United Ireland

aido179

TL;DR

No- this bullshit has gone on too long. let it die, not the people involved. Why should i give a tupence ha'penny whether some northerners use the same currency and government?

Sharpshooter

Jim236 wrote: »

They already offered us the 6 counties back during WWII in exchange for us allowing the British to use our ports, airspace and establish bases here and that we fight alongside British forces in the planned invasion of Germany, and de Valera kindly told them where to stick it.



Thats not an opinion, its ignorance and bigotry of the highest order. I don't know how you can call yourself Irish, theres nothing Irish about scum like you...

Banned.

McArmalite

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Sorry buddy, it's an honest statement of how I feel in response to OPs opening post.

I really can't figure out how people get so anal about what is right before their faces.

Bigotry and sectarianism cuts both ways and and really who wants that nest of dissidents anywhere next or near them.
Certainly not me

I can do without that hassle to be honest.

I couldn't give a flying fook whether Celtic or Rangers win anything.

I prefer life in the 21st century to be honest;)

Yet another rant for a bit of attention :rolleyes:

Artic Wolf

Artic Wolf wrote: »

There will always be trouble in the north, if there were to be a united Ireland the loyalists would come down here and bomb the place to bits.

That type of situation would never happen unless there was an armed invasion/annexation of the north by the republic.

There are many reasons why unionsts would not want to join in a united Ireland, the attitude of some of the posters in this thread for starters.

But first the (relatively small) groups of extremists on both sides of those "peace walls" need to accept the rights of the other side and not act like tribal warlords with flags, parades and painted kerbstones etc.

Trbal politics should have no place in a modern society, at the moment that's all they have there.

If the fears of the unionist population can be addressed, then there is no real reason why north and south can't be united, NOT taken over as republicans are demanding.

Then I am of course, ignoring the economic issues, If the UK was in the Euro it would be much easier for this to happen.

FlutterinBantam

McArmalite wrote: »

Yet another rant for a bit of attention :rolleyes:

heh heh heh

If you don't agree with someone it's a rant.

Discerning posters can see around that one friend, you are not dealing with dullards and imbeciles here friend.

Suggest you check the calendar buddy, 2009 last I saw it;)

Don't stay stuck in the past.

dlofnep

FlutterinBantam - You've paraded on about 2009, and people being stuck in the past in every single post you've made. It's getting a little worn out at this point. Try a new angle.

Date doesn't determine whether or not people want to strive for an independant nation, free from state bias, have cultural freedom and to not be attached to terrible foreign policies. It's evident all across the world, not only in Ireland.

Whether you like it or not, the majority of the people in Ireland & Britain support Irish Unity. The current day, year, weather or annual rainfall is irrelevant.

FlutterinBantam

I couldn't give a fiddlers pal.

I don't, and that's why I am replying to this thread.

Too many punters around here waving flags and causes but assuming that the other side is the one in the wrong.I saw the Thomas Cooke scenario, rent a crusty were around like flies around a shyte when a bit of publicity bacame apparent

My advice to them is get a job and contribute.

That's the sign of a true patriot, not some crusty existing in a squat looking for some populist cause to shake the lice from his/r hair;)

carlybabe1

Are ye joking, this government is Eires answer to Maggie Thatcher

Id rather be ruled by the English at this moment in time, they couldnt do a worse job than what we've got right now

dr.bollocko

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I couldn't give a fiddlers pal.

I don't, and that's why I am replying to this thread.

Too many punters around here waving flags and causes but assuming that the other side is the one in the wrong.I saw the Thomas Cooke scenario, rent a crusty were around like flies around a shyte when a bit of publicity bacame apparent

My advice to them is get a job and contribute.

That's the sign of a true patriot, not some crusty existing in a squat looking for some populist cause to shake the lice from his/r hair;)

Please do not post in this thread again.

phinie

This one is getting a bit of a bore. After 30 years of slaughter, the Belfast agreement laid down the constitutional rules for a united Ireland. Majority must want it. Now we are a long way from that.

Anyway folks, we cannot afford this 26 counties as it is. Also Northerners have a lower cost of living, better health care and would be nuts to join a state that has run into the ground.

