United Ireland

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

Moving the goalposts comes to mind



Its naive to accept it. Have a look at the party political support part, its very amusing when compared to the real world.

It is an opinion poll! I'm surprised at the figures but as I keep pointing out Referenda are different from party political support, Lisbon being an example. Assuming all SF/SDLP votes in a General Election equates to the same thing as a Yes vote is naive!

philologos

K-9 wrote: »

The point is NI would have ceased to exist.

Yes, but my point is why should the UK have any impact in the unchanged region (I.E the 26 counties)? It seems a bit absurd to me. If a united Ireland exists, it will probably have to be federal with the Northern Assembly remaining in place.

CelticTiger*

Whats interesting in that opinion poll is that the youngest group are the largest for a United Ireland.
Theres not exactly a baby boom up there either so, give it time, it will happen.

K-9

Jakkass wrote: »

Yes, but my point is why should the UK have any impact in the unchanged region (I.E the 26 counties)? It seems a bit absurd to me. If a united Ireland exists, it will probably have to be federal with the Northern Assembly remaining in place.

But probably with a UK input or oversight.

But again, if the 32 county Republic has been accepted, your suggestion IS UK influence in the 32 county ROI affairs, the 26 county ROI ceases to exist.

CelticTiger* wrote: »

Whats interesting in that opinion poll is that the youngest group are the largest for a United Ireland.
Theres not exactly a baby boom up there either so, give it time, it will happen.

Or older and wiser! :eek: In my experience this tends to be the case. Very idealistic when young, more realistic when older!

IRockUrSocks

I am proud to be an Irish citizen.

I am proud of the volunteers of generations past and I celebrate their victory. They're the reason my passport says "Eire". They are the reason I can officially call myself an Irishman.

Padraig Pearse, James Connolly, Thomas Clarke, Sean MacDermott, Joseph Plunkett, the bravery of the IRB, ICA, Cumann na mBan, Hibernian Rifles, FE and the Irish volunteers.

Is this what they gave their lives for?

A lot of people in here are quick to critic and be skeptical towards uniting but can I ask you a question? Can you even begin to contemplate what it feels like to be an nationalist, an Irishman, a Catholic in Northern Ireland? If your family had been discriminated against, denied basic human rights and held back from equality in a court of law, what on earth would it take to change a man's opinion, a man's drive and force a man to strive for change? A change that us, as Irish citizens of today must honour what those of the past wished for us.

Regardless of what implications it has on our economy, it just seems right.

I'm not a Sinn Fein supporter, I'm not an I.R.A of today supporter. But what I am is an Irishman and judging by half the people in here, it looks likely I'm in the minority.

philologos

McArmalite wrote: »

So your telling me that british occupation of the country was not " anti-democratic decision making that is imposing a decision on an unwilling population. " :rolleyes: I'm not going to bother.....................

It wasn't but we can't turn back the clock. We have to live by democratic standards in 2009.

Theta

IRockUrSocks wrote: »

I am proud to be an Irish citizen.

I am proud of the volunteers of generations past and I celebrate their victory. They're the reason my passport says "Eire". They are the reason I can officially call myself an Irishman........

So hold on a second you are telling me that the two hundred and fifty odd people who said no or they were not bothered are not proud Irishmen???

You're a joke.

And besides that there are plenty of northern catholics who would rather remain part of the UK

Dr. Baltar

Short answer to this question:

So long as this was supported on both sides of the border and was acheived through democratic and peaceful means I would support this agenda 100%.
Right now however, the most important thing for us to do as a people is to maintain peace in the north of our island.

DamoDLK

IRockUrSocks wrote: »

I'm not a Sinn Fein supporter, I'm not an I.R.A of today supporter. But what I am is an Irishman and judging by half the people in here, it looks likely I'm in the minority.

Minority?
Don't be silly.. I reckon the majority of posters here are fully Irish, and damn happy about it too. Just because they, nor I, don't support the provos or their associates - does not mean that we are not nationalistic. I certainly don't support the RHD.

