So what type of relationship should Ireland have with Britain?

AceofSpades001

Bubs101 wrote: »

And when he was born in DUblin it was part of the U.K. before which would make him British

That would make Mahatma Gandhi British by that logic. Plus most of Africa and a fair portion of Asia could claim British descent. Regardless of this completely trivial point is the fact that it matters not whether someone was Catholic/Protestant/Irish/British, only what cause they fought for.

Personally I think that Ireland should continue developing strong ties with the UK as regards trade. But I think that there should be more of a push from the Irish side to reassert our culture. I'm not saying that we should
ban speaking English or anything drastic but establishing and demonstrating to the world a pride in our culture that doesn't involve going to the pub and belting out a tune of "Get out ye Black and Tans" would be nice.

Besides, I think that within a few generations, when the memories of troubles in the north are but a memory of great grandparents and the hardline unionist numbers have dwindled relative to a rising moderate (and maybe apathetic) population, I think that we will see a United Ireland voted in by referendum by Northern Irish people. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but hopefully?

purple'n'gold

“That would make Mahatma Gandhi British by that logic. Plus most of Africa and a fair portion of Asia could claim British descent. Regardless of this completely trivial point is the fact that it matters not whether someone was Catholic/Protestant/Irish/British, only what cause they fought for.”

Neither India nor any part of Africa was ever part of the United Kingdom. Ireland was, from 1801 to 1922.

DublinWriter

all the stars wrote: »

We dont own this world anyway - it belongs no one. So what differance will it make.

True - I always thought it was a bit like fleas arguing over who owned the dog.

As long as basic human and civil rights are enjoyed by all, then what is the problem?

AceofSpades001

purplengold wrote: »

“That would make Mahatma Gandhi British by that logic. Plus most of Africa and a fair portion of Asia could claim British descent. Regardless of this completely trivial point is the fact that it matters not whether someone was Catholic/Protestant/Irish/British, only what cause they fought for.”

Neither India nor any part of Africa was ever part of the United Kingdom. Ireland was, from 1801 to 1922.

Woops, need to brush up on my history.

Riddle101

purplengold wrote: »

“That would make Mahatma Gandhi British by that logic. Plus most of Africa and a fair portion of Asia could claim British descent. Regardless of this completely trivial point is the fact that it matters not whether someone was Catholic/Protestant/Irish/British, only what cause they fought for.”

Neither India nor any part of Africa was ever part of the United Kingdom. Ireland was, from 1801 to 1922.

correction it was known as the Union of Great Britain and Ireland, i don't see anything there about Scotland or Wales, so that must mean we weren't seen as British. Also dose it really make any difference whether Pearse was British or not, he fought for Irish rights therfore he did not care if he was British nor dose anyone else for that matter.

Like i said before we need to forget the past, if Britain can forget that France was at one stage their biggest enemy or that Germany once invaded most of Europe then i think Ireland and Britain should forget there difference, the Rep of Ireland is free now just get over it

LordSutch

Which probably makes all our Grandparents/ Great grandparents British/Irish if they were born pre 1922 ?

As a matter of interest, its fascinating when you look at old pictures or read accounts of Queen Victoria's last visit in 1900~1901 particularly to see the thousands of Irish people all over Dublin & Dun Laoghaire (Kingstown) waving Union Jacks (Dublin Jackeens)? ~ and then just a couple of decades later (we are not british, we never were british, we despise the british & everything they stand for) & we dont want the North or its people to be British either :rolleyes:

If you look at our history, it does seem that we have a somewhat confused identity regarding our Geography & National identity, and recently we have even left the british isles according to Dermot Ahearn (Twit) but at least we have joined the "Council of the Isles" which I presume is the British isles

And what is British anyway? I am british for sure (but I am certainly not English), Paisley is also very Irish & fervently British too . . . . the Union Jack is the British Flag (but is also one third Irish) :eek:

This group of islands are all intertwined so much that its just plain silly to pretend that we are all foreign or alien to each other in Britain & Ireland, so I think we should enjoy our new found peacefull relationship within these islands ~ British, Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Cornish, Manx, etc etc etc . . .

Its very true what a previous poster said about "Our children playing in their garden, & theirs in ours" and its always been that way too .............

