Poll
Question:
Would you back unity if a border poll was held tomorrow?
Option 1: Yes (Northerner)
Option 2: No (Northerner)
Option 3: Yes (Southener)
Option 4: No (Southener)
Important to get a feel for both jurisdictions as ultimately both have to pass individually as per the GFA.
Northern 1 will be skewed as I doubt if there's many Unionists or Alliance people on here?
I see Angelo has voted :D
I don't think the sample population for this poll will tell us anything. A predominantly Ulster based gaa forum favour independence. Same with the GAA fans in the south, probably to a lesser degree.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 20, 2021, 03:17:59 PM
Northern 1 will be skewed as I doubt if there's many Unionists or Alliance people on here?
[/b]
I am in favour of a UI and would hope to vote positively if a referendum poll is held in my lifetime but, as the old saying puts it, the devil is in the detail.
It's quite understandable that Nationalist posters on the board seem to think that a single vote majority north of the border is all that's needed to get the job done and dusted, but I wouldn't be so sure. There's 300+ years of past history to be put aside before there's a realistic chance of a positive referendum outcome will become a reality.
I think most citizens of the Republic are in favour okay but are genuinely afraid that sectarian violence will erupt again and will spill over into the south.
I am concerned that a sizeable number of Nationalists/Sinn Feiners seem far too eager to repay with interest all the insults and humiliation to their cause right back to 1690 and beyond.
There must be a mutual acceptance before the polling booths open, that past history cannot be allowed to determine future policy. That's some ask.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 20, 2021, 03:17:59 PM
Northern 1 will be skewed as I doubt if there's many Unionists or Alliance people on here?
True but it would give a view of the Northern Nationalist population at the very least.
Not sure if I am a Northerner or a Southerner. Lived in both before going overseas. Because I was born on the Northern side of the border I voted as a northerner. Truly I have never seen myself as either. But then I was born just south of Keady.😜
Would be interested in the views of those who voted no North and South?
Would be interested to know what it would look like, healthcare etc
Nobody knows
Would be interested in how many of the Yes (Northerner) are "with reservations" or would living "free" in a UI trump all reservations about finances, health service etc.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 20, 2021, 04:58:30 PM
Would be interested in how many of the Yes (Northerner) are "with reservations" or would living "free" in a UI trump all reservations about finances, health service etc.
I think you just have to dig in for a few years and things will level out, as they do when it happens.
Germany being one example
My view on a border poll is quite simplistic really. If any man or woman who currently calls themselves Irish votes against a united Ireland then are they really Irish?? Not in my book.
I've lived in the south long enough to know that most southerners dont really care about the north.
Be interested to see who voted no Northerner.
Probably just some Dublin7 trolling.
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
Hopefully a few posters here will NOT be involved it trying to persuade people to vote for a UI in the Referendum.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 20, 2021, 04:58:30 PM
Would be interested in how many of the Yes (Northerner) are "with reservations" or would living "free" in a UI trump all reservations about finances, health service etc.
There was an interesting (two-part) article on slugger regarding "planning" apartheid with regards infrastructure in the north. It sets out the obvious disparity between east and west but also details further the disproportionate investment that has been made throughout our wee colony's history under unionist rule.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2021/03/18/tackling-northern-irelands-infrastructure-apartheid-part-1-the-problem/
Anyway, huge scope for investment once unity happens. Good driver for the economy with all the new and overdue rail links, motorways, dual carriageways and other infrastructure projects.
I also read on Twitter that the tories have sold off another 37 NHS surgeries, something the furhrer Bojo said he wouldn't do. NHS is slowly being privatised anyway, so the thought of losing it is becoming less worrying.
I also think it would be nice knowing that my taxes don't go towards nuclear war heads or a shady family of mutli-millionaires...
So at the minute it's 66% for southerners and 91% for northeners.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
I'm a Yes but realise it comes with issues for the South as the North is massively reliant on cash from London and has a public sector making up about 30% of all employment.
Boris will probably screw us out of stuff like that anyway.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 20, 2021, 09:13:54 PM
I'm a Yes but realise it comes with issues for the South as the North is massively reliant on cash from London and has a public sector making up about 30% of all employment.
There needs to hard bargaining to ensure that London cannot just f**k off and leave the place in a mess.
Utterly vital in the success of a new state is resources and services that were privatised need to come back under the control of the state.
Utilities
Roads
Health
Housing
Etc
Quote from: armaghniac on March 20, 2021, 09:41:02 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 20, 2021, 09:13:54 PM
I'm a Yes but realise it comes with issues for the South as the North is massively reliant on cash from London and has a public sector making up about 30% of all employment.
There needs to hard bargaining to ensure that London cannot just f**k off and leave the place in a mess.
True, but at least we know they stick to their agreements once made.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
You're on roll sid, the whiskey must be flowing
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
You are on song tonight, sid.
Maithiú
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking
you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
Good man, Sid.
I agree.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
Any party rushing a referendum is on a road to failure. I think 20 years is realistic and discussions should begin on a blueprint on what a new ireland would look like. It is always going to hit people in the pocket. But health service is the big one.
I think each nordie should have to apply to join individually.
Weed out the trouble makers.
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
I'm sure if you get a platform to speak on the subject like the above it will be a done deal.
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
A new and free UI is all well and good but I'm all for Larne and it's environs remaining a British enclave like Gibraltar. Otherwise all bets are off.
Excellent idea Ned.
Sammy Wilson could be their Chief Minister😃.
As regards "free staters(sic)" letting "Nordies" in....
Of course that will be the case as we have to vote on it too.
The new AI entity won't be a 1 party SF dictatorship as envisaged by some.
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Right seafoid that's you banned from county down. 😒
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
You seemed to have missed the bit where we have a vote to decide if we actually want ye
If we do
There will have be a holding pen for your ilk on the border followed by a re education camp to introduce you to gainful employment and not the notion of a socialist ie Handout Republic .
Quote from: Rossfan on March 21, 2021, 11:07:56 AM
Excellent idea Ned.
Sammy Wilson could be their Chief Minister😃.
As regards "free staters(sic)" letting "Nordies" in....
Of course that will be the case as we have to vote on it too.
The new AI entity won't be a 1 party SF dictatorship as envisaged by some.
SF are the self proclaimed only party interested in a united Ireland. Once hat's achieved I assume they'll disband.
That's a great reason to vote for a united Ireland on it's own
Quote from: clonadmad on March 21, 2021, 11:18:12 AM
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
You seemed to have missed the bit where we have a vote to decide if we actually want ye
If we do
There will have be a holding pen for your ilk on the border followed by a re education camp to introduce you to gainful employment and not the notion of a socialist ie Handout Republic .
No.
The problem with Free Staters like yourself is that you seem to be under the illusion that ye are going to be housing northerners.
It's about a the cessation of two failed statelets, one denigrated by sectarianism and oppression, the other by political corruption and private business interests.
Your comments say it all, you have utter contempt for nothern nationalists but this is going to happen in spite of how much you resist. The days of a FFG dominated FS are numbered, they have destroyed future generations of young people and they won't vote for those parties any more. Putting the bankers, Larry Goodman, Denis O'Brien and the property developers ahead of the citizen has brought it to this endgame.
It's the DUP/FF/FG who are actually accelerating this inevitability despite the fact none of these parties wanting it.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 11:37:21 AM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 21, 2021, 11:07:56 AM
Excellent idea Ned.
Sammy Wilson could be their Chief Minister😃.
As regards "free staters(sic)" letting "Nordies" in....
Of course that will be the case as we have to vote on it too.
The new AI entity won't be a 1 party SF dictatorship as envisaged by some.
SF are the self proclaimed only party interested in a united Ireland. Once hat's achieved I assume they'll disband.
That's a great reason to vote for a united Ireland on it's own
They will have delivered their mandate if they have delivered a United Ireland.
It's important then for the 32 to move to a more leftist society. Not where FFG can service wealthy billionaires at the detriment of its citizens.
Quote from: snoopdog on March 20, 2021, 05:31:34 PM
My view on a border poll is quite simplistic really. If any man or woman who currently calls themselves Irish votes against a united Ireland then are they really Irish?? Not in my book.
I've lived in the south long enough to know that most southerners dont really care about the north.
Nail on head. If you're voting no you are not Irish.
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 21, 2021, 12:24:12 PM
Quote from: snoopdog on March 20, 2021, 05:31:34 PM
My view on a border poll is quite simplistic really. If any man or woman who currently calls themselves Irish votes against a united Ireland then are they really Irish?? Not in my book.
I've lived in the south long enough to know that most southerners dont really care about the north.
Nail on head. If you're voting no you are not Irish.
What are you?
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 11:43:37 AM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 21, 2021, 11:18:12 AM
Quote from: Angelo on March 21, 2021, 08:16:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Rejoining?
This isn't about rejoining.
This is about a new and free United Ireland.
There seems to be this arrogance from free staters that they are letting us in for some reason.
You seemed to have missed the bit where we have a vote to decide if we actually want ye
If we do
There will have be a holding pen for your ilk on the border followed by a re education camp to introduce you to gainful employment and not the notion of a socialist ie Handout Republic .
No.
The problem with Free Staters like yourself is that you seem to be under the illusion that ye are going to be housing northerners.
It's about a the cessation of two failed statelets, one denigrated by sectarianism and oppression, the other by political corruption and private business interests.
Your comments say it all, you have utter contempt for nothern nationalists but this is going to happen in spite of how much you resist. The days of a FFG dominated FS are numbered, they have destroyed future generations of young people and they won't vote for those parties any more. Putting the bankers, Larry Goodman, Denis O'Brien and the property developers ahead of the citizen has brought it to this endgame.
It's the DUP/FF/FG who are actually accelerating this inevitability despite the fact none of these parties wanting it.
Socialism is great till you run out of others peoples money
I've contempt for no one on here bar you.
Actually a SF led government in the Republic would soften their cough when they have to implement the Austerity that's coming down the tracks
In any All Ireland set up the State will be run by those elected by the voters.
That will rule out loonylefties being in any kind of power.
If Sinn Féin still exist then they will be a Centrist catch all populist party. They're already heading that way with their 2 abortion positions, not to mention their everything free but cut taxes too.
Calling the 26Cos a "failed statelet(sic)" is the language of the 1950s and is now only used by brainwashed eejits.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 21, 2021, 01:18:40 PM
In any All Ireland set up the State will be run by those elected by the voters.
That will rule out loonylefties being in any kind of power.
If Sinn Féin still exist then they will be a Centrist catch all populist party. They're already heading that way with their 2 abortion positions, not to mention their everything free but cut taxes too.
Calling the 26Cos a "failed statelet(sic)" is the language of the 1950s and is now only used by brainwashed eejits.
Poor Angelo
He has more in common with the likes of Jim Alister.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need
persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
How many "nationalist Nordies" will vote NO because of their pockets?
Then there was the genius (forget his handle) on this board who suggested having higher taxes in the 26 to pay for better health care in the 6 ::)
The Free Stater partitionists getting very testy about calling out the inherent corruption associated with both parties who have governed over their state since its shady inception.
Quote from: charlieTully on March 21, 2021, 11:10:56 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:13:38 AM
It should be done in stages with Fermanagh rejoining first because Fermanagh had voted allegiance to Dáil Éireann pre 1921.
Throne would be next , then Derry, followed by Armagh
Maybe Down could be digested in stages.
And Antrim, with Larne at the end.
Right seafoid that's you banned from county down. 😒
GRMA Charlie
https://youtu.be/mkTI1L2Ap3s
Quote from: Rossfan on March 21, 2021, 01:48:36 PM
How many "nationalist Nordies" will vote NO because of their pockets?
Then there was the genius (forget his handle) on this board who suggested having higher taxes in the 26 to pay for better health care in the 6 ::)
almost all of them, a border poll in the north would be thrashed, god knows why unionists are so scared of it ::)
Personally, I would vote yes, but there is a myriad of issues that would need to be addressed, and I'd imagine any reunification process would need to be phased in over a number of years and stages.
I think that the vision any of us have of how a United Ireland would work or look depends on our ages, influences and experience.
I know that while I was in school (a long way from the border, and violence in the North was a regular feature in the news), there would always have been a pretty significant tacit support, but for us nationalist and Republicans were interchangeable. Up the ra was familiar graffiti and sentiments. I'm not interested in debating the rights or wrongs of this- Sid and Angelo are both far better equipped to do this than me, but it always struck me as somewhere between odd and sinister the portrayal in the media even from when I was a teen: it was overwhelmingly anti- Sinn Féin and the IRA, but there never seemed to be near as much about the UDA or UFF. I think that's a fair observation, but I don't have anything to back it up, so maybe I'm wrong.
Again as a teen my Dad started doing business with a few different lads from Tyrone, Armagh and Belfast for a while. It was fascinating to hear them describe day to day life, and regular encounters with the RUC and the British army, and on one or two trips with him to that part of the world I saw it for myself- in what world would it be considered normal to be questioned by a soldier with a gun pointing into the car? It got me thinking at an early age that we were living in a complete bubble by comparison, and not only were we being insulated from all this, we were being conditioned by the media and the other political parties: I always found it baffling how it seemed that the powers that be seemed so eager to condemn anything Sinn Fein or nationalist, and why? Because we were so dependent on the UK economically, we wouldn't want to be seen or heard to cause offence? There are so many strands and layers- I haven't the time, or the required knowledge or comprehension to go into so many things here.
I have noticed over the past 20 years that the school environment and attitude towards the North has changed a lot. Kids growing up now have other things that take up their time and attention. Up the ra is very rare, either written or said. So I'd imagine the concept of a United Ireland or vote, and the thought processes for people in their 20s or teens, and for those of us old enough to remember' the Troubles' are different, possibly very different.
The entire concept is big, bigger than a couple of paragraphs on a chat forum. That's my tuppence worth- I don't post too often, but I read a lot of threads every day. I try to keep an open mind, and I used to find this forum great because of the variety of views or links that I could read, and sometimes take on board for my own point of view. I know very little, and understand less, and I'm slow to make my mind up because there's always the other side of the story to consider.
Quote from: Substandard on March 21, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Personally, I would vote yes, but there is a myriad of issues that would need to be addressed, and I'd imagine any reunification process would need to be phased in over a number of years and stages.
I think that the vision any of us have of how a United Ireland would work or look depends on our ages, influences and experience.
I know that while I was in school (a long way from the border, and violence in the North was a regular feature in the news), there would always have been a pretty significant tacit support, but for us nationalist and Republicans were interchangeable. Up the ra was familiar graffiti and sentiments. I'm not interested in debating the rights or wrongs of this- Sid and Angelo are both far better equipped to do this than me, but it always struck me as somewhere between odd and sinister the portrayal in the media even from when I was a teen: it was overwhelmingly anti- Sinn Féin and the IRA, but there never seemed to be near as much about the UDA or UFF. I think that's a fair observation, but I don't have anything to back it up, so maybe I'm wrong.
Again as a teen my Dad started doing business with a few different lads from Tyrone, Armagh and Belfast for a while. It was fascinating to hear them describe day to day life, and regular encounters with the RUC and the British army, and on one or two trips with him to that part of the world I saw it for myself- in what world would it be considered normal to be questioned by a soldier with a gun pointing into the car? It got me thinking at an early age that we were living in a complete bubble by comparison, and not only were we being insulated from all this, we were being conditioned by the media and the other political parties: I always found it baffling how it seemed that the powers that be seemed so eager to condemn anything Sinn Fein or nationalist, and why? Because we were so dependent on the UK economically, we wouldn't want to be seen or heard to cause offence? There are so many strands and layers- I haven't the time, or the required knowledge or comprehension to go into so many things here.
I have noticed over the past 20 years that the school environment and attitude towards the North has changed a lot. Kids growing up now have other things that take up their time and attention. Up the ra is very rare, either written or said. So I'd imagine the concept of a United Ireland or vote, and the thought processes for people in their 20s or teens, and for those of us old enough to remember' the Troubles' are different, possibly very different.
The entire concept is big, bigger than a couple of paragraphs on a chat forum. That's my tuppence worth- I don't post too often, but I read a lot of threads every day. I try to keep an open mind, and I used to find this forum great because of the variety of views or links that I could read, and sometimes take on board for my own point of view. I know very little, and understand less, and I'm slow to make my mind up because there's always the other side of the story to consider.
A reasonable well thought out honest post. You'll not last long on here!
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Quote from: Substandard on March 21, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Personally, I would vote yes, but there is a myriad of issues that would need to be addressed, and I'd imagine any reunification process would need to be phased in over a number of years and stages.
I think that the vision any of us have of how a United Ireland would work or look depends on our ages, influences and experience.
I know that while I was in school (a long way from the border, and violence in the North was a regular feature in the news), there would always have been a pretty significant tacit support, but for us nationalist and Republicans were interchangeable. Up the ra was familiar graffiti and sentiments. I'm not interested in debating the rights or wrongs of this- Sid and Angelo are both far better equipped to do this than me, but it always struck me as somewhere between odd and sinister the portrayal in the media even from when I was a teen: it was overwhelmingly anti- Sinn Féin and the IRA, but there never seemed to be near as much about the UDA or UFF. I think that's a fair observation, but I don't have anything to back it up, so maybe I'm wrong.
Again as a teen my Dad started doing business with a few different lads from Tyrone, Armagh and Belfast for a while. It was fascinating to hear them describe day to day life, and regular encounters with the RUC and the British army, and on one or two trips with him to that part of the world I saw it for myself- in what world would it be considered normal to be questioned by a soldier with a gun pointing into the car? It got me thinking at an early age that we were living in a complete bubble by comparison, and not only were we being insulated from all this, we were being conditioned by the media and the other political parties: I always found it baffling how it seemed that the powers that be seemed so eager to condemn anything Sinn Fein or nationalist, and why? Because we were so dependent on the UK economically, we wouldn't want to be seen or heard to cause offence? There are so many strands and layers- I haven't the time, or the required knowledge or comprehension to go into so many things here.
I have noticed over the past 20 years that the school environment and attitude towards the North has changed a lot. Kids growing up now have other things that take up their time and attention. Up the ra is very rare, either written or said. So I'd imagine the concept of a United Ireland or vote, and the thought processes for people in their 20s or teens, and for those of us old enough to remember' the Troubles' are different, possibly very different.
The entire concept is big, bigger than a couple of paragraphs on a chat forum. That's my tuppence worth- I don't post too often, but I read a lot of threads every day. I try to keep an open mind, and I used to find this forum great because of the variety of views or links that I could read, and sometimes take on board for my own point of view. I know very little, and understand less, and I'm slow to make my mind up because there's always the other side of the story to consider.
A very good post.
You can see how brainwashed some free staters are by the contributions on here.
Rossfan and Dublin7 being prime examples of the type of brain donor commentary you expect. All slurs, little substance.
I got pilloried on another chat for saying that as a nationalist I need a lot of reassurance before I would commit to yes. This is mainly because of my age and stage in life. If I were younger I would enthusiastically take the chance. I would need to be sure that my health needs and retirement both of which are rushing at me quicker than I'd like , are taken care off. I make no apology for that. Secondly the threat from loyalist crime gangs would need to be addressed. I also would not wish my experience of growing up in a state that denied and denies my right to be Irish visited on those who feel that they are British.
The new All Ireland entity will have to have Constitutional arrangements for the 6Co area and for the "Ulster British"( I can't think of a better term) who live there.
Well if loyalist crime gangs get wind of people not voting for a UI based on threats from them, we all know what is going to happen.
What i do find both fascinating and simultaneously utterly depressing, is the differences in conversation between the Nationalists/Republicans/others both North and South(be that political parties, media and even forums like this. Loads of different opinions/arguments both for and against.
Is there anything like that sort of discourse on the Unionist/Loyalist side?
All roads lead to Dublin and hell!
https://sluggerotoole.com/2021/01/17/unionism-fighting-a-border-poll/
Worth a read. A fermanagh orangeman no less
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
Now Lairín that's you tould. ;D
Only extremist Nordie Nationalists count.
The other 6.3 million of us won't matter in this new Ireland.
Sounds like an Irish version of Polpotism.
Pólpota?
The mindset of some free staters is stuck in the 1950s.
Rossfan gets very tetchy when a mirror gets held up to the rampant partionism in the south.
NI productivity is lower than RoI
Plus the Loyalist work culture needs to be reengineered
Just came across this on tiktok, there are about 5 or 6 videos. On how NI is better off in the UK, and some economic 'facts'.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeA9gF5D/
Quote from: bennydorano on March 21, 2021, 08:07:56 PM
Just came across this on tiktok, there are about 5 or 6 videos. On how NI is better off in the UK, and some economic 'facts'.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeA9gF5D/
The UK hasn't been good for NI for at least 2 generations. Thatcherism is London centric and disadvantages the regions including NI
Brexit is the UK shooting itself in the foot . No benefit to NI.
Quote from: seafoid on March 21, 2021, 08:20:25 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 21, 2021, 08:07:56 PM
Just came across this on tiktok, there are about 5 or 6 videos. On how NI is better off in the UK, and some economic 'facts'.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMeA9gF5D/
The UK hasn't been good for NI for at least 2 generations. Thatcherism is London centric and disadvantages the regions including NI
Brexit is the UK shooting itself in the foot . No benefit to NI.
When it comes to public spending and austerity, parts of the UK have suffered a lot more gravely than the 6 counties
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
I think it might be helpful to consider this link on the cost to the British taxpayer to keep Norn Iron solvent. No wonder the Brits want to offload the whole goddamn lot of ye? :D
Okay the link is somewhat outdated. (Published in 2018 but the figures are substantial by any standards.
Northern Ireland fiscal deficit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Northern Ireland fiscal deficit from 1999 to 2018
Northern Ireland fiscal deficit (also known as a subvention[1] or subsidy[2]) is the amount by which the public expenditure in Northern Ireland exceeds the tax revenue collected in Northern Ireland. The deficit typically runs at a rate of £10 billion per annum which is more than one third of Northern Ireland's annual fiscal budget. The size of the deficit has been seen by some commentators as a possible impediment to the future reunification of Ireland.
Only possible, sez he?? ;D ;D
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
You say you don't want a sectarian statelet and yet you say the following?
How can the prospective unified Irish state you want not be sectarian if you're calling for anybody who votes against unification to be shot for being a "West Brit"?
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:59 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
Good man, Sid.
I agree.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you
want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you
would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you
did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 21, 2021, 09:00:46 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
You say you don't want a sectarian statelet and yet you say the following?
How can the prospective unified Irish state you want not be sectarian if you're calling for anybody who votes against unification to be shot for being a "West Brit"?
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:59 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
Good man, Sid.
I agree.
I note your lack of ability to detect sarcasm. I wouldn't go as far as having them shot, but they'd be a waste of space and a shame to their country.
If a border poll was passedd has anyone in SF considered what effect out will have on Unionists? Do you care?
They will no longer be a part of the UK so I doubt most will be happy with that. Has any policies been prepared to subsidise the costs of them relocation to the UK for example or are they expected to just accept it and deal with it. That's just a recipe for disaster and reappearance of the paramilitary terrorist organizations
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:33:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 21, 2021, 09:00:46 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
You say you don't want a sectarian statelet and yet you say the following?
How can the prospective unified Irish state you want not be sectarian if you're calling for anybody who votes against unification to be shot for being a "West Brit"?
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:59 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 20, 2021, 11:41:53 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
That should be the campaign slogan
Maybe throw in "if you don't vote Yes you're a West Brit **** who should be shot" as well
Marketing material like that will be sure to win over the middle ground
Good man, Sid.
I agree.
I note your lack of ability to detect sarcasm. I wouldn't go as far as having them shot, but they'd be a waste of space and a shame to their country.
I'm very good at detecting sarcasm and it didn't seem very sarcastic to me - it seemed half in jest, whole in earnest - especially given your other comments that I quote - which strongly imply that your preferred version of a united Ireland would not be based on parity of esteem but on vilification of those who do not subscribe to a stifling, uber-nationalistic official culture as dictated by Sinn Fein
I think it's worth putting this article up again.
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/optimized/3X/7/5/7554f7bd199fa6bd1245e664786ee3faf2db737c_2_1035x663.jpeg)
The economic debate is seperate but lets call out the bigots who are using unionism as a bogeyman to deflect from this. The same bigots have little to say when unionists discriminate against Irish culture and Catholicism in the O6 are the same ones rolling out unionist fears to avoid talking about it.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
If a border poll was passedd has anyone in SF considered what effect out will have on Unionists? Do you care?
They will no longer be a part of the UK so I doubt most will be happy with that. Has any policies been prepared to subsidise the costs of them relocation to the UK for example or are they expected to just accept it and deal with it. That's just a recipe for disaster and reappearance of the paramilitary terrorist organizations
What's another 30 years of violence, maybe if we had have stuck to our guns (no pun) back in the 20's we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough
problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 01:15:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn.
I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
It makes perfect sense.
If you're not intelligent enough to know the difference between net and gross then yea, don't continue the discussion and waste my time any further ;D
Can you point out to me where i said I was pressing for a referendum? THAT is what does not exist ;D
Just a point of reference: outside of London, ALL statistical regions of the UK, with the exception of two, carry an annual fiscal deficit. NI has been doing so annually since 1966.
I don't think any right-minded Republican is proposing unification to take place overnight, but Lar does make a good point that SF need to provide a detailed plan of how exactly it will take place. Not some 30 page summary of economic aspirations. Quite why he has singled SF out though I am not sure - there are other pro-unity parties that surely should have their skates on?
The SNP commissioned a 650 page paper on "Scotland's Future", perhaps SF are waiting until they are in government north and south before replicating something similar? Who knows. Perhaps a cross-party initiative could be formed to examine the real possibility of getting the ball rolling? We cant pussyfoot around Unionists forever.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
If a border poll was passedd has anyone in SF considered what effect out will have on Unionists? Do you care?
If a border poll was not passed has anyone in FFG considered what effect it will have on Nationalists? Do you care? If your blueshirted darlings really cared about unionism they would organise in the north instead of just using it for political point scoring. Or at the
very least, they could have supported Ian Marshall for a seat in the Seanad. A lot of people in the south use the spectre of loyalist violence as a bogeyman to reject talk of a border poll/reunification. Pity they weren't half, or even a quarter as concerned during the times when loyalists actually
were most active in killing Irish people in the north.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
They will no longer be a part of the UK so I doubt most will be happy with that. Has any policies been prepared to subsidise the costs of them relocation to the UK for example or are they expected to just accept it and deal with it. That's just a recipe for disaster and reappearance of the paramilitary terrorist organizations
Are you suggesting that the wishes of the majority be ignored incase the minority don't like it? Or are you suggesting that there should be a requirement of a majority greater than 50%+1?
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 07:06:32 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
If a border poll was passedd has anyone in SF considered what effect out will have on Unionists? Do you care?
If a border poll was not passed has anyone in FFG considered what effect it will have on Nationalists? Do you care? If your blueshirted darlings really cared about unionism they would organise in the north instead of just using it for political point scoring. Or at the very least, they could have supported Ian Marshall for a seat in the Seanad. A lot of people in the south use the spectre of loyalist violence as a bogeyman to reject talk of a border poll/reunification. Pity they weren't half, or even a quarter as concerned during the times when loyalists actually were most active in killing Irish people in the north.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 21, 2021, 09:39:08 PM
They will no longer be a part of the UK so I doubt most will be happy with that. Has any policies been prepared to subsidise the costs of them relocation to the UK for example or are they expected to just accept it and deal with it. That's just a recipe for disaster and reappearance of the paramilitary terrorist organizations
Are you suggesting that the wishes of the majority be ignored incase the minority don't like it? Or are you suggesting that there should be a requirement of a majority greater than 50%+1?
FF/FG have no interest in calling for a border poll and have never claimed to. It's SF who are demanding this so I assumed they have policies to go with this sound it's.
I realise you don't care what happens to Unionists if we end up with a united Ireland, but they are real people with real jobs and real homes. Why should all the public sector employees vote themselves out of a job for a flag?
The reality (for me) is convincing all the benefits users that losing or possibility of losing their DLA/PIPs housing welfare and other benefits will not be the case.
Public sector jobs are way to much but a proportion of those jobs will still be required, so for me that's not an issue.
Be rest assured that there will be 'republicans' and 'nationalist' looking to preserve there lifestyles and that's the key area for this poll debate.
In the short term these benefits should be covered by the uk government for a period of transition but that won't last long.
This poll is too early if done in next 3/4 years. The damage and fall out of brexit needs sorting first.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 07:45:48 AM
FF/FG have no interest in calling for a border poll and have never claimed to. It's SF who are demanding this so I assumed they have policies to go with this sound it's.
FG have no interest in holding one tomorrow. But the point you are at pains to avoid is that neither do SF. But as the self proclaimed 'United Ireland', FG at least like to pretend that they are pro-Irish Unity and such an aspiration cannot happen without a border poll. Demographic trends indicate that such a poll will happen relatively soon. Shouldn't FG attempt to be prepared for that eventuality?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 07:45:48 AM
I realise you don't care what happens to Unionists if we end up with a united Ireland, but they are real people with real jobs and real homes. Why should all the public sector employees vote themselves out of a job for a flag?
I realise you don't now, and never have, cared for nationalists in the north, but we are real people with real jobs and real homes. And we understand that partition has caused economic havoc in the north for absolutely everybody. I also realise that you don't actually care aboit unionists either. They are just useful to hold up as an excuse for your opposition to any mention of conatitutional change. You didn't answer my question(s):
Are you suggesting that the wishes of the majority be ignored incase the minority don't like it? Or are you suggesting that there should be a requirement of a majority greater than 50%+1?
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and using terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
Germany had the Schlieffen plan in World War I
Sinn Fein will have the Schleeveen plan
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/sam-mcbride-a-failure-of-unionist-diplomacy-has-left-it-more-isolated-than-for-decades-3172052
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
You could have a World Series of Border Polls
Best of 7 for the right to rule the wee six
Maybe you could even make it like a World Snooker final and make it best of 35 polls
Politics in NI could just become an endless series of border polls and SF and the DUP could forget all about any real issues
Actually they've already done that - so they might as well do it for the entertainment
Michelle O'Neill could do that triumphant Dennis Taylor finger wag when the united Ireland side wins 18-17 - like in that 1985 final, it could all come down to winning the (people of) colours
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
You might not think it suitable but its what is in the GFA which was overwhelmingly endorsed across Ireland. So you are opposed to the GFA, and advocate a unionist veto? Cos unionist vetos have always been a good thing havent they? ::)
We still haven't got an answer to the question about whether Unionists should get another go if they lose the first border poll
Nationalists will look for another go if they lose it, so why shouldn't Unionists get one?
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 09:23:16 AM
We still haven't got an answer to the question about whether Unionists should get another go if they lose the first border poll
Nationalists will look for another go if they lose it, so why shouldn't Unionists get one?
You'd need to ask Unionists about that.
Oh no wait that's right, Unionists won't even talk about the first one never mind another one!
I see the DUP pulling the Irish Language Act (again) as protest against the Northern Ireland protocol.
So they look to inflict punishment on their own rather than Boris or anyone across the water cause it's all they know.
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
As part of the new United Ireland treaty, Ulster Scots is made first official language, a bridge to Scotland is built, and the Dublin government pays for Belfast to once again start making ocean going luxury cruise liners
But disaster strikes with the launch of the Titanic 2
She's too tall to fit under the bridge, and knocks the bridge into the sea, before sinking herself
The entire party membership of the DUP is on board and goes down beneath the icy waves off Belfast Lough
Utopia awaits
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 09:23:16 AM
We still haven't got an answer to the question about whether Unionists should get another go if they lose the first border poll
Nationalists will look for another go if they lose it, so why shouldn't Unionists get one?
Unionism in their arrogance never asked for subsequent border bolls if they lost any of them.
The GFA is majority plus 1.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 01:27:28 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 01:15:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn.
I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
It makes perfect sense.
If you're not intelligent enough to know the difference between net and gross then yea, don't continue the discussion and waste my time any further ;D
Can you point out to me where i said I was pressing for a referendum? THAT is what does not exist ;D
<yawn>
Would you please go away...
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
Why would there be a round 2? Once Ireland is united following the 1st border poll then future decisions taken will be a 32 county matter. Unionists would be represented in the Dail and would be a powerful enough block there to get concessions on things important to them. Democracy is 50% + 1. Its funny how when united Ireland gets close we get the experts tell us that this is not sufficient.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 09:48:29 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 09:23:16 AM
We still haven't got an answer to the question about whether Unionists should get another go if they lose the first border poll
Nationalists will look for another go if they lose it, so why shouldn't Unionists get one?
Unionism in their arrogance never asked for subsequent border bolls if they lost any of them.
The GFA is majority plus 1.
It would be covered by a future treaty
Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2021, 09:54:02 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
Why would there be a round 2? Once Ireland is united following the 1st border poll then future decisions taken will be a 32 county matter. Unionists would be represented in the Dail and would be a powerful enough block there to get concessions on things important to them. Democracy is 50% + 1. Its funny how when united Ireland gets close we get the experts tell us that this is not sufficient.
There's nothing to say a united Ireland is close
It's highly unlikely anybody here will live to see one
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
Within 5 years I'd say when the realities of Brexit start to kick home and the 6 counties are the odd ones out.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
The Shinners here need to get on message
Some of them are going on about planning
Yet others are talking about "50% +1 is a united Ireland - end of" - or words to this effect
If the latter is true, then there's no planning needed, all that's needed is a referendum, which doesn't take any planning at all to hold, NI is well used to holding elections
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
You can't say a vote of 50% +1 = united Ireland - end of - and simultaneously talk about planning
The two are contradictory
"Planning" would effectively mean you would have to have a defined treaty spelling out the exact terms of a united Ireland ready to go in the event of a Yes vote - and that's against the Good Friday Agreement
Isn't it?
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
Notwithstanding my reservations stated elsewhere, a 50+1% will not happen, certainly not in the way you portray. In all likelihood a postive vote will only start a process if it is that close. I would hope that there is a sizeable majority apparent before the vote.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
The Shinners here need to get on message
Some of them are going on about planning
Yet others are talking about "50% +1 is a united Ireland - end of" - or words to this effect
If the latter is true, then there's no planning needed, all that's needed is a referendum, which doesn't take any planning at all to hold, NI is well used to holding elections
To be fair these are personal opinions. SF position as a party seems to be about preparation. I don't take seriously their calls for a vote and see it as a tactic.
There absolutely needs to be a plan/roadmap. It's a must and a given for all sides, 6 and 26, to consider. If anything is learned from Brexit, it's that a vote without a roadmap, only leads to disaster.
What you are saying is fine and on paper and in normal world would make perfect logic and sense. But apply that to NI where an Irish Language Act brings down the local administration for 2 years and it doesn't even affect the day to day life of vast majority of residents.
In my eyes anything done without strong cross community participation won't be worth the paper it written on and will be thrown out without a thought.
That may be wrong in many eyes but those in power in one side will only see it this way. Do we have any strong leaders who will make that move to start the discussion? I can't see it at present.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 10:16:11 AM
You can't say a vote of 50% +1 = united Ireland - end of - and simultaneously talk about planning
The two are contradictory
"Planning" would effectively mean you would have to have a defined treaty spelling out the exact terms of a united Ireland ready to go in the event of a Yes vote - and that's against the Good Friday Agreement
Isn't it?
What?
To learn the lessons from Brexit, it's not that it won by a simple majority was the issue. It was the people had differing opinions on what post Brexit UK would look like and ultimately people voted for a ideal rather than a reality.
Before a UI referendum should happen the planning phase needs to happen as to what form that UI would take. How would health, education, elections, governance be impacted and what is the future state. So on and so forth
It isn't rocket science nor contradictory.
The lessons that need to be learned are probably more from the failings on the scottish independence voted. They failed on logistical issues like currency etc and that finer grained stuff needs detailed. They also failed due to some empty promises and lies from the tories so that lesson needs to be learned from too but perhaps more from the electorate than the parties.
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 05:53:51 AM
Just a point of reference: outside of London, ALL statistical regions of the UK, with the exception of two, carry an annual fiscal deficit. NI has been doing so annually since 1966.
I don't think any right-minded Republican is proposing unification to take place overnight, but Lar does make a good point that SF need to provide a detailed plan of how exactly it will take place. Not some 30 page summary of economic aspirations. Quite why he has singled SF out though I am not sure - there are other pro-unity parties that surely should have their skates on?
The SNP commissioned a 650 page paper on "Scotland's Future", perhaps SF are waiting until they are in government north and south before replicating something similar? Who knows. Perhaps a cross-party initiative could be formed to examine the real possibility of getting the ball rolling? We cant pussyfoot around Unionists forever.
I realise that every part of the UK, London excepted, needs a financial bail out to stay solvent but that's not an issue in the present context. In the event of a unity referendum being carried, the 6 counties will leave the Union and the British taxpayer will no longer boe obliged to bail them (it?) out year after year.
My esteemed opponent claims that Norn Iron only get £5 bn of this bailout but it's what it costs the British taxpayer that's at issue here. My gripe is that SF are conspicuously silent on this matter. As you say, the SNP in similar circumstances commissioned a lengthy report to cover this and every other issue that would arise if the Scottish referendum was carried.
Yer man claims that there is plenty of evidence "out there" and tells me to look for it myself as it's no concern of his.
I have looked for it and have found out that it isn't there.
I'd have no problem voting for unity if I know in advance what I am voting for-- and agree with it. SF won't commit itself to anything or at least haven't done so to date.
Why did I single out SF ?
Because, as far as I know, SF is the only party pressing for a referendum.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:27:17 AM
There absolutely needs to be a plan/roadmap. It's a must and a given for all sides, 6 and 26, to consider. If anything is learned from Brexit, it's that a vote without a roadmap, only leads to disaster.
100%
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:27:17 AM
What you are saying is fine and on paper and in normal world would make perfect logic and sense. But apply that to NI where an Irish Language Act brings down the local administration for 2 years and it doesn't even affect the day to day life of vast majority of residents.
In my eyes anything done without strong cross community participation won't be worth the paper it written on and will be thrown out without a thought.
That may be wrong in many eyes but those in power in one side will only see it this way. Do we have any strong leaders who will make that move to start the discussion? I can't see it at present.
But suggesting that a plan can't be suitable, or even made, unless it had cross-community support is just absolute Narnia stuff which only serves to hold the idea of a democratic choice to ransom. Unionism is never going to sit down an help devise a plan to bring them out of the uk and to suggest we can't start planning until they do is either totally naive or else a deliberate excuse to avoid ever, ever planning for unity.
A border poll is going to happen regardless, so if you are waiting to start the planning until unionism wants to get involved in making it, then that just won't happen, and you'll be facing into a Brexit style poll where people don't know what they are voting for. That can't happen. Demographics dictate that the poll will happen relatively soon regardless, so the planning has to start now regardless, and anyone and everyone who wants to be involved should get involved.
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 09:50:02 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 01:27:28 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 01:15:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn.
I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
It makes perfect sense.
If you're not intelligent enough to know the difference between net and gross then yea, don't continue the discussion and waste my time any further ;D
Can you point out to me where i said I was pressing for a referendum? THAT is what does not exist ;D
<yawn>
Would you please go away...
Aye. Typical free state mindset for all to see.
To hell with the north eh
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
SF's greater push is not for a referendum, but for planning to start for when a referendum is called. Which will carry more weight in swaying the middle ground in the north: a SF plan for a united Ireland, or an cross-party plan for a United Ireland? A plan written by SF alone would be disregarded by the middle ground and used for political bickering by other parties. It would be a total waste of time and effort and would run contrary to what the aim of a plan would be: an template agreed by all who want to see unification happen.
As I keep repeating, we now have the beginnings of an economic united Ireland. That will undoubtedly lead to closer political alignment, and then you look at the rapidly changing demographic situation, then you can be sure a poll
will happen in the relatively near future. The Irish government is abdicating it's responsibility by not being prepared.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 09:13:33 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
There needs to be a plan, or better still a cross-party and cross-community agreement, of what the United Ireland would look like - how it would work in terms of elections, subventions, amalgamating public service, flags, anthems, citizenship etc
There seems to be an attitude from the most fortright people here that we just have a vote, and if the result is 50%+1 then that's everything decided and we wake up the next day in the new Ireland. That's deluded thinking.
SF and it's supporters are the ones shouting about this and ysing terms like "west brit" and "not a real irishman" for anyone who asks the inevitable questions and doesn't give an unequivocal yes.
These people would want to grow up and come out of their bubble - SF won't and can't deliver a UI on their own.
Of course we need a plan. That's what SF have been pressing the government to get the finger out on for quite some time.
As for the 50%+1 bit. You might not like it, but if a border poll is called and the result is 50.1% in favoir of unity, then it WILL be unity. That isn't delusion. It's what's written in the GFA. Just because you would like to see a bigger majority doesnt mean a bigger majority is required. Are you suggesting a greater majority should be required? And if so, how much greater?
50 plus 1% is not suitable for constitutional issues given the fluid nature of public opinion. Just look.at Brexit.
Northern Ireland is hopelessly polarised and 50 plus 1% would be really f**king stupid. The Unionists could organise a posse of Alliance voters to win 50 plus 1% round 2
You could have a World Series of Border Polls
Best of 7 for the right to rule the wee six
Maybe you could even make it like a World Snooker final and make it best of 35 polls
Politics in NI could just become an endless series of border polls and SF and the DUP could forget all about any real issues
Actually they've already done that - so they might as well do it for the entertainment
Michelle O'Neill could do that triumphant Dennis Taylor finger wag when the united Ireland side wins 18-17 - like in that 1985 final, it could all come down to winning the (people of) colours
The rules would have to be clear
Best of 5
Live on Sky
2 losses in a row gets Mid antrim
No refunds
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 11:00:55 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
SF's greater push is not for a referendum, but for planning to start for when a referendum is called. Which will carry more weight in swaying the middle ground in the north: a SF plan for a united Ireland, or an cross-party plan for a United Ireland? A plan written by SF alone would be disregarded by the middle ground and used for political bickering by other parties. It would be a total waste of time and effort and would run contrary to what the aim of a plan would be: an template agreed by all who want to see unification happen.
As I keep repeating, we now have the beginnings of an economic united Ireland. That will undoubtedly lead to closer political alignment, and then you look at the rapidly changing demographic situation, then you can be sure a poll will happen in the relatively near future. The Irish government is abdicating it's responsibility by not being prepared.
Political parties in the south can only plan for a united Ireland if all the political parties both north and south work together to come to an agreement. At the moment the two main political parties in the north won't work together and they shut down the assembly for over a year rather than come to an agreement.
I don't think a border boll is even a remote possibility at the moment and it's just political grandstanding by SF calling for one
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
Then forget about a UI for another generation. It's not a god given right either BTW.
Loyalists/Unionists by the fact that its their MO won't want a UI but they're in a minority in NI now so if those of us that want a UI don't win over these people by listening, understand and addressing their fears then we won't get one.
It's that simple.
The 3 or 4 extremists on this Board are doing a great job of alienating "freestaters"(sic) with their insults, hectoring, and general bad mouthing.
They want a"Border poll now" but then want the Irish Government to make arrangements for it first. The Irish Government have no role in the matter of course.
Then they say if its 50%+1 in favour in the North a United Ireland is then established.
They must be going to re write the GFA so that 4 million voters in the 26 Counties don't get to vote on the matter.
Sinn Féin are the main proponents of a "Border poll" so let's see a realistic practical paper on what they propose a United Ireland looks like.
And please leave out nonsense like a "32 County Socialist Republic".
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:29:30 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 10:16:11 AM
You can't say a vote of 50% +1 = united Ireland - end of - and simultaneously talk about planning
The two are contradictory
"Planning" would effectively mean you would have to have a defined treaty spelling out the exact terms of a united Ireland ready to go in the event of a Yes vote - and that's against the Good Friday Agreement
Isn't it?
What?
To learn the lessons from Brexit, it's not that it won by a simple majority was the issue. It was the people had differing opinions on what post Brexit UK would look like and ultimately people voted for a ideal rather than a reality.
Before a UI referendum should happen the planning phase needs to happen as to what form that UI would take. How would health, education, elections, governance be impacted and what is the future state. So on and so forth
It isn't rocket science nor contradictory.
But surely that's against the Good Friday Agreement
How can you negotiate a treaty about a state that doesn't exist
There were and could be no negotiations over Brexit until Brexit had been voted for
Because Brexit didn't exist until it was voted for
Also, if any united Ireland being voted on would be defined in small print
before a vote, it would be rejected
And you're never going to get a pre-vote agreement anyway on what a united Ireland would mean in practice, too many people disagree
The only way a united Ireland would be voted for is if it's voted on blind, like Brexit - with the negotiations on what exactly it is to follow afterwards
The only planning you can do is to get the UK government to set out the exact criteria for when a border poll would be called - and the criteria could only be determined by designating a certain threshold for pro-united Ireland sentiment in approved opinion polling
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 11:14:35 AM
Political parties in the south can only plan for a united Ireland if all the political parties both north and south work together to come to an agreement. At the moment the two main political parties in the north won't work together and they shut down the assembly for over a year rather than come to an agreement.
That's just, yet again, ignoring the reality. Are you seriously suggesting that unionists are going to sit down to plan for how to bring about the political change they are most opposed to? Of course they wont. No more than SF supporters are ever going to sit down with the British Government and help draw up a plan for never getting a united Ireland. Pie in the sky waffle. Turkeys won't vote for Christmas and it's insulting to them to expect them to. A border poll will be swung by the middle ground. That middle ground will only back it if they believe it constitutes a big enough effort to include those who will lose out in the referendum.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 11:14:35 AM
I don't think a border boll is even a remote possibility at the moment and it's just political grandstanding by SF calling for one
Of course it's not a possibility at the moment, but if a week is a long time in politics, then what's a decade? It's not long ago that I and others like me had to make sure we added about an hour onto any car journey we went on because of the likelihood of armed police and/or soldiers harassing us on the sides of the roads. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, compare that to today where we essentially have an economic united Ireland which can
only lead to increased political convergence, and where we are witnessing demographic changes that show a Catholic/nationalist population which is younger and growing much more rapidly than the Protestant/unionist population. You can willfully ignore that reality all you like, but it remains the reality. A border poll will happen relatively soon.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 10:58:00 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 09:50:02 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 01:27:28 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 01:15:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn.
I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
It makes perfect sense.
If you're not intelligent enough to know the difference between net and gross then yea, don't continue the discussion and waste my time any further ;D
Can you point out to me where i said I was pressing for a referendum? THAT is what does not exist ;D
<yawn>
Would you please go away...
Aye. Typical free state mindset for all to see.
To hell with the north eh
Where did I say that??? ;D ;D
No.To hell with you.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
And every other party is a disgrace for not doing so!
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:26:20 AM
The 3 or 4 extremists on this Board are doing a great job of alienating "freestaters"(sic) with their insults, hectoring, and general bad mouthing.
They want a"Border poll now" but then want the Irish Government to make arrangements for it first. The Irish Government have no role in the matter of course.
Then they say if its 50%+1 in favour in the North a United Ireland is then established.
They must be going to re write the GFA so that 4 million voters in the 26 Counties don't get to vote on the matter.
Sinn Féin are the main proponents of a "Border poll" so let's see a realistic practical paper on what they propose a United Ireland looks like.
And please leave out nonsense like a "32 County Socialist Republic".
You've made some good points, but I resent you calling me a Nordie.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:26:20 AM
The 3 or 4 extremists on this Board are doing a great job of alienating "freestaters"(sic) with their insults, hectoring, and general bad mouthing.
They want a"Border poll now" but then want the Irish Government to make arrangements for it first. The Irish Government have no role in the matter of course.
Who has said there should be a "border poll now" on the board?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:26:20 AM
Then they say if its 50%+1 in favour in the North a United Ireland is then established.
They must be going to re write the GFA so that 4 million voters in the 26 Counties don't get to vote on the matter.
