Why did Ireland need help to solve the Northern Problem?

PhonyDoctor

Hi,

Sorry if the title appears offensive - I wanted it to be provative to draw some traffic, but ultimaely I want thoughtful responses to an issue of debate among a few friends of mine here in the Washington DC area.

Anyway, the issue is what do you as Irish (and yes, we understand that there are substantial differences b/t Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland) think were the three biggest reasons for the relative peace achieved after decades of strife, terrorism and violence.

Much thanks,

The Phony Doctor

InFront

The people in Northern Ireland. Talks wouldn't even have started if they didn't will them to.

There isn't a shred of doubt but that the DUP or SF wouldn't have engaged with the political machinery of powersharing if they thought they would get burned by the population.

The Republic, the UK, the former US President - these things helped and nudged the process along. They certainly didn't solve it.

PhonyDoctor

InFront wrote:

The people in Northern Ireland. Talks wouldn't even have started if they didn't will them to.

Yes, but what changed in NI that in turned changed the attitudes and/or resolve of the NI people?

InFront

People in Northern Ireland are (by and large) quite explicitly tired of an unworthy and pointless conflict, I suppose.
What I mean by nudging it along does come under the doubtless inspiration of leaders like Ahern, Blair and Clinton - and others before them - but your question relates to the biggest reason for peace. Well it was undoubtedly the Northern Irish themselves.

They were, after all, the society causing the civil war. Of course peace had to begin and end with their affirmation, this was the limiting factor of building peace, therfore the most significant.

homah_7ft

I'm not really all that sure if society in the North has changed all that much. There always was a decent majority who just wanted to live their lives. I think that it could very well be down to individual political leaders. The conflict in it's current guise arose when angry young catholic men (and some women-yes!) felt that violence was the only answer to the sectarian bigotry that blighted their lives. Now these men have power over their followers and are well into their fifties. They've grown older and wiser while importantly maintaining the clout to hold the next generation in line with their will. In short the leaders have tired of the violence and have the power to order others to lay down their arms.

Victor

One point made was that many of the more senior militant leaders are in their fifties, sixties and even older. They have grandchildren and even great grandchildren. This created a realisation that they couldn't engage in a permanent war or if they did, that it would be their grandchildren and even great grandchildren doing the dying, not the old men.

Also, if they died of old age, without peace, they would be mere footnotes in history that didn't solve anything, not leaders of their people.

I think moderates like the SDLP also helped hugely - I think a big step was the Hume-Adams talks that presented radical republicanism with an oppurtunity for an alternative to violence.

I think the Irish, British, American, Canadian, South African, the EU and a few other governments helped create time and space - and cash - to allow a breathing space for things to happen. Its often better to have a referee to solve an argument.

PhonyDoctor

homah_7ft wrote:

I'm not really all that sure if society in the North has changed all that much. There always was a decent majority who just wanted to live their lives. I think that it could very well be down to individual political leaders. The conflict in it's current guise arose when angry young catholic men (and some women-yes!) felt that violence was the only answer to the sectarian bigotry that blighted their lives.

What bigotry in particular? Did it end?

homah_7ft wrote:

Now these men have power over their followers and are well into their fifties. They've grown older and wiser while importantly maintaining the clout to hold the next generation in line with their will. In short the leaders have tired of the violence and have the power to order others to lay down their arms.

Very interesting.

Do you think that the Ireland's amazing improved economy helped. It's just a theory of mine, but I always thought high unemployment leads to idle people in need to do something, which leads to their vulnerability to be used as pawns for angry causes.

PhonyDoctor

Victor wrote:

One point made was that many of the more senior militant leaders are in their fifties, sixties and even older. They have grandchildren and even great grandchildren. This created a realisation that they couldn't engage in a permanent war or if they did, that it would be their grandchildren and even great grandchildren doing the dying, not the old men.

Ah, so it seems that the Irish, even the worst of the terrorists, loved their children more than they hated the British. One of the great things about Western culture IMHO, is our love of family exceeds our love of self and personal ambitions.

homah_7ft

PhonyDoctor wrote:

What bigotry in particular? Did it end?





Do you think that the Ireland's amazing improved economy helped. It's just a theory of mine, but I always thought high unemployment leads to idle people in need to do something, which leads to their vulnerability to be used as pawns for angry causes.

The first point is a matter for another thread

Secondly you could have a point about the unemployment level. I'm not sure if you are talking about the, "Celtic tiger" which really would have no impact I'd say. Northern Ireland's unemployment rate is down but it gets a little muddier when take into account the low working age employment rate.

luckat

What's the meaning of the thread title? Puzzled.

Victor

luckat wrote:

What's the meaning of the thread title? Puzzled.

Indeed.

darkman2

PhonyDoctor wrote:

Ah, so it seems that the Irish, even the worst of the terrorists, loved their children more than they hated the British. One of the great things about Western culture IMHO, is our love of family exceeds our love of self and personal ambitions.

