HOW WOULD YOU VOTE IN A BORDER POLL?

[Rossfan]

10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
?

[Angelo]

10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
?

I'd imagine you and Dublin7 are two of them.

[seafoid]

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

[Armagh18]

10 pro UK Northerners I see.
Angelo
Armagh 18
Shooters
?

what are you on about you clown?

[bennydorano]

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.

[clonadmad]

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?

[seafoid]

Shinners have an ideology that won't be needed in a united Ireland.

[Mario]

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?

[Lar Naparka]

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

[seafoid]

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.

[sid waddell]

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"

Eoghan Harris eat your heart out.

"Sidney" is correct there

[sid waddell]

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

[sid waddell]

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

[sid waddell]

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

[Milltown Row2]

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