A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.

Started by winghalfback, May 27, 2015, 03:16:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

BennyCake

So in a nutshell, it pays for DUP and SF to Stoke the fires in order to add support for their separate causes, ie. the North in the uk, a United ireland. And the more one side can poke the other, it benefits both parties.

It's obvious long term plans don't exist, other than politicans looking after their pay packets.

Dire Ear


smelmoth

#2117
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

smelmoth

Quote from: Owen Brannigan on March 09, 2018, 02:32:40 PM
The problem that we find now is that there is no way forward because both sides have declared on a subject on which neither can retreat any further.

On one hand SF has made major concessions from its January 2017 stance:

1. A very diluted ILA compared to its previous ministerial position and to the minimum required by the various Irish language organisations that thought they were leading the way.

2. Depend on DUP not using the PoC to allow SSM when the Assembly returns.

3. No mention of excluding Foster until she is 'cleared' by the inquiry, in fact no mention of RHI at all

In return, DUP has failed to deliver:

1. Not even any hint that legislation on the Irish language would be accepted where it might be construed in any fudge as an ILA for SF

2. No reformation of the PoC and while it cannot use it alone to block SSM it can count on TUV and a few UUP to use this legislation as it needs it.

DUP is trying to shift its stance to using UK parliament and show it doesn't need the Assembly in the hope that as a GE approaches in RoI, SF will want to be in government to show it is a capable coalition partner in the south.

UK government continues to support DUP as it has major problems with its own rebel remainer MPs.  Sets a budget for 2018-19 and lets NICS run the show for another 12 months.  The sky didn't fall in over the last 400+ days and the public didn't make much of a fuss other than to prefer that MLAs had their pay cut.

The problem causing this stasis is the lack of a competitive electoral system brought in by DUP and SF at the St Andrews Agreement whereby the FM would belong to the largest party and not the largest community representation or even voted for by the whole Assembly. 

SF agreed to this as a way of demanding all nationalist votes to try to take the position and nearly made it at the last election.  DUP wanted this to destroy the UUP by ensuring maximum vote could be pulled out for DUP to prevent a SF FM.

This crazy situation needs to be removed to allow competitive elections rather than creating parallel one party systems that we now have and have allowed the current impasse to occur.

2 parties running from tough decisions. The best way to deflect is to declare an enemy and focus on them

Was reading earlier today of the national pride of everyday Russians being swelled by reports of events in Salisbury. They think they are at war. Their government wants them to think that. Meanwhile their economy spirals downwards. Easy manipulated those Russians. You wouldn't get that here

smelmoth

#2119
Quote from: BennyCake on March 09, 2018, 03:06:29 PM
So in a nutshell, it pays for DUP and SF to Stoke the fires in order to add support for their separate causes, ie. the North in the uk, a United ireland. And the more one side can poke the other, it benefits both parties.

It's obvious long term plans don't exist, other than politicans looking after their pay packets.

As you say, in a nutshell

DUP a bit more vulnerable. Not much sign of nationalism realigning itself. Unionism very easily could. There is a core group that won't let DUP move forward. Eventually the party has to split. We need this to happen. There is a bigger, but less vocal section of the unionist voter and non voter community who just want to back a winning unionist ticket. We need a sensible one to emerge. That is the way out of this

tonto1888

Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

smelmoth

Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

The easy way out of that one is to say that membership of a proscribed organisation is a criminal activity

To engage in what I think you are getting at then yes I absolutely consider that shootings, bombings, punishment beatings, racketeering etc are criminal activities and their perpetrators, by definition, criminals.

But criminal wasn't my word.

Keyser soze

Well it was ur words as u said he certainly was a criminal.

Orchard park

#2123
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 03:45:45 PM
Well it was ur words as u said he certainly was a criminal.
[/quote



]Lynch was a renegade, a bully and a thug. He means very little to the majority of the people in NI

Did you know him?

My parents did. Aul fella wouldn't have a great word for him.


tonto1888

Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

The easy way out of that one is to say that membership of a proscribed organisation is a criminal activity

To engage in what I think you are getting at then yes I absolutely consider that shootings, bombings, punishment beatings, racketeering etc are criminal activities and their perpetrators, by definition, criminals.

But criminal wasn't my word.

Just to be clear, Im not looking an argument, its just interesting to see different points of view.

Forget about technicalities etc, do you consider them to be criminals? For me I generally don't, although that is not to say that there weren't atrocities carried out in the name of Irish Republicanism

Syferus

#2125
Quote from: Rossfan on March 09, 2018, 09:16:12 AM
Has Syfīn allowed Tony F to use his account?
He used to be a half baked wildly optimistic Ros fan (+ Mayowestros,  Galway hurlers, St Brigids. .....) but now he's gone into a WUM of the highest order.
His new hobby horse is blaming the GAA for promoting "White Irish Catholic culture" whatever that is.
As 98% of Irish people are white, 70% would class themselves Catholic, 90% are Irish born .....
I suppose the GAA could get all their clubs to play soccer, get their catholic members to convert to some other religions and try and get citizenship of some other Countries.

