Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland, united and free!

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    RiverWilde wrote: »
    Why on earth would the 6 counties want to leave the UK? For what? To join a country that is badly run, corrupt to the core and practically bankrupt both economically and morally?

    Ah no I can't see it happening anytime soon.

    Riv
    Well it would'nt be any change from the system they are under now.

    The "carry on" in Britain and NI and the Republic would make an Italian crooked politician or African crooked politician blush:cool:


  • Options
    #63
    S-Murph
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭S-Murph


    RiverWilde wrote: »
    Why on earth would the 6 counties want to leave the UK? For what? To join a country that is badly run, corrupt to the core and practically bankrupt both economically and morally?

    Ah no I can't see it happening anytime soon.

    Riv

    Thats why, from the polls I have seen, most republicans are socialists. They want to change/overthrow both the Freestate and the British state to create a 32 county Irish socialist republic.

    Very few republicans, from what I can gather, favour simply merging the north with the south.


  • Options
    #64
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Once the giro keeps coming in they couldn't care less where it comes from.


    Sad to say that ,but regrettably true.

    Only ones battering on about a UI are the entrenched kerbpainters and flag wavers, who regrettably have been inculcated with flawed idealism and ,again regrettably, haven't got the pragmatic sense of reality to see things as they really are.

    these people need to look around and sniff the air.


    There is no great stomach for a push for a UI in the ROI at this point in time.


    We have other issues to worry about.:mad:


  • Options
    #65
    DoireNod
    Registered Users Posts: 863 ✭✭✭DoireNod


    rovert wrote: »
    Lads it is 2010

    Nationalism is such an outdated concept. It shouldnt be a primary driver for a major decision such as this. Like it or not the Brits are doing us a favour by bank rolling N.I.
    There are so many outdated concepts that are still floating around and indeed flourishing in the world . I think most Nationalists and Republicans are in favour of a re-united Ireland on more than just nationalistic idealism. They obviously agree with the practical possibilities of the notion.
    lugha wrote: »
    Anyway, I wouldn’t get too attached to it. When your glorious united Ireland comes, surely you know that the flag (and the national anthem) will go?
    I obviously share a different opinion to you with regard to the tricolour. The flag of green, white and orange may be seen as tainted by some, but its symbolism of reconciliation should endure and be promoted. However, if it meant Irish unity, I think I'd gladly accept a new flag and anthem. What would they be though?
    FlutterinBantam wrote: »
    Once the giro keeps coming in they couldn't care less where it comes from.


    Sad to say that ,but regrettably true.
    It's not true but you're right, it is sad of you to say it.
    FlutterinBantam wrote: »
    Only ones battering on about a UI are the entrenched kerbpainters and flag wavers, who regrettably have been inculcated with flawed idealism and ,again regrettably, haven't got the pragmatic sense of reality to see things as they really are.
    This is also not true. I don't know where you get these ideas from. Do you really think all nationalists and republicans who favour Irish unity are 'entrenched kerbpainters and flag wavers'?
    FlutterinBantam wrote: »
    We have other issues to worry about.:mad:
    Why must that preclude us from discussing Irish reunification?


  • Options
    #66
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    FlutterinBantam wrote: »
    Once the giro keeps coming in they couldn't care less where it comes from.


    Sad to say that ,but regrettably true.

    Only ones battering on about a UI are the entrenched kerbpainters and flag wavers, who regrettably have been inculcated with flawed idealism and ,again regrettably, haven't got the pragmatic sense of reality to see things as they really are.

    these people need to look around and sniff the air.


    There is no great stomach for a push for a UI in the ROI at this point in time.


    We have other issues to worry about.:mad:

    Why do you keep ignoring the fact that there is widespread support across the island for a 32 county republic? I'm not sayin people want it put to the top of the agenda, cause like you say we have more important things to deal with atm, but while you might have your opinion on whether or not a UI should happen, its just that, your opinion.