As for it being our island, well the Gaels invited the Normans to come here to beat up other Gaels. I suppose you could say we asked for it. The native peoples of the US and Canada have a better case as they invited no one. It is a bit late to drag up that argument, don't you think?

Robo

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

FlutterinBantam - You've paraded on about 2009, and people being stuck in the past in every single post you've made. It's getting a little worn out at this point. Try a new angle.

Date doesn't determine whether or not people want to strive for an independant nation, free from state bias, have cultural freedom and to not be attached to terrible foreign policies. It's evident all across the world, not only in Ireland.

Whether you like it or not, the majority of the people in Ireland & Britain support Irish Unity. The current day, year, weather or annual rainfall is irrelevant.

What's the weather like on your planet?

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What's the weather like on your planet?

Dunno, I'm stuck in an office all day. Probably the same as yours.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

Dunno, I'm stuck in an office all day. Probably the same as yours.

I've been working in a 26 storey building today and people keep asking me what the view is like.

Odd question seeing as I am on the 2nd floor :-)

You live in an ideal world Dlofnep.

chopperbyrne

dlofnep wrote: »

FlutterinBantam - You've paraded on about 2009, and people being stuck in the past in every single post you've made. It's getting a little worn out at this point. Try a new angle.

Date doesn't determine whether or not people want to strive for an independant nation, free from state bias, have cultural freedom and to not be attached to terrible foreign policies. It's evident all across the world, not only in Ireland.

Whether you like it or not, the majority of the people in Ireland & Britain support Irish Unity. The current day, year, weather or annual rainfall is irrelevant.

Again, idealistically they support it. Realistically the majority in Ireland are against it. Considering we would be the ones with the deciding vote, that's all that matters.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've been working in a 26 storey building today and people keep asking me what the view is like.

Odd question seeing as I am on the 2nd floor :-)

You live in an ideal world Dlofnep.

26 stories? What happened the other 6?

It's not a bad life, cup of tea, a computer for a bit of banter on boards.. Could be worse!

dlofnep

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Again, idealistically they support it. Realistically the majority in Ireland are against it. Considering we would be the ones with the deciding vote, that's all that matters.

There is obviously an issue around the timing of it - I don't think it's a matter of an instant changeover, but rather a gradual changeover. We need to be more respectful to the cultural beliefs of the Unionists, and ensure that they feel welcome in a single country. We need to develop a strategy to ensure that they do feel welcome, whether that be something as small as funding something like Ulster-Scots as a gesture of good will - or having national holidays for them.

I don't think that the majority of Ireland will reject unity when the time comes for the vote. The real issue is warming Unionists to the idea - and that transends cultural indifference, we also have to work out the economic differences and provide a platform for a single country that can prosper. I do take all of these into account, and I'm certainly not a dreamer. I don't see it happening in the next 10 years, but the issue will always be alive in Irish society and will have to be tackled at some point.

mobius42

Lads, I'm scared.


I agreed with Jakkass on something.

walrusgumble

Jim236 wrote: »

They already offered us the 6 counties back during WWII in exchange for us allowing the British to use our ports, airspace and establish bases here and that we fight alongside British forces in the planned invasion of Germany, and de Valera kindly told them where to stick it.



Thats not an opinion, its ignorance and bigotry of the highest order. I don't know how you can call yourself Irish, theres nothing Irish about scum like you...

offered us back the north? churchill???? i am sorry sir / madam. without any disrepect, but please do not take others and de valera for a fool!!!!

you honestly think this man was serious or genuine????? from some accounts he had a habit of making exciting outbursts when he had a couple of brandys (i don't wish to be disrepectful with regard to his fondness of the drink.. after all with all the stress he was going through)

Do you honestly believe that even if churchill wanted to give back the north that
(a) House of Lords would tolerate it
(b) his own party would tolerate it
(c) the majority of unionists in ni and his own party the converatives (i think - didn't he change sides) would tolerate it
(d) churchill knew what the attitudes of the irish was. as arrogant as he was at times, churchill had better clout of the land than others in westminister
(e) considering his rheortic over the treaty, insistance of maintaining the symbols of britishness contained in the treaty and free state constitution and his own family background (wasn't he related to randolph churchill?)

please don't be daft, if that little comment of a nation once again , assuming that that is all that was made, why didn't he not purse this further? i say respectively,that your comment flies in the face of common sense.