Of course those in the south get a vote. Funny you don't regard as "extremist" those who are arguing that 50%+1 in the north should not be a sufficient majority - a position which runs contrary to the GFA.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:26:20 AM
Sinn Féin are the main proponents of a "Border poll" so let's see a realistic practical paper on what they propose a United Ireland looks like.
And please leave out nonsense like a "32 County Socialist Republic".
As I said above, what's the point in SF alone producing a paper? Do you think other parties would engage constructively with it, or use it for political point scoring? Which do you think the middle ground would take heed of: a plan produced with the involvement of the Irish Government and the SDLP, or one just produced by SF? If FFG have the courage of their convictions, then let them act constructively. A border poll is inevitable in the relatively short terms future. For the government parties of the south to refuse to prepare for it is an abdication of duty.
I favour a UI, but with conditions as I've outlined. It serves no purpose to denigrate people in the ROI who look north and think we don't want any of that. If you want a UI then you need to ensure that as many concerns of the various parties can be addressed as possible. It is most certainly the case that a 32 county socialist republic will not happen. Initial iterations of Unity will likely be federal and still have a big British link. Insulting unionists and citizens south of the border is not helpful.
SF produce their paper and challenge the rest to follow suit.
I never said ignore 50%+1, I was making the point us folks "down here" have to vote too.
Mind you I'd be happier with 55 or 60%.
As I said before the duty of the Government Parties in the "South" is to govern the State.
The Supreme Court decided many years ago (McGimpsey case) that the Government was under no obligation to work fir a UI under the old Articles 2 and 3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann.
Those articles are now (rightly) watered down so there's no imperative.
Edit - very sensible post by Apples.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
SF produce their paper and challenge the rest to follow suit.
I never said ignore 50%+1, I was making the point us folks "down here" have to vote too.
Mind you I'd be happier with 55 or 60%.
As I said before the duty of the Government Parties in the "South" is to govern the State.
The Supreme Court decided many years ago (McGimpsey case) that the Government was under no obligation to work fir a UI under the old Articles 2 and 3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann.
Those articles are now (rightly) watered down so there's no imperative.
Edit - very sensible post by Apples.
Imperatives wouldn't work, I sense that most of those I know south of the border would accept an orderly transition to a UI that held out the hope of prosperity for all.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 11:00:55 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
SF's greater push is not for a referendum, but for planning to start for when a referendum is called. Which will carry more weight in swaying the middle ground in the north: a SF plan for a united Ireland, or an cross-party plan for a United Ireland? A plan written by SF alone would be disregarded by the middle ground and used for political bickering by other parties. It would be a total waste of time and effort and would run contrary to what the aim of a plan would be: an template agreed by all who want to see unification happen.
As I keep repeating, we now have the beginnings of an economic united Ireland. That will undoubtedly lead to closer political alignment, and then you look at the rapidly changing demographic situation, then you can be sure a poll will happen in the relatively near future. The Irish government is abdicating it's responsibility by not being prepared.
IT seems to me that they are clearly calling for a referendum asap. I can't recall them inviting any other party to enter into discussions with them- on anything really. I don't expect any other party to produce a roadmap to anywhere if they have no interest in a referendum.
THe jibes that any Irish person is a West Brit if they won't vote for UI is ludicrous, stuff ypu'd get on a school playground.
It's like asking people to buy a pig in a poke. I mean who' commit himself to anything if he doesn't know what he is voting for?
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 11:15:11 AM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
Then forget about a UI for another generation. It's not a god given right either BTW.
Loyalists/Unionists by the fact that its their MO won't want a UI but they're in a minority in NI now so if those of us that want a UI don't win over these people by listening, understand and addressing their fears then we won't get one.
It's that simple.
Why?
You don't need to win FFG voters over primarily. I think the vote will pass fairly comfortably down south, the changing demographics will prove that.
Addressing loyalist fears is fine but this is not genuine when it comes to FFG and the Free State mainstream media. They are not for changing, they are entrenched and do not want it to happen. They are merely using Unionist fears as a bogeyman, the real reason is a United Ireland dilutes the grip they have the Irish establishment. The last thing they want to countenance is reform of their state and losing control. We've seen how insidious it is recently with them when it comes to judicial appointment.
I don't think the free staters on here on a general level are reflective of the free state itself, the demographics are changing and they are the kind of dinosaurs who can't read the music of the room. The Independent/Irish Times/RTE have been running a vociferous campaign against SF for over a decade now and they keep on growing despite their best efforts. I think the majority of people under 50 want real reform down south too.
The north will be the real battleground and the conversation needs to start.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
SF produce their paper and challenge the rest to follow suit.
Utter nonsense. And what would the rest do if SF did what you suggest? They would attack SF's plan and universally deride them as being trying to be divisive and provocative for even talking about United Ireland. Oh and misrepresent their plan as some sort of a demand for an immediate border poll.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
I never said ignore 50%+1, I was making the point us folks "down here" have to vote too.
I didn't claim you said to ignore 50%+1. I said there are others here who seem to be advocating that, and yet you don't regard their utterly anti-GFA position as "extremist".
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
Mind you I'd be happier with 55 or 60%.
I'd like to see a poll WON by at least that, but to suggest that a poll for unity of 50.1% should be honoured would be anti-democratic, ant-GFA, and an endosement of a unionist veto - any anyone who know anything about the six counties should know that unionist vetoes are never, ever a good idea.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
As I said before the duty of the Government Parties in the "South" is to govern the State.
The Supreme Court decided many years ago (McGimpsey case) that the Government was under no obligation to work fir a UI under the old Articles 2 and 3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann.
Those articles are now (rightly) watered down so there's no imperative.
All governments have contingency plans for possible future major events. The Irish Government are no different. Just bacause you believe there is no legal imperative to include something ti such a plan doesn't mean it should not be included on the grounds of responsible governance. The Irish Government drew up contingency plan in the event of Britain voting for Brexit. To suggest that they should not have some sort of a plan in place for what is an inevitable border poll, is just downright stupid. The government only a few years ago drew up an 'Ireland 2040' strategy to plan for the next few decades. To draw up such a plan and ignore, as it did, the potential for a border poll, is an total abdication of responsibility.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 11:42:20 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 10:58:00 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 09:50:02 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 01:27:28 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 01:15:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 22, 2021, 12:36:40 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:04:10 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 10:23:28 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 10:01:29 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 03:14:49 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 21, 2021, 07:19:00 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 21, 2021, 02:10:06 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 20, 2021, 09:01:07 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 20, 2021, 06:33:27 PM
Said it before and will say it again.
Any Irish person that votes against unity is an embarrassment to their country and an embarrassment as a person.
I think it's fair tos ay that a huge majority down south are in favour of a UI but fully realise that a lot of hard bargaining is needed before we can entertain any hopes of coming up with an arrangements, federal states or otherwise, that would have any chance of success.
Putting a UI together is one thing but coming up with a solution that works is going to be far harder- if unity ever comes to pass.
No "hard bargaining" needs to be done.
We're not asking you for a favour so stop letting on that northerners need to grovel to the southerners as if you're gonna bail us out or something. The irony in that too though eh.
If and when it comes down to putting an X in the box, if any Irish person votes against unity they are an embarrassment.
To whom? I can't see many southerners who see the essence of Irishness being an aspiration for unity with no strings whatever attached. They would like to be allowed the right to have some say in their own future.
To their country and to themselves, as I already said in my last post.
The fact you go on to say that they may need persuaded says it all, it reinforces my point.
"I'll only vote for a UI if it doesn't cost me any money". Plastic paddies. They'd be the biggest waste of spaces of the lot.
G'man, you're in flying form- musta been on the Lurgan champagne last night!
I'm afraid that there's a chance that you might actually be serious.
I will decide if something embarrasses me or not.
Dunno how you think people down south won't vote for UI if it's going to cost them money- all available evidence points the other way.
Back in the 90s, when the GFA negotiations were at a critical stage, the south was asked to amend its constitution to remove articles that were offensive to Unionists in general. Both articles were rescinded by massive majorities. By and large, people down here are very much aware of what is happening in the North and will do whatever can be done to bring about reconciliation between the warring factions in the god-forsaken corner of the island.
Of course, a UI will cost us money and a lot more besides but it's not up to us to make the first move.
Seems to me that all SF is doing is hyping up sectarian tensions for reasons I don't understand.
Has Mary Lou and co. come up with what should be done in the event of a UI vote being in their favour in NI? Any blueprint for the shape a UI should take?
You show me SF's proposal for their vision of a UI and I will rest my case.
Any attempt to form a sectarian state will lead to more violence and destruction and will knock the arse out of any chances of making any form of UI work. That's delusion on a grand scale.
I'd have no problems sharing Ireland with the vast majority from both sides of the community up north. But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours.
Of course I'm serious.
You can decide whatever you want, but you'll still be an embarrassment and waste of space if you vote to keep British rule in Ireland.
All available evidence points the other way but you go on to say it will cost you money and more? Make your mind up.
You are not in a position to be laying down the conditions or the requirements, nor will you be "importing" us, get off your high partitionist horse. It's funny you think that. Maybe you shouldn't have sold the north up the river back in the day.
There is no attempt to form a sectarian statelet, in fact that is what we're trying to move away from, which is what SF have been saying all along. But it's not about SF.
I never said implied or otherwise indicated that I want to keep British rule in Ireland- if you don't agree please point out to me where and when I said do.
What available evidence have you got that a UI won't cost us money? At the moment you are costing the British taxpayer the not inconsiderable sum of £15bn annually to keep your "failed statelet" ticking over.
Who is going to pick up your tabs when the British finally get this particular monkey off their backs. I never said we would be "importing" you or anything like it. You have an elevated sense of your own importance I'm afraid.
If you want a United Ireland, you'd better be prepared to muck in like everyone else and work to make it happen. also would like to see a unified Ireland, where all shades of political and religious beliefs are accommodated and no one gets preferential treatment.
Now, I might as well be trying to play handball against a haystack rather than attempting to have a logical exchange with you. You're entitled to your own political beliefs but so am I and I don't share yours. C'est la vie, I guess.
However, I have one question you can answer without compromise of any sort. Have SF given any thought to what the consequences may be if their call for a UI is successful? Have they a stated policy on what should happen next? Can you tell me where and when Mary Lou outlined their position on the matter or if it is a case of making it up as you go along, hoping everything will work out on the day?
I can't take your call for a UI seriously if you can't be arsed to consider what the consequences might be if your wish is granted.
BTW, you have never even referred to the possibility that over a million Unionists might not agree with you?
Your attempt to ask a tirade of random questions is a poor attempt to cover your tracks here.
First of all, let's be clear that I didn't say you want to keep British rule in Ireland, but you would be a waste of space and an embarrassment to the country if you did vote for that.
And judging by your plastic paddy, depending-on x y z viewpoints you're putting across, I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
You literally did say you would be importing us, I have bolded that to prove it. Deary me, you're losing the run of yourself.
Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that.
You disagree with my political view, so you don't want a United ireland then I take it.
Ah, Jaysus, would you got back and read again the bit you have bolded? ;D
If I was a preacher man, I'd use the proverb, "there's none so blind as those who will not see," as the text for my homily when preaching to the Shinners anytime.
What I actually wrote was: But we have enough problems of our own without importing yours. In other words, you will be made welcome if you left your sectarian baggage behind you.
I don't see how you could take any other meaning out of this.
As for my tirade of random questions, I'll simplify things for you. At a conservative estimate, the British economy pays 15 bn annually to keep Northern Ireland viable and I gave a reputable reference to back my assertion.
"Also, the 15bn sum you came up with couldn't be further from the truth. It's about 1/5 of that." Where did you get that figure from? I defy you to up with a credible reference to support your claim and, no, the Anderstown News won't be accepted.
You still haven't told me, at the third time of asking, where Sinn Fein's propose doing in the event of a UI referendum being carried. I have now put that question to you in 3 different ways in the hope that you will understand at least one of them.
I don't expect an honest answer now, to be honest.
I know what you wrote. You're letting on that we're "problematic" and we somehow have to grovel for yous to take us on ;D
And for that reason, I have no interest in trying to debate the matter with you as if I have to prove myself to the south on behalf of the north. If you want to know what SF are up to or what they propose then there are plenty of ways to find out.
I made a statement at the top on what I think of those who vote against unity, which I very much stick by. If you want to be one of them with your west Brit conditions then be my guest.
It just so happens that I have great respect for Wolfe Tone and for the ideals of the movement he directed, The United Irishmen.
The stated aim of Tone and his followers was to secure the "equal representation of all the people" in a "national government."
In other words, Tone and the United Irishmen strove to establish a state where all shades of opinion would be tolerated and accommodated. In my concept of a UI, ex-Provos and ex-UVF men would find a place if they undertook to work for the common good and swore to leave their past where it belongs-- in the past.
No rocket science needed to understand that, I hope. If someone chooses to be a West Brit, then that's his decision to make.
If there are plenty of ways for me to find out what the Shinners propose doing if a UI referendum is passed, then why don't you point out a few of them. I know I'd find a needle in a haystack before I'd find evidence of Shinners policy in the event of a UI referendum being carried.
Finally, and I mean finally this time where did the figure of £5 bn annually in subvention assistance come from? I say the figure is at least 3 times greater and I backed up my claims by providing a reputable link- I'm still waiting on a response to this.
Incidentally, I could have provided a lot more. Google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland" and you'll find out what I mean.
I agree with your little story, unionists should be made welcome a UI, but I made reference to those who consider themselves Irish voting against a UI.
Ask a SF representative or do a bit of research, its there to be seen. It's not up to me to sell a UI to the conditional nationalists, I've already made clear what I would think of them if they voted against a UI.
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn. There is evidence for this if you care to look. The brits are very good at telling what the gross figure is, but the gross figure isn't what the north gets.
Aw bollix, will you cut it out? ;D ;D
Yes but the NET subsidy is a fraction of what the gross subsidy is, approx 5bn.
I don't know if you plucked this from your arse or you ear but, either way, it makes no sense at all.
You are pressing for the unity referendum to be held, not me.
FFs, I don't see the need to look for evidence of anything I know does not exist. ;D
Lookit it, there's little point in continuing this discussion when you obviously can't tell your arse from your elbow.
Over and out...
It makes perfect sense.
If you're not intelligent enough to know the difference between net and gross then yea, don't continue the discussion and waste my time any further ;D
Can you point out to me where i said I was pressing for a referendum? THAT is what does not exist ;D
<yawn>
Would you please go away...
Aye. Typical free state mindset for all to see.
To hell with the north eh
Where did I say that??? ;D ;D
No.To hell with you.
You value (what
you think will be) an extra few euro in your pocket over the unification of Ireland. Have some shame.
I'd be prepared to accept a united Ireland if it meant 32 quid less in my pocket every week
But I'd draw the line at 33 quid less
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 11:43:17 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 10:00:35 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 09:50:35 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 09:38:00 AM
Any people look to have a United Ireland poll that will offer them some new Ireland?
May lock this thread and come back in 50 years and see if there anything doing cause it not happening anytime soon.
People are not asking for a poll to happen tomorrow. They are looking for the planning for a poll to start today. You can rest assured though, with the demographic and political trends going the way they are, there will be a poll before 50 years are up.
On the planning, you will need all communities represented and engaged for the planning. If it's a nationalist plan, it will never be accepted. Or if it's one sided it only representing that one side regardless of their intentions.
There is no chance you can even start the planning in current political climate and is that going to change in a generation even?
Of course you can start the planning. Those who always say we can't talk about a border poll because there is no plan are almost always the first to shoot down any talk of planning. Funny that.
If you're waiting on unionism to engage in discussion about reunification, then you'll wait from now until the end of time. What CAN be done now, is to have any and all stakeholders who are willing to discuss it, draw up the plan and present it to unionism in the hope some will consider it. Most wont and that's fair enough. They are unionists. It's the middle ground who will decide a future poll and they will only be won over by a plan that they feel is inclusive of unionism.
The bottom line is that demographics alone demonstrate that a border poll will happen in the relatively near future. Do you suggest going into it without a plan? I wouldn't.
I agree with 100% you. But SF is the only party campaigning for a referendum and, therefore
is the only party that needs to present their roadmap.
And every other party is a disgrace for not doing so!
But why do you say that?
It's daft to think other parties haven't discussed the possibility of a border poll and haven't a position prepared if the referendum is passed. BUt as long as there's no possibility of a poll, at present, would should any sane person choose to debate something they feel isn't going to happen?
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
IT seems to me that they are clearly calling for a referendum asap.
They have repeatedly called for one to happen in 5 years. It was part of their manifesto at the last election. All their utterances since have been calls for planning to begin.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
I can't recall them inviting any other party to enter into discussions with them- on anything really. I don't expect any other party to produce a roadmap to anywhere if they have no interest in a referendum.
They've been consistently calling for an All-Ireland forum to be put in place. There's no point in them talking to themselves. And as I keep saying, it doesn't matter if FFG have "no interest" in a referendum or not. A referendum is still going to happen despite them. So to refuse to pan ahead for it is shockingly irresponsible. The had a contingency plan in place for Britain leaving the EU, but steadfastly refuse to put on in place for the 6 counties leaving the UK. A dereliction of duty, given the absolute inevitability of a poll.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
THe jibes that any Irish person is a West Brit if they won't vote for UI is ludicrous, stuff ypu'd get on a school playground.
It's like asking people to buy a pig in a poke. I mean who' commit himself to anything if he doesn't know what he is voting for?
And yet you defend those who refuse to engage in a discussion about what they might be voting for. Besides, I could get into a rant about why many in the north feel disgusted about anyone in the south even having to think about whether they want the reunification and independence of their own country; particularly against the backdrop of how many in the south treated the norh post-partition, and the feeling that there was a dishonorable wrong there that ought to be righted, but I'll leave that to another day.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
75% of "freestaters" Have voted on this poll for unification. And please, I was born in Cavan and live in the west of the country now. I do not like to be referred to as a "freestater".
There's a lot of political entrenchment to the border poll down south.
I'd put the following categories
Strongly in favour: SF
Moderately in favour: SDLP, People Before Profit
On the fence: Greens, Social Democrats, Alliance
Strongly Opposed: FF, FG, Labour, DUP, UUP, TUV
I think the demographics will have a big issue. The north has a growing Catholic/Nationalist population but there's also the disillusionment of the younger generation - particularly down south with how rapid SF's growth was, a protest vote for change - something other than the FFG policies that has seen a housing crisis and dysfunctional health service. The FFG core vote will continue to fall and SF will be in government in the 26 after the next election. I'd be fairly expectant of that, when they do get in power they will then advance the conversation about the border poll.
I do see it happening in the next decade at some point and I do think that those who shout the loudest against it happening on both sides of the border are part of a dinosaur breed who are dying out.
Let's look at the political landscape of politics both sides of the border in the past decade or 15 years.
In the 2007 FS general election - FFGLAB held 148 seats of 166 (89%)
In the 2020 FS general election - FFG held 78 of 160 seats (49%)
In the 2007 Assembly Elections - DUP/UUP/TUV/PUP won 55/108 seats (51%)
In the 2017 Assembly elections - DUP/UUP/TUV/PUP won 39/90 seats (43%)
Now the Assembly elections are still pretty much a green/orange divide, the shift more represents the changing of demographics with relation to the Catholic/Protestant population.
Down south is different, it's a result of the u50 generation being foisted with the consequences of incompetence and normalising corrupt political practices from FFG governments and the people are voting for change.
Here is the exit poll from the last general election down south, FFG are utterly reliant on the vote of the over 65s
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/exit-poll-by-numbers-who-voted-what-way-and-where-1.4166978
Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2021, 12:36:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
75% of "freestaters" Have voted on this poll for unification. And please, I was born in Cavan and live in the west of the country now. I do not like to be referred to as a "freestater".
Yes but 25% haven't.
The Free State is what I refer to it as, the island is partitioned into two states. If you are a republican then I'm sure you resent the free state as much as I do and what to bring about the cessation of two failed states on this island to one which is a more fairer and equitable society.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 12:45:16 PM
The Free State is what I refer to it as, the island is partitioned into two states. If you are a republican then I'm sure you resent the free state as much as I do and what to bring about the cessation of two failed states on this island to one which is a more fairer and equitable society.
Are you sure you can make a silk purse from a sow's ear? Or more exactly two sows' ears?
Angelo has consistently asked: what's in it for people under 40 to get a Covid vaccine?
Given that stance, it seems fair to ask of him: what's in it for the people who he so dismissively refers to as "free staters" to vote for Ireland to take in the North?
Why would we? Why should we?
I'm not of that "I'm alright Jack" view on a united Ireland myself, but neither am I an "I'm alright Jack" merchant as regards the Covid vaccine, whereas Angelo is
There's a deep hypocrisy there on Angelo's part
He dismisses societal solidarity as regards the Covid vaccine, yet demands that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists in their desire for a united Ireland
That's hypocrisy
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 12:45:16 PM
Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2021, 12:36:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
75% of "freestaters" Have voted on this poll for unification. And please, I was born in Cavan and live in the west of the country now. I do not like to be referred to as a "freestater".
Yes but 25% haven't.
The Free State is what I refer to it as, the island is partitioned into two states. If you are a republican then I'm sure you resent the free state as much as I do and what to bring about the cessation of two failed states on this island to one which is a more fairer and equitable society.
Far from being a failed state, the Republic of Ireland is one of the most successful states in the world and one of the best in the world to live in
The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life
Some "failed state", eh ;D
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-un-human-development-index-2019-5303638-Dec2020/#:~:text=Switzerland%2C%20Hong%20Kong%2C%20Iceland%2C,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 12:53:25 PM
Angelo has consistently asked: what's in it for people under 40 to get a Covid vaccine?
Given that stance, it seems fair to ask of him: what's in it for the people who he so dismissively refers to as "free staters" to vote for Ireland to take in the North?
Why would we? Why should we?
I'm not of that "I'm alright Jack" view on a united Ireland myself, but neither am I an "I'm alright Jack" merchant as regards the Covid vaccine, whereas Angelo is
There's a deep hypocrisy there on Angelo's part
He dismisses societal solidarity as regards the Covid vaccine, yet demands that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists in their desire for a united Ireland
That's hypocrisy
I don't demand anything.
The FFGLab century long control of the Free is coming to an end and when that happens the momentum behind a United Ireland grows.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:00:54 PM
The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life
Some "failed state", eh ;D
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-un-human-development-index-2019-5303638-Dec2020/#:~:text=Switzerland%2C%20Hong%20Kong%2C%20Iceland%2C,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world.
Maybe you should canvas your constituency next time around to see what people think of the state.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 12:53:25 PM
Angelo has consistently asked: what's in it for people under 40 to get a Covid vaccine?
Given that stance, it seems fair to ask of him: what's in it for the people who he so dismissively refers to as "free staters" to vote for Ireland to take in the North?
Why would we? Why should we?
I'm not of that "I'm alright Jack" view on a united Ireland myself, but neither am I an "I'm alright Jack" merchant as regards the Covid vaccine, whereas Angelo is
There's a deep hypocrisy there on Angelo's part
He dismisses societal solidarity as regards the Covid vaccine, yet demands that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists in their desire for a united Ireland
That's hypocrisy
I don't demand anything.
The FFGLab century long control of the Free is coming to an end and when that happens the momentum behind a United Ireland grows.
You didn't address the point
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:04:15 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 12:53:25 PM
Angelo has consistently asked: what's in it for people under 40 to get a Covid vaccine?
Given that stance, it seems fair to ask of him: what's in it for the people who he so dismissively refers to as "free staters" to vote for Ireland to take in the North?
Why would we? Why should we?
I'm not of that "I'm alright Jack" view on a united Ireland myself, but neither am I an "I'm alright Jack" merchant as regards the Covid vaccine, whereas Angelo is
There's a deep hypocrisy there on Angelo's part
He dismisses societal solidarity as regards the Covid vaccine, yet demands that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists in their desire for a united Ireland
That's hypocrisy
I don't demand anything.
The FFGLab century long control of the Free is coming to an end and when that happens the momentum behind a United Ireland grows.
You didn't address the point
I did.
You said I demanded something.
I do not demand anything.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:02:33 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:00:54 PM
The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life
Some "failed state", eh ;D
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-un-human-development-index-2019-5303638-Dec2020/#:~:text=Switzerland%2C%20Hong%20Kong%2C%20Iceland%2C,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world.
Maybe you should canvas your constituency next time around to see what people think of the state.
You didn't address the point
You claim Ireland is a "failed state"
Yet the UN ranks it second in the world for quality of life
If Ireland was a failed state, don't you think the UN would rank it a lot lower?
If Ireland was a failed state, you'd expect it to rank, ooh, maybe 102nd, or 202nd, rather than 2nd?
Wouldn't you?
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:00:54 PM
The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life
Some "failed state", eh ;D
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-un-human-development-index-2019-5303638-Dec2020/#:~:text=Switzerland%2C%20Hong%20Kong%2C%20Iceland%2C,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world.
That index was heavily skewed by gross national income per capita, which is grossly inflated by the multinationals' leprechaun economics.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:06:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:04:15 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 12:53:25 PM
Angelo has consistently asked: what's in it for people under 40 to get a Covid vaccine?
Given that stance, it seems fair to ask of him: what's in it for the people who he so dismissively refers to as "free staters" to vote for Ireland to take in the North?
Why would we? Why should we?
I'm not of that "I'm alright Jack" view on a united Ireland myself, but neither am I an "I'm alright Jack" merchant as regards the Covid vaccine, whereas Angelo is
There's a deep hypocrisy there on Angelo's part
He dismisses societal solidarity as regards the Covid vaccine, yet demands that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists in their desire for a united Ireland
That's hypocrisy
I don't demand anything.
The FFGLab century long control of the Free is coming to an end and when that happens the momentum behind a United Ireland grows.
You didn't address the point
I did.
You said I demanded something.
I do not demand anything.
Ooh, semantics when confronted with a point you can't answer
OK, let's change the wording to satisfy your semantics
Let's say you're
encouraging or
respectfully advocating that people in the Republic show solidarity with Northern nationalists by voting for a united Ireland in a border poll
That's still hypocrisy compared to your stance on the Covid vaccine
On one issue, you're advocating solidarity - and on the other, you're an I'm alright Jacker
That's deep hypocrisy
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 01:11:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:00:54 PM
The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life
Some "failed state", eh ;D
https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-un-human-development-index-2019-5303638-Dec2020/#:~:text=Switzerland%2C%20Hong%20Kong%2C%20Iceland%2C,the%20highest%20in%20the%20world.
That index was heavily skewed by gross national income per capita, which is grossly inflated by the multinationals' leprechaun economics.
It's a quality of life index - the clue is in the name - "Human Development"
It takes into account the whole population and their quality of life and their ability to have quality of life
Are you claiming Ireland is a failed state?
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:14:03 PM
It's a quality of life index - the clue is in the name - "Human Development"
It takes into account the whole population and their quality of life and their ability to have quality of life
Next time, try reading beyond the headline.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
QuoteThe health dimension is assessed by life expectancy at birth, the education dimension is measured by mean of years of schooling for adults aged 25 years and more and expected years of schooling for children of school entering age. The standard of living dimension is measured by gross national income per capita. The HDI uses the logarithm of income, to reflect the diminishing importance of income with increasing GNI. The scores for the three HDI dimension indices are then aggregated into a composite index using geometric mean. Refer to Technical notes for more details.
The HDI simplifies and captures only part of what human development entails. It does not reflect on inequalities, poverty, human security, empowerment, etc. The HDRO offers the other composite indices as broader proxy on some of the key issues of human development, inequality, gender disparity and poverty.
Quote
Are you claiming Ireland is a failed state?
I didn't make that claim. But it is certainly an underperfomer, lacking a lot of what most other Western European countries take for granted. Most especially the ability to withstand periodic economic downturns without significant social and economic harm.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 12:16:29 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
SF produce their paper and challenge the rest to follow suit.
Utter nonsense. And what would the rest do if SF did what you suggest? They would attack SF's plan and universally deride them as being trying to be divisive and provocative for even talking about United Ireland. Oh and misrepresent their plan as some sort of a demand for an immediate border
We can't do up a paper because the nasties might give out to us!!
"Nordie" Paranoia gone mad with you..
Let them deride and pick holes etc. Challenge them to come up with a better plan.
I've been giving ye the blueprint here for 10 or maybe 15 years at this stage.
PS sadly the thread is now filled with "You are ignorings...."
Hopefully the sensible posters will continue to engage with each other despite this.
https://www.nisra.gov.uk/statistics/labour-market-and-social-welfare/annual-survey-hours-and-earnings
"The key points from the Northern Ireland ASHE 2020 show that:
Median gross weekly earnings for full-time employees in April 2020 decreased by 1% from £535 in 2019 to £529 in 2020; the first annual decrease in weekly earnings since 2014 and the largest decrease on record."
https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/earningsandlabourcosts/
Q3 20 Average weekly earnings EUR 844
That's a big gap.
Shinners who think that the Southern political class is useless don't know much about economics.
One of the biggest challenges would be how to improve productivity in the 6 counties.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 12:29:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
IT seems to me that they are clearly calling for a referendum asap.
They have repeatedly called for one to happen in 5 years. It was part of their manifesto at the last election. All their utterances since have been calls for planning to begin.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
I can't recall them inviting any other party to enter into discussions with them- on anything really. I don't expect any other party to produce a roadmap to anywhere if they have no interest in a referendum.
They've been consistently calling for an All-Ireland forum to be put in place. There's no point in them talking to themselves. And as I keep saying, it doesn't matter if FFG have "no interest" in a referendum or not. A referendum is still going to happen despite them. So to refuse to pan ahead for it is shockingly irresponsible. The had a contingency plan in place for Britain leaving the EU, but steadfastly refuse to put on in place for the 6 counties leaving the UK. A dereliction of duty, given the absolute inevitability of a poll.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 12:14:49 PM
THe jibes that any Irish person is a West Brit if they won't vote for UI is ludicrous, stuff ypu'd get on a school playground.
It's like asking people to buy a pig in a poke. I mean who' commit himself to anything if he doesn't know what he is voting for?
And yet you defend those who refuse to engage in a discussion about what they might be voting for. Besides, I could get into a rant about why many in the north feel disgusted about anyone in the south even having to think about whether they want the reunification and independence of their own country; particularly against the backdrop of how many in the south treated the norh post-partition, and the feeling that there was a dishonorable wrong there that ought to be righted, but I'll leave that to another day.
You misuynderstand me completely.
In fact, I am calling for the exact pposite.
I do not think any sane person would back SF's call for a referendum- without question. IU have no doubt that people in the South would vote Yes in overwhelming numbers if the felt they were voting for a UI that stood a reasonable chance of success.
I'd lke a full and frank discussion of the pro and cons of wehat I would be voting for and I expect most people would feel the same way, north or south.
SF are the only party actually canvassing for a referendumso SF are the only party that has to put its cards on the table and declare what they want people to vot for.
Other parties, north and south, have made it clear that they have on interest in a border polll at the moment so why shoulld any of themdeclare their positioon on something they have no interest in and they feel is not likely to happen?
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 01:24:44 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:14:03 PM
It's a quality of life index - the clue is in the name - "Human Development"
It takes into account the whole population and their quality of life and their ability to have quality of life
Next time, try reading beyond the headline.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
QuoteThe health dimension is assessed by life expectancy at birth, the education dimension is measured by mean of years of schooling for adults aged 25 years and more and expected years of schooling for children of school entering age. The standard of living dimension is measured by gross national income per capita. The HDI uses the logarithm of income, to reflect the diminishing importance of income with increasing GNI. The scores for the three HDI dimension indices are then aggregated into a composite index using geometric mean. Refer to Technical notes for more details.
The HDI simplifies and captures only part of what human development entails. It does not reflect on inequalities, poverty, human security, empowerment, etc. The HDRO offers the other composite indices as broader proxy on some of the key issues of human development, inequality, gender disparity and poverty.
Quote
Are you claiming Ireland is a failed state?
I didn't make that claim. But it is certainly an underperfomer, lacking a lot of what most other Western European countries take for granted. Most especially the ability to withstand periodic economic downturns without significant social and economic harm.
Oh I did read beyond the headline
Literally nobody says Ireland is remotely near being perfect or anything like it but we are demonstrably a very successful state and one of the best places in the world to live
If Ireland is ranking second in the UN HDI, even the most miserable, cynical curmudgeon would have to admit we're doing something right
Actually, they probably wouldn't
QuoteThe HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.
The health dimension is assessed by life expectancy at birth, the education dimension is measured by mean of years of schooling for adults aged 25 years and more and expected years of schooling for children of school entering age. The standard of living dimension is measured by gross national income per capita. The HDI uses the logarithm of income, to reflect the diminishing importance of income with increasing GNI. The scores for the three HDI dimension indices are then aggregated into a composite index using geometric mean.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:32:33 PM
Oh I did read beyond the headline
Literally nobody says Ireland is remotely near being perfect or anything like it but we are demonstrably a very successful state and one of the best places in the world to live
You claimed that "The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life" based on a very limited and flawed study.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 01:25:54 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 12:16:29 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 11:59:17 AM
SF produce their paper and challenge the rest to follow suit.
Utter nonsense. And what would the rest do if SF did what you suggest? They would attack SF's plan and universally deride them as being trying to be divisive and provocative for even talking about United Ireland. Oh and misrepresent their plan as some sort of a demand for an immediate border
We can't do up a paper because the nasties might give out to us!!
"Nordie" Paranoia gone mad with you..
Let them deride and pick holes etc. Challenge them to come up with a better plan.
I've been giving ye the blueprint here for 10 or maybe 15 years at this stage.
PS sadly the thread is now filled with "You are ignorings...."
Hopefully the sensible posters will continue to engage with each other despite this.
You are as bad as Angelo, Nordie/freestater 2 sides, same coin.
Reading some of the posts on here, I wouldn't want to share the 6 Co's with some of you never mind a UI.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:32:33 PM
Oh I did read beyond the headline
Literally nobody says Ireland is remotely near being perfect or anything like it but we are demonstrably a very successful state and one of the best places in the world to live
You claimed that "The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life" based on a very limited and flawed study.
Ireland did rank second in the UN Human Development Index
But that doesn't satisfy you because apparently
you're the expert in how to run a world Human Development Index
Forget the UN one, yours is the real one to trust, even if it's written in the back of a stamp
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
You claim FG and FF are irrelevant to you yet you spend most of your time posting about them
Nobody has to misrepresent you, and anyway your entire worldview is based on mispresenting others, truth means literally nothing to you
Keep it up if you want though, the more you post the more you turn people off a united Ireland
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 01:25:54 PM
We can't do up a paper because the nasties might give out to us!!
"Nordie" Paranoia gone mad with you..
Let them deride and pick holes etc. Challenge them to come up with a better plan.
::) Unless you are utterly stupid, you'll have understood that when I say that:
Quote
They would attack SF's plan and universally deride them as being trying to be divisive and provocative for even talking about United Ireland. Oh and misrepresent their plan as some sort of a demand for an immediate border poll.
that I'm making the point that the entire endeavor on SF's behalf would be en exercise in futility, rather than a mere complaint that "the nasties might give out to us". I'm going to be kind and give you the benefit of the doubt as say you aren't stupid, but merely are trying to deliberately misrepresent me.
FFG have been challenged to engage in
any form of planning for a few years now. Perhaps consider my question again. Which do you think the middle ground (those who will decide the result of the poll) would take more heed of: a plan produced with the involvement of the Irish Government, SF, the SDLP, and all other parties who say they want this same thing, or one just produced by SF?
And, given that a border poll is an inevitability, wouldn't you expect any Irish government to at least be prepared? and aside from that, wouldn't you think parties that call themselves "The Republican Party" and "the United Ireland Party" wouldn't
need to be coxed and cajoled into planning for a united Ireland?
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 22, 2021, 01:39:01 PM
Reading some of the posts on here, I wouldn't want to share the 6 Co's with some of you never mind a UI.
;D ;D ;D
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
You claim FG and FF are irrelevant to you yet you spend most of your time posting about them
Nobody has to misrepresent you, and anyway your entire worldview is based on mispresenting others, truth means literally nothing to you
Keep it up if you want though, the more you post the more you turn people off a united Ireland
No I don't.
I said their intransigence to a border poll does not matter. It's going to happen with or without them down the line. Nobody is calling for a border poll tomorrow. SF are actively talking about opening the dialogue for this to happen in the coming years. FFG and the establishment media are utterly against it. There is nothing FFG can do to stop this happening down the line, they won't have the numbers to do so.
Policies and decisions they choose to implement at government level do have an impact and are relevant and it's why people under the age of 50 have completely jumped ship. It's an inevitability that SF will head up the government in the next election down south.
Might be more worth your while trying to make a coherent argument than the amount of time and effort you are making to construct false equivalences.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
There is no point in a border poll if people aren't ready for a United Ireland. People are going to want answers as to how NI would be integrated.
The abortion referendum is the reference for such an important vote . A citizens assembly of 100 people taken from all walks of life debated and assessed all of the issues that were expected to come up during the referendum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Assembly_(Ireland)#Eighth_Amendment
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:47:52 PM
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:32:33 PM
Oh I did read beyond the headline
Literally nobody says Ireland is remotely near being perfect or anything like it but we are demonstrably a very successful state and one of the best places in the world to live
You claimed that "The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life" based on a very limited and flawed study.
Ireland did rank second in the UN Human Development Index
But that doesn't satisfy you because apparently you're the expert in how to run a world Human Development Index
Forget the UN one, yours is the real one to trust, even if it's written in the back of a stamp
Oops looks like I hit a nerve. For all our supposed sophistication, a surprising number of our people get ratty when our "best little country in the world" myth gets punctured. If they got half as ratty about our almost-once-a-decade average of serious recessions, or our poor infrastructure and social services, we'd have a much better country.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 02:00:12 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 01:25:54 PM
We can't do up a paper because the nasties might give out to us!!
"Nordie" Paranoia gone mad with you..
Let them deride and pick holes etc. Challenge them to come up with a better plan.
::) Unless you are utterly stupid, you'll have understood that when I say that:
Quote
They would attack SF's plan and universally deride them as being trying to be divisive and provocative for even talking about United Ireland. Oh and misrepresent their plan as some sort of a demand for an immediate border poll.
that I'm making the point that the entire endeavor on SF's behalf would be en exercise in futility, rather than a mere complaint that "the nasties might give out to us". I'm going to be kind and give you the benefit of the doubt as say you aren't stupid, but merely are trying to deliberately misrepresent me.
FFG have been challenged to engage in any form of planning for a few years now. Perhaps consider my question again. Which do you think the middle ground (those who will decide the result of the poll) would take more heed of: a plan produced with the involvement of the Irish Government, SF, the SDLP, and all other parties who say they want this same thing, or one just produced by SF?
And, given that a border poll is an inevitability, wouldn't you expect any Irish government to at least be prepared? and aside from that, wouldn't you think parties that call themselves "The Republican Party" and "the United Ireland Party" wouldn't need to be coxed and cajoled into planning for a united Ireland?
The border poll is inevitable, but it won't be in the lifetime of this government so they're not going to waste any time and energy on it and as has been pointed out previously there's no demand from the electorate in the south for them to do anything differently.
SF have been given no indication from either the British or UK government that they intend to call a border poll in the short to medium term so that also accounts for the lack of any planning for a united Ireland
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 03:07:31 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
There is no point in a border poll if people aren't ready for a United Ireland. People are going to want answers as to how NI would be integrated.
The abortion referendum is the reference for such an important vote . A citizens assembly of 100 people taken from all walks of life debated and assessed all of the issues that were expected to come up during the referendum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Assembly_(Ireland)#Eighth_Amendment
This is the nub of it all though. Would the wee 6 just be integrated into a Dail/Dublin driven UI or do we seriously need to look at a New Ireland and I'd agree that the best way to do that would be a citizens forum or similar to eek that out.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 12:45:16 PM
Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2021, 12:36:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 10:53:50 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 22, 2021, 10:48:15 AM
I cannot believe that there are so called Irish people on a GAA forum who are against Irish Unity. Hang your heads in shame. I get that there are loads of issues to sort out, no one is claiming it will be a straightforward process. But to actively be against unity is frankly disgusting.
Lets win them over rather than berate them.
They don't want to be won over but I think this board is very backward. Most of the Free Staters here seem to be died in the wool FFG supporters. FF are dust, Micheal Martin has finished them while FG are never going to be much more than a 25% first preference party, they are the Irish Tories and are toxic to anyone with a bit of humanity and sense of fairness. So this board is not really representative. Young people in the 26 have been failed by FFG policies which is why this demograph will not countenance voting for them. The momentum is building for a United Ireland and the desperate voices of opposition will not be enough to stop it.
We don't need to convince them, it's going to happen whether they like it or not. SF will be in power soon south of the border and they will be in a position to make this happen probably sometime in the next 10 years.
75% of "freestaters" Have voted on this poll for unification. And please, I was born in Cavan and live in the west of the country now. I do not like to be referred to as a "freestater".
Yes but 25% haven't.
The Free State is what I refer to it as, the island is partitioned into two states. If you are a republican then I'm sure you resent the free state as much as I do and what to bring about the cessation of two failed states on this island to one which is a more fairer and equitable society.
I am a republican however I do not "resent" the Republic of Ireland. I see it as a stepping stone for the full 32 county republic. We have a lot to be proud of against all the odds of making the Republic a successful nation. There are things that happened in it that I resent such as the power the Catholic Church were allowed to hold and the lack of action during the troubles and the downright ignoring of the troubles by many. But a strong Republic of Ireland makes unification much more likely as it will entice people from all backgrounds to want to join.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 22, 2021, 03:30:53 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 03:07:31 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 01:17:10 PM
I'm not advocating solidarity on one hand. People should be conscionable to do what they want but I think FFG are being extremely disingenuous here in their pathetic excuses to not engage in dialogue on the United Ireland debate.
A border poll is going to happen despite the intransigence of FFGLab and DUP/UUP, it's those parties who are trying to fight against the tide. It's to do with the changing of demographics on both sides of the border and both due to the failings of the states on both sides of the border.
You should spend more time on articulating your own views than misrepresenting others.
If you weren't advocating solidarity you wouldn't be calling people you think are not sufficiently pro-united Ireland for your liking "pathetic"
Actually, maybe you're right, maybe you're not advocating solidarity at all
Maybe you're actually a DUP plant who is anti-united Ireland and all your bluster here is fiendishly designed to turn people off the idea
That's just a joke by the way, mate
But that's sort of how it comes across because the way you go on there's absolutely no way you'd persuade anybody to vote for a united Ireland and chances are you'd turn quite a few people off the idea
You're misrepresenting me again.
I'm calling them pathetic as they are pathetic. I'm not asking them to do anything, I will comment on what I perceive their actions to be and in this case they are pathetic.
The thing about it is they have blocked talks on this for decades, FFG have abandoned and villanised northern nationalists for decades. They should be ashamed of that but the times are now changing, The Border Poll will be a reality, whether they like it or not.
FFG are irrelevant to me as they intransigent to any sort of positive societal impact that threatens their own vested interests.
Tiocfaidh ar la is getting closer.
There is no point in a border poll if people aren't ready for a United Ireland. People are going to want answers as to how NI would be integrated.
The abortion referendum is the reference for such an important vote . A citizens assembly of 100 people taken from all walks of life debated and assessed all of the issues that were expected to come up during the referendum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Assembly_(Ireland)#Eighth_Amendment
This is the nub of it all though. Would the wee 6 just be integrated into a Dail/Dublin driven UI or do we seriously need to look at a New Ireland and I'd agree that the best way to do that would be a citizens forum or similar to eek that out.
Of course..
There's is little point in asking one to vote for a UI and then being unwilling to let them know what sort of UI you have in mind.
I refuse to commit myself to anything until I know what I am voting for.
SF is calling for UI and want interparty discussions to begin.
So far so good...
But (all?) other parties on the island are reluctant to have such referendum now as they collectively feel that it would have little chance of success and then there cannot be another referendum for seven years.
I think it's not rocket to suggests that SF need to declare their hand...tell the people what they propose discussing with other parties. They seem very reluctant to do this and I won't back their call unless I know what I am voting for.
Last sentence is spot on Itchy.
A modern outward looking 21st Century relatively prosperous State would be more attractive to join with than a "failed State "
Uniting the latter with a failed "Statelet" would give us a Western version of Albania.
Now how do we get a work ethic into them lazy 6 Cos crowd? ;)
Clare Byrne the place to be tonight.
Topic - United Ireland.
MM, Leo, Mary Lou, Ian Jnr.
Plus Brolly, Andrew Trimble.
Be some shouting match ;D ;D
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:38:40 AM
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 05:53:51 AM
Just a point of reference: outside of London, ALL statistical regions of the UK, with the exception of two, carry an annual fiscal deficit. NI has been doing so annually since 1966.
I don't think any right-minded Republican is proposing unification to take place overnight, but Lar does make a good point that SF need to provide a detailed plan of how exactly it will take place. Not some 30 page summary of economic aspirations. Quite why he has singled SF out though I am not sure - there are other pro-unity parties that surely should have their skates on?
The SNP commissioned a 650 page paper on "Scotland's Future", perhaps SF are waiting until they are in government north and south before replicating something similar? Who knows. Perhaps a cross-party initiative could be formed to examine the real possibility of getting the ball rolling? We cant pussyfoot around Unionists forever.
I realise that every part of the UK, London excepted, needs a financial bail out to stay solvent but that's not an issue in the present context. In the event of a unity referendum being carried, the 6 counties will leave the Union and the British taxpayer will no longer boe obliged to bail them (it?) out year after year.
My esteemed opponent claims that Norn Iron only get £5 bn of this bailout but it's what it costs the British taxpayer that's at issue here. My gripe is that SF are conspicuously silent on this matter. As you say, the SNP in similar circumstances commissioned a lengthy report to cover this and every other issue that would arise if the Scottish referendum was carried.
Yer man claims that there is plenty of evidence "out there" and tells me to look for it myself as it's no concern of his.
I have looked for it and have found out that it isn't there.
I'd have no problem voting for unity if I know in advance what I am voting for-- and agree with it. SF won't commit itself to anything or at least haven't done so to date.
Why did I single out SF ?
Because, as far as I know, SF is the only party pressing for a referendum.
If we can accept that most of GB is running at a deficit then it stands to reason, NI, a periphery region of the UK was always going to naturally be slightly worse off. So even if the Troubles never happened, the North would have been a fiscal burden to GB regardless. So in a post-conflict NI, where many people want NI to "work", it is patently clear that this objective is unachievable. While NI has quite low unemployment, it has a highly unskilled workforce, less job security, is paid less than rest of UK and has a massive 20% of the workforce not earning a basic living wage.
In terms of the subvention, it really depends who you listen to. Unionists are in the bizarre position of having to argue the cost of the Union. SF are not silent on this, in fact they point to military/defence spending, servicing British debt, overseas spending and pensions which will all come off the reunification bill. The exact cost is impossible to say of course but I'd imagine even the most economic illiterate among us can see that estimates will be nowhere near the higher end of the scale (£15bn??)
I agree/disagree with your singling out of SF - yes they should be getting the finger out but so should plenty of other parties. Especially self-styled Republican ones.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 03:12:03 PM
The border poll is inevitable, but it won't be in the lifetime of this government so they're not going to waste any time and energy on it and as has been pointed out previously there's no demand from the electorate in the south for them to do anything differently.
SF have been given no indication from either the British or UK government that they intend to call a border poll in the short to medium term so that also accounts for the lack of any planning for a united Ireland
The Irish Government in 2017, produced an 'Ireland 2040' strategy, which was about making contingency plans for the medium term future. It didn't even reference the fact that a border poll in that time frame is a strong probability. Are you seriously suggesting that:
(i) A government is wrong to draw up contingency plans for the well-being of a state if those plans extend beyond the it's term in office?
(ii) That it was sensible/responsible to omit to include
any forward planning for a border poll in the 'Ireland 2040' project, given the probability of a border poll within that time frame?
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 03:48:28 PM
SF is calling for UI and want interparty discussions to begin.
So far so good...
