Question for Republicans (of the Irish variety)

Nalced_irl

That is double standards but its called war. America fighting a war to secure world freedom by occupying countries against their will and also supporting occupiers is also a double standard. As is the Brits fighting for freedom while occupying the north. America threatening to attack Iran to stop them developing nukes while they have the largest amount in the world is also. Not everything in war is done strictly by the book.

Fratton Fred

Nalced_irl wrote: »

As is the Brits fighting for freedom while occupying the north.

How can it be an occupation when the majority of people in NI want them there and the majority of people on this island voted to acknowledge that those people had the right to choose?

Otacon

Nalced_irl wrote: »

That is double standards but its called war. America fighting a war to secure world freedom by occupying countries against their will and also supporting occupiers is also a double standard. As is the Brits fighting for freedom while occupying the north. America threatening to attack Iran to stop them developing nukes while they have the largest amount in the world is also. Not everything in war is done strictly by the book.

Can you then explain how Gerry McCabe's murder qualifys as a act of war?

Nalced_irl

Your seriously going to argue that its not occupation?? Its a foreign force in another countrys territory. Thats occupation. Planting a load of your own people there so that they become the majority doesnt change that. The way i see it, Ireland is Ireland and the majority of this island dont want them there.

oscarBravo

Nalced_irl wrote: »

Your seriously going to argue that its not occupation?? Its a foreign force in another countrys territory.

No, it's not. In case you hadn't noticed, we voted to relinquish our claim on that territory.

Northern Ireland is a part of the UK. It's not "occupied" except in some people's deluded imaginations.

Nalced_irl

Otacon wrote: »

Can you then explain how Gerry McCabe's murder qualifys as a act of war?

I dont remember claiming it was. It was an attempted robbery to fund a war if you want to connect it to it tho

Liam Byrne

Nalced_irl wrote: »

That is double standards but.....

Ignore the "but......"; it's double-standards. So now we're getting somewhere.

People who dislike and query the double-standards are therefore (a) justified in both instances and (b) not "anti-" any side or other - they're just "anti-" double standards.

And, as said already, that makes a lot of people dislike / distrust the overall "republican" movement, because they stick by those double-standards and attempt to excuse them while looking for "justice" and transparency from others.

And as also said already, when they stop doing that we might start to listen to them, and maybe even trust them somewhere down the line.....

But I really wish that people would stop accusing me of being pro-British or west-Brit or anti-republican or some other such "what you're saying doesn't suit me so I'll pretend you're singling us out to deflect attention from the facts".

I'm simply anti double standards. Period.

Liam Byrne

Nalced_irl wrote: »

I dont remember claiming it was. It was an attempted robbery to fund a war if you want to connect it to it tho

P.S. If it was, it broke the ceasefire, so you'd probably want to check that one with Gerry Adams & Co. to see if it's OK to say it.

A Dub in Glasgo

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ignore the "but......"; it's double-standards. So now we're getting somewhere.

People who dislike and query the double-standards are therefore (a) justified in both instances and (b) not "anti-" any side or other - they're just "anti-" double standards.

And, as said already, that makes a lot of people dislike / distrust the overall "republican" movement, because they stick by those double-standards and attempt to excuse them while looking for "justice" and transparency from others.

And as also said already, when they stop doing that we might start to listen to them, and maybe even trust them somewhere down the line.....

But I really wish that people would stop accusing me of being pro-British or west-Brit or anti-republican or some other such "what you're saying doesn't suit me so I'll pretend you're singling us out to deflect attention from the facts".

I'm simply anti double standards. Period.

Ignore the "but......"; it's double-standards. So now we're getting somewhere.

People who dislike and query the double-standards are therefore (a) justified in both instances and (b) not "anti-" any side or other - they're just "anti-" double standards.

And, as said already, that makes a lot of people dislike / distrust the overall British Government movement, because they stick by those double-standards and attempt to excuse them while looking for "justice" and transparency from others.

And as also said already, when they stop doing that we might start to listen to them, and maybe even trust them somewhere down the line.....

But I really wish that people would stop accusing me of being pro-Irish or Irish Republican or anti-British or some other such "what you're saying doesn't suit me so I'll pretend you're singling us out to deflect attention from the facts".

I'm simply anti double standards. Period.

---

It works both ways

LordSutch

Nalced_irl wrote: »

Your seriously going to argue that its not occupation?? Its a foreign force in another countrys territory. Thats occupation. Planting a load of your own people there so that they become the majority doesnt change that. The way i see it, Ireland is Ireland and the majority of this island dont want them there.

Its a Foreign force in another country's territory - me bum!