nayorleck114

Look the united Ireland will never happen, The majority of people in the north don't want it and the goverment of the south can't afford it. Things have moved on, so should we. If there were to be a united ireland with united consensus then fine, but as it stands I can't see if happening.

walrusgumble

walrusgumble wrote: »

offered us back the north? churchill???? i am sorry sir / madam. without any disrepect, but please do not take others and de valera for a fool!!!!

you honestly think this man was serious or genuine????? from some accounts he had a habit of making exciting outbursts when he had a couple of brandys (i don't wish to be disrepectful with regard to his fondness of the drink.. after all with all the stress he was going through)

Do you honestly believe that even if churchill wanted to give back the north that
(a) House of Lords would tolerate it
(b) his own party would tolerate it
(c) the majority of unionists in ni and his own party the converatives (i think - didn't he change sides) would tolerate it
(d) churchill knew what the attitudes of the irish was. as arrogant as he was at times, churchill had better clout of the land than others in westminister
(e) considering his rheortic over the treaty, insistance of maintaining the symbols of britishness contained in the treaty and free state constitution and his own family background (wasn't he related to randolph churchill?)

please don't be daft, if that little comment of a nation once again , assuming that that is all that was made, why didn't he not purse this further? i say respectively,that comment flies in the face of common sense.

Don't forget that in the summer of 1941, Nazi Germany had the upper hand and was decimating the Atlantic convoys, Britain needed full access to ports on the west coast to effectively combat the Uboats.

Desperate times call for desperate measures!

For the Unionists, given the choice between De Valera's catholic/celtic paradise and Nazi German occupation, it wasn't too difficult to swing, as for the other issues - "don't you know, there's a war on!".

walrusgumble

dlofnep wrote: »

There is obviously an issue around the timing of it - I don't think it's a matter of an instant changeover, but rather a gradual changeover. We need to be more respectful to the cultural beliefs of the Unionists, and ensure that they feel welcome in a single country. We need to develop a strategy to ensure that they do feel welcome, whether that be something as small as funding something like Ulster-Scots as a gesture of good will - or having national holidays for them.

I don't think that the majority of Ireland will reject unity when the time comes for the vote. The real issue is warming Unionists to the idea - and that transends cultural indifference, we also have to work out the economic differences and provide a platform for a single country that can prosper. I do take all of these into account, and I'm certainly not a dreamer. I don't see it happening in the next 10 years, but the issue will always be alive in Irish society and will have to be tackled at some point.

in a similar thread along time ago, i asked, at a similar juncture in the debate, (so i will ask again), for the purpose of a decent discussion and debate and continuation before some laN&ers manage to get an important thread (for some) locked

what needs to be done constitutionally,legislatively, socially, culturally and economically to at least bring further closerness between this two parts of the island. (lets face it unionists - whether extreme or moderate will always want full or some link to britian)

what issues do we share common interests? attitude towards abortion? etc . i suppose some areas in the constitution need to be updated on paper (eg article 41 which in some instances is now not relavant considering art 8 of the echr)

some often complain about the retoric of groups like ff and sf about how unity can happen and how we should get ready for the big push. yet when someone stpes up and ask for specifics they get shouted down. i am in no doubt or at least i hope, that the said groups have set out the plan, institution etc of how to achieve unity peacefully and what to do with it next.

should we have a federal state? surely we could have the house of parliament move between dublin and belfast on a regular basis? - ok that may not be a great or even good idea, luck at how much hassle it has for the eu - any better ideas (no doubt there are) please contribute

what do we do in the meantime. how do we make others feel that dublin and our towns/villages/cities etc are not alien. how do we show that we are not very different.

i remember a great story albert reynolds use to have (ni being one area al actually shined considering the problems of the day and with house of commons) he argued and encouraged his unionist friends like gusty spencer that since they made alot of money together through business... surely they could do business with the peace process (or something like that - his book when he brings it out would be worth reading)

walrusgumble

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't forget that in the summer of 1941, Nazi Germany had the upper hand and was decimating the Atlantic convoys, Britain needed full access to ports on the west coast to effectively combat the Uboats.

Desperate times call for desperate measures!