Over the natural course of history the country will unite again that day will come. Its only natural. This must happen peacefully and with full agreement on both sides. (which could take some time)

DamoDLK

irlmarc wrote: »

So hold on a second you are telling me that the two hundred and fifty odd people who said no or they were not bothered are not proud Irishmen???

You're a joke.

And besides that there are plenty of northern catholics who would rather remain part of the UK

Agree, The health care system is better for sure!

cngamemart

yes if possible

Faugh_a_Ballagh

NO

Their will never be a United Ireland. the united irish men, the republican brotherhood, the ribbonmen, the ira, pira, inla, iplo, rira, cira and the rest of these fascist movements couldnt bomb or kill their way to a fascist ireland.
all failed attempts, the battle of the diomond, battle of dollys brae, the illegal attampted coup in 1916, the border campaign and the troubles
and many more attrocities are all failed attempts to bring fascism to these shores.
the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get.
The ira of the troubles where brought to submission by the the Army such as the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Irish Regiment and many other brave Regiments, the Police, Royal Ulster Constabulary, and the brave Ulster Volunteers.

sto sursum pro ulsterman

Faugh_a_Ballagh

Faugh_a_Ballagh wrote: »

NO

Their will never be a United Ireland. the united irish men, the republican brotherhood, the ribbonmen, the ira, pira, inla, iplo, rira, cira and the rest of these fascist movements couldnt bomb or kill their way to a fascist ireland.
all failed attempts, the battle of the diomond, battle of dollys brae, the illegal attampted coup in 1916, the border campaign and the troubles
and many more attrocities are all failed attempts to bring fascism to these shores.
the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get.
The ira of the troubles where brought to submission by the the Army such as the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Irish Regiment and many other brave Regiments, the Police, Royal Ulster Constabulary, and the brave Ulster Volunteers.

sto sursum pro ulsterman

McArmalite's alter ego :eek:

bikeblues

in other news , no one gives a fcuk .
republic cant handle its own countys never mind 6 more -


if you really want a united Ireland - stand up to and destroy the present government and stop it raping the irish people
so it can buy all the unsold and unbuilt property the banks own = NAMA .

Dr. Baltar

Faugh_a_Ballagh wrote: »

NO

Their will never be a United Ireland. the united irish men, the republican brotherhood, the ribbonmen, the ira, pira, inla, iplo, rira, cira and the rest of these fascist movements couldnt bomb or kill their way to a fascist ireland.
all failed attempts, the battle of the diomond, battle of dollys brae, the illegal attampted coup in 1916, the border campaign and the troubles
and many more attrocities are all failed attempts to bring fascism to these shores.
the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get.
The ira of the troubles where brought to submission by the the Army such as the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Irish Regiment and many other brave Regiments, the Police, Royal Ulster Constabulary, and the brave Ulster Volunteers.

sto sursum pro ulsterman

Since when is Marxism = Fascism?

Bragadin

Northern ireland is a consociational region. One with no substantial ethnic majority, what differnce does is make if it is part of the UK or the republic? Either way one group who has been born and raised there and has every right to live there will be unsatisified. What other claim do we have on northern ireland? A brief medieval kingdom? or just rounding out our territory so it looks better on a map? I would have thought that kind of idea died out in the 19th century.

Either way is it really worth the disruption it would cause to integrate the north with the republic? It would be no small affair. We'd just go from the long beligered freedom fighters to the new occupying force.

The only way i'd ever support it would be through a referendum with a clear and significant majority. And even then it would still be so differnt that it would require a devolved government.

Just to clarify, i am irish. I just have no interest in expansionism

McArmalite

Deleted User wrote: »

McArmalite's alter ego :eek:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

bikeblues wrote: »

in other news , no one gives a fcuk .

