Reply to post: Re: Well

Re: Well

@ Rob D.

"The fact that the EU (negotiators) are stating that a border would be required does not equate to the EU stating that they want a border."

That is a step closer than a lot of replies I get. A border has 2 sides. If the UK/NI doesnt want a border we dont make one. If the EU/ROI dont want one they dont make one. If instead of desperately clinging to something to negotiate about the EU agrees to effectively no border in Ireland then the problem is solved. The one wanting the border is the one demanding it, holding out for it, unwilling to not have one. It truly is that simple that the EU want a border and so it is their problem.

"So we change the EU rules to give Portugal a special status that no other country in the world has, and everyone can agree to that, can't they?"

Actually the EU can. They can choose not to and thats up to them but so be it. There is also the good friday agreement which our lack of desire for a border meets the criteria of the agreement (from my understanding of it) and imposing a border would be problematic. So if the EU wants a border it is the one imposing it and it would be the ROI going along with it who would be violating it (technically). Solutions have been proposed by the UK but the EU want a harder border so nuff said.

"(Subtitute 'border with Ireland' for 'participate fully in Galileo' to get back on topic.)"

Very different issues. As the EU's vanity project and technically theirs it is not our problem to build and pay for their toy for them to play with. I dont know if this is their level headed thought that brought this about or their temper tantrum (similar to the TLD tantrum). But I dont really care nor do I want to be represented by such a childish political entity. Hell they are in trade war with the US after pointing out it is protectionism and bad to do!