Unionists have just as much right to occupy this island as Vikings, Norse, Danes, Angles, Normans, Scots, Huguenots, Picts, Poles, Celts or Irish Nationalists!

"Get it"

not one of my best posts admittedly :-)

Erin Go Brath

oscarBravo wrote: »

No, it's not. In case you hadn't noticed, we voted to relinquish our claim on that territory.

Northern Ireland is a part of the UK. It's not "occupied" except in some people's deluded imaginations.

How come Britain were involved in negotiations with Ireland for part of 'their territory' then? Would they negotiate with Ireland with a view to giving away Yorkshire?

How come Britian have agreed to leave Ireland forever when a simple majority within the 6 counties vote in favour of reunification, with no provisions for the north ever returning to the UK?

The simple reality is the British Army is an occupying force, and Britains soverignty over the 6 counties is temporary and conditional.

Fratton Fred

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

How come Britain were involved in negotiations with Ireland for part of 'their territory' then? Would they negotiate with Ireland with a view to giving away Yorkshire?

How come Britian have agreed to leave Ireland forever when a simple majority within the 6 counties vote in favour of reunification, with no provisions for the north ever returning to the UK?

The simple reality is the British Army is an occupying force, and Britains soverignty over the 6 counties is temporary and conditional.

excluding the RIR, who are a local regiment, how many British soldiers exactly are there in Northern Ireland these days, or were there before the sectarian violence erupted?

the Occupation is in the mind of republicans and is a term used to justify their acts, no more. Northern ireland is no more occupied than the USA, or Brazil.

Erin Go Brath

Fratton Fred wrote: »

excluding the RIR, who are a local regiment, how many British soldiers exactly are there in Northern Ireland these days, or were there before the sectarian violence erupted?

the Occupation is in the mind of republicans and is a term used to justify their acts, no more. Northern ireland is no more occupied than the USA, or Brazil.

Theres about 5,000 British soldiers in the 06 as far as i'm aware. This number is less than there was previous but is still a considerable presence.

Whatever way you look at it a large amount of people in the 06 view them as an occupying force theres no getting away from that. They are viewed by many in the area as a hidrance and unwanted presence.

stovelid

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Whatever way you look at it a large amount of people in the 06 view them as an occupying force theres no getting away from that. They are viewed by many in the area as a hidrance and unwanted presence.

The large amount is a large minority, North and South. The soldiers are only viewed by republicans as a hindrance and unwanted presence. Not by a significant proportion of NI. Or a majority of people in the Republic who voted to revoke our claim on NI.

I would personally like to see the soldiers leave too, but using the word occupation to describe a small garrison of (largely barracks-bound) soldiers in a devolved section of the UK (with policing exclusively devolved to the PSNI) is an overreaction.

@Fred. I don't think the RIR exists anymore. Could be wrong.

oscarBravo

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

How come Britain were involved in negotiations with Ireland for part of 'their territory' then? Would they negotiate with Ireland with a view to giving away Yorkshire?

Ireland didn't have a constitutional claim on Yorkshire. Ireland did have a constitutional claim on part of the UK, which was one of the root causes of the internecine conflict there. It could be argued that, from a strictly Irish perspective, there was an occupation prior to the GFA, but international law disagreed.

How come Britian have agreed to leave Ireland forever when a simple majority within the 6 counties vote in favour of reunification, with no provisions for the north ever returning to the UK?

The simple reality is the British Army is an occupying force, and Britains soverignty over the 6 counties is temporary and conditional.

The French provinces of Alsace and Lorraine have changed hands between Germany and France on a number of occasions. Are France occupying them now? Was Germany occupying them in the past?

Sovereignty over an geographic area changes over time. In the past it has mostly happened as a result of violence and bloodshed. It may happen in the future in Northern Ireland; if so, hopefully it will be as a result of diplomacy, negotiation and democracy. If and when it happens, there may be those who believe that NI is occupied by Ireland - and they would be as wrong as you are now.

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Whatever way you look at it a large amount of people in the 06 view them as an occupying force theres no getting away from that. They are viewed by many in the area as a hidrance and unwanted presence.

The Gardaí are viewed by many as a hindrance and unwanted presence. Doesn't make them an occupying force.

getz

most people who went to school in the republic-- have had a history lesson that has been anti/british [i know i went to school in the republic for a time} i came back to england brainwashed --all i can say start looking with a open mind -- if northern ireland wishes to join the south they will ,at the end of the day its up to the people who live in the north who make that decision--

Liam Byrne

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Ignore the "but......"; it's double-standards. So now we're getting somewhere.

People who dislike and query the double-standards are therefore (a) justified in both instances and (b) not "anti-" any side or other - they're just "anti-" double standards.

