Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
What do you mean how? By requesting the extension of A50 it was in his amendment text i believe.

Not going to happen. EU27 won't agree an extension except for a referendum.

Some Tories think they might renegotiate the backstop and or other parts of the deal. I don't though. I think they'll watch us squirm till we eventually pull the plug.
 
It was certainly no threat to the Vatican or the RCC.

I don't think he won either. His aim was to leave a dynasty that will last centuries. Instead the Tudor dynasty with his children as a traumatised Elisabeth preferred taking her own dynasty to the grave then give power to a man. Tudor left an England that was divided, which was a pariah in Europe and was left vulnerable to a crusade which actually happened. He could have lost more if that's what you mean (England might have become Spanish)
Yeah, I only meant he won as in he resisted the demands of the Vatican, he made loads of mistakes in general. I thought the Elizabethan age is generally regarded as pretty successful for England really, she was just a bit shit at propagating. Would I have the monasteries back though, owning half of England and dictating the politics of the day? Hell no, but again, it's just a pity he wasted the cash the way he did. A little part of me is saying we might be getting a bit off topic as well - but you started it.
 
They can't extend for renegotiation, only for GE or referendum. And the other 27 agreeing.

Of course they can, the point of allowing it for a GE is a shift in terms. If May tries to renegotiate on the same red lines then yes they'll refuse but if she reaches out on a cross party basis to come up with something that will command a majority (if possible) they'll extend. That's the main point of the discussed july extension.

The direction of travel is for a better deal for them.
 
Of course they can, the point of allowing it for a GE is a shift in terms. If May tries to renegotiate on the same red lines then yes they'll refuse but if she reaches out on a cross party basis to come up with something that will command a majority (if possible) they'll extend. That's the main point of the discussed july extension.

The direction of travel is for a better deal for them.

What is going to be different in the withdrawal agreement that can be different? It's got to be something sensible, do you seriously see something sensible getting a majority acceptance in the HoC. No trade deals included btw.
 
In the (unlikely) event of a no- deal, what happens to the small matter of the £39 thousand million pounds?
 
Of course they can, the point of allowing it for a GE is a shift in terms. If May tries to renegotiate on the same red lines then yes they'll refuse but if she reaches out on a cross party basis to come up with something that will command a majority (if possible) they'll extend. That's the main point of the discussed july extension.

The direction of travel is for a better deal for them.

The negotiations are finished. The EU has no incentive to change anything in the deal. She might try, again, she will fail.

They want us to remain. They can almost certainly acheive that now by doing nothing.
 
In the (unlikely) event of a no- deal, what happens to the small matter of the £39 thousand million pounds?

It's 39 billion but whatever the UK owe they still have to pay it whether there is a deal or not. If there is no deal it'll probably be about 24bn because the Uk won't have to pay for the transition
 
It's the biggest defeat you silly shit.
 
She's going to go back to the EU.
And then what? She certainly cannot expect more favourable terms after this public humiliation.

From the EU's perspective, only two options remain: no deal or no Brexit.
 
Yeah, I only meant he won as in he resisted the demands of the Vatican, he made loads of mistakes in general. I thought the Elizabethan age is generally regarded as pretty successful for England really, she was just a bit shit at propagating. Would I have the monasteries back though, owning half of England and dictating the politics of the day? Hell no, but again, it's just a pity he wasted the cash the way he did. A little part of me is saying we might be getting a bit off topic as well - but you started it.

Its easy to judge history now but that's not the correct way to see things. You need to see things from his perspective. Tudor took a stable and respectable kingdom to the brink of civil war and invasion. Smallfolk were left dying on both sides (first Catholics, then Protestants under Mary, then Catholics again) and his dynasty ended after 1 generation. His crown ended up first to Mary, the very daughter of the woman he turned against then to Elizabeth the daughter of the woman he executed.

Regarding monasteries, I agree wholeheartedly and I assure you no one understand the injustice of a rich church in a poor country then I do. This situation survived in Malta well past medieval times, as the church and the British empire agreed not to step at each other toes. It was only after independence when Mintoff finally put the church in place and it was a fight him and his supporters (including my grandfather) had to fight for inch by inch and suffer a horde of injustices because of it. Yet, you also need to understand the times too. During the medieval times, that wealth could end up either to the church whom, with all its weaknesses, did care for the poor else it would end up in the hands of nobility who didn't share any love for the poor.