Ship of Fools: Yesterday It Was Funny.....

Thread: Yesterday It Was Funny..... Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020213

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

I can't help but notice that all the joke news websites that used to post ridiculous made up stories are nowadays just posting the real news. They don't have to make it up anymore; the real news is so ridiculous and hilarious that they just post it as is. The latest news of the DUP joining forces with the Tories had me in stitches yesterday and with my mouth hanging open for 24 hours in total disbelief. Today, in the cold light of a new day, it doesn't seem so funny anymore.

Northern Ireland's politics has always been the UK's sewage outlet. It's the place of shady deals, brown envelopes for politicians and folk that should be nowhere near a politician, scandals and mud that never sticks, dirty politics of the worst kind, vote meddling and fixing rarely seen outside of a banana republic, and of course - lest we forget - employing the support of terrorism for political means. I suspect that pretty much everyone in the UK is aware that Sinn Fein have used such ploys and tactics down through the years; but are they aware that the DUP is a mirror image of them? The DUP play the politics of being SF's opposite number, not doing what 'they' do, but it's all a part of the fudge and the lie.

Let me give you but one example.......(and this truly is but one among many)....
Last month Arlene Foster (the Bride of Shrek that heads up the Deplorable Unionist Party) wanted to ensure that a large contingent of central area Belfast would be whipped into line to vote 'appropriately'. She did this by arranging a meeting with the head wig of the UDA (that's an illegal terrorist organisation, just in case you didn't know) and requested his public endorsement so that people would know who they were supposed to vote for. This delightful individual from the UDA also has the ear of the LCC - an umbrella organisation of the various paramilitary lovelies that have made Northern Ireland such a great place to live in for the last fifty or so years - and passed the 'endorsement request' on to them so that all the areas they controlled through intimidation and violence would know who to vote for. Now I guess if you are lacking any brain capable of the usual reasoning, you might argue that this is what comes under the banner of 'community relations'. If you are capable of thought though, you might recall that the UDA only a month previous to all this had brutally murdered one of their own in Belfast for 'not toeing the party line'.

This is the party Ms May has decided to shack up with. In a Britain wracked with the pain of recent terror attacks, she employs the shadiest party in British politics she can find to embolden her grip on power - a party with known and well documented nasty dealings and links to truly evil individuals and groups. Some seem a small bit vexed about the DUP's stance on religious fundamentalism, on abortion, on gay rights etc, but really, these are the least of your worries. You cannot lie with dogs and expect to come up without fleas. But do the people in the rest of the UK actually know any of this? I get the impression that most people don't even know who the DUP is.

I should say one last thing as there is a deeply inherent danger to all of these recent developments. Not all people in Northern Ireland are represented by these lunatics, nor are they like them in any way. Please don't brand all of them with the same brush. There is a large proportion of society (on all sides of the political divides) that truly longs to get on with life in a quiet and peaceful existence who today are worried and shamed.

Yesterday it was funny. Today....not so much.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Not much one can add to this in Purgatory.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Given the current situation with UK terrorism, which incidentally began under a Labour Government, you might find an NI representation having it's uses in an advisory role.
What is it they say? Use a thief to catch a thief.

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

quote:

Use a thief to catch a thief.

Fight fire with fire?

Northern Ireland did that for quite a few years. I didn't work out very well.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

The Deeply Unpleasant Party is indeed scary....
[Help]

O if only Ireland had broken away entirely from 'Great Britain' back in the 1920s.

I wonder just how much this man is to blame?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Carson

IJ

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

We've spent the last few years concerned about how bad things would be if UKIP got a couple of MPs and held the balance of power. We didn't realize how bad things could actually be. I'd prefer Garage or Nutter to be propping up the government (and, I didn't think I'd ever say that).

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Correction.
I stated the brutal murder was a month before Arlene met UDA boss Jackie. It was in fact a mere two days after that brutal murder - which took place in front of the victims three year old son - that Arlene trotted along to him to enlist his help and support.

Not that the passage of time makes any great difference, but it's incredible to me that the body is barely cold before she shakes the hand that sanctioned it.

