Am I missing something? Its the EU that don't want to do a deal, not the UK so why all the flack to Boris?

[QuiQuaiQuod]

Am I naïve? Am I interpreting this right? I'm so sick and tired of the whole thing, but isn't it the EU that are playing silly buggers in their petulance? Boris is trying to do a deal.

Yet everyone is blasting HIM.

BTW I voted remain but accepted the result and just want it all over and done with, plus the attitude of Brussels and remOANERS,- not Remainers who accept result -has been abysmal .

I am not a fan of Boris BTW but he seems to know what to do. Or have I had my head stuck in the sand for the last 3 years?

Please be gentle, no bun fights, a sensible discussion please,

I don't think the 'characters' are immediately inter-changeable, due to differing circumstances. But the behaviours ARE directly inter-changable, which is really scary for our futures.
Eh? so the rise of a fanatical dictator won't be mirrored by current events but somehow the outcome will? So it will be like Hitler if there hadn't been Hitler? How does that work?

@Ohflippineck

Oh how funny ive been watching the same series and thought to myself how utterly hyperbolic comparisons between the present situation and the rise of the Nazi party was.

Theres no SS enforcement, no mass arrests of remainers and no disappearing of opponents to the system, no murders, no court cases where politicians are linked with violent deaths.

The UK could have done a norway, turkey, switzerland, canada or whatever deal. The UK wanted a special deal negotiated. The EU spent months negotiating a deal till both sides of negotiaters were happy about it (pretty difficult when one side needs 27 countries to agree). The UK them told the EU that they don't want the deal that they agreed upon.

How is this the EU being difficult? Surely it's tge UK being psycho here.

Incandescent, the referendum was always advisory. If after three years we are no closer to finding a realistic path towards exit that won't inflict catastrophic national harm, the right course is not to plough on regardless but to cancel the whole thing. If in future someone wishes to negotiate an exit deal that can find a majority of the nation wishing to vote in favour (as opposed to a vague cipher which every Tom dick and Harry filled with their preferred little Englander fantasy wishlist), then they are welcome to put it to a vote.

Even if you disagree with that, saying that the libdem manifesto commitment to cancel brexit is 'antidemocratic' just demonstrates jaw-dropping ignorance about how our democracy works. Representative democracy has never been about allowing people to choose every aspect of how they are governed, it's about choosing a set of people who we think will do the best job then letting them get on with it, by and large, until it's time to make another choice about who rules us. Don't like the libdems manifesto commitment? Don't vote for them then. If enough people disagree with you to get them into power, then, well, I hate to break if to you but that is in fact precisely how our democracy works.

No, it isn't easy to paint "Hitler=Johnson" but it IS useful to point out how behaviours lead to particular circumstances. Attempt to bypass Parliament, exacerbate division, create a chaos, blame 'others', ignore the law, antagonise existing international partners, constantly claim "it's in the name of the people!" (despite this being not reflected in polls or experience), display racist tendency with a bit of xenophobia thrown in, convince yourself you and your class are born to rule, ally with similar minded states.

This obv isn't a complete scenario but not bad as a start. It can get much worse.

So in fact there is almost nothing similar between recent events and those in Nazi Germany, but we should still panic as if there is ? Illogical, Captain.

The EU spent months negotiating a deal till both sides of negotiaters were happy about

Actually they didn’t agree a deal. They presented a deal. 27 countries agreed to it but the UK government didn’t.

The UK govt needed to pass it through parliament and failed. So no deal was agreed.

family - err....I'd beg to differ, but hey, it's the internet.

In what sense was "no deal" agreed?

@escapade1234
The EU didn't "present" a deal. There were negotiaters from the UK who negotiated with negotiaters from the EU. The UK therefore had as much possibility to negotiate as the EU. The problem is that everyone is only looking at what they want for themselves, not what the best way forward is for the country.

Mr Pan I didn’t mean “no deal” I meant a deal wasn’t agreed.

Yes, but negotiators don’t make laws. They present deals to be voted on by MPs. Previous posters made it sound as though the UK agreed something and then changed their minds m.

Any deal will be repeatedly voted down because we have a parliament that doesn’t want to leave the EU.

The backstop was a UK proposal.

Ffs.

Where on the ballot paper did it say advisory

Where on the ballot paper did it say advisory

The advisory nature of the ballot was clear on official literature and official sources. Didn't you read any of them?

No it's because the ERG group in the tories want a no deal and constantly voted against any deal. Lets be specific here. We have a chunk in Parl who want to leave the EU but ONLY in the most chaotic circumstances.

there, fixed it for you.

Yes but the Gov also said at the time it would be honoured

Yes but the Gov also said at the time it would be honoured

True, but it was clear on official sources that it was legally advisory, not binding.

A dumbass fudge on Cameron's part that backfired horribly.

IF it was 'legally binding', it has been demonstrated already in court that th result would have been declared 'nul' due to the illegalities and inconsistencies applied to it.

Yes major mess up: "we will agree to respect it, without a sausage about how it's done."

Idiots.

The advisory nature of the ballot was clear on official literature and official sources. Didn't you read any of them?

So an official source like the referendum leaflet sent to every home was a lie?

"This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide."

That was a lie - what else in the leaflet was a lie?

This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide

That's not the same as saying it was legally binding.

Well it was definitely an error - a 'lie' is a big thing to allege.

nonetheless, the political parties messed it up. You'd think the remainers didn't bother with this inconsistency, in the belief that the country isn't rank stupid enough to actually vote to screw itself.

Yes, it was a lie, because they didn't have the first clue what they were implementing or how they would do it. You know politicians lie, all the time? And Johnson is still lying to you now.

Fucking hell, I despair.