For the Unionists, given the choice between De Valera's catholic/celtic paradise and Nazi German occupation, it wasn't too difficult to swing, as for the other issues - "don't you know, there's a war on!".

yes fair enough, thats true. but churchill was bluffing on this one though.i dont think he dared mention this to his colleagues. can someone confirm, specify this ? also i suppose, ireland or the irish free state where still in the commonwealth then. sure going by the sounds of people here (and in fairness, their points regarding why ui is a bad idea or pie in the sky are valid and sadly, realistic) people would have gone ape at the idea of ireland going into war or have the dreaded brits back calling all the shots. i think that was one reason dev did not take up the proposal , wasn't a majority of the country in support of neutrality?

interesting choice though nazi's or priest ridden catholic ireland ... hhhhhmmmmm (joking those feckers were not that bad - ... the priests that is.... we got good education .... for the love of god say nowt about recent events)


could i suggest one book worth looking at - a book on josph walshe - irish foreign folicy 1922-1946 by aengus young. looks like there was far more than friendly neutrality and sending brits back to the front than we already know.

dlofnep

walrusgumble wrote: »

in a similar thread along time ago, i asked, at a similar juncture in the debate, (so i will ask again), for the purpose of a decent discussion and debate and continuation before some laN&ers manage to get an important thread (for some) locked

what needs to be done constitutionally,legislatively, socially, culturally and economically to at least bring further closerness between this two parts of the island. (lets face it unionists - whether extreme or moderate will always want full or some link to britian)

what issues do we share common interests? attitude towards abortion? etc . i suppose some areas in the constitution need to be updated on paper (eg article 41 which in some instances is now not relavant considering art 8 of the echr)

Now we're getting somewhere! Good question.

I think we share more in common, than differences. Ian Paisley for example is a big fan of St. Patrick and would like an all-inclusive holiday for everybody on the Island to share.

I think firstly - Passport issues and identity issues must be addressed. Much like in the north at the moment - people have the right to identify as Irish or British and could avail of an Irish or British passport. Travel between both nations could remain free, and trade between the countries could be free (that means, getting rid of VRT for cars and the likes).

We could have 2 national holidays maybe. One for both communities, and maybe one to celebrate peace between the two communites (excuse for a pissup, and we all love a good pissup!).

There have been suggestions of rejoining the commonwealth, although personally I'm not in favour of that as an option. Although it has been suggested by Eamon Ó Cuiv as a means of getting Unionists onboard and feeling apart of the community. It's worth discussing I guess.

If we really want Unionists onboard, we can't have a gimme gimme attitude and need to make some compromises. I think it will take time. It won't be easy. But it's worth looking at.

dlofnep

Sorry you edited your post, didn't catch the end of it. I'll have a read over the rest when I'm back from tea-break Thanks for stiffling up a good debate!

walrusgumble

dlofnep wrote: »

Now we're getting somewhere! Good question.

I think we share more in common, than differences. Ian Paisley for example is a big fan of St. Patrick and would like an all-inclusive holiday for everybody on the Island to share.

I think firstly - Passport issues and identity issues must be addressed. Much like in the north at the moment - people have the right to identify as Irish or British and could avail of an Irish or British passport. Travel between both nations could remain free, and trade between the countries could be free (that means, getting rid of VRT for cars and the likes).

We could have 2 national holidays maybe. One for both communities, and maybe one to celebrate peace between the two communites (excuse for a pissup, and we all love a good pissup!).

There have been suggestions of rejoining the commonwealth, although personally I'm not in favour of that as an option. Although it has been suggested by Eamon Ó Cuiv as a means of getting Unionists onboard and feeling apart of the community. It's worth discussing I guess.

