Would you like to see a united Ireland?

LordSutch

O'Morris wrote: »

Ideally, I would like a united and independent Ireland governed from Dublin rather than from either London or Brussels. Scotland is now just a few steps away from being an independent country. Not only would we be in the same position today had we remained in the union with Britain but we'd also probably be wealthier and still united. We'd also probably have far fewer immigrants.

If you are saying what I think you are saying then I agree 100% with you, ie that the republic should have stayed in the Union, thus it would have retained its Wealth & Status as held pre 1922 (instead of going down the tubes for 80 years) - until the Celtic Tiger arrived.

O'Morris wrote: »

I think many unionists value their British identity so much that I'm sure they would rather live on British soil under a British government than live on Irish soil under an Irish government, even if that government and the nationalist population is bending over backwards to make them feel welcome.

We value our identity just as much as you value yours matey.

O'Morris wrote: »

What do you mean it became a less friendly place for protestants after the establishment of the Free State? What evidence do you have that it was any less friendly than it was before the establishment of the free state?

The Country became Roman Catholic over night - got a New National Anthem + a New flag, 'so yes' maybe us Prods felt like slightly uneasy :rolleyes: maybe my grandparents were cold shouldered, maybe (definately) protestants were told to keep their heads down when the Union was broken, remember most of our grandparents/great grandparents came back from the trenches only to find that 'Home' wasnt very Homely anymore . . . :mad:

O'Morris wrote: »

I don't want to see us to make life uncomfortable for northern protestants in a united Ireland. As I've said, I think we should be prepared to make sacrifices so that they feel at home in a united Ireland.

Thats very kind of you.

O'Morris wrote: »

Most of them probably won't. We'll have to make a united Ireland as accommodating a place for them as we can.

Ah tanks very much.

O'Morris wrote: »

You're assuming that if they stay they'll fight which I don't think is a fair assumption. I believe most of them will stay but I can't see them choosing to fight. They're resigned to the fact that Ireland will be united some day so I think they will probably just accept it as something that's not worth wasting the energy to oppose.

Oh yeah :rolleyes:

O'Morris wrote: »

Northern protestants are a law-abiding and peaceful people. If they do want to mount any opposition to an united Ireland, I think that it will take the form of political and democratic opposition. I don't believe they will resort to violence.

Depands on the nature of the threat :mad:

O'Morris wrote: »

I think most people are resigned to the inevitability of a united Ireland so I can't see them resorting to violence to try to reverse something that has little prospect of being reversed.

There you go in cloud cuckoo land again .............

O'Morris wrote: »

I've never met any Germans who regrets that their country was united. I've met Irish people who don't want a united Ireland. There are plenty of them on this forum. I think they're only a very small minority of the Irish population though.

I wonder.

O'Morris wrote: »

And the human migration would be a good thing if the people emigrating are unionists. It will ease the sectarian tension between the two sides.

Are you taking the Pi** Where are we emigrating to

turgon

O'Morris wrote: »

I do want as many of them to leave as possible but if you read what I had written I was talking about the people who don't leave, the people who choose to remain in Ulster.

Would it not be easier if the Irish people in the North left?

guinnessdrinker

Camelot wrote: »

If you are saying what I think you are saying then I agree 100% with you, ie that the republic should have stayed in the Union, thus it would have retained its Wealth & Status as held pre 1922 (instead of going down the tubes for 80 years) - until the Celtic Tiger arrived.

In fairness, Ireland pre 1922 wasn't exactly an economic utopia either. Mostly a poor agricultural orientated country and possibly poorer urban communities, don't forget about Dublin's famous slums! I don't think there was too much wealth around for the general population to enjoy.

Camelot wrote: »

The Country became Roman Catholic over night - got a New National Anthem + a New flag, 'so yes' maybe us Prods felt like slightly uneasy :rolleyes: maybe my grandparents were cold shouldered, maybe (definately) protestants were told to keep their heads down when the Union was broken, remember most of our grandparents/great grandparents came back from the trenches only to find that 'Home' wasnt very Homely anymore . . . :mad:

I don't think the country became Roman Catholic overnight, the majority of the country outside the north east were always Catholic anyway. I know the Irish tricolour is not exactly cherished by people from a Unionist background these days but when first introduced it at least acknowledged people from the two main communities on the island at the time. I can completely understand Unionists not liking the anthem though especially as it replaced God Save the King!

