Margaret Thatcher....

[LCohen]

I am not against A united Ireland. I am just against any of the guff that is spouted about it being achieved in any circumstance other than a majority of the people in the 6 counties voting for it (and presumably a similar vote in the republic) or that violence/murder can be justified in persuit of it (as it will need a democratic vote). Anybody who thinks these are unreasonable views needs urgent help.

[Rossfan]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what part of Ireland wasn't under the jurisdiction of those Viceroys/Lords Lieutenants that the Brits used to send over to live in what's now Aras an Uachtatáin between 1801 and 1921/2 ?
1172 or thereabouts England's King Henry appointed himself " Lord of Ireland".
sometime in the 1500's England and Wales's King Henry 8th appointed himself " King of Ireland".
After 1603 the English ( or their colonists/lackeys) ran IRELAND as a separate single entity.
Until the Act of Union in 1800/1801 They always referred to the "Kingdom of Ireland".
What part of Ireland did they leave out??
I suggest Cohen you learn some real history - not some blinkered bit of unionistic make believe.

[LCohen]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what part of Ireland wasn't under the jurisdiction of those Viceroys/Lords Lieutenants that the Brits used to send over to live in what's now Aras an Uachtatáin between 1801 and 1921/2 ?
1172 or thereabouts England's King Henry appointed himself " Lord of Ireland".
sometime in the 1500's England and Wales's King Henry 8th appointed himself " King of Ireland".
After 1603 the English ( or their colonists/lackeys) ran IRELAND as a separate single entity.
Until the Act of Union in 1800/1801 They always referred to the "Kingdom of Ireland".
What part of Ireland did they leave out??
I suggest Cohen you learn some real history - not some blinkered bit of unionistic make believe.

Agian apologies but I assumed your point was that Ireland had been united under something other than English/British rule

[lynchbhoy]

To run away from the question admitting the north was I democratically founded, and reply with a request for a fit for tat justification of all the killing done by IRA against the killing and persecution and generations of lives ruined by unionist/loyalist killer gangs/ruc/British army/b specials/ colluding unionist & political parties and their killing squads.

Some might say that none of the deaths were justified.
Others might say that they were all justified as retaliation especially when the ultimate goals of peace and equality have been realized.

It doesn't matter what is said as your blinkered outlook won't deviate from the unionist/loyalist party line!

How have I ran away from the question about the foundation of NI. A majority of people in the 6 counties wanted to stay in UK. They stayed. The will of majority obviously impacted on the minority. Thats democracy.

Retaliation cannot be a justification for murder. What good does it do?

how could it have ben democratic when the whole (at that point) single country was not asked for their opinion - only a portion of the entire electorate was seemingly lobbied.
thats not democracy in any meaning of the word.
its a selection of the electorate.

you keep running away from this fact.


what good did the retaliation to the killing and murder by the state and its agents- well peace and equality have been bourne out of it! it wasnt there when the establishment and their death squads ruled the six counties.
Machevellian I know but !

[lynchbhoy]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what part of Ireland wasn't under the jurisdiction of those Viceroys/Lords Lieutenants that the Brits used to send over to live in what's now Aras an Uachtatáin between 1801 and 1921/2 ?
1172 or thereabouts England's King Henry appointed himself " Lord of Ireland".
sometime in the 1500's England and Wales's King Henry 8th appointed himself " King of Ireland".
After 1603 the English ( or their colonists/lackeys) ran IRELAND as a separate single entity.
Until the Act of Union in 1800/1801 They always referred to the "Kingdom of Ireland".
What part of Ireland did they leave out??
I suggest Cohen you learn some real history - not some blinkered bit of unionistic make believe.

Agian apologies but I assumed your point was that Ireland had been united under something other than English/British rule

it was a single country prior to cromwellian forces. various kings ruled and at times areas (must be careful not to use the word states) were often ruled by lesser lords or kings.
go read.

[Rossfan]

I am against A united Ireland. I just agianst any of the guff that is spouted about it being achieved in any circumstance other than a majority of the people in the 6 counties voting for it (and presumably a similar vote in the republic) or that violence/murder can be justified in persuit of it (as it will need a democratic vote). Anybody who thinks these are unreasonable views needs urgent help.

Whatever about the past ( about which we can do nothing other than acknowledge facts no matter how unpalatable to us) - that is what we've now agreed under the G F Agreement.

