Messages

In Northern Ireland what percentage of those promoting the language are of the gobshite / Political division type though? That's before we discuss do we actually even need it for those that just like it? My view on the latter is yes but don't spend disproportionate public funds on it, my view on the former is that it is a Political thing often promoted by the abhorrent. "Every word spoken in Irish is a nail toward a united Ireland" - to even consider such a term with what people speak is mad in my view and whatever this Irish is should be opposed. If these Shinners and republicans hijack their language then the language enthusiasts know where the remedy needs applied, not with those put off it by these people.

So the point moves from "Irish is a language cobbled together for political purposes" to "The Irish language has been hijacked for political purposes".   

I reiterate if you started with the latter viewpoint you would not have alienated a vast swathe of people who might actually have been willing to discuss the latter.

/Jim.

I feel that a lot of British Irishmen lose out on Irish culture because the Irishness that is dominant has been highly Politicised which has the effect of excluding people from it. There is no doubt about that in my mind.  Is that intolerance or bogotry?  It possibly, even probably, has led to a prejudice in me against things "Irish" because the dominant thread in Irish culture appears to be anti-Brit. Is that right? I would argue ye, but it may possibly not be but that is the perception.  It doesn't mean that I am any less Irish in my mind though, but I just can't identify with that sort of Irishness and don't like it being presented as Irish. I think there is a whole pile more to being Irish than the narrow version that this board subscribes to.  Now, the questions and the type of discussion that Jim Murphy is conducting is reasonable, interesting, and informative. However, it isn't for this thread.  What I don't get is that so many people in Ireland have a British culture and have contributed to British culture, country and Army for hundreds of years.  Why is it a surprise now that Irish people are doing this at the moment? The criticism that I have heard has been from the anti-Brit brigade of Ireland so that's to be expected, but others?

Whether the points I made are relevant to the thread or not is a moot point.  There were in direct answer to a post you made and deserve answer.

Either way you have changed your point from first post to last by moving from a position of mocking Irish culture to claiming to be excluded from it due to various reasons.

I would suggest if you want to engage in "reasonable, interesting and informative" debate you would select something akin to the latter position so we could look at those reasons that contribute to your alienation, rather than having to deal with blanket insults.

And as for the actual thread started.  The title of the original article is a nonsense by your reasoning.  If the Irish were always joining the British Army "for hundreds of years" then the current climate is no different really and doesn't deserve comment.  As for Sinn Féin/republicans being unhappy about it: what do you expect given their political outlook?

/Jim.

I have no doubt that there was a separate culture on this island at one stage.  Is that the culture now? Is that Irish or Irish culture? I just see the cultures now pretty much intertwined (to use your word) and those that are highlighting differences tend to have a Political objective in this.  Those of us from Ireland who are British have largely lost out on a richer cultural exposure of the many cultural aspects of this island because culture has largely been designed to be different in order to make a Political point.

You are saying two different things in one sentence:

• There are people who highlight the differences between the cultures to make a political point
• These differences are largely "designed" into the cultures for political reasons

The former is a reasonable point and one that could be made about "British" and "Irish" people of all hues. 

The latter is very dubious.  It is reasonable to say it is an opinion but backing it up with a rationale of "I just don't get it" is nonsensical, particularly when contrary evidence is so readily available.  Do you think that Book of Kells, Annals of the Four Master or 18th century Róisín Dubh style poetry was engineered in 1920's Ireland to somehow justify the existance of a separate state.

The language bit is completely lost on me. I just don't see the need for it as I speak for communication.  If people want to learn it I am all for it as I would be any other harmless pastime. The vastly different promotion of the "Irish" language in Ireland (both ROI and NI) in proportion to other pastimes by groups and governments is Political though.  In NI the context is particularly horrendous. I don't know how those particular users sit with the users in the ROI but I once spoke to a Gaeltachter in Galway once and he said he hates the Northern Irish users of the language as he said they murder it.

Some people see it as critical to their identity.  It happens:  Belgium, Basque country, Brittany, Wales.  You admit you don't get it but you still weigh in with a definitive view on their motivation.  You think that is reasonable? 

As for someone from Galway and their views on Northern Irish language that could be as much about dialect as anything else.  Like any language there are dialects and pronounciation nuances from region to region.  Akin to English and Ulster-Scots maybe?

The GAA is still highly Political and sets itself out as anti-British. It is not a part of "Irish" that I could associate with yet it is definitively Irish.