Let the Good Friday Agreement flourish & bed in, and these two islands will continue to grow closer (again) & find new ways & channels to go forward together as we have always done since the beginning of time.

leninbenjamin

AceofSpades001 wrote: »

Personally I think that Ireland should continue developing strong ties with the UK as regards trade.

side note; pretty pointless exercise to focus on increasing trade with Britain, by and large the markets there are saturated anyway. from an economic point of view we need to diversify trade rather than concentrate it.

On topic I don't give a feck tbh about realigning the relationship or what have you. by and large the relationship we have is fine as is, it's just in the progress of normalising after the past few turbulent decades. I'd focus more on strengthening our relationship with the rest of the EU frankly, it's going to be the institution to have the most profound impact on our wee isle's progress over the next few decades or so. better to be trying to alleviate the sourness the French feel over our tax regime (like a country of 4mill is going to make a whit on the mismanagement of their economy seeing as they are so domestically orientated to being with :rolleyes:).

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

If you look at our history, it does seem that we have a somewhat confused identity regarding our Geography & National identity, .

I dont feel confused at all. Im Irish and thats that. Where would any 'confusion' come from? Everyone I know has absolutely no confusion about their national identity. Why would they? If you where born before the British departure maybe its understandable. Today there is no basis for any confusion south of the border. Even Kevin Myers seems to have gotten over his 'confusion'.;)

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

Let the Good Friday Agreement flourish & bed in, and these two islands will continue to grow closer (again) & find new ways & channels to go forward together as we have always done since the beginning of time.

lol your take on the past is, at best warped and wrong - your thoughts for the future are a pipe dream. Why would we want to go back to being treated like crap by the British?
Because thats how we were always treated. Leopards dont change their spots.

darkman2

djpbarry wrote: »

Who would they be? You don't think the people of NI have the right to elect whoever they please?
This country wouldn't, or you wouldn't? Personally, I don't see any problems with an independent NI.

Do you recall the regime in NI under the Unionists? It has been said that Unionists in NI are 'a different breed' to that in either the UK or the Republic. It is, in my opinion, their irrational sense of siege that gives them the accurate description of being the most unreasonable of people. If they had control up there on their own then you would know about it! Thats the way they are - and not too distant history verifies that. The British and the Irish governments decided long before the GFA that it is unacceptable to have Unionists governing the North on their own. They cant be trusted and we know what would be meated out to Catholics and Nationalists. Hence why they cannot and will not have real democracy in NI. Hence - 'Power sharing'.........take the Jews, for example, they dont give the Germans an inch today - they let them know they have nukes specifically targeting them. The message is - dont mess with us again. Our own have been on the recieving end in NI at the hands of Unionists - how can we ever trust them? And I know someone will bring up the IRA etc in reply to this - the Unionists up there let the Nationalists know their place long before the IRA was a problem.

Agent Smith

sexual....



I see Wales Checking us out. they want some of our sweet ass....

Anti

agent smith wrote: »

sexual....



I see Wales Checking us out. they want some of our sweet ass....

Like fúck do we !

LordSutch

What I was eluding to in Post#37 was that the lines between being Irish & or British are/ have always been blurred ............

Geographically this island is just 22 miles away from our neighbouring island 'Britain' with tens of thousands (a million maybe)? people in Britain claiming Irish ancestry, & with one million Unionists on this island, & with many more with English, Scottish, or Welsh Surnames spread all over this island which is understandable given our proximity & cultural ties with the Big island next door.

But then I am a Unionist & I am Irish/ British too, so I suppose my ideas & relationship with the rest of the people in this little group of islands would be somewhat different when compared to an "Irish" Nationalist for example, who sees the "British" as some kind of negative foreign people who are to be disliked & who belong to the past when the island of Ireland is concerned.

You cant wash britishness out of our blood, its in there to stay, for good, no more so than many people in Britain can pretend that they are 'not Irish'.

bartholomewbinn

darkman2 wrote: »

Do you recall the regime in NI under the Unionists? It has been said that Unionists in NI are 'a different breed' to that in either the UK or the Republic. It is, in my opinion, their irrational sense of siege that gives them the accurate description of being the most unreasonable of people. If they had control up there on their own then you would know about it! Thats the way they are - and not too distant history verifies that. The British and the Irish governments decided long before the GFA that it is unacceptable to have Unionists governing the North on their own. They cant be trusted and we know what would be meated out to Catholics and Nationalists. Hence why they cannot and will not have real democracy in NI. Hence - 'Power sharing'.........take the Jews, for example, they dont give the Germans an inch today - they let them know they have nukes specifically targeting them. The message is - dont mess with us again. Our own have been on the recieving end in NI at the hands of Unionists - how can we ever trust them? And I know someone will bring up the IRA etc in reply to this - the Unionists up there let the Nationalists know their place long before the IRA was a problem.