But (all?) other parties on the island are reluctant to have such referendum now as they collectively feel that it would have little chance of success and then there cannot be another referendum for seven years.
You are again persisting with the misrepresentation that SF are demanding a poll to happen now. They have repeatedly said they would like to see on in 5 years. Not now.
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 03:10:50 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:47:52 PM
Quote from: five points on March 22, 2021, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 01:32:33 PM
Oh I did read beyond the headline
Literally nobody says Ireland is remotely near being perfect or anything like it but we are demonstrably a very successful state and one of the best places in the world to live
You claimed that "The UN ranks Ireland second in the world for quality of life" based on a very limited and flawed study.
Ireland did rank second in the UN Human Development Index
But that doesn't satisfy you because apparently you're the expert in how to run a world Human Development Index
Forget the UN one, yours is the real one to trust, even if it's written in the back of a stamp
Oops looks like I hit a nerve. For all our supposed sophistication, a surprising number of our people get ratty when our "best little country in the world" myth gets punctured. If they got half as ratty about our almost-once-a-decade average of serious recessions, or our poor infrastructure and social services, we'd have a much better country.
The only nerve you hit is your own when you decided to deny that Ireland ranked second in the UN Human Development Index, which is a pretty good indicator that we're a good country to live in
Who said we're the best country in the world, nobody I know or have heard of, there's loads wrong with this country, as there is with every country
But the fact we're demonstrably one of the better ones, near enough the top in the world actually, seems to really rankle with some terminally miserable people
Some people even try to claim we're a failed state and those people are head the balls
Quote from: Rossfan on March 22, 2021, 03:51:31 PM
Last sentence is spot on Itchy.
A modern outward looking 21st Century relatively prosperous State would be more attractive to join with than a "failed State "
Uniting the latter with a failed "Statelet" would give us a Western version of Albania.
Now how do we get a work ethic into them lazy 6 Cos crowd? ;)
NI had an industrial base
from which non Prods were excluded
Non Prods wer poor
Then the industrial base collapsed
Non Prods got educated
Working class Prods typically did not.
I think NI has a lot of margin.
Quote from: Louther on March 22, 2021, 03:55:14 PM
Clare Byrne the place to be tonight.
Topic - United Ireland.
MM, Leo, Mary Lou, Ian Jnr.
Plus Brolly, Andrew Trimble.
Be some shouting match ;D ;D
Nicely set up for the usual SF bashing RTE show.
Laughable that Naomi Long and Andrew Trimble will probably more for a United Ireland than Martin (who ridiculously claims to be republican when he is staunchly partitionist) would be.
I think of that panel only MLMD and Brolly will advocate for a United Ireland.
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 03:55:58 PM
In terms of the subvention, it really depends who you listen to. Unionists are in the bizarre position of having to argue the cost of the Union. SF are not silent on this, in fact they point to military/defence spending, servicing British debt, overseas spending and pensions which will all come off the reunification bill. The exact cost is impossible to say of course but I'd imagine even the most economic illiterate among us can see that estimates will be nowhere near the higher end of the scale
The point is that when two states separate the norm is for debt and pensions to be split accordingly and this is what is envisaged for Scotland. Now I can think of many reasons why this should not be case for NI leaving the UK, but what model exactly do SF propose?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56457295#:~:text=Finland%20has%20been%20named%20the%20happiest%20place%20in%20the%20world,Switzerland%2C%20Iceland%20and%20the%20Netherlands.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 03:57:55 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 03:12:03 PM
The border poll is inevitable, but it won't be in the lifetime of this government so they're not going to waste any time and energy on it and as has been pointed out previously there's no demand from the electorate in the south for them to do anything differently.
SF have been given no indication from either the British or UK government that they intend to call a border poll in the short to medium term so that also accounts for the lack of any planning for a united Ireland
The Irish Government in 2017, produced an 'Ireland 2040' strategy, which was about making contingency plans for the medium term future. It didn't even reference the fact that a border poll in that time frame is a strong probability. Are you seriously suggesting that:
(i) A government is wrong to draw up contingency plans for the well-being of a state if those plans extend beyond the it's term in office?
(ii) That it was sensible/responsible to omit to include any forward planning for a border poll in the 'Ireland 2040' project, given the probability of a border poll within that time frame?
2040 is two decades away. That's when we can start a proper discussion on a border poll that might have a chance of passing.
Pointless holding one in the next few years as it won't pass and it'll be at least 7 years before they can hold another one. I imagine this is why no one is pushing or preparing for a poll at the moment. Again no point planning for something so far away and unguaranteed
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 04:00:49 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 03:48:28 PM
SF is calling for UI and want interparty discussions to begin.
So far so good...
But (all?) other parties on the island are reluctant to have such referendum now as they collectively feel that it would have little chance of success and then there cannot be another referendum for seven years.
You are again persisting with the misrepresentation that SF are demanding a poll to happen now. They have repeatedly said they would like to see on in 5 years. Not now.
SF want to set a timeline for a poll and want discussions to begin now. That okay with you?
Whether you want it now or in ten years, if you set a definite time limit and you go about discussing the holding of such an election, you are canvassing for the election you want to be held. You are in active election mode.
More moderate parties feel preparing for a poll at present is not advisable and feel it will prove particularly divisive and hasn't a hope of success. It also means that the chances of a successful result will be delayed by at least seven more years, according to GFA protocols.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 05:42:07 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 22, 2021, 03:57:55 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 22, 2021, 03:12:03 PM
The border poll is inevitable, but it won't be in the lifetime of this government so they're not going to waste any time and energy on it and as has been pointed out previously there's no demand from the electorate in the south for them to do anything differently.
SF have been given no indication from either the British or UK government that they intend to call a border poll in the short to medium term so that also accounts for the lack of any planning for a united Ireland
The Irish Government in 2017, produced an 'Ireland 2040' strategy, which was about making contingency plans for the medium term future. It didn't even reference the fact that a border poll in that time frame is a strong probability. Are you seriously suggesting that:
(i) A government is wrong to draw up contingency plans for the well-being of a state if those plans extend beyond the it's term in office?
(ii) That it was sensible/responsible to omit to include any forward planning for a border poll in the 'Ireland 2040' project, given the probability of a border poll within that time frame?
2040 is two decades away. That's when we can start a proper discussion on a border poll that might have a chance of passing.
Pointless holding one in the next few years as it won't pass and it'll be at least 7 years before they can hold another one. I imagine this is why no one is pushing or preparing for a poll at the moment. Again no point planning for something so far away and unguaranteed
With Brexit and a likely Scottish break away, the next 5-7 years is exactly the right time.
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 03:55:58 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 10:38:40 AM
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 05:53:51 AM
Just a point of reference: outside of London, ALL statistical regions of the UK, with the exception of two, carry an annual fiscal deficit. NI has been doing so annually since 1966.
I don't think any right-minded Republican is proposing unification to take place overnight, but Lar does make a good point that SF need to provide a detailed plan of how exactly it will take place. Not some 30 page summary of economic aspirations. Quite why he has singled SF out though I am not sure - there are other pro-unity parties that surely should have their skates on?
The SNP commissioned a 650 page paper on "Scotland's Future", perhaps SF are waiting until they are in government north and south before replicating something similar? Who knows. Perhaps a cross-party initiative could be formed to examine the real possibility of getting the ball rolling? We cant pussyfoot around Unionists forever.
I realise that every part of the UK, London excepted, needs a financial bail out to stay solvent but that's not an issue in the present context. In the event of a unity referendum being carried, the 6 counties will leave the Union and the British taxpayer will no longer boe obliged to bail them (it?) out year after year.
My esteemed opponent claims that Norn Iron only get £5 bn of this bailout but it's what it costs the British taxpayer that's at issue here. My gripe is that SF are conspicuously silent on this matter. As you say, the SNP in similar circumstances commissioned a lengthy report to cover this and every other issue that would arise if the Scottish referendum was carried.
Yer man claims that there is plenty of evidence "out there" and tells me to look for it myself as it's no concern of his.
I have looked for it and have found out that it isn't there.
I'd have no problem voting for unity if I know in advance what I am voting for-- and agree with it. SF won't commit itself to anything or at least haven't done so to date.
Why did I single out SF ?
Because, as far as I know, SF is the only party pressing for a referendum.
If we can accept that most of GB is running at a deficit then it stands to reason, NI, a periphery region of the UK was always going to naturally be slightly worse off. So even if the Troubles never happened, the North would have been a fiscal burden to GB regardless. So in a post-conflict NI, where many people want NI to "work", it is patently clear that this objective is unachievable. While NI has quite low unemployment, it has a highly unskilled workforce, less job security, is paid less than rest of UK and has a massive 20% of the workforce not earning a basic living wage.
In terms of the subvention, it really depends who you listen to. Unionists are in the bizarre position of having to argue the cost of the Union. SF are not silent on this, in fact they point to military/defence spending, servicing British debt, overseas spending and pensions which will all come off the reunification bill. The exact cost is impossible to say of course but I'd imagine even the most economic illiterate among us can see that estimates will be nowhere near the higher end of the scale (£15bn??)
I agree/disagree with your singling out of SF - yes they should be getting the finger out but so should plenty of other parties. Especially self-styled Republican ones.
Again, that's an eminently sensible post. However, no matter who you listen to, the North needs massive injection of cash every year to stay solvent. If you google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland," you will find estimates varying between 8 and 15 billion. Whatever the true figure may be the North will need billions of outside help to survive.
That's the first issue that crosses most peoples' minds when the subject of a border poll crops up.
PS All nationalist parties claim they want to see a united Ireland but don't think that now is a good time to start agitating for one. In other words, mess this one up and cause sectarian rows and tension that will last for years. Also, an election referendum can only be held if there's a gap of seven years between referenda.
IMO, calling for an election now is inadvisable.
If it's going to be 2040 before a border poll has a realistic chance of passing, that's just enough time for the Unionists to set about reversing the outbreeding trend
They'd have to embrace Catholic Church teachings on sex for that, it wasn't that uncommon back in the day for Catholic women in the Republic to have 20 plus kids
Nationalists say "f**k the Union", Unionists could say "f**k for the Union"
The "Breed Like Rabbits" (in the headlights) campaign could catch on, especially given that a lot of Unionists don't seem to have much to do these days except sit around wishing it was 1690
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
Nope
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
I'm struggling with that part, I'd thinking both sides would be up here rather than down there.
I'd be happier if liberal prods could see the benefits first before asking a poll
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 06:20:05 PM
Again, that's an eminently sensible post. However, no matter who you listen to, the North needs massive injection of cash every year to stay solvent. If you google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland," you will find estimates varying between 8 and 15 billion. Whatever the true figure may be the North will need billions of outside help to survive.
That's the first issue that crosses most peoples' minds when the subject of a border poll crops up.
PS All nationalist parties claim they want to see a united Ireland but don't think that now is a good time to start agitating for one. In other words, mess this one up and cause sectarian rows and tension that will last for years. Also, an election referendum can only be held if there's a gap of seven years between referenda.
IMO, calling for an election now is inadvisable.
That is entirely correct, we in the north live in a basketcase. However I disagree, now is the time to turn the screw. With Scotland posed for an election in 45 days and a likely return of a majority of pro-independence MSPs (and thus a pledge for indyref2) it would be expedient of SF and whoever else to agitate for a border poll. I will admit at this juncture that Unionist concerns, at least the more belligerent ones, are far down my list of concerns.
I think that when the peace process got going the Brits made a tactical decision to reduce the risk of a return to violence by throwing money at the 6 counties. It would have been cheaper to invest in skills and productivity but they didn't.
https://youtu.be/PlGmYetiCjA
Quote from: general_lee on March 22, 2021, 08:25:18 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 22, 2021, 06:20:05 PM
Again, that's an eminently sensible post. However, no matter who you listen to, the North needs massive injection of cash every year to stay solvent. If you google for "British annual subvention to Northern Ireland," you will find estimates varying between 8 and 15 billion. Whatever the true figure may be the North will need billions of outside help to survive.
That's the first issue that crosses most peoples' minds when the subject of a border poll crops up.
PS All nationalist parties claim they want to see a united Ireland but don't think that now is a good time to start agitating for one. In other words, mess this one up and cause sectarian rows and tension that will last for years. Also, an election referendum can only be held if there's a gap of seven years between referenda.
IMO, calling for an election now is inadvisable.
That is entirely correct, we in the north live in a basketcase. However I disagree, now is the time to turn the screw. With Scotland posed for an election in 45 days and a likely return of a majority of pro-independence MSPs (and thus a pledge for indyref2) it would be expedient of SF and whoever else to agitate for a border poll. I will admit at this juncture that Unionist concerns, at least the more belligerent ones, are far down my list of concerns.
Again, I don't disagree with any of that. However, loyalist tensions are rising over the issue of having a border of any sort between the 6 cos and the PSNI say they are closely monitoring the situation Inflaming sectarian feeling right now wouldn't be advisable.
Also, you can't half turn on a light or give someone a half kick up the backside. In the same manner,, you can't half call an election. If SF had sent out feelers in the conventional way politicians communicate with each other, they might get somewhere. They know this full well and they know what the response was going to be.
Back in the Celtic Tiger days I was on pretty good terms with Bertie Ahern. Bertie wasn't a regular in the Yacht in Clontarf but he's drop in for a pint or two from time to time.
Just by pure coincidence, of course, he'd bump into Ruairi Quinn of the Labour Party. They's stop to have a quick chat and no outsider wouldn't be any the wiser. But those chance meetings were carefully choreographed. After all, they were supposed to be deadly enemies and they were but only on a political level. It was in both parties' interests to keep communication lines open.
No matter which Miceal and Mary Lou personally think of the other, it's inconceivable that there is no communication between their parties just as the White House and the Kremlin have their own protected hotline between the leaders. I'm saying that if the Shinners really wanted yo open discussions with any of the other parties they need not use the media to issue invitations to anyone.
I mean it wouldn't do Miceal or Leo's public image if they have spent their careers hopping fucks of Mary Lou's hide and then turn around and say, "Incidentally, we are have unification talks with Sinn Fein.
IMO, Sinn Fein are playing double entendre here. THey know damn well that challenging FFG or any other politician to openly discuss any sensitive issue that might go anywhere won't get a positive response from any side.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 08:15:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
I'm struggling with that part, I'd thinking both sides would be up here rather than down there.
I'd be happier if liberal prods could see the benefits first before asking a poll
All 10 of them?
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 09:14:19 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 08:15:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
I'm struggling with that part, I'd thinking both sides would be up here rather than down there.
I'd be happier if liberal prods could see the benefits first before asking a poll
All 10 of them?
Well good luck with your attitude
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 09:14:19 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 08:15:48 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
I'm struggling with that part, I'd thinking both sides would be up here rather than down there.
I'd be happier if liberal prods could see the benefits first before asking a poll
All 10 of them?
Seek Help Son
Discussion on this topic on CB Live at the minute
Gregory Campbell exemplifying the entrenched intransigence of unionism. It's going to happen regardless of the tantrum they throw. They are not for turning, they don't want to be engaged.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:03:56 PM
Gregory Campbell exemplifying the entrenched intransigence of unionism. It's going to happen regardless of the tantrum they throw. They are not for turning, they don't want to be engaged.
There is no point trying to bring people like Gregory into the conversation. He offers nothing outside of no no never.
Quote from: RedHand88 on March 22, 2021, 10:05:37 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:03:56 PM
Gregory Campbell exemplifying the entrenched intransigence of unionism. It's going to happen regardless of the tantrum they throw. They are not for turning, they don't want to be engaged.
There is no point trying to bring people like Gregory into the conversation. He offers nothing outside of no no never.
Yes and that's the largest representation of unionism and loyalism.
Quote from: seafoid on March 22, 2021, 08:43:45 PM
I think that when the peace process got going the Brits made a tactical decision to reduce the risk of a return to violence by throwing money at the 6 counties. It would have been cheaper to invest in skills and productivity but they didn't.
https://youtu.be/PlGmYetiCjA
You are on the button here! Except it wasn't only Britain who offered the sweetner.
It may have seemed strange back then that a number of different countries at the same time offered to chip in to help keep the Peace Process going but it wasn't pure coincidence.
Canada, The US, France, Germany and Japan all seemed full of good will around the same time.
I found this out years later.
Seems John de Chastelain, the principal peace broker had persuaded a number of reputable countries to offer to put up all the money needed to allow the people of Ulster to end their economic dependence on the UK. A united Ireland just might be on but this was only hinted at --nothing explicit. Well the Prods didn't bite; they wanted the money sure enough but were afraid to take the first step. They were less distrustful of the Fenian bastards they were dealing with than they were of their own followers, waiting for them to make a slip.
I believe one of their negotiators (David Ervine, I think) said he was more afraid of being stabbed in the back than in the belly.)
(Reputable means ones that the Prods might trust.)
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Bizarre attitude.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:23:03 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Bizarre attitude.
Maybe he's one of those 10 you were talking about
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
What?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 10:24:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:23:03 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Bizarre attitude.
Maybe he's one of those 10 you were talking about
Yet it's the Gregory Campbells/Poots/Steve Aikens who are the elected voices of unionism
Joe brolly is a national treasure.
You beat me to it Milltown. Some people need to get out more.
I know many hundreds of very decent Protestant people. You know....the kind in the middle ground that can actually be won over to the idea of a UI......as long as they can feel safe and valued in that new arrangement.
I've not an ounce of time for anyone here who has any other kind of view.
Catholic Protestant and Dissenter.
Remember William Orr.
Standing ovation for Claire Byrne for cutting off that absolute gobshite! She humiliated him :D
Last week RTE gave Leo Varadkar a platform yo make sectarian comments against SF unchallenged.
Tonight Claire Byrne cuts off Brolly for making accurate comments on Gregory Campbell.
The names bias is beyond the pale.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:32:24 PM
Standing ovation for Claire Byrne for cutting off that absolute gobshite! She humiliated him :D
She humiliated herself.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:32:24 PM
Standing ovation for Claire Byrne for cutting off that absolute gobshite! She humiliated him :D
He just made a **** of himself..... again...
Thought Leo spoke very well, at least the one minute clip on CB Twitter feed.
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:26:56 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 10:24:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:23:03 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Bizarre attitude.
Maybe he's one of those 10 you were talking about
Yet it's the Gregory Campbells/Poots/Steve Aikens who are the elected voices of unionism
By definition unionist voters will vote to stay in the union, it's like like saying SF voters will not vote for a UI, I mentioned the mild prod voters on the left. But carry on making a dick of yourself
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 10:39:18 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:26:56 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 10:24:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 10:23:03 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:18:26 PM
Look at that Andrew Trimble on the telly. Being reasonable, honest and balanced. But f**k him, he's a prod eh, no point talking to him.
Bizarre attitude.
Maybe he's one of those 10 you were talking about
Yet it's the Gregory Campbells/Poots/Steve Aikens who are the elected voices of unionism
By definition unionist voters will vote to stay in the union, it's like like saying SF voters will not vote for a UI, I mentioned the mild prod voters on the left. But carry on making a dick of yourself
And Gregory Campbell is the elected voice of unionism and his views are widely shared. Who is the progressive voice of elected unionism?
You are either daft stupid or ignorant. I've not mentioned unionists, but carry on
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:32:24 PM
Standing ovation for Claire Byrne for cutting off that absolute gobshite! She humiliated him :D
Yeah, that little gobshite is beyond reprehensible.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 10:45:19 PM
You are either daft stupid or ignorant. I've not mentioned unionists, but carry on
I have. Intransigent unionists cannot be engaged, they don't want to be. They are not for turning. They will be left behind.
Loyalists cannot be allowed to hold everyone to ransom. If there's a UI we'll bring out the gun. Seriously!!
So to summarize
Angelo hates people from the Republic and Protestants
Good luck in getting your socialist utopia
Jesus Martin is just a Terrible Taoiseach. He's supposes to be leading the republican party
Quote from: clonadmad on March 22, 2021, 10:57:51 PM
So to summarize
Angelo hates people from the Republic and Protestants
Good luck in getting your socialist utopia
He's a fuckwit who's grown up in some backward republican enclave who's yet to meet anyone outside of his bedroom
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
Quote from: Itchy on March 22, 2021, 11:01:31 PM
Jesus Martin is just a Terrible Taoiseach. He's supposes to be leading the republican party
He's very poor. His shared island unit is all he wants to talk about, and nobody else is interested in it.
A poor communicator, very uninspiring.
The Free State establishment are shaking in their boots.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 22, 2021, 10:57:51 PM
So to summarize
Angelo hates people from the Republic and Protestants
Good luck in getting your socialist utopia
I don't hate protestants. You might see the world in a polarising manner but I'm more enlightened and tolerant than you.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 22, 2021, 10:32:24 PM
Standing ovation for Claire Byrne for cutting off that absolute gobshite! She humiliated him :D
She really didn't. What were you watching?
It is a good job Bruton is a thing of the past.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
Sid, I have enough demons of my own to tangle with so I don't want to enter the Angelo vs the rest of humanity controversy but I will say he's no fuckwit; he knows exactly what he is doing and is a top class debater when he chooses to be serious.
Brolly, on the other hand is totally serious all the time. A very decent individual in some ways as when he offered to donate a kidney to someone with chronic kidney disease and an absolute bollix like the time he was commentating on am Ulster and he spent his time lampooning Tommy Freeman who had put a Hilti nail though his hand and opted to play with his hand heavily bandaged.
I'd take Angelo any day before that narcissist. If people think they'll win a debate with Angelo or think they will get him to admit defeat at any time, they deserve a dunce's hat.
So if we don't admit to being wrong then you're Angelo?
I never realised how much Bwyson looks like TinTin
His head also looks like an egg - more than Stephen Donnelly does
For a few reasons, I only saw bits of it- missed the whole Joe Brolly segment, although I gather it wasn't that long.
Mary Lou spoke well, I thought- carefully constructed, focused on being inclusive: buoyant and positive, and effective without getting snagged on what will undoubtedly be major thorny issues, I thought.
I don't like Leo, full stop. I think a lot of what comes from Fine Gael and Fianna Fail the last few years regarding Sinn Fein always seems to be snide and defensive. It always seems so contrived that it becomes tiresome, and legitimate challenges therefore get diminished in the overall rhetoric.
Micheal Martin reminds me so much of Enda Kenny, just less crude and more prissy. I would class neither of them as a leader, let alone a statesman. Maybe I just have an idealistic view of what I'd want politicians and cabinet members to be, but I try to imagine what a history book in 50 or 100 years time might read as defining or distinguishing features about them, and I can't see anything in them. Bertie, as despicable as he might be, will always have the Good Friday Agreement to his name.
I'm sorry I missed Trimble and the unionist take, although hearing Bryson and Campbell referenced shows the kind of span of a bridge that would be required.
So my conclusions from tonight, albeit on a limited basis, would be the Irish government position is to sit on their hands and do nothing. Yes, a huge amount of groundwork is required and all of this would take time, and yes it would be imperative to bring along the unionist population, including the most entrenched, but I didn't see any sign of impetus or desire from either Martin or Varadkar.
I get the feeling this will be a long, long thread before there is a poll, and then the aftermath.
Niamh McElduff sounds like she's auditioning for the Rose of Tralee
She has a signed St. Kilda jersey in the background
No loaf of Kingsmills
Typical Tyrone dose.
Bring back the mucksavage thread
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 11:36:10 PM
So if we don't admit to being wrong then you're Angelo?
Well, I won't disagree with you, yet I can't agree with you. Because, either way, I don't understand you. ;D
Mary Lou and Leo both very measured and cordial, thought there might have been a bit more bite with them to be honest. Both spoke well and even though I'm no fan of Leo he does deserve credit.
Brolly obviously getting dogs abuse for his cameo, no surprise there. Gregory Campbell with his usual sneering attitude added nothing to the programme and when Brolly called him on it he got cut off. Nothing he said was untrue. That really annoyed me to be honest and I alluded to "pussyfooting" around Unionists before in this thread. Disappointing from RTÉ but no surprise at all.
Andrew Trimble and Naomi Long but spoke more diplomatically and sincerely and although they represent a small minority within the broader Unionism family they are the ones who will be pivotal in any future referendum.
Micheal Martin and John Bruton between them have about as much charisma as a bucket of shite.
I would to have seen Bruton asked 'Would you like to see a United Ireland?' Personally I think he wouldn't.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:46:12 PM
I never realised how much Bwyson looks like TinTin
His head also looks like an egg - more than Stephen Donnelly does
https://uncyclopedia.ca/wiki/Jamie_Bryson (https://uncyclopedia.ca/wiki/Jamie_Bryson)
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:07:17 AM
Mary Lou and Leo both very measured and cordial, thought there might have been a bit more bite with them to be honest. Both spoke well and even though I'm no fan of Leo he does deserve credit.
Brolly obviously getting dogs abuse for his cameo, no surprise there. Gregory Campbell with his usual sneering attitude added nothing to the programme and when Brolly called him on it he got cut off. Nothing he said was untrue. That really annoyed me to be honest and I alluded to "pussyfooting" around Unionists before in this thread. Disappointing from RTÉ but no surprise at all.
Andrew Trimble and Naomi Long but spoke more diplomatically and sincerely and although they represent a small minority within the broader Unionism family they are the ones who will be pivotal in any future referendum.
Micheal Martin and John Bruton between them have about as much charisma as a bucket of shite.
Yeah I'd agree with most of that.
Its quite amusing to see the abuse here for Brolly. His crime? Calling out Gregory Campbell as rascist and homophobic. Well sorry folks thats exactly what he and his party are. I think Joe left out sectarian but maybe he was cut off too early. Very little ire for Gregory though, says a lot about some contributors.
However, I will say that Joe would have been better to make his point for a united Ireland instead of going the route he went but that doesn't make what he said untrue.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:46:12 PM
I never realised how much Bwyson looks like TinTin
His head also looks like an egg - more than Stephen Donnelly does
Wonder if the Kinihan drug cartel had a "spokesperson" would they get as much airtime as wee Jamie on RTE?
Gregory being Gregory but needs to be asked how democratic he actually is when a majority decide on a UI. He's so used to the unionist veto on everything that its almost expected that they can do what they want when they want up North.
Their centenary stone pish is emblematic of their attitude and those uppity croppys now putting a stop to it.
MaryLou and Vardakar talked sense with maybe varying timelines but thats to be expected. The 2040 nonsense spouted on here is ridiculous, 2028 is the date we should be preparing for.
Didn't get to see Joe but he's a soapbox and was always going to use it. Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island. He's dire.
Quote from: Itchy on March 23, 2021, 08:22:13 AM
Its quite amusing to see the abuse here for Brolly. His crime? Calling out Gregory Campbell as rascist and homophobic. Well sorry folks thats exactly what he and his party are. I think Joe left out sectarian but maybe he was cut off too early. Very little ire for Gregory though, says a lot about some contributors.
However, I will say that Joe would have been better to make his point for a united Ireland instead of going the route he went but that doesn't make what he said untrue.
You've grudgingly pointed out what the problem with Joe's contribution was in your second paragraph
He wasn't constructive, he just descended into mudslinging
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:27:29 AM
Quote from: Itchy on March 23, 2021, 08:22:13 AM
Its quite amusing to see the abuse here for Brolly. His crime? Calling out Gregory Campbell as rascist and homophobic. Well sorry folks thats exactly what he and his party are. I think Joe left out sectarian but maybe he was cut off too early. Very little ire for Gregory though, says a lot about some contributors.
However, I will say that Joe would have been better to make his point for a united Ireland instead of going the route he went but that doesn't make what he said untrue.
You've grudgingly pointed out what the problem with Joe's contribution was in your second paragraph
He wasn't constructive, he just descended into mudslinging
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:32:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 22, 2021, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 22, 2021, 07:06:42 PM
The partitionists can keep angling against it but it will happen in this decade despite all their efforts to prevent it.
What will happen in this decade? A poll, a referendum, a plan for a poll or a plan for a referendum?
I think there is enough groundswell of support both sides of the border for a poll to be called and the demographics are only trending more in support of it.
The demographics include a lot of nationalist kids who don't have a vote. Nothing will happen this decade.
Quote from: Dougal Maguire on March 23, 2021, 01:13:08 AM
I would to have seen Bruton asked 'Would you like to see a United Ireland?' Personally I think he wouldn't.
Let's just say for hypotheticals Bruton had been asked that question and said no
What do you think the reaction would have been?
In my view, what likely would have happened is that he would have been subjected to a torrent of vicious abuse on social media and would likely have received death threats
Why? Because it's seen as taboo for a Catholic from the Republic to not want a united Ireland, or not care about whether a united Ireland happens
And that is not a healthy situation at all, it's a very unhealthy situation
It should not be seen as taboo for a southern Catholic to be against a united Ireland - that view should be afforded the same respect as any other
Presumably given you wanted Bruton to be put on the spot in a hectoring "YES/NO" manner, you'd like to have seen Trimble put on the spot in the same manner
"Andrew, are you in favour of a United Ireland - YES or NO"
"Well I'd prefer to talk about things we all have in common across the island and how we can work to work to build a better island based on mutual respect"
"No, Andrew, ANSWER THE QUESTION - are you in favour of a united Ireland or not?!"
Don't think think that would have been a good line of questioning
Interestingly, it hasn't been noted that Brolly said it wasn't a concern to him whether a united Ireland happened or not
Which I thought was the most interesting and considered part of his contribution
The FF/FG line is we aren't ready yet, we need to learn from the mistakes of Brexit etc. I think they will say this for all eternity. How much can you really resolve before hand, reach an agreement on the health service, education etc etc these things would take years even decades to sort out if there is no referendum, plus there will be no appetite from FG/FF/DUP to discuss them unless there is a vote for a UI that is successful. Is there a precedent for this type of thing. What happened with east and west Germany, didn't the whole process take about 18 months? And here we are discussing 2028 or 20never.
Have the vote soon and have longer transitional periods than Brexit (if it is successful) is my view or it will never happen.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
Good debate and you got mainly what you expected from all parties.
The Unionist view - using the 2 as extreme ends was important to have. We know exactly their views and their intentions but if you leave them out you give them oxygen to fuel their exclusion in addition to their views. Including them gives the middle ground the chance to make up their own mind and take onboard all sides of the debate.
Trimble was interesting and he'd have the like of Rory McIlory in the same category - liked or not. Their is a large sway of people who are creating their own identity as Northern Irish from both sides and they will be key to whatever happens.
Brolly was Brolly and wanted to have his own debate. While his views on DUP are grounded, this wasn't the debate for that. Thought he started well but went where no else was going. He milking it on twitter to prove the point he was making was right, without recognising that no one needed that point made.
MM was his usual self, glittery and unconfident. Doesn't present well.
The teacher from Tyrone - think she was trying to interview for a house share in the holy lands.
It was a much better debate than I had anticipated beforehand. I had feared that it had the capacity to descend into bitter acrimony. But then Ian Og pulled out and Joe got cut off.
As others have stated Mary Lou and Leo whilst both holding different political views, do appear to have a sort of grudging mutual respect, certainly more than with Micheal Martin. Joe as usual came onto the programme with a pre ordained agenda of mud slinging at the DUP. Whilst he didn't say anything that wasn't true, it probably wasn't the forum to go off on a tangent. It is a tricky one though since I often fell that RTE does often pander to northern unionism, quite often at the expense of nationalism. They do need to have their say but they also need to be called out on certain topics. After all, if the country is reunified they will be in a smaller proportion of the overall population than those who are deemed foreign nationals.
Mary Lou & Leo had a reasoned debate - was actually refreshing to see that for a change and shows how things could be.
Poor Niamh from Carrickmore - she had a sheet in front of her and was clearly just trying to get everything in that was on the sheet. Had no intention of answering any question or having an informed debate.
Trimble is the type of person that will hold all of the aces in the UI debate - there are many more like him in the North and understanding and accepting their beliefs are vital.
Wee Seamie spoke surprisingly well for a change however his stance will never change. Gregory the same.
Joe wanted to run the show on his terms - was never going to happen in this format when he isnt in the studio but Claire Byrne was too quick to cut him off - she had obviously been warned. RTE bosses will be delighted to have got a cut at him.
Good show overall
Quote from: Louther on March 23, 2021, 09:17:49 AM
Good debate and you got mainly what you expected from all parties.
The Unionist view - using the 2 as extreme ends was important to have. We know exactly their views and their intentions but if you leave them out you give them oxygen to fuel their exclusion in addition to their views. Including them gives the middle ground the chance to make up their own mind and take onboard all sides of the debate.
Trimble was interesting and he'd have the like of Rory McIlory in the same category - liked or not. Their is a large sway of people who are creating their own identity as Northern Irish from both sides and they will be key to whatever happens.
Brolly was Brolly and wanted to have his own debate. While his views on DUP are grounded, this wasn't the debate for that. Thought he started well but went where no else was going. He milking it on twitter to prove the point he was making was right, without recognising that no one needed that point made.
MM was his usual self, glittery and unconfident. Doesn't present well.
The teacher from Tyrone - think she was trying to interview for a house share in the holy lands.
I agree with all of this. Brolly might be right but if you want Unionists to come along you have to try and not attack them at every turnaround. He offered nothing regardless if he was right.
Trimble is the real interesting character in all of this. In our bubbles we might view this as a binary Y/N choice. In reality there is a big cohort of people who don't identify with the politics of the DUP or SF.
Thought Mary Lou was a bit disingenuous. The idea that Stormont is beacon of political light is fanciful. In reality not a day goes by that the DUP and SF aren't working against one another. Stormont needs to work firstly. If it doesn't Unionists will never even think about a possible UI settlement. The DUP are as much to blame as SF in this regard.
McElduff was a weird one. For some reason wanted to prove her Ultra Irish credentials. Strange.
Bryson in his first communion suit was a highlight in what was a very serious debate.
There's a huge job of work to do.
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 09:37:58 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 23, 2021, 09:17:49 AM
Good debate and you got mainly what you expected from all parties.
The Unionist view - using the 2 as extreme ends was important to have. We know exactly their views and their intentions but if you leave them out you give them oxygen to fuel their exclusion in addition to their views. Including them gives the middle ground the chance to make up their own mind and take onboard all sides of the debate.
Trimble was interesting and he'd have the like of Rory McIlory in the same category - liked or not. Their is a large sway of people who are creating their own identity as Northern Irish from both sides and they will be key to whatever happens.
Brolly was Brolly and wanted to have his own debate. While his views on DUP are grounded, this wasn't the debate for that. Thought he started well but went where no else was going. He milking it on twitter to prove the point he was making was right, without recognising that no one needed that point made.
MM was his usual self, glittery and unconfident. Doesn't present well.
The teacher from Tyrone - think she was trying to interview for a house share in the holy lands.
I agree with all of this. Brolly might be right but if you want Unionists to come along you have to try and not attack them at every turnaround. He offered nothing regardless if he was right.
Trimble is the real interesting character in all of this. In our bubbles we might view this as a binary Y/N choice. In reality there is a big cohort of people who don't identify with the politics of the DUP or SF.
Thought Mary Lou was a bit disingenuous. The idea that Stormont is beacon of political light is fanciful. In reality not a day goes by that the DUP and SF aren't working against one another. Stormont needs to work firstly. If it doesn't Unionists will never even think about a possible UI settlement. The DUP are as much to blame as SF in this regard.
McElduff was a weird one. For some reason wanted to prove her Ultra Irish credentials. Strange.
Bryson in his first communion suit was a highlight in what was a very serious debate.
There's a huge job of work to do.
At least the discussion has started.
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 09:37:58 AM
Quote from: Louther on March 23, 2021, 09:17:49 AM
Good debate and you got mainly what you expected from all parties.
The Unionist view - using the 2 as extreme ends was important to have. We know exactly their views and their intentions but if you leave them out you give them oxygen to fuel their exclusion in addition to their views. Including them gives the middle ground the chance to make up their own mind and take onboard all sides of the debate.
Trimble was interesting and he'd have the like of Rory McIlory in the same category - liked or not. Their is a large sway of people who are creating their own identity as Northern Irish from both sides and they will be key to whatever happens.
Brolly was Brolly and wanted to have his own debate. While his views on DUP are grounded, this wasn't the debate for that. Thought he started well but went where no else was going. He milking it on twitter to prove the point he was making was right, without recognising that no one needed that point made.
MM was his usual self, glittery and unconfident. Doesn't present well.
The teacher from Tyrone - think she was trying to interview for a house share in the holy lands.
I agree with all of this. Brolly might be right but if you want Unionists to come along you have to try and not attack them at every turnaround. He offered nothing regardless if he was right.
Trimble is the real interesting character in all of this. In our bubbles we might view this as a binary Y/N choice. In reality there is a big cohort of people who don't identify with the politics of the DUP or SF.
Thought Mary Lou was a bit disingenuous. The idea that Stormont is beacon of political light is fanciful. In reality not a day goes by that the DUP and SF aren't working against one another. Stormont needs to work firstly. If it doesn't Unionists will never even think about a possible UI settlement. The DUP are as much to blame as SF in this regard.
McElduff was a weird one. For some reason wanted to prove her Ultra Irish credentials. Strange.
Bryson in his first communion suit was a highlight in what was a very serious debate.
There's a huge job of work to do.
I think that is correct but moreso with the softer unionist types like Trimble/McIlroy/Best. Those types need to be respected, welcomed and heard and I honestly think that they will. Those are the type of people who will be crucial to the result of any future border poll.
However there is a large mixture of loyalists, religious fundamentalists, suprermacists and sectarian types who would eat grass before they could be reasoned with. They will simply never consider or vote for a UI under any circumstances. They will feel threatened but that does not mean they should not be called out on their views simply to appease them. There is a significant younger generation of softer Unionists (probably a lot of Alliance voters) who are equally abhorred by the DUP and the Jim Allister types. I think it was too early in the debate for Joe Brolly to be bringng it up last night though.
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
A thing that grates on me is the use of the term "PUL" and I think the likes of the DUP are as guilty as anyone on creating this one. There are many different views in the "PUL". The extreme we hate everything Irish is not to be respected but I find it hard to believe the majority of people are like that. It's good to see that some of these shows have a more middle of the road person like Trimble on to represent these views.
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:07:18 AM
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
I honestly couldn't think of a worse idea. The repartitioning of partition? Look how it worked first time, surely we have learned the lessons from that.
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:07:18 AM
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
??
that's a big fat no from me. Jamie Bryson only lives 15 miles from me FFS. ;D
Duty called so I didn't see it.
Seems to have been decent enough so must try the player thingy.
I expected it would be a shouting match so didn't bother to record it.
The Referendum when or if it comes will be decided by the Alliance/"Northern Irish"/ soft unionist/middle ground people.
There was a survey in the Examiner back round November where 52% of young people said they were neither Nationalist nor Unionist.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 10:26:57 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:07:18 AM
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
??
that's a big fat no from me. Jamie Bryson only lives 15 miles from me FFS. ;D
It doesn't make any sense to me either seafoid...
Middle of the road protestants (not unionists) and middle of the road catholics(not necessarily nationalists) are the areas need convinced like you say RF.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
As bad as Brookeborough or Arlene ?
Did Martin ever put the future of the unit he is charge of in jeopardy ? Arlene did
I thought Sarah Creighton was interesting
She's a Unionist
But she also seems very liberal and sensible in her views on bread and butter political issues, she came across like she'd be in Labour or the Social Democrats if she was in the Republic
This is a section of Northern society we hear very little from - progressive women who are Unionists or from Unionist backgrounds
Sophie Long is one of the few others with any platform I can think of, maybe Linda Ervine is another one, I suppose Sylvia Hermon was too
But they are very marginalised in public debate and seem to have nowhere to go politically, which is a pity because they have a great deal to contribute, I think they're the most interesting demographic in NI
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:07:18 AM
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
Should we abandon a section of Irish citizens in a sectarian gerrymandered state designed to ensure they are in a minority?
Cos it worked so well the first time?
Christ Almighty.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
I thought he showed excellent leadership in the marriage and abortion referendums even though much of his party was clearly not supportive in private
He led on the smoking ban and plastic bag tax
I wouldn't vote for him but I think he's a decent man, honest and a good listener, he isn't charismatic but I think that's a much overrated quality
In bare electoral terms he has been a success given where Fianna Fail were when he took over and I think whoever eventually takes over from him will lead the party to oblivion, their support is literally dying out
Fintan O'Toole wrote an article last summer which was quite praiseworthy of his time in politics
I don't think Fianna Fail had a decent man as leader before him since Jack Lynch, they were all sleveens and hucksters, Reynolds was the best leader they had in that time but he was still a huckster
Economics are going to win this argument, people like Bryson who wrap themselves in the flag are not worth wasting time talking to and Gregory will have his house on the market within days of a referendum and relocate to Surrey or somewhere. Its the Andrew Trimble's of this world, educated with young families from both sides need convincing.
I'm working in Dublin with a lad from Portadown who comes from a very loyalist family, would be aware of their history. He was working in London Monday - Friday but wanted to come home for his kids. He was offered a role with the two leading contractors in the North both offering him 50k. He took a role with us in Dublin on 80K euro, I was keeping him going about coming down to Dublin to take Irish money, his answer was "as Neil Diamond said Money Talks ".
I would also notice this boom in the south there is a lot more protestant lads coming down to work Monday to Friday than the Boom of 03-08, we have 3 crews on site one from Bangor, one from Ballymena and one from Enniskillen, wouldn't have seen them before. They are seeing the prosperity and want a bit of the action.
Another big thing coming down the tracks which will have a major impact is as soon as the Pandemic is over the Tories are going to privatise/sell of the NHS, American health providers are already circling. Free Health Care is about the only argument Ian Og or Jim Allister can role out.
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
Quote from: pbat on March 23, 2021, 11:34:45 AM
Economics are going to win this argument, people like Bryson who wrap themselves in the flag are not worth wasting time talking to and Gregory will have his house on the market within days of a referendum and relocate to Surrey or somewhere. Its the Andrew Trimble's of this world, educated with young families from both sides need convincing.
I'm working in Dublin with a lad from Portadown who comes from a very loyalist family, would be aware of their history. He was working in London Monday - Friday but wanted to come home for his kids. He was offered a role with the two leading contractors in the North both offering him 50k. He took a role with us in Dublin on 80K euro, I was keeping him going about coming down to Dublin to take Irish money, his answer was "as Neil Diamond said Money Talks ".
I would also notice this boom in the south there is a lot more protestant lads coming down to work Monday to Friday than the Boom of 03-08, we have 3 crews on site one from Bangor, one from Ballymena and one from Enniskillen, wouldn't have seen them before. They are seeing the prosperity and want a bit of the action.
Another big thing coming down the tracks which will have a major impact is as soon as the Pandemic is over the Tories are going to privatise/sell of the NHS, American health providers are already circling. Free Health Care is about the only argument Ian Og or Jim Allister can role out.
I think that is precisely it.
Before a border poll is called which will likely be in 5+ years there will need to be a body of work done in preparing the economic argument. Given that the poll can only be triggered by a British SOS it is likely that it will have a reasonable level of success when it does takes place. Therefore the middle 20% will be the deciding factor and that is where the economics come into play. Alliance politicians and their voter base will hold the key and this will not be based on identity but rather a pragmatic choice based on economics, health, education, rights, housing etc.
There will be foreign nationals voting in that poll as well and nobody knows how that would translate into a border poll but political unionism is so inward looking and entrenched that I can't imagine it holding much broad appeal particularly to a younger generation who can be swayed either way.
Unfortunately those with a voice in the media representing unionism tend to be the Allisters, Paisleys, Wilsons, Campbells of this world. A lot of younger unionists must despair at the calibre of politician they are producing.
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 23, 2021, 10:58:00 AM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:07:18 AM
Would people accept a smaller NI enclave if it meant the rest of the 6 counties became part of the South ?
Should we abandon a section of Irish citizens in a sectarian gerrymandered state designed to ensure they are in a minority?
Cos it worked so well the first time?
Christ Almighty.
That was obviously a wind up post! Who da f**k wants another partition? f**king hell!
Sarah Creighton and Andrew Trimble represent a swathe of soft unionism which could be persuaded to accept some form of unity that reflects all identities. Calling an early poll will not help. I still believe that SF don't necessarily want an early poll but it is part of their strategy to keep debate going. Martin is out of his depth on all fronts not just on the unity debate.
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
The disappointing thing for me in last nights show was the failure of all the nationalist participants to point out that for all the talk from unionism for equality in the NI state, not on symbol from the nationalism is reflected in the official representation of the state. A lot of talk though on unionist symbols in a new Ireland.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 11:08:31 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
I thought he showed excellent leadership in the marriage and abortion referendums even though much of his party was clearly not supportive in private
He led on the smoking ban and plastic bag tax
I wouldn't vote for him but I think he's a decent man, honest and a good listener, he isn't charismatic but I think that's a much overrated quality
In bare electoral terms he has been a success given where Fianna Fail were when he took over and I think whoever eventually takes over from him will lead the party to oblivion, their support is literally dying out
Fintan O'Toole wrote an article last summer which was quite praiseworthy of his time in politics
I don't think Fianna Fail had a decent man as leader before him since Jack Lynch, they were all sleveens and hucksters, Reynolds was the best leader they had in that time but he was still a huckster
You really are a parody of Eoghan Harris at this stage.
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/4/7/4723f6a308585c67367ac30cb267fc5ab6c09fd5.jpeg)
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/6/a/6a45be511e2baa4875e32efc1c9b851b3644f2a0.jpeg)
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
I agree that Britain will be glad to get rid of us and should chip in accordingly. However, there is a confounding factor in that they do not want rid of Scotland and a careful formula is needed if NI is to get a lot of money after leaving and Scotland is not.
Quote from: Hereiam on March 23, 2021, 12:10:33 PM
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
As I said if NI was alone I suspect the British would be open to negotiation on these matters, as NI contributes nothing to the ability to pay the debt at present, but Scotland confuses things.
Perhaps the debt could be taken on by anyone wanting to remain British in the 6 counties, that should cause some thought among some.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
I agree that Britain will be glad to get rid of us and should chip in accordingly. However, there is a confounding factor in that they do not want rid of Scotland and a careful formula is needed if NI is to get a lot of money after leaving and Scotland is not.
Quote from: Hereiam on March 23, 2021, 12:10:33 PM
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
As I said if NI was alone I suspect the British would be open to negotiation on these matters, as NI contributes nothing to the ability to pay the debt at present, but Scotland confuses things.
Perhaps the debt could be taken on by anyone wanting to remain British in the 6 counties, that should cause some thought among some.
Scotland will be gone before they turn to here.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:19:23 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
I agree that Britain will be glad to get rid of us and should chip in accordingly. However, there is a confounding factor in that they do not want rid of Scotland and a careful formula is needed if NI is to get a lot of money after leaving and Scotland is not.
Quote from: Hereiam on March 23, 2021, 12:10:33 PM
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
As I said if NI was alone I suspect the British would be open to negotiation on these matters, as NI contributes nothing to the ability to pay the debt at present, but Scotland confuses things.
Perhaps the debt could be taken on by anyone wanting to remain British in the 6 counties, that should cause some thought among some.
Scotland will be gone before they turn to here.
That's a scenario, that Scotland heads off soon and that they are sorted. Then Scotland leaving is bound to rev things up here.
However, it would be wise if some smart person devises a financial model that gives the right answer for Scotland and NI, and if that was used for Scotland to avoid any disputes afterwards. The only other observation is that model based on the present contribution of the place would also be quite favourable to Wales. The Welsh will not head off on their own, but if Scotland and NI both leave they might well want to do so as well.
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
As bad as Brookeborough or Arlene ?
Did Martin ever put the future of the unit he is charge of in jeopardy ? Arlene did
In all fairness Arlene is a whole new level of incompetence along with the other leaders currently directing operations in the DUP.
TBH I'd my Dublin centric hat on when I made that statement about Micheal Martin.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 12:35:21 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
As bad as Brookeborough or Arlene ?
Did Martin ever put the future of the unit he is charge of in jeopardy ? Arlene did
In all fairness Arlene is a whole new level of incompetence along with the other leaders currently directing operations in the DUP.