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :

Shit - I just had a segment of the Sex Pistols track Anarchy in the Uk play in my head...

"Is this the MPLA
Or is this the UDA
Or is this the IRA
I thought it was the U.K.
Or just another country
Another council tenancy"

Full lyric
Full track

And Theresa May isn't just about to risk everything - she really wants to restart The Troubles? As Westminster is the mediator between the DUP and Sinn fein for restarting Stormont...

"No fun, no fun at all. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Well, Nutty and Garbage are out of the picture for now (doubtless they will emerge from The Black Swamp at some point), but, yes, even they are preferable to the Desperately Useless Party.

One can only hope (and pray) that The Black Swamp swallows up May, Foster, et al, sooner rather than later.

Dear God, what a pile of shite it all is.

IJ

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

Those of us who remember the start of the "Marching season" will remember that the people insisting on their rights to march were the Orangemen.

It would be like the Germans insisting on marching across the Channel Islands in celebration of when they occupied them.

That is who May is in bed with, and it will not work. Sein Fein have been arguing that it is in violation of the Good Friday Agreement, which is is in principle even if not in actual detail (although I suspect it is written in there).

So yes, not funny. Not today, not yesterday, not ever. May is ricking the very tenuous peace in Ireland to hold onto power for a short time. That is politically insane.

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :

I'm not quite sure if this is the best place for this article from the New Yorker which I saw elsewhere. It is clever and quite funny and I think will raise a smile or two! [Smile]

If this is the wrong place, would Hosts please say and I will post appropriately. Thank you.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Snort. I love the end.

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Snort. I love the end.

I have just listened again!

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Given the current situation with UK terrorism, which incidentally began under a Labour Government, you might find an NI representation having it's uses in an advisory role.
What is it they say? Use a thief to catch a thief.

I think you'll find that terrorism started under Ted Heath. There were a few Fenian bombs and anarchist attacks before that, and the gunpowder plot, of course, but the current round began in the early 1970s.

Posted by M. (# 3291) on :

1969, wasn't? (From memory)

M.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by M.:
1969, wasn't? (From memory)

M.

IIRC (from history. I was only 3) it was the army being sent in to protect the Catholics from Protestant paramilitaries.

Posted by Martha (# 185) on :

SusanDoris I enjoyed that. Thanks!

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:

IIRC (from history. I was only 3) it was the army being sent in to protect the Catholics from Protestant paramilitaries.

Yes to this.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Harold Wilson sent the troops in, not Ted Heath.

There's been small scale IRA campaigns in the 1940s, 1950d and early '60s too.

Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/many-people-killed-terrorist-attacks-uk/

An article about the numbers of people killed every year since 1970, by terrorists

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Snort. I love the end.
I have just listened again!

When I read that, for some reason I hear the voice of Rowan Atkinson.

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

When I read that, for some reason I hear the voice of Rowan Atkinson.

Excellent! Thank you!

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:

Dear God, what a pile of shite it all is.

All because Cameron could help but fiddle with the pin on the back of the shite cart causing all the deplorables to ooze out. Or does it go back to that damn butterfly flapping it's wings somewhere.
[Razz]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Given the current situation with UK terrorism, which incidentally began under a Labour Government, you might find an NI representation having it's uses in an advisory role.
What is it they say? Use a thief to catch a thief.
I think you'll find that terrorism started under Ted Heath. There were a few Fenian bombs and anarchist attacks before that, and the gunpowder plot, of course, but the current round began in the early 1970s.

Actually, I think you will find that various forms of oppression and aggression have a history well before that. A hundred years ago, the British were rounding up and executing "terrorists".

The history of this dispute goes back generations - the plantations, the potato famine - it just tends to erupt when there is a British PM who does something insanely stupid over there.

Oh.

If I was in Sein Fein, I would probably be considering whether this fundamentally broke the GFA, and so they were justified in returning to an armed struggle. Theresa might just have restarted the conflict, the arrogant piece of shit.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Yes, lots of jokes going around about that old balaclava being dusted down from the attic, and trying to remember where that rifle was buried by Murphy's barn.

