New BBC documentary asks ‘Who Won the War in North?’

[Aerlik]

If "war" rules were applied there'd be plenty on the republican side of the fence would have had a free visit to The Hague.

And that is why the English refused to call it a war.  Imagine Thatcher and Pinochet in the waiting room of The Hague Court No.1, awaiting their turns for their respective war crimes...

[Myles Na G.]

Look at Scotland, 45% voted for independence and no violence. There is a lesson in that for Gerry and his "hard men".

That was democracy at work and it worked well. However, the terms 'democracy' and 'Ireland' don't sit well in the same sentence. In the latter part of the 19th century and the early decades of the 20th, the democratic wishes of the greater number of people on this island were denied, when the demand for Home Rule was refused. Thereafter, the state of Northern Ireland was established and sustained at the point of a gun against the wishes of a majority on the island. If there was a referendum tomorrow for all the people of this island, the chances are a majority would vote in favour of a reunited Ireland outside the union. Would that vote be allowed? Would the result be respected? If force is used to suppress democracy, the likelihood is always that some will see force as a means of re establishing their democratic rights. Personally I think that approach is badly misguided, but I understand how others might arrive at that conclusion.

[Tonto]

If "war" rules were applied there'd be plenty on the republican side of the fence would have had a free visit to The Hague.

And that is why the English refused to call it a war.  Imagine Thatcher and Pinochet in the waiting room of The Hague Court No.1, awaiting their turns for their respective war crimes...

I didn't and don't want to argue about what constitutes war crimes. All I was saying was that republicans like to call it a war, but didn't obey the rules of war.

[orangeman]

Prior and Tebbitt seem to be calling it a draw.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-29364986

[Tonto]

Look at Scotland, 45% voted for independence and no violence. There is a lesson in that for Gerry and his "hard men".

That was democracy at work and it worked well. However, the terms 'democracy' and 'Ireland' don't sit well in the same sentence. In the latter part of the 19th century and the early decades of the 20th, the democratic wishes of the greater number of people on this island were denied, when the demand for Home Rule was refused. Thereafter, the state of Northern Ireland was established and sustained at the point of a gun against the wishes of a majority on the island. If there was a referendum tomorrow for all the people of this island, the chances are a majority would vote in favour of a reunited Ireland outside the union. Would that vote be allowed? Would the result be respected? If force is used to suppress democracy, the likelihood is always that some will see force as a means of re establishing their democratic rights. Personally I think that approach is badly misguided, but I understand how others might arrive at that conclusion.

The argument that NI was formed against the majority of the people of Ireland only works if you consider the entire island to be one nation.  The fact is that the majority of nationalists and the majority of unionists (a similar number of unionists and nationalists were caught on the "wrong" side of the border) were able to exercise self-determination by the partition of Ireland. 

Either way, the argument that all of the people of Ireland should vote in a referendum to determine whether or not the whole of the island should separate from the rest if the UK is defunct thanks to both parts of Ireland ratifying the Good Friday Agreement by referendum.

[armaghniac]

Of course the entire island of Ireland is one nation, that is even in the GFA.

[Tony Baloney]

Prior and Tebbitt seem to be calling it a draw.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-29364986

Neither side got what they wanted and if it is a draw the Brits got a point away from home so must feel "happier" that there is no UI and the six are still theirs.

[lynchbhoy]

I've said it before on here but the goal of republicans was to stop the persecution and discrimination - violent and physical - as well as bringing Irish/nationalist/catholic / working class up to parity and no longer second class citizens in relation to the unionist/loyalist/prod/ planters.

Ireland's reunification was then seen as the ultimate way to get this , so became the mantra.

Sunningdale is v similar to gfa - but back then it would have never worked - it wasn't practical as neither side would adhere to it.

It was a jump too far for unionist/loyalists and sunningdale didn't dictate how it could enforce changes on them.

Ireland is an Island country - it once was, so at some point it will be again.
Since gfa people are content now to be able to live normal lives so reunification will happen more slowly.
It's all down to money, economy and then the voting majority will go for it both side of the border.

Without their British army leaders, the unionist/loyalist violent groups haven't the about to mount anything more than a short riot.
These will have no effect or long term issue after reunification.

Bigger issue is healthcare, dole , jobs etc

The subsidy money  from Brit gov to take the 6 counties off their hands will only stretch do far.