    And its easy for you to sit there and bang on about 'kerbpainters' and 'flagwavers' as if they're stuck in the past, you actually have your independence. Put yourself in the shoes of an Irish person living in the North, part of another country due to no fault of their own, but of a policy of partition and isolation forced on them by a foreign country. Your whole culture and identity is suppressed, your people are oppressed by a government that doesn't represent them, would you just sit back and do nothing? No you'd protest against it, you'd wave Irish flags to symbolise your Irishness, to symbolise that you're not a part of the British nation. Obviously things have changed now, but that feeling of being forced to express your identity by protest and force because you're oppressed from expressing it otherwise is still remnant in many parts of the North.
    lugha wrote: »
    Anyway, I wouldn’t get too attached to it. When your glorious united Ireland comes, surely you know that the flag (and the national anthem) will go?

    I doubt it, whatever about the anthem, the flag will more than likely stay, as happened in Germany when they reunified. Theres nothing wrong with the tricolour, its representative of both traditions and symbolises peace between both communities.

    And btw do you actually genuinely think the Brits want you's in the UK? I mean you clearly like to think theres no support for a United Ireland in the South, but what makes you actually think the Brits want yeahs? Why would you think they'd want to be associated with yeahs? Like it or not, as far as they're concerned, you're as Irish as Paddy from Ballygobackwards...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Jim236 wrote: »

    And its easy for you to sit there and bang on about 'kerbpainters' and 'flagwavers' as if they're stuck in the past, you actually have your independence. Put yourself in the shoes of an Irish person living in the North, part of another country due to no fault of their own, but of a policy of partition and isolation forced on them by a foreign country. Your whole culture and identity is suppressed, your people are oppressed by a government that doesn't represent them, would you just sit back and do nothing? No you'd protest against it, you'd wave Irish flags to symbolise your Irishness, to symbolise that you're not a part of the British nation. Obviously things have changed now, but that feeling of being forced to express your identity by protest and force because you're oppressed from expressing it otherwise is still remnant in many parts of the North.



    ..

    In all fairness you put that very well, I can understand where you are coming from.

    Seems to me to be a very fair minded synopsis of a fair minded person.

    Unfortunately not all people are as balanced and pragmatic as you seem to be.

    Very well put across.


  • Options
    #68
    Zambia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭Zambia


    junder wrote: »
    Yes before independence many unionists may indeed have referred to themselves as irish, but since 1921 most northern irish unionists do not see themselves as irish any longer espically those of us born after 1921. Personly i don't have any problem with the irish, live and let live i say, it just annoys me when they try and force thier identy on to me.

    Fair enough , anyway we are going OT and its all my fault I will leave it at that.

    Cheers for your replys


  • Options
    #69
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    DoireNod wrote: »
    I think most Nationalists and Republicans are in favour of a re-united Ireland on more than just nationalistic idealism. They obviously agree with the practical possibilities of the notion.

    Obviously?


  • Options
    #70
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    DoireNod wrote: »
    There are so many outdated concepts that are still floating around and indeed flourishing in the world .
    I agree. Including the Republican view that the British government attitude to Nationalist is much the same now as it was in 1969. :pac:
    DoireNod wrote: »
    I think most Nationalists and Republicans are in favour of a re-united Ireland on more than just nationalistic idealism.
    It doesn't look like that from where I'm standing. I still have not heard a convincing argument why any problems which currently exist cannot be solved without a UI. I expect what many Republicans think a UI will bring and what it actually does bring will be very different.
    DoireNod wrote: »
    I obviously share a different opinion to you with regard to the tricolour.
    Well, yes. But I think you are a tad closer to the Sinn Fein way of thinking than me!
    DoireNod wrote: »
    The flag of green, white and orange may be seen as tainted by some, but its symbolism of reconciliation should endure and be promoted.
    Tainted business aside, I think there is a dishonesty about the flag. I don't think either Nationalists or Unionists have any interest in sharing this island. If the Unionist got their way, Ulster would be a protestant state for a protestant
    people. And I don't think Republicans are serious about Unionists playing a part in a UI.
    DoireNod wrote: »
    However, if it meant Irish unity, I think I'd gladly accept a new flag and anthem. What would they be though?
    How about Ireland's call for the anthem? :) That thought should put a dent in some Republican's aspirations!