It won't be funny if it starts to happen. With the British govt in alliance with Protestant sectarians, who seem to be endorsed by the UDA, they are playing with fire.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Missed the cut. Talking about terrorism going back to the days of Heath is a bit weird. Talk about 800 years of struggle by Irish people, maybe. On second thoughts, let's not get into all that.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

I agree.
To be quite honest, since the start of last year's dreaded Referendum many of us are doomwatch-scenarioed out.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Missed the cut. Talking about terrorism going back to the days of Heath is a bit weird. Talk about 800 years of struggle by Irish people, maybe. On second thoughts, let's not get into all that.

Deliberately weird! Just a response to rolyn's statement that terrorism started under Labour.

A seldom mentioned feature of terrorism is its rapid mutation rate. Remember hijacking? Letter bombs? Anthrax in the post? We've had bombs on transport, bombs in cars and vans, booby traps on people's own cars, suicide vests, machine gun attacks, vehicles as weapons, stabbings, food contamination, hostage taking, gas attacks, bombs at big events.

What next? You'd think it could be anything, but if it's another van on London Bridge they'll find us ready. We've anticipated that one.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Interesting point, but the capacity of the human mind to think up new levels of evil is unlimited.

As is, of course, its capacity to rise above those evils.

IJ

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Surely there is a solution? Just get Sinn Fein to take their seats in Westminster, at least for the duration of this Parliament, and then they can go back to their principled absence.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Surely there is a solution? Just get Sinn Fein to take their seats in Westminster, at least for the duration of this Parliament, and then they can go back to their principled absence.

The problem for SF's POV is that they've stood in the election on a platform of abstaining from Westminster, so to now go would look like a betrayal for their core voters. Plus as it stands they'd still have to swear loyalty to the Queen, which they've said that they won't do.

On the other hand, one might think simply turning up and voting in a single confidence vote to bring down the parliament for the sole reason that having the DUP in government would utterly break the GFA and the peace in NI... well that could be argued to be in the interests of their supporters.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

Mr. Cheesy wrote:

quote:
On the other hand, one might think simply turning up and voting in a single confidence vote to bring down the parliament for the sole reason that having the DUP in government would utterly break the GFA and the peace in NI... well that could be argued to be in the interests of their supporters.

Has it been established that Sinn Fein would bring enough members in for the opposition to outvote the Tories/DUP in a non-confidence vote? I thought the last time we tallied this, it was determined that, assuming all members of all parties vote, the Tories would still win.

[ 11. June 2017, 16:49: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Stetson says:

assuming all members of all parties vote

Aye, there's the rub...

IJ

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
I'm not quite sure if this is the best place for this article from the New Yorker which I saw elsewhere. It is clever and quite funny and I think will raise a smile or two!
If this is the wrong place, would Hosts please say and I will post appropriately. Thank you.

Love it! I needed a laugh today, and that did it.

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
O if only Ireland had broken away entirely from 'Great Britain' back in the 1920s.

Then it too could have had the benefits of Magdalene Laundries, starved babies buried in mass graves as in Tuam, bans on divorce and contraceptives throughout the 20th century, and a destructive economic and foreign policy based on visceral anti-British loathing. I'm surprised they didn't want that!

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
and a destructive economic and foreign policy based on visceral anti-British loathing

As opposed to the one we had, which was based on ... what exactly? Overweening pride?

Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :

Wow - politics is weird at the moment, but I didn't expect to be humming 'The Sash' while reading the ship. Who said ideology was dead!

ETA - I'd forgotten about the condom shop in Temple Bar. Not that I ever had much cause... [Smile]

[ 11. June 2017, 20:40: Message edited by: mark_in_manchester ]

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

Meanwhile the local branch of The Apprentice Boys of Derry decides to celebrate their sudden entrance into the political mainstream by attacking an Irish pub.

FFS. Granted Mrs May would have difficulty pinpointing Liverpool on a map, but does she not have the slightest smidgen of awareness of the sort of people she's talking to?

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Stetson says:

assuming all members of all parties vote

Aye, there's the rub...