If we really want Unionists onboard, we can't have a gimme gimme attitude and need to make some compromises. I think it will take time. It won't be easy. But it's worth looking at.

pis* ups eh, ah i doubt paisley's church would not like that. then again we have our pioneers, god bless them.(still their wallets are probably laughing - unless they like cake and sweets and the bottle of cidona or lucozade )

could we, in a few years time (long after 1916 celebrations - a tad bit worried about that - hopefully we can commerate but be respectful) invite a love ulster (baby) parade back down to o'connell st?invite unionist to bang a drum (and bass) at paddys day festival? i see the orangemen are trying to improve their image

as much as i love the idea and true origins of the tricolour, maybe we change it to a green flag with a harp and the red hand?

commonwealth?? ah, you know the story there. sure we are in europe after all (as ppppprionus de rossa would say)

hopefully the setanta cup will continue - maybe let one of ni clubs win it for once (yeah right) it would be nice to have an all ireland soccer league and in the future national team (pie in sky)

maybe, for the sake of bringing the gaa to a wider audience, rename certain clubs, unless the person honoured is actually from that area (that might be tricky as thats the gaa's scope and then we might have to change our capitals stations - with for james connolly is unfair as he might have being one man unionists from the working class could tolerate and he is one man who often seems to be rubbed out of history abit) surely there are a few burly unionists who would not mind playing gaa? even billy wright played hurling (that of course does not make him a good man)

the car vrt issue is quiete good - get me auld vauxhall astra going

might be no harm leaving the auld celtic and rangers tops away and actually support their local teams ( again pie in the sky - if one supports a team they support a team, i suppose if identity is in question why should one ignore it)

DoireNod

walrusgumble wrote: »

as much as i love the idea and true origins of the tricolour, maybe we change it to a green flag with a harp and the red hand?

The flag issue is an interesting one. Would the 4 provinces in one flag be enough?

Hagar

One of the oldest flags is now the Presidential flag, a gold harp on a blue background. No green, no orange no offence to anybody. Personally I would love it.

walrusgumble

DoireNod wrote: »

The flag issue is an interesting one. Would the 4 provinces in one flag be enough?

ye why not, i always liked the connacht pledge, a nice big eagle /bird thing.

maybe a bunch of shamrocks around it. that set a few eyes about on the international stage (the province flag)

walrusgumble

walrusgumble wrote: »

could i suggest one book worth looking at - a book on josph walshe - irish foreign folicy 1922-1946 by aengus young. looks like there was far more than friendly neutrality and sending brits back to the front than we already know.

My Grandad lived near the POW camp on the curragh, he said that that happened as well, not to mention the employment that was offered to so many Irishmen in Britain to replace men who had joined up to fight.

So I believe that it could have happened (NI traded for neutrality), Pearl Harbour put an end to it though, De Valera was given the two fingered salute!

Fratton Fred

Here's a radical one. How about for the sake of a united Ireland, Sinn Fein disbands as a political Party, or at least, they undergo a radical change, including a complete change of leadership.

How much of the objection to a united Ireland is a simple case of not wanting the other side to win? If "the otherside" were no longer there, would that help?

I also see things like a common curiculum in schools, with Irish non compulsory and obviously less reliance on the RC in education. A common currency, road signs in KM and a unified VAT and PAYE rate and after that, there is just the question of which shower of useless bastards you choose to govern.

Hagar

Hagar wrote: »

One of the oldest flags is now the Presidential flag, a gold harp on a blue background. No green, no orange no offence to anybody. Personally I would love it.

You beat me to it! I was going to suggest that one.

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Here's a radical one. How about for the sake of a united Ireland, Sinn Fein disbands as a political Party, or at least, they undergo a radical change, including a complete change of leadership.

How much of the objection to a united Ireland is a simple case of not wanting the other side to win? If "the otherside" were no longer there, would that help?

I also see things like a common curiculum in schools, with Irish non compulsory and obviously less reliance on the RC in education. A common currency, road signs in KM and a unified VAT and PAYE rate and after that, there is just the question of which shower of useless bastards you choose to govern.

Yes, but the unonist parties would also have to disband/reform, there is no place for tribal politics in a modern Ireland.

The economic union would be much harder, but probably easier now that the "celtic tiger" has been seen to be naked! At least wait till sterling has revalued against the euro, then costs of goods & services will be on a par.

But please don't inflict the crappy Irish road signs and bad driving on the north - we'll take theirs. Metric is OK though

hamlet1

i couldn't bear to be united with that lot up north.they are of a completely different mindset than us.my biggest fear is that gerry adams would become taoiseach.as for their accent.....spare me

DoireNod

hamlet1 wrote: »

i couldn't bear to be united with that lot up north.they are of a completely different mindset than us.my biggest fear is that gerry adams would become taoiseach.as for their accent.....spare me

Completely different mindset? Of course, anyone would understand the differing mindset as a result of the Troubles, but Irish people in the North are still Irish

Adams for Taoiseach? :eek:

And I like my accent!

