It makes no sense whatsoever for the EU to say they've had no workable proposals if they have had. It can be disproven. Even if I grant you that we might not want to do that now, which still makes no sense. Even in that case it could be disproven later. And for what benefit? Why would that be more in their interest than actually pointing out flaws in the UK proposals? Your plotline makes about as much sense as The Phantom Menace.
Even without having to lean on the DUP I doubt that a deal which separated NI from GB in this manner would have passed through the commons. Certainly the ERG would have rejected it as they do pretty much any deal anyway.
Er...the English court allready laid out the facts...if they had gone against that it would have been an outrage.
"We could do this"
They've said they'll consider any proposal which achieves the same goals as the backstop and are not wedded to the backstop itself but anything which achieves the same goals is going to be pretty similar. No hard border requires regulatory and tariff alignment between NI and RoI. Otherwise no deal. This has not changed.
Why? Because I can see both sides of the argument? - the idiot brexiteer and willing-to-suck-dick remainer side?
Don't think they are. Does what I wrote above make you think that they're in any way playing anything other than hard-ball?
And if that's actually the case - rather than a pragmatic fudge - then we've two choices:
You want me to apologise because someone sid the right thing?....hmmmm.
No because that isn't the point. The Good Friday Agreement has its own mandate from a referendum passed by a bigger majority where every voter was given THE EXACT TEXT of what they were voting for.