TBH I'd my Dublin centric hat on when I made that statement about Micheal Martin.
A bigger question is who is the leader? Is it really Arlene?
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 23, 2021, 12:59:44 PM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 12:35:21 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 09:11:06 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Micheal is Micheal, the worse leader of any political party in the history of this Island.
You can find any opinion on the internet
Happy to be proved wrong when you show me an instance when he showed leadership or backbone!
As bad as Brookeborough or Arlene ?
Did Martin ever put the future of the unit he is charge of in jeopardy ? Arlene did
In all fairness Arlene is a whole new level of incompetence along with the other leaders currently directing operations in the DUP.
TBH I'd my Dublin centric hat on when I made that statement about Micheal Martin.
A bigger question is who is the leader? Is it really Arlene?
It's definitely not Arlene as Sammy, Poots, Ian O'G, Jeffery et all just ignore her and undermine her at every cut and turn. Hard to know what's going on there.
It used to be said it was Dodds in charge but he's gone all quiet. They are definitely very fractured at present. There is a little bit of distraction going on too I suspect but definitely the bold Sammy is on a solo run.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
He was right. People like Campbell are horrid individuals. But there's lots of Catholics North and South, and in the GAA who are homophobic. There's still a huge number who are anti-abortion in the South. And many Catholic Sinn Fein and SDLP voters in North and FF/FG voters in South are anti-abortion. Northern Catholics are more conservative. The Dana's of the world. In an eventual United Ireland there will be a bigger population of anti-abortion and anti-marriage equality. So not sure what Joe's point was. Those Gregory Campbell views won't go away in a UI - they will only get stronger. And the left/right divide on social issues will grow more intense.
Thought it was a good show overall. Was a bit surprised that both Mary Lou and Leo were cagey on the flag question and anthem. It's as well to be honest with the people and say there will be a new flag. But I suppose neither wanted a headline that they were getting rid of it. Got to protect those Southern votes.
Is there a progressive voice in Unionist politics?
Is there anyone from the UUP/DUP side that you could genuinely say is trying to build a better society for the O6?
Some of the bigoted nonsense their elected officials come out are beyond the pale. Yer one Rosemary Barton coming out and saying people talking about GAA in the workplace was latent intimidation being a prime example. Everything about mainstream unionist politics is to incite, stoke and enflame sectarian tensions - that's their modus operandi so can people please tell us how we can engage with talks of a United Ireland with them?
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
The DUP are homophobic and in my view they are racist and white supremacist
Byrne cut Brolly off primarily because he used the word racism about Campbell
Ireland's defamation laws are draconian
RTE had to pay out 20k just last week because of what that far right troll I won't name said when he was on PrimeTime recently
They also had to pay out a much bigger sum again to homophobe John Waters, just because he was called a homophobe on RTE
I wouldn't be surprised that's the last we see of Brolly on RTE - for a long time at least - because any time he's on he's liable to say something that will cost them money
Quote from: johnnycool on March 23, 2021, 01:03:31 PM
Quote from: imtommygunn on March 23, 2021, 12:59:44 PM
A bigger question is who is the leader? Is it really Arlene?
It's definitely not Arlene as Sammy, Poots, Ian O'G, Jeffery et all just ignore her and undermine her at every cut and turn. Hard to know what's going on there.
I don't think it's hard to understand
Foster is a woman
That's the reason
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 01:15:59 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
The DUP are homophobic and in my view they are racist and white supremacist
Byrne cut Brolly off primarily because he used the word racism about Campbell
Ireland's defamation laws are draconian
RTE had to pay out 20k just last week because of what that far right troll I won't name said when he was on PrimeTime recently
They also had to pay out a much bigger sum again to homophobe John Waters, just because he was called a homophobe on RTE
I wouldn't be surprised that's the last we see of Brolly on RTE - for a long time at least - because any time he's on he's liable to say something that will cost them money
Yet Brian Dobson let Leo Varadkar make comments about SF being sectarian (noting vague or implied about it as it was very explicit using that exact label) which were later proven to be utterly false. Dobson allowed those comments to go unchecked and unchallenged.
So once again you make a very watery comment to defend the indefensible.
Quote from: weareros on March 23, 2021, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
He was right. People like Campbell are horrid individuals. But there's lots of Catholics North and South, and in the GAA who are homophobic. There's still a huge number who are anti-abortion in the South. And many Catholic Sinn Fein and SDLP voters in North and FF/FG voters in South are anti-abortion. Northern Catholics are more conservative. The Dana's of the world. In an eventual United Ireland there will be a bigger population of anti-abortion and anti-marriage equality. So not sure what Joe's point was. Those Gregory Campbell views won't go away in a UI - they will only get stronger. And the left/right divide on social issues will grow more intense.
Thought it was a good show overall. Was a bit surprised that both Mary Lou and Leo were cagey on the flag question and anthem. It's as well to be honest with the people and say there will be a new flag. But I suppose neither wanted a headline that they were getting rid of it. Got to protect those Southern votes.
To be honest I think the politicians are behind the people on this. Every opinion poll in the south has re-unification over 70% when don't knows are excluded. FF and FG are playing it long due to party political interests but recent contributions from Jim O Callaghan and Bertie Ahern as well as Leo's nuanced performance last night tend to suggest both parties are adjusting their position. Very surprised that a citizens assembly was not discussed last night during all the talk of planning. Micheal has hung himself on a hook saying no border poll during this Dail and as a result is the most negative Southern politician at present (excluding the retired John Bruton). Decent program overall although I thought Byrne was too keen to talk about flags for a headline and not address schools, health, economy which are the actual things that will affect the floating vote.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 01:15:59 PM
RTE had to pay out 20k just last week because of what that far right troll I won't name said when he was on PrimeTime recently
They didn't have to. There is no such thing in law as defaming a political party. RTE freely chose to pay out that money.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:26:07 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:19:23 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
I agree that Britain will be glad to get rid of us and should chip in accordingly. However, there is a confounding factor in that they do not want rid of Scotland and a careful formula is needed if NI is to get a lot of money after leaving and Scotland is not.
Quote from: Hereiam on March 23, 2021, 12:10:33 PM
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
As I said if NI was alone I suspect the British would be open to negotiation on these matters, as NI contributes nothing to the ability to pay the debt at present, but Scotland confuses things.
Perhaps the debt could be taken on by anyone wanting to remain British in the 6 counties, that should cause some thought among some.
Scotland will be gone before they turn to here.
That's a scenario, that Scotland heads off soon and that they are sorted. Then Scotland leaving is bound to rev things up here.
However, it would be wise if some smart person devises a financial model that gives the right answer for Scotland and NI, and if that was used for Scotland to avoid any disputes afterwards. The only other observation is that model based on the present contribution of the place would also be quite favourable to Wales. The Welsh will not head off on their own, but if Scotland and NI both leave they might well want to do so as well.
Personally I think Scotland leaving is a prerequisite for NI voting for unification, at least in say, the next 30/40 years or so
NI Unionists have a much bigger identification with Scotland than with England
In the same way that Brexit was a major sea change in terms of making the environment for Scottish independence much more favourable, if the Scots leave, it could cause a sea change in how a lot of Unionists think about the Union - because the Union would effectively no longer exist - it would likely cause a domino effect, with the Welsh maybe wanting to leave too,
And whatever happened NI and Scotland would be in separate states for ever more
Sturgeon being cleared yesterday could be an important event in terms of the future history of this island
Quote from: keep her low this half on March 23, 2021, 01:23:47 PM
Quote from: weareros on March 23, 2021, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
He was right. People like Campbell are horrid individuals. But there's lots of Catholics North and South, and in the GAA who are homophobic. There's still a huge number who are anti-abortion in the South. And many Catholic Sinn Fein and SDLP voters in North and FF/FG voters in South are anti-abortion. Northern Catholics are more conservative. The Dana's of the world. In an eventual United Ireland there will be a bigger population of anti-abortion and anti-marriage equality. So not sure what Joe's point was. Those Gregory Campbell views won't go away in a UI - they will only get stronger. And the left/right divide on social issues will grow more intense.
Thought it was a good show overall. Was a bit surprised that both Mary Lou and Leo were cagey on the flag question and anthem. It's as well to be honest with the people and say there will be a new flag. But I suppose neither wanted a headline that they were getting rid of it. Got to protect those Southern votes.
To be honest I think the politicians are behind the people on this. Every opinion poll in the south has re-unification over 70% when don't knows are excluded. FF and FG are playing it long due to party political interests but recent contributions from Jim O Callaghan and Bertie Ahern as well as Leo's nuanced performance last night tend to suggest both parties are adjusting their position. Very surprised that a citizens assembly was not discussed last night during all the talk of planning. Micheal has hung himself on a hook saying no border poll during this Dail and as a result is the most negative Southern politician at present (excluding the retired John Bruton). Decent program overall although I thought Byrne was too keen to talk about flags for a headline and not address schools, health, economy which are the actual things that will affect the floating vote.
Agreed on pols behind. In fact if Martin had an ounce of strategic sense, he'd be eager to get all this sorted including the border poll date before he leaves government - and be remembered for something groundbreaking. In fact, if Leo survives the leak scandal I'd be willing to bet he will do it in his 2 year term and part of his reelection pitch will be, the middle minority in North will only vote for a UI (let's say it's 2029/9 which would fall in term of next gov if current survives full term) if FG are in power as we are not threatening to the Middle. Not saying he's right, but that is how it could play out providing British are willing to play ball.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 01:32:11 PM
Personally I think Scotland leaving is a prerequisite for NI voting for unification, at least in say, the next 30/40 years or so
NI Unionists have a much bigger identification with Scotland than with England
In the same way that Brexit was a major sea change in terms of making the environment for Scottish independence much more favourable, if the Scots leave, it could cause a sea change in how a lot of Unionists think about the Union - because the Union would effectively no longer exist - it would likely cause a domino effect, with the Welsh maybe wanting to leave too,
And whatever happened NI and Scotland would be in separate states for ever more
Sturgeon being cleared yesterday could be an important event in terms of the future history of this island
Scotland leaving would be influential, but I would still wonder if they will. I have no doubt Scotland will thrive if independent but they have to get from here to there and the UK will definitely be giving them debt and expecting them to pay their own pensions.
If Scotland does not leave I would expect NI to still leave within 30 years. When the core unionist vote becomes one third then all it requires is for nationalists to get organised once.
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Quote from: pbat on March 23, 2021, 11:34:45 AM
Economics are going to win this argument, people like Bryson who wrap themselves in the flag are not worth wasting time talking to and Gregory will have his house on the market within days of a referendum and relocate to Surrey or somewhere. Its the Andrew Trimble's of this world, educated with young families from both sides need convincing.
I'm working in Dublin with a lad from Portadown who comes from a very loyalist family, would be aware of their history. He was working in London Monday - Friday but wanted to come home for his kids. He was offered a role with the two leading contractors in the North both offering him 50k. He took a role with us in Dublin on 80K euro, I was keeping him going about coming down to Dublin to take Irish money, his answer was "as Neil Diamond said Money Talks ".
I would also notice this boom in the south there is a lot more protestant lads coming down to work Monday to Friday than the Boom of 03-08, we have 3 crews on site one from Bangor, one from Ballymena and one from Enniskillen, wouldn't have seen them before. They are seeing the prosperity and want a bit of the action.
Another big thing coming down the tracks which will have a major impact is as soon as the Pandemic is over the Tories are going to privatise/sell of the NHS, American health providers are already circling. Free Health Care is about the only argument Ian Og or Jim Allister can role out.
Don't think you can draw conclusions that they would vote Yes in a border poll from any of that though
Like, many Irish who have a vote here work in England but if there was a referendum on whether Ireland should leave the EU and join the same economic zone as Britain I highly doubt they'd be voting Yes
People's personal economic decisions about where to live or work remain very much divorced from the united Ireland issue I think
Economic arguments always favour the status quo - the status quo is a known quantity - to change the status quo is a leap of faith
Economic arguments favoured the status quo in the Scottish referendum, the 1995 Quebec independence referendum, and they did with Brexit too - it was blood and soil nationalism and the dangling of fantasy, not solid economic arguments, that won the referendum for Brexit
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 01:32:11 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:26:07 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:19:23 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:08:08 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
I don't think anyone denys that this will improve production in the North. However, consumption in the North is supported by a bung from Westminster every year, and therein lies the debate.
If an agreed Ireland can be achieved the costs associated will be resolved. Britain would pay to be rid of us.
I agree that Britain will be glad to get rid of us and should chip in accordingly. However, there is a confounding factor in that they do not want rid of Scotland and a careful formula is needed if NI is to get a lot of money after leaving and Scotland is not.
Quote from: Hereiam on March 23, 2021, 12:10:33 PM
One thing people forget is that Westminster will want to saddle the north with a portion of the debt which the UK currently has built up. This will happen with Scotland as well if they do vote to leave, do not think for one minute that Westminster will just say "ok chaps off you go"
As I said if NI was alone I suspect the British would be open to negotiation on these matters, as NI contributes nothing to the ability to pay the debt at present, but Scotland confuses things.
Perhaps the debt could be taken on by anyone wanting to remain British in the 6 counties, that should cause some thought among some.
Scotland will be gone before they turn to here.
That's a scenario, that Scotland heads off soon and that they are sorted. Then Scotland leaving is bound to rev things up here.
However, it would be wise if some smart person devises a financial model that gives the right answer for Scotland and NI, and if that was used for Scotland to avoid any disputes afterwards. The only other observation is that model based on the present contribution of the place would also be quite favourable to Wales. The Welsh will not head off on their own, but if Scotland and NI both leave they might well want to do so as well.
Personally I think Scotland leaving is a prerequisite for NI voting for unification, at least in say, the next 30/40 years or so
NI Unionists have a much bigger identification with Scotland than with England
In the same way that Brexit was a major sea change in terms of making the environment for Scottish independence much more favourable, if the Scots leave, it could cause a sea change in how a lot of Unionists think about the Union - because the Union would effectively no longer exist - it would likely cause a domino effect, with the Welsh maybe wanting to leave too,
And whatever happened NI and Scotland would be in separate states for ever more
Sturgeon being cleared yesterday could be an important event in terms of the future history of this island
Personally I don't think it is a prerequisite at all. Yes, it would make a border poll here virtually inevitable almost immediately but I'd be very surprised if there isn't a border poll here within 30/40 years even if Scotland voted to stay in the UK. It makes far more sense for Scotland to stay inside the UK given the potential issues of a land border which we know all about from the outworkings of Brexit.
Does anyone here recall Nell McCafferty?
Years ago when Mary Harney was a government minister, Nell appeared on a current affairs program and government policies came up in the discussion. Without warning she passed a sneering remark about Harney's ability to do her job properly since she was more concerned with her drink than her duties. (These may not have been her exact words but this what she was inferring.)
The presenter cut her off immediately and apologised to her audience, saying RTE dtd not condone her remarks but Mary H sued for defamation and won her case. RTE was also sued and lost heavily.
Ever since then the station has had a very rigid set of protocols. I suppose all stations have their own guidelines for guests appearing on their programs but Donnybrook is paranoid about this.
So Brolly knew full well that he could not accuse a named, living person who wasn't there to defend himself. IMO, he just might have gotten away with if he'd retracted his remark and maybe passed it off as a slip of the tongue but he didn't and continued to remonstrate even after his sound was cut off. He's been on that station long enough to know the ropes. He had already been taken off the Sunday Game for another breach of RTE guidelines so I can't feel sorry for him.
Quote from: keep her low this half on March 23, 2021, 01:23:47 PM
Quote from: weareros on March 23, 2021, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 23, 2021, 12:00:05 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 22, 2021, 11:02:22 PM
Wouldn't be a big fan of Bruton but I thought he was very sensible
Brolly flunked that big time
Went the Angelo route
Didn't work at all, unsurprisingly
Claire Byrne is very distracting, a standing ovation indeed, but make sure not to stand up
To be fair Brolly was pointing out the anti abortion homophobia of the DUP and should have been asked to provide examples, which he did today on twitter.
He was right. People like Campbell are horrid individuals. But there's lots of Catholics North and South, and in the GAA who are homophobic. There's still a huge number who are anti-abortion in the South. And many Catholic Sinn Fein and SDLP voters in North and FF/FG voters in South are anti-abortion. Northern Catholics are more conservative. The Dana's of the world. In an eventual United Ireland there will be a bigger population of anti-abortion and anti-marriage equality. So not sure what Joe's point was. Those Gregory Campbell views won't go away in a UI - they will only get stronger. And the left/right divide on social issues will grow more intense.
Thought it was a good show overall. Was a bit surprised that both Mary Lou and Leo were cagey on the flag question and anthem. It's as well to be honest with the people and say there will be a new flag. But I suppose neither wanted a headline that they were getting rid of it. Got to protect those Southern votes.
To be honest I think the politicians are behind the people on this. Every opinion poll in the south has re-unification over 70% when don't knows are excluded. FF and FG are playing it long due to party political interests but recent contributions from Jim O Callaghan and Bertie Ahern as well as Leo's nuanced performance last night tend to suggest both parties are adjusting their position. Very surprised that a citizens assembly was not discussed last night during all the talk of planning. Micheal has hung himself on a hook saying no border poll during this Dail and as a result is the most negative Southern politician at present (excluding the retired John Bruton). Decent program overall although I thought Byrne was too keen to talk about flags for a headline and not address schools, health, economy which are the actual things that will affect the floating vote.
And to be fair to ML she did say that in any conversations she is having the health service and economy always come before flags and emblems. There is always room for agreement on Flags and emblems, but the wavering vote will be persuaded by economics. Interesting to hear Campbell admit that there was 3 minorities now.
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Lad, you don't know an awful lot about the north do you?
One thing an Independent Scotland would do is end "British" Nationality.
Wonder what the reduced United Kingdom would then call itself?
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
The North is not as polarised as you think. Yes in working class loyalist and republican grass roots areas it probably is. But there is a large swathe on either side of the Alliance vote that would not be too far apart. They will prefer a particular outcome but will happily accept a vote either way. For a UI to succeed money will need spent in these deprived areas to keep a lid on things. In general there is no appetite for war in either direction.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
The good news is that the conversation is well under way, the UI train has left the station and there's no going back. Whenever we see successive polls of reputation showing a majority for reunification, that's the time to set the border poll date. That majority doesn't appear to be there yet. I for one don't want to see a border poll happening too soon only for it to be lost, it needs to be won and won well at the first attempt.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Correct Michael however the only thing this proves is that Westminster is propping up NI with billions per year.
If that payment starts reducing then this place is fooked.
Many English people (including politicians) couldnt care less if NI is part of the UK or not
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Are they still the 6th? I thought they had fell back. Britain and Britishness is on the wane. The greatest threat to Unionism isn't actually Irish Nationalism...It's English Nationalism. Brits care not a jot for the precious union. While this Tory government might talk about the Union the reality is that at the very first hard choice it had between the Union and Brexit, it plumped for Brexit and imposed an Irish Sea Border straight over the heads of Unionists wishes. Hard-line Unionists like Bryson and Geoffrey need to start getting this. The conversation has started, it will only end in one spot with a New Ireland. Do they want to help shape that or stand on the sidelines and complain about the outcome? I know which side I would choose.
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 03:28:11 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Are they still the 6th? I thought they had fell back. Britain and Britishness is on the wane. The greatest threat to Unionism isn't actually Irish Nationalism...It's English Nationalism. Brits care not a jot for the precious union. While this Tory government might talk about the Union the reality is that at the very first hard choice it had between the Union and Brexit, it plumped for Brexit and imposed an Irish Sea Border straight over the heads of Unionists wishes. Hard-line Unionists like Bryson and Geoffrey need to start getting this. The conversation has started, it will only end in one spot with a New Ireland. Do they want to help shape that or stand on the sidelines and complain about the outcome? I know which side I would choose.
I should also add that the DUP and their "Britishness" is very far removed from what the everyday English person relates to. Brits are for the most part Liberal in their outlook. They are not the right wing Christian fundamentalists that the DUP for the most part are. Brits look at them and shake their heads.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Probably one of the reasons why Brexit has and may be even more unstabilising for the North is the economic impact it will have.
The UK Exports have taken a fair old hammering in the last few months, unless that is addressed ASAP a lot of businesses may go to the wall never to return as trading in the Asian markets and getting deals there isn't going to be a quick thing.
We really haven't seen how that is going to impact here as yet. It may well be beneficial to have access to the German (5th), French (7th), Italian (9th) and Spanish (11th) markets than the UK market
The NI Protocol is meant to be the best of both worlds. If that really is the case then the economic case for a UI may be dented.
Whitehall will need to make good on the promises that EU funding streams will be maintained. That and any hit to the £8B subvention will have the middle ground looking south potentially.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
What good is being part of the 6th biggest economy if you contribute nothing to it? Why, almost 25 years post GFA is NI still one of the worst-off regions in the UK? What exactly is the benefit of being part of this "6th biggest economy"?
In reality the UK economy is centred around London and the south east of England - where fiscal decisions are made which benefit the people who live and work there the most. That's why (as already mentioned) Unionists are expendable and have and will continue to be used by the tories as and when they feel like it. And of course the DUP like good little bootlickers will go back asking for more.
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 03:28:11 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Are they still the 6th? I thought they had fell back. Britain and Britishness is on the wane. The greatest threat to Unionism isn't actually Irish Nationalism...It's English Nationalism. Brits care not a jot for the precious union. While this Tory government might talk about the Union the reality is that at the very first hard choice it had between the Union and Brexit, it plumped for Brexit and imposed an Irish Sea Border straight over the heads of Unionists wishes. Hard-line Unionists like Bryson and Geoffrey need to start getting this. The conversation has started, it will only end in one spot with a New Ireland. Do they want to help shape that or stand on the sidelines and complain about the outcome? I know which side I would choose.
Little Englanders and Little Englander media do care about the Union
The hit job on Sturgeon over the last few weeks demonstrates this, they'd do anything to try and bury Scottish independence
But they don't care about the
people in other parts of the Union
They see the other parts of the Union as England's plaything, as a sort of Greater England, as lebensraum
It's another version of have cake and eat it
Quote from: sid waddell on March 23, 2021, 04:47:37 PM
Little Englanders and Little Englander media do care about the Union
The hit job on Sturgeon over the last few weeks demonstrates this, they'd do anything to try and bury Scottish independence
But they don't care about the people in other parts of the Union
They see the other parts of the Union as England's plaything, as a sort of Greater England, as lebensraum
It's another version of have cake and eat it
I hear you're a Little Englander now, Alex Salmond? ::) ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 04:23:40 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
What good is being part of the 6th biggest economy if you contribute nothing to it? Why, almost 25 years post GFA is NI still one of the worst-off regions in the UK? What exactly is the benefit of being part of this "6th biggest economy"?
In reality the UK economy is centred around London and the south east of England - where fiscal decisions are made which benefit the people who live and work there the most. That's why (as already mentioned) Unionists are expendable and have and will continue to be used by the tories as and when they feel like it. And of course the DUP like good little bootlickers will go back asking for more.
Support to workers and business during recent pandemic and development and roll-out of vaccine spring to mind.
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 03:32:16 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 23, 2021, 03:28:11 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
Are they still the 6th? I thought they had fell back. Britain and Britishness is on the wane. The greatest threat to Unionism isn't actually Irish Nationalism...It's English Nationalism. Brits care not a jot for the precious union. While this Tory government might talk about the Union the reality is that at the very first hard choice it had between the Union and Brexit, it plumped for Brexit and imposed an Irish Sea Border straight over the heads of Unionists wishes. Hard-line Unionists like Bryson and Geoffrey need to start getting this. The conversation has started, it will only end in one spot with a New Ireland. Do they want to help shape that or stand on the sidelines and complain about the outcome? I know which side I would choose.
I should also add that the DUP and their "Britishness" is very far removed from what the everyday English person relates to. Brits are for the most part Liberal in their outlook. They are not the right wing Christian fundamentalists that the DUP for the most part are. Brits look at them and shake their heads.
I that the same 'everyday English person' that voted Brexit?
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 06:03:34 PM
Support to workers and business during recent pandemic and development and roll-out of vaccine spring to mind.
You're right michaelg, remiss of me to overlook the support given to businesses during the pandemic, especially companies owned by Conservative party donors and pals of the tories... how many £bns of taxpayers money do you reckon has been thrown away? Who needs tenders anyway?
Does Michael realise other Countries also supported workers and businesses.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 23, 2021, 06:49:37 PM
Does Michael realise other Countries also supported workers and businesses.
Of course. Simply stating that level of support from UK government was good.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 07:23:28 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 23, 2021, 06:49:37 PM
Does Michael realise other Countries also supported workers and businesses.
Of course. Simply stating that level of support from UK government was good.
Was it not the least that was expected from them?
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 23, 2021, 07:26:12 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 07:23:28 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 23, 2021, 06:49:37 PM
Does Michael realise other Countries also supported workers and businesses.
Of course. Simply stating that level of support from UK government was good.
Was it not the least that was expected from them?
Had never considered what might happen in the event of a global pandemic.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-40249826.html
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 06:03:34 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 04:23:40 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 03:20:27 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 23, 2021, 12:51:03 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 23, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
Quote from: oakleaflad on March 23, 2021, 11:51:32 AM
I've seen a lot of people saying 'we can't afford the North' but surely on an island our size we'd be better off having an All Ireland economy? Are studies like the following nonsense?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html (https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20388959.html)
I'm not an economist but surely it stands to reason that after 100 years, most of which has been spent as an economic failure, the move towards an all-island economy can only benefit the North.
Comments like this gloss over the ailing ROI economy for the first 70 odd years of its existence where high unemployment and emigration was widespread. Coupled with the propensity for a boom and bust style economy, it's maybe not just as straightforward as people think.
No, they don't. Partition imposed a cost, greater for NI than the ROI, and still does. Those dislocations can be ameliorated. The ROI was not very prosperous after independence, but it was not prosperous before independence. The 1930s and 1940s were not great periods in world history for boosting your international trade. The ROI lost a few years at the start of the 1950s, but in the late 1950s they got the show on the road and have progressed relative to NI ever since.
I note how your response chooses to ignore the fact that NI would continue remain as part of the UK, the 6th largest economy in the world. That may have a bearing in people's decision making when economic factors are being considered.
What good is being part of the 6th biggest economy if you contribute nothing to it? Why, almost 25 years post GFA is NI still one of the worst-off regions in the UK? What exactly is the benefit of being part of this "6th biggest economy"?
In reality the UK economy is centred around London and the south east of England - where fiscal decisions are made which benefit the people who live and work there the most. That's why (as already mentioned) Unionists are expendable and have and will continue to be used by the tories as and when they feel like it. And of course the DUP like good little bootlickers will go back asking for more.
Support to workers and business during recent pandemic and development and roll-out of vaccine spring to mind.
If anything the support to workers and businesses in the south was at least as generous as in the UK if not more. Irish businesses received a wage subsidy if they could demonstrate that their turnover was substantially reduced and it was paid for the entire workforce, not just in the case of furloughed workers. Like furlough, it was a blunt instrument, but it supported
companies that traded through the pandemic at serious increased cost, unlike the furlough scheme which only supported
workers that were sent / had to stay at home. Business support in NI was in the form of Covid loans, which had to be repaid. This wasn't the case with the wage subsidy which was a generous subsidy to businesses to keep their workers on the books.
Ask ExcludedNI about the support for NI businesses.
https://twitter.com/excludedni?lang=en
Jesus!! My dick is bigger than your dick posts!
Wise up
The change in stance by the hierarchy in the south even in the last few weeks is telling. Is there something going on in the background or is it a response to the threat of SF in the 26?
When the likes of Jim O Callaghan is drawing up reunification proposals and a ff cork td looking for a new ministerial post for reunifucation, something must be stirring
I'd say Jim's push on Martin isnt far off.
Too late for Jim. Miceal will see his 2 years out and ff will be looking at signifigant seat losses at the next election.
Quote from: michaelg on March 23, 2021, 07:23:28 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 23, 2021, 06:49:37 PM
Does Michael realise other Countries also supported workers and businesses.
Of course. Simply stating that level of support from UK government was good.
Not especially good. When things were bad in the North-West in the autumn there was a stat that a business in Strabane that was closed was getting one third as much as in a business in Letterkenny.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 23, 2021, 07:59:03 PM
Jesus!! My dick is bigger than your dick posts!
Wise up
Are you talking about what I posted?
Definitely not written in that spirit. I'd be the first to acknowledge that many elements of Irish economy / social policy are not good - inflation, housing, health etc. There are valid criticisms of corporate taxation / FDI policy. The only point I was trying to make was that the Irish government has been very nimble about using state aid to support businesses and it is a seriously business friendly set up. There would be many businesses in NI that would have given their right arm for the wage subsidy available in the south as there was nothing available to them up here. It was an incredibly generous scheme.
The broader debate is all swings and roundabouts when looked at in terms of current policies and economics. The big question is what is the vision for the future and all of that seems to be stacked in favour of nationalists.
As has been the case throughout Brexit, the DUP's position, continues to put NI's place in the union at risk. Ironically, the full and successful implementation of the protocol is more likely to result in NI remaining part of the UK, since it will mean that NI businesses will have more to lose when leaving the UK - unfettered access to GB market and the foot in both camps giving strong potential for inward investment of goods manufacturers. The fact that the protocol doesn't cover services weakens this argument. However, businesses will not want to lose the "best of both worlds" benefit. Many may be vociferous in highlighting the challenges given to them by the protocol, but if it was removed entirely there would be serious regret.
Again, ironically, failure to implement the protocol properly is now a driver for a UI in my view. Both the EU and Ireland are depending on the UK to apply the protocol (or mind the backdoor), and if they cannot be trusted to implement it properly, then what are the long term consequences for the integrity of the Single Market and Ireland's place in that market. I do not think that the DUP realise just how fundamental this issue is. It was interesting that Varadkar mentioned Joint Authority last night. It would be interesting to look at that through the lens of government who desperately need the protocol to work and are watching politicians setting fire to it, with even district councils being allowed to undermine an international treaty. A UI or joint authority would give the Irish government / EU proper control over the backdoor and that will be a key factor behind the scenes as long as the EU lasts.
Quote from: ardtole on March 23, 2021, 08:56:03 PM
The change in stance by the hierarchy in the south even in the last few weeks is telling. Is there something going on in the background or is it a response to the threat of SF in the 26?
When the likes of Jim O Callaghan is drawing up reunification proposals and a ff cork td looking for a new ministerial post for reunifucation, something must be stirring
See my post above - last paragraph
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Quote from: APM on March 23, 2021, 10:00:05 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 23, 2021, 07:59:03 PM
Jesus!! My dick is bigger than your dick posts!
Wise up
Are you talking about what I posted?
Definitely not written in that spirit. I'd be the first to acknowledge that many elements of Irish economy / social policy are not good - inflation, housing, health etc. There are valid criticisms of corporate taxation / FDI policy. The only point I was trying to make was that the Irish government has been very nimble about using state aid to support businesses and it is a seriously business friendly set up. There would be many businesses in NI that would have given their right arm for the wage subsidy available in the south as there was nothing available to them up here. It was an incredibly generous scheme.
The broader debate is all swings and roundabouts when looked at in terms of current policies and economics. The big question is what is the vision for the future and all of that seems to be stacked in favour of nationalists.
As has been the case throughout Brexit, the DUP's position, continues to put NI's place in the union at risk. Ironically, the full and successful implementation of the protocol is more likely to result in NI remaining part of the UK, since it will mean that NI businesses will have more to lose when leaving the UK - unfettered access to GB market and the foot in both camps giving strong potential for inward investment of goods manufacturers. The fact that the protocol doesn't cover services weakens this argument. However, businesses will not want to lose the "best of both worlds" benefit. Many may be vociferous in highlighting the challenges given to them by the protocol, but if it was removed entirely there would be serious regret.
Again, ironically, failure to implement the protocol properly is now a driver for a UI in my view. Both the EU and Ireland are depending on the UK to apply the protocol (or mind the backdoor), and if they cannot be trusted to implement it properly, then what are the long term consequences for the integrity of the Single Market and Ireland's place in that market. I do not think that the DUP realise just how fundamental this issue is. It was interesting that Varadkar mentioned Joint Authority last night. It would be interesting to look at that through the lens of government who desperately need the protocol to work and are watching politicians setting fire to it, with even district councils being allowed to undermine an international treaty. A UI or joint authority would give the Irish government / EU proper control over the backdoor and that will be a key factor behind the scenes as long as the EU lasts.
The previous posts were debating who was better at this and that who was shit at this and that.
For me personally it's a no brainier there will be economic upheaval but that's expected, I'm lucky that I'm in a global company and my wife is a teacher, her pension will no doubt be covered by whatever financial settlements would be agreed. I've a family across the divide here, but there won't be any arguments, they'll vote as they see fit, and her family will accept the outcome about from the poll results and move on.
I just can't see being done this decade if I'm being honest, get it done after some great background media and social media attention. If SF are the main drivers in this then we are starting off on the wrong foot.
There has to be a remain group and leave group, both arguments need to be heard without the the distraction of these political parties. Will just drive division
Quote from: APM on March 23, 2021, 10:00:54 PM
Quote from: ardtole on March 23, 2021, 08:56:03 PM
The change in stance by the hierarchy in the south even in the last few weeks is telling. Is there something going on in the background or is it a response to the threat of SF in the 26?
When the likes of Jim O Callaghan is drawing up reunification proposals and a ff cork td looking for a new ministerial post for reunifucation, something must be stirring
See my post above - last paragraph
Yeah APM, that makes sense. For the likes of Jim OCallaghan to publish a proposal for a united ireland really got me thinking, what was fuelling this sudden change of direction or opinion?
I didnt think it was the rise of sf in the 26 because its not a signifigant factor in elections down here, so it had to be an external influence, either europe or the uk maybe some backing from usa.
Whatever has happened in the background there has been a signifigant change in approach in a short period of time. Have Rte ever done a program on reunification before?
If joint authority wasn't an option 23 years ago for the good Friday agreement then it most certainly should not be an option to hold off a UI for another generation
Jim's UI proposals
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/republic-could-reject-a-united-ireland-ocallaghan-warns-40232474.html
Quote from: ardtole on March 23, 2021, 10:36:34 PM
Quote from: APM on March 23, 2021, 10:00:54 PM
Quote from: ardtole on March 23, 2021, 08:56:03 PM
The change in stance by the hierarchy in the south even in the last few weeks is telling. Is there something going on in the background or is it a response to the threat of SF in the 26?
When the likes of Jim O Callaghan is drawing up reunification proposals and a ff cork td looking for a new ministerial post for reunifucation, something must be stirring
See my post above - last paragraph
Yeah APM, that makes sense. For the likes of Jim OCallaghan to publish a proposal for a united ireland really got me thinking, what was fuelling this sudden change of direction or opinion?
I didnt think it was the rise of sf in the 26 because its not a signifigant factor in elections down here, so it had to be an external influence, either europe or the uk maybe some backing from usa.
Whatever has happened in the background there has been a signifigant change in approach in a short period of time. Have Rte ever done a program on reunification before?
Brexit has changed the dynamic. Boris Johnson threw the DUP under the bus. The sea border has unsettled Unionists who worry about London casting NI adrift.
Unionism has no leverage after the DUP's solo run.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RMcCrory95/status/1349408946818330630
Meanwhile.....
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/new-dublin-belfast-economic-corridor-aims-to-tackle-challenges-imposed-by-brexit-the-pandemic-and-climate-change-40233411.html
I see Leaky Leo has just announced the establishment of an "economic corridor" between Dublin and Belfast, linking all 8 local authority bodies along the way. Dunno exactly what that means as Leo was sparse on details.
However, I feel the latest move to forge closer lions between Dublin and Belfast is no random one-ff affair.Jim O'Callaghan's proposals and the Cork TD's call for UI discussions all coming at the same time don't look coincidental to me.
I'd say there is a concerted move between Dublin and Westminster to forge closer social, cultural and economic links between North and South with political syncing coming last of all.
Unity by slow degrees in other words.
It's obvious that the opposition to SF's call for a border poll now is coming from the established parties in the South and to a lesser extent from the SDLP and Alliance. I think the possibility of Arlene and Sammy % Co. looking for a border poll just doesn't arise.
Both FF and FG have had talks with both the SDLP and Alliance in the recent past and I'd say there is a lot of inter party talks going on right now with the knowledge of London.
Mary Lou is a shrewd operator and doesn't want to be left behind and since the Shinners are easily the most popular party on the island, she's determined not to be sidelined.
I think the ground work isn't close to completion right now but things are gradually coming together.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
You think only 26 counties were involved in the pre-partition Tan War then?
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
This is a very poor take. How can anybody make such a generalised sweeping comment about who is more Irish than another. As a northerner I don't see myself as any more or less Irish than anyone in the south. But being told that I am neither Irish nor British but 'something in between' is just an insult. I'm not sure if you're just trolling but if not you show a complete misuderstanding of identities. It reminds me of the time Billy Sheehan sang God Save the Queen to try and rile up Ciaran McKeever before a match.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 11:31:50 AM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
This is a very poor take. How can anybody make such a generalised sweeping comment about who is more Irish than another. As a northerner I don't see myself as any more or less Irish than anyone in the south. But being told that I am neither Irish nor British but 'something in between' is just an insult. I'm not sure if you're just trolling but if not you show a complete misuderstanding of identities. It reminds me of the time Billy Sheehan sang God Save the Queen to try and rile up Ciaran McKeever before a match.
It was seafoid who said that, and as his name suggests, he mainly talks shite.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
*gave up half way.
Quote from: Tubberman on March 24, 2021, 11:36:55 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 11:31:50 AM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
This is a very poor take. How can anybody make such a generalised sweeping comment about who is more Irish than another. As a northerner I don't see myself as any more or less Irish than anyone in the south. But being told that I am neither Irish nor British but 'something in between' is just an insult. I'm not sure if you're just trolling but if not you show a complete misuderstanding of identities. It reminds me of the time Billy Sheehan sang God Save the Queen to try and rile up Ciaran McKeever before a match.
It was seafoid who said that, and as his name suggests, he ;D talks shite.
Mainly?? ;D
I regard myself as Irish and it's not a big deal as I get on with my life. I never feel my identity is threatened in any way. I know it's far different for Nationalists in the north and I do understand their frustration at being unable to live in an atmosphere with an Irish ethos.
But Sammy and Arlene are Irish also and have as much right to call themselves so as I have. I have met numerous Unionists who don't look on themselves as British and resent being called so. Like the monstrous Ulsterman who stood beside me at a match in Lansdowne Road one day and nearly buckled me when he gave me a hearty thump on the back.
"I'm as good a sportsman as any," sez he. "I'd go anywhere at any time just to see England get stuffed."
He had a Union Jack wrapped around his shoulders and saw nothing incongruous with that.
Like many other moderate Prods I have met, he could carry both identities easily.
People like him would regard themselves as Unionists in broad terms but absolutely despise the UDA/UVF factions.
Northern posters on the board can speak with greater authority on this but I feel that a large swathe of Unionists realise that England would be glad to get rid of them and would be amenable to the idea of a UI if the safeguards were in place.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
Typical free state guilt trip statement here
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 24, 2021, 01:39:40 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
Typical free state guilt trip statement here
He's just a troll, little evidence of any intelligent or well constructed posts from him.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
Partitionist free stater in we fought and won shocker
The only difference is you had the shame to sell out a part of the country. And therefore, you didn't fight for your identity hard enough, you didn't "win" at all.
You're the type of boy who'd vote against a United Ireland cos it might cost you a few quid.
Embarrassing
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or have emphathy with that. It's beyond you.
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that
some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
I'm not quite sure where you're coming from here at all. Stage Irishness, what exactly does that involve anyway?
As for stating that England feels more like home than Dublin, well the mind boggles. As someone who crosses the border every day and who has also spent some time in England, well that is just simply nonsense. English mentality is very different with the odd exception. If you've ever spent a weeks holidays in a British tourist resort you'd soon know the difference.
Is that Eamonn Collins, the former IRA informer you are talking about? Just because he says it doesn't mean it is true.
I'm not sure what this sudden obsession with southern Irish trying to tell northern nationalists that they should be more British than Irish is anyway. I'm not sure is it just some posters trolling or if they genuinely believe their own statements. Either way this is totally out of touch with the reality in my experience.
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 02:50:48 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
I'm not quite sure where you're coming from here at all. Stage Irishness, what exactly does that involve anyway?
As for stating that England feels more like home than Dublin, well the mind boggles. As someone who crosses the border every day and who has also spent some time in England, well that is just simply nonsense. English mentality is very different with the odd exception. If you've ever spent a weeks holidays in a British tourist resort you'd soon know the difference.
Is that Eamonn Collins, the former IRA informer you are talking about? Just because he says it doesn't mean it is true.
I'm not sure what this sudden obsession with southern Irish trying to tell northern nationalists that they should be more British than Irish is anyway. I'm not sure is it just some posters trolling or if they genuinely believe their own statements. Either way this is totally out of touch with the reality in my experience.
I would put it down to Free Stater guilt manifesting itself into a defence mechanism. It's time for them to first of all acknowledge their state's failings to northern nationalists since The Troubles broke out and then to show some contrition for it.
Any who says the Free State establishment has shown anything but contempt to Northern nationalists for the past 50 years is truly deluded.
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
There's more than a touch of quaint Britishness about Westport, there's even a touch of England's green and pleasant land about Castlebar with its nice village green
But neither feels remotely like Portadown or Lurgan
Maybe a bit like Armagh
Do different towns/cities make people feel more or less Irish or something?
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Bayonne and Bilbao are both in the Basque Country but, in another, more pertinent way in terms of international status, Bayonne is in France and Bilbao is in Spain
There are lots English people in Torremolinos but it isn't in England
There are lots of Irish in Boston but it isn't in Ireland
Quote from: general_lee on March 24, 2021, 02:59:43 PM
Do different towns/cities make people feel more or less Irish or something?
Athlone makes me feel less Irish
Shithole
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Bayonne and Bilbao are both in the Basque Country but, in another, more pertinent way in terms of international status, Bayonne is in France and Bilbao is in Spain
There are lots English people in Torremolinos but it isn't in England
There are lots of Irish in Boston but it isn't in Ireland
And what
I feel a hell of alot more at home in westport or Cork than I would in East Belfast or the Shankill Road. Similarly I'm sure there are alot of D4 dubs who'd feel more at home watching Bristol or harlequins in England than they would watching Crossmaglen or gaoth dobhair
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 03:06:23 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Bayonne and Bilbao are both in the Basque Country but, in another, more pertinent way in terms of international status, Bayonne is in France and Bilbao is in Spain
There are lots English people in Torremolinos but it isn't in England
There are lots of Irish in Boston but it isn't in Ireland
And what
Mayo is in a state called Ireland
Armagh is in a state called the United Kingdom
If the status of the counties was the same you wouldn't be calling for a border poll
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:09:32 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 03:06:23 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Bayonne and Bilbao are both in the Basque Country but, in another, more pertinent way in terms of international status, Bayonne is in France and Bilbao is in Spain
There are lots English people in Torremolinos but it isn't in England
There are lots of Irish in Boston but it isn't in Ireland
And what
Mayo is in a state called Ireland
Armagh is in a state called the United Kingdom
If the status of the counties was the same you wouldn't be calling for a border poll
Armagh is in a state called Ireland.
Both were once under British rule, now one of those is.
The status of both counties was the same back then, just as it is now.
Seafoid saying the north will always be a different status to the south just doesn't add up, as the south was once in the same boat as the north.
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
Really? You sure about that now? The language the people are speaking is a fairly big trace dont you think? Not to mention the countless other examples. Nearly our entire Island is inextricably linked to Britain for forever more whether people like it or not.
When did Armagh secede from the 6 Counties? ::)
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:09:32 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 03:06:23 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 03:01:23 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 02:49:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
The people are the same, Jesus Christ.
The status of the counties is not the same. There is no trace of Britishness in Mayo and there will always be some in Armagh even in a united Ireland.
The status is the same.
There are British people in Mayo.
Both are counties in Ireland.
Bayonne and Bilbao are both in the Basque Country but, in another, more pertinent way in terms of international status, Bayonne is in France and Bilbao is in Spain
There are lots English people in Torremolinos but it isn't in England
There are lots of Irish in Boston but it isn't in Ireland
And what
Mayo is in a state called choking when the reach an Ireland
Armagh is in a state where the United Kingdom had to move about in helicopters because the ground was a no go.
Fixed that for ya Sid
A lot of Northern Republicans do try and go out of their way to prove they are "Ultra Irish"
A handy check list is
Love The Wolfe Tones
Love Celtic / Hate Rangers
Huge SF supporters - see no wrong support - cult like
Hate any Nationalists who don't subscribe to their way of thinking
Want to ram a United Ireland down everyone's throats and have no time for relationship building with others of a different viewpoint
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
I would say some of the quarter may have changed their mind now that some of the major parties in the South have softened their stance
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
(http://www.animated-gifs.fr/category_money/notes-2/0002.gif)
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
What poll?
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
170 is not a great sample size, although you'd expect the self-selecting GAA-oriented crowd here to be more nationalistic than what the poll shows.
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
I don't recognise the formulation that someone who disagrees with your position has to be a know nothing.
Unfortunately I know too much about the North. And I am not a partitionist. It's all Ireland.
https://youtu.be/Jwv2B4W9brk
You cannot fix the Ulster question just because you have a United Ireland. You can't fix it by claiming OWC is British either.
Because the people are both Irish and British.
NI will always have some Brit influence. It will.always have Rangers fans. The Plantation is forever.
Presumably the 7 want nothing to do with nasty freestaters,ffg, failed State, stab in the back 1921, westbrits blah blah?
I would expect a plebiscite in the 26 on a UI held in a vacuum with no preplanning or outline of the type of new State etc would be about 65/35.
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 04:52:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
I don't recognise the formulation that someone who disagrees with your position has to be a know nothing.
Unfortunately I know too much about the North. And I am not a partitionist. It's all Ireland.
https://youtu.be/Jwv2B4W9brk
You cannot fix the Ulster question just because you have a United Ireland. You can't fix it by claiming OWC is British either.
Because the people are both Irish and British.
NI will always have some Brit influence. It will.always have Rangers fans. The Plantation is forever.
That's obviously not true though.
1. I'm not Irish and British, I'm just Irish.
2. Your attempt to annex the O6 doesn't add up when the Mayo was in its same position, by your logic, it will always have British influence.
You are no different, or your status is no different than us, back then, or now.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
What poll?
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
EvilG and Michael are probably 2 of them or are they not allowed to vote being.....
Angelo, Armagh18 and Shooters are likely 3 being of the of the hate "freestaters(sic)" camp.
The other 2 are having the craic.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 24, 2021, 05:12:37 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
EvilG and Michael are probably 2 of them or are they not allowed to vote being.....
Angelo, Armagh18 and Shooters are likely 3 being of the of the hate "freestaters(sic)" camp.
The other 2 are having the craic.
I include the Southern No's in that too just for the record.
Quote from: trailer on March 24, 2021, 04:11:43 PM
A lot of Northern Republicans do try and go out of their way to prove they are "Ultra Irish"
A handy check list is
Love The Wolfe Tones
Love Celtic / Hate Rangers
Huge SF supporters - see no wrong support - cult like
Hate any Nationalists who don't subscribe to their way of thinking
Want to ram a United Ireland down everyone's throats and have no time for relationship building with others of a different viewpoint
I wouldn't conflate some of that with Irishness. Some of it is just pure tokenism but neither would I criticise those living in socially deprived interface areas for latching onto some of these ideals. It is just their way of expressing their identity and giving themselves a common purpose. If it makes them feel more Irish themselves then so be it, its not going to offend me. Thankfully I live in a part of the north where I don't feel as though I have to go around waving a tricolour and wearing a Celtic jersey. So it is all down to lived experiences and each persons experience is different. All nationalists and republicans do not fall into a single category and I don't like those sweeping generalisations.