If no one gives a fcuk as you say, why is it one of the most discussed issues on the boards ? And back in 1916, 1798 etc their was always a minority of cranks who said " the time wasn't right now ", " it would have to wait until...... "

republic cant handle its own countys never mind 6 more -

Well the british made a great job of handling Ireland didn't they down the centruies, especially the six counties from partition on. Indeed the british are making a great job of running their own country, Northern Rock, RBS, MP's expenses, brits getting killed and maimed every second day in A'stan in what is looking tio be an unwinnable war etc,

stand up to and destroy the present government and stop it raping the irish people
so it can buy all the unsold and unbuilt property the banks own = NAMA .

Agreed.

Kernel

McArmalite wrote: »

If no one gives a fcuk as you say, why is it one of the most discussed issues on the boards ? And back in 1916, 1798 etc their was always a minority of cranks who said " the time wasn't right now ", " it would have to wait until...... "
.

No one does give a **** really. The idea of nation states is dead. We live in a New World Order, an irrelevant small state in the European Union. Plus, we couldn't afford to take Ulster as part of the Republic.

I think people are more interested in sorting out the ****hole 26 counties before worrying about the ****hole other 6.

McArmalite

Faugh_a_Ballagh wrote: »

NO

Their will never be a United Ireland. the united irish men, the republican brotherhood, the ribbonmen, the ira, pira, inla, iplo, rira, cira and the rest of these fascist movements couldnt bomb or kill their way to a fascist ireland.
all failed attempts, the battle of the diomond, battle of dollys brae, the illegal attampted coup in 1916, the border campaign and the troubles
and many more attrocities are all failed attempts to bring fascism to these shores.
the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get.
The ira of the troubles where brought to submission by the the Army such as the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Irish Regiment and many other brave Regiments, the Police, Royal Ulster Constabulary, and the brave Ulster Volunteers.

sto sursum pro ulsterman

" the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get. " They showed some resolve in abounding their fellow unionists of Ulster in Donegal, Monaghan and Cavan without a thought . Not to mention the thousands of other unionists in Dublin etc where Carson was actually from. Some resolve all right :rolleyes:

DoireNod

Faugh_a_Ballagh wrote: »

NO

Their will never be a United Ireland. the united irish men, the republican brotherhood, the ribbonmen, the ira, pira, inla, iplo, rira, cira and the rest of these fascist movements couldnt bomb or kill their way to a fascist ireland. all failed attempts, the battle of the diomond, battle of dollys brae, the illegal attampted coup in 1916, the border campaign and the troubles
and many more attrocities are all failed attempts to bring fascism to these shores.

You obviously don't understand the issues which led to their resistance. They didn't want a 'fascist' Ireland either. Ever hear of the phrase 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun'? Historically speaking, that's very true.

the resolve of the Ulsterman and woman through these times of darkness have always pulled through even stronger and stronger we will get.
The ira of the troubles where brought to submission by the the Army such as the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Irish Regiment and many other brave Regiments, the Police, Royal Ulster Constabulary, and the brave Ulster Volunteers.

For a start, your misuse of the term Ulster is just annoying. The rest of this statement stinks of bias and is actually false.

sto sursum pro ulsterman

How intelligent...
This whole post reeks of bias. Did you create an account just to post this comment?

Bragadin wrote: »

What other claim do we have on northern ireland? A brief medieval kingdom? or just rounding out our territory so it looks better on a map? I would have thought that kind of idea died out in the 19th century.

Why do you think that kind of idea died out? What claim did the IRB, IRA and the other rebels have back at the beginning of the 20th century to issue a proclamation declaring Ireland a republic???

Just to clarify, i am irish. I just have no interest in expansionism

Expansionism?

McArmalite

Kernel wrote: »

No one does give a **** really. The idea of nation states is dead. We live in a New World Order, an irrelevant small state in the European Union. Plus, we couldn't afford to take Ulster as part of the Republic.

I think people are more interested in sorting out the ****hole 26 counties before worrying about the ****hole other 6.

Another rant for a bit of attention, these southside boys have never got over the british abounding them.

Bragadin

DoireNod wrote: »

Why do you think that kind of idea died out? What claim did the IRB, IRA and the other rebels have back at the beginning of the 20th century to issue a proclamation declaring Ireland a republic???