As for people returning from the War, it was not just protestants that were shunned upon return. People joined the army for many various reasons and unfortunately for a long time those that fought in WWI were forgotten about. I think now though that finally people are begining to remember those Irish soldiers that fought and died, whether in the name of Ireland or Britian and I personally think it's a good thing that they are finally being remembered.

I think people on this island from Unionist and Nationalist communities are a lot more similiar than they think (although some won't like that fact). I heard Bertie Ahern say shortly before he resigned as Taoiseach something along the lines that he thought that Unionists have a lot more in common with the people from Dublin than they have with people from London, it's not that often I agree with him but on that observation I think he was spot on.

Erin Go Brath

Camelot wrote: »

why not re-absorbe the south back into the UK as it was pre 1922, then you could have your Holy Grail of a 'United Ireland' & I am sure Irelands Unionists would be very happy indeed - then, just to put the iceing on the cake, you could remove about 20 layers of green paint on the post boxes to reveal the Nations 'Royal Mail Red' once again

How about that for a United Ireland? my point being that its just as daft asking the North to become part of the South as it is for the South to become part of the North or reintegrate back into the UK - isnt it?

Great idea. Then we can become the downtrodden race that some of you self-loathing types aspire to. Seriously Ireland under UK rule hasn't done very well in the past has it? Lets examine, yes that lovely chap Oliver Cromwell massacred his way through the country. Oh the penal laws they were a good one. How about the famine where food was shipped out of the country by British soldiers and people let starve to death. What about our native language and sports which were outlawed etc etc etc.

I don't get how people think unification is daft. Monaghan and Tyrone in seperate jurisdictions, Derry and Donegal in different jurisdictions, now thats daft!

LordSutch

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

In fairness, Ireland pre 1922 wasn't exactly an economic utopia either. Mostly a poor agricultural orientated country and possibly poorer urban communities, don't forget about Dublin's famous slums! I don't think there was too much wealth around for the general population to enjoy.

Well, Yes, I agree with you guinnessdrinker to a certain extent apart from Irelands economic state which was probably on a par with northern England or Scotland at that time, & remember that Dublin was the 'Second City' of the UK, an Underground Tube network was on the cards for Dublin, Dunleary to Dublin (Kingstown) had already seen one of the first & most successful railway lines, the Liffey was full of Guinness Barges & steamers of all sorts, there was a lot of Wealth in the country too (as well as poverty)!

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

I know the Irish tricolour is not exactly cherished by people from a Unionist background these days but when first introduced it at least acknowledged people from the two main communities on the island at the time. I can completely understand Unionists not liking the anthem though especially as it replaced God Save the King!

I dont dislike the Tricolour . . . . :eek: . . . but . . . it has been seriously tarnished since 1916 to an extent that, well, lets say i'm slowly warming to it :eek: but on the other hand maybe i'm not Orange or Green, and this is where the Union flag which is one third Irish fits in 'perfectly' (for me). As for for the current Anthem of the Republic, sorry its a non starter.

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

As for people returning from the War, it was not just protestants that were shunned upon return. People joined the army for many various reasons and unfortunately for a long time those that fought in WWI were forgotten about. I think now though that finally people are begining to remember those Irish soldiers that fought and died, whether in the name of Ireland or Britian and I personally think it's a good thing that they are finally being remembered.

Well, Yes, I agree with you yet again guinnessdrinker.

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

I think people on this island from Unionist and Nationalist communities are a lot more similiar than they think (although some won't like that fact). I heard Bertie Ahern say shortly before he resigned as Taoiseach something along the lines that he thought that Unionists have a lot more in common with the people from Dublin than they have with people from London, it's not that often I agree with him but on that observation I think he was spot on.

Yeah, kinda, but the thing is that westbrits like me (or Northern Unionists) are very similar to you naturally, but, & here is the but, we believe in the 'Union' (a connection) between Ireland & Britain - Irish Nationalists dont.

All in all it seems like we are on a similar political wavelength today

pablomakaveli

Camelot wrote: »

As for for the current Anthem of the Republic, sorry its a non starter.

You may dislike the irish anthem but id be completely against changing or removing it. it may be offensive to unionists in the north but people in the republic might similarly be offended by god save the queen.

that said i respect the british peoples right to their anthem and if was attending a match or event where it was played, i wouldnt be happy about it but i would at least be respectful.

most anthems are about war or are very nationalistic so i guess you'll just have to accept the fact its our anthem and (hopefully) will remain our anthem.

unionists often complain about amhran na bhfiann (by the way iv never once heard a unionist call it by its irish name) but they may as well be complaining about the french or american anthems being offensive if they are going to criticise our anthem for being too warlike.