I do agree that there needs to be a dialling down of rhetoric from some political representatives (I presume that is what you are referring to) and I think in fairness that there has been some of this within SF since Mary Lou took over the leadership of the party and the old war veterans are gradually phased out. Politicians such as Martina Anderson would be best advised to show a little bit more humility, I don't think that serves their cause any good in trying to win a border poll. It's just Sammy Wilson in reverse and only serves to beat the drum to a particular base by reinforcing some of the stereotypes that you've expressed.
I think a lot of this is largely a generational thing. People under the age of 40 now have very hazy memories of the troubles and just want a fairer society with a chance of making a decent living with decent public services and where they feel free to express their identity whatever that may be. Younger people now are much more open and less entrenched in their views.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 24, 2021, 05:12:37 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
EvilG and Michael are probably 2 of them or are they not allowed to vote being.....
Angelo, Armagh18 and Shooters are likely 3 being of the of the hate "freestaters(sic)" camp.
The other 2 are having the craic.
Nope, not me (though I assume I would be permitted to vote, if I chose)
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:00:10 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 04:52:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
I don't recognise the formulation that someone who disagrees with your position has to be a know nothing.
Unfortunately I know too much about the North. And I am not a partitionist. It's all Ireland.
https://youtu.be/Jwv2B4W9brk
You cannot fix the Ulster question just because you have a United Ireland. You can't fix it by claiming OWC is British either.
Because the people are both Irish and British.
NI will always have some Brit influence. It will.always have Rangers fans. The Plantation is forever.
That's obviously not true though.
1. I'm not Irish and British, I'm just Irish.
2. Your attempt to annex the O6 doesn't add up when the Mayo was in its same position, by your logic, it will always have British influence.
You are no different, or your status is no different than us, back then, or now.
He didn't say you're British
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 05:32:27 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:00:10 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 04:52:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
I don't recognise the formulation that someone who disagrees with your position has to be a know nothing.
Unfortunately I know too much about the North. And I am not a partitionist. It's all Ireland.
https://youtu.be/Jwv2B4W9brk
You cannot fix the Ulster question just because you have a United Ireland. You can't fix it by claiming OWC is British either.
Because the people are both Irish and British.
NI will always have some Brit influence. It will.always have Rangers fans. The Plantation is forever.
That's obviously not true though.
1. I'm not Irish and British, I'm just Irish.
2. Your attempt to annex the O6 doesn't add up when the Mayo was in its same position, by your logic, it will always have British influence.
You are no different, or your status is no different than us, back then, or now.
He didn't say you're British
Yes he did.
K
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 04:52:17 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 24, 2021, 11:14:49 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
NI is never going to be the same as Mayo because a certain proportion of the peple do not identify as Irish. The best that can be hoped for is some sort of fudge.
If NI were the same as Mayo the armed struggle would have won.
Nonsense, typical free stater partitionist attitude who knows fa about the north.
A certain proportion in the north can identify however they please, that's nothing to do with the Irish in the north. There is plenty in the south that do not identify as Irish.
The north IS the same as Mayo.
The difference is (can't believe I'm having to spell this out) that the south sold the north up the river and the British state establishment in the north had greater power in the "armed struggle".
I'd say you're one of the boys that would vote against a UI.
I don't recognise the formulation that someone who disagrees with your position has to be a know nothing.
Unfortunately I know too much about the North. And I am not a partitionist. It's all Ireland.
https://youtu.be/Jwv2B4W9brk
You cannot fix the Ulster question just because you have a United Ireland. You can't fix it by claiming OWC is British either.
Because the people are both Irish and British.
NI will always have some Brit influence. It will.always have Rangers fans. The Plantation is forever.
It won't be fixed immediately in the same way that the peace process post GFA was a journey that a generation probably needed to go through. However, it was always a fairly inevitable long term settlement that the 6 counties would be returned to a single island state at some point in the future.
A major issue was that the planted population never attempted to fully integrate themselves into the country to which they were sent. Partition only helped reinforce this even further when they became the sole ruling class after which they became even more insular and defensive in their attempt to reinforce a protestant state for a protestant people.
Demographics will now shortly take over but it will be too simplistic to say that the 6 counties will always be both Irish & British. The identities of its people might be but most people apart from the Unionists themselves will simply recognise it as Ireland.
In a Unified country they will have to be welcomed and given protections that some nationalists will find uncomfortable but for some of the Unionists this will never be enough. Similar to shortly after when the 26 counties gained their independence, I would expect that some of them may decide to relocate to England or Scotland.
Quote from: trailer on March 24, 2021, 04:11:43 PM
A lot of Northern Republicans do try and go out of their way to prove they are "Ultra Irish"
A handy check list is
Love The Wolfe Tones
Love Celtic / Hate Rangers
Huge SF supporters - see no wrong support - cult like
Hate any Nationalists who don't subscribe to their way of thinking
Want to ram a United Ireland down everyone's throats and have no time for relationship building with others of a different viewpoint
Says the unionist boot licker. ;D
A lot of Northern stoops do try and go out of their way to prove they are "Ultra accommodating"
A handy check list is
Love pledging allegiance to the monarchy/taking seats in Westminster
Love wearing poppies / Hate Easter lilies
Love taking titles and sitting in the House of Lords
Love celebrating partition
Huge SDLP supporters - see no wrong support - cult like
Hate any Republicans who don't subscribe to their way of thinking
Want to ram project Northern Ireland down everyone's throats and have no time for relationship building with others of a different viewpoint
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 24, 2021, 05:30:18 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 24, 2021, 05:12:37 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
EvilG and Michael are probably 2 of them or are they not allowed to vote being.....
Angelo, Armagh18 and Shooters are likely 3 being of the of the hate "freestaters(sic)" camp.
The other 2 are having the craic.
Nope, not me (though I assume I would be permitted to vote, if I chose)
Nor me!
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Give Angelo a chance
Another 6 months and he will have it close to half
So Seafoid reckons the six counties aren't as Irish as the 26 and that we could consider re-partition (cos it worked so well the last time?).
The mind boggles.
17.3% of Dublin is foreign national. Does this make Dublin less Irish?
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2021/03/24/news/warning-after-several-hundred-people-from-republic-try-to-book-covid-jabs-in-northern-ireland-2265429/
Those pesky free staters, coming up here trying to take our vaccines 8)
I'd imagine they'd all be in favour of a UI.
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:36:28 PM
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
6 of them voted Angelo out
:D ;D
Quote from: RedHand88 on March 24, 2021, 09:01:43 PM
17.3% of Dublin is foreign national. Does this make Dublin less Irish?
In a unified Ireland the foreign nationals will actually outnumber the Unionists so I guess that means Ireland will be Irish, British and everything else.
;D ;D ;D wonder how that list is coming on
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 07:59:54 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Give Angelo a chance
Another 6 months and he will have it close to half
Only an idiot would base a decision like this based on the musings of an on- line WUM. Unless you wanted an excuse to vote that way anyway....
Quote from: Snapchap on March 24, 2021, 08:46:53 PM
So Seafoid reckons the six counties aren't as Irish as the 26 and that we could consider re-partition (cos it worked so well the last time?).
The mind boggles.
Another good example here of a Northern poster not engaging with what another poster actually said and creating a warm bath of fake offence to wallow in
Sooooo comforting
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:42:36 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on March 24, 2021, 09:01:43 PM
17.3% of Dublin is foreign national. Does this make Dublin less Irish?
In a unified Ireland the foreign nationals will actually outnumber the Unionists so I guess that means Ireland will be Irish, British and everything else.
Irlandia będzie polska
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:36:28 PM
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
I don't know very many Catholics in the North but I know enough t feel that a sizeable rump would feel uncomfortable stepping into the unknown, giving the inevitable backlash that willl inevitably follow.
I'm thinking mainly of the Malone Road types; those who have a grand wee comfortable lifestyle and don't want to jeopardise it in any way. I'm not blaming, if that's the word, anyone on that particular road- it's just the social class they belong.
I wonder if the Nationalists on the board are being a bit too confident in assuming that demographics and a bit of patience is all that it will take to let everything slip into place.
For instance, could all pro-UI posters honestly claim that every (Catholic) voter they know will be 100% sure to vote for the end of partition?
There is a signifigant amount of catholics with cushy civil service jobs, how they are rewarded or compensated for expected redundancies will be more telling.
There is going to be money thrown at this, whatever has happened in the last few weeks, the change in attitude, particulary from the politicians in the south has been dramatic.
You mean BT9 ners like Brolly?
Tbh the numbers are not that high that would make a significant difference, I said earlier that the ones on benefits and social housing they'd be harder to convince, those with money will always find a way.
It's not like those top civil service jobs will disappear, the lower paid CS jobs will go first.
I agree totally mr2, thats why when sammy from sandy row or billy from ballymena are in the privacy of the voting booth, the 200 euro a week dole money that the south pays, compared to the 50 or 60 in the north could be hugely signifigant.
Wouldnt suprise me if the same lads were out throwing petrol bombs for a few days after what they voted for passed either.
Quote from: ardtole on March 25, 2021, 07:39:39 AM
I agree totally mr2, thats why when sammy from sandy row or billy from ballymena are in the privacy of the voting booth, the 200 euro a week dole money that the south pays, compared to the 50 or 60 in the north could be hugely signifigant.
Wouldnt suprise me if the same lads were out throwing petrol bombs for a few days after what they voted for passed either.
I would say the South would have to review their payments schemes, how much does a standard dole merchant get in the south?
Free rent and social payments?
200 a week approx, rent covered, and a medical card. With the huge cost of rent in the private sector it actually is a detterent for some to return to work.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 07:27:38 AM
You mean BT9 ners like Brolly?
Tbh the numbers are not that high that would make a significant difference, I said earlier that the ones on benefits and social housing they'd be harder to convince, those with money will always find a way.
It's not like those top civil service jobs will disappear, the lower paid CS jobs will go first.
In Brollys defence he's a BT6er
Quote from: RedHand88 on March 25, 2021, 07:55:41 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 07:27:38 AM
You mean BT9 ners like Brolly?
Tbh the numbers are not that high that would make a significant difference, I said earlier that the ones on benefits and social housing they'd be harder to convince, those with money will always find a way.
It's not like those top civil service jobs will disappear, the lower paid CS jobs will go first.
In Brollys defence he's a BT6er
Sorry mlord! I'd have had him there based on his involvement with St Brigids
Its probably been discussed earlier but is the huge budget deficit in the North going to be an issue?
Quote from: michaelg on March 24, 2021, 07:54:52 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 24, 2021, 05:30:18 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 24, 2021, 05:12:37 PM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 24, 2021, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 04:49:33 PM
Quote from: Orior on March 24, 2021, 04:28:52 PM
So according to this poll, a quarter of GAA people in the south would not vote for a united Ireland.
What the heck is going on?
Perhaps some of the quarter could list 5 clear reasons why not.
Maybe even more surprising is the fact that 7 GAA people in the north voted to stay under British rule.
I would honestly love to know the rationale behind this if anyone wants to confess!?
You'd wonder how they can look themselves in the mirror.
EvilG and Michael are probably 2 of them or are they not allowed to vote being.....
Angelo, Armagh18 and Shooters are likely 3 being of the of the hate "freestaters(sic)" camp.
The other 2 are having the craic.
Nope, not me (though I assume I would be permitted to vote, if I chose)
Nor me!
You two lads still hold the Unionist veto so no matter how the rest of us vote your votes override all that.
Unless one voted for a UI then we're proper fúcked. ;D
Quote from: Maroon Manc on March 25, 2021, 08:52:39 AM
Its probably been discussed earlier but is the huge budget deficit in the North going to be an issue?
Of course it will especially for the non emotionally motivated "middle ground" in the 6 who will decide the Referendum.
So the quicker the North starts to cash in on its unique post Brexit position and tries to improve itself the better
Some GAAboarders work in FIFA?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9395669/Official-FIFA-website-makes-bizarre-inclusion-Irish-Free-State-Northern-Irelands-group.html
Quote from: general_lee on March 24, 2021, 06:25:14 PM
A lot of Northern stoops do try and go out of their way to prove they are "Ultra accommodating"
A handy check list is
Love pledging allegiance to the monarchy/taking seats in Westminster
Love wearing poppies / Hate Easter lilies
Love taking titles and sitting in the House of Lords
Love celebrating partition
Huge SDLP supporters - see no wrong support - cult like
Hate any Republicans who don't subscribe to their way of thinking
Want to ram project Northern Ireland down everyone's throats and have no time for relationship building with others of a different viewpoint
Yup.
That would be my general conclusion of your modern day Stoop.
Their main political representation is to be anti-SF more than anything else. A parody of a political party and Eastwood has to be just about the most embarrassing political figure in the O6 and that really is some achievement in itself.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:36:28 PM
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
I don't know very many Catholics in the North but I know enough t feel that a sizeable rump would feel uncomfortable stepping into the unknown, giving the inevitable backlash that willl inevitably follow.
I'm thinking mainly of the Malone Road types; those who have a grand wee comfortable lifestyle and don't want to jeopardise it in any way. I'm not blaming, if that's the word, anyone on that particular road- it's just the social class they belong.
I wonder if the Nationalists on the board are being a bit too confident in assuming that demographics and a bit of patience is all that it will take to let everything slip into place.
For instance, could all pro-UI posters honestly claim that every (Catholic) voter they know will be 100% sure to vote for the end of partition?
I think most people are realistic enough to know that calling a border poll and winning it are 2 completely different realities. However I do think that when it is called that there would be a reasonable assumption that it will pass. And yes, there will be cushy catholic voters who may not want to give up what they see as some of their home comforts if it makes them economically worse off. But that is where the work lies for civic nationalism in preparing ahead for the poll and bringing forward the benefits of a unified island in order to alleviate those fears. I'd be fairly sure that when it does happen that there will be a groundswell of public opinion both nationally and internationally behind the idea of reunification and I don't even think many in Britain will object to it, certainly at least privately.
Work around the gradual phasing out of UK subvention grants, maintenance of pension entitlements, international funding etc need to be ironed out. The British position regarding the north may have changed forever as a result of the outworkings of Brexit and with the opening debate from political parties in the south there is a whiff of change in the air. Even getting many Unionist politicians to the position that they are accepting of the fact that a border poll is fairly inevitable would have been unthinkable only 5 years ago.
At the minute, until we know how this new nation state will look, it is a futile exercise in second guessing how cushy catholics, foreign nationals and people in the middle will vote, but I'd be fairly sure that by the time it comes to pass that the work will have been done by that stage. Then it will largely boil down to basic economics and the biggest challenge will be for civic nationalism to try and win this argument.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:36:28 PM
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
I don't know very many Catholics in the North but I know enough t feel that a sizeable rump would feel uncomfortable stepping into the unknown, giving the inevitable backlash that willl inevitably follow.
I'm thinking mainly of the Malone Road types; those who have a grand wee comfortable lifestyle and don't want to jeopardise it in any way. I'm not blaming, if that's the word, anyone on that particular road- it's just the social class they belong.
I wonder if the Nationalists on the board are being a bit too confident in assuming that demographics and a bit of patience is all that it will take to let everything slip into place.
For instance, could all pro-UI posters honestly claim that every (Catholic) voter they know will be 100% sure to vote for the end of partition?
I am one of that sizeable rump, although not a Malone Road type. We are culturally Irish and broadly in favour of unity. But some reassurance is required and we would be easier persuaded than the middle ground. A lot of my nervousness centres around being in my 60's. Some on here pilloried me for this position but the concerns of this demographic can and should be assuaged.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 10:28:44 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
I think both statements are accurate.There's definitely a mutual lack of trust between Nationalists north and south.
We, in the republic, cannot understand why the cross-community aggro is still very much in evidence. One could say, "They finally got parity of esteem and all that goes with it and they still aren't satisfied."
The fact is that the Civil War, immediately after the Treaty, split the Free State in two. Families and friends were split and the bitterness lasted down the generations.
They were too busy fighting each other than to think of helping anybody.
Then, to cap it all, De Valera started an economic war with England when FF came to power. He reneged on loan repayments and the Brits blocked the import of agricultural produce from the state. This lasted from 1932 to 1938 and the Free State economy was smashed. Almost immediately afterwards, WW11 came along and added to the general destitution. The south hadn't a pot to piss in, never mind going to anyone else's aid.
There is also a small cabal of loudmouths on the northern side who go out of their way to disparage the south. There are a few of them on here. They despise everything down south but are still the most vociferous supporters of unity. While I think most down here just ignore them, the idea of having to listen to them if and when we have a UI, is off putting, to say the least.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:13:39 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 10:28:44 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
I think both statements are accurate.There's definitely a mutual lack of trust between Nationalists north and south.
We, in the republic, cannot understand why the cross-community aggro is still very much in evidence. One could say, "They finally got parity of esteem and all that goes with it and they still aren't satisfied."
The fact is that the Civil War, immediately after the Treaty, split the Free State in two. Families and friends were split and the bitterness lasted down the generations.
They were too busy fighting each other than to think of helping anybody.
Then, to cap it all, De Valera started an economic war with England when FF came to power. He reneged on loan repayments and the Brits blocked the import of agricultural produce from the state. This lasted from 1932 to 1938 and the Free State economy was smashed. Almost immediately afterwards, WW11 came along and added to the general destitution. The south hadn't a pot to piss in, never mind going to anyone else's aid.
There is also a small cabal of loudmouths on the northern side who go out of their way to disparage the south. There are a few of them on here. They despise everything down south but are still the most vociferous supporters of unity. While I think most down here just ignore them, the idea of having to listen to them if and when we have a UI, is off putting, to say the least.
I have seen that a few times at GAA games where there is a bit of an argument going on about something that has happened on the field and the old "free state bastards" line comes out and you sold us out etc. I must say its a tiny tiny minority but it goes to show the bitterness of some.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:13:39 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 10:28:44 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
I think both statements are accurate.There's definitely a mutual lack of trust between Nationalists north and south.
We, in the republic, cannot understand why the cross-community aggro is still very much in evidence. One could say, "They finally got parity of esteem and all that goes with it and they still aren't satisfied."
The fact is that the Civil War, immediately after the Treaty, split the Free State in two. Families and friends were split and the bitterness lasted down the generations.
They were too busy fighting each other than to think of helping anybody.
Then, to cap it all, De Valera started an economic war with England when FF came to power. He reneged on loan repayments and the Brits blocked the import of agricultural produce from the state. This lasted from 1932 to 1938 and the Free State economy was smashed. Almost immediately afterwards, WW11 came along and added to the general destitution. The south hadn't a pot to piss in, never mind going to anyone else's aid.
There is also a small cabal of loudmouths on the northern side who go out of their way to disparage the south. There are a few of them on here. They despise everything down south but are still the most vociferous supporters of unity. While I think most down here just ignore them, the idea of having to listen to them if and when we have a UI, is off putting, to say the least.
And why do you think that is?
100 years of turning a blind eye to the institutional sectarianism northern nationalists received in their daily lives.
Watching on as innocent catholics were shot and beaten off the streets, burned out of their homes by state forces.
Denied the right to vote, gain employment or have the same educational rights as the other side of the community.
Vilified and pontificated at nationalists who decided to take the fight up themselves while at the same time meekly tutting at the British state sponsored terrorism on its citizens.
That is the reason I feel the South is an insidious institution. For me unity is not about the north joining the south, it's about the end of two utterly rotten states who have completely failed the citizens of this island. It's consigning those failures to the bin and starting all over it. Now a lot of Free Staters, and I'm not referring directly to you here don't want to deal with the shame they should acknowledge on how northern nationalists were abandoned by their state and then vilified for standing up for their human rights and their community when the British State turned its forces on a defenceless people.
Decency, respect, humanity would have seen the Free State intervening meaningfully in The Troubles, instead it washed its hand off it to keep the status quo, to carry on the gravy train. Bar a handful of politicians like Neil Blaney through the years, the actions of FFG politicians has to be dismiss, insult and diminish northern nationalist as some sort of crazed sectarian extremists without ever examining their own failings.
Rather than Micheal Martin turning a request that he engage with families of The Troubles to get some restorative justice into a quite frankly disgusting political point scoring exercise, maybe he should address the failings of his parties and the other governments and their pathetic repsonse and treatment all through the years to northern nationalists.
I think one of the most disheartening and frustrating aspects of the lockdowns and vaccine rollout is the wavering and uncertainty, with the narrative shifting daily or weekly. If people thought there was a definitive direction, then people would be more likely to be on board and engage with the processes.
The same would apply in the case of reunification. Reading here the last week or so reminds me of a section in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy- the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything was 42, but the problem was no-one could define the question. There are so many strands that it is natural that people would focus on specific ones either closest to their hearts or their economic circumstances, and idle speculation or hearsay would do little to dispel doubts or not fuel anxieties about other strands. There would need to be some form of forum whereby people could submit their views across a range of local, community and national issues, and then this data to be analysed to suggest directions. This process would need to run concurrently with cross-party talks at a political level, again from local to regional to national scale. It would take a lot of time, and again it would take time to digest the findings, but there is such diversity, even from the comments here in the last while, to encapsulate all views would be a pretty herculean task.
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at at time, and it would be the same here- a lot of small steps to get things in motion, but even before these could happen, there needs to be a framework which could point the way, and ultimately see a timeline evolve. The old Gaelic chieftains' complaint that the Normans were becoming more Irish than the Irish themselves (or was it the other way round with the Normans complaining, I can't remember) shows a difficulty in defining being Irish, and the who or what is an Irishman argument sidetracks the debate when identity is so crucial to different groupings and backgrounds.
There needs to be options put before people, with possibilities and alternatives, and when people can see these options, they can start thinking about what the end product would look like.
The entire concept just can't be reduced to a yes or a no.
Otherwise, the answer is 42.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 12:07:09 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 24, 2021, 09:36:28 PM
So none of the 7 northerners who would vote to stay under British rule are prepared to come forward to explain their thinking. I think there was either some dodgy voting going on or maybe they're just too afraid to admit it.
I don't know very many Catholics in the North but I know enough t feel that a sizeable rump would feel uncomfortable stepping into the unknown, giving the inevitable backlash that willl inevitably follow.
I'm thinking mainly of the Malone Road types; those who have a grand wee comfortable lifestyle and don't want to jeopardise it in any way. I'm not blaming, if that's the word, anyone on that particular road- it's just the social class they belong.
I wonder if the Nationalists on the board are being a bit too confident in assuming that demographics and a bit of patience is all that it will take to let everything slip into place.
For instance, could all pro-UI posters honestly claim that every (Catholic) voter they know will be 100% sure to vote for the end of partition?
I am one of that sizeable rump, although not a Malone Road type. We are culturally Irish and broadly in favour of unity. But some reassurance is required and we would be easier persuaded than the middle ground. A lot of my nervousness centres around being in my 60's. Some on here pilloried me for this position but the concerns of this demographic can and should be assuaged.
to be fair apples
a fair few of the guys who vote sinn fein and claim their benefits need to be persuaded also, the privacy of teh vote might make people be a little more hesitant when the bit comes to teh bit.
i am in my 50s but my two kids are definitely not sure fire votes for unity. the eldest is content that she is recognised as irish but would need to be persuaded to vote yes, whilst teh youngest would be fire and brimstone, lets get it done.
what i am saying is that its not a given that the youth will automatically vote yes either.
Ye do realise there are social welfare benefits in the 26 Cos?
Ye do realise that the UK benefits are among the lowest in Europe?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 01:02:42 PM
Ye do realise there are social welfare benefits in the 26 Cos?
Ye do realise that the UK benefits are among the lowest in Europe?
Was just about to say this. Surely the ones on benefits need the least convincing...
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 01:18:05 PM
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
Think you'll find the insults are a 2 way street
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:19:04 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 01:18:05 PM
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
Think you'll find the insults are a 2 way street
Granted but I prefer the higher moral ground. But there are a number of pro unity posters on here who disparage anyone with a different take.
Quote from: Cavan19 on March 25, 2021, 12:25:22 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:13:39 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 10:28:44 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
I think both statements are accurate.There's definitely a mutual lack of trust between Nationalists north and south.
We, in the republic, cannot understand why the cross-community aggro is still very much in evidence. One could say, "They finally got parity of esteem and all that goes with it and they still aren't satisfied."
The fact is that the Civil War, immediately after the Treaty, split the Free State in two. Families and friends were split and the bitterness lasted down the generations.
They were too busy fighting each other than to think of helping anybody.
Then, to cap it all, De Valera started an economic war with England when FF came to power. He reneged on loan repayments and the Brits blocked the import of agricultural produce from the state. This lasted from 1932 to 1938 and the Free State economy was smashed. Almost immediately afterwards, WW11 came along and added to the general destitution. The south hadn't a pot to piss in, never mind going to anyone else's aid.
There is also a small cabal of loudmouths on the northern side who go out of their way to disparage the south. There are a few of them on here. They despise everything down south but are still the most vociferous supporters of unity. While I think most down here just ignore them, the idea of having to listen to them if and when we have a UI, is off putting, to say the least.
I have seen that a few times at GAA games where there is a bit of an argument going on about something that has happened on the field and the old "free state bastards" line comes out and you sold us out etc. I must say its a tiny tiny minority but it goes to show the bitterness of some.
There is always a vocal minority in all walks off life. For every free state b******d comment there will be a similar "British b*******d" comment from some bitter minority from the south. Decisions should not be based on these people and too often people using these types of comments as a defence for making a certain decision, are doing so only to cover up their real reason for making such decision.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 01:18:05 PM
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
What good reasons were there?
A "not my problem" attitude. The Free State has absolutely no position to moralise on what happened in The Troubles when they were happy enough to stand idly by and let nationalists be terrorised in a sectarian state.
When you have families who have lost and suffered at the hands of the British state and calls for restorative justice are handled with a "but the IRA" response then I think it shows the absolute contempt the Free State establishment has for northern nationalists.
Spot on Apples.
All the voters in the Referenda(dums?) will have been born long after 1921 and many will have been born after 1994.
The past is the past, what happened happened and moaning to people who weren't born then is pointless and reinforces stereotypes.
As business and commercial interests are coming together perhaps its time for "civic nationalism" to start a Citizens Assembly type forum of some sort open to all shades across Ireland ?
Leave the politicians, especially the 17th Century ones behind.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what's your point?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 01:26:34 PM
Spot on Apples.
All the voters in the Referenda(dums?) will have been born long after 1921 and many will have been born after 1994.
The past is the past, what happened happened and moaning to people who weren't born then is pointless and reinforces stereotypes.
As business and commercial interests are coming together perhaps its time for "civic nationalism" to start a Citizens Assembly type forum of some sort open to all shades across Ireland ?
Leave the politicians, especially the 17th Century ones behind.
Dear me. Maybe the least self-aware statement I've ever seen on this board.
Have contributed to these types of threads on here for near 20 years, the only thing that's changed is that the Northerners & Southerners are getting further apart and more nasty to each other. I've long reconciled myself to the fact that a UI is a pipe dream, if Scotland goes then maybe there's a chance, if not , no chance imo.
I think that this has the potential to be the longest ever thread on this board.
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 02:04:38 PM
Have contributed to these types of threads on here for near 20 years, the only thing that's changed is that the Northerners & Southerners are getting further apart and more nasty to each other. I've long reconciled myself to the fact that a UI is a pipe dream, if Scotland goes then maybe there's a chance, if not , no chance imo.
I wouldn't conflate a few cranks on an online thread or on Twitter who have their own personal agendas and vendettas, with the general public mood. A younger generation coming through now generally do not hold that same level of bitterness and prejudice in my experience.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what's your point?
Are you that economically illiterate
The NI economy with all its billions in subventions from the English taxpayer is underperforming the Republic by a minimum of 2/3rds by some metrics and up to 90% in others
The billions that have spent on it by the UK taxpayer haven't shifted the arrow upwards on any graph,actually it appears that the opposite is the case
Will it come to a point in 30/40 years time,where even the english will say this is too much of a drain on us,
you lot take it on
remember the subvention to NI is an awful lot more that the EU one and we all know what happened there
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 01:23:05 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 01:18:05 PM
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
What good reasons were there?
A "not my problem" attitude. The Free State has absolutely no position to moralise on what happened in The Troubles when they were happy enough to stand idly by and let nationalists be terrorised in a sectarian state.
When you have families who have lost and suffered at the hands of the British state and calls for restorative justice are handled with a "but the IRA" response then I think it shows the absolute contempt the Free State establishment has for northern nationalists.
There was civil war in the south over the partition of this island
I know you have conveniently forgotten that detail
It doesn't suit your narrative of they left us behind
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 02:19:51 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what's your point?
Are you that economically illiterate
The NI economy with all its billions in subventions from the English taxpayer is underperforming the Republic by a minimum of 2/3rds by some metrics and up to 90% in others
The billions that have spent on it by the UK taxpayer haven't shifted the arrow upwards on any graph,actually it appears that the opposite is the case
Will it come to a point in 30/40 years time,where even the english will say this is too much of a drain on us,
you lot take it on
remember the subvention to NI is an awful lot more that the EU one and we all know what happened there
We don't know is the simple answer, looking back in the not so distant past Ireland was nearly bankrupt and now its bounced back, go back even further and there wasn't a road that didn't have a hole on it or didnt take you through every village on the way to Dublin.
You are going into the future with a blind idea of how it will pan out.
Northern Ireland is not a country its a state that's been run into the ground after over 30 years of troubles, were building were raised to the ground and business couldn't open without having to pay for the 'protection' from their local hoods.
Within that period industries closed like Mackies Harlands, and other major engineering firms, a small place like here can't and won't be able to sustain itself with the drop off in industry.
I'm sure there is enough of a skilled work force to get it up and going again. Local politics has a lot to answer to, but sure we'll keep voting them in and get the same results.
Your post is something we all know. So what's your real point? That the South would be mad to take back the north, that it would be better to stay as a republic and not unify the island?
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 12:26:03 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 12:13:39 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 10:28:44 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:48:03 PM
Quote from: trueblue1234 on March 24, 2021, 02:38:16 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 24, 2021, 02:03:44 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 24, 2021, 11:21:04 AM
Quote from: GiveItToTheShooters on March 23, 2021, 10:07:17 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 23, 2021, 01:53:43 PM
The 6 counties are always going to be treated differently because of the polarisation. Currently they are neither fully Irish nor fully British but something in between.
In a United Ireland that would not change.
It will be heartbreaking for Northern Shinners to live in a country that is not a romantic republic straight out of the Wolfe Tones.
Free stater mindset clear for all to see again. People in the 6 counties are as Irish as you, if not more, as they've had to fight for their identity.
Nordie in I'm more Irish than you shocker
only difference is we fought for our identity and won
There's a bizarre sort of stage Irishness with a minority of Northern nationalists - like you get with a lot of Irish Americans, or old time London Irish
A sort internal dissonance or insecurity - they feel they have to constantly prove their Irishness, but they try to fool themselves that that conscious, over the top performance makes them more Irish - it doesn't, and misunderstands what Irishness is
The DUP do this with Britishness as well
Eamonn Collins sort of lifted the lid on the internal contradictions felt by some northern nationalists when he stated that despite embracing the over the top caricature of performative "I'm more Irish than you"ness for many years, he actually felt much more at home when he was in Derby than in Dublin - the streetscape, the million little everyday things people did, England felt more "familiar" than Dublin, which felt more foreign
And certainly Glasgow seemed much more familiar and less foreign compared to Newry or Belfast than Dublin did
That insecurity might have come from decades of attempts to strip us of our Irishness by multiple British Governments. I wouldn't expect you to understand or emphasis with that. It's beyond you.
I didn't criticise Northern nationalists who have an insecurity about their identity
I would think it is quite difficult not to have some
Interestingly, I have known Northern Protestants from a soft Unionist background who have told me they felt much more at home living in Dublin than they did in England, so it can work the other way too
I think something that is common to both Nationalists and Unionists is that some of them are hankering over a bygone idea of "pure" "Irishness" or "Britishness", almost a 1920s idea of either
Those things don't really exist any more, the world has moved on and so have Ireland and Britain, much as some people are angry about that
I have travelled extensively in Britain. I see similarities between Central Dublin and Central London, probably because the are Capitals. There is definitely a Celtic kindredness between the Scots and the Irish. I have always found English towns and cities on the whole to be foreign in spite of the similar signage. When I go to Donegal, Dundalk, Monaghan or Cavan I do not notice any particular difference. I guess because I grew up in a townland that inspite of the outside pressures from the state was centred on the chapel and the GAA. As with all countries you will get regional differences in language, food etc... I don't feel anymore Irish than the next man, I don't feel the need to wrap myself in the flag. There is a distinct lack of understanding in many in the Republic of the hurt and the journey of Northern Nationalists, as exemplified by Micheál Martin's Bon Joviesque contribution to CB live. He might as well have said some of my best friends are Nordies. There is also a distinct lack of knowledge up here of citizens from the South. We could perhaps listen and explain more on this thread rather than spout insults?
I think both statements are accurate.There's definitely a mutual lack of trust between Nationalists north and south.
We, in the republic, cannot understand why the cross-community aggro is still very much in evidence. One could say, "They finally got parity of esteem and all that goes with it and they still aren't satisfied."
The fact is that the Civil War, immediately after the Treaty, split the Free State in two. Families and friends were split and the bitterness lasted down the generations.
They were too busy fighting each other than to think of helping anybody.
Then, to cap it all, De Valera started an economic war with England when FF came to power. He reneged on loan repayments and the Brits blocked the import of agricultural produce from the state. This lasted from 1932 to 1938 and the Free State economy was smashed. Almost immediately afterwards, WW11 came along and added to the general destitution. The south hadn't a pot to piss in, never mind going to anyone else's aid.
There is also a small cabal of loudmouths on the northern side who go out of their way to disparage the south. There are a few of them on here. They despise everything down south but are still the most vociferous supporters of unity. While I think most down here just ignore them, the idea of having to listen to them if and when we have a UI, is off putting, to say the least.
And why do you think that is?
100 years of turning a blind eye to the institutional sectarianism northern nationalists received in their daily lives.
Watching on as innocent catholics were shot and beaten off the streets, burned out of their homes by state forces.
Denied the right to vote, gain employment or have the same educational rights as the other side of the community.
Vilified and pontificated at nationalists who decided to take the fight up themselves while at the same time meekly tutting at the British state sponsored terrorism on its citizens.
That is the reason I feel the South is an insidious institution. For me unity is not about the north joining the south, it's about the end of two utterly rotten states who have completely failed the citizens of this island. It's consigning those failures to the bin and starting all over it. Now a lot of Free Staters, and I'm not referring directly to you here don't want to deal with the shame they should acknowledge on how northern nationalists were abandoned by their state and then vilified for standing up for their human rights and their community when the British State turned its forces on a defenceless people.
Decency, respect, humanity would have seen the Free State intervening meaningfully in The Troubles, instead it washed its hand off it to keep the status quo, to carry on the gravy train. Bar a handful of politicians like Neil Blaney through the years, the actions of FFG politicians has to be dismiss, insult and diminish northern nationalist as some sort of crazed sectarian extremists without ever examining their own failings.
Rather than Micheal Martin turning a request that he engage with families of The Troubles to get some restorative justice into a quite frankly disgusting political point scoring exercise, maybe he should address the failings of his parties and the other governments and their pathetic repsonse and treatment all through the years to northern nationalists.
I am genuinely surprised that you should ask that question. I think I have already spelled that out. Over 90% of the population took sides in the civil war- a greater number than got involved in any way in the Tan war that preceded it.
I was two generations removed from the civil war and the native village was still split down the middle. Even children from the pro- and ani- treaty factions weren't allowed to play with each other.
You had Taigs vs Prods but the opposing sides down here hated each other just as much. The Free State had a miniscule industrial base- cattle on the hoof and the few bob emigrants might send home was the only ways of getting money into the poorer rural parts. The Land War brought the economy to its knees.
Some households had wet and dry cell wireless, few could afford the luxury of buying newspapers and in any event, the news was heavily censored so the vast majority knew little about happenings in Northern Ireland.Even as late as 1969 when the Irish army pretended it was going to invade south Down, you wouldn't get the likes in the Keystone Kops. Most of the lorries broke down between the Curragh and Dundalk.
Clonad Mad already stated that the Irish economy was banjaxed in the period after partition. THe population of native county fell by a third due to emigration between partition and the arrival of Sean Lemass as Taoiseach in the 60s.
Don't see how anyone could expect a mob of half-starved civilians take on one of the world's superpowers.
All this won't answer one fundamental question; why do those who most hate the "Free State" demand unity as a matter of right?
Now, I don't intend to have a flame war with you or anyone else but I have to ask you a pertinent question.
You began by asking me something then proceeded to give the answer although I had gone into considerable lengths to deal with the issues you were raising.
So, genuinely, why bother asking me anything since you had no interest in what I already had stated?
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
Those who hold the "youse left us behind" narrative should note the following:
Had the Free Staters decided to invade the North or go to war with Unionists, it would have been done on the exact same rationale as Hitler used to invade the Sudetenland
The Nazis believed that the concept of a Greater Germany was an inherently natural, God-given one
Putin uses this narrative to occupy parts of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova
Hardline Israelis use this narrative to occupy Palestine
There is no such a thing in nature as an independent all-Ireland state and there never will be such a thing, because no state exists in nature
An independent all-Ireland state would be an artificial creation, just like the United Kingdom is and Northern Ireland itself is
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
Lets just say you closed the gate, welded it shut and moved on
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
I wouldn't be just as definite about whether it was the correct decision and it is easier to say that it was if you are living in the south and have already gained your independence. We could be sitting here today with an entire island under some form of British rule or alternatively we could be sitting in a 32 county republic, who knows. The likelihood is that there were would have been further bloodshed though.
I also note that another northerner has voted to 'keep Ulster British' in the poll. Is there no way of revealing usernames on these polls?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 03:03:00 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
Lets just say you closed the gate, welded it shut and moved on
In your view, not in reality
Bunreacht na hEireann had Articles 2 and 3
Those who believe the South should have invaded the North appear to maintain that a fledgling quasi-independent state could have defeated the might of the British Empire and successfully claimed a territory which was part of the United Kingdom itself - where a clear majority wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom
Even Hitler didn't try that
Argentina invaded the Falklands, a group of islands on its doorstep with a tiny population, conditions were infinitely more favourable for a successful conquest than they would have been in the North, but they were routed by the Brits
And yet some people here think there would have been a different result had the new Free State tried it in the 1920s?
Delusion is putting it mildly
Consider the mass forced population transfers in Europe after wars in the 20th century
Consider India/Pakistan post-1947
Consider what's happened to the Rohingya in Burma recently
It is far from beyond the bounds of possibility that had the Free State decided to "not leave behind" Northern Catholics in 1922, there would scarcely have been a Northern Catholic remaining at the end of it all, they'd have been either dead or ethnically cleansed into Louth or Monaghan or Cavan or Leitrim or Donegal, or further south
They might have taken Donegal as plunder
There would likely have been no North to ever "get back"
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 03:16:17 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 03:03:00 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
Lets just say you closed the gate, welded it shut and moved on
In your view, not in reality
Bunreacht na hEireann had Articles 2 and 3
Those who believe the South should have invaded the North appear to maintain that a fledgling quasi-independent state could have defeated the might of the British Empire and successfully claimed a territory which was part of the United Kingdom itself - where a clear majority wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom
Even Hitler didn't try that
Argentina invaded the Falklands, a group of islands on its doorstep with a tiny population, conditions were infinitely more favourable for a successful conquest than they would have been in the North, but they were routed by the Brits
And yet some people here think there would have been a different result had the new Free State tried it in the 1920s?
Delusion is putting it mildly
Consider the mass forced population transfers in Europe after wars in the 20th century
Consider India/Pakistan post-1947
Consider what's happened to the Rohingya in Burma recently
It is far from beyond the bounds of possibility that had the Free State decided to "not leave behind" Northern Catholics in 1922, there would scarcely have been a Northern Catholic remaining at the end of it all, they'd have been either dead or ethnically cleansed into Louth or Monaghan or Cavan or Leitrim or Donegal, or further south
They might have taken Donegal as plunder
There would likely have been no North to ever "get back"
Have people here suggested that an invasion should have took place?
I think you are being just a tad hyperbolic by continually referencing Hitler but I do agree with the jist of the argument in that it would have been a mission doomed to failure.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America[/quote]
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 03:15:39 PM
I also note that another northerner has voted to 'keep Ulster British' in the poll. Is there no way of revealing usernames on these polls?
(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/50354448/pitchforks-at-the-rdy.jpg)
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 02:22:26 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 01:23:05 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 25, 2021, 01:18:05 PM
We Northern Nationalists need to get beyond the "yous left us behind"narrative, there were very good reasons why the 26 Counties were powerless to do anything about the situation. It is worth remembering that southern voters will need to vote in favour of unity and that can't be taken as a given. Throwing insults is no way to persuade them.
What good reasons were there?
A "not my problem" attitude. The Free State has absolutely no position to moralise on what happened in The Troubles when they were happy enough to stand idly by and let nationalists be terrorised in a sectarian state.
When you have families who have lost and suffered at the hands of the British state and calls for restorative justice are handled with a "but the IRA" response then I think it shows the absolute contempt the Free State establishment has for northern nationalists.
There was civil war in the south over the partition of this island
I know you have conveniently forgotten that detail
It doesn't suit your narrative of they left us behind
Was the Civil War over partition or the dominion status and oath of allegiance?
The north was soon forgotten about and FFG politicians have shown nothing but contempt for northern nationalists since then.
Unlike you, I don't have a narrative here. I prefer to stick to the truth and the cold hard truth is the Free State were happy to do nothing as we endured a loyalist pogrom aided and abetted by the British and Irish Free State.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 03:15:39 PM
I also note that another northerner has voted to 'keep Ulster British' in the poll. Is there no way of revealing usernames on these polls?
My bet would be trailer.
I'd say you could guarantee a few of the free state trolls saw fit to recognise that option.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/3/8/38f62776f6cb278e10c5e5caa39d2bd381cc1e1c.png)
Eoghan Harris eat your heart out.
10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
???????
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 04:09:34 PM
10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
???????
I'd imagine you and Dublin7 are two of them.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 04:09:34 PM
10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
???????
what are you on about you clown?
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 02:34:27 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 02:19:51 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what's your point?
Are you that economically illiterate
The NI economy with all its billions in subventions from the English taxpayer is underperforming the Republic by a minimum of 2/3rds by some metrics and up to 90% in others
The billions that have spent on it by the UK taxpayer haven't shifted the arrow upwards on any graph,actually it appears that the opposite is the case
Will it come to a point in 30/40 years time,where even the english will say this is too much of a drain on us,
you lot take it on
remember the subvention to NI is an awful lot more that the EU one and we all know what happened there
We don't know is the simple answer, looking back in the not so distant past Ireland was nearly bankrupt and now its bounced back, go back even further and there wasn't a road that didn't have a hole on it or didnt take you through every village on the way to Dublin.
You are going into the future with a blind idea of how it will pan out.
Northern Ireland is not a country its a state that's been run into the ground after over 30 years of troubles, were building were raised to the ground and business couldn't open without having to pay for the 'protection' from their local hoods.
Within that period industries closed like Mackies Harlands, and other major engineering firms, a small place like here can't and won't be able to sustain itself with the drop off in industry.
I'm sure there is enough of a skilled work force to get it up and going again. Local politics has a lot to answer to, but sure we'll keep voting them in and get the same results.
Your post is something we all know. So what's your real point? That the South would be mad to take back the north, that it would be better to stay as a republic and not unify the island?
The troubles ended 23 years ago and the arrow is still pointing downwards for the northern economy
1945 Germany was bombed back to the Stone Age
1968 it was one of the richest countries in the world
Maybe the English taxpayers should double or even treble the subvention
It still wouldn't move the dial
You don't think the troubles on the island cost the Republic in terms of billions spent on security and lost FDI?
Shinners have an ideology that won't be needed in a united Ireland.
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 04:32:56 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 02:34:27 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 02:19:51 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what’s your point?
Are you that economically illiterate
The NI economy with all its billions in subventions from the English taxpayer is underperforming the Republic by a minimum of 2/3rds by some metrics and up to 90% in others
The billions that have spent on it by the UK taxpayer haven’t shifted the arrow upwards on any graph,actually it appears that the opposite is the case
Will it come to a point in 30/40 years time,where even the english will say this is too much of a drain on us,
you lot take it on
remember the subvention to NI is an awful lot more that the EU one and we all know what happened there
We don't know is the simple answer, looking back in the not so distant past Ireland was nearly bankrupt and now its bounced back, go back even further and there wasn't a road that didn't have a hole on it or didnt take you through every village on the way to Dublin.
You are going into the future with a blind idea of how it will pan out.
Northern Ireland is not a country its a state that's been run into the ground after over 30 years of troubles, were building were raised to the ground and business couldn't open without having to pay for the 'protection' from their local hoods.
Within that period industries closed like Mackies Harlands, and other major engineering firms, a small place like here can't and won't be able to sustain itself with the drop off in industry.
I'm sure there is enough of a skilled work force to get it up and going again. Local politics has a lot to answer to, but sure we'll keep voting them in and get the same results.
Your post is something we all know. So what's your real point? That the South would be mad to take back the north, that it would be better to stay as a republic and not unify the island?
The troubles ended 23 years ago and the arrow is still pointing downwards for the northern economy
1945 Germany was bombed back to the Stone Age
1968 it was one of the richest countries in the world
Maybe the English taxpayers should double or even treble the subvention
It still wouldn’t move the dial
You don’t think the troubles on the island cost the Republic in terms of billions spent on security and lost FDI?
How many years post partition did it take for RoI to become an economically successful country?
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
All that is fair enough but if the island hadn't been partitioned, the Free State would not have been created. There would have been no reason for the Oath in the first place. In that case, there would not have been a civil war. (there most likely have been one anyway- there were assloads of reasons for both sides to start scrapping.)
When sid hove into view and waded in, I had been discussing partition with Angelo and the Oath was't relevant. It wasn't the Oath that led to the Belfast pogroms or the decades of discrimination and persecution of the Catholic minority.
In
Quote from: Mario on March 25, 2021, 04:51:31 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 04:32:56 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 02:34:27 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 02:19:51 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 01:41:41 PM
Quote from: clonadmad on March 25, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
Bottom line
The North of this island is an underperforming asset relative to the rest of the country
Partition turned the most successful part of Ireland into one of the poorest parts of Europe with billions needed every year from the English taxpayers to keep it even at that level
NI currently has a population 36% of the Republics
1.1920 2 counties Down and Antrim had 80% of the total economic output of the Island, today the total NI economic output is 8% of this islands output.
If NI was in any fit state economically, it would be contributing a third or more.
2.The Size of the Republics economy is €400bn odd, the size of NI's is £40bn odd
NI's economy should be treble what it is, £120bn odd
3.Exports
ROI total exports €160bn odd,2020 up 8% on 2019
NI total exports £7bn odd
the reality is that the increase in the Republic exports between 2019 and 2020 is greater than NI total exports tells its own story.
4.Cross Border Exports by value
34% NI exports to the Republic
1% ROI exports to NI
So what's your point?
Are you that economically illiterate
The NI economy with all its billions in subventions from the English taxpayer is underperforming the Republic by a minimum of 2/3rds by some metrics and up to 90% in others
The billions that have spent on it by the UK taxpayer haven't shifted the arrow upwards on any graph,actually it appears that the opposite is the case
Will it come to a point in 30/40 years time,where even the english will say this is too much of a drain on us,
you lot take it on
remember the subvention to NI is an awful lot more that the EU one and we all know what happened there
We don't know is the simple answer, looking back in the not so distant past Ireland was nearly bankrupt and now its bounced back, go back even further and there wasn't a road that didn't have a hole on it or didnt take you through every village on the way to Dublin.
You are going into the future with a blind idea of how it will pan out.
Northern Ireland is not a country its a state that's been run into the ground after over 30 years of troubles, were building were raised to the ground and business couldn't open without having to pay for the 'protection' from their local hoods.