The situation is different now. Then we were looking at a largely remotly ruled ethnicly homogeneous area. We have an independent irish state now but we've been separated from the north for a long time. You can't really say the people in northern ireland are any less free then in the republic, they even have freedom of nationality.

What i mean is that it is no longer necesary to 'liberate' the north. So what reason is there for a united ireland?

Rebelheart

DamoDLK wrote: »

Minority?
Don't be silly.. I reckon the majority of posters here are fully Irish, and damn happy about it too. Just because they, nor I, don't support the provos or their associates - does not mean that we are not nationalistic. I certainly don't support the RHD.

I believe his point was that he does not support the PIRA, but that he does support the political reunification of Ireland. He was equating Irishness with support for reunification, not Irishness with support for the PIRA. There's a world of a difference there, I think.

DamoDLK wrote: »

Over the natural course of history the country will unite again that day will come. Its only natural. This must happen peacefully and with full agreement on both sides. (which could take some time)

Well said. And that's the rub of the issue. This country is too small to remain permanently divided into two states, especially given that it is also an island. Like the Normans and Vikings, the "British" will also be proclaiming their Irishness in due course. It may take a load of immigrants for that to happen but, as you say, it's a natural progression for such a small island.

DoireNod

Bragadin wrote: »

The situation is different now. Then we were looking at a largely remotly ruled ethnicly homogeneous area. We have an independent irish state now but we've been separated from the north for a long time. You can't really say the people in northern ireland are any less free then in the republic, they even have freedom of nationality.

Yes, the situation is slightly different now, but it does not change the fact that part of Ireland is still under British rule due to the fact that a gerrymandered 'state' was created made up of 6 counties of Ireland. In any case, the same could be said for Ireland pre-1916. Ireland had been part of the U.K. for quite some time and things were 'normalised' (the only notable uprising prior to 1916 was 1798, no?). The 'independence' gained from British rule for the 26 counties is the same kind of independence that people want when they wish to see Ireland united. It's simple.

Bragadin

DoireNod wrote: »

Yes, the situation is slightly different now, but it does not change the fact that part of Ireland is still under British rule due to the fact that a gerrymandered 'state' was created made up of 6 counties of Ireland. In any case, the same could be said for Ireland pre-1916. Ireland had been part of the U.K. for quite some time and things were 'normalised' (the only notable uprising prior to 1916 was 1798, no?). The 'independence' gained from British rule for the 26 counties is the same kind of independence that people want when they wish to see Ireland united. It's simple.

I appreciate what your saying but i really don't think this it is simply a continuation of the war of independence. I realise that the sentiment for many people has continued, but the situation has not. Northern ireland is a different place then it was, for much of the 20th century, and the rest of ireland has developed concurrently and seperatly from it. Britain may have created a fait accompli with gerrymandering and the like, but the people who live there now can't be penalized for such a decision. I can't see how absorbing the north could help or serve northern ireland to any degree other then a sentimental one, but i can see it causing a significant amount of disruption.

Faugh_a_Ballagh

"They showed some resolve in abounding their fellow unionists of Ulster in Donegal, Monaghan and Cavan without a thought . Not to mention the thousands of other unionists in Dublin etc where Carson was actually from. Some resolve all right"
yes you are right these areas should be NORTHERN IRELAND,

"For a start, your misuse of the term Ulster is just annoying. The rest of this statement stinks of bias and is actually false."
THATS RICH COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO TELLS A BIASED ONESIDED STORY

"How intelligent...
This whole post reeks of bias. Did you create an account just to post this comment? "
IS THAT NOT THE REASON BEHIND A PUBLIC FORUM SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SIGN UP AND POST?????????
TYPICAL,

"Why do you think that kind of idea died out? What claim did the IRB, IRA and the other rebels have back at the beginning of the 20th century to issue a proclamation declaring Ireland a republic???"
THEY HAD NO CLAIM AND STILL DONT

McArmalite

Bragadin wrote: »

The situation is different now. Then we were looking at a largely remotly ruled ethnicly homogeneous area.