Fair enough but again you were having a pop the games ("made up") not the organisation.

All in all Jim there are a whole raft of cultural quirks and debates to be had.  I just don't get the anti-British bits and because the cultures are so intertwined and the people of these islands have co-habited and interbred that to be shocked at why an Irish person would join the Army is surprising apart from the usual Irish=anti-British quarters.  I could understand why someone would say they didn't want anyone to join the Army because of what is involved, but that wouldn't matter whether the recruit was from Dingle, Donaghadee or Donnnigton.

Listen Roger someone could be anti-British Army without being anti-British.  Someone from Donnington is not going to have immediate family/friends who suffered at the hands of the British Army where as some from Dingle or Donaghadee may well have.  Then there is also plenty of people (as there is plenty of British people) who would see joining an army of any other state as disloyal. 

Oodles of reasons: so why go with lazy, hackneyed and jaundiced view of Irish=Anti-British?

/Jim.

I suppose it's a bit harsh but I just don't get the "Irish" culture that the "Irish" have.  I do see it as largely anti-British and feel totally outside it. Yet I see massive overlaps and to me it is just a British region in denial with some nasty bits bolted on. 

Any cursory research into Irish literature or music for example would dispel that fairly quick.  Irish culture existed independently of British culture and then became entwined.  The differences are more pre-existing than add-ons.  No doubt you have no desire/need/intent to do such research: fair enough.  But then please don't pontificate about what you don't know about.

Who is promoting most this cultural language and for what reason?

Be less insular Roger, look outside the Northern Ireland context.  Many academics, hobbyists and people from genuine Gaeltachts promote the language.  This would include many British people from Scotland.

No but what was the reason for making them up? Most sports are made up for sports reasons.

Michael Cusack started the GAA in response to a highly politicised effort to eradicate certain aspects of culture.  This is historical fact. It is evidence by British statute books from approx. 1750 - 1890.  It in no way takes away from the merits of the games themselves.

/Jim.

A few made up sports heavily submerged in anti-British stuff, a cobbled together language hi-jacked by the most anti-British, and dressing up as leprechauns on St Patrick's (a Brit) day and getting pished to then sing traditional laments generally about how bad the Brits are.  Riverdance wasn't bad mind.

Wow ignorance to go with the arrogance. 

/Jim.

Wee moans about the Army are just more of the nonsense which they haven't really subscribed to or else moans from those that are deluded Shinner types.

You see there's the arrogance again...they are a multitude of (perfectly valid) reasons other than "nonsense" and "Shinner delusion" why an Irish person would have an issue with the British Army and those that join it but hey let's ignore that just because they have the temerity to shop in Tesco and watch Coronation Street.

And for the record Roger there is hell of a lot more to Irish culture and identity than being anti-British.

/Jim.

Deranged? I've never heard of anyone from such a background ever contemplating such a move, far less going ahead with it. As I see it, a military career appeals to some people, but doesn't to others. Obviously the latter would never join the IDF or any other army.

As for the former, if you want to be a soldier, why would you join the IDF to further your ambitions when the British armed forces are open to you? It's a bit like a young footballer deciding to play for e.g. St. Pats Athletic or Galway Utd or someone, in preference to an offer from Chelsea or Man Utd...

Even those who want to be in the armed forces, but disapprove of Iraq etc, can always find a branch of the Services where they're unlikely to be sent there - the Royal Navy, perhaps, or a specialist unit? Some people on this Board who disapprove of the British Army etc seem to think it is entirely composed of infantry squaddies or Paras, or Marines etc, who are the ones who usually see the dirty end of the action. However, there is a whole range of other specialist units whose duties vary enormously. Which, btw, is likely one of the attractions for Irish recruits, not really available in the IDF.

P.S. To answer your question directly, in the highly unlikely event of an NI Unionist deciding to join the IDF, I'd say the reaction would vary from (benign) bemusement, via suspicion, to outright hostility, depending on how hardline his background/neighbourhood is. But as I say, I really can't imagine it ever happening.

I asked the questioned because I believe that the direct answer to my question is a lot less on the benign side and more towards hostility.  Joining an army of a foreign power!?!!?  How disloyal etc..  I think it's a point that many unionists should take on board before lecturing Irish people who have a similar reaction to people joining the British Army.  That's before we even talk about the emotiveness to those in the Republic who have relatives (very recent, in my case grandparents) who were at the receiving end of said British Army.