Within that period industries closed like Mackies Harlands, and other major engineering firms, a small place like here can't and won't be able to sustain itself with the drop off in industry.
I'm sure there is enough of a skilled work force to get it up and going again. Local politics has a lot to answer to, but sure we'll keep voting them in and get the same results.
Your post is something we all know. So what's your real point? That the South would be mad to take back the north, that it would be better to stay as a republic and not unify the island?
The troubles ended 23 years ago and the arrow is still pointing downwards for the northern economy
1945 Germany was bombed back to the Stone Age
1968 it was one of the richest countries in the world
Maybe the English taxpayers should double or even treble the subvention
It still wouldn't move the dial
You don't think the troubles on the island cost the Republic in terms of billions spent on security and lost FDI?
How many years post partition did it take for RoI to become an economically successful country?
Approximately the same as it took to turn the 6 counties into a basket case.
The switching of economic roles has been one of the most interesting developments of the last century.
What wasn't fair about partition was bringing Fermanagh, tyrone, south Down most of Derry and South Armagh into the statelelet and then deny denying the nationalists there full rights. There was just a fait accompli.
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 04:08:38 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/3/8/38f62776f6cb278e10c5e5caa39d2bd381cc1e1c.png)
Eoghan Harris eat your heart out.
"Sidney" is correct there
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
The Kosovan Serbs, with Milosevic, were responsible for starting the chain of events which eventually led to the war in Yugoslavia, in 1987
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
It isn't part of Serbia
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
[/quote]
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 03:26:24 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 03:16:17 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 03:03:00 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
Lets just say you closed the gate, welded it shut and moved on
In your view, not in reality
Bunreacht na hEireann had Articles 2 and 3
Those who believe the South should have invaded the North appear to maintain that a fledgling quasi-independent state could have defeated the might of the British Empire and successfully claimed a territory which was part of the United Kingdom itself - where a clear majority wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom
Even Hitler didn't try that
Argentina invaded the Falklands, a group of islands on its doorstep with a tiny population, conditions were infinitely more favourable for a successful conquest than they would have been in the North, but they were routed by the Brits
And yet some people here think there would have been a different result had the new Free State tried it in the 1920s?
Delusion is putting it mildly
Consider the mass forced population transfers in Europe after wars in the 20th century
Consider India/Pakistan post-1947
Consider what's happened to the Rohingya in Burma recently
It is far from beyond the bounds of possibility that had the Free State decided to "not leave behind" Northern Catholics in 1922, there would scarcely have been a Northern Catholic remaining at the end of it all, they'd have been either dead or ethnically cleansed into Louth or Monaghan or Cavan or Leitrim or Donegal, or further south
They might have taken Donegal as plunder
There would likely have been no North to ever "get back"
Have people here suggested that an invasion should have took place?
I think you are being just a tad hyperbolic by continually referencing Hitler but I do agree with the jist of the argument in that it would have been a mission doomed to failure.
Not one person has said invade the north, but just saying ah feck them, at least we are sorted attitude.
I've yet to see from the history of partition (unless someone could provide it, as would help towards my daughters A levels on the history of partition, in a prod school too, tut tut) a sustained attempt to get a 32 county republic.
Maybe the Anglo Irish Agreement, the Good Friday agreement as an attempt
You say "no one has said invade the North", yet it's the inescapable logic of the "youse left us behind" narrative, that the Free State/Republic should have invaded the North, or at minimum acted like the US did as regards the Contras in Nicaragua
The Free State and later the Republic of Ireland had zero power to do anything in the North, they didn't control it
The only thing they could do was to exercise soft power, and for about six decades they had precisely none of that
A 32 county Republic could not happen because the majority of the people in the north east not just did not want it, but were bitterly hostile to it
Facts on the ground are very difficult to change
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:16:07 PM
You say "no one has said invade the North", yet it's the inescapable logic of the "youse left us behind" narrative, that the Free State/Republic should have invaded the North, or at minimum acted like the US did as regards the Contras in Nicaragua
The Free State and later the Republic of Ireland had zero power to do anything in the North, they didn't control it
The only thing they could do was to exercise soft power, and for about six decades they had precisely none of that
A 32 county Republic could not happen because the majority of the people in the north east not just did not want it, but were bitterly hostile to it
Facts on the ground are very difficult to change
You couldn't have invaded San Marino never mind the north ffs!
That's why you didn't bother, quietly closed the gate and moved on.
Rubbed your hands and that was that.
It's ok, the north could have just rolled over and during the 30's and 40's that's what happened, but there were some campaigns that failed during the 50's to eventually it got us to the 60's when equality became the focus worldwide, the troubles then moved it to a different level and was prolonged well past the point of return.
During that whole time after partition there was nothing from the South.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
[/quote]
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
Is the proposed "Border poll" about rehashing 1919 to 1923 or about the future?
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
[/quote]
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 06:39:49 PM
Is the proposed "Border poll" about rehashing 1919 to 1923 or about the future?
The people who are most concerned about a border poll are those who are most concerned with the past - an imagined past
This is the problem
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 05:59:14 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 04:08:38 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/3/8/38f62776f6cb278e10c5e5caa39d2bd381cc1e1c.png)
Eoghan Harris eat your heart out.
"Sidney" is correct there
Sidney was right about a lot of things.
Sid Waddell just turned into an Eoghan Harris parody.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:16:07 PM
You say "no one has said invade the North", yet it's the inescapable logic of the "youse left us behind" narrative, that the Free State/Republic should have invaded the North, or at minimum acted like the US did as regards the Contras in Nicaragua
The Free State and later the Republic of Ireland had zero power to do anything in the North, they didn't control it
The only thing they could do was to exercise soft power, and for about six decades they had precisely none of that
A 32 county Republic could not happen because the majority of the people in the north east not just did not want it, but were bitterly hostile to it
Facts on the ground are very difficult to change
You couldn't have invaded San Marino never mind the north ffs!
That's why you didn't bother, quietly closed the gate and moved on.
Rubbed your hands and that was that.
It's ok, the north could have just rolled over and during the 30's and 40's that's what happened, but there were some campaigns that failed during the 50's to eventually it got us to the 60's when equality became the focus worldwide, the troubles then moved it to a different level and was prolonged well past the point of return.
During that whole time after partition there was nothing from the South.
I'm not sure exactly what you expected the South to do about the plight of northern Catholics
The fact is that northern Catholics lived in a region of this island in which the majority of the population were fervent Unionists who were prepared to go to war to maintain British rule in that region, and once partition happened, exercise their power to make Catholics second class citizens
It was a shitty situation but the South had basically no power to prevent it
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:04:38 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
It isn't part of Serbia
And? The Bosnian Serbs were accommodated in the Srpska Republic yet they still agitate and gravitate towards Serbia, so yes they do likely say 'youse left us behind'.
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
And? The Bosnian Serbs were accommodated in the Srpska Republic yet they still agitate and gravitate towards Serbia, so yes they do likely say 'youse left us behind'.
The Serbs in Kosovo probably feel even harder done by.
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:04:38 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
It isn't part of Serbia
And? The Bosnian Serbs were accommodated in the Srpska Republic yet they still agitate and gravitate towards Serbia, so yes they do likely say 'youse left us behind'.
I would guess they probably do
The alternative to "leaving them behind" was for Serbia to keep waging war in 1995
I think it was a better outcome that the war stopped
The "youse left us behind" narrative is basically "youse should have waged genocidal war against themmuns"
Not that I believe the Serbs were correct but at least they waged war. Genocide war though
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 07:03:04 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:04:38 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
It isn't part of Serbia
And? The Bosnian Serbs were accommodated in the Srpska Republic yet they still agitate and gravitate towards Serbia, so yes they do likely say 'youse left us behind'.
I would guess they probably do
The alternative to "leaving them behind" was for Serbia to keep waging war in 1995
I think it was a better outcome that the war stopped
The "youse left us behind" narrative is basically "youse should have waged genocidal war against themmuns"
Yis waged genocidal war against each other, maybe it would have been better against themmuns
Well the forward-looking approach of shaping the New Ireland didn't last long....
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics[/quote]
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
I would be of the opinion let the past go and plan for the future. Hard not to rise to some of the sanctimonious drivel you read here.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 05:59:14 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 25, 2021, 04:08:38 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
(https://tfkdatatfk.s3.dualstack.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/original/3X/3/8/38f62776f6cb278e10c5e5caa39d2bd381cc1e1c.png)
Eoghan Harris eat your heart out.
"Sidney" is correct there
You seemed a nicer fella years ago Sidney. What happened?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 25, 2021, 07:13:22 PM
Not that I believe the Serbs were correct but at least they waged war. Genocide war though
Thank goodness for the war in Bosnia, eh
At least the Bosnian Serbs feel less let down as a result of it
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 07:16:35 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 07:03:04 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 06:55:20 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:04:38 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 25, 2021, 04:29:57 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 25, 2021, 04:20:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 25, 2021, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
That may be true and I think it was more a case of a bird in the hand and just take what is on offer while we can. Nobody can sit here now and definitively say whether that was right or wrong, it was probably the correct decision at that particular time given the context since even the anti treatyites main bone of contention was primarily with the oath and not with partition.
It was presumed then though that a 32 county republic would follow at some point afterwards but somewhere along the line this faded as the southern state had enough problems of its own.
I think it was definitely the correct decision because it did indeed give the Irish Free State the freedom to achieve real freedom
As regards the North, to go to war over the North would have been a bloodbath which would have resulted in total Unionist victory and likely mass murder of Catholics and mass ethnic cleansing
There might barely have been a Catholic in the entire six counties by the end of it
So when people say "youse left us behind", consider that
I wonder do the Bosnian Serbs say to the Serbs "youse left us behind"
The Kosovan Serbs definitely do
And there's still the Srpska Republic within Bosnia & H for the Serbs. Not the best analogy.
It isn't part of Serbia
And? The Bosnian Serbs were accommodated in the Srpska Republic yet they still agitate and gravitate towards Serbia, so yes they do likely say 'youse left us behind'.
I would guess they probably do
The alternative to "leaving them behind" was for Serbia to keep waging war in 1995
I think it was a better outcome that the war stopped
The "youse left us behind" narrative is basically "youse should have waged genocidal war against themmuns"
Yis waged genocidal war against each other, maybe it would have been better against themmuns
I'm surprised I have to explain this but pro-Treaty and and anti-Treaty factions were not ethnic groups
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
Says the man with the classic ussans and themmans post.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
[/quote]
Partition was not the cause of the civil war Lar
It's pretty easy to understand
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Partition was not the cause of the civil war Lar
It's pretty easy to understand
[/quote]
No, but it was the end product. They were inexorably linked.
It's pretty easy to understand
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 08:30:26 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Partition was not the cause of the civil war Lar
It's pretty easy to understand
No, but it was the end product. They were inexorably linked.
It's pretty easy to understand
[/quote]
Partition wasn't the end product of the Civil War
Partition was legislated for in 1920 and introduced in 1921
The Civil War began in June 1922
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
Fair play to Lar, Sid even who attempt to entry into meaning debate on this topic. I'm sure even they must read the posts of Rossfan and think "what is the point of any of his posts?" That, I do believe is one of the few things Angelo has been correct on all along.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
Does anyone else feel that there is a stronger power pushing for reunification, probably the EU with Boris silently backing it.
Im from the north, currently living and working in the south and to be honest, reunification of Ireland wouldnt meet the top 10 points of interest if there was an election. At the last election I barely remember it being mentioned.
In fact some comments particulary from fg politicians would indicate no interest at all in dealing with the north.
So why the sudden talk of reunifucation, what has brought it to front pages, current affair programs etc? Why the sudden interest from Jim O'Callaghan etc.
Previously it has been given lip service and kicked as far down the lane as possible.
From living down here, id honestly be 50/50 on whether the vote would pass in the 26. Its definitely not a priority for the majority of voters here.
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Quote from: ardtole on March 25, 2021, 09:32:12 PM
Does anyone else feel that there is a stronger power pushing for reunification, probably the EU with Boris silently backing it.
Im from the north, currently living and working in the south and to be honest, reunification of Ireland wouldnt meet the top 10 points of interest if there was an election. At the last election I barely remember it being mentioned.
In fact some comments particulary from fg politicians would indicate no interest at all in dealing with the north.
So why the sudden talk of reunifucation, what has brought it to front pages, current affair programs etc? Why the sudden interest from Jim O'Callaghan etc.
Previously it has been given lip service and kicked as far down the lane as possible.
From living down here, id honestly be 50/50 on whether the vote would pass in the 26. Its definitely not a priority for the majority of voters here.
Covid
Look over there
Quote from: ardtole on March 25, 2021, 09:32:12 PM
Does anyone else feel that there is a stronger power pushing for reunification, probably the EU with Boris silently backing it.
Im from the north, currently living and working in the south and to be honest, reunification of Ireland wouldnt meet the top 10 points of interest if there was an election. At the last election I barely remember it being mentioned.
In fact some comments particulary from fg politicians would indicate no interest at all in dealing with the north.
So why the sudden talk of reunifucation, what has brought it to front pages, current affair programs etc? Why the sudden interest from Jim O'Callaghan etc.
Previously it has been given lip service and kicked as far down the lane as possible.
From living down here, id honestly be 50/50 on whether the vote would pass in the 26. Its definitely not a priority for the majority of voters here.
I would say the rise of SF down south has certainly put the agenda front and centre more and also the fallout from Brexit.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
Sid would probably give up Donegal Cavan and Monaghan given his track record on partition
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Must be nice to dictate to folk how to vote, how does one go about getting that right?
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Must be nice to dictate to folk how to vote, how does one go about getting that right?
If people vote for certain extremist parties, they should be aware of the logical consequences of that
DUP/SF are a cartel who thrive on mutual loathing and suspicion - not on constructiveness
If you want constructive politics, vote for people who might be constructive
Feigning victimhood or accusing others of being a "dictator" because they give an entirely reasonable opinion is a great last resort tactic on the internet
Quote from: michaelg on March 25, 2021, 08:24:21 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
Says the man with the classic ussans and themmans post.
I really miss his daily updates on covid figures in the north comparative to the south which suddenly stopped for some reason when there was a change in trend. But I'm sure that was just a coincidence
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:19:09 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Must be nice to dictate to folk how to vote, how does one go about getting that right?
If people vote for certain extremist parties, they should be aware of the logical consequences of that
DUP/SF are a cartel who thrive on mutual loathing and suspicion - not on constructiveness
If you want constructive politics, vote for people who might be constructive
Feigning victimhood or accusing others of being a "dictator" because somebody they give an entirely reasonable opinion is a great last resort tactic on the internet
It is not entirely reasonable to tell people how to vote. It's a dictate. It's deflection also. It's apparent you have no desire to consider unification for want of a better word. That's absolutely fine. You adopt the position that everyone who votes dup or sf are extremists. A cartel?. The constitutional question will always be an issue here. I do believe you are being deliberately obtuse on the matter Sid.
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:28:11 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:19:09 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Must be nice to dictate to folk how to vote, how does one go about getting that right?
If people vote for certain extremist parties, they should be aware of the logical consequences of that
DUP/SF are a cartel who thrive on mutual loathing and suspicion - not on constructiveness
If you want constructive politics, vote for people who might be constructive
Feigning victimhood or accusing others of being a "dictator" because somebody they give an entirely reasonable opinion is a great last resort tactic on the internet
It is not entirely reasonable to tell people how to vote. It's a dictate. It's deflection also. It's apparent you have no desire to consider unification for want of a better word. That's absolutely fine. You adopt the position that everyone who votes dup or sf are extremists. A cartel?. The constitutional question will always be an issue here. I do believe you are being deliberately obtuse on the matter Sid.
They are extremist parties
Unification will come when it is ready to come, it is blindingly obvious that a lot of posters here want to try and force it before it is ready
That's not a good idea
(https://i.imgflip.com/536kod.jpg)
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 25, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
Indeed.
A lot of our 6 Co friends still living in 1921.
At least they're 231 years ahead of th'others :-\
You'd almost think we we just came through a conflict that came about as a direct result of what happened in 1921, wouldn't you ::)
And its almost as though it must be easy to sit in judgement of those who came through it, from the comfort of the southern side of the border.
Arrogant clown.
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
Thats a utopia Charlie.
Not all youths are like that unfortunately
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
While your point is sound in theroy the reality is discussions would require the DUP and SF to meet, compromise and god forbid be civil to each other. At the moment it's unlikely both parties would even agree to meet with each other and the assembly was shut down for over a year as neither party was willing to compromise and seem to be more intent on antagonising each other
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
While your point is sound in theroy the reality is discussions would require the DUP and SF to meet, compromise and god forbid be civil to each other. At the moment it's unlikely both parties would even agree to meet with each other and the assembly was shut down for over a year as neither party was willing to compromise and seem to be more intent on antagonising each other
If your analysis of the assembly collapse is as grossly over-simplistic as "they were as bad as eachother", then you need to go away and do a bit of reading up about it.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 08:31:34 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
While your point is sound in theroy the reality is discussions would require the DUP and SF to meet, compromise and god forbid be civil to each other. At the moment it's unlikely both parties would even agree to meet with each other and the assembly was shut down for over a year as neither party was willing to compromise and seem to be more intent on antagonising each other
If your analysis of the assembly collapse is as grossly over-simplistic as "they were as bad as eachother", then you need to go away and do a bit of reading up about it.
So you think SF had no responsibility for the collapse and the fact it lasted 3 years? I know the British get accused of revising history, but it seems they're not the only ones
Giveittotheshooters and the rest of the Shinners are going to have to get real
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-peace-process-offers-lessons-for-those-who-seek-united-ireland-1.4520277
Diarmaid Ferriter: Peace process offers lessons for those who seek united Ireland
What is needed at very least is a North-South Citizen's Assembly over the long term
Diarmaid Ferriter
30
"Ripeness is all". These words from Shakespeare's King Lear were believed by Seán Ó hUiginn, head of the Anglo-Irish division of the Department of Foreign Affairs in the mid-1990s, to be also a maxim applying to the politics of the peace process. Exactly 25 years ago Ó hUiginn and others were dealing with the fallout from the Canary Wharf bombing in London that marked the end of the IRA's 17-month ceasefire and temporarily derailed the fragile dialogue.
The discussions got back on track, but not without much recrimination, the consequence of what Ó hUiginn referred to as events that "recharged the toxic legacy of distrust" and indicated that the time was not ripe for as much progress as some desired. For others, of course, the time was never and will never be ripe. That can be said of Irish unity as well, a subject that has received much attention this week arising out of the RTÉ Claire Byrne Live show devoted to the subject. It was, by and large, a calm and reasoned discussion, but also one with reminders of prematurity of premise.
As the centenary of the creation of Northern Ireland approaches and in the context of Brexit and the increased political strength of Sinn Féin as well as the wider shakiness of the UK and the increased isolation of the DUP, those intent on seeking a border poll are robustly making their case. But it also appears there is a temptation to ignore what is uncomfortably under our noses in preference for loftier, abstract declarations about historical destiny and inevitability. The bald reality is that this small island has not managed a coherent north-south unity in relation to dealing with a devastating pandemic over the last year. That, surely, is an indication of the unity mountain to climb, as is the underuse or neglect of structures already provided for or envisaged in 1998 in relation to dialogue and co-operation, such as an independent North-South consultative forum comprising "social partners".
Joe Brolly disconnected during RTÉ united Ireland debate after DUP remarks
Taoiseach pushes back against calls in US for referendum on Irish unity
Friends of Sinn Féin places ads in US newspapers calling for referendum on Irish unity
The focus needs to shift from excessive concentration on the DUP and Sinn Féin to incorporate civic groups
That raises the wider question of what would be involved in, say, a 10-year plan towards a border poll. In recent years, Ó hUiginn and others involved in the peace process on both the British and Irish sides have given detailed overviews of what went in to achieving agreement in 1998; investments that were political, intellectual and practical, requiring a structured and inclusive "process". Civil servants, diplomats and politicians did much to create what have been termed "zones of convergence" which surely are also an essential prerequisite to creating any kind of dynamic towards unity.
Political extremities
While there is inevitably much focus on political extremities, the late Seamus Mallon of the SDLP suggested that whatever divides nationalists and unionists, what they have in common is being "largely detached from the mother countries which they identify so strongly with". That was something Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness also used to refer to; what he termed the "gulf in understanding" between those north and south who might share a desire for unity but lived with hard mental borders. The chasm between northern unionists and London is also striking and long-standing; Tony Blair used to despair of the self-defined purity of the Orange Order men: "There is nothing more irritating than sitting in a room with someone who claims to be British but who treats you as though you are nothing to do with Britain, even though you are the prime minister."
Mallon also warned of a premature border poll that would only create greater disunity, leading to a "captured unionist minority inside a state from which they are completely alienated. Does that sound familiar?" What is needed at the very least is a north-south citizen's assembly over the long-term to discuss what both sides of the island have, or need to have, in common along with confronting what divides them.
The focus also needs to shift from excessive concentration on the DUP and Sinn Féin to incorporate civic groups. Consider, for example, the plea from a sizeable group of civic unionists exactly three years ago who called for "a transparent and inclusive debate covering rights, truth, equality and civil liberty" as the noise around Brexit drowned them out. Bread and butter issues concerning economic convergence, social and health services and standards of living are also of paramount importance. Attention too, needs to be given to another observation of Ó hUiginn: "Measures to respect the divided allegiances of Northern Ireland are already pledged to continue with reversed polarity in the event of a change of flag. This dimension of the Belfast Agreement is rarely discussed".
Insistence on precise timetables seems unwise; as Eamonn Gallagher, the first to head the department of foreign affair's Northern Ireland unit put it: "I have never thought that the timescale for unity was important. What we have to do is create the conditions for natural development". That process can only be painstaking.
Had a look at the 2011 census, 10.3% of Catholics considered themselves to be British whilst 26.9% considered themselves to be Northern Irish; It will be interesting to see how that differs from 2021 census which has just finished.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 09:11:16 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 08:31:34 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
While your point is sound in theroy the reality is discussions would require the DUP and SF to meet, compromise and god forbid be civil to each other. At the moment it's unlikely both parties would even agree to meet with each other and the assembly was shut down for over a year as neither party was willing to compromise and seem to be more intent on antagonising each other
If your analysis of the assembly collapse is as grossly over-simplistic as "they were as bad as eachother", then you need to go away and do a bit of reading up about it.
So you think SF had no responsibility for the collapse and the fact it lasted 3 years? I know the British get accused of revising history, but it seems they're not the only ones
I'm definitely not SF's biggest fan, but there was one party who kept Stormont down and it wasn't SF. Not remember when the deal was done until Arlenes's bosses in the UVF/UDA said no?
Quote from: Maroon Manc on March 26, 2021, 09:16:42 AM
Had a look at the 2011 census, 10.3% of Catholics considered themselves to be British whilst 26.9% considered themselves to be Northern Irish; It will be interesting to see how that differs from 2021 census which has just finished.
I think the Northern Irish thing will probably be the same, there is a swathe of people who have no association with the south and don't recognise Dublin as the seat of power. My kids have Irish passports so I'd be interested in knowing what they put in that box, considering their upbringing..
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
The discussion is well underway and will continue.
https://www.irishnews.com/opinion/columnists/2021/03/26/news/alex-kane-for-many-unionists-the-ending-of-partition-spells-the-end-of-their-identity-2266634/
English people living in Spain are still English and don't need the British Government to be in charge of where they live to remain English.
Similarly Irish people emigrated all over and remain Irish.
People who identify as Irish in the North remain Irish despite being under London rule.
Yet this crowd can't be British unless the British Government is in charge.?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 09:11:16 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 08:31:34 AM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:50:37 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:41:44 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 11:38:24 PM
Starting conversations about how it might work is not forcing it sid. Remember brexit? You fire on with the witty memes and the tacit insults though.
You can have all the conversations you like
Doesn't change the fact that there currently isn't a majority in NI for a united Ireland, or anything close to it
For there to be a majority, you need two things i) time and ii) NI to fail even more than it is already failing
You can't force i) and forcing ii) is a terrible idea
I agree. Cant be forced. Hence the need for discussion and preparation for the possibility that it may occur in the future. To just ignore it is folly. Things are changing here. Our youth are articulate, energetic and passionate about their nationality, they won't bomb or shoot, they will articulate the argument. This isn't going away Sid.
While your point is sound in theroy the reality is discussions would require the DUP and SF to meet, compromise and god forbid be civil to each other. At the moment it's unlikely both parties would even agree to meet with each other and the assembly was shut down for over a year as neither party was willing to compromise and seem to be more intent on antagonising each other
If your analysis of the assembly collapse is as grossly over-simplistic as "they were as bad as eachother", then you need to go away and do a bit of reading up about it.
So you think SF had no responsibility for the collapse and the fact it lasted 3 years? I know the British get accused of revising history, but it seems they're not the only ones
SF made the move to collapse it. And if you think the reasons they did so are as much the fault of SF as the DUP, then you seriously need to cop yourself on.
Unless of course SF also reneged on Language Act commitments promised as preconditions to power sharing, back at St Andrews, or was that just the DUP?
Or unless SF were refusing to enact a Bill of Rights as was agreed in 1998 in the GFA, or was the just the DUP?
Or unless SF were blocking sex marriage, despite the majority of MLAs being in support of it, or was the just the DUP?
Or unless SF also took £500m of tax payers money and burned in in wood pellet boilers and then refused to see their leader, who oversaw this scheme, to take responsibility for it and resign, or was that just the DUP?
Or unless SF were blocking funding for legacy inquests, or was the just the DUP?
Or unless it was actually SF who backed out of a deal to re-instate the institutions because the Orange Order and the UDA told them they didn't like the sound of it, or was that the DUP?
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything? Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
SF & DUP get on well enough when it suits them, ie dishing out money to themselves and various groups littered with family and friends, at council level and executive level.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Sorry Sid, I don't know from where you hail but you are posting facile errant nonsense that shows no understanding of the 6 counties or the experience of nationalists in a hostile state. There is a reason why SF are so popular and it has to do with their effective delivery on the ground for people in need. The SDLP had years of a head start but ignored working class communities. Alliance is built on the highly effective foundation of Naomi Long, and a soft unionism that does not like the DUP or the UUP which is now DUP Lite.
Having said all of that and not to totally forget my lived experience I want to see a civilised conversation that does not harp back to the perceived injustices of the past. Nationalists are capable for doing that, our problem is a rump of unionism that sees any change as sellout.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
I think if SF hadn't collapsed the assembly when they did, a lot of their voter base would have been asking questions of them. There was a constant denial of rights and obstructionism by the DUP and nationalists were generally just fed up but even at that I still think it would have muddled on but for the RHI scandal. It was the straw that broke the camels back and other party leaders had also called for Arlene Fosters head at the time. In fact it is a miracle how she has managed to ride out the storm and still be in the position of party leader.
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
like Sid you display a lack of understanding as to how the NI executive works. In effect both sides can veto. DUP use theirs to block abortion reform, language equal marriage etc... SF have used the veto on far fewer occasions. A border poll can not create any more division than already exists. At the end of the day we in the north have a democratic right to decide our future, you are pedal the same line as FF that only unionist votes matter.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
If you think you'll hear any threat of violence from the Republican side you're even more deluded than I thought.
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 26, 2021, 02:29:54 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
If you think you'll hear any threat of violence from the Republican side you're even more deluded than I thought.
If the loyalist paramiliatires end the ceasefire you're saying the IRA won't? Strange how you think I'm deluded. I'll be less insulting and call you naive
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 26, 2021, 02:29:15 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
like Sid you display a lack of understanding as to how the NI executive works. In effect both sides can veto. DUP use theirs to block abortion reform, language equal marriage etc... SF have used the veto on far fewer occasions. A border poll can not create any more division than already exists. At the end of the day we in the north have a democratic right to decide our future, you are pedal the same line as FF that only unionist votes matter.
Free Staters love to pontificate but don't seem to have the intelligence to get informed before commenting.
It's typical Dublin7, make ignorant comments and be corrected before changing course to make more ignorance comment sand be corrected again.
This is the type of idiot you get down south who return FFG into office.
Oddly enough that's the same FFG government who refused to discuss going into govt down south with SF while pontificating at them to do business with the DUP up north.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 03:02:15 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 26, 2021, 02:29:54 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
If you think you'll hear any threat of violence from the Republican side you're even more deluded than I thought.
If the loyalist paramiliatires end the ceasefire you're saying the IRA won't? Strange how you think I'm deluded. I'll be less insulting and call you naive
This is the point I made on another thread.
If Loyalists start to attack and God forbid injure/kill catholics do people think there will be no retaliation?
Quote from: Taylor on March 26, 2021, 03:13:40 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 03:02:15 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 26, 2021, 02:29:54 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
If you think you'll hear any threat of violence from the Republican side you're even more deluded than I thought.
If the loyalist paramiliatires end the ceasefire you're saying the IRA won't? Strange how you think I'm deluded. I'll be less insulting and call you naive
This is the point I made on another thread.
If Loyalists start to attack and God forbid injure/kill catholics do people think there will be no retaliation?
Do you genuinely think loyalism cares enough about the union to kill without immunity to do so?
They don't have an RUC bungling investigations for them anymore.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PMFor 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass?
What did they do to get the assembly back up and running? Are you a bit slow? They made a deal in Feb 18. The DUP reneged on it because they brought it to the Orange Order and UDA, who told them to scrap it. I'm still waiting on your to acknowledge that, and explain how it was as much SF's fault at the DUPs.
What would you suggest SF should have done, since you hold them equally to blame? Bow to the will of the UDA and give up on a Language Act?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
Arlene is still there because an inquiry didn't recommend her stepping down. SF provided her with the opportunity to temporarily step aside pending said inquiry. Most rational people saw that as SF trying desperately to avoid an assembly collapse. Not you though, apparently.
And as for the Irish Language Act, maybe you haven't been aware, but only last week, Arlene Foster gave an update in the Assembly that the legislation in on track for implementation by next May. And didn't she even say 'Sin é' at then end.
Besides, if you thought that the DUP were still dragging their feet on commitments made such as a language act, RHI etc, then why on earth would you be holding SF as equally culpable for calling the DUP out on it.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them.
I gave you a comprehensive list of commitments that the DUP failed to live up to/actions they took/refused to take before the collapse. Since it clearly went straight over your head, I'll jog your memory:
- They reneged on Language Act commitments promised as preconditions to power sharing, back at St Andrews
- They reneged on the enactment of a Bill of Rights as was agreed in 1998 in the GFA
- They blocked same sex marriage, despite the majority of MLAs being in support of it
- They took £500m of tax payers money and burned it in wood pellet boilers and then refused to see their leader step aside temporarily pending an investigation
- They blocked funding for legacy inquests
Since you have come to the simpleton's conclusion that both sides were as bad as each other, then maybe you can furnish us with a list of commitments made that SF also refused to live up to while in government? Or if you cannot, are you arguing that SF, and by extension, northern nationalism, should have just stayed in government and accepted the above list of behaviour (and whatever more that would have come) from the DUP?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities.
A border poll will only be called when the British Sec of State feels it is likely to result in constitutional change. Do you think he's going to call one unless the result is a fairly certain yes? And demographic, economic and political trends all point to that as the inevitable result at some point in the future.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
Or maybe people just want the GFA to be respected, and to not have the goalposts moved by people who are starting to worry that a reunification vote might actually happen. I'll ask you again: if a border poll passes by 50.1%, should it be deemed invalid?
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
Thankfully this type of attitude didn't exist in the mid 1990's or I doubt we'd have had ever seen the GFA.
You seem to have a 'sit on our hands and do nothing' policy cos it's not our problem. It does nothing to dispel the sort of stereotypical 'I'm alright Jack' accusation thrown at southerners when it comes to the Border Poll issue and the rights of nationalists in the north.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 26, 2021, 02:29:15 PM
A border poll can not create any more division than already exists.
If you believe that, I have some magic beans to sell you
The Brits may want to dump NI. This is one thing that keeps Unionists awake at night. Brexit is English nationalism, not Unionism. The DUP didn't understand that. The Tories shafted them.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 26, 2021, 04:55:23 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 01:10:47 PM
Quote from: Snapchap on March 26, 2021, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
3 years this stalemate went on, not a few weeks or months, but 3 years.
We can count in the six counties too. The fact that it went on for three years doesn't alter my point, which is that it is simplistic, ill-informed nonsense to suggest that SF and the DUP were equally responsible for the collapse.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
If hadn't been for the Irish and British governments getting involved and forcing the main parties in the north to compromise there'd be no assembly today. Do the DUP and SF agree on anything except that they disagree on everything?
And again, I remind you that the parties had an agreement made ONE year after the collapse and had a draft text of the deal produced, only for the DUP to renege on it solely because they had to run it past the Orange Order and the UDA, who promptly told them to tear it up. Of course, that's something you don't seem to want to talk about, presumably because it puts a big huge dent in your "both as bad as eachother" horses**t.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 26, 2021, 11:56:28 AM
Both parties view each with hostility that will only grow if a border poll is called. Your naively think if a united Ireland is voted for the DUP should suck it up and say nothing as that's democracy. Unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that. If that's the campaign strategy it's doomed for failure
The consent principle was in the agreement because it was a demand of unionism and agreed to as a concession/compromise from nationalism. Do you think nationalists would have agreed to it if they believed it wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on because government/parties would act in bad faith and attempt to re-write it down the line? If there is no consent principle, there is no GFA. Nobody is suggesting that the DUP will suck it up, but again, the consent principle was a demand from unionism as part of an agreement that they then signed up to, and as such have committed to accepting the result of any poll. Just as nationalism will. Are you trying to suggest that a border poll passing by 50.1% should be deemed invalid?
Fine SF are blameless and it's all the DUPs fault.
Sarcasm? Apologies. I thought I was having a discussion with an adult.
Would I be correct in saying that Martin McGuinness provided Arlene Foster the opportunity to stand aside pending investigation, so as to avoid the Assembly's collapse? Maybe you could tell us all how SF were as much to blame as the DUP for the collapse then? Not to mention for the failure to get the deal across the line in Feb 2018?
For 3 years what exacty did SF AND the DUP do to solve the impass? Major issues were Arlene & the Irish language act and as far as I can tell Arlene is still there and the Irish language is still not sorted. It achieved nothing.
It amazes me how you believe its all the DUPs fault and nothing to do with SF. The gas thing is die hard DUP supporters will say it's all SF fault and nothing to do with them. In terms of the border poll itself I see it failing in north and all it will achieve is create ever more division between the two communities. Maybe that's what some individuals on both sides want? Unionist threats recently show they're willing to play that card so how long before you start hearing similar noises from the other side?
Thankfully this type of attitude didn't exist in the mid 1990's or I doubt we'd have had ever seen the GFA.
You seem to have a 'sit on our hands and do nothing' policy cos it's not our problem. It does nothing to dispel the sort of stereotypical 'I'm alright Jack' accusation thrown at southerners when it comes to the Border Poll issue and the rights of nationalists in the north.
I think for a peaceful united Ireland both SF and the DUP need to compromise and come to some sort of agreement before calling a border poll, but that's not something the DUP seem willing to do and based on the comments for some SF supporters on here that's not something they're willing to do either. I don't see how anyone in the south can help with that.
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
In a border poll situation they should send any loyalists to prison in England, so that they can be British, and any subsequent release should be based on staying in Britain.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Partition was not the cause of the civil war LarIt's pretty easy to understand
[/quote]
Sid, mo chara buan, I've been neglecting you but , once in a while, I got to escape into the real world. I have no problems with what you are saying about the sequence of events. It's the importance attached to both Partition and the Oath of Allegiance that bothers me a bit. (To be perfectly honest, not too much either!)
Are you familiar with "The Making of Modern Ireland 1603-1923" by the historian, JC Beckett, a Prod but an impartial one, IMO anyway.
I can't quote from an online account so I will keep excerpts short and to the point.
PPS 458-459 are the ones I am referring to with a bit of help from 455.
(The plenipotentiaries have returned to face opposition from De Valera et al..)
"They denied that the delegates had any right to sign it, and accused them of having betrayed the republic; they rejected the notion of dominion status and,
in particular, they rejected the Oath of Allegiance to the crown.But they offered no better alternative." etc. etc.
My contention has been that Partition and the taking of the Oath split the warring factions from the off, as it were.
In fact Beckett does not refer, even once, to the oath of allegiance as he describes events leading up to the commencement of hostilities. In other words, the oath of allegiance was not the root cause of the civil war, according to Beckett.
Did the IRA abandon the North?
"But a powerful section of the anti-treaty party, unwilling to wait and distrustful of public opinion, saw in the renewal of the war with Britain the best chance of restoring unity and reviving the republican cause; "
I'd translate that to mean that the anti-treaty sites did reject partition, in part because it abandoned the Northern Catholics to their fate and were not prepared to allow this to happen.
What do you think?
Quote from: armaghniac on March 26, 2021, 10:18:44 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
In a border poll situation they should send any loyalists to prison in England, so that they can be British, and any subsequent release should be based on staying in Britain.
Shades of Frongoch 1916-1918..
Intern them and they will return heroes to their communities. They will return better organised and more determined to keep up the fight. Look what happened to the Volunteers after Easter 1916.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 26, 2021, 11:01:41 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 26, 2021, 10:18:44 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
In a border poll situation they should send any loyalists to prison in England, so that they can be British, and any subsequent release should be based on staying in Britain.
Shades of Frongoch 1916-1918..
Intern them and they will return heroes to their communities. They will return better organised and more determined to keep up the fight. Look what happened to the Volunteers after Easter 1916.
There are many jails in England. Give them long sentences.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 26, 2021, 10:55:11 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Partition was not the cause of the civil war Lar
It's pretty easy to understand
Sid, mo chara buan, I've been neglecting you but , once in a while, I got to escape into the real world. I have no problems with what you are saying about the sequence of events. It's the importance attached to both Partition and the Oath of Allegiance that bothers me a bit. (To be perfectly honest, not too much either!)
Are you familiar with "The Making of Modern Ireland 1603-1923" by the historian, JC Beckett, a Prod but an impartial one, IMO anyway.
I can't quote from an online account so I will keep excerpts short and to the point.
PPS 458-459 are the ones I am referring to with a bit of help from 455.
(The plenipotentiaries have returned to face opposition from De Valera et al..)
"They denied that the delegates had any right to sign it, and accused them of having betrayed the republic; they rejected the notion of dominion status and,
in particular, they rejected the Oath of Allegiance to the crown.But they offered no better alternative." etc. etc.
My contention has been that Partition and the taking of the Oath split the warring factions from the off, as it were.
In fact Beckett does not refer, even once, to the oath of allegiance as he describes events leading up to the commencement of hostilities. In other words, the oath of allegiance was not the root cause of the civil war, according to Beckett.
Did the IRA abandon the North?
"But a powerful section of the anti-treaty party, unwilling to wait and distrustful of public opinion, saw in the renewal of the war with Britain the best chance of restoring unity and reviving the republican cause; "
I'd translate that to mean that the anti-treaty sites did reject partition, in part because it abandoned the Northern Catholics to their fate and were not prepared to allow this to happen.
What do you think?
[/quote]
What do I think?
I think it's perfectly possible to come up with any nonsense narrative to claim that partition
was the cause of the Civil War and people do this sort of thing all the time
I mean people have tried to come up with narratives to say the US Civil War was not about slavery, they do this all the time actually
Partition did not cause the Civil War and that's the central fact you seem to struggle with
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 11:19:08 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Empires were all based on nationalism
Nationalism eats all before it
Nationalism and hatred of the other are indivisible
Nationalism taken to its logical conclusion leads to mass murder and genocide
Personally I think there's a decent case that every national flag in the world should be burned
I certainly think every Union Jack and Tricolour on this island and especially in NI should be burned
Flags in NI are used purely to antagonise the other and most of this board is made up of fleggers
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 11:39:27 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 11:19:08 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Empires were all based on nationalism
Nationalism eats all before it
Nationalism and hatred of the other are indivisible
Nationalism taken to its logical conclusion leads to mass murder and genocide
Personally I think there's a decent case that every national flag in the world should be burned
I certainly think every Union Jack and Tricolour on this island and especially in NI should be burned
Flags in NI are used purely to antagonise the other and most of this board is made up of fleggers
Nationalism was bolstered and grew out of those very empires. The problem was those empires themselves where the few attempted to impose their will and laws to rule over millions of natives often in far distant lands with entirely different cultures. Yet you perceive the problem as being those same nation states in wanting the right to self determination.
Do you think Ireland was correct to strike out for independence in the early 20th century then, since what was that only borne out of nationalism and a strike against a foreign ruler?
The issue of flags is a separate issue and I'm no great supporter of flags, they are most often used simply as a way of marking out territory. I don't get the obsession with them even if I can understand others living in interface areas and why they do it.
If as some insist you shove a united Ireland down the throat of the Unionists and like it or lump it then I've no doubt there will be a paramilitary response. I almost admire the naivety of the nationals who claim there won't be a republican response
Quote from: dublin7 on March 27, 2021, 12:32:09 PM
If as some insist you shove a united Ireland down the throat of the Unionists and like it or lump it then I've no doubt there will be a paramilitary response. I almost admire the naivety of the nationals who claim there won't be a republican response
Your comments are very absolutist.
1) The vast majority do not want to 'shove it down Unionists throats'. That is why there needs to be a prolonged discussion about how a workable solution can be found. Even at this early stage of the discussion I haven't seen too many suggest that there will be this utopia of a 32 county socialist republic, there will be compromise needed on both sides
2) Despite your definitive claim that there will be a paramilitary response, you don't know what will happen. I suspect there would be resistance from within loyalism but that is no reason to thwart democracy. The loyalists are not the broader unionist community in the same way that the dissidents are not representative of wider nationalist sentiment. Apart from anything else I do not think they have either the wherewithal, the structures nor the intelligence needed to begin a paramilitary campaign.
3) Any possible retaliation would depend on the extent of the violence, who it was perpetrated against and how prolonged it became.
4) Lastly the most important point. Nationalists in the north have lived under British rule against their will (subserviently to a protestant ruling class for a large part of it's existence) for 100 years. What is the difference in that and 'ramming a UI down Unionists throat'? If a majority of people decide that they want a new UI arrangement should we kow-tow to Loyalist demands because the playground bully threatens to take up armalites and semtex? A border poll is going to happen at some point in the future anyway due to demographics and even the unionist politicians are beginning to face up to this reality.
The ceasefire is well over 20 years, anyone involved back then is suffering with arthritis and hearing loss, the guns are gone and won't be coming back out, there is no backing from anyone to go back down that road, as for the loyalist there is no doubt that there will be a backlash but that will end. If its the will of the people through the poll it could work with little bloodshed.
To be a UI it may take a different path to get there, the devil is in the detail. A hand over period were the boys on the Hill still hold power, pass laws and run the government in the 6 counties, the UK slowly steps away and blending in period begins, life stays the same until the new generation grows up with life in a new country and there are no changes to their day to day.
Shoving down peoples throat is just not going to happen
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:38:58 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 26, 2021, 10:55:11 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 07:55:12 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 03:33:03 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 25, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 02:29:05 PM
The oath of allegiance was the primary reason for the Civil War
That it wasn't a Republic
Partition was barely a reason at all, if even that
You are splitting hairs, sid. All roads led to the same end...
Those who were pro-treaty were prepared to take the Oath of Allegiance and those who were anti- weren't.
I'm not splitting hairs
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
Partition was not the reason for the existence of the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War
The only reason one would believe this is if one took the film "Michael Collins" as definitive historical fact, rather than light entertainment aimed at Middle America
If you are not, you have me lost for words.
The anti-treaty side rejected the oath of allegiance . The Free State was to be an entity independent from the United Kingdom but within the British Empire. This entailed the taking of the Oath. One side refused to take it and the other did not. As with the Tan war, neither side declared war but there was an inexorable drift towards conflict.
The Irregulars took possession of the Four Courts. The Brits gave the National side an ultimatum- either get them out or we'll bombard the effing' lot of them.
The government, aka Nationalists decided to attack to prevent a flare up of the Brits vs the IRA all over again- they were windy that in the event of resumption of hostilities, the 'ra would have more support among the masses than they had so they borrowed British guns and attacked the place and the rest is history..
Now,, sid, those who were murdered, blown up or plain executed and their kith and kin
weren't too pushed about which came first. partition or the Oath.
I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make
Partition wasn't the reason for the Civil War
sid, I am conceding defeat.
Without Partition, there would not have been a civil war.
No partition......no Oath of Allegiance.....no Civil War
Taking the Oath meant accepting the king as head of state, thereby accepting the creation of the Free State. The Bolshies would not take the oath...they were no party to the creation of the Free State .
Now, you may tie yourself up in semantic conundrums all day long but since I no longer have a job to go to, I cannto waste someone else's time so include me out on this one.
You're saying that if a 32 county Republic had been granted, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics?
Agreed
But there was never going to be a 32 county Republic granted, that was fantasy
Had the 1912 Home Rule bill been enacted on an all island basis as originally envisaged, had 1916 never happened, there still would have been Civil War, it just would have taken a different form - between Catholic Home Rulers and northern Protestant Unionists
Had a 32 county Republic been granted, the same Civil War, between Catholic Republicans and northern Protestant Unionists, would have occurred
Had a 26 county Republic been granted in 1922 with no oath, there would not have been a civil war between southern Catholics
??
How could a 26 county republic have bee granted?
Did anyone bring up the subject of such a republic?
If such a move ha been made, why did the Staters and the Bolshies not jump at it and avoid conflict on a massive scale?
Partition was not the cause of the civil war Lar
It's pretty easy to understand
Sid, mo chara buan, I've been neglecting you but , once in a while, I got to escape into the real world. I have no problems with what you are saying about the sequence of events. It's the importance attached to both Partition and the Oath of Allegiance that bothers me a bit. (To be perfectly honest, not too much either!)
Are you familiar with "The Making of Modern Ireland 1603-1923" by the historian, JC Beckett, a Prod but an impartial one, IMO anyway.
I can't quote from an online account so I will keep excerpts short and to the point.
PPS 458-459 are the ones I am referring to with a bit of help from 455.
(The plenipotentiaries have returned to face opposition from De Valera et al..)
"They denied that the delegates had any right to sign it, and accused them of having betrayed the republic; they rejected the notion of dominion status and, in particular, they rejected the Oath of Allegiance to the crown.
But they offered no better alternative." etc. etc.
My contention has been that Partition and the taking of the Oath split the warring factions from the off, as it were.
In fact Beckett does not refer, even once, to the oath of allegiance as he describes events leading up to the commencement of hostilities. In other words, the oath of allegiance was not the root cause of the civil war, according to Beckett.
Did the IRA abandon the North?
"But a powerful section of the anti-treaty party, unwilling to wait and distrustful of public opinion, saw in the renewal of the war with Britain the best chance of restoring unity and reviving the republican cause; "
I'd translate that to mean that the anti-treaty sites did reject partition, in part because it abandoned the Northern Catholics to their fate and were not prepared to allow this to happen.
What do you think?
What do I think?
I think it's perfectly possible to come up with any nonsense narrative to claim that partition
was the cause of the Civil War and people do this sort of thing all the time
I mean people have tried to come up with narratives to say the US Civil War was not about slavery, they do this all the time actually
Partition did not cause the Civil War and that's the central fact you seem to struggle with[/quote]No sid you ain't got it right and not for the first time either, I may add.
My point is and was that the oath of allegiance did not cause the Civil War and there's a difference- as any normal individual would probably agree.
Dev's followers were keen to continue the conflict in the north but desisted as they feared they would not have has enough support. Added to this, Collins and Craig had reached a consensus- a modus operandi, as it were, so Dev and the Bolshies knew they had no chance of success.
To accept your thesis, I would have to disregard what J C Beckett and me oul' fella had to say and the Staters destroyed my grandfather's brick works so the dad had vested interest in this war.
Beckett did not refer to the oath as he described the descent into Civil War. Nobody I know of suggested that a 26 county was ever a possibility either- until you cme along.