The lad seems to think if he throws in a few long winded words and phrases he will somehow impress us :rolleyes:

We have an independent irish state now but we've been separated from the north for a long time.

You'd think we where talking about North and South Korea if this fella is anything to go by. Indeed in 1916 etc, west brits would have been using the arguement that we where part of britain for so long now, what was the point of seperation. We always will have a backward crowd who will always throw silly arguements against Irish independence. I rememeber my grandfather telling me, in the 20's and 30's that when the Free State were talking about introducing new stamps, a more Irish educational curicullum, biligual street names, breaking away from sterling etc, a usual minority of cranks came out against it. Sadly, their still around :rolleyes:

You can't really say the people in northern ireland are any less free then in the republic, they even have freedom of nationality.

What i mean is that it is no longer necesary to 'liberate' the north. So what reason is there for a united ireland?

Obviously the poor lad cannot accept the concept of national sovereignty. Baciscally he's saying that a country can be free while occupied by a foreign force

Nailz

I'm not bothered. All it is is a change of currency, flags, road signs and some people saying "We own you", it's just land.

Rebelheart

Nailz wrote: »

I'm not bothered. All it is is a change of currency, flags, road signs and some people saying "We own you", it's just land.

A tad superficial, don't you think. In realpolitik terms, it's about security, stability, economic prosperity and, ultimately, about moving on from the settler-native dichotomy of the past towards a sense of community between both. For the more practical-minded in society, community is economic and political cohesion and strength. Everybody wins.

DoireNod

Faugh_a_Ballagh wrote: »

THATS RICH COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO TELLS A BIASED ONESIDED STORY

What 'BIASED ONESIDED STORY' did I tell?

IS THAT NOT THE REASON BEHIND A PUBLIC FORUM SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SIGN UP AND POST?????????
TYPICAL,

Boards is a public forum, but you'll have to learn that there is no free speech. My point was that your post was very biased and ill-informed. I simply questioned whether you signed up to post such a biased an ill-informed opinion, or to attempt to contribute to reasonable, well-thought-out discussion?

THEY HAD NO CLAIM AND STILL DONT

Tell that to the Dáil that they have no claim over the 26 counties. :rolleyes:

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

Indeed the british are making a great job of running their own country, Northern Rock, RBS, MP's expenses

Aah yes, the low life scum bag MPs who are fiddling the british tax payer out of their hard earned cahs, the bastards should be made to pay it all back.

Rebelheart wrote: »

A tad superficial, don't you think. In realpolitik terms, it's about security, stability, economic prosperity and, ultimately, about moving on from the settler-native dichotomy of the past towards a sense of community between both. For the more practical-minded in society, community is economic and political cohesion and strength. Everybody wins.

How is it, or are you just trying to impress us with big words

DoireNod

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah yes, the low life scum bag MPs who are fiddling the british tax payer out of their hard earned cahs, the bastards should be made to pay it all back.

OT
Let's face it, it wasn't just Sinn Féin - not to excuse the ridiculous money politicians get.

Sure, Alan Duncan says the world has 'gone mad' and that he's outraged that politicians have been 'forced to live on rations'.

Rebelheart

Fratton Fred wrote: »

How is it, or are you just trying to impress us with big words

They weren't "big words", Fratton Fred. Given that, I think it may be a bit difficult for you to understand how reunification has all of the above benefits. To most people, these benefits are obvious.

Fratton Fred

DoireNod wrote: »

OT
Let's face it, it wasn't just Sinn Féin - not to excuse the ridiculous money politicians get.

Sure, Alan Duncan says the world has 'gone mad' and that he's outraged that politicians have been 'forced to live on rations'.

Alan duncan is a low life scum bag MP, so i wouldn't take any notice of what he says. He does, at least, justify some of his expenses by at least turning up at westminster once in a while.

Rebelheart wrote: »

They weren't "big words", Fratton Fred. Given that, I think it may be a bit difficult for you to understand how reunification has all of the above benefits. To most people, these benefits are obvious.