IJ

If it's a throne speech or money bill, you'll likely have every member of the House dragged in for the vote. The only way some of them are likely to miss it is if they are physically incapacitated(and no, I don't mean on Guiness).

Posted by alienfromzog (# 5327) on :

It does seem that Mrs May is playing with fire.

Forget everything you know or think about the DUP and focus on this one fact: Devolved government is currently suspended in NI. The Good Friday Agreement is - in effect - currently suspended.

As specified within the GFA, the UK government (and the Irish government) are the mediators between the parties. The current dispute is principally between Sinn Fein and the DUP. Whatever the rights and wrongs, is it even remotely credible that Mrs May's government can fairly mediate between them when her position is dependent on the DUP?

I am just old enough to remember the 1980s. In the mainland UK, the IRA were the main concern but the evil of the so-called loyalist paramilitary groups was very much a mirror image. This 800-year old conflict seemed intractable.

The peace process had many architects and many heroes (including people I don't trust or like (such as Adams and Paisley) and whom I do not respect (such as Major). The peace process reached a tipping-point where there seemed to be a beautiful inevitability of peace. All sides saw the futility of violence and the communities were not willing to tolerate those who wouldn't play their part and reach good compromises.

There was a lot of hard work and some very wise and skilled people and the GFA was born.

It's not perfect but NI has had nearly 20 years of nearly peace. It really is miraculous.

The problem is that the 'positive inevitability' I describe is nothing of the sort and the peace remains fragile. The GFA has held but it is in danger.

Brexit is a real risk and is going to need some serious work to find a way through. And on top of that our Prime Minister is now making things worse.

It worries me, how easily the whole thing could begin to to unravel. I fear that there are enough people in NI who either don't remember how bad things got or don't care. I fear that the hard work of building a peace together could be undone.

And I think it unconscionable that a UK Prime Minister would take any risk with that. It is true that I have never held Mrs May in particularly high esteem, but this seems to be a new low of putting self and party before country.

It is true that the irony of May spending half the campaign calling Corbyn a terrorist-sympathizer and then propping up her government with the only NI party not to join the GFA and who has not renounced the terrorist path, deeply ironic. But it is a sad laugh because I fear the real-world consequences too.

AFZ

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
I thought the last time we tallied this, it was determined that, assuming all members of all parties vote, the Tories would still win.

The Tories have 317. That includes one deputy speaker who does not vote, so 316 voting members.

The DUP have 10.

Labour have 262, which includes two deputy speakers who do not vote, so 260 voting members.

The SNP has 35.
The Lib Dems have 12.
Plaid Cymru have 4.
The Greens have 1.
The Speaker has 1 (and doesn't vote)
Plus one independent (Lady Hermon, who resigned from the UUP)
Sinn Féin have 7, were they to take their seats.

So if SF don't take their seats (as usual), the Tory/DUP combo has 326 votes and the rest have 313. Were SF to vote, the "others" would still only have 320.

Assuming, of course, that everyone shows up and votes the party line, which is where things always get interesting when there's a narrow margin.

[ 12. June 2017, 04:26: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

That also assumes that the 13 Scottish Conservatives will vote with the Conservative parliamentary party.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Surely they will be whipped into line. Remember that this is Westminster, not Holyrood; and that Ruth D. isn't there to lead them.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
That also assumes that the 13 Scottish Conservatives will vote with the Conservative parliamentary party.

They'd be kissing their careers as Conservatives good-bye if they did that. Of course, if they were planning to join another party, start their own, or leave politics entirely, that could be an option.

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :

barnabas62

Glad you liked it! We certainly need something to laugh at in the face of gloom. I am listening to 'Skios' by Michael Frayn, read, superbly of course, by Martin Jarvis. I recommend it!!

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :

barnabas62

Glad you liked it! We certainly need something to laugh at in the face of gloom. This weekend I have been listening to 'Skios' by Michael Frayn, read, superbly of course, by Martin Jarvis. I recommend it!!