There's no point in throwing Lord Paul Bew or Diarmuid Ferriter at you either I fear.
I'm going to sign off- which I promised I was going to do days ago. Everyone else is wrong
(Yeah, I know I'm a feckin' eejit.) ;D
How about concentrating on the future in this thread?
If people want to rehash 100 years ago set up a separate one.
We may be able to shape the future but we certainly can NOT reshape the past.
Quote from: dublin7 on March 27, 2021, 12:32:09 PM
If as some insist you shove a united Ireland down the throat of the Unionists and like it or lump it then I've no doubt there will be a paramilitary response. I almost admire the naivety of the nationals who claim there won't be a republican response
From memory they signed up to the GFA. Agreed to the principle of consent. All this 23 years ago. Hardly shoving it down their throat is it.
Disagreements over the oath was the main reason for the Civil War, Lar
Not partition
The oath and partition were entirely separate things
Somewhere along the line you seem to have picked up the belief that the oath and partition were exactly the same thing
They weren't
There's no one (maybe a small few ) shoving anything anywhere.
Brexit, Protocol, economic realities and changing demographics means people are now talking about the subject.
Catholics/nationalists in the 6 can live with the GFA.
What arrangements can be made in a future All Ireland entity that Protestants/Unionists can live with?
That is a worthy subject of discussion and debate.
In regards to the historical arguments going, when did any major event ever revolve around one contributing event or 'fact', idiotic to think in such black & white terms, most major events have many contributing factors, Irish Civil War included.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 02:42:57 PM
There's no one (maybe a small few ) shoving anything anywhere.
Brexit, Protocol, economic realities and changing demographics means people are now talking about the subject.
Catholics/nationalists in the 6 can live with the GFA.
What arrangements can be made in a future All Ireland entity that Protestants/Unionists can live with?
That is a worthy subject of discussion and debate.
It would need to be a 'soft' republic in the north, run for a while in Stormont then gradually work towards breaking free completely
Quote from: bennydorano on March 27, 2021, 02:45:44 PM
In regards to the historical arguments going, when did any major event ever revolve around one contributing event or 'fact', idiotic to think in such black & white terms, most major events have many contributing factors, Irish Civil War included.
+1
Of course there were multiple factors. To suggest that the Oath of Allegiance led to the Civil War is not supported by any other authority than our sid. I mean if JC Beckett didn't think it was worthy of mention, what link to anything of note has Sid got to prove the rest of the civilised world is wrong?
I mean can he refer to any other credible authority than himself?
My idea is a Confederation of 2 "home rule" areas run by slimmed down Dáil and Stormont.
The "Confederacy" to be in charge of major items, foreign affairs etc.
GFA provisions re dual Nationality, passports etc to continue in the 6 Co area.
Sid, what had the American Civil War got to do with Partition?
You draw some sort of analogy there but I'm sure damned if I can follow you.
Same as with the controversy over Aonghus MacGrianna's attempt at humour on New Year's Eve.
I merely said the hoor should have apologised and you came back with a bizarre potpourri of accusations, insinuations and over the top generalisations.
How you associate my simple statement with the rape and murder of Manuela Raedo was off the Richter scale in terms of logic . What connection you could see between me and Eamon Martin, the I Own Her Institute and ''je suis Charlie" left me puzzled.
As far as I was concerned, Eamon Martin, David O'Brien and anyone else who was bothered one way about the skit's contents could go around to the back of the RTE canteen and kick the shins off each other.
No particular offence intended but you appear to have developed hyperbole into a form of art.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 12:27:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 11:39:27 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 11:19:08 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Empires were all based on nationalism
Nationalism eats all before it
Nationalism and hatred of the other are indivisible
Nationalism taken to its logical conclusion leads to mass murder and genocide
Personally I think there's a decent case that every national flag in the world should be burned
I certainly think every Union Jack and Tricolour on this island and especially in NI should be burned
Flags in NI are used purely to antagonise the other and most of this board is made up of fleggers
Nationalism was bolstered and grew out of those very empires. The problem was those empires themselves where the few attempted to impose their will and laws to rule over millions of natives often in far distant lands with entirely different cultures. Yet you perceive the problem as being those same nation states in wanting the right to self determination.
Do you think Ireland was correct to strike out for independence in the early 20th century then, since what was that only borne out of nationalism and a strike against a foreign ruler?
The issue of flags is a separate issue and I'm no great supporter of flags, they are most often used simply as a way of marking out territory. I don't get the obsession with them even if I can understand others living in interface areas and why they do it.
1916 wasn't only borne out of nationalism
James Connolly and the Citizen Army weren't nationalists
They saw an independent Ireland as the best avenue to a socialist society, the lot of workers, of people, regardless of background, was what they cared about
In order to achieve this, they made an alliance with the rest of the 1916 rebels who were nationalist
Pearse was a fanatical nationalist, like really f**king fanatical, his speech at the O'Donovan Rossa funeral is totally bonkers
I'm ambivalent enough about the concept of Irish independence, Do I think it's better we're independent now? Yes, probably, because the UK is a fairly rotten polity largely controlled by a cabal of southern English conservatives, and the British Empire was even more rotten
And I would prefer not to be part of that
But that said, independent Ireland was a pretty rotten place for most of the 20th century, probably much more rotten than the UK was in that time
Having thought a lot about this in recent years, I'm neither proud nor ashamed to be Irish, and by Irish I mean somebody who comes from the island of Ireland
and a citizen of an independent Irish state, it's an accident of birth and an accident of birth on the part of everybody else who was born into it
Ireland is decent enough now because we started to look outward rather than inward, it has changed a lot, it's far from the worst place, far from perfect but overall there are few places I'd rather live
Were it possible for Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the United Kingdom, independence wouldn't really have mattered, why would it, who cares what flag flies
It probably wasn't possible though
Is it possible for Northern Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the UK or as part of an independent Irish state? I don't know, but that's what yis should be focussing on, not on what state NI is part of
As Joe Brolly says, whichever flag flies above Stormont isn't going to matter - the question of a united Ireland is basically irrelevant
Flegs don't put bread and ice cream on the table
It's how the politicians and the people in NI behave that will determine what sort of society NI has
As long as yis divide yerselves into usuns and themuns it'll continue be a shithole - whether part of the UK or an independent Irish state
Quote from: bennydorano on March 27, 2021, 02:45:44 PM
In regards to the historical arguments going, when did any major event ever revolve around one contributing event or 'fact', idiotic to think in such black & white terms, most major events have many contributing factors, Irish Civil War included.
Aye, and partition was a fringe one, if even that, it was was basically irrelevant
But according to Lar it was "the reason"
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 27, 2021, 03:01:32 PM
Sid, what had the American Civil War got to do with Partition?
You draw some sort of analogy there but I'm sure damned if I can follow you.
Same as with the controversy over Aonghus MacGrianna's attempt at humour on New Year's Eve.
I merely said the hoor should have apologised and you came back with a bizarre potpourri of accusations, insinuations and over the top generalisations.
How you associate my simple statement with the rape and murder of Manuela Raedo was off the Richter scale in terms of logic . What connection you could see between me and Eamon Martin, the I Own Her Institute and ''je suis Charlie" left me puzzled.
As far as I was concerned, Eamon Martin, David O'Brien and anyone else who was bothered one way about the skit's contents could go around to the back of the RTE canteen and kick the shins off each other.
No particular offence intended but you appear to have developed hyperbole into a form of art.
I'm not sure what the US Civil War has to do with partition
Perhaps you can tell me
Maybe you can also tell me what Manuela Riedo or Aengus MacGrianna have to with partition
Because I haven't a clue
You clearly do though
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 02:41:26 PM
Disagreements over the oath was the main reason for the Civil War, Lar
Not partition
The oath and partition were entirely separate things
Somewhere along the line you seem to have picked up the belief that the oath and partition were exactly the same thing
They weren't
Which of us came up with the following?
"I mean people have tried to come up with narratives to say the US Civil War was not about slavery, they do this all the time actually"
You recognise it?
I certainly didn't bring the American Civil War into any discussion with you.
Throw enough shite and some of it will stick appears to be your line of debate as I instanced when I was daft enough to engage you over the MacGrianna attempt at humour.
It should have been obvious that I wac referring to your Blietzkrig approach to logical discussion.
Finally sid, I am still waiting for you to backup your contention that the taking of the Oath of Allegiance led to the Civil War.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 02:35:21 PM
How about concentrating on the future in this thread?
If people want to rehash 100 years ago set up a separate one.
We may be able to shape the future but we certainly can NOT reshape the past.
Couldn't agree more. I thought I was cute enough not to get drawn into a dogfight with one of the Terrible Twins.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 03:00:51 PM
My idea is a Confederation of 2 "home rule" areas run by slimmed down Dáil and Stormont.
The "Confederacy" to be in charge of major items, foreign affairs etc.
GFA provisions re dual Nationality, passports etc to continue in the 6 Co area.
What's the point then? Particularly, if as you say, Nationalsists can live with the current situation.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 03:05:35 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 12:27:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 11:39:27 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 11:19:08 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Empires were all based on nationalism
Nationalism eats all before it
Nationalism and hatred of the other are indivisible
Nationalism taken to its logical conclusion leads to mass murder and genocide
Personally I think there's a decent case that every national flag in the world should be burned
I certainly think every Union Jack and Tricolour on this island and especially in NI should be burned
Flags in NI are used purely to antagonise the other and most of this board is made up of fleggers
Nationalism was bolstered and grew out of those very empires. The problem was those empires themselves where the few attempted to impose their will and laws to rule over millions of natives often in far distant lands with entirely different cultures. Yet you perceive the problem as being those same nation states in wanting the right to self determination.
Do you think Ireland was correct to strike out for independence in the early 20th century then, since what was that only borne out of nationalism and a strike against a foreign ruler?
The issue of flags is a separate issue and I'm no great supporter of flags, they are most often used simply as a way of marking out territory. I don't get the obsession with them even if I can understand others living in interface areas and why they do it.
1916 wasn't only borne out of nationalism
James Connolly and the Citizen Army weren't nationalists
They saw an independent Ireland as the best avenue to a socialist society, the lot of workers, of people, regardless of background, was what they cared about
In order to achieve this, they made an alliance with the rest of the 1916 rebels who were nationalist
Pearse was a fanatical nationalist, like really f**king fanatical, his speech at the O'Donovan Rossa funeral is totally bonkers
I'm ambivalent enough about the concept of Irish independence, Do I think it's better we're independent now? Yes, probably, because the UK is a fairly rotten polity largely controlled by a cabal of southern English conservatives, and the British Empire was even more rotten
And I would prefer not to be part of that
But that said, independent Ireland was a pretty rotten place for most of the 20th century, probably much more rotten than the UK was in that time
Having thought a lot about this in recent years, I'm neither proud nor ashamed to be Irish, and by Irish I mean somebody who comes from the island of Ireland and a citizen of an independent Irish state, it's an accident of birth and an accident of birth on the part of everybody else who was born into it
Ireland is decent enough now because we started to look outward rather than inward, it has changed a lot, it's far from the worst place, far from perfect but overall there are few places I'd rather live
Were it possible for Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the United Kingdom, independence wouldn't really have mattered, why would it, who cares what flag flies
It probably wasn't possible though
Is it possible for Northern Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the UK or as part of an independent Irish state? I don't know, but that's what yis should be focussing on, not on what state NI is part of
As Joe Brolly says, whichever flag flies above Stormont isn't going to matter - the question of a united Ireland is basically irrelevant
Flegs don't put bread and ice cream on the table
It's how the politicians and the people in NI behave that will determine what sort of society NI has
As long as yis divide yerselves into usuns and themuns it'll continue be a shithole - whether part of the UK or an independent Irish state
The Irish Citizen Army were not the main protagonists behind independence and to think otherwise is simply to rewrite history. The driving force was a nationalism in the same way as many failed rebellions of the past.
Had others shown your same ambivalence towards gaining their independence 100 years ago, then you would still be a part of the British state led by English Tories and for which you have suggested is a rotten state. That's where a 'sit on your hands' approach gets you instead of trying to improve things for society from within.
Where do you draw the line in preventing people's aspiration to having a common identity with a shared common goal then. Without it the focus would be entirely on the individual and taken away from the collective. Would we even have a GAA without club or county boundaries where identity is everything.
It won't be an easy problem to solve in the north but try and erode the blatant sectarianism and you go a long way to solving the problem. Rather than divide people from the cradle, educate them together and that is a starting point. If that works then gradually introduce shared living spaces and work forward in incremental steps. In another generation or two you could be in a different space but it requires creative thinking not a 'do nothing' approach.
As for Joe Brolly, he wrote an article in the Sunday Independent only a week previously stating it was time for a United Ireland so I wouldn't pass much remarks on Joe. He'd probably have another different opinion again today if you asked him.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:38:58 AM
I mean people have tried to come up with narratives to say the US Civil War was not about slavery, they do this all the time actually
And strictly speaking they're correct - at least to start with. For the war commenced in April 1861 when the Southern states seceded from the
Union to form a
Confederacy.
The terms were important, since the South wanted control over what they saw as their own (state) affairs, including but not excusively, Slavery. And although Lincoln had been elected on a manifesto which opposed Slavery, he was consistent throughout in prosecuting the war in order to preserve the Union, see eg the lyrics of The Battle Cry of Freedom:
"The Union forever! Hurrah, boys, hurrah!
Down with the traitor, up with the star;
While we rally round the flag, boys, rally once again,
Shouting the battle cry of freedom!"(Note the use of the word "traitor")
While Lincoln didn't make the Proclamation abolishing Slavery throughout all the states until September 1862. This was as much from expediency as principle, since the Union was losing the war at that stage and he knew that the Proclamation would both encourage Black recruitment to the Union army, at the same time as encouraging Southern slaves to escape and travel North, where many would also join up, whilst simultaneously hurting the Southern economy.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:38:58 AM
Partition did not cause the Civil War and that's the central fact you seem to struggle with
It certainly seems to have caused a civil war on this board, that's for sure! ;)
Anyhow, the question must be whether the Anti-Treaty forces would still have fought had there been no Oath. My own guess is that some of them would certainly have wanted to do so (esp those from the North, obviously), but
might have been deterred had they thought their numbers too few to have a chance of winning.
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 03:51:35 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 03:05:35 PM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 12:27:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 11:39:27 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on March 27, 2021, 11:19:08 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 26, 2021, 07:33:47 PM
If a republican grouping goes back to killing because the loyalists are doing it then they'll have achieved what they want. Game over. No poll or no votes going towards it.
The thirst for killing is gone. You can blood and thunder all you want but committing crimes will be severely dealt with. Regardless of no RUC the ability to catch people is so much better. Up the prison sentences and lick them away for life. No parole.
Let's see how they'll square that
Locking people up will increase the desire of others in their community for violence
This goes for both Irish nationalist and British nationalist
It would act as a rallying call
Did internment teach you nothing
Did the H-Blocks teach you nothing
The only way you can stop this is to quell the crazy nationalist sentiments which lead to people getting locked up in the first place
Nationalisms are what lead to thirst for killing
What is so crazy about a nationalistic outlook, it's a perfectly legitimate aspiration. Without it, empires would have flourished as imperialism took hold as bigger nations plundered and persecuted the native people. Or should the natives nod obediently say nothing and learn to serve their masters. The Irish state was founded on the same 'crazy nationalism' that seems to irk you. But yet you reckon it is the desire to break free from historical oppression and subservience that is the problem rather than the oppressors themselves, that is certainly an alternative outlook.
Empires were all based on nationalism
Nationalism eats all before it
Nationalism and hatred of the other are indivisible
Nationalism taken to its logical conclusion leads to mass murder and genocide
Personally I think there's a decent case that every national flag in the world should be burned
I certainly think every Union Jack and Tricolour on this island and especially in NI should be burned
Flags in NI are used purely to antagonise the other and most of this board is made up of fleggers
Nationalism was bolstered and grew out of those very empires. The problem was those empires themselves where the few attempted to impose their will and laws to rule over millions of natives often in far distant lands with entirely different cultures. Yet you perceive the problem as being those same nation states in wanting the right to self determination.
Do you think Ireland was correct to strike out for independence in the early 20th century then, since what was that only borne out of nationalism and a strike against a foreign ruler?
The issue of flags is a separate issue and I'm no great supporter of flags, they are most often used simply as a way of marking out territory. I don't get the obsession with them even if I can understand others living in interface areas and why they do it.
1916 wasn't only borne out of nationalism
James Connolly and the Citizen Army weren't nationalists
They saw an independent Ireland as the best avenue to a socialist society, the lot of workers, of people, regardless of background, was what they cared about
In order to achieve this, they made an alliance with the rest of the 1916 rebels who were nationalist
Pearse was a fanatical nationalist, like really f**king fanatical, his speech at the O'Donovan Rossa funeral is totally bonkers
I'm ambivalent enough about the concept of Irish independence, Do I think it's better we're independent now? Yes, probably, because the UK is a fairly rotten polity largely controlled by a cabal of southern English conservatives, and the British Empire was even more rotten
And I would prefer not to be part of that
But that said, independent Ireland was a pretty rotten place for most of the 20th century, probably much more rotten than the UK was in that time
Having thought a lot about this in recent years, I'm neither proud nor ashamed to be Irish, and by Irish I mean somebody who comes from the island of Ireland and a citizen of an independent Irish state, it's an accident of birth and an accident of birth on the part of everybody else who was born into it
Ireland is decent enough now because we started to look outward rather than inward, it has changed a lot, it's far from the worst place, far from perfect but overall there are few places I'd rather live
Were it possible for Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the United Kingdom, independence wouldn't really have mattered, why would it, who cares what flag flies
It probably wasn't possible though
Is it possible for Northern Ireland to be a fair and just society as part of the UK or as part of an independent Irish state? I don't know, but that's what yis should be focussing on, not on what state NI is part of
As Joe Brolly says, whichever flag flies above Stormont isn't going to matter - the question of a united Ireland is basically irrelevant
Flegs don't put bread and ice cream on the table
It's how the politicians and the people in NI behave that will determine what sort of society NI has
As long as yis divide yerselves into usuns and themuns it'll continue be a shithole - whether part of the UK or an independent Irish state
The Irish Citizen Army were not the main protagonists behind independence and to think otherwise is simply to rewrite history. The driving force was a nationalism in the same way as many failed rebellions of the past.
Had others shown your same ambivalence towards gaining their independence 100 years ago, then you would still be a part of the British state led by English Tories and for which you have suggested is a rotten state. That's where a 'sit on your hands' approach gets you instead of trying to improve things for society from within.
Where do you draw the line in preventing people's aspiration to having a common identity with a shared common goal then. Without it the focus would be entirely on the individual and taken away from the collective. Would we even have a GAA without club or county boundaries where identity is everything.
It won't be an easy problem to solve in the north but try and erode the blatant sectarianism and you go a long way to solving the problem. Rather than divide people from the cradle, educate them together and that is a starting point. If that works then gradually introduce shared living spaces and work forward in incremental steps. In another generation or two you could be in a different space but it requires creative thinking not a 'do nothing' approach.
As for Joe Brolly, he wrote an article in the Sunday Independent only a week previously stating it was time for a United Ireland so I wouldn't pass much remarks on Joe. He'd probably have another different opinion again today if you asked him.
If you don't think the Citizen Army and Connolly were "one of the main protagonists" for independence you're wrong
Before 1916 there was very little appetite for a Republic at all, Home Rule was the main goal
The Citizen Army and Connolly were the reason the proclamation called for a socialist Republic, had they not been involved the proclamation would not have called for such
I've no doubt if Connolly believed a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland was possible, that would have been his preferred outcome
That line about a socialist Republic endured
But most of the people who were fighting for independence from 1919 on didn't believe in a socialist Republic, they were mostly ethnonationalists and theocrats
I'm all for integrated education, I'm all for integrated living
Unfortunately most people in the North are dead against it despite claiming to be for it
That's because the central plank that divides Northern society is the failed ideology of usuns and themmuns, too many of yis hate each other
Maybe along with the burning of every Union Jack and Tricolour, the school system should be revolutionised and every religious denominated school abolished
That wouldn't wash either though
Eroding sectarianism should be the goal of everybody - but constant agitation for a border poll will only increase it
If Ireland was still a part of the UK, maybe the UK would be a much different state these days, who knows, maybe it wouldn't have been
Quote from: michaelg on March 27, 2021, 03:51:13 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 03:00:51 PM
My idea is a Confederation of 2 "home rule" areas run by slimmed down Dáil and Stormont.
The "Confederacy" to be in charge of major items, foreign affairs etc.
GFA provisions re dual Nationality, passports etc to continue in the 6 Co area.
What's the point then? Particularly, if as you say, Nationalsists can live with the current situation.
All Ireland and its people would be a sovereign State, no foreign Country would rule any part of it (maybe let Westminster have Larne ;D), the wishes of the vast majority of the people of Ireland would be adhered to, the wishes of the majority of the people of the 6 Cos would be adhered to.
Nobody in London would be making decisions about the 6 Cos.
Assuming a yes vote in the 2 Referenda of course.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 04:42:44 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 27, 2021, 03:51:13 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 03:00:51 PM
My idea is a Confederation of 2 "home rule" areas run by slimmed down Dáil and Stormont.
The "Confederacy" to be in charge of major items, foreign affairs etc.
GFA provisions re dual Nationality, passports etc to continue in the 6 Co area.
What's the point then? Particularly, if as you say, Nationalsists can live with the current situation.
All Ireland and its people would be a sovereign State, no foreign Country would rule any part of it (maybe let Westminster have Larne ;D), the wishes of the vast majority of the people of Ireland would be adhered to, the wishes of the majority of the people of the 6 Cos would be adhered to.
Nobody in London would be making decisions about the 6 Cos.
Assuming a yes vote in the 2 Referenda of course.
Sweet Home Cullyhanna would be the new national anthem of this Confederacy
The Stars 'N' Bars would be the new national flag - that's the stars from the Starry Plough surrounded by pictures of Ireland's greatest contribution to world culture - pubs
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 27, 2021, 04:26:00 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:38:58 AM
I mean people have tried to come up with narratives to say the US Civil War was not about slavery, they do this all the time actually
And strictly speaking they're correct - at least to start with. For the war commenced in April 1861 when the Southern states seceded from the Union to form a Confederacy.
The terms were important, since the South wanted control over what they saw as their own (state) affairs, including but not excusively, Slavery. And although Lincoln had been elected on a manifesto which opposed Slavery, he was consistent throughout in prosecuting the war in order to preserve the Union, see eg the lyrics of The Battle Cry of Freedom:
"The Union forever! Hurrah, boys, hurrah!
Down with the traitor, up with the star;
While we rally round the flag, boys, rally once again,
Shouting the battle cry of freedom!"
(Note the use of the word "traitor")
While Lincoln didn't make the Proclamation abolishing Slavery throughout all the states until September 1862. This was as much from expediency as principle, since the Union was losing the war at that stage and he knew that the Proclamation would both encourage Black recruitment to the Union army, at the same time as encouraging Southern slaves to escape and travel North, where many would also join up, whilst simultaneously hurting the Southern economy.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 10:38:58 AM
Partition did not cause the Civil War and that's the central fact you seem to struggle with
It certainly seems to have caused a civil war on this board, that's for sure! ;)
Anyhow, the question must be whether the Anti-Treaty forces would still have fought had there been no Oath. My own guess is that some of them would certainly have wanted to do so (esp those from the North, obviously), but might have been deterred had they thought their numbers too few to have a chance of winning.
Well, I quoted JC Beckett on this subject for sid's enlightenment but I think if I stuck in an excerpt from the Kama Sutra he wouldn't have noticed.
Beckett had claimed that the anti-Treaty faction had actively considered prolonging the struggle in Northern Ireland but, in the end, decided against it. Collins, having foreseen the likelihood of this happening, had come to an understanding with Craig and, presumably, let it be known that the Nationalists were not going to get involved.
So a combination of circumstances led to Dev et al abandoning their plans.
Incidentally, have you heard or read anywhere that the Oath of Allegiance led to the Civil War?*
*Any other omniscient, knowall expert other than our Sid! ;D
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 04:52:10 PM
The Stars 'N' Bars would be the new national flag - that's the stars from the Starry Plough surrounded by pictures of Ireland's greatest contribution to world culture - pubs
Are you
sure?
"Ale was a native British drink before the arrival of the Roman Empire in the 1st century, but it was with the construction of the Roman road network that the first pubs, called tabernae, began to appear. The word eventually became corrupted into tavern.
After the departure of Roman authority in the 5th century and the fall of the Romano-British kingdoms, the Anglo-Saxons established alehouses that may have grown out of domestic dwellings, first attested in the 10th century. These alehouses quickly evolved into meeting houses for folk to socially congregate, gossip and arrange mutual help within their communities. The Wantage law code of Æthelred the Unready proscribes fines for breaching the peace at meetings held in alehouses."https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/The-Great-British-Pub/ (https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/The-Great-British-Pub/)
Though the Irish might have invented bar fights... ;)
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 27, 2021, 04:58:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 27, 2021, 04:26:00 PM
Anyhow, the question must be whether the Anti-Treaty forces would still have fought had there been no Oath. My own guess is that some of them would certainly have wanted to do so (esp those from the North, obviously), but might have been deterred had they thought their numbers too few to have a chance of winning.
Incidentally, have you heard or read anywhere that the Oath of Allegiance led to the Civil War?
The Oath (or more accurately, the counter-demand for a Republic) will have been a factor, and the major one for many participants. But it was by no means the only one, with Partition being arguably more important.
While there will also have been many other factors of the sort which usually colour these things. One of these will have been simple war weariness, allied to the very real fear that if the Treaty wasn't accepted, the British would return with a big enough army to impose it come-what-may.
While there was also the question of who would wield real power after the Anglo-Irish War was over, the Army or the Dáil. As is so often the case in such conflicts, there was a clear sense of entitlement from many combatants who felt they had done the 'heavy lifting' during the fighting, versus those politicians who felt that fighting was just the means to the end, that end being the political settlement. Indeed this "entitlement" was further fuelled by those combatants who were disgruntled at not having received pay due to them from their war service.
And while I'm unsure how far it went, the support by the Catholic church for the Free State government must have influenced at least some people.
Finally there was the question of Personality. And with the two chief personalities, Collins and De Valera, having come to hate each other, with neither willing to share power, then Dev was always going to strike out against Collins.
Of course we don't know whether Collins would have accepted the result of the election had the pro-treaty vote been in the minority (I suspect he might), but such was Dev's overwheening lust for power that we can be sure he was never going to accept mere leadership of a minority opposition in the Dáil without a fight.
Quote from: sid waddell on March 27, 2021, 04:52:10 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 04:42:44 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 27, 2021, 03:51:13 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on March 27, 2021, 03:00:51 PM
My idea is a Confederation of 2 "home rule" areas run by slimmed down Dáil and Stormont.
The "Confederacy" to be in charge of major items, foreign affairs etc.
GFA provisions re dual Nationality, passports etc to continue in the 6 Co area.
What's the point then? Particularly, if as you say, Nationalsists can live with the current situation.
All Ireland and its people would be a sovereign State, no foreign Country would rule any part of it (maybe let Westminster have Larne ;D), the wishes of the vast majority of the people of Ireland would be adhered to, the wishes of the majority of the people of the 6 Cos would be adhered to.
Nobody in London would be making decisions about the 6 Cos.
Assuming a yes vote in the 2 Referenda of course.
Sweet Home Cullyhanna would be the new national anthem of this Confederacy
The Stars 'N' Bars would be the new national flag - that's the stars from the Starry Plough surrounded by pictures of Ireland's greatest contribution to world culture - pubs
I have to confess Sid this made me lol
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 27, 2021, 06:00:38 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on March 27, 2021, 04:58:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 27, 2021, 04:26:00 PM
Anyhow, the question must be whether the Anti-Treaty forces would still have fought had there been no Oath. My own guess is that some of them would certainly have wanted to do so (esp those from the North, obviously), but might have been deterred had they thought their numbers too few to have a chance of winning.
Incidentally, have you heard or read anywhere that the Oath of Allegiance led to the Civil War?
The Oath (or more accurately, the counter-demand for a Republic) will have been a factor, and the major one for many participants. But it was by no means the only one, with Partition being arguably more important.
While there will also have been many other factors of the sort which usually colour these things. One of these will have been simple war weariness, allied to the very real fear that if the Treaty wasn't accepted, the British would return with a big enough army to impose it come-what-may.
While there was also the question of who would wield real power after the Anglo-Irish War was over, the Army or the Dáil. As is so often the case in such conflicts, there was a clear sense of entitlement from many combatants who felt they had done the 'heavy lifting' during the fighting, versus those politicians who felt that fighting was just the means to the end, that end being the political settlement. Indeed this "entitlement" was further fuelled by those combatants who were disgruntled at not having received pay due to them from their war service.
And while I'm unsure how far it went, the support by the Catholic church for the Free State government must have influenced at least some people.
Finally there was the question of Personality. And with the two chief personalities, Collins and De Valera, having come to hate each other, with neither willing to share power, then Dev was always going to strike out against Collins.
Of course we don't know whether Collins would have accepted the result of the election had the pro-treaty vote been in the minority (I suspect he might), but such was Dev's overwheening lust for power that we can be sure he was never going to accept mere leadership of a minority opposition in the Dáil without a fight.
Of course we don't know whether Collins would have accepted the result of the election had the pro-treaty vote been in the minority (I suspect he might), but such was Dev's overwheening lust for power that we can be sure he was never going to accept mere leadership of a minority opposition in the Dáil without a fight.
[/quote]
I think iit's is reasonable to assume that Partition was at the forefront of the reasons that led to the civil war. Unless it became obvious that partition was on the cards, there would have been little cause to swear anything to the king.
Partition was undoubtedly the principal issue that separated the factions. If Dev had had more support, he'd have continued the fight in the North but with Collins' tacit understanding with Craig, the Long fella knew he'd get nowhere without the support of the Big Fella.
Incidentally, have you ever come across a suggestion that a 26 county republic might be formed which would do away with the necessity to swear anything?
No other
know all expert apart from sid has ever brought this up to my knowledge.
The Church split along class lines- as it had been doing since the time of the famine if not before.
Bishops and upper echelons supported the status quo with rare exceptions. In my home diocese of Achonry, the bishop told his flock that anyone taking up arms against the Crown forces would be excommunicated and forbidden the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist.
Some of the local clergy, n the other hand, said it was business as usual and to hell with the bishop. This was the situation was to be repeated throughout the south.
This also applied to the civil war.
The hierarchy were pro- Treaty and many, though not all,, of the clergy backed the irregulars.
I think it's very telling that the news that an inquest into the Ballymurphy massacre will be held, later this month, 47 years later, and the public reaction has been minimal. Furthermore, Ch4's new documentary on the killings seems to have gone largely unnoticed.
Maybe news media in Northern Ireland may have touched on the subject in the light of the upcoming inquest and tv documentary, but nothing was mentioned, ASAIK south of the border...sweet fa...zero
I genuinely feel sorry for posters on the board who feel that the southern partitionist, Free State bastards didn't come to their aid in times gone by and show no remorse for their inaction etc etc but the harsh fact is that even in Republican strongholds in the Wee Six, no reaction to the re-awakening of interest in those premeditated murders has been evident.
It's as if the human mind has an anti-overload mechanism that shuts consciousness down when the reality is too terrible to face.. I don't recall any fuss being made to commemorate the victims of Kitson's thugs when anniversaries came around and judging by his subsequent career, his actions were approved by his superiors. Can't recall much international reaction either - certainly not at government level.
I recall being in Newry about 20 years ago on the anniversary of the Ballymurphy murders and there wasn't a banner insight- never mind a good wall mural or two.
I guess that what I am getting at is that expecting sympathy from any quarter for the wrongs done to anybody during the troubles is a wasted exercise.
I don't expect any southern poster to disagree with me when I say that very few south of the border, and many too north of it, won't pay a blind bit of notice to anyone griping about past wrongs. This isn't pleasant news for many with genuine grievances but it can't be helped.
Trying to change public opinion is like trying to get a puppy's tail to wag a St. Bernard Dog.
The C4 documentary about Ballymurphy was three years ago?
Unless there's another new one upcoming?
I seem to remember it attracted quite a bit of attention at the time
Quote from: sid waddell on March 28, 2021, 03:01:45 PM
The C4 documentary about Ballymurphy was three years ago?
Unless there's another new one upcoming?
I seem to remember it attracted quite a bit of attention at the time
I'm going by the current thread that attracted a total of 14 posts.
It attracted 8 posts when it was first posted and Angelo resurrected it this week to announce that the findings were due in May. That, in turn led to an additional 5 posts, two of which were by Angelo. I'm saying hat the population north and south don't appear to be too interested in what happend in Ballymurphy in 1971.
Going by the commentary and we'll solely focus on the O6 at present.
Most people accept the DUP/UUP/TUV cannot be engaged with on this, their political leaders are not willing to entertain discussion. These parties play up to the gallery of the voters of rabid unionism and sectarianism, that's what they are about. They got 42.5% of the vote last time out. But it's a dwindling vote in terms of demographics. They are being outbred steadily over year and years. They don't want to be engaged, they can't be engaged - forget about it.
SF make up about 28% of the vote in the last election, let's just say for augment sake - all pro United Ireland. Now don't forget there's also a sizable dissident groupings up north who never vote, who never engage electorally who will come out for this vote. They don't seem to recognised in this regard yet but it's important not to forget them.
Now it's probably on to the most important area that middle ground.
It's hard to know how the SDLP will go, it's a very watery version of nationalism. Their voting base is a mixture of an older generation vote and affluent areas like South Belfast, they might like the status quo.
Alliance is another very iffy area. Some people would regard them as moderate unionist but I think they are more of a moderate grouping of all sorts of leanings. If you look at some of their candidates from nationalist areas last time around they have a number of candidates you would say could very well be from nationalist backgrounds. The default position that the Alliance is a unionist party is not something I necessarily agree with myself. I don't really see a huge difference to them and the watery version of nationalism you get with the SDLP.
Noreen Campbell - Fermanagh/South Tyrone
Stephen Donnelly - West Tyrone
Colm Cavanagh - Foyle
I think a lot of these votes are best up for grabs and it's best let the DUP/UUP/TUV dinosaurs make their mind up for them.
Greens/PBP etc might be more engaged by the prospect of an All Ireland basis.
The next assembly elections will be interesting to see if there has been a more notable shift in demographics
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Just as a point of order, they tried to repay this earlier but it was declined by the British government.
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
So, f**k all point in a border poll then
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 29, 2021, 04:22:44 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Just as a point of order, they tried to repay this earlier but it was declined by the British government.
Also, the NHS and free healthcare one bugs the absolute shite out of me. For those of us who work and pay National Insurance, it is not free. Free at the point of consumption but we still pay for it whether you use it or not.
UK will privatise large chunks of the NHS within the next 10 years.
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 29, 2021, 04:22:44 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Just as a point of order, they tried to repay this earlier but it was declined by the British government.
At 6% interest I'm not surprised they didn't want it back early.
Good to see them talking about economics because that will be the decider whenever the Referendum is run.
On the Health front 323,174 people waiting for an outpatient appt in the 6 on 31/12/20. C.700k in the 26.
I suspect ours would be higher but for over 40% of the population having private health insurance.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
This made me laugh
"Most people accept the DUP/UUP/TUV cannot be engaged with on this, their political leaders are not willing to entertain discussion. These parties play up to the gallery of the voters of rabid unionism and sectarianism, that's what they are about. They got 42.5% of the vote last time out. But it's a dwindling vote in terms of demographics."
A united Ireland is going to take a lot of work. There is no point in a deadline until the work is done.
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
Quote from: 93-DY-SAM on March 29, 2021, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 29, 2021, 04:22:44 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Just as a point of order, they tried to repay this earlier but it was declined by the British government.
Also, the NHS and free healthcare one bugs the absolute shite out of me. For those of us who work and pay National Insurance, it is not free. Free at the point of consumption but we still pay for it whether you use it or not.
That indeed is another painful one to have to endure. It seems for a lot of unionists and loyalists their argument against a UI is "Yeah but you have to pay €50 to see the doctor'.
They don't seem to grasp how the NHS works.
Quote from: Rossfan on March 29, 2021, 05:05:56 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 29, 2021, 04:22:44 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on March 29, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
I agree, plus take the cultural aspect out of the UI debate and you're left with the economics of the situation, in a few recent twitter skirmishes I've read people of (I assume) a Unionist background when faced with how the ROI is performing economically weren't long throwing up counterpoints: The ROI debt clock; the fact that just last week the ROI paid back the last installment of the UK funded bailout loan; health service v NHS / Vaccine performance.
Unionism isn't and won't be wowed by superior ROI economic performance - when they can still claim to be part of the 5th or 6th biggest economy in the world, eventho NI contributes very very little to it.
Just as a point of order, they tried to repay this earlier but it was declined by the British government.
At 6% interest I'm not surprised they didn't want it back early.
Good to see them talking about economics because that will be the decider whenever the Referendum is run.
On the Health front 323,174 people waiting for an outpatient appt in the 6 on 31/12/20. C.700k in the 26.
I suspect ours would be higher but for over 40% of the population having private health insurance.
Absolutely, from an economic point of view of course they'd want to see out the full term.
And on that note you are correct. You will have people on both sides who's views and vote will never be changed. The middle ground will be the deciding factor in this, and the back pocket will be the deciding factor in
that.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
Do you know many unionist people yourself? Also, what are you basing your 5% figure on?
Quote from: michaelg on March 29, 2021, 06:04:23 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
Do you know many unionist people yourself? Also, what are you basing your 5% figure on?
The fact that unionists vote en masse for the unashamed sectarianism of TUV/DUP/UUP.
Look at the triumphalism of unionist politics with the Pat Finucane case lately.
To say mainstream Unionist politics is from the gutter is the truth and that type of politics is what Unionists vote for.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 06:15:50 PM
Quote from: michaelg on March 29, 2021, 06:04:23 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 03:26:42 PM
The middle ground tends to be interested in facts. Things like standard of living and likely chaos.
And demographics don't change overnight.
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
You simply have no idea what you are dealing with.
Do you know many unionist people yourself? Also, what are you basing your 5% figure on?
The fact that unionists vote en masse for the unashamed sectarianism of TUV/DUP/UUP.
Look at the triumphalism of unionist politics with the Pat Finucane case lately.
To say mainstream Unionist politics is from the gutter is the truth and that type of politics is what Unionists vote for.
TUV vote is negligible and not sure that UUP can be tarred with same brush. Still not sure where you get your 5% figure from.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 05:50:50 PM
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
"And never will " is bullshit.
It will take work to make it work.
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
;D Say what you mean there Seafoid
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 05:50:50 PM
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
"And never will " is bullshit.
It will take work to make it work.
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
See this is just it. You clearly know nothing about the north. How have unionist politics progressed in the past 100 years. Have a look at the soldier F thing a few years back and tell me these are the type of people who can be engaged. Your level of ignorance is off the chart.
You saw Gregory Campbell last week did you? That's the sort of viewpoint that sees you top the poll and romp home in elections in unionist constituencies.
That's the sort of rhetoric that will have unionists vote enmasse for you. Can you name me a progressive unionist politician?
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 07:11:51 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 05:50:50 PM
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
"And never will " is bullshit.
It will take work to make it work.
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
See this is just it. You clearly know nothing about the north. How have unionist politics progressed in the past 100 years. Have a look at the soldier F thing a few years back and tell me these are the type of people who can be engaged. Your level of ignorance is off the chart.
You saw Gregory Campbell last week did you? That's the sort of viewpoint that sees you top the poll and romp home in elections in unionist constituencies.
That's the sort of rhetoric that will have unionists vote enmasse for you. Can you name me a progressive unionist politician?
Nobody in the South will vote for NI v 2.0 with the Shinners in charge and the Unionists as the Taigs. Get real.
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 07:29:31 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 07:11:51 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 05:50:50 PM
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
"And never will " is bullshit.
It will take work to make it work.
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
See this is just it. You clearly know nothing about the north. How have unionist politics progressed in the past 100 years. Have a look at the soldier F thing a few years back and tell me these are the type of people who can be engaged. Your level of ignorance is off the chart.
You saw Gregory Campbell last week did you? That's the sort of viewpoint that sees you top the poll and romp home in elections in unionist constituencies.
That's the sort of rhetoric that will have unionists vote enmasse for you. Can you name me a progressive unionist politician?
Nobody in the South will vote for NI v 2.0 with the Shinners in charge and the Unionists as the Taigs. Get real.
I've said it a few times before but I'm not sure the ROI citizenry would vote for a UI in the secrecy of the polling booth.
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 07:29:31 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 07:11:51 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 05:50:50 PM
I think you are showing plenty of ignorance here. Asking to engage with people are not willing to engage and never will be shows how little experience you have with unionism.
"And never will " is bullshit.
It will take work to make it work.
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
See this is just it. You clearly know nothing about the north. How have unionist politics progressed in the past 100 years. Have a look at the soldier F thing a few years back and tell me these are the type of people who can be engaged. Your level of ignorance is off the chart.
You saw Gregory Campbell last week did you? That's the sort of viewpoint that sees you top the poll and romp home in elections in unionist constituencies.
That's the sort of rhetoric that will have unionists vote enmasse for you. Can you name me a progressive unionist politician?
Nobody in the South will vote for NI v 2.0 with the Shinners in charge and the Unionists as the Taigs. Get real.
That type of scenario just shows how deluded you are and how little you know about the north.
Do you expect a United Ireland means An Garda Siochana colluding with Catholics to murder innocent Protestants?
It's a moronic argument you are putting forward without a shred of logic or intelligence.
Seafoid has shown he has plenty of knowledge of the North Tbf, and makes a lot of sense, if you dismiss Seafoid you're not going to have much luck getting many southerners on board, Angelo
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:51:24 PM
Seafoid has shown he has plenty of knowledge of the North Tbf, and makes a lot of sense, if you dismiss Seafoid quoit not going to have much luck getting many southerners on board
His argument is primitive and shows no understanding of the north.
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 08:53:22 PM
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:51:24 PM
Seafoid has shown he has plenty of knowledge of the North Tbf, and makes a lot of sense, if you dismiss Seafoid quoit not going to have much luck getting many southerners on board
His argument is primitive and shows no understanding of the north.
Genuinely curious, have you found that insulting people is effective in winning people over to your arguments?
You have views that many would agree with but your aggressive antagonistic approach , more often than not, undermines your argument
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
We can do without the likes of that cnut.
How do you get a free car?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 29, 2021, 09:13:43 PM
We can do without the likes of that cnut.
How do you get a free car?
thinking of moving up to the wee 6 ?
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:59:16 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
I said last week that there is an element of Sinn Fein's support in the Republic that would vote against unification
It's not surprising it would be the same up north
Sinn Fein might find it difficult to wean some of their supporters off the British teat, "take what you can it's the Brits money"
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:59:16 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
I was told on here that the south gives you more if you're a benefits user! Is it not the case?
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 29, 2021, 09:34:59 PM
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:59:16 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
I was told on here that the south gives you more if you're a benefits user! Is it not the case?
I think the benefits in the south are better, but I forgot about the lads on dla
Free car and taxed and insured!
The ones with it don't even drive
Quote from: ardtole on March 29, 2021, 10:42:35 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 29, 2021, 09:34:59 PM
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:59:16 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
I was told on here that the south gives you more if you're a benefits user! Is it not the case?
I think the benefits in the south are better, but I forgot about the lads on dla
Need to think about the package!
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 29, 2021, 11:25:38 PM
Quote from: ardtole on March 29, 2021, 10:42:35 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 29, 2021, 09:34:59 PM
Quote from: 6th sam on March 29, 2021, 08:59:16 PM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
Incredibly I've heard similar rationale from so-called republicans 🤦🏻♂️
I was told on here that the south gives you more if you're a benefits user! Is it not the case?
I think the benefits in the south are better, but I forgot about the lads on dla
Need to think about the package!
Shinners have always been about packages
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
Thank God. Disgrace what some c***ts are getting.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
I don't see how they are
Quote from: Rois on March 29, 2021, 07:04:53 PM
Quote from: seafoid on March 29, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
Unless you want the 6 counties to remain as a polarised kip.
;D Say what you mean there Seafoid
Polarised means 2 camps and limited crossover
Kip means lower productivity, lower investment, lower educational standards, high outwards migration, low economic dynamism.
NI has a lot of margin, IMO, if it can fix the above
Quote from: Saffrongael on March 30, 2021, 08:25:23 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
I don't see how they are
The conservatives have already started to tighten benefits, wait till the pandemic ends and savings need made.
Quote from: Saffrongael on March 30, 2021, 08:25:23 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
I don't see how they are
Won't happen. Benefits are an industry here. A lot has been made about PIP and how Draconian it is with people starving etc. They forget that many many people in the North are getting the equivalent of dole, child benefit, housing benefit, DLA etc. so if you have 3 or 4 weans you could be on a right earner.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 30, 2021, 08:46:55 AM
Quote from: Saffrongael on March 30, 2021, 08:25:23 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
I don't see how they are
Won't happen. Benefits are an industry here. A lot has been made about PIP and how Draconian it is with people starving etc. They forget that many many people in the North are getting the equivalent of dole, child benefit, housing benefit, DLA etc. so if you have 3 or 4 weans you could be on a right earner.
And if you get those kids diagnosed with some sort of condition that'll give you some more money!
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 30, 2021, 08:54:24 AM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 30, 2021, 08:46:55 AM
Quote from: Saffrongael on March 30, 2021, 08:25:23 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 30, 2021, 06:58:15 AM
Quote from: skeog on March 29, 2021, 08:57:27 PM
Met a man today all he was concerned about was his benefits and his car thats the problem.No free cars down south he said and the fraud squad would know when you went to the toilet.I couldnt believe that he thought this way his benefits before a UI.To make it worse he would be a strong SF supporter.If he is thinking like that what hope have we of winning BP imo.
The free cars are coming to end up here.
I don't see how they are
Won't happen. Benefits are an industry here. A lot has been made about PIP and how Draconian it is with people starving etc. They forget that many many people in the North are getting the equivalent of dole, child benefit, housing benefit, DLA etc. so if you have 3 or 4 weans you could be on a right earner.
And if you get those kids diagnosed with some sort of condition that'll give you some more money!
Thats the home run for a lot of people
How many people do you know to be abusing the welfare system?
How many "career welfare" people vote?
Quote from: smort on March 30, 2021, 09:54:40 AM
How many people do you know to be abusing the welfare system?
The top echelons of the Tory party are creaming the welfare system in a big way or is it OK to give vastly inflated contracts to party donors and go hammer wee Sammy for claiming a DLA car when his back isn't as bad as he's letting on?
Quote from: Rossfan on March 30, 2021, 11:00:45 AM
How many "career welfare" people vote?
local politicians are fighting their corner at every turn, which makes me think quite a lot of them ?
A quick google of a former local independent councillor on our council who was well known as the man to speak to regarding welfare, shows he ran a "Consultants & Advice Agency". So basically he charged them a fee plus the promise of a vote in return for filling in their forms (& making sure they were accepted ;))
I'm all for social welfare BTW, if people need it, they should get it in a decent society BUT there are some amount of assholes ripping the piss.
Especially the social welfare recipients who tell you they're "Farmers" ::)
Some people rip the piss with the DLA cars. You get c***ts running about in brand new motors cos their young one has some mild form of autism or some such, while people with arthritis in absolute agony are told they're entitled to nothing and fit to work!
Quote from: general_lee on March 30, 2021, 12:51:55 PM
Some people rip the piss with the DLA cars. You get c***ts running about in brand new motors cos their young one has some mild form of autism or some such, while people with arthritis in absolute agony are told they're entitled to nothing and fit to work!
Mind the time Alex Maskey turned up to Stormont in his DLA car.
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 29, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
I know you're around, Angelo, so any chance of a reply?
(Thanks in advance)
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 04:38:13 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 29, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
I know you're around, Angelo, so any chance of a reply?