  • Options
    #71
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    Jim236 wrote: »
    I doubt it, whatever about the anthem, the flag will more than likely stay, as happened in Germany when they reunified. Theres nothing wrong with the tricolour, its representative of both traditions and symbolises peace between both communities.
    I don't think the Unionists would accept the tricolor just as I don't think many Nationalists would be keen on a union Jack appearing anywhere on a new flag.

    Jim236 wrote: »
    And btw do you actually genuinely think the Brits want you's in the UK?
    What are you on about? I have no interest in being part of the UK. :confused:
    Jim236 wrote: »
    I mean you clearly like to think theres no support for a United Ireland in the South
    No, I don't think that at all. I suspect there is quite a bit of support, probably a clear majority I would say. But it won't be hard to discourage a few of them once they see the price tag of a UI :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    junder wrote: »
    Don't come from Ireland so how can i be Irish? A point that has been gone over and over and over and over again, i am well aware that i don't live in Great Britain, i do however, as you have already pointed out live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland tha nationality of which is British er and since i am a citizen (and yes it is citizen and not subject) of the UK er go i am British

    So Scottish people arent Scotish they are British, Welsh people arent Welsh they are British.
    We all know that protestants in NI identify with Britain because they think it keeps them on top in NI. in NI what is good for protestants is bad for catholocs and vice versa.

    NI is a zero-sum state which is set up for two tribes. Anti-catholicism which is entrenched in the religious, social and political structures in NI insures there will always be two tribes in conflict. As you know biblical anti-catholocism is widespread in NI.

    The guarantee for protestants to keep dominance in this zero-sum is to associate with Britain.

    They feel that the rest of Ireland is just an extension of a zero-sum scenario and if they joined they will be on the losing end.

    Infact the ROI would be a richer place with a large protestant minority.

    Whats good for catholic is good for protestants in this part of ireland and vice versa.


  • Options
    #73
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    lugha wrote: »
    What are you on about? I have no interest in being part of the UK. :confused

    Sorry I just assumed from some of your posts(where you're nearly speaking on behalf of Unionism), that you were a Unionist, fair enough if you're not.


  • Options
    #74
    DoireNod
    Registered Users Posts: 863 ✭✭✭DoireNod


    rovert wrote: »
    Obviously?
    Yes. Do you disagree?
    lugha wrote: »
    It doesn't look like that from where I'm standing. I still have not heard a convincing argument why any problems which currently exist cannot be solved without a UI. I expect what many Republicans think a UI will bring and what it actually does bring will be very different.
    What do you think Republicans think a re-united Ireland will bring? What do you expect it will bring?

    lugha wrote: »
    Tainted business aside, I think there is a dishonesty about the flag. I don't think either Nationalists or Unionists have any interest in sharing this island. If the Unionist got their way, Ulster would be a protestant state for a protestant
    people. And I don't think Republicans are serious about Unionists playing a part in a UI.
    Unionists did get their way and 6 counties were the fabric of a protestant state for protestant people, but thankfully that has changed significantly. Why do you think that Republicans are not serious about having those from the unionist community being a part of a re-united Ireland?

    lugha wrote: »
    How about Ireland's call for the anthem? :) That thought should put a dent in some Republican's aspirations!
    Admittedly not one of Phil Coulter's finest compositions...but hey, it's used for a united Irish rugby team without much complaint.


  • Options
    #75
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    DoireNod wrote: »
    What do you think Republicans think a re-united Ireland will bring? What do you expect it will bring?
    Well one of the more bizarre claims is that a UI will bring an end to the tribal politics of NI. I don't see a shred of evidence for that happening.
    DoireNod wrote: »
    Why do you think that Republicans are not serious about having those from the unionist community being a part of a re-united Ireland?
    Not just Republicans, Nationalists as well. I don't think there is a smidgen of respect for their culture or traditions. We are just not at honest about this as they are.


