit does it give them whether its in place or not?
Click to expand...
It's an international agreement, which is subject to international law. As well as LaPennaBianca's response, she is also probably saying "How can we trust a country that doesn't meet it's international legal obligations".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top