Are you going to let your dislike for a northern accent (Donegal included) sway you to be against Irish independence? :pac:

Bottle_of_Smoke

Fratton_Fred wrote:

How much of the objection to a united Ireland is a simple case of not wanting the other side to win? If "the otherside" were no longer there, would that help?

I don't think much. Hardcore Unionists and Loyalists are going to resist any united ireland suggestion, even if Brian Cowen was to murder Martin McGuinness on live TV. Also the "otherside" isn't just Sinn Fein, they view the SDLP or the "fenian free state" with just as much contempt as they do republicans, perhaps even more because they can't hold murder and bombings against them.

A United Ireland will bring about armed conflict and terrorist attacks. No two ways about that. No flag that incorporates Unionist traditions with the best will in the world will not be acceptable to loyalists. If London tells them where to go they'll lay down their lives for an Independent Ulster. In fact the UDA used to want an Independent Ulster

Bottle_of_Smoke

hamlet1 wrote: »

i couldn't bear to be united with that lot up north.they are of a completely different mindset than us.my biggest fear is that gerry adams would become taoiseach.as for their accent.....spare me

Been living there a while and I lived all my previous life in Dublin. This is nonsense. Don't worry about Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein wouldn't be in power in a United Ireland.

CelticTiger*

Timing will be key imo.

At present then no, but give it time.
Trust me first Scotland COULD become independent(the majority want it please dont argue)
Then Wales after scotland, then NI will see no point staying in the UK.
Then they will realise they're fecked on their own, so we offer them a helping hand.

There would have to be serious change though such as:

*The official language would have to be switched from Irish to English.(best for every1 tbh)

*The flag would change, no way they'd accept the tricolour.

*The powers that be the Catholic church would have to be less powerful

*National anthem

CelticTiger*

walrusgumble wrote: »

a green flag with a harp and the red hand?

The Leinster flag.That'd be perfect

dlofnep

CelticTiger* wrote: »

*The official language would have to be switched from Irish to English.(best for every1 tbh)

No it wouldn't. English is already an official language. There is no reason to revoke Irish as an official language.

dlofnep

dlofnep wrote: »

No it wouldn't. English is already an official language. There is no reason to revoke Irish as an official language.

Just need to add "Ulster scots" to the list.

dlofnep

Deleted User wrote: »

Just need to add "Ulster scots" to the list.

I've no problem with Ulster-Scots being recognized as a language at all. If they want to use it, they can. Whatever gets everyone on board and makes them feel welcome

bernardo mac

TheZohan wrote: »

It will never happen in any of our lifetimes.

Looked at The Day Mountbatten Died which dealt with the Warrenpoint Massacre that occurred just hours after the Mullaghmore murders and it brought back the dreadful and depressing time to me.I remember how many of us,hopeful of better Ireland for all were sunk into despair knowing that each atrocity committed by the opposing elements only deepened the hatred and the certainty that more tragedies would follow.And they did on all sides and particularly tragic were the almost countless murders of the innocent that continued ,unabated ,since the "troubles" began a decade earlier in 1969.Ruari O Bradaig was honest enough to recall a sense of almost gloating triumph that his side felt regarding the" success" of the "operations" on both sides of the Border.I am sure that Loyalists also derived morbid satisfaction from the deaths of the Hunger Strikers and Mrs Thatcher's cold and murderous indifference two years later in 1981.There is peace now,the opposing sides are spent,hopefully.But,I believe they are still entrenched ,ideologically,and true progress lies in a no go area.Naturally,the Republicans and the Loyalist/Unionists will not forget the sacrifices of their dead and will remain steadfastly faithful to each tradition ensuring they will remain prisoners of principle,memory and history.Agreed,no United Ireland in our lifetime.Sadly.

CelticTiger*

dlofnep wrote: »

No it wouldn't. English is already an official language. There is no reason to revoke Irish as an official language.