[LCohen]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what part of Ireland wasn't under the jurisdiction of those Viceroys/Lords Lieutenants that the Brits used to send over to live in what's now Aras an Uachtatáin between 1801 and 1921/2 ?
1172 or thereabouts England's King Henry appointed himself " Lord of Ireland".
sometime in the 1500's England and Wales's King Henry 8th appointed himself " King of Ireland".
After 1603 the English ( or their colonists/lackeys) ran IRELAND as a separate single entity.
Until the Act of Union in 1800/1801 They always referred to the "Kingdom of Ireland".
What part of Ireland did they leave out??
I suggest Cohen you learn some real history - not some blinkered bit of unionistic make believe.

Agian apologies but I assumed your point was that Ireland had been united under something other than English/British rule

it was a single country prior to cromwellian forces. various kings ruled and at times areas (must be careful not to use the word states) were often ruled by lesser lords or kings.
go read.

Have read a little on the subject matter over the years. Pre-British rule which person/body ruled all of the island?

[LCohen]

I am against A united Ireland. I just agianst any of the guff that is spouted about it being achieved in any circumstance other than a majority of the people in the 6 counties voting for it (and presumably a similar vote in the republic) or that violence/murder can be justified in persuit of it (as it will need a democratic vote). Anybody who thinks these are unreasonable views needs urgent help.

Whatever about the past ( about which we can do nothing other than acknowledge facts no matter how unpalatable to us) - that is what we've now agreed under the G F Agreement.

Which founds the National question in democracy - where it should have been all along

[lynchbhoy]

from memory
the high king of eamhain mhaca

diarmuid mcmurrogh from memory might have also ruled as high king also.

[Eamonnca1]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what was the Irish Parliament then? And why were orange elements so vehemently opposed to its abolition by the Act of Union?

[LCohen]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what was the Irish Parliament then? And why were orange elements so vehemently opposed to its abolition by the Act of Union?

It was assumed that you were putting forward the thesis that Ireland had been ruled as a single entity from within (as opposed to under British/Englsh rule).

Lynchboy is directing us to the era of the High Kings. I'm not sure either of his examples could claim control over all of the island of ireland.

[Rossfan]

Until around the time of Henry 8th most Kings in most countries were kind of overlords of a crowd of semi independent local chiefs/barons/dukes/Taoisigh or what ever.
The Ard Rí was supposed to be in charge of All Ireland but only as a kind of distant Supervisor.
The Ard Ríthe were from present day Co Roscommon usually ( well of course they would) and were in charge till around the 11th Century when Brian Bóramha seized power and all Hell broke loose from there on.
The last Ard Rí of All Ireland was Ruairi Ó Concúbhair ( from Ros of course) as afterwards the the English King was "Lord of Ireland" so the title faded away.

[Eamonnca1]

No - Ireland was never rules as a single entity.

So what was the Irish Parliament then? And why were orange elements so vehemently opposed to its abolition by the Act of Union?

It was assumed that you were putting forward the thesis that Ireland had been ruled as a single entity from within (as opposed to under British/Englsh rule).

Why would you assume that? The Irish Parliament sat from medieval times right up to 1800. The Kingdom of Ireland existed from 1542 up to 1800. 

Never governed as a single entity?

Now if you're talking about the Lordship of Ireland that came before the Kingdom of Ireland, maybe then you might have a point, since its influence ebbed and flowed and didn't cover the entire island, but if you're suggesting that Ireland has never ever been governed as a single entity then you're talking through your hat.

Lynchboy is directing us to the era of the High Kings. I'm not sure either of his examples could claim control over all of the island of ireland.

I'm not Lynchboy.

[Eamonnca1]

Until around the time of Henry 8th most Kings in most countries were kind of overlords of a crowd of semi independent local chiefs/barons/dukes/Taoisigh or what ever.
The Ard Rí was supposed to be in charge of All Ireland but only as a kind of distant Supervisor.
The Ard Ríthe were from present day Co Roscommon usually ( well of course they would) and were in charge till around the 11th Century when Brian Bóramha seized power and all Hell broke loose from there on.
The last Ard Rí of All Ireland was Ruairi Ó Concúbhair ( from Ros of course) as afterwards the the English King was "Lord of Ireland" so the title faded away.

Spot on.  England didn't unite as anything resembling a country in the modern sense until about 1485, so by Lcohen's yardstick it would seem that England can't have any claim to being a "real" nation either.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Spot on.  England didn't unite as anything resembling a country in the modern sense until about 1485, so by Lcohen's yardstick it would seem that England can't have any claim to being a "real" nation either.

As Brendan Behan so memorably put it: We (Irish) were "a proud and intelligent people, who had a language, a literature, when the barbarian woad-painted Briton was first learning to walk upright."