Then maybe me and the majority of posters on this thread are thick, because we are all missing how these wonderful benefits, such as security and financial prosperity will suddenly come about once the tricolour is raised above Stormont.

How about putting your money where your mouth is and telling us exactly what these benefits are, apart from making everyone suddenly feel "More Irish" of course.

Bragadin

McArmalite wrote: »

The lad seems to think if he throws in a few long winded words and phrases he will somehow impress us :rolleyes:

I'm just trying to be carefull. I think my spellign mistakes will balance out the impressive factor though

You'd think we where talking about North and South Korea if this fella is anything to go by. Indeed in 1916 etc, west brits would have been using the arguement that we where part of britain for so long now, what was the point of seperation. We always will have a backward crowd who will always throw silly arguements against Irish independence. I rememeber my grandfather telling me, in the 20's and 30's that when the Free State were talking about introducing new stamps, a more Irish educational curicullum, biligual street names, breaking away from sterling etc, a usual minority of cranks came out against it. Sadly, their still around :rolleyes:

I can assure you i am a whole new variaty of crank

Obviously the poor lad cannot accept the concept of national sovereignty. Baciscally he's saying that a country can be free while occupied by a foreign force

Thats far too simplistic. The unionists are not an insignificant minority, and they aren't blow ins either. It's not as simple anymore as evil english imperialists oppressing thronging catholic second class masses. The 'continuation war' theory of irish unification to finally kick out the brits, is not only old fasioned, but it sugests an immediate disrespect for the divided population of northern ireland.

Perhaps devolved government will lead as a stepping stone to a united ireland but maybe not in the short term.

Rebelheart

Fratton Fred wrote: »

will suddenly come about once the tricolour is raised above Stormont.

Right there is your problem. Eleven words of your own creation with absolutely no basis in anything that was said. Your problem with the English language seems to go beyond supposedly "big words" and into the realms of childish simplicity. Somewhere in the horizon will, hopefully, be a capacity for serious discussion with adults.

Fratton Fred

Rebelheart wrote: »

Right there is your problem. Eleven words of your own creation with absolutely no basis in anything that was said. Your problem with the English language seems to go beyond supposedly "big words" and into the realms of childish simplicity. Somewhere in the horizon will, hopefully, be a capacity for serious discussion with adults.

am i missing something here?

you were saying that a united Ireland is "security, stability, economic prosperity and, ultimately, about moving on from the settler-native dichotomy of the past towards a sense of community between both"

how will a united Ireland suddenly bring this about? Northern Ireland is heading more and more towards all the above, why does it need to be united with the south to achieve this?

If NI has all of this, then republicans trying to unite Ireland against the wishes of the majority is just expansionism, especially if those Republicans happen to live in the south.

gurramok

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If NI has all of this, then republicans trying to unite Ireland against the wishes of the majority is just expansionism, especially if those Republicans happen to live in the south.

Which majority?

If a majority of NI wants it, so be it.

Majority of the South wants it now in one form or another so thats not even on the radar for dispute.

Fratton Fred

gurramok wrote: »

Which majority?

If a majority of NI wants it, so be it.

Majority of the South wants it now in one form or another so thats not even on the radar for dispute.

in that case, what if the majority of the UK want the whole of Ireland to rejoin?

They are seperate countires, the only people who can decide on their future is the people of Northern Ireland. Rightly or Wrongly, Michael Collins gave away that right 80 years ago and, ironically, as he was probably the only person who was capable of actually getting it back, the anti treaty bunch killed it off almost entirely in Cork a few years later.

the whole thing is a ****ing mess, but outside interference isn't going to work. I hear all the arguements about prosperity etc etc, but no one seems to be able to actually tell me how Ireland will be more prosperous as a whole.

gurramok

I've never heard from an English person or never heard from an English politician that wants Ireland back in the UK?!

THe majority of the UK does not live in Ireland!!