No english is just the most spoken, irish is the official language of the state

Rebelheart

CelticTiger* wrote: »

No english is just the most spoken, irish is the official language of the state

Incorrect:

Article 8
1. The Irish language as the national language is the first official language.
2. The English language is recognised as a second official language.


http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/html%20files/Constitution%20of%20Ireland%20(Eng)Nov2004.htm

Until this issue is sorted, there is zero chance of a united Ireland!

gurramok

Ironically, more peace lines have sprung up since the peace dawned in the last 10+years with none torn down.

So is peace bad?

walrusgumble

Deleted User wrote: »

My Grandad lived near the POW camp on the curragh, he said that that happened as well, not to mention the employment that was offered to so many Irishmen in Britain to replace men who had joined up to fight.

So I believe that it could have happened (NI traded for neutrality), Pearl Harbour put an end to it though, De Valera was given the two fingered salute!

to be honest i don't think it was a two finger salute, i know what you mean - it was never going to happen, history would repeat itself. how could either side trust each other considering british hostilities during the imperial confernce, irish instistance of making the 1921 treaty an international instrument, irish insistance of joining the league of nations (which dev later became president - at this time helped him believe that if a war occurred small nations would be ignored)


Panic is the only word that could be described about the notion of offering a united ireland. as you say desperate times needed desperate measures.


there was serious double crossing if you will. check out the book and others like it, like papers of the german ambassador in ireland at the time. Von Ribbontop (sp) german ambassador made it clear in writing that so long as ireland would adhere to strict neutrality germany would not attack.

There were actually talks on neutrality in return for united ireland during 1940. the above are reasons that it did not happen, and naturally it would only happen after the war - here we go again 1914 all over.

Ireland provided the allies with geographical information about the 26 counties in the event of invasion, the miliatary were in intense co-operation and planning, the irish authorities even informed the brits of ira activity, the brits were allowed to keep their wireless sets while the german's set was confiscated later, all communications were routed to britian - there is plenty more examples from state papers of co-operation.

Ireland put themselves at huge risk of invasion from both sides of the war, yet shortly after the brits played down the help the irish gave by their media, who knew damn all about the real position, constantly crticising the irish. whatever about the shortcomings after the war, dev and the government need to be credited for their role during this time. we are all aware that ireland's men and women contributed greatly to the war cause of britain and the us

in effect, there was very little else ireland could have done even if it physically joined the war. At time of neutrality many believed that germany would win unless us joined. even the british were not too confident after dunkirk. as you say when the us joined it was all shoulders to the wheel. If germany won, ireland might have being attacked by germany if seen to assist the allies. by stating neutral it was win germany sympathy. going whole hog with britain at an early stage meant almost certain lost of independence. I understand that the irish relied heavily on irish american strength in america to prevent either britain or germany touching us.

if britain were so concerned with ireland being attacked, why didn't it not provide further support and supply of ships and guns so that it could protect their area?

As you know, even if offer of unity was genuinely offered, dev and even dillion of cumann na ngaedheal/fg (who admitted this) the irish people would not accept it, if joining the war was a condition, for obvious reasons.

Hagar

Deleted User wrote: »

Until this issue is sorted, there is zero chance of a united Ireland!

So the Peace Lines were there to keep separate the two communities and stop unnecessary conflict? If that is so can somebody explain to me the picture on the page linked to above where the RUC are opening a gate in the Peace Line to allow an Orange March into the Nationalist community. Absolute madness.

bernardo mac

Peace is most welcome and peace lines probably necessary until long after the present generations are no more

walrusgumble

Deleted User wrote: »

Until this issue is sorted, there is zero chance of a united Ireland!

its a real sorry state of affairs, what does others in the european union think, what would people in berlin think? i know they are neccessary. jesus the sooner they are down the better. without sounding poncy, they totaly block teh beautiful scenery of the mountains and glens like.

both the uk and ireland should continue pumping more money into cross community base projects and support the idea that no voice shoudl be ignored.

whatever happens, if people in this side of the boarder wish to improvements , at least a point where we can say the unionist is a friend of ireland, maybe we (at per usual mind) need to make the first steps.

THe identity that is northern ireland does also need to be left alone and able to sort out their state independently,and the countries should be there to assist and support. there is genuine great potential in that area be it in industry, agriculture etc.

for now i would be happy to hear good stories, stories of success, and all parties talking sense when i switch onto hearts and minds and other bbc sunday morning programmes.