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

@Stetson, the Scottish Tory MPs fought a very different campaign to that south of the border. They may feel they have a different mandate. Ruth Davidson has been making public statements to that effect.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
@Stetson, the Scottish Tory MPs fought a very different campaign to that south of the border. They may feel they have a different mandate. Ruth Davidson has been making public statements to that effect.

But, just to be clear, however different a piper they may be marching to, they ARE still members of the Tory party, right? If so, and they vote to bring down the government, I would be correct in assuming that they want to leave the party and go elsewhere, right?

[ 12. June 2017, 07:09: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

They are still Tories, and still under the Tory whip. And they have made it clear that they have no intention of breaking away.

Yet.

But there is always the possibility that they will, or they can threaten to, putting further pressure on May. They fought on different issues and if those are not suitably addressed, they might decide they are better off alone.

This is the whole problem May has - she needs to keep the DUP, the Scottish Tories and all the other parts of the coalition on line, so she is unable to make and bold decisions, or forge her own way. This particularly applies to the Brexit negotiations. She will have to make sure that she doesn't annoy the fringes.

That is weak leadership, and is likely to destroy her.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

But then the practical problem for the Scottish Tories is that they've basically been lent a vote by those in Scotland who can't stomach another indy referendum.

If they look like they're the only thing which has enabled a hard brexit (I hate that term, but I think means leaving the EU, EEA etc without any deal) they've got to believe that they're electorally finished.

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
I'm not quite sure if this is the best place for this article from the New Yorker which I saw elsewhere.

Thank you. I was having a rotten day and this has made it better.

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

It's being reported here this morning that the DUP are agreeing to a hard Brexit as part of the deal. I can't see this anywhere in the UK press currently so I'm hoping it's just a fog of nonsense. On the other hand it wouldn't exactly surprise me.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
It's being reported here this morning that the DUP are agreeing to a hard Brexit as part of the deal. I can't see this anywhere in the UK press currently so I'm hoping it's just a fog of nonsense. On the other hand it wouldn't exactly surprise me.

I wonder how they square free trade access to the Republic with leaving the single market. Have they given any indication that they're open to the idea of a hard Irish border?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

I think the BBC news website had something earlier about the Tory-DUP deal 'not having a deadline', but it seems to have disappeared (the news item I mean).

Mrs. May is going to have rather more to cope with over the next few days than the DUP deal, however important that might be. Some of the less right-wing papers are homing in on the selling-off of social housing some 30 years ago...

IJ

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:

Mrs. May is going to have rather more to cope with over the next few days than the DUP deal, however important that might be. Some of the less right-wing papers are homing in on the selling-off of social housing some 30 years ago...

IJ

It is true that this couldn't have really come at a worse time. However it can't be good that the unfortunate timing means that ministers cannot be properly held to account in the HoC because it isn't currently fully sitting.

Once again, the British fascination with insane and arcane procedures is meaning that we're coasting down a hill with no breaks and a distracted driver.

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I think the BBC news website had something earlier about the Tory-DUP deal 'not having a deadline', but it seems to have disappeared (the news item I mean).

I saw that as well. I understand she is betting (probably safely in this case) that the DUP won't vote down the Queen's Speech even if they abstain, and so it should pass, albeit narrowly.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
It's being reported here this morning that the DUP are agreeing to a hard Brexit as part of the deal. I can't see this anywhere in the UK press currently so I'm hoping it's just a fog of nonsense. On the other hand it wouldn't exactly surprise me.
I wonder how they square free trade access to the Republic with leaving the single market. Have they given any indication that they're open to the idea of a hard Irish border?

IIRC, the noises from Downing Street before the election was called (if they have any meaning at all) were that the UK would seek to leave the single market/customs union and retain an open border with Ireland. Without any indication of how on earth they were going to pull off this miracle.

Though, I'm fairly sure that an open border is something Ireland wants as well, and so the EU would not be looking favourably on any deal that doesn't provide that (which doesn't make such a deal possible, just that the sane heads in the EU will be trying to find a solution while the headless chickens in the UK government run around doing fuck all, which at least offers a shred of hope that something might be worked out).

