Some lite reading.

[Thomas]

Maybe we're on the same page on the hymn book but singing in different keys


I know we can turn our back on a treaty and walk away. I'm guessing that's what you mean when you say "it does not stop us"


The Germans decided to walk away from the treaty of Versailles. Things went downhill a bit for them after that ...


The point I was trying to make is that there might be financial penalties and there certainly would be political consequences if the United Kingdom were to unilaterally tear up a treaty we had agreed to.


Those consequences ought to be carefully weighed by those seeking to turn their back on whatever agreement they have in mind to disregard, and it may be the measured verdict having weighed up those penalties and consequences is that the penalties and pain exceed the benefit of unilateral revocation.


It is purely in that sense I say this might stop us.


I know there is nothing physically or legally preventing us from turning our backs on a previous agreement. That's the whole rationale behind 'no Parliamentary bind the hands of another'.


Do you now see and understand what I am actually saying ??

Things didnt go downhill for the germans after walking away from the treaty of versailles john.

Things went downhill for the germans once they pissed off too many people and turned practically the main powers of the day....the russians and the yanks , against them.

The secret  to breaking unbreakable agreements is managing the fallout afterwards.

When the UN high court told the uk to leave the chagos islands as soon as possible , and they missed the 6 month deadline imposed , what happened? Feck all , except a bit of whinging and puerile symbolistic wrist slapping.

Why?

Cause the yanks have a military base  there and might is right.

Anyone with any clout and the ability to manage repercussions can break gerrys fantasy unbreakbale agreements. Im not suggesting countires should , or the uk could im simply calling into question the nonsense certain eu arse licking hysterics on this forum come out with.

[johnofgwent]

No John, that doesn't stop us. At best it's an incentive to not to break a treaty but in no way does it stop us.

Maybe we're on the same page on the hymn book but singing in different keys


I know we can turn our back on a treaty and walk away. I'm guessing that's what you mean when you say "it does not stop us"


The Germans decided to walk away from the treaty of Versailles. Things went downhill a bit for them after that ...


The point I was trying to make is that there might be financial penalties and there certainly would be political consequences if the United Kingdom were to unilaterally tear up a treaty we had agreed to.


Those consequences ought to be carefully weighed by those seeking to turn their back on whatever agreement they have in mind to disregard, and it may be the measured verdict having weighed up those penalties and consequences is that the penalties and pain exceed the benefit of unilateral revocation.


It is purely in that sense I say this might stop us.


I know there is nothing physically or legally preventing us from turning our backs on a previous agreement. That's the whole rationale behind 'no Parliamentary bind the hands of another'.


Do you now see and understand what I am actually saying ??

[Nick]

Come on Nick


You know the answer to that


What stops us walking away from a treaty is the legal shitstorm that follows if we do.


But I did find it interesting when I started reading the 1200 page monster that all the way through are statements allowing each side to ignore the other's courts. So in principle it seems we can.


In short, the 1200 pages are filled with statements about entering this agreement in good faith. Time will tell if the EU - and particularly the French - do.

No John, that doesn't stop us. At best it's an incentive to not to break a treaty but in no way does it stop us.

[johnofgwent]

I don't need to go any further, the answer is there.

Answer the question. What stops us from walking away from a treaty? You told Tom that the UK can't just walk away, what prevents us?

Come on Nick


You know the answer to that


What stops us walking away from a treaty is the legal shitstorm that follows if we do.


But I did find it interesting when I started reading the 1200 page monster that all the way through are statements allowing each side to ignore the other's courts. So in principle it seems we can.


In short, the 1200 pages are filled with statements about entering this agreement in good faith. Time will tell if the EU - and particularly the French - do.

[Nick]

he already answered that earlier in this thread nick , that no one can stop the uk pulling out of a treaty . He simply gets all mealy mouthed about it and mumbles on something about repercussions and international law being sacrosanct.

Another about turn then.

[Thomas]

Just answer the question Gerry. Who can stop the UK pulling out of a treaty?

he already answered that earlier in this thread nick , that no one can stop the uk pulling out of a treaty . He simply gets all mealy mouthed about it and mumbles on something about repercussions and international law being sacrosanct.

[Nick]

You have to read further than the headline nick, then you'll get your answer. I gave it to you, just read. You do know what click bait is ?  headlines are not the detail.

Just answer the question Gerry. Who can stop the UK pulling out of a treaty?