And, as said already, that makes a lot of people dislike / distrust the overall British Government movement, because they stick by those double-standards and attempt to excuse them while looking for "justice" and transparency from others.

And as also said already, when they stop doing that we might start to listen to them, and maybe even trust them somewhere down the line.....

But I really wish that people would stop accusing me of being pro-Irish or Irish Republican or anti-British or some other such "what you're saying doesn't suit me so I'll pretend you're singling us out to deflect attention from the facts".

I'm simply anti double standards. Period.

---

It works both ways

Nice try, Dub in Glasgow, but this aspect has already been dealt with; the Brits aren't asking me to support them or accusing me of being anti-Irish when I raise questions about what they do.

They're also not likely to be in power or in Government in Ireland. Yes, I would have problems if they were, given some of their double-standards, but as it's not going to happen then it's a non-issue.

But I do have problems when people who could potentially be in Government and therefore in charge of the state excuse the murder of Gardai and add or remove "but..." when it suits them.

Yes there's an element of "turn the other cheek" for the greater good, but that's been used up with the release of people. Now it's up to the republican movement to acknowledge that, realise that it wasn't a "right", but a concession, and start being above board.

RSF Cill Dara

getz wrote: »

most people who went to school in the republic-- have had a history lesson that has been anti/british [i know i went to school in the republic for a time} i came back to england brainwashed --all i can say start looking with a open mind -- if northern ireland wishes to join the south they will ,at the end of the day its up to the people who live in the north who make that decision--

in what way were u brainwashed ? were the stories u heard lies?

Erin Go Brath

oscarBravo wrote: »

Ireland didn't have a constitutional claim on Yorkshire. Ireland did have a constitutional claim on part of the UK, which was one of the root causes of the internecine conflict there. It could be argued that, from a strictly Irish perspective, there was an occupation prior to the GFA, but international law disagreed. The French provinces of Alsace and Lorraine have changed hands between Germany and France on a number of occasions. Are France occupying them now? Was Germany occupying them in the past?

Sovereignty over an geographic area changes over time. In the past it has mostly happened as a result of violence and bloodshed. It may happen in the future in Northern Ireland; if so, hopefully it will be as a result of diplomacy, negotiation and democracy. If and when it happens, there may be those who believe that NI is occupied by Ireland - and they would be as wrong as you are now.

The Gardaí are viewed by many as a hindrance and unwanted presence. Doesn't make them an occupying force.

I disagree strongly with this crypto unionist standpoint. To support the British imposed partition in which the ruling class has rendered Catholic/Nationalists within as 2nd class citizens is immoral. Britains bogus claim to sovereignty over part of the Irish nation is the single biggest cause of conflict in this country and their divide and conquer strategy of favouring one tradition above another has been the single biggest factor in stoking tensions in the region.

Britains claim to soverignty over the 6 county statelet amounts to nothing more than a land grab using descendents of planted people from the previous few centuries as convenient pawns in this crime against the Irish nation!

getz

history of the republic as told in religious schools is true only as far as you wish to believe-- i was told that all people in ireland did not wish to stay british and backed the sinn feiners-- this was not true --the sinn feiners was looked upon as trouble makers -it was not untill the royal irish constabulary[black and tans] massacred ordinary citizens that public opinion turned against the crown--this kind of thing was also going on in the uk but nowhere as bad [peterloo massacre in manchester]--but the problem in schools the full story is never told --most people in northern england always suported a irish independance--in fact a lot of the leaders of the irish independence movement was english born-- this kind of thing are not told to school children-the brothers like to keep things -anti/british

oscarBravo

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

I disagree strongly with this crypto unionist standpoint.

You're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't change the facts.

What does "crypto unionist" mean, anyway?

To support the British imposed partition in which the ruling class has rendered Catholic/Nationalists within as 2nd class citizens is immoral.

I don't support the actions and policies that led to thirty years of conflict. I believe in civil and human rights for everyone. But the absence (in the past) of civil rights doesn't an occupation make.

Britains bogus claim to sovereignty...

It's not bogus. It's legitimate. If there were ever any doubts about that legitimacy, they were put to rest when the people of this country voted overwhelmingly in favour of an agreement that removed the dispute.

There is only one country in the world which claims sovereignty over Northern Ireland, and that's the UK. That makes it as much part of the UK as Yorkshire is.

...over part of the Irish nation is the single biggest cause of conflict in this country...

The fact that there have been people on both sides of the divide only too willing to commit mass murder to achieve their political ends has been something of a contributory factor also.

...and their divide and conquer strategy of favouring one tradition above another has been the single biggest factor in stoking tensions in the region.

