Why on earth would Varadkar have "aligned his interests with the UK"? The people of the Republic of Ireland would have no truck with such a thing - they are so Europhilic it would make London blush and the other EU countries have followed their policy lead in all the key areas because it's so important for them.

By the way, it's laughable, but predictable, for Brexiteers to try and paint the Irish (the Irish!) as bullies (booo hoo, they "played 'us vs them'"icon_wink.gif. Projection much? Is there no end to the extremes to which Brexiteers will go to try and claim for themselves the mantle of victims?

Anyway, a nice spin from you there of what appears to be happening today - which is the EU sticking by the red lines they've reiterated since the very start and Johnson panicking and chucking everything and anything under the bus to get a deal.

Hmmm. I must have imagined the result on 12 June 2008. Quite the swing followed. Curious. Europhiles indeed. Eire's economy has done so well in the EU, yes?

FFS, Eire's only land border is with the UK. If you don't understand why Eire should have been doing their best to ensure a positive agreement with the UK, you probably shouldn't be discussing politics.

And your interpretation of events reeks of blinkered Europhilia. The EU has been banking on the UK taking no-deal off the table, revelling in the knowledge they hold all the cards. They've been sitting back, comfy in this knowledge. Unless you've not been paying attention, this has been confirmed by insiders on both sides. Now, however, we are telling them energetically and repeatedly that the 31 Oct deadline WILL apply, deal or no deal, regardless of any idiotic amendments, and they are worried.

You think the EU will throw Eire under the bus and allow a no-deal outcome. I disagree. I think they will blink.

So i think the problem here is you want to distinguish between "the EU" and the ROI. Whereas I pretty clearly stated above that the EU is in fact following Ireland's lead. Broadly, if it works for the Irish, it will work for the EU. There won't be any throwing the Irish under any bus apart from those who have brought this chaos upon them in the first place.

As for Irish pubic views on the EU and whether Ireland has prospered since joining the community, those don't take much finding out and they won't match whatever your agenda is.

While it is possible they’ve finally seen the whites of Boris’s eyes and pooped themselves, it also seems plausible that Boris has amended his offer. Which I suspect was always the plan.

At this point, it isn’t about ‘winning’, if it ever was, it is about avoiding a mutually assured poop show (MAPS). If Johnson has concocted something that meets the approval of the EU and Westminster, whether through balls out steel-eyed resolute determination, or some clever customs solution, then kudos to him.

And the UK's only land border is with Eire. There is obvious sense in Eire wanting a free border with NI, but by the same logic the UK should want a free border with all it's nearest overseas neighbours in Western Europe than the other major markets 4,000 miles away.

It would be great to know what concessions (in either direction) were offered in either the meeting with Boris and the Irish PM or between Boris and Barnier.
Certainly something changed due to one or both of these but, it doesn't appear to have been made public.

As Irelands most important trading partner, it's just possible that Boris has "persuaded" him that Ireland need to do a little more.
Alternatively, Boris, desperate to get something back to Parliament in time for "super Saturday", has thrown himself under the proverbial bus.

Anyway, it appears that we are all entering "the tunnel" and lets see what comes out of the other end , which still has to make it through Parliament.

It’s probably best that it is kept quiet unless/until they have something final to present. Otherwise it’ll start getting picked apart before it is done.

From the Irish perspective I imagine the main problems, in rough order of ease of dealing with, are that the new plan (BJ v1) is not immediately operative, the effective DUP veto on implementing and continuing it, and just having customs checks at all.

The first could be solved by an extension to the post-Brexit transition period, the second was, I assume, initially put in as a tactical concession for this round of talks. The interesting one is having the Customs border at all. As it always has been. The problem is that it is essentially trinary choice - Customs Union/regulatory alignment, in the Irish Sea or on the island of Ireland. There’s little room for compromise on that point - one side has to give way. The other can help them out presentationally but not much more than that.

Indeed, "taking back control of our borders and immigration" is bloody difficult if there isn't a border.
Although it becomes easier when people or goods make it onto the "mainland", theoretically, the movement of both goods and services will be free accross all of Ireland and with all the good will in the world, this could only be "managed" properly with a border between the north and south.
Unless everyone is going to be tagged, all the technology in the world wont prevent people and goods being moved illegally between the two halves of Ireland and without physical checks in place, I'm not sure how the movement of goods can be controlled, in fact, I'd suggest that it's utterly impossible.
Having done a lot of business over there (north and south) for many, many years and with the culture of "palm greasing" in certain areas, "smuggling" will become rife and there will have to be some "beefed up" customs checks on this side of the water for any goods coming in.