The Jews have nukes targeting Germany? Are you privy to information the rest of us don’t have, or are you into substance abuse?

FTA69

DublinWriter wrote: »

The whole 'Brits Out' argument makes me laugh. The UK would have pulled out of the Province long ago if they had a free choice. The area has been a massive drain on the UK economy since the 1950's and was increasingly moreso after the commencement of the troubles.

Nonsense. If the Brits had wanted to leave they would have left, simple as that, the same way they left Aden, Kenya and a raft of other places. They wouldn't have fought a 25 year dirty war and armed Loyalists if they were simply piggy in the middle between the mad Paddies. Personally I think it is much more politically naieve to buy into this notion that the Brits have no interest in this country at all considering 15% of their military intelligence budget concerns this country, as well as the fact they are building a massive MI5 headquarters in Ireland.

If Britain pulled out of the North in the morning, what do you think 500,000+ Unionists would do? Wake up in the morning, rub the sleep from their eyes, and go "Jaysus Billy, sure we might as well give this whole Republican thing a go".

No, but they would also have no choice but to live in an Irish Republic as there would be no foreign power guaranteeing them a veto over Irish sovereignty.

No they would not. There would be an all-out civil war up there that would make Kosovo look like a tea party. Meanwhile Westminster would look over at Dublin and say "That's your problem now, chaps".

War with a view to what? Reunification with Britain would be an impossibility. That leaves an independent northern state. This would also be unfeasable considering the fact the Unionists have no critical mass outside North Down and the Antrim coast. Both Belfast and Derry have clear nationalist majorities, the border area is overwhelmingly nationalist as is the countryside of Fermanagh and Tyrone. A Unionist state on its own could never survive, hence why the Brits had to prop it up in the face of a Republican insurgency.

purple'n'gold

Riddle101 wrote: »

correction it was known as the Union of Great Britain and Ireland, i don't see anything there about Scotland or Wales, so that must mean we weren't seen as British. Also dose it really make any difference whether Pearse was British or not, he fought for Irish rights therfore he did not care if he was British nor dose anyone else for that matter.

Like i said before we need to forget the past, if Britain can forget that France was at one stage their biggest enemy or that Germany once invaded most of Europe then i think Ireland and Britain should forget there difference, the Rep of Ireland is free now just get over it

“Grattan’s independent Irish parliament lasted a mere 18 years. The Act of Union of 1800, which came into force on 1 January 1801, created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and united the parliaments of the two kingdoms. From then until Independence in 1922 Irish Members of Parliament held seats in the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with its seat at the Palace of Westminster.”

http://www.irlgov.ie/oireachtas/a-misc/historical-note.htm

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

What I was eluding to in Post#37 was that the lines between being Irish & or British are/ have always been blurred ............

Geographically this island is just 22 miles away from our neighbouring island 'Britain' with tens of thousands (a million maybe)? people in Britain claiming Irish ancestry, & with one million Unionists on this island, & with many more with English, Scottish, or Welsh Surnames spread all over this island which is understandable given our proximity & cultural ties with the Big island next door.

But then I am a Unionist & I am Irish/ British too, so I suppose my ideas & relationship with the rest of the people in this little group of islands would be somewhat different when compared to an "Irish" Nationalist for example, who sees the "British" as some kind of negative foreign people who are to be disliked & who belong to the past when the island of Ireland is concerned.

You cant wash britishness out of our blood, its in there to stay, for good, no more so than many people in Britain can pretend that they are 'not Irish'.

You say your 'Unionist'. Would it be too much to ask for you to say where you where born? Might allow some to understand where your coming from better.

LordSutch

On the island of Ireland.

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

On the island of Ireland.

Could you be more specific - NI or ROI? Its important in the context of the debate to know on what legal and practical basis you describe yourself as 'British'. I was born in the ROI therefore I am not British. Where you born in the ROI?

clarkey2008

It is past having asking about what type of relationship we should have with Britain.