Hmmm you manage to get 'the Irish' and 'worst of the terrorists' into the one sentence......is this a wind up? If not then yes I agree the economy makes people happy.:)

gandalf

PhonyDoctor wrote:

Hi,

Sorry if the title appears offensive - I wanted it to be provative to draw some traffic, but ultimaely I want thoughtful responses to an issue of debate among a few friends of mine here in the Washington DC area.

Anyway, the issue is what do you as Irish (and yes, we understand that there are substantial differences b/t Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland) think were the three biggest reasons for the relative peace achieved after decades of strife, terrorism and violence.

Much thanks,

The Phony Doctor

Next time title your thread to match what you are discussing. I don't expect to see this happen again.

gandalf

PhonyDoctor wrote:

Hi,

Sorry if the title appears offensive - I wanted it to be provative to draw some traffic, but ultimaely I want thoughtful responses to an issue of debate among a few friends of mine here in the Washington DC area.

Lets have some context here. Are you all American, are some Irish or what we call Plastic Paddies (those americans/english that claim to be irish)?

Why were you discussing the "Irish" problem. was the "Iraq" problem too boring for you?

Anyway, the issue is what do you as Irish (and yes, we understand that there are substantial differences b/t Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland) think were the three biggest reasons for the relative peace achieved after decades of strife, terrorism and violence.

People have started to mature in Northern Ireland, when they hit adulthood we will welcome them into the Republic.

Hotblack Desiato

PhonyDoctor wrote:

One of the great things about Western culture IMHO, is our love of family exceeds our love of self and personal ambitions.

You're kidding, right?

Zambia

gandalf wrote:

Lets have some context here. Are you all American, are some Irish or what we call Plastic Paddies (those americans/english that claim to be irish)?

Why were you discussing the "Irish" problem. was the "Iraq" problem too boring for you?

People have started to mature in Northern Ireland, when they hit adulthood we will welcome them into the Republic.

My arent we in a good mood today Gandalf

Personnally I think the other poster was right , it tends to be dole cheating I think the pool of qualantity Volunteers is drying up. The northern goverment/administartion does not discriminate and a catholic has as much chance of progressing here as anyone else.

PhonyDoctor

darkman2 wrote:

Hmmm you manage to get 'the Irish' and 'worst of the terrorists' into the one sentence......is this a wind up? If not then yes I agree the economy makes people happy.:)

Of course there's no "wind up".

PhonyDoctor

gandalf wrote:

Next time title your thread to match what you are discussing. I don't expect to see this happen again.

Given the context of the discussion, the issue was whether the Irish settled their own problems, or whether it was necessary for the rest of the world to do it for them.

The title IS commensurate with the thread.

FYI, it was my assertion that the Irish were 99% responsible for their own rise, but the truth is none in the debate knew enough about the issue.

RuggieBear

PhonyDoctor wrote:

One of the great things about Western culture IMHO, is our love of family exceeds our love of self and personal ambitions.

lol.

darkman2

Zambia232 wrote:

My arent we in a good mood today Gandalf

He is in the mood to pick on people today.

PhonyDoctor

gandalf wrote:

Lets have some context here. Are you all American, are some Irish or what we call Plastic Paddies (those americans/english that claim to be irish)?

I've some ancestory that might have been born in your neighborhood, but I've never thought of myself as Irish.

However, your animus ("Plastic Paddies"?) is interesting. What makes a person Irish? Is a person less Irish because his ancestors left an Island in a wake of famine only to have a one in three chance of surviving within the next five years of reaching the American continent?

Why were you discussing the "Irish" problem. was the "Iraq" problem too boring for you?

Are you always such a hostile knob? I've done nothing to insult you or a single person here. Your apparent hatred of Americans is a bit too zealous under the circumstances.

RuggieBear

PhonyDoctor wrote:

Are you always such a hostile knob? I've done nothing to insult you or a single person here. Your apparent hatred of Americans is a bit too zealous under the circumstances.

bye bye now.

PhonyDoctor

RuggieBear wrote:

lol.

Laugh, but I believe it to be true. I have two neighbors - one ethnically Armenian Christian who grew up in Turkey, and the other an Iranian who converted to Christianity from Islam (and who is condemned to death upon returning to Iran). Both have said this same thing, and the problems of their own countries is that they hate everyone who is the least bit different more than they love their own children.

PhonyDoctor

RuggieBear wrote:

bye bye now.

Is unreasoned hatred against Americans (or any non-Irish) allowed by Gandalf without reply? (by the way - really original name there) If so, I really don't need to be here. That's okay, I've gotten much of the answer I came for.

To the rest of you, have a wonderful weekend

hullaballoo

PhonyDoctor wrote:

I've some ancestory that might have been born in your neighborhood, but I've never thought of myself as Irish.

For shame(!)

However, your animus ("Plastic Paddies"?) is interesting. What makes a person Irish? Is a person less Irish because his ancestors left an Island in a wake of famine only to have a one in three chance of surviving within the next five years of reaching the American continent?

Most people would say, "Irish citizenship" makes you Irish. Personally, I can't fault their logic.

Are you always such a hostile knob? I've done nothing to insult you or a single person here.

Wait wait wait. You've done nothing to insult him? What does calling him a 'hostile knob' do?