So push for equality, rather than secession - then everyone's a winner. Right?

Britains claim to soverignty over the 6 county statelet amounts to nothing more than a land grab using descendents of planted people from the previous few centuries as convenient pawns in this crime against the Irish nation!

Britain's claim to sovereignty was acknowledged and accepted by overwhelming majority of the people of this country more than ten years ago. You really ought to learn to move on.

getz

why are we saying britain lets call it bryttas--thats its celtic name-oh yes we are celts as well

Erin Go Brath

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't support the actions and policies that led to thirty years of conflict. I believe in civil and human rights for everyone. But the absence (in the past) of civil rights doesn't an occupation make. It's not bogus. It's legitimate. If there were ever any doubts about that legitimacy, they were put to rest when the people of this country voted overwhelmingly in favour of an agreement that removed the dispute.

There is only one country in the world which claims sovereignty over Northern Ireland, and that's the UK. That makes it as much part of the UK as Yorkshire is. The fact that there have been people on both sides of the divide only too willing to commit mass murder to achieve their political ends has been something of a contributory factor also. So push for equality, rather than secession - then everyone's a winner. Right? Britain's claim to sovereignty was acknowledged and accepted by overwhelming majority of the people of this country more than ten years ago. You really ought to learn to move on.

I doubt Ian Paisley could have put a better slant on the Good Friday when he sold it to unionists. The people of Ireland voted for a peaceful solution to end the troubles and diffuse the sectarian situation which was getting out of hand. Part of this solution is that when a nationalist majority emerges a reunification referendum will be triggered by the Secretary of State, and a 50% +1 result in favour will mean Unification. When Ireland becomes unified there is NO PROVISION for the 6 Counties to re-enter the UK ever again. If the referendum results in a majority voting to stay within UK jurisidiction then subsequent referendums may be held every 7 years until the majority vote for Unification. The constitiutional status of the 6 Counties is therefore NOT resolved. The current status is temporary and conditional.

The north is therefore not as much part of the UK as Yorkshire is. Yorkshires position in the UK is not under threat by a simple majority opt out. Next you'll be telling us the north is as 'British as Finchley'. Just make sure you're in the middle of Ballymena or somewhere similiar when you impart that pearl of wisdom.

oscarBravo

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

[...] The current status is temporary and conditional.

The north is therefore not as much part of the UK as Yorkshire is. Yorkshires position in the UK is not under threat by a simple majority opt out. Next you'll be telling us the north is as 'British as Finchley'. Just make sure you're in the middle of Ballymena or somewhere similiar when you impart that pearl of wisdom.

What's funny is that you accuse me of spin.

Temporarily, conditionally or otherwise, Northern Ireland is part of the UK and is therefore not occupied. Spin away, but to say otherwise is just plain factually inaccurate.

stovelid

oscarBravo wrote: »

What does "crypto unionist" mean, anyway?
.

They're like crypto-fascists. And they hang around with warmongers and squares.

Liam Byrne

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

.....the single biggest cause of conflict in this country

Since you don't have a location on your profile, can we just clarify which country you mean by "this country" ? If you mean Ireland, then the single biggest cause of conflict is crime and drugs, including alcohol.

Actually, now that I think of it, there's an interesting concept; aren't England, Scotland and Wales all "countries within the UK" ?

So what's Northern Ireland's official status ? I think I heard "statelet" mentioned at some stage, but I'm not sure how official that was, and while "province" is occasionally used, that's not right either since there are 3 counties of Ulster in this country......

I've confused myself now!!

getz

england-scotland-wales-northern ireland-and the republic of ireland---are in the british isles-- is this thread . would you let your daughter marry a englishman

Liam Byrne

getz wrote: »

england-scotland-wales-northern ireland-and the republic of ireland---are in the british isles-- is this thread.

That's completely irrelevant, as the "british isles" is an archaeic geographical term, named appropriately for its time, and does not have any bearing on current political borders or soverignity.

It's a bit like saying we speak "English" (it was the language for there only back when it was "named"), or calling native Americans "Indians" because explorers thought they'd circumnavigated the globe when they "found" the U.S.A.

As for the other waffle:

would you let your daughter marry a englishman

Don't have a daughter, but if I did.......as long as he's sound and decent, good for her and what she wants, why not ?

getz

LIAM--i love you ,all i was doing was fishing and you took the bait--try it somtime its fun

Liam Byrne

getz wrote: »

LIAM--i love you ,all i was doing was fishing and you took the bait--try it somtime its fun

Didn't take any bait.....just stated the facts. You should try it sometime - it's fun too!!!