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Posted by Mr Cheesy:

quote:

I wonder how they square free trade access to the Republic with leaving the single market. Have they given any indication that they're open to the idea of a hard Irish border?

There are I'm sure others who can explain this more succinctly than I. but essentially the DUP play a politics game. The old saying of hunting with the hound and running with the fox could easily be said of how the DUP do politics in order to get what they really want; and therein lies the great question: what dot he DUP want? Essentially there have an almost irrational, paranoid fear of a united Ireland so will do anything (including cloak and dagger partnerships with paramilitaries) to see that done. That has been slowly eroding democracy in NI and consistently chipping away at the GFA. Look at ho they appeal to the diverse approaches to religious sentiment to get voters on side too. You could claim this is part and parcel of politics but when it deliberately divides communities and results in violence (and they are under no illusion that this is what they are doing) you have to question if they should be in any position of leadership.

But I think the main thrust is still to cement the union and destroy any possibility of a united Ireland. Policies have been both passed and resisted in order to make that process either difficult or almost impossible. So for instance, recently they have emphatically opposed an Irish language act and have toyed with linking it to Ulster Scots (which is a dialect rather than a language and even that is questioned by language academics). Things like this help to muddy the waters and create a fog of confusion, so that any Irish language act would not be seen as a similar act to what already exists in the republic. In this sense they are not governing for the people in their care. They are only acting in self preservation. In this light, a hard border makes perfect sense. It is much more difficult to talk about a united Ireland when the border is anything but 'soft'. In talks with the RofI a trade border that treated Ireland as one entity was mooted (with the trade border being somewhere across the Irish sea). That utterly terrified them and I think if they still believe that this might be on the table - even if it is only as open possible prospect - they won't want to back it.

Sorry, that wasn't very succinct at all.

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Sorry, I missed the edit.

Essentially there have an almost irrational, paranoid fear of a united Ireland so will do anything (including cloak and dagger partnerships with paramilitaries) to see that done

Should read:

Essentially they have an almost irrational, paranoid fear of a united Ireland so will do anything (including cloak and dagger partnerships with paramilitaries) to see that it [a united Ireland] is not done

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :

The DUP ought to be willing to do a deal with the Conservatives under almost any conditions, because Corbyn would see this as an obvious way to deliver hard Brexit plus no border between NI and RoI - simply reunite Ireland! Unionists shafted = added bonus.

Results - probably not good - "Ulster will fight etc...".

[ 16. June 2017, 11:27: Message edited by: TurquoiseTastic ]

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Posted by Turquoise:

quote:

The DUP ought to be willing to do a deal with the Conservatives under almost any conditions, because Corbyn would see this as an obvious way to deliver hard Brexit plus no border between NI and RoI - simply reunite Ireland! Unionists shafted = added bonus.

Results - probably not good - "Ulster will fight etc...".

There's one very large insect in that ointment though. You would need to have the agreement of the current Dail in the RofI and it would need to go to a referendum. There currently isn't a snowball's chance in hell of that ever getting passed here, despite posturing noises barely a few months ago.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

Looking at Leorning Cniht's calculations, my mind wandered to a hypothetical situation.... Would a caucus revolt against May be possible, and, if so, would that have a meaningful effect on the numbers? LC came up with 326/320. Would four Conservatives defect if May were to stay? Would the Conservatives hold firm to an MP if she were to resign?

Would SF's support give them a one-time pass? I would hope, but I wouldn't be optimistic. Sometimes peace requires a suspension of stated principle.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
Looking at Leorning Cniht's calculations, my mind wandered to a hypothetical situation.... Would a caucus revolt against May be possible, and, if so, would that have a meaningful effect on the numbers? LC came up with 326/320. Would four Conservatives defect if May were to stay? Would the Conservatives hold firm to an MP if she were to resign?

The chances of the Tories bringing down the government because they don't like May are close to zero, I would think. At a resulting election, many of them would be out of a job.

quote:
Would SF's support give them a one-time pass? I would hope, but I wouldn't be optimistic. Sometimes peace requires a suspension of stated principle.

Academic discussion because SF have very recently repeated that they'll not be sitting in the HoC.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0