And why would you be surprised at the hostility? Wasn't that what you were aiming at - a provocative thread? That's without even bringing up the racism. Oops. I said it, didn't I?

Your apparent hatred of Americans is a bit too zealous under the circumstances.

What circumstances are you privy to that allows you to dictate what is 'too zealous' and what is not?

cailin_donn

Hmmmm what makes you Irish? well a number of things
1)Being a citizen
2)Being reared with a deep bitterness towards england
3)Having the accent also adds to the effect!
4)Behaving like an irish person, which differs sometimes but not greatly
5)Drinking... and if you got angry at me saying that then lighten up!!! lol

hullaballoo

cailin_donn wrote:

2)Being reared with a deep bitterness towards england

I think the discussion is about the here and now. Not a century ago.

Liam Byrne

PhonyDoctor wrote:

Ah, so it seems that the Irish, even the worst of the terrorists, loved their children more than they hated the British. One of the great things about Western culture IMHO, is our love of family exceeds our love of self and personal ambitions.

PLEASE tell me you're not so naieve that that statement isn't dripping with sarcasm ? The current incarnation of Western Culture is probably the worst ever example of how to look after family and community!

darkman2 wrote:

Hmmm you manage to get 'the Irish' and 'worst of the terrorists' into the one sentence......is this a wind up? If not then yes I agree the economy makes people happy.

My aren't we sensitive today ? The quote was "the Irish, even the worst of the terrorists....."

2 points:

1) the above statement wasn't saying that "all Irish were terrorists", it was saying that "even" the scumbags, who had previously shown no regard for lives of children or others, managed to put the future quality of life of their children ahead of their need for violence

2) I'd guess (having seen a few of your posts in other threads) that you've taken issue with a perceived implication that only the "irish" had their selection of scum; my opinion is that, in the context of the thread, the OP mean "the Northern Irish", so you should actually be happy - it's those from the "other side" that should be annoyed that he didn't include the word "British".

To keep on that frame of mind, there was no way for Ireland to solve the problem on its own; at the very least, the Republic of Ireland has no juristiction or right to tell anyone from the North what to do (just as the reverse applies) and some UK input was required in order to allay the concerns of what are essentially their citizens in the North.

As for U.S. and other involvement; I'm not sure why they were required, but I'm damn glad that it wasn't Bush who was trying to "help", considering his method of dealing with countries that might have small minorities of marginally-supported terrorists is to blow the crap out of them!

Who cares, anyway ? As long as the thugs on both sides have stopped shooting and bombing innocent people, I'm happy, whoever's responsible!

gandalf

PhonyDoctor wrote:

I've some ancestory that might have been born in your neighborhood, but I've never thought of myself as Irish.

However, your animus ("Plastic Paddies"?) is interesting. What makes a person Irish? Is a person less Irish because his ancestors left an Island in a wake of famine only to have a one in three chance of surviving within the next five years of reaching the American continent?

Just wondering how your conversation got onto the Irish problem?

I sure you can claim Irish ancestry but you are not Irish. If they or you were born in America and claim citizenship I would call you American.

Are you always such a hostile knob? I've done nothing to insult you or a single person here. Your apparent hatred of Americans is a bit too zealous under the circumstances.

I asked you a simple question because your provocative thread seemed condescending and appeared that you were talking down to us poor Irish.

I do see I hit a raw nerve where on earth did you get that I had hatred of Americans from that one question. You seem to be a bit paranoid.

Anyway I will leave it to one of the other Politics Mods to ban you.

Good night and good luck.

PhonyDoctor

gandalf wrote:

Just wondering how your conversation got onto the Irish problem?

It doesn't matter. Your hostility is uncalled for.

I sure you can claim Irish ancestry but you are not Irish. If they or you were born in America and claim citizenship I would call you American.

That's fair enough. That's what I call myself, but it's ashame that you condescend to people who happen to proudly reflect on their Irish ancestory.

I asked you a simple question because your provocative thread seemed condescending and appeared that you were talking down to us poor Irish.

Which might seem a fair statement had I not qualified it with the very first sentence of my thread.

I do see I hit a raw nerve where on earth did you get that I had hatred of Americans from that one question. You seem to be a bit paranoid.

Paranoid - no - your hostility was clear, and to tell you the truth - a startling event. It's just when people go and make hostile statements about Americans that I remark on it. By the way, the thread on "Irish Loyalties" is also marked by spontaneous anti-American attacks where I had not made a single remark against a single person or against the Irish.

Go figure.

Anyway I will leave it to one of the other Politics Mods to ban you.

Obviously, they're not going to ban you no matter what you say

PhonyDoctor

Liam Byrne wrote:

PLEASE tell me you're not so naieve that that statement isn't dripping with sarcasm ?

No, I was quite sincere. Perhaps I rate your culture higher than you rate your own.

The current incarnation of Western Culture is probably the worst ever example of how to look after family and community!

Having visited most of Europe, much of Central and South America, China, Korea, Russia, the Ukraine, Turkey and a number of other spots around the world, Western Culture compares favorably.

Of course if you are comparing modern western culture to previous incarnations only (at least for the last 500 years), I might agree with you in many respects.