No one wins wars. But the nationalist peoples of the 6 counties have got what they alwYs wanted and needed!

[Myles Na G.]

Look at Scotland, 45% voted for independence and no violence. There is a lesson in that for Gerry and his "hard men".

That was democracy at work and it worked well. However, the terms 'democracy' and 'Ireland' don't sit well in the same sentence. In the latter part of the 19th century and the early decades of the 20th, the democratic wishes of the greater number of people on this island were denied, when the demand for Home Rule was refused. Thereafter, the state of Northern Ireland was established and sustained at the point of a gun against the wishes of a majority on the island. If there was a referendum tomorrow for all the people of this island, the chances are a majority would vote in favour of a reunited Ireland outside the union. Would that vote be allowed? Would the result be respected? If force is used to suppress democracy, the likelihood is always that some will see force as a means of re establishing their democratic rights. Personally I think that approach is badly misguided, but I understand how others might arrive at that conclusion.

The argument that NI was formed against the majority of the people of Ireland only works if you consider the entire island to be one nation.  The fact is that the majority of nationalists and the majority of unionists (a similar number of unionists and nationalists were caught on the "wrong" side of the border) were able to exercise self-determination by the partition of Ireland. 

Either way, the argument that all of the people of Ireland should vote in a referendum to determine whether or not the whole of the island should separate from the rest if the UK is defunct thanks to both parts of Ireland ratifying the Good Friday Agreement by referendum.

Perhaps you think that Scotland is comprised of two nations also, given that 45% of the people voted for an independent Scotland outside the union, while 55% opted to remain British? Maybe Glasgow and Dundee should be given federal status, or become self governing cantons? Also, northern unionists were not able to exercise self determination. Their 'country' was carved out for them by the British government and imposed by threat of force. Had they been left to themselves, they would've been unable to hold on to more than 3 counties at best. In all likelihood, they would've had to have reached some sort of negotiated settlement with their fellow citizens of this island. They may have argued for and obtained some sort of northern parliament for themselves, but the wishes of the majority of the island would have been respected and the integrity of Ireland as a country would've been maintained. Also, the GFA has not made the argument defunct. The agreement was ratified by both parts of the island as the best deal available at present, but noone said that it was a full and final settlement.

[Myles Na G.]

I've said it before on here but the goal of republicans was to stop the persecution and discrimination - violent and physical - as well as bringing Irish/nationalist/catholic / working class up to parity and no longer second class citizens in relation to the unionist/loyalist/prod/ planters.

Ireland's reunification was then seen as the ultimate way to get this , so became the mantra.

Sunningdale is v similar to gfa - but back then it would have never worked - it wasn't practical as neither side would adhere to it.

It was a jump too far for unionist/loyalists and sunningdale didn't dictate how it could enforce changes on them.

Ireland is an Island country - it once was, so at some point it will be again.
Since gfa people are content now to be able to live normal lives so reunification will happen more slowly.
It's all down to money, economy and then the voting majority will go for it both side of the border.

Without their British army leaders, the unionist/loyalist violent groups haven't the about to mount anything more than a short riot.
These will have no effect or long term issue after reunification.

Bigger issue is healthcare, dole , jobs etc

The subsidy money  from Brit gov to take the 6 counties off their hands will only stretch do far.

No one wins wars. But the nationalist peoples of the 6 counties have got what they alwYs wanted and needed!

This particular nationalist person from the 6 counties begs to differ. I'd like a 32 county Ireland independent of Great Britain, please.

[tiempo]

Prior and Tebbitt seem to be calling it a draw.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-29364986

Fellow Conservative peer and former party chairman Lord Norman Tebbit, whose wife was paralysed in the Brighton bombing, told Peter Taylor: "I have no sympathy for those who declared the war but having said all that, one way or another, a ceasefire was achieved and to that extent it was a price that was worth paying.

Tebbit himself is a victim of British colonialism, persecution, sectarianism and Thatcherism and he's too blinkered to see it (supposedly). His wifes life changing injuries were a price worth paying, the ultimate slap in the face to the poor woman. Tebbit knows only too well what went on in the 6 and his role in it and he tells this to the public to save face for the "establishment". I wonder if his private opinion matches his public.