It is tricky, because according to this, it is currently unlawful for NI and GB to end up in different customs territories... https://mobile.twitter.com/IanDunt/stat ... 4613681152 Obviously legislation can be changed by a new vote, but it is another wrinkle BJ could have maybe have done without. Then there’s UK’s commitments under the Good Friday agreement, requiring an open border and an absence of checks. And finally Brexiteers’ expectation of / demand for a hard/non-BRINO Brexit. I don’t find May or Johnson hugely sympathetic, but I have to admit it is a knotty problem. Obviously the New Deal for Northern Ireland money might help, but how much is enough for the DUP to go with something that cuts at their very reason for existing? Or could Johnson even pivot to Labour MPs open to a softer Brexit deal? it’d put both him and them under pressure, if he did - but even I would have applaud his ‘bravery’.

It is tricky, because according to this, it is currently unlawful for NI and GB to end up in different customs territories... https://mobile.twitter.com/IanDunt/stat ... 4613681152 Obviously legislation can be changed by a new vote, but it is another wrinkle BJ could have maybe have done without. Then there’s UK’s commitments under the Good Friday agreement, requiring an open border and an absence of checks. And finally Brexiteers’ expectation of / demand for a hard/non-BRINO Brexit. I don’t find May or Johnson hugely sympathetic, but I have to admit it is a knotty problem. Obviously the New Deal for Northern Ireland money might help, but how much is enough for the DUP to go with something that cuts at their very reason for existing? Or could Johnson even pivot to Labour MPs open to a softer Brexit deal? it’d put both him and them under pressure, if he did - but even I would have applaud his ‘bravery’.

The point of the post is you will never get a perfect deal - it doesn't exist there are always compromises. Both sides need to agree what is important to them i.e. what they must have and what they would like to have and they are usually decided by impact on the whole - e.g. you wouldn't bet the farm but you might be willing to give in on some other elements of the deal because if it gets the deal done. The GFA maybe on of those elements that needs to be sacrificed to get the deal through for the bigger benefit of the whole?

In London the Police seem to have accepted young black people will continue to murder each other in an around East London which contains the violence into a designated area then enables them to concentrate resources into other more media-friendly activities.

Comparing "random" deaths on the streets of London, to sectarian murders in N. Ireland is just crazy (even if many of all of these are due to the drugs trade.
You appear to have stumbled on this comparison somewhere or other and believe it to be a justifiable reason for accepting a deal that will turn N. Ireland into some kind of killing fields and shame on you for doing so.
Maybe you're not old enough to remember the troubles but, for the sake of a "trade deal" ??? it would be utter lunacy.
It may be worth remembering that the N. Ireland "conflict" wasn't restricted to the border towns, most notably the Brighton bombing and the Warrington Pub bombing.
AS I said, disgusting that you would accept these types of incident under any circumstances and just to force through Brexit, is bloody disgusting.

You’re right that it does just come down to personal perspective and priorities. And fair play, you’re very frank in acknowledging potential consequences of your compromise or sacrifice. It shows a remarkable, if somewhat scary, intellectual honesty. The one thing I will note about sacrificing the GFA, is that it gives the UK freedom to unilaterally define its position, but wouldn’t be a compromise with the EU - it’d be adopting a hardline stance that pretty much rules out a divorce deal. So you’d be getting a double whammy of political and economic turbulence.

The sacrifice i’d look to make is accepting a customs union for the whole UK. My hope being that this would garner support from the control-of-immigration Brexit constituency, as well as many who voted Remain in 2016. Fair enough, the regulatory independence, ‘sovereignty’ brexiteers won’t be happy (and they’re influential if maybe not so numerous). Plus and Truss will be denied a more prominent role on the international stage. But to me that is ‘price worth paying’ to avoid risking a return of the Troubles in NI, and significant economic damage. But then I don’t give a poop about the ideological purity of something I didn’t vote for, and where you see a benefit for the whole, I see costs for all.

I would agree the customs union solves many issues but it is really the only bargaining chip the EU has and as such they will want something for it. The ability to do deals all over the world is great in theory but will take many years and the first deal that needs doing is a deal with the EU. Hammond has the right idea but there is no way the EU are going to allow the UK to leave when it wants and they will want other concessions - can a deal be done that saves face for both parties?

The troubles in Ireland towards the end were more about organised crime and same religion retribution than anything Catholics v Protestants. As said before we are happy to let inner-city young black men kill each other, we allow distribution of Class A drugs all over the country because the collateral damage is smaller than the investment required to stop it. Could the same be said of the GFA - it is no surprise the EU has raised its profile disproportionately.

An article in the Spectator today suggests the German economy would really struggle from a no deal exit for the UK - perhaps Boris telling them we will be leave deal or no deal on the 31st is being believed and being acted upon in the EU

Have you ever thought about taking a step back and pondered that maybe the media you're getting your "facts" from might be misleading you for reasons unknown? Because to anyone with their heads screwed on properly neither of the above make any sense.

coming from someone who has consistently been shown on this thread to talk complete rubbish I doubt your view of the situation or any situation actually holds any weight. Just run along to your next Momentum meeting and don't forget to pray to Tusk 5 times a day.