Or will the EU go for the metaphorical Bullseye caravan and force a UK crash out, confident in the knowledge that we’ll be begging to rejoin in 5 years and they can dictate terms?

strutss i think you are on the money.

"Or will the EU go for the metaphorical Bullseye caravan and force a UK crash out..."

"Come and take a look at what you could've won"

Deffo unhinged. 

The EU might be a bunch of corrupt, ruthless, snobbish, misogynistic, unpatriotic bounders, but at least they act rationally. 

I suspect she is mentally unhinged by now I’m sorry to say.

The EU need to be forced with the reality of what will happen to Ireland and what will happen to their own economy.  May has gone cap in hand and they have seen it.  Weak.

Delay for six months then tell them they will face a 50% punitive tariff on any imported goods that we can source elsewhere and we will give them a 0 rate tariff.

The only option at this stage is to start a trade war or at least threaten it unless they start acting like fooking grown ups.  And we’ll starve the fook out of Ireland while we are at it. 

fook off Tecco. 

I can't remember anyone getting this much grief when she's clearly trying to do her best with the mess she inherited. Where is Cameron these days.

Seriously Anna, we need to get aggressive.

You now full well I think that leaving is wrong but if we are going to leave then we need a strong leader who will go to EU and furnish them with a few facts of life.

Either that or we go for a full on Free Trade with RoW but massive tariffs on EU no deal situation.

Nuke them from orbit, it’s the only way to be sure.

Out of the mouths of babes. Or what chambers said. 

It's like watching a terraceful of super fat guys shouting at Lionel Messi. 

Except that Messi is gifted and has in the past presented the 2nd most potent attacking threat in the world.  Other than that, great analogy.

Nonetheless, you are to the prime minister what those guys are to Messi 

Nonetheless, you are to the prime minister what those guys are to Messi 

No.  Not at all.  He got there through talent.  She got there by taking the UKs least wanted job.  There wasn’t even a challenge or election, just a coronation.  She foolishly stepped into the chance to ‘rule’ as PM after Cameron walked.  She knew the job and arrogantly assumed she could handle it.  She couldn’t.

Her ‘deal’ is a shambles, she played the whole thing wrong.  Patel got it right in terms of how she should have been highlighting negative repercussions to other EU members if they didn’t chill the fook out and give us a break.

80% of all Ireland’s imports come in via the UK.  They have no simple logistical way to change that.  Let’s tariff the fook out of it until they run out of food, oil, medicine and see how the EU is prepared to deal with us then.

Never a good idea to threaten people in negotiations Teclis.

Patel has never got anything right in her miserable life HTH HTH.

And what Clergs said. 

Rofl ok then! 

The only sense in which she has ever been right is in the "to the right of Attila the Hun" sense. 

Honestly.  I have to come back to this ‘not threatening people in negotiations’ thing.

Chambo, seriously here, have you ever witnessed high level aggressively contested negotiations?  I mean seriously, the second email from my ex-wife-to-be’s lawyer was a blatant threat.  It happens all the time.

Ive personally witnessed a client (loooong who) give the other sides lawyers such a dressing down I thought they were going to cry.  Their own fault tbh, but still.

Never threaten in negotiations, just lol. Sure if you’re a boy scout or in the civil service rather than the real world.

I'm not a Tory and I voted to remain.  But she doesn't seem unhinged.  I don't get the logic of delaying this vote though, maybe she's thinking a bit of festive spirit from the EU.

Where I think the biggest mistake has been made (leaving aside re-running or not following the referendum) is putting all eggs into the basket for a deal.  The working assumption should have been a no deal (which is in fact the current, agreed position) and a good deal seen as a bonus.  A lot of tough talk about what she should and shouldn't accept but unless you were in the negotiations its easier said than done.

I actually don't find the backstop solution that abhorrent.  It happens all the time in the commercial world.  You agree what you can up front.  They lawyers (rightly) want it all sewn up, but it isn't possible.  You agree to negotiate the rest, which is does carry risk.  But you usually agree something in the end.  I suppose if you think the EU's just out to stiff us then fair enough, it's too risky.  But it's not an insane approach.

Ive personally witnessed a client (loooong who) give the other sides lawyers such a dressing down I thought they were going to cry. Their own fault tbh, but still.

Never threaten in negotiations, just lol. Sure if you’re a boy scout or in the civil service rather than the real world.

In the real world this isn't actually very clever. You just make yourself look like a twot. 

The way to win in negotiations is to know your stuff inside and back to front (or at least better than the other side), know what your best case scenario and your worst case scenario is (and when to walk away)  and just keep being politely and firmly persistent until eventually they get tired and give up. 