LordSutch

In fairness I didnt slate 'The Soldiers Song' and all I'am saying is that its a 'Non-Starter' as a National Anthem in relation to the original question Re 'Would You Like to see a United Ireland' - thats all i'm saying.

Presuming you want to include Unionists ?

xOxSinéadxOx

but what would be the advantages of a united ireland? i can't think of any...

djpbarry

pablomakaveli wrote: »

You may dislike the irish anthem but id be completely against changing or removing it. it may be offensive to unionists in the north but people in the republic might similarly be offended by god save the queen.

Not really; they're both a crocks of ****e.

pablomakaveli

Camelot wrote: »

In fairness I didnt slate 'The Soldiers Song' and all I'am saying is that its a 'Non-Starter' as a National Anthem in relation to the original question Re 'Would You Like to see a United Ireland' - thats all i'm saying.

Presuming you want to include Unionists ?

Ok. its just there has been a lot of talk about changing tha anthem as it offends unionists.

but im against a united ireland so i dont see the need for it to be changed. its our traditional anthem which means it shouldnt be changed.

i understand you werent slating it though.:)

LordSutch

pablomakaveli wrote: »

but im against a united ireland so i dont see the need for it to be changed. its our traditional anthem which means it shouldnt be changed.

I agree.

Thirdfox

Speaking as a naturalised Irish (originally Chinese - have been Irish most of my life) I think preserving the status quo is good - until everyone can come to an agreement (not unlike the Republic of China (Taiwan)/People's Republic of China problem). What I most certainly do not want is further bloodshed. Likewise if one side tries forcefully to change the status quo there will be a negative reaction on the other side.

Anyway, we're all part of the European Union - and ceding more sovereignty to it so in some sense we're already part of one (big) family. We share the same language, the same passport (EU passport), the same citizenship (as per the EU - we are all EU citizens now), and probably the same currency soon-ish. What does it matter where the boundary line happens to fall if most people are content?

O'Morris

sink wrote:

As has been eluded to many times the Norths economy is very different to our own and heavily reliant upon the public sector which accounts for 63% of their overall economy, comparatively our public sector only accounts for 36% of our economy. If we were to take on the responsibility of managing the Norths economy it would cost us a huge amount in government funding for many years.

It would cost us a huge amount of money if we took on the management of the north's economy now but there is no prospect of a united Ireland any time soon. It's not going happen tomorrow or the day after. A united Ireland would be at least another ten years away so we can't base the economic costs of unification on a current comparison of the economies. We need to base it on what the economy will look like in ten years from now or even twenty years from now. I don't believe the north's economy will be as heavily reliant on the public sector in 2018 as it is now. I think the peace dividend will lead a increase in the amount of foreign investment over the next few years and that more than anything else will lead to a greater increase in the number of people employed in the private sector.

We need to have a proper feasibility study done to find just what the costs will be and what would be involved in integrating the two economies. If the costs are found to be too high and if the people would not be prepared to pay for it then we'll just need to abandon the idea in the short-term and wait for another generation to see if things change.

If the costs are not found be be unpayable though and if a poll finds that most people in the 26 counties would be prepared to bear the financial burden of unification then the government should come up with a strategy for how they plan to achieve it. As long as we have the support of the majority of the catholic population, all we would need to do is persuade a minority of the protestant population to get over 50% of the north's electorate.

sink wrote:

It would be very difficult to replace those jobs with new private sector jobs at an adequate pace and there will be some structural unemployment the result of which will be a spike in unemployment levels and a decrease in the size of the economy. It would take several years to develop the private sector to fully pick up the slack left over from the downsized public sector.

And most of us are prepared to wait several years. It would depend on how much the north would cost. I would be prepared to pay as much proportionately for Irish unification as the west Germans paid for German unification.

sink wrote:

I have no opposition to a united Ireland on cultural grounds but bet your ass many Unionists do.

I would expect them to be opposed to it but as long as they respect the rule of law and the principle of consent then I don't see it being a major problem.