[Thomas]

He flip flops all of the time, using different political theories, last night he was a neo liberal.

He is a neo libeal and always has been sheep. Tony blair worshipping new labour small c tory , with a few labour party tropes thrown in about the poor , the nhs and international solidarity.

The flip floping is him thinking he is being "machiavellian" 

Far too cunning a political performer for the likes of us mere riff raff sheep.

[Thomas]

What your proposing is the UK being a rogue state outside any known global body, the UN, WTO, Vienna Convention. Is the UK planning on leaving all of these, going totally solo ?

what a load of cac. International law is regualrly broken. Russia broke international law in crimea , what did the international bodies do?

Spain refuses to accept the right of self determination in catalonia , saying the  indivisible spanish constitution trumps international law.

What did the international community and more importantly the gutless EU do ?

The uk is currently breaking international law over the chagos islands , and defying the un .What has the internaitonal community done.?

You dont half talk some rubbish so you do.

There is a difference between some warm cosy cuddly international law tract and then enforcing it into action.

As nations like the yanks , russians and many others have shown past and present , the old doctrine of "might is right" is what matters in thew world , and always has done.

A law is meangless drivel for beaurocrats to bicker over unless it can be enforced and backed up.

[Sheepy]

Heres what you said ...

To talk about a word being of british origin is a nonsense  that no irishman would ever say. Its another slip of the tongue so to speak and a flashpoint into your english mind where you think of things in terms of being british.

How can a word be of british origin , when britain isnt a country , its an island made up of three nations each with their own native languages , which all irishmen know , and the common tongue is english , not british?

The linguistics dont matter , its merely the thought process behind that slip of the keyboard which again shows you for the fraud that you are.

Im well aware of that fact. None of this detracts from my point , and how you think , and as such is yet more diversionary waffle to cover your tracks and litter yet another thread with all your bullshit and innuendo whilst screaming about brexit.
Still thinking in terms of british history i see gerry?

Scotland was an independent country at the time of the plantations , so no they werent "protestant brits" , as every irishman knows , and of course most irish know as well how those dissenting protestants of scottish descent were treated over the next 250 years.

Told you before in your previous incarnation on this forum , your british history teaches you the proddies went to northern ireland in 1600 and have been pro british ever since , when the fact of the matter that only happened from around 1850 onwards.

Maybe to further bolster your irish impersination , you should google the penal laws , and how they were enacted against all dissenting groups in ireland , not just irish catholics , but those of presbyterian protestant dissent , and how no northern protestant presbyterian by 1704 could hold any office in law ,army , navy , customs and excise or municipal emnployment while presbyterian ministers were excluded from giving a sermon , on penalty of fine for first offence and execution for further offences.

What you call personal insults is merely me picking you up on the cac you talk.

You lost the debate "mate" back in june 2016.
no i will wait to further see how things transpire till we see how we can wring stuff out of it for scottish indy.

Your world really is falling apart isnt it " gerry?"

Rubbish.

Name one single word in modern english that is of "british " origin?

Every linguist on the planet knows full well the history of the english language , its word content and origination , 45% of which are french , 15% danish , 30% anglo saxon , and the further 10 % a mix of hindi , and other borrowed words from other world languages with even a few gaelic words like "rannsaich" " to search" thrown in .

Stick to tossing numbers around gerry , because you plainly arent good at politics , current irish affairs , history or even linguistics. Throwing numbers around and talking solely about brexit might save you making any more slips of the tongue .

He flip flops all of the time, using different political theories, last night he was a neo liberal.

[Thomas]

So typical of you Thomas, make the debate personal or historical to 1800BC. You just can't debate the points. My point stands, I never said Bristish was a language. You did that, mr strawman.

Heres what you said ...

(no schooling I know it's not a word of british origin.

To talk about a word being of british origin is a nonsense  that no irishman would ever say. Its another slip of the tongue so to speak and a flashpoint into your english mind where you think of things in terms of being british.

How can a word be of british origin , when britain isnt a country , its an island made up of three nations each with their own native languages , which all irishmen know , and the common tongue is english , not british?

The linguistics dont matter , its merely the thought process behind that slip of the keyboard which again shows you for the fraud that you are.

Secondly every Irish man is taught Irish (seldom called gaelic, if you lived here you would know that) and most can't string a sentence after 14yrs in school.