Also tbhe Irish Army have a very proud record in the field of peace-keeping.  Personally if I was inclined towards military service I'd rather be working in Chad with the Rangers and regular troops than illegally occupying Iraq.

I think anyone how doesn't consider the above emotiveness is arrogant and anyone who demeans the Irish peacekeeping contribution is ignorant.

/Jim.

A genuine question:  How would a person from Northern Ireland who joined the Irish Army be regarded in the unionist/loyalist community? - As a career soldier, someone committing treason or somewhere in the middle?

/Jim.

no one said it was all of Ireland but it is certainly a massive part of it. Can you understand that.

Hmmm.. majority rules, like it or lump it.  Live with our identity and get on with it.

You are not a Ulster Unionist circa 1967 are you?

/Jim.

I must say, Irelands Call is truly woeful...not to mention the bit about 'answering our country's call'. What country?  

Ireland's Call may not be to everyone tastes musically.  That said not many anthem's are (Apart from France) but people are just used to them.  As for countries vs. country I'd think you are crediting Mr. Coulter with too much if you think that is some kind of deliberate slight.

Since, at Ravenhill, the IRFU went back on the long standing convention of playing the host nation anthem, Ireland rugby team no longer represents us all, from all traditions. It represents only one political outlook on the island. The Unionist opinion isnt deemed worthy of respect by the iRFU and it was clearly felt that the Nationalist community, north and south, wouldnt have been magnanimous enough to repsect that. True or not, I dont know?
As such,  the IRFU may as well revert to the Republic's anthem only, home and away. The team isnt one I identify with any longer. Continuing with Ireland's Call serves no purpose. The damage has been done.

While I have made my opinion clear about the correct form of action, the seems to be a certain element in Northern Ireland that see fit to be offended by motivations that are not necessarily there.  As for damage being done over one incident I think you are being a tad prickly if you say the situation is irredeemable.   Anyhow the flow from Connolly Station at the All-Black game suggests not everyone in Da'North shares your outlook.

/Jim.

There are 3 ways to be consistent:

1) Play the anthem of the home state and nothing else.  Amhrán na bhFiann in the Republic and God Save The Queen in Northern Ireland.
2) Play Ireland's Call only
3) Play Ireland's Call and the anthem of the home state.

In my opinion, 1 is not a runner.  In a rugby context GSTQ is the English anthem...end of.  3 is cumbersome and the fact that IRFU did not follow the policy in Ravenhill last year makes a mockery of it anyway.

That leaves option 2 as the best possible solution.

/Jim.

I think O'Gara has blown his chance his chance of being number 10 for the Loins unless he has a super 6 nations. It is starting to look like O'Gara just cant cut it at international level!!!!

McCaw stated after the game that they had a plan to target him....and it worked to perfection.  He'd be well behind the Welsh boys in Lions terms because it's happened too often at this stage.  A good 6-Nations for Cipriani would mean that the Sky-Hype machine would push him into pole position.

It appears Contepomi is out next weekend which is a plus.  (Although as Munster have shown, he is another than crumbles when targetted).

/Jim.

The ranking system is explained here

http://www.irb.com/rankings/explain/index.html

As far as I can see, if Ireland lose (by any margin) and Scotland win, then Ireland drop below Scotland in the rankings.

Scotland are 0.26 points behind Ireland. Because of the gap in rating between Scotland and Canada, Scotland will get no ranking points for beating Canada, whatever the margin. If Scotland lose they'll drop about two points and if they draw they'll drop about one point and in either case, Ireland stay ahead of them no matter what the result against Argentina.

But if Scotland win, Ireland can only afford to drop 0.26 points. However, a loss to Argentina, by any margin, would lose them at least 0.7 of a point, as far as I can see from the graphs. A draw or a win would gain Ireland fractional points.

Thanks for that Hardy.  A case of must win against the Pumas so..... 

/Jim.

I thought that Ireland were now safe in 8th position, had heard that Scotlands penalty miss in the last few minutes cost them (woeful miss as well)

Ireland could be in trouble if the lose by more than 15points.  A 15point margin increases the effect of a win/loss.  The strength of opposition is also a factor.  I'm not sure where the actually specifics of points/weighting are published but I'd say a 15 point+ win for Scotland coupled with a 15 point+ loss for Ireland would make things very tight.

The Scottish penalty had no particularly bearing as they still would have lost the game...

/Jim.

How come nobody ever invades Switzerland?

Because of the knives..............

/Jim.