Many of us are opposed to our membership of the European Union (not the common market) but we don't resort to violence to reverse it. I don't believe the unionist population will resort to violence either to oppose a united Ireland. We'll hear plenty of fighting talk from them but I just don't think they have the stomach for a return to the violence of the last thirty years.

sink wrote:

Dissident Unionists could escalate the situation and start a campaign to free themselves of Irish rule.

They could but I don't believe they would have the support of the broader unionist population in the way that the republicans did. The nationalist population in the north didn't resort to violence at the time of partition at the time Ireland was partitioned back in the 1920s and I think it will be the same with the unionist population when Ireland is united.

sink wrote:

I think your presupposition that many Unionist would emigrate to Britain is ill founded.

I don't think it is ill-founded. Most of them will stay but I can see huge numbers of them deciding to emigrate to retain their British nationality.

sink wrote:

How many Irish emigrated south after partitioning?

Not many because partition was viewed as a temporary arrangement and so most nationalists didn't see any point in moving at the time of partition. They expected that the country would be united after a few years. I think more than a few nationalists in the north did move south though.

sink wrote:

There wouldn't be any entertainment of your notion that we could give a constitutional role to the Monarch or other such nonsense as it would be rejected out of hand in a popular referenda.

I wouldn't underestimate the sacrifices that republicans would be prepared to make if it meant an end to partition.

sink wrote:

In finale I would reflect back to the relation you played between my rejection of seeking a united Ireland and immigration. As I have pointed out I do not oppose a united Ireland on cultural ground and at the same time I do not support immigration on cultural grounds so your entire premise is false.

I wasn't referring to you personally so my premise cannot be false. I was referring to a general tendency to dismiss the idea of a united Ireland because their "not like us" by the same people who would condemn people for giving the same reason for restricting immigration.

LordSutch

Thirdfox wrote: »

Speaking as a naturalised Irish (originally Chinese - have been Irish most of my life) I think preserving the status quo is good - until everyone can come to an agreement (not unlike the Republic of China (Taiwan)/People's Republic of China problem). What I most certainly do not want is further bloodshed. Likewise if one side tries forcefully to change the status quo there will be a negative reaction on the other side.

Anyway, we're all part of the European Union - and ceding more sovereignty to it so in some sense we're already part of one (big) family. We share the same language, the same passport (EU passport), the same citizenship (as per the EU - we are all EU citizens now), and probably the same currency soon-ish. What does it matter where the boundary line happens to fall if most people are content?

Well said Thridfox - I just wish everybody had your common sense & logic, then we could all relax - & maybe then Republicans would STOP trying to FORCE their version of what they call a united ireland - the Status Quo works just fine as it currently stands with the North still part of the UK.

O'Morris

Camelot wrote: »

Well said Thridfox - I just wish everybody had your common sense & logic, then we could all relax - & maybe then Republicans would STOP trying to FORCE their version of what they call a united ireland - the Status Quo works just fine as it currently stands with the North still part of the UK.

Now look here, old boy, we'll get the 6 counties eventually. Our day will come, even if that day is another century away. You people need to face up to that fact and you need to ask yourself what will be in your long-term interests. If your share of the population continues to fall then you'll be less likely to negotiate a favourable position in a united Ireland when it does happen.

It's in the catholic nationalists interests to wait for another fifty years for a united Ireland as the longer they wait the weaker the position of the orangemen will become and so when Ireland is united it will be the kind of Ireland that they want and not the kind of Ireland that liberal, tolerant, educated people such as yourself and myself want.

LordSutch

O'Morris wrote: »

Now look here, old boy, we'll get the 6 counties eventually. Our day will come, even if that day is another century away.

Here lies the problem.

oscarBravo

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

I don't get how people think unification is daft. Monaghan and Tyrone in seperate jurisdictions, Derry and Donegal in different jurisdictions, now thats daft!

Freiburg and Colmar in different jurisdictions, now that's daft!

Borders are a fact of life.

O'Morris

Camelot wrote: »

Here lies the problem.

I was only joking. I wasn't seriously trying to suggest that the 26 counties will claim ownership of the 6 counties. Ireland is the property of all Irishmen (both New and Old Irish) and the day will come when we'll have full ownership of the country together.