Rebelheart

Fratton Fred wrote: »

am i missing something here?

Yes, most definitely yes.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

how will a united Ireland suddenly bring this about?

There's that word again, 'suddenly' - created by you without any basis in what was said (I'm repeating myself once more). If you wish to discuss this seriously, please desist from creating words and ascribing those words to other posters in an attempt to make yourself seem smart and the other poster silly.

Thank you.

McArmalite

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah yes, the low life scum bag MPs who are fiddling the british tax payer out of their hard earned cahs, the bastards should be made to pay it all back.

:pac:

DoireNod

Fratton Fred wrote: »

the whole thing is a ****ing mess, but outside interference isn't going to work. I hear all the arguements about prosperity etc etc, but no one seems to be able to actually tell me how Ireland will be more prosperous as a whole.

Outside interference? Do you mean 'interference' from the Republic of Ireland? The Republic has to have a say in unification. That's why there's all this Anglo-Irish agreement carry-on in the first place.

It's hard to say what the economic results will be in the case of unification, but people with no clue who say that it's not worth the hassle or that it will cripple the economy don't know that for sure either. If there's a positive case to be made for an all-Ireland economy, then Irish unification should prove to be all the more enticing.

Rebelheart

Fratton Fred wrote: »

They are seperate countires, the only people who can decide on their future is the people of Northern Ireland. Rightly or Wrongly, Michael Collins gave away that right 80 years ago

Why do you say such uninformed things? Michael Collins gave away no such right. The "right" of a majority of people in the Six Counties to decide the future of that region was only bestowed upon them in 1973, in the Northern Ireland Constitution Act of that year. 1973, not 1921. Re-read.

No such "right" had ever been granted to that majority before, not even in the Ireland Act of 1949 (which granted that "right" to a majority in the Northern Ireland parliament rather than to a majority of the people).

McArmalite

Bragadin wrote: »

I can assure you i am a whole new variaty of crank

No, your just the exact same, their's nothing new in what your doing. Their was and will always be wannabe intellectuals who will argue against the national wishes of a free and independent Ireland.

Thats far too simplistic. The unionists are not an insignificant minority, and they aren't blow ins either. It's not as simple anymore as evil english imperialists oppressing thronging catholic second class masses. The 'continuation war' theory of irish unification to finally kick out the brits, is not only old fasioned, but it sugests an immediate disrespect for the divided population of northern ireland.

Perhaps devolved government will lead as a stepping stone to a united ireland but maybe not in the short term.

It's too simplistic/it's too complicated, it's moving to slowly/it's moving too quickly :rolleyes:. As previously stated " We always will have a backward crowd who will always throw silly arguements against Irish independence. ....in the 20's and 30's that when the Free State were talking about introducing new stamps, a more Irish educational curicullum, biligual street names, breaking away from sterling etc, a usual minority of cranks came out against it."

goldenbrown

do you think northern irish nationalists are eager to participate in the crisis that is the republic of ireland economy??

Rebelheart

goldenbrown wrote: »

do you think northern irish nationalists are eager to participate in the crisis that is the republic of ireland economy??

The last thing I'd want to be is pedantic - mar dhea - but wouldn't "northern irish nationalists", or at least "Northern Irish nationalists", be loyalists or similar? Now Irish nationalists in the north? That's a different story!

mike65

gurramok wrote: »

Majority of the South wants it now in one form or another/b] so thats not even on the radar for dispute.

Thats a curious statement, which form or other? One shouldn't presume consent in any event.

Fratton Fred

Rebelheart wrote: »

Yes, most definitely yes.



There's that word again, 'suddenly' - created by you without any basis in what was said (I'm repeating myself once more). If you wish to discuss this seriously, please desist from creating words and ascribing those words to other posters in an attempt to make yourself seem smart and the other poster silly.

Thank you.

It sounds like you can't the question TBH.

weepee

Unity puts an end to nipping 'up North' for cheaper-everything.

Unity puts an end to nipping 'down South' to fill the tank.

''This message was posted by one of those northern scum''.