You and a couple others have got hot under the collar over something as mundane as pointing out the culture the GAA promotes is only reflective of white, Catholic Ireland. There are plenty of other aspects to contemporary Irish culture in case you've somehow missed them all.

Ignoring that fact until we get to a point like in France where minorities feel totally disenfranchised hardly seems like a solution worth considering. Sport is the best vehicle to my mind for promoting inclusion and community irrespective of colour or creed, and an unwillingness for the biggest sporting organisation in the country to let go of old symbols so they can move towards a point in time when all people feel comfortable being part of a GAA club or the wider Gaelic community is also backwards.

Minorities on this island, be they unionists, protestants, Africans, Arabs, Indians, travellers, LGBTQ, all should be part of the GAA and feel equally accepted and a part of the decision-making process. Just because one lad in Ballagh or a few COI lads in Ulster have the balls to stick their heads above the parapet it doesn't mean we have this issue solved. It's a long, hard road but one that should be taken.

smelmoth

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 03:45:45 PM
Well it was ur words as u said he certainly was a criminal.

Yes. Someone else threw the word out there. And I agreed with it

smelmoth

Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

The easy way out of that one is to say that membership of a proscribed organisation is a criminal activity

To engage in what I think you are getting at then yes I absolutely consider that shootings, bombings, punishment beatings, racketeering etc are criminal activities and their perpetrators, by definition, criminals.

But criminal wasn't my word.

Just to be clear, Im not looking an argument, its just interesting to see different points of view.

Forget about technicalities etc, do you consider them to be criminals? For me I generally don't, although that is not to say that there weren't atrocities carried out in the name of Irish Republicanism

Criminal. Very clear on that

tonto1888

Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:55:56 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

The easy way out of that one is to say that membership of a proscribed organisation is a criminal activity

To engage in what I think you are getting at then yes I absolutely consider that shootings, bombings, punishment beatings, racketeering etc are criminal activities and their perpetrators, by definition, criminals.

But criminal wasn't my word.

Just to be clear, Im not looking an argument, its just interesting to see different points of view.

Forget about technicalities etc, do you consider them to be criminals? For me I generally don't, although that is not to say that there weren't atrocities carried out in the name of Irish Republicanism

Criminal. Very clear on that

fair enough. You're entitled to your view. I disagree in the main. No doubt there were criminals who used Irish Republicanism to go about their ways. I remember reading on one of the many books written about the time a quote by a lady in Tyrone talking about her sons which stuck with me. She said, yes they were in the IRA, but they weren't bad boys. If they were bad boys I wouldn't have let them back in the house. Ordinary people caught up in extraordinary times is how Ive heard it described and I tend to agree

Therealdonald

Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:58:43 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:55:56 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:52:55 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: tonto1888 on March 09, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: smelmoth on March 09, 2018, 02:01:21 PM
Quote from: Keyser soze on March 09, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
Does not surprise me that someone who would denigrate one of the hunger strikers would base their principles on economics. Quisling.

Well lots of people will use economics as part of their reasoning. You might as well start to prepare yourself for that now, because it isn't going to change. Maybe calling them names will make you feel better and so very grown up. Not sure it win any votes though

If I was to drag some young fella into a side street and give him a beating around the knees and ankles would you that behaviour to display the characteristics of say bullying or thuggery?

So just a criminal then?

Well he certainly was a criminal.

I called him a bully, a thug and a renegade. He certainly was all those things.

If you want to drag me into a debate on the hunger strike then plough on. My views won't surprise you. An horrific way to die. An horrific way to let someone die. Little credit to be attributed to any side.

would you consider every IRA/INLA member a criminal?

The easy way out of that one is to say that membership of a proscribed organisation is a criminal activity

To engage in what I think you are getting at then yes I absolutely consider that shootings, bombings, punishment beatings, racketeering etc are criminal activities and their perpetrators, by definition, criminals.

But criminal wasn't my word.

Just to be clear, Im not looking an argument, its just interesting to see different points of view.

Forget about technicalities etc, do you consider them to be criminals? For me I generally don't, although that is not to say that there weren't atrocities carried out in the name of Irish Republicanism

Criminal. Very clear on that

fair enough. You're entitled to your view. I disagree in the main. No doubt there were criminals who used Irish Republicanism to go about their ways. I remember reading on one of the many books written about the time a quote by a lady in Tyrone talking about her sons which stuck with me. She said, yes they were in the IRA, but they weren't bad boys. If they were bad boys I wouldn't have let them back in the house. Ordinary people caught up in extraordinary times is how Ive heard it described and I tend to agree

Criminal... very clear about that. The type of answer that automatically makes the majority of nationalists in the North shudder and think ewww another Brit masquerading as an Irishman.