Im well aware of that fact. None of this detracts from my point , and how you think , and as such is yet more diversionary waffle to cover your tracks and litter yet another thread with all your bullshit and innuendo whilst screaming about brexit.

Scotland, other than the prodestants brits that came over and stole the land from the Irish, apart from that Scotland doesn't get much of a mention.

Still thinking in terms of british history i see gerry?

Scotland was an independent country at the time of the plantations , so no they werent "protestant brits" , as every irishman knows , and of course most irish know as well how those dissenting protestants of scottish descent were treated over the next 250 years.

Told you before in your previous incarnation on this forum , your british history teaches you the proddies went to northern ireland in 1600 and have been pro british ever since , when the fact of the matter that only happened from around 1850 onwards.

Maybe to further bolster your irish impersination , you should google the penal laws , and how they were enacted against all dissenting groups in ireland , not just irish catholics , but those of presbyterian protestant dissent , and how no northern protestant presbyterian by 1704 could hold any office in law ,army , navy , customs and excise or municipal emnployment while presbyterian ministers were excluded from giving a sermon , on penalty of fine for first offence and execution for further offences.

But keep continuing with your personal insults, it just demonstrates your loosing the debate.

What you call personal insults is merely me picking you up on the cac you talk.

You lost the debate "mate" back in june 2016.

Have you anything of note to add about the glorious one sided deal that the likes of Nick, who hasn't a clue of its contents, has deemed a victory,

no i will wait to further see how things transpire till we see how we can wring stuff out of it for scottish indy.

Your world really is falling apart isnt it " gerry?"

A perfectly correct statement,

Rubbish.

Name one single word in modern english that is of "british " origin?

Every linguist on the planet knows full well the history of the english language , its word content and origination , 45% of which are french , 15% danish , 30% anglo saxon , and the further 10 % a mix of hindi , and other borrowed words from other world languages with even a few gaelic words like "rannsaich" " to search" thrown in .

Stick to tossing numbers around gerry , because you plainly arent good at politics , current irish affairs , history or even linguistics. Throwing numbers around and talking solely about brexit might save you making any more slips of the tongue .

[Thomas]

Care to give some exampes of the points I made not being correct.

I have done so plenty of times!

Care to actually make a political point on a political forum instead of tossing numbers about that any third rate accountant could do ?

Politics isnt accounts gerry. No matter how much you wish it were.

Told you before , so much of what happens in the political world cannot be explained by simple economics. If it were brexit would never have happened , ireland would still be in the british empire , and the world would barely have budged from the safe comfortable economic status quo over many many centuries.

Thats why your machiavellian( no laughing at the back) new labour pro european politics fall down every time.

You dont understand people , nor what motivates them.

You think by tossing a few coins , displaying the carrot of "helping the oppressed poor and the nhs" and international solidarity is what motivates people , when plainly it isnt.

If it was , labour would never have been out of power , instead of hardly being in power over the last century.

[T00ts]

Thanks but no where near as powerful as the empire. I take it you don't get the idea of people making decisions by consensus, together.

If you believe that then there is little hope for you. Angela Merkel decided that we would leave without a deal unless she started singing, and sing she did. Macron was the only other voice heard and disagreed with her and suddenly he went silent in the last days. She who pays the piper calls the tune. Ireland is just an also ran with so many others.

[Thomas]

Like usual Thomas your just making up stuff. You seem to think the uk can walk away from commitments and legal obligations. Good luck with that one. Johnson does talk sh1t about it but in the end his advisers will make sure he doesn't cross that line.

I havent said any of this or insinuated it. You are twisting the discussion to suit your own warped view.

I simply said hypothetically , that there is no treaty/agreement in history that couldnt be broken/changed/walked away from( if the need arose).No one but you suggested the other party couldnt or wouldnt try and enforce repercussions. So stop making things up.

I gave plenty of examples , from irish history , sky news correspondant adam parsons tweet that the current deal could be derailed by march if cracks appear , and of course the famous quote by former brexit secretary David Davis , from march 2019 , where he said..

"There is no treaty in the world where a sovereign nation joins up and can only leave when the other side says so"

You have no political points to make gerry , you are nothing more than a grubby little self hating englishman who despises his own nation for voting the opposite of what you wanted.

[GerryT]

Of course Gerry we all know what's click bait,it's we are the eu and the eu is us also you're much more powerful now than the old evil empire.

Thanks but no where near as powerful as the empire. I take it you don't get the idea of people making decisions by consensus, together.