(Thanks in advance)
Will only answer when he has an answer, generally allows the page to disappear and then come back with another post
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 04:38:13 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 29, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
I know you're around, Angelo, so any chance of a reply?
(Thanks in advance)
90% of nationalists are moderate.
Quote from: Angelo on March 30, 2021, 06:24:19 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 04:38:13 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 29, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
I know you're around, Angelo, so any chance of a reply?
(Thanks in advance)
90% of nationalists are moderate.
Righto so.
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 30, 2021, 06:24:19 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 04:38:13 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 29, 2021, 10:40:21 PM
Quote from: Angelo on March 29, 2021, 03:57:09 PM
Moderate unionism represents about 5% of unionism.
Does that mean you think only 5% of Unionists are "moderate", which most people would take to mean reasonable, open to compromise, willing to see the other side etc?
If so, what percentage would you ascribe to nationalism?
I know you're around, Angelo, so any chance of a reply?
(Thanks in advance)
90% of nationalists are moderate.
Righto so.
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nope.
I think you're deluded if you think otherwise. Look at the political commentary of the largest unionist parties. When bigoted dinosaurs like Poots, Campbell, Wilson, Tom Elliot and Rosemary Barton are what you offer us then I can take we can say quite fairly that those figures are accurate.
Trying to equate both sides are as bad as each other is palpable nonsense, look at the 12th of July every year if you want to encapsulate unionism. Vocal and triumphant bigotry.
Quote from: trailer on March 30, 2021, 04:37:59 PM
Quote from: general_lee on March 30, 2021, 12:51:55 PM
Some people rip the piss with the DLA cars. You get c***ts running about in brand new motors cos their young one has some mild form of autism or some such, while people with arthritis in absolute agony are told they're entitled to nothing and fit to work!
Mind the time Alex Maskey turned up to Stormont in his DLA car.
I do indeed. A **** move.
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atangledweb.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F07%2FLa%2BMon%2B_6.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
A majority of nationalists only supported that party after they changed course from those things.
Unionism hasn't changed course since Cromwell and regard not changing course as a strength.
I can easily find a quote from a nationalist condemning La Mon, even likely from SF. Where is the Unionist that has condemned the Plantation of Ulster?
More green and orange politics. Doomed
The bigotry of Evil Genius simmering here.
Of course the IRA did bad things, that's what happens in a conflict but the sectarian foundations of the orange state in the north and the unwillingness of the British and Free State governments to do anything on it is what caused the Provisional IRA to form.
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Unionists brought the Gun into Irish Politics. I despise violence, but Unionists are not innocent in all of this and even today many Unionists hint at a return to violence. Very similar tactics to what Trump was at. The Unionist community needs to wake up.
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on March 31, 2021, 12:37:46 AM
More green and orange politics. Doomed
Well you half right, orange politics is indeed doomed.
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Trailer doesn't really do discussion or engagement.
Mud slinging is his only known code of interaction.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 10:53:58 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Unionists brought the Gun into Irish Politics. I despise violence, but Unionists are not innocent in all of this and even today many Unionists hint at a return to violence. Very similar tactics to what Trump was at. The Unionist community needs to wake up.
Nobody was saying that they were. The point being discussed was the assertion that Nationalists were intrisically moderate, despite the fairly obvious point that most vote for a party intrically linked to terrorisrt activity and atrocities.
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
Quote from: michaelg on March 31, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 10:53:58 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Unionists brought the Gun into Irish Politics. I despise violence, but Unionists are not innocent in all of this and even today many Unionists hint at a return to violence. Very similar tactics to what Trump was at. The Unionist community needs to wake up.
Nobody was saying that they were. The point being discussed was the assertion that Nationalists were intrisically moderate, despite the fairly obvious point that most vote for a party intrically linked to terrorisrt activity and atrocities.
Lots of Nationalists are moderate. A huge amount were comfortable the GFA. There was no chat of a border poll and I would say I had an aspiration for a UI but no desire to push for it. The actions of "moderate" Unionists. Brexit, the disdain in which the Irish language was treated, how Irishness in general was viewed changed the game. Nationalists even moderate ones began to see that The DUP and others had no notion of accommodating ordinary Nationalists in a post conflict NI. The DUP and their voters will have to take responsibility for their actions. Chickens are coming home to roost and moderate Nationalism wants a more balanced and fairer society. At this stage that doesn't look achievable in NI.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
What did you think of Mandela, Trailer?
Usual one-sided assessments of a complicated situation. blood on many hands stretching back beyond 1921.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was
'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
So Trailer thinks Mandela was a monster.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
My point is that Bobby Storey was a person of significant influence in the IRA, this is widely accepted.
From this article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981)
Studying his history, Storey, who was the IRA's director of intelligence in the eyes of those who knew that world well, was "a planner, operator and an enforcer"
What was he planning? Birthday Parties? Easter Egg Hunts? Fancy Dress competitions?
The IRA committed mass murder which is widely accepted. I don't think any of those who were members of the IRA can then claim they weren't involved in
those events. It's the Nuremberg defence.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
My point is that Bobby Storey was a person of significant influence in the IRA, this is widely accepted.
From this article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981)
Studying his history, Storey, who was the IRA's director of intelligence in the eyes of those who knew that world well, was "a planner, operator and an enforcer"
What was he planning? Birthday Parties? Easter Egg Hunts? Fancy Dress competitions?
The IRA committed mass murder which is widely accepted. I don't think any of those who were members of the IRA can then claim they weren't involved in those events. It's the Nuremberg defence.
Feel free to come back to me with any evidence. Anything at all. An opinion piece with 'anonymous sources' is not evidence.
If you feel justified to call somebody a mass murderer with no basis then continue doing so. It won't lose me any sleep. Just thought I would point out that its probably not something anyone should do.
Then again he did have a significant prison sentence. Obviously a mass murderer on that basis alone.
I'll continue to not call people mass murderers without evidence, you continue to do the opposite. We're both happy.
Although you've now taken it to another level of insinuating that every single member of the IRA is a mass murderer. (See Catholic Church analogy)
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
My point is that Bobby Storey was a person of significant influence in the IRA, this is widely accepted.
From this article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981)
Studying his history, Storey, who was the IRA's director of intelligence in the eyes of those who knew that world well, was "a planner, operator and an enforcer"
What was he planning? Birthday Parties? Easter Egg Hunts? Fancy Dress competitions?
The IRA committed mass murder which is widely accepted. I don't think any of those who were members of the IRA can then claim they weren't involved in those events. It's the Nuremberg defence.
You'll have no problem at all in stating that Michael Collins, James Connolly and or indeed as Angelo suggests, Nelson Mandela, were just mass murderers too then?
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 01:33:16 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
My point is that Bobby Storey was a person of significant influence in the IRA, this is widely accepted.
From this article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981)
Studying his history, Storey, who was the IRA's director of intelligence in the eyes of those who knew that world well, was "a planner, operator and an enforcer"
What was he planning? Birthday Parties? Easter Egg Hunts? Fancy Dress competitions?
The IRA committed mass murder which is widely accepted. I don't think any of those who were members of the IRA can then claim they weren't involved in those events. It's the Nuremberg defence.
Feel free to come back to me with any evidence. Anything at all. An opinion piece with 'anonymous sources' is not evidence.
If you feel justified to call somebody a mass murderer with no basis then continue doing so. It won't lose me any sleep. Just thought I would point out that its probably not something anyone should do.
Then again he did have a significant prison sentence. Obviously a mass murderer on that basis alone.
I'll continue to not call people mass murderers without evidence, you continue to do the opposite. We're both happy.
Although you've now taken it to another level of insinuating that every single member of the IRA is a mass murderer. (See Catholic Church analogy)
The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation who's sole aim was to remove Britain from Ireland by force. I don't get the comparison if I'm honest.
Great to see trailer squirming here.
There's a real toxicity to his views on here and no harm at all for everyone to see how hollow and cynical a poster he is.
Quote from: Applesisapples on March 26, 2021, 01:31:02 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 11:03:59 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 09:06:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on March 25, 2021, 08:43:47 PM
Quote from: charlieTully on March 25, 2021, 08:28:26 PM
Is there any actual possibility of discussion on how a potential new Ireland might look, or is that not possible without a frank honest discussion on the past?
The fantasy of a glorious "new" Ireland is based on the fantastical premise that Unionists will simply fall in and accept it
I dare say some Protestant Unionists had this same fantasy about Irish Catholics in the six counties
Some will accept it
Many will not
And thus the six counties are destined to always be afflicted with division and turmoil
Doesn't matter which jurisdiction they're under, they will always be afflicted because it's a classic territorial dispute where one section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of one state
And another section of the population believes it is an inherent state of nature for the territory which makes up the six counties to be part of a different state
You can't square that, somebody has to lose
The only alternative is that people learn to forget about Irish nationalism and British nationalism and think about forging a society that works for all
The majority of voters in the six counties vote for parties for whom that is not a priority
The best thing that could happen to NI is for every union Jack and tricolour in the place to be burned
Your conclusion only leaves one loser though. Us as per standard. It reads of accept your lot northern nationalists, maybe this is not your intention.
When competing nationalisms divide a society everybody loses
What's your solution?
A functioning society is more important than fwegs
Good man. Fwegs? My solution is lay out how an all island health system would look, how education would look, taxation, housing. How are a minority incorporated and given absolute equality. What fwegs and emblems would look like. Giving those whose culture is orangism and parades etc assurances this can continue in a safe manner. East West copereration. What's yours ? The status quo?
.
My solution is that people in NI vote out the extremists on both sides and elect people who will work together to create an equal society
A united Ireland will come when it's ready to come
And it's not remotely ready to come yet
What will happen is that as the sabre rattling about a border poll ramps up, the extremists on both sides will benefit more and more because both sides will retreat more and more into competing nationalisms
Irish nationalists will retreat towards SF, British nationalists will retreat towards the DUP
The centre, whatever is there of it, will not hold
Vote out the DUP and SF and elect SDLP, Alliance, PBP and moderate Unionists
Sorry Sid, I don't know from where you hail but you are posting facile errant nonsense that shows no understanding of the 6 counties or the experience of nationalists in a hostile state. There is a reason why SF are so popular and it has to do with their effective delivery on the ground for people in need. The SDLP had years of a head start but ignored working class communities. Alliance is built on the highly effective foundation of Naomi Long, and a soft unionism that does not like the DUP or the UUP which is now DUP Lite.
Having said all of that and not to totally forget my lived experience I want to see a civilised conversation that does not harp back to the perceived injustices of the past. Nationalists are capable for doing that, our problem is a rump of unionism that sees any change as sellout.
Not sure if 'Nationalists are capable for doing that', when some posters on here are referring back to the Plantation of Ulster.
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 01:41:30 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 01:33:16 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:55:57 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:24:46 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 12:01:36 PM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:52:09 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 31, 2021, 11:17:33 AM
Quote from: trailer on March 31, 2021, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: ThroughTheLaces on March 31, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 11:32:06 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on March 30, 2021, 11:07:09 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:41:09 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 10:24:41 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on March 30, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Quote from: Evil Genius on March 30, 2021, 06:39:06 PM
90% of Nationalists are moderate, but only 5% of Unionists.
Such a mindset would be laughable, were it not reflective of the whole problem.
You know, "The Politics of Themmuns", exhibit No.1 'Angelo' ::)
Nationalism is intrinsically moderate, as all it wants is a normal democratic country.
Unionism is the opposite of moderate, it wants to extend colonialism, when it couldn't win by force in most of the Ireland, it seized part of the country as a sectarian statelet.
Unionist political parties offer no moderation and many people from a PUL background are drifting to Alliance as a consequence.
Ah right, so "Themmuns" it is, then.
Glad we got that sorted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Mon_restaurant_bombing)
I said that nationalism was intrinsicially moderate, I did not say that all those who purported to be nationalists were moderate. RTÉ have been replaying the Reeling in the Years and I noted La Mon, one of the most disgraceful events in Irish history was in that year.
The difference being that 90%+ of nationalists do not justify La Mon.
If I said something that was not correct, then I'm sure you can refute it. I did not refer to "Themmuns" ,
Yet the large majority of Nationalists in NI vote for the party which is inextricably linked with the organisation which carried out La Mon.
And the Enniskillen bombing.
And the nakedly sectarian massacres at Tullyvallen, Darkley and Kingsmill.
And the abduction, torture, murder and disappearing of Jean McConville.
And Patsy Gillespie.
And a thousand other atrocities.
None of which justifies or condones one iota the myriad atrocities committed by their (so-called) "Loyalist" counterparts, but come on, surely you haven't forgotten what the IRA and INLA etc did in the name of Nationalism?
I mean, at a time when SF are falling over themselves to be seen "honouring" mass murderers like Bobby Storey?
I guess "moderate" means something different where you come from.
Great. Another Jamie Bryson.
Did the IRA commit multiple atrocities?
Are SF inextricably linked with, and supportive of, the IRA campaign?
Do the majority of Nationalists vote SF?
You don't need to be Jamie Bryson to ask those questions.
Though maybe you do need his mindset when required to answer them i.e. play the man instead of the ball.
Unless, of course, you're talking about a different Jamie Bryson from the one who got a massive 167 votes in the last election he fought in his own Bangor West backyard? (Equates to 2% of the vote, btw)
Listen, I'm not speaking for the majority of Unionists who vote for the DUP, nor do I condone those who do - I'm proud to say I've never given that mob so much as a 9th preference vote.
But just look at this picture and tell me that one side votes for extremists, while the other votes for moderates:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F45552000%2Fjpg%2F_45552995_pa226bodypaisleylaugh.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Them tell me which is which... ::)
Was Bobby Storey convicted of mass murder?
Was Stalin?
Was Churchill? Was Mick Collins?
Exactly. If a conviction in a court is what it takes then that's a pretty unrealistic bar.
It was a simple question...answered by questions. Nice one.
I don't normally go around calling someone a mass murderer as a matter of fact without having anything to base it on. But that's just me.
Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence. And all the intelligence available points to him being a significant player in the IRA. He also had a very typical Republican/IRA send off.
Weird hill to choose to die on.
OK, I don't think there is anything I can argue with there.
Two questions though:
1) What was Bobby's significant prison sentence for?
2) Why would you think he wouldn't have had a 'very typical Republican/IRA send off', when he was both a Republican and a former IRA member?
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Is it that he wasn't a Mass murderer?
The point I am making is that he was an IRA member. Someone else actually called him a mass murderer, it wasn't me but anyway, that organisation was responsible for Mass Murder. The excuse that I was only following orders or only had a bit part to play didn't work at the Nuremburg trials and I don't think it'll work here. That would be my view and I don't think if you were / are a member of the IRA you can seriously claim to not have supported murder at Ballygawley, La Mon, Warrington, Narrow Water, Shankill rd.
When I stated he was being called a mass murderer your response was 'Well now Bobby did serve a significant prison sentence.'. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make there to be honest.
There are many, many things that Republicans can feel shame about, not limited to what you've mentioned above. Nobody can, or should, deny that.
The fact that he has no conviction for murder is the point I was making. Do I know what he was/wasn't involved in? Of course I don't, in the same way that you nor anyone else on here does. What we do have is facts however, yet that seems insufficient for some.
By your own logic, given the behaviour of the Catholic Church, we are safe to accuse all priests of being paedophiles, given they were all part of the Catholic Church. But that would be ridiculous because we know that's not the case.
Dunno if this is a logical argument given The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation. I don't think anyone can say that the IRA had some good people who were involved. I can't really understand how anyone can stand over what the IRA and it's members did. I often think of the young children murdered, what must their final moments on this earth have been like? The fear in their hearts, the loneliness as their lives slipped away, young innocent children, while a few IRA men hid in a safe house, back slapping one another on a job well done.
But look you have your view and I have mine.
It's a perfectly reasonable comparison as you're simply defending the statement that he was a mass murderer simply because he was an IRA member yet has no convictions for murder, let alone mass murder. But apparently having a significant prison sentence means you must be a mass murderer. I did not know that until now. Every day's a school day.
You've gone off down a road that no one asked you to. I've agreed with you on the incidents you have named, and nobody in their right mind would disagree. Your emotional description of innocent people losing their lives adds nothing to the debate and doesn't strengthen your argument in any way.
I can't imagine there was anybody slapping each other on the back for a 'job well done' that involved innocent children, or others.
All of your theatrics can be equally applied to the young children who's lives slipped away at the hands of the British Army. Nobody is clean in this and to pretend otherwise is deluded.
I do have my view and you do have yours. I'll continue to refrain from calling people mass murderers whilst you'll coninue to justify it, regardless of evidence.
We're different like that.
My point is that Bobby Storey was a person of significant influence in the IRA, this is widely accepted.
From this article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bobby-storey-the-ira-s-planner-and-enforcer-who-stayed-in-the-shadows-1.4292981)
Studying his history, Storey, who was the IRA's director of intelligence in the eyes of those who knew that world well, was "a planner, operator and an enforcer"
What was he planning? Birthday Parties? Easter Egg Hunts? Fancy Dress competitions?
The IRA committed mass murder which is widely accepted. I don't think any of those who were members of the IRA can then claim they weren't involved in those events. It's the Nuremberg defence.
Feel free to come back to me with any evidence. Anything at all. An opinion piece with 'anonymous sources' is not evidence.
If you feel justified to call somebody a mass murderer with no basis then continue doing so. It won't lose me any sleep. Just thought I would point out that its probably not something anyone should do.
Then again he did have a significant prison sentence. Obviously a mass murderer on that basis alone.
I'll continue to not call people mass murderers without evidence, you continue to do the opposite. We're both happy.
Although you've now taken it to another level of insinuating that every single member of the IRA is a mass murderer. (See Catholic Church analogy)
The Catholic Church isn't a terrorist organisation who's sole aim was to remove Britain from Ireland by force. I don't get the comparison if I'm honest.
That's fine, forget the analogy. There is a lot more to that post that you've conveniently decided to ignore, instead solely responding to four bracketed words.
But that's fine too I suppose. It's who you are.
Bear with me for a more detailed response, I will need a while to read through all the evidence you've sent through.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/una-mullally-taoiseach-s-bland-nothings-on-united-ireland-fail-us-all-1.4522302
Good article on Micheal Martin's pathetic contribution to the United Ireland debate.
The two shades of blue stripey effect on the screen when you have big long multiple quotes would make a very nice wallpaper, especially for a Dub
Anybody know where I could get that pattern?
Angelo Una is a one trick pony like ML moaning all the time about Govt policy.Share a few Stephen Collins articles as he is the opposite.By the way you made no comment on my prominent SF supporter more important his benefits free car,free education,free health etc?.
Una is woke and the woke SF supporters will drop SF like a hot snot when they work out that you can't support SF and remain woke
Micheál Martin in particular has been busily advocating "the Seamus Mallon approach" to a border poll - an approach which is deeply anti-GFA. As the below column puts it, it is an approach which deliberately places an "impossible obstacle" in the way of Irish Unity being achieved.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EyM3v86WUAAyLv4?format=jpg&name=medium)
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
Quote from: grounded on April 05, 2021, 01:39:25 PM
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
This is a good article which breaks down roughly what you could expect. Note this is before last years election so SF would be higher based on more recent figures.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/ (https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/)
Quote from: RedHand88 on April 05, 2021, 02:03:12 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 05, 2021, 01:39:25 PM
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
This is a good article which breaks down roughly what you could expect. Note this is before last years election so SF would be higher based on more recent figures.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/ (https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/)
SF will be the political vehicle to get a United Ireland. Where they go from there will be anyone's guess. They will have their go at power soon down south, they are blessed on that front as they can hardly do worse than what FFG have presided over the past 15 years or so. There is going to be an assembly election either this year or next, there's a very strong chance SF will be the largest party after it. There could well be a general election sometime next year down south and I think it's inevitable that SF will be the largest party down south and likely to take the lead role in govt after that.
When or if that happens is when the wheels will be in motion for a border poll, there are plenty political factions on this island on both sides of the border opposed to that poll but I think the will is there with the people for it.
The article Snapchap posted perfectly displays the duplicity by Martin and FF. It's obvious to anyone who has a brain than they do not want reunification as it takes away their grip of power they are desperately trying to cling onto, the prospect of reform makes them quiver in their boots and anyone who buys the strawman arguments about respecting unionism really need to give themselves a shake.
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
Quote from: RedHand88 on April 05, 2021, 02:03:12 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 05, 2021, 01:39:25 PM
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
This is a good article which breaks down roughly what you could expect. Note this is before last years election so SF would be higher based on more recent figures.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/ (https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/)
The article is assuming the 6 will be incorporated into the 26?
Also when we have an All Ireland State Unionists/Ulster British or whatever they'll be called then will be a minority in the 6 Cos.
What exactly would SF have to offer if an AI State has been set up?
What kind of Parliament/Congress/Assembly will there be?
As for the next election in the 26... latest opinion polls would suggest
FG 48
SF 47
FF 18
We'd be looking at a 4 party Coalition :o
However a lot could happen in 3 and a half years.....
Quote from: Rossfan on April 05, 2021, 03:08:03 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on April 05, 2021, 02:03:12 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 05, 2021, 01:39:25 PM
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
This is a good article which breaks down roughly what you could expect. Note this is before last years election so SF would be higher based on more recent figures.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/ (https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/)
The article is assuming the 6 will be incorporated into the 26?
Also when we have an All Ireland State Unionists/Ulster British or whatever they'll be called then will be a minority in the 6 Cos.
What exactly would SF have to offer if an AI State has been set up?
What kind of Parliament/Congress/Assembly will there be?
As for the next election in the 26... latest opinion polls would suggest
FG 48
SF 47
FF 18
We'd be looking at a 4 party Coalition :o
However a lot could happen in 3 and a half years.....
Not a hope either FG or FF have more than SF next time around.
Both FF and FG are toxic to most of the u50s. People want change and will vote for it.
Quote from: Angelo on April 05, 2021, 05:18:11 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on April 05, 2021, 03:08:03 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on April 05, 2021, 02:03:12 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 05, 2021, 01:39:25 PM
Yep, expect more of the same as the calls for a border poll become stronger. But thems not the rules.
Hypothetically if there was a united Ireland tomorrow what would be each Parties % representation in any Dail. Obviously there would probably be an amalgamation of parties. But as it stands now what would it be?
This is a good article which breaks down roughly what you could expect. Note this is before last years election so SF would be higher based on more recent figures.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/ (https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/01/26/what-would-a-32-county-dail-eireann-look-like/)
The article is assuming the 6 will be incorporated into the 26?
Also when we have an All Ireland State Unionists/Ulster British or whatever they'll be called then will be a minority in the 6 Cos.
What exactly would SF have to offer if an AI State has been set up?
What kind of Parliament/Congress/Assembly will there be?
As for the next election in the 26... latest opinion polls would suggest
FG 48
SF 47
FF 18
We'd be looking at a 4 party Coalition :o
However a lot could happen in 3 and a half years.....
Not a hope either FG or FF have more than SF next time around.
Both FF and FG are toxic to most of the u50s. People want change and will vote for it.
SF won't give them change.
You were probably watching Bob the Builder when Gilmore declared "it's Labour's way or Frankfurt's way"
SF want power and cars. They won't change the system.
Don't make me laugh
Neoliberalism betrays everyone. FF, Labour and SF.
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
The Department of Finance won't change.
SF won't change anything.
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 09:34:25 AM
The Department of Finance won't change.
SF won't change anything.
Spoken like a FFG zealot not wanting to cough it up.
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
But politicians on this island don't. They make themselves wealthy, a lot of them are landlords and business owners with vested interests in policies that benefit them and their class.
I'd agree the salary thing is gimmicky, what would be interesting is if they do get power and we can then judge if they make moves to reform the pay for political office holders and their advisors.
Quote from: Angelo on April 06, 2021, 10:03:55 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 09:34:25 AM
The Department of Finance won't change.
SF won't change anything.
Spoken like a FFG zealot not wanting to cough it up.
What does that mean? None of the parties understand what is going on.
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 10:17:15 AM
Quote from: Angelo on April 06, 2021, 10:03:55 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 09:34:25 AM
The Department of Finance won't change.
SF won't change anything.
Spoken like a FFG zealot not wanting to cough it up.
What does that mean? None of the parties understand what is going on.
It's the type of line parroted by FFG about the hypotheticals of SF being in govt. FFG have ran the 26 for a century, there is precedent there on all their failures. SF should be judged on their performance when or if they get power. The prospect of it seems to worry the FFG grass roots, people know why it does.
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about it. Politicians are on obscene money and expenses anyway.
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about turning your nose up at €10k and handing it back to the taxpayer.
Quote from: Armagh18 on April 06, 2021, 10:22:45 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about it. Politicians are on obscene money and expenses anyway.
The basic salary for an MLA is £49,500
MP from 1 April 2020 is £81,932
The basic salary of a backbench TD is €96,189
You find that obscene?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 06, 2021, 10:42:29 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on April 06, 2021, 10:22:45 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about it. Politicians are on obscene money and expenses anyway.
The basic salary for an MLA is £49,500
MP from 1 April 2020 is £81,932
The basic salary of a backbench TD is €96,189
You find that obscene?
Beyond obscene for the work they do!
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 10:39:34 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about turning your nose up at €10k and handing it back to the taxpayer.
They'd only be getting €4k of that to take home I'd estimate.
And SF have plenty of $£ to look after them.
Quote from: Rossfan on April 06, 2021, 11:06:45 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 10:39:34 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about turning your nose up at €10k and handing it back to the taxpayer.
They'd only be getting €4k of that to take home I'd estimate.
And SF have plenty of $£ to look after them.
Oh ffs ::)
Hit a nerve did we😃😄😁
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%25C3%25A9in-is-the-richest-political-party-in-ireland-1.4193124%3fmode=amp
Quote from: Armagh18 on April 06, 2021, 11:00:10 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 06, 2021, 10:42:29 AM
Quote from: Armagh18 on April 06, 2021, 10:22:45 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about it. Politicians are on obscene money and expenses anyway.
The basic salary for an MLA is £49,500
MP from 1 April 2020 is £81,932
The basic salary of a backbench TD is €96,189
You find that obscene?
Beyond obscene for the work they do!
I've actually no idea of the normal day to day of what an elected rep does so couldn't comment on the work they do, I suppose for the MLA's they had it free for 3 years.
Can anyone put up what they should be doing?
Why was there no 'I wouldn't vote' option?
Quote from: Rossfan on April 06, 2021, 11:06:45 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 10:39:34 AM
Quote from: 6th sam on April 06, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Quote from: Snapchap on April 06, 2021, 07:33:44 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 06, 2021, 06:55:27 AM
SF want power and cars.
Of course they want power. What would be the point in a political party that didn't?
And as for cars, didn't most, if not all, SF's TDs recently sign their annual salary increase waivers, returning just short of €10k eack back to the state?
I think SF not taking their full salary is gimmicky. Our politicians have a difficult job and have important responsibility and influence . If they improve employment, homelessness, education , health , they've earned a decent salary in my opinion.
Nothing gimmicky about turning your nose up at €10k and handing it back to the taxpayer.
They'd only be getting €4k of that to take home I'd estimate.
And SF have plenty of $£ to look after them.
Give up 4K of your take home pay then. A ridiculous statement
I don't belong to any very rich organisation :-\
I find it odd that free staters are more upset at a man leaving SF his inheritance than they are at decades of FFG TDs profiting through corruption, abuse of power and dodgy dealings.
You won't find a quisling like Rossfan raising objections to Micheal Martin taking bungs from property developers but SF TDs giving back a pay rise triggers him.
A bizarre outlook.
Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.
Quote from: trailer on April 06, 2021, 06:40:00 PM
Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.
Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!
Quote from: Tubberman on April 06, 2021, 06:51:08 PM
Quote from: trailer on April 06, 2021, 06:40:00 PM
Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.
Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!
Why would they when FFG will probably hand it over to Larry Goodman.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 06, 2021, 06:51:08 PM
Quote from: trailer on April 06, 2021, 06:40:00 PM
Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.
Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!
That right, yeah?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Et3nKE4XMAMRD6B?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuHDGjAWQAArj3u?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtyhMOAXYAYYlRN?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtzoW9KXUAErPKz?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Et3IG8nXMAEfsdJ?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Et2ep2FWgAEUjhs?format=jpg&name=large)
That's just the first few SF TD's I checked. I'm sure I could source more of these photos if you like?
Poor auld Trailer. ;D
Good Lord, Eilis could be getting the road when Comrade Harris reads that!
https://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/moving-the-goalposts-on-irish-unity-now-is-moral-cowardice-40272586.html
Now, though, it appears that some, alarmed by the prospect of a potentially destabilising Border poll in the next few years, want to change the rules, arguing instead that a simple majority should no longer be sufficient for a change to the North's constitutional status.
Such a retreat was signalled by former SDLP deputy leader, the late Seamus Mallon, in his 2019 memoir.
In it, he argued that "the GFA metric of 50 per cent plus one for unity will not give us the kind of agreed Ireland we seek". Fearing the violence that could erupt, North and South, in the event of a narrow majority for Irish unity, Mallon came to the conclusion that the "parallel consent" principle which applies in the Assembly - which requires a majority of both unionists and nationalists, or a "weighted majority" including at least 40pc of both - should be applied to the constitutional question itself.
Otherwise, he warned, Northern Ireland risked replicating the conditions at the start of its existence, when nationalists were resentfully forced to remain in the UK against their will.
Mallon was right. But only half right. Such a scenario might indeed turn unionists into an angry minority on the island; but changing the rules to appease them would also incentivise the worst elements in loyalism to threaten trouble. As for nationalists, changing the rules to stop them from achieving a united Ireland, even after they'd won a Border poll, would simply cement the old poisonous idea that peaceful change is impossible.
It's not surprising that Mallon's plan has been embraced by many unionists who, whilst pooh-poohing the idea that a Border poll could deliver a majority for Irish unity any time soon, clearly aren't minded to take a risk.
They like the additional safeguard that "parallel consent" would offer, for a little while longer at least. In practice, though, it would be a false consolation. Once nationalists gained a majority, the end of Northern Ireland would simply be a matter of time.
......................................................................................................................................................................
What stops them from acknowledging it (the cynicism of 'parallel consent -- my italics') is fear. Fear of violence. Fear of contamination from a virus of sectarian militancy spreading south in future. Those fears are not unreasonable, given Irish history. Faced with that risk, people in the 26 counties would be entitled to decide that a unitary state was not for them, even if the North had earlier voted in favour.
....................................................................................................
Perhaps what ultimately frightens those in the Republic who are hitching a ride on the late Seamus Mallon's coat tails in the hope of preventing a Border poll in the short or medium term, is the very idea of change. Abhorrently, many commentators have even taken to arguing against Irish unity on the risible grounds that people "up there" are not as authentically Irish as the people "down here".
"I will never consider them as Irish as I am," one columnist wrote recently. On social media, nastier things still are spewed by anonymous trolls.
.......................................................................................................
It's perfectly possible to make reasoned arguments against a united Ireland without painting everyone in the North as some kind of lesser species who mustn't be allowed to sit on the best furniture lest they leave a stain or a smell. People who know better should leave that toxicity to Twitter.
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
A January survey by pollster LucidTalk found 47 per cent of respondents in Northern Ireland wanted the region to remain in the UK, with 42 per cent favouring it becoming part of a united Ireland — an outcome that shows the criteria for a referendum are currently not met. The more deeply researched Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, conducted annually by Queen's and Ulster universities since 1998, have consistently found support for unification at a little over 20 per cent.
This is for the Shinners
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.
"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast. Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter.
If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."
If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.
https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 07:09:17 AM
This is for the Shinners
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.
"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast. Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter.
If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."
If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.
https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo
There was a good letter in the Irish Times last week about how the style of Micheal Martin's contribution on the Claire Byrne programme was exactly what was needed
I found it very hard to disagree with
Boring politician speak on an issue like this is much underrated
The alternative is hysterical hyper-partisan nonsense which perpetuates an us and them situation, and heightens the chances of killing
If you want to persuade moderate unionists they have nothing to fear, people like Micheal Martin and Neale Richmond are who you want
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/bland-nothings-on-united-ireland-1.4523145
I think that all sounds reasonable Seafoid. But its about having those conversations now.. not trying to brush the idea under the carpet or leaving it for the younger generation coming through in 10 or 20 years to deal with.
Talk of needing a concensus before a poll can even be called(noble as that notion may sound ) in both communities in NI, is just a further example of that type of lazy thinking.
P.s. i loved the Down clip. Fabulous team.
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 07:09:17 AM
This is for the Shinners
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.
"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast. Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter.
If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."
If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.
https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo
I can't view the article you've posted up, I think there is merit in the quotes from the article that you have raised. It is the middle ground who will decide the outcome based on real life daily issues rather than identity politics. I don't think anyone is actually arguing for a border poll right now, however, rather that proper engagement begin on the preparations for it. If this takes 10 years then it is not so important when it is held but that it is properly discussed and debated.
However for a certain section of people there will never be a right time and they don't want to have to deal with it, they'd rather let it be somebody else's problem.
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
Quote from: grounded on April 06, 2021, 09:52:22 PM
Good Lord, Eilis could be getting the road when Comrade Harris reads that!
https://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/moving-the-goalposts-on-irish-unity-now-is-moral-cowardice-40272586.html
Now, though, it appears that some, alarmed by the prospect of a potentially destabilising Border poll in the next few years, want to change the rules, arguing instead that a simple majority should no longer be sufficient for a change to the North's constitutional status.
Such a retreat was signalled by former SDLP deputy leader, the late Seamus Mallon, in his 2019 memoir.
In it, he argued that "the GFA metric of 50 per cent plus one for unity will not give us the kind of agreed Ireland we seek". Fearing the violence that could erupt, North and South, in the event of a narrow majority for Irish unity, Mallon came to the conclusion that the "parallel consent" principle which applies in the Assembly - which requires a majority of both unionists and nationalists, or a "weighted majority" including at least 40pc of both - should be applied to the constitutional question itself.
Otherwise, he warned, Northern Ireland risked replicating the conditions at the start of its existence, when nationalists were resentfully forced to remain in the UK against their will.
Mallon was right. But only half right. Such a scenario might indeed turn unionists into an angry minority on the island; but changing the rules to appease them would also incentivise the worst elements in loyalism to threaten trouble. As for nationalists, changing the rules to stop them from achieving a united Ireland, even after they'd won a Border poll, would simply cement the old poisonous idea that peaceful change is impossible.
It's not surprising that Mallon's plan has been embraced by many unionists who, whilst pooh-poohing the idea that a Border poll could deliver a majority for Irish unity any time soon, clearly aren't minded to take a risk.
They like the additional safeguard that "parallel consent" would offer, for a little while longer at least. In practice, though, it would be a false consolation. Once nationalists gained a majority, the end of Northern Ireland would simply be a matter of time.
......................................................................................................................................................................
What stops them from acknowledging it (the cynicism of 'parallel consent -- my italics') is fear. Fear of violence. Fear of contamination from a virus of sectarian militancy spreading south in future. Those fears are not unreasonable, given Irish history. Faced with that risk, people in the 26 counties would be entitled to decide that a unitary state was not for them, even if the North had earlier voted in favour.
....................................................................................................
Perhaps what ultimately frightens those in the Republic who are hitching a ride on the late Seamus Mallon's coat tails in the hope of preventing a Border poll in the short or medium term, is the very idea of change. Abhorrently, many commentators have even taken to arguing against Irish unity on the risible grounds that people "up there" are not as authentically Irish as the people "down here".
"I will never consider them as Irish as I am," one columnist wrote recently. On social media, nastier things still are spewed by anonymous trolls.
.......................................................................................................
It's perfectly possible to make reasoned arguments against a united Ireland without painting everyone in the North as some kind of lesser species who mustn't be allowed to sit on the best furniture lest they leave a stain or a smell. People who know better should leave that toxicity to Twitter.
Parallel consent would never work, Unionism will never consent. But Mallon does raise the genuine concern that should 51 or 52% result in immediate unity then there could be major difficulties. In my view such a result should preface a period of negotiation and a process to get there peacefully and with maximum economic advantage. having said that there is a long way to go to get to that 50/51 mark.
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 03:30:43 AM
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
A January survey by pollster LucidTalk found 47 per cent of respondents in Northern Ireland wanted the region to remain in the UK, with 42 per cent favouring it becoming part of a united Ireland — an outcome that shows the criteria for a referendum are currently not met. The more deeply researched Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, conducted annually by Queen's and Ulster universities since 1998, have consistently found support for unification at a little over 20 per cent.
Those polls are too simplistic, unity is much more complicated than that, not a certainty but at the moment none of those advocating a poll have provided the necessary research or answers to secure a yes.
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
You can put anything you like in an Election manifesto!
However unless you get an overall majority it remains a work of fiction.
PR will ensure ongoing Coalitions and if the recent opinion polls are reflected it will be a multi party Government with a Programme worked out in negotiations.
It will be
FG/FF/Greens and???
Or
SF/FF/Greens/SDP/Labour. Good luck with getting the latter 2 on board unless they've reunited in the meantime.
Meanwhile the "conversation" on a UI and Referenda needs to continue.
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:54:17 AM
Parallel consent would never work, Unionism will never consent. But Mallon does raise the genuine concern that should 51 or 52% result in immediate unity then there could be major difficulties. In my view such a result should preface a period of negotiation and a process to get there peacefully and with maximum economic advantage. having said that there is a long way to go to get to that 50/51 mark.
While 51% might win the vote, there is a larger proportion of the population that recognise the validity of that vote, provided that there is a proper effort to bring everyone in the solution. There is a section of unionism who do not recognise democracy at all and these cannot be helped, but the bigger middle block can be brought on board to recognise the validity of the process even if not all of them would advocate unity at this precisely this point in time.
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
Quote from: Wildweasel74 on April 07, 2021, 11:41:23 AM
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
Nobody is looking for a border poll in the morning and everybody wants engagement on the relevant issues that you raise. Point me to where any sane person wants a blind border poll tomorrow.
What is the 'usual bullshit about unity' that you are referring to? Did you even watch the Claire Byrne programme a few weeks back or read the recent discussions about beginning the conversation?
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:56:39 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 03:30:43 AM
https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689
A January survey by pollster LucidTalk found 47 per cent of respondents in Northern Ireland wanted the region to remain in the UK, with 42 per cent favouring it becoming part of a united Ireland — an outcome that shows the criteria for a referendum are currently not met. The more deeply researched Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, conducted annually by Queen's and Ulster universities since 1998, have consistently found support for unification at a little over 20 per cent.
Those polls are too simplistic, unity is much more complicated than that, not a certainty but at the moment none of those advocating a poll have provided the necessary research or answers to secure a yes.
Its not a million miles away either though
The life and times survey otherwise known as the unionist security blanket is seriously flawed. It usually has SF on about 9% of the vote it also carries out the poll face to face, not sure of anywhere on the planet where you going into a voting booth with someone looking at you.
The lucid talk polls have their flaws too but they are accurate. I even thought at the last election the Alliance surge prediction was pie in the sky stuff but it happened.
I have said it before the SOS will drag their heels on the matter. Unionists will use the life and times survey as hard proof they will then claim nationalist only get 40% of the vote counting just SF and SDLP, they will claim green, alliance PBP and all others probably even openly nationalist independents as pro status quo. It will take the courts to sort out what the criteria for a referendum is and if it has been met.
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
Mr Gript himself here, waiting for the right wing to steam to power....or is it the left you for?
You've no clue what people thinking or living down here, you stuck in the occupied 6, self pity mindset that will hold you and you mirror images on the unionist side back and keep you in the troubles for decades. No stones on you to actually make a change, just want what suits you and forget everyone else. And you talk of dinosaurs....a bluffer of the highest level. And proven to peddle lies when it suits him.
Quote from: Louther on April 07, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
Mr Gript himself here, waiting for the right wing to steam to power....or is it the left you for?
You've no clue what people thinking or living down here, you stuck in the occupied 6, self pity mindset that will hold you and you mirror images on the unionist side back and keep you in the troubles for decades. No stones on you to actually make a change, just want what suits you and forget everyone else. And you talk of dinosaurs....a bluffer of the highest level. And proven to peddle lies when it suits him.
You're projecting a false allegation here again. You have no basis for it but I think slinging mud defines your limitations.
I've never read an article on Gript, I've never mentioned them on here before you did, I've never posted a link to any articles of there's. You on the other hand have openly admitted to knowing what is reported by them and what isn't. You're the poster who introduced them to the debate. It seems the only poster who reads Gript on here is you.
I can see by the fact that you are now resigned to flinging mud at me with these incessant and baseless allegations is an indicator of the embarrassment and shame you must feel after outing yourself as a subscriber to Gript, a far right editorial.
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 02:09:28 PM
Quote from: Louther on April 07, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
Mr Gript himself here, waiting for the right wing to steam to power....or is it the left you for?
You've no clue what people thinking or living down here, you stuck in the occupied 6, self pity mindset that will hold you and you mirror images on the unionist side back and keep you in the troubles for decades. No stones on you to actually make a change, just want what suits you and forget everyone else. And you talk of dinosaurs....a bluffer of the highest level. And proven to peddle lies when it suits him.
You're projecting a false allegation here again. You have no basis for it but I think slinging mud defines your limitations.
I've never read an article on Gript, I've never mentioned them on here before you did, I've never posted a link to any articles of there's. You on the other hand have openly admitted to knowing what is reported by them and what isn't. You're the poster who introduced them to the debate. It seems the only poster who reads Gript on here is you.
I can see by the fact that you are now resigned to flinging mud at me with these incessant and baseless allegations is an indicator of the embarrassment and shame you must feel after outing yourself as a subscriber to Gript, a far right editorial.
That all you can do? Deny and deflect.
You've been caught out on this board more times it's funny at this stage. You get shown up and then disappear from view for a few days when a few hard questions put to you that expose your lies.
You don't have to subscribe to Gript and well you know. There is plenty, far too much, sharing of their stuff on twitter to know what they said and thankfully plenty of people who call them out for what they report.
This is where you entered the thread below. No contribution to the point in hand, just some rehashed baseless mud slinging that has nothing in relevance to the discussion
Quote from: Louther on April 07, 2021, 02:01:51 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
Mr Gript himself here, waiting for the right wing to steam to power....or is it the left you for?
You've no clue what people thinking or living down here, you stuck in the occupied 6, self pity mindset that will hold you and you mirror images on the unionist side back and keep you in the troubles for decades. No stones on you to actually make a change, just want what suits you and forget everyone else. And you talk of dinosaurs....a bluffer of the highest level. And proven to peddle lies when it suits him.
It's spam. It's what you do. Spam up the board with inane, baseless trolling and the moderator should be taking action against your type of posting.
Quote from: Wildweasel74 on April 07, 2021, 11:41:23 AM
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
Yep needs to be a proper discussion before any border poll. I dont think anybody argues with that.
Funny your post brought back some memories from an open talk that Chris McGimpsey was giving to the Unionist party in Trinity College in the 90's.( Coincidentally Sinn Fein were banned from having any organisation in Trinity at that time).
He included all those arguments re: Health, Finance, education and demographics. At the time he was quite adamant that there would never be a nationalist majority and thus no possibility of a UI. The south couldn't afford it etc.
Strangely one other strand of his argument was that closer integration within the EU would do away with a lot of the aspirations Nationalists had for a UI.
Was weasel on of the 14 No voters? ;D
2016 with its Brexit and a year of DUPUDA trying to recreate the 1 Party State(let) greatly hastened the day of an All Ireland political entity.
Quote from: Wildweasel74 on April 07, 2021, 11:41:23 AM
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
If a border poll is called now, as per the GFA there must be one held every 7 years thereafter.
Not quite.
There may not be one held within 7 years.
Quote from: pbat on April 07, 2021, 03:30:55 PM
Quote from: Wildweasel74 on April 07, 2021, 11:41:23 AM
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
If a border poll is called now, as per the GFA there must be one held every 7 years thereafter.
The GFA states that a second poll can't be held before 7 years have passed. There is no requirement to hold one exactly when the 7 years have passed. Nor for one evey 7 years. My hope is that one referendum will be all that is required.
Quote from: pbat on April 07, 2021, 03:30:55 PM
Quote from: Wildweasel74 on April 07, 2021, 11:41:23 AM
Until someone brings to the table the processes that protects pensions, and not charging for doctor and hospital appointments( got alot as not well). The gap in pay differences north and south, the increased cost of food prices between both. Until the persons looking a border poll answer how these issues are to be resolved, before a poll, they are wasting their time. Nobody gona go down a route like the leaving the EU vote, as it was obvious nobody knew what they were voting for. A border poll vote blindly on the basis of just a United Ireland ain't gona cut the mustard anymore with people. Bring forward a proper basis and plan why it is better for united Ireland, instead of the usual bullshit about unity. A border poll in the morning wouldn't even be close, and in turn affect delay another vote to years down the line.
If a border poll is called now, as per the GFA there must be one held every 7 years thereafter.
Brexit won't be subject to a second ref because the Tories are afraid of a rejection and paralysis.
An unplanned SF UI would be a total clusterfuck economically. Why would anyone in the South vote for it 7 years later?
The only way to do it is properly.
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 01:30:38 PM
Quote from: seafoid on April 07, 2021, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Angelo on April 07, 2021, 11:16:15 AM
Quote from: yellowcard on April 07, 2021, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Applesisapples on April 07, 2021, 10:48:30 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 05, 2021, 03:02:13 PM
If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.
If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.
I think that this is correct. I don't believe that SF will be anywhere near as radical as some would suggest if they actually get into government. The only way this could happen would be if there were to lead a government with left wing socialists and the numbers just won't be there for such an outcome. So that means a coalition with most likely FF and/or Labour and I think we would see a drastically watered down version of left wing policies. Who knows, there may even be some form of split if FF deteriorates even further and some will defect to FG and some to SF.
Reality will bite for SF though once they get into government since they will be dealing with real life economics for the first time. It will be interesting to see their next election manifesto since it would be the first time that they will potentially be held to account on their policies since prior to now they were never going to have to stand over them.
There's definitely truth to that.
However the plus point for them is the decades of corruption and incompetence from FFG means it's a case that they don't have to do an awful lot of positive things to change a lot.
I'd expect SF to hit 50~ seats down south the next time. I expect FF to fall in line with them and probably the SD and Greens.
Forget about Labour, they are utterly finished.
Why is the standard of living in the 26 counties higher than that in the North?
Terms like "Free State" and assuming economic backwardness in the South are signs of 1950s Unionism.
Is it?
Why don't you ask the younger generation of under 40s why they are voting in their droves for SF.
I think you'll find it's very much an anti-FFG vote due to the crisis they have created in terms of home ownership, cost of living, an out of control rental market that effect the average worker hugely in that generation as vutlure funds, landlord and MNCs cream the riches.
The predominant outlook of dinosaurs like you, Rossfan and Louther is all over now. You can bitch and moan about the change that's coming down the line but you can't stop it now.
The NI deficit is approx EUR 13bn per annum
What's your costed plan to get it down to zero over 15 years?
Insults are assumed to have an economic worth of zero.
Interesting viewpoint from a unionist - interesting to me anywway, as someone who would have practically no interaction with unionists
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-is-unionism-without-the-union-the-question-has-us-spooked-1.4536486?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true (https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-is-unionism-without-the-union-the-question-has-us-spooked-1.4536486?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true)
Quote from: Tubberman on April 14, 2021, 09:39:16 AM
Interesting viewpoint from a unionist - interesting to me anywway, as someone who would have practically no interaction with unionists
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-is-unionism-without-the-union-the-question-has-us-spooked-1.4536486?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true (https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-is-unionism-without-the-union-the-question-has-us-spooked-1.4536486?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true)
Interesting the mention of Sue Gray. She's married to a Portaferry man and knows plenty about Nationalist culture and identity as well.
Decent article in the round but the days of the unionist veto are gone and whilst I think those who align with the label "unionist" will never be happy in a UI in terms of the constitutional question but it has to work for them socially and economically as well as everyone else for that matter.