We are all in a united Europe now, soverign powers are all but gone.

LordSutch

The part that remaines within the UK.

Latchy

turgon wrote: »

How about political union with Scotland and Wales. Get the whole united celtic republics thing going

That's assuming all the welsh and scottish want that kinda union, like we are going to be one big happy celtic family .The protestant section /traditionalists of that part of uk might not like the idea just as much as the unionist crowd in NI dont .

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

The part that remaines within the UK.

So now we find out Arthur F is in fact a Northern Unionist commenting on the 'Britishness' in Irish people south of the border. You probrably should have lied and said you were born here!;)

LordSutch

Do you disagree & deny everything that I said in Post#37 and Post#44.

ciaran2008

I don't think it makes a difference to be honest because at the end of the day we are all part of the EU which is increasingly becoming more and more like the US i.e the EU Parliament being Congress and each country being a state and it wont be too long until we have Governor Ahern/Cowen and Governor Brown so who cares?

leninbenjamin

FTA69 wrote: »

DublinWriter wrote: »

Nonsense. If the Brits had wanted to leave they would have left, simple as that, the same way they left Aden, Kenya and a raft of other places. They wouldn't have fought a 25 year dirty war and armed Loyalists if they were simply piggy in the middle between the mad Paddies. Personally I think it is much more politically naieve to buy into this notion that the Brits have no interest in this country at all considering 15% of their military intelligence budget concerns this country, as well as the fact they are building a massive MI5 headquarters in Ireland.

slight tangent here again, but i wonder does that hark back to the WWII and the vulnerability they felt through our neutrality? the only logical reason for maintaining a foothold in the country would surely be so as to give a platform to invade the entire Island from should we ever see a 'doomsday' scenario again like WWII.

CerebralCortex

ArthurF wrote: »

What I was eluding to in Post#37 was that the lines between being Irish & or British are/ have always been blurred ............

Geographically this island is just 22 miles away from our neighbouring island 'Britain' with tens of thousands (a million maybe)? people in Britain claiming Irish ancestry, & with one million Unionists on this island, & with many more with English, Scottish, or Welsh Surnames spread all over this island which is understandable given our proximity & cultural ties with the Big island next door.

But then I am a Unionist & I am Irish/ British too, so I suppose my ideas & relationship with the rest of the people in this little group of islands would be somewhat different when compared to an "Irish" Nationalist for example, who sees the "British" as some kind of negative foreign people who are to be disliked & who belong to the past when the island of Ireland is concerned.

You cant wash britishness out of our blood, its in there to stay, for good, no more so than many people in Britain can pretend that they are 'not Irish'.

No you can. I was born Irish. I'm usually I'm not very nationalist but on this I am. My surname is of anglo-norman origin but that is inconsequential to how I see my identity actually it makes me feel even less british tbh. "British" is a London construct to bind geographically and culturally different people together for their own gains to make them feel good when they're being f**ked over. There is no equality by its very nature in being british ever wonder why most of the countries surrounding england have populations barely 10% on average of england's. Imho britishness = servitude to the crown with no gain.
Wrt the origional post Britain should be threated like any other country in europe.

darkman2

ArthurF wrote: »

If you look at our history, it does seem that we have a somewhat confused identity regarding our Geography & National identity, and recently we have even left the british isles according to Dermot Ahearn (Twit) but at least we have joined the "Council of the Isles" which I presume is the British isles .

If you look at 'our' history you will quickly find that this country was oppressed by the country next door. You dont have to look to far to see the consequences of this. Just look at the population! It is simply a matter of fact that the reason this country's population is so low and sparse is a direct consequnce of British policy here through generations before 1921.


Also im intrigued to know how you can describe our foreign minister as a 'twit' for representing the views of the vast majority of the Irish people in this jurisdiction in relation to that term. Most people here dont use that term in every day language. I suppose you will now suggest that we are all twits for not using it? I suppose an attitude like that from a Northern Unionist is hardly supprising!

oscarBravo

Two points, darkman2: first, don't even think about using terms like "vast majority" unless you have reliable figures to back it up. Second, you're not long back from a ban; you should know better than to personalise the debate.

LordSutch

CerebralCortex wrote: »

"British" is a London construct to bind geographically and culturally different people together for their own gains to make them feel good when they're being f**ked over.

I never heard that one before.