Do you think you have a column in the financial times or something?

@cookie 

I would support a rof Anna ft bit

:-) 

You’re a civil servant or formerly such and while perhaps fashions have changed, I don’t know for sure, since 2006 I can assure you that threats and highly aggressive language were very much de rigeur during corporate negotiations that I witnessed. 

None of these people are negotiators, which sticks out a mile.  

I'm not a civil servant and whilst I know that some people "negotiate" like fooking twots, it's not the most effective way of getting what you want. When the other side (usually yanks) do this I usually just let them run out of steam and then I get my way by actually knowing what the fook I'm talking about. 

I think it depends on your personality a bit too.  May doesn't like the threats.  She tried it early on over defence and so many people got upset about it she didn't try it again.  I sense she was secretly relieved by that.  Now she's getting stick for not being hard enough.

Moggo would have sorted it, with a withering stare and a baffling classical reference or use of an obscure word.  

What Anna said. Adopt your hard man approach Teclis and people will just walk away and no win-win for anyone.

It may make you feel like billy big bollocks, but in the end, counter productive and pointless.

I am not talking about litigation here, rather commercial negotiations.

About which you are, no doubt, an expert.

I don't think she is unhinged. I think she has the personality of a person who believes in following the rules. Hence, Brexit means Brexit. She might not agree with it personally but believes it is the job of the PM to deliver it, at all costs. She has no practicality. She doesn't like changing course ( we were warned abou this when she became PM) and still today she posed the question does this House not want to deliver Brexit - the House voted on it, she expected MPs to go along with her plan, any plan which made it happen, doesn't matter how etc. She understands her plan doesn't really deliver it but believes it is best that can be achieved and should trump every other consideration. It's a personality defect, no emotional intelligence but not unhinged.

No she wont give in. She is set on course of delivering it - today she more or less told the House, you voted on this, this is what it looks like, whether you like it or not. She pulled the vote because losing would imperil Brexit and she doesnt think that is an option. 

I Think when people say, we should have another ref, you are allowed to change your mind, she goes crazy, the House has spoken and thats that.

Its like suggesting the Queen abdicate. No way.

Sorry Anna you talk a lot of sense normally but you were trained by the people responsible for negotiating our PFI agreements and therefore, like all of the civil service, you have no credibility in this area whatsoever.

Chambo, please do shut up, you've never been involved (or like me witnessed) in a multimillion pound multijurisdictional transaction and have no fooking clue what I'm talking about.  Or indeed what you are talking about, in this area.

Tecco m7 you talk such obvious bullshit all of the time. FWIW I’ve been involved in dozens of multimillion pound transactions (which actually is a pretty low bar) and can count on one hand the number of times I’ve witnessed scenes like you describe. 

Yeah ok it's bullshit,  sure it is.  Good luck.  Lol.  

Lambs to the slaughter,

It's not tho, child.  But you crack on.  I wasn't saying that every single negotiation would result in threats and belligerence etc.  I would rather have hoped, however, that when negotiations for the single most important political event in our lifetimes was taking place, the politicians would have done rather better to bring forward some negotiators with a bit of aggressive nasty corporate experience.

I don't even mean lawyers TBH, because most lawyers tend to be quite civilised about things, I was thinking more of the ugly side of private equity negotiators which I've seen from a couple of different angles.  I can assure you that what gets discussed between deal teams in PE behind closed doors and far away from lawyers definitely includes threats and any other concept or tactic that may help the cause reach the required conclusion.

This isn't a time for chummy PFI negotiators or friendly Marketing directors trying to organise a discount on this year's latest CRM innovation, it's a time for the nastiest and most aggressive negotiators possible to arrange the best deal possible.  The end justifies the means.

But you carry on with your pompous holier than thou "ooh he knows nothing, it's all rosy" attitude just like our negotiators seem to have.  Bunch of institutionalised non commercial jobsworths who have sold the country short.

Better to starve the Irish eh Tecs, safe in the knowledge the EU couldn't tariff the fook back out of us?

Sure they could but we'd be free to negotiate Free Trade, zero tariff deals with other suppliers.  There would be a time of transition and it would be initially painful to adapt but rather that than either this ridiculously undemocratic faux deal that Mays PFI specialists have concocted.  

I voted to remain but I am more strongly in favour of democracy, however flawed it may be, than in our membership of the EU.

We voted, my team lost.  It does not mean we should bend over and let Europe do whatever it wants.  We should use any and all means necessary to secure a fair and reasonable exit from the EU. Our ridiculously inept civil service, cheerleader by May have not produced is as they have been too nice.  The time for nice was over, two years ago.