[lynchbhoy]

I've said it before on here but the goal of republicans was to stop the persecution and discrimination - violent and physical - as well as bringing Irish/nationalist/catholic / working class up to parity and no longer second class citizens in relation to the unionist/loyalist/prod/ planters.

Ireland's reunification was then seen as the ultimate way to get this , so became the mantra.

Sunningdale is v similar to gfa - but back then it would have never worked - it wasn't practical as neither side would adhere to it.

It was a jump too far for unionist/loyalists and sunningdale didn't dictate how it could enforce changes on them.

Ireland is an Island country - it once was, so at some point it will be again.
Since gfa people are content now to be able to live normal lives so reunification will happen more slowly.
It's all down to money, economy and then the voting majority will go for it both side of the border.

Without their British army leaders, the unionist/loyalist violent groups haven't the about to mount anything more than a short riot.
These will have no effect or long term issue after reunification.

Bigger issue is healthcare, dole , jobs etc

The subsidy money  from Brit gov to take the 6 counties off their hands will only stretch do far.

No one wins wars. But the nationalist peoples of the 6 counties have got what they alwYs wanted and needed!

This particular nationalist person from the 6 counties begs to differ. I'd like a 32 county Ireland independent of Great Britain, please.

I'm all for it, but proper process must be adhered to now.
There is no rush given the end of violence and almost all discrimination

I'm with you Myles but we can't or won't force it down people's throats - thats what I mean

[LCohen]

It was a draw and it could have been called a draw before it started. If it happened again it would end in a draw again.

Republicanism could never force Britain to leave NI and leave behind a unionist majority. Therefore Republican violence could never win.
Republicanism is an idea as much as a group of people therefore the British could never defeat all republicanism.

Neither side won. Neither side could ever win. Each side was assured that they could never (militarily) lose. It was futile. The Dissos are the only ones who can't see this.

[lynchbhoy]

The 'dissos' are a banding together of some opportunistic fellas that see they can now make money for themselves as opposed for 'the cause' AND some people from areas that are still getting grief from the state bodies / cops ( where old ruc types still prevail ) - such as in Derry City

[bennydorano]

Look at Scotland, 45% voted for independence and no violence. There is a lesson in that for Gerry and his "hard men".

That was democracy at work and it worked well. However, the terms 'democracy' and 'Ireland' don't sit well in the same sentence. In the latter part of the 19th century and the early decades of the 20th, the democratic wishes of the greater number of people on this island were denied, when the demand for Home Rule was refused. Thereafter, the state of Northern Ireland was established and sustained at the point of a gun against the wishes of a majority on the island. If there was a referendum tomorrow for all the people of this island, the chances are a majority would vote in favour of a reunited Ireland outside the union. Would that vote be allowed? Would the result be respected? If force is used to suppress democracy, the likelihood is always that some will see force as a means of re establishing their democratic rights. Personally I think that approach is badly misguided, but I understand how others might arrive at that conclusion.

The argument that NI was formed against the majority of the people of Ireland only works if you consider the entire island to be one nation.  The fact is that the majority of nationalists and the majority of unionists (a similar number of unionists and nationalists were caught on the "wrong" side of the border) were able to exercise self-determination by the partition of Ireland. 

Either way, the argument that all of the people of Ireland should vote in a referendum to determine whether or not the whole of the island should separate from the rest if the UK is defunct thanks to both parts of Ireland ratifying the Good Friday Agreement by referendum.

Perhaps you think that Scotland is comprised of two nations also, given that 45% of the people voted for an independent Scotland outside the union, while 55% opted to remain British? Maybe Glasgow and Dundee should be given federal status, or become self governing cantons? Also, northern unionists were not able to exercise self determination. Their 'country' was carved out for them by the British government and imposed by threat of force. Had they been left to themselves, they would've been unable to hold on to more than 3 counties at best. In all likelihood, they would've had to have reached some sort of negotiated settlement with their fellow citizens of this island. They may have argued for and obtained some sort of northern parliament for themselves, but the wishes of the majority of the island would have been respected and the integrity of Ireland as a country would've been maintained. Also, the GFA has not made the argument defunct. The agreement was ratified by both parts of the island as the best deal available at present, but noone said that it was a full and final settlement.

Not a new argument. Remember getting my eyes opened on OWC a few years ago on the Unionist take on things, something I'd never considered before and their position was entirely understandable.