Looking at it the other around, you (New Irish people) will get the 26 counties some day.

jim o doom

I'm inclined to think & hope that the counties will never be rejoined - besides the tax implications it will drop on us having to pay an even larger social services bill than we do now; will the people up there be willing to not only give up what they have now, combined with lower inflation, but will they be willing to give up their superior health service? Even if they have to travel to England for health they have it a lot better - I wouldn't be willing to give that up for something so pointless as "complete national identity" or whatever it is the people who want the six counties back believe in..
Not only that though, it's great being able to drive to the North as if it was a "different country" which it is, but you know what I mean; you can go up and get some "illegal fireworks" cheap booze - it's great being able to do that, it's not as if NI being part of the UK is preventing anyone from there or here going back and forth as if the border didn't exist in the first place!
This is just to be scandalous, but a good friend of mine wants to print up a t-shirt stating on the front "NI is a cancer, lets keep it a British one".
Ridiculous but funny - he'll never print it up because he would be lynched >:o)

gandalf

Have just skimmed over this thread so what I am saying may have been covered elsewhere.

I would love to see a united Ireland providing everything is in place to ensure its a smooth transition.

At the moment the conditions are not there, both sides of the community in Northern Ireland are still entrenched in the past and until they can sort out their differences there is no point transplanting them into this country. I reckon this is at least 2 generations away.

Northern Ireland needs to change dramatically from an economic point of view. At the moment its economy is based on hand outs from London. Until they can change this to be more on parity with the south there is no point in them joining us, it will cause too much of a strain on our economy.

LordSutch

A 'Minor' question for you 'O'Morris' - "What do you think of my United Ireland suggestion in Post# 59" ?

guinnessdrinker

gandalf wrote: »

Northern Ireland needs to change dramatically from an economic point of view. At the moment its economy is based on hand outs from London. Until they can change this to be more on parity with the south there is no point in them joining us, it will cause too much of a strain on our economy.

I think some people against a United Ireland because of fears of what will happen to the economy and it's a fair enough concern. However, I think these fears are based on what would happen if reunification happened overnight.

Gandalf is right about both economies on the island needing to be on par with each other. This is already begining to happen. I know when Peter Hain first spoke of an all island economy a couple of years ago that Unionists at first were outraged but at the end of the day, greater economic co-operation makes perfect sense and is of mutual benefit to people on both sides of the border.

Here is a link to a gov page that includes the comprehensive study on the all island economy. It makes for interesting reading and you don't have to be an economist to realise most of what is written in it is common sense.

RDM_83

oscarBravo wrote: »

Freiburg and Colmar in different jurisdictions, now that's daft!

Borders are a fact of life.

I hope you end up living up in Buncrana with cancer so you can appreciate the "Borders are a fact of life" attitude properly

Edit: sorry change that to a different serious illness I forgot about the 2006 closing of the Letterkenny general stuff that sort of forced the issue of cancer, mind you if your in Dungloe or somewhere Belfast ain't much use to you either

O'Morris

Camelot wrote: »

A 'Minor' question for you 'O'Morris' - "What do you think of my United Ireland suggestion in Post# 59" ?

I am a unionist in the sense that I consider Ireland to be part of the British family of nations and I would like to see closer integration between the nations of the British isles. I would be supportive of a union of the British isles as an alternative to the European union but I would still rather see us being governed by our own Irish government in Dublin (or possibly even in Belfast if that would make the orangemen happy) though rather than a government in London or Brussels.

Independence was not worth the price of partition. It was only ever meant to be a temporary, short-term solution to the problem of the orangemen's opposition to home rule. If people knew back then that it would be permanent then we would never have gone ahead with breaking away from the union. Now that we have broken away though we can't do much to reverse it.

Northerner's home is in a united Ireland with the rest of us. The British don't want you, we do.

LordSutch

Bloody Hell - I actually agree with you 100% :eek:

LovetohateTV

Yes

O'Morris

Camelot wrote: »

Bloody Hell - I actually agree with you 100% :eek:

I knew you would old chum. All we need to do now is convince a big enough minority of the rest of the protestant population in the north and sure we're half way there.

LordSutch

With the whole island back in the Commonwealth (to help sweeten the bitter pill)!

gandalf

Camelot wrote: »

With the whole island back in the Commonwealth (to help sweeten the bitter pill)!

Hmm we might actually win a medal in the Commonwealth games as well

sink

While I agree that partition was bad for the south as we lost out economically but those days are long gone. The UK tax payer is not going to fund a Dublin underground transportation network these days. I don't see any economic benefits in re-joining the UK that we would not get by simply joining the commonwealth. I strongly support joining the commonwealth.