  • Options
    #76
    Happy Monday
    Registered Users Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Jim236 wrote: »
    And btw do you actually genuinely think the Brits want you's in the UK? I mean you clearly like to think theres no support for a United Ireland in the South, but what makes you actually think the Brits want yeahs? Why would you think they'd want to be associated with yeahs? Like it or not, as far as they're concerned, you're as Irish as Paddy from Ballygobackwards...

    As an a half Englishman myself the British - as you put it - on the mainland want the British people in NI to have the right to be British while the majority so decides.

    This should be obvious to even the most ignorant - sorry, ardent - of Republicans after 25 years of facing down the IRA. Hundreds of soliders died to defend the right of people in the North to be British.

    As a half Irishman let me now turn the tables on you.

    How many Irish people want mad Seamas from the Falls and his like talking about the sit-e-ation and all that stuff down here. When Irish Protestants were burning Irish Catholics from their homes in 1969 over the border no-one reacted to defend those people down here and no-one had helped them in the 50 years before that.


  • Options
    #77
    Jim236
    Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭Jim236


    Happy Monday wrote: »
    Hundreds of soliders died to defend the right of people in the North to be British.

    Thats funny, I thought they were there to defend Catholics from Protestant attacks?
    Happy Monday wrote: »
    How many Irish people want mad Seamas from the Falls and his like talking about the sit-e-ation and all that stuff down here. When Irish Protestants were burning Irish Catholics from their homes in 1969 over the border no-one reacted to defend those people down here and no-one had helped them in the 50 years before that.

    We all know if the republic had 'reacted', the war between 2 communities would have extended to a war between 2 states. When the British government were handling the situation as what they saw as a 'domestic issue', what could the republic have done? Lynch only had to utter the words "we will not stand idly by" to spark a threat of war, so yeh can only imagine what would've happened if any type of invasion was mounted...


  • Options
    #78
    Happy Monday
    Registered Users Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭Happy Monday


    Jim236 wrote: »
    Thats funny, I thought they were there to defend Catholics from Protestant attacks?

    They were originally deployed in that role but the 'true defenders' of Irish freedom decided to take pot shots at them to stir up a war against British rule in NI. Ultimately their role was to ensure that the democratic wishes of the people in NI were upheld and this they achieved with the IRA accepting British rule in Ireland. This belies the belief held by nationalists that the British people on the mainland are unconcerned about the British people in NI.
    Jim236 wrote: »
    We all know if the republic had 'reacted', the war between 2 communities would have extended to a war between 2 states. When the British government were handling the situation as what they saw as a 'domestic issue', what could the republic have done? Lynch only had to utter the words "we will not stand idly by" to spark a threat of war, so yeh can only imagine what would've happened if any type of invasion was mounted...

    If the people of the North meant anything to people down here then surely that would have been a risk worth taking.


  • Options
    #79
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    DoireNod wrote: »
    Yes. Do you disagree?

    Yes with your use of obviously hence the question mark


  • Options
    #80
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    Zambia232 wrote: »
    Fair enough , anyway we are going OT and its all my fault I will leave it at that.

    Cheers for your replys

    To clarify my position i am of the view that individuls we can define ourselves as we see fit i live in northern ireland and see myself as British that is my right, there are others who live in northern ireland who see themselves as irish, that is their right and niether of us has the right to force our identys on the other. I believe that arguments that say you 'live in ireland so you must be irish' and vice versa 'you live in the UK so you must be British' a waste of time and are only pushed by ignorant people who have no idea of the nuances of Northern Ireland.
    As for the tricolour i am well aware of what it supposedly means but it will never mean that to me, it will never be my flag, nor will your anthem ever be mine nor your police force, your army, your president, your primeminster, your Dail, they are, and will forever be Foreign to me.


  • Options
    #81
    walrusgumble
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    Jim236 wrote: »
    Thats funny, I thought they were there to defend Catholics from Protestant attacks?



    We all know if the republic had 'reacted', the war between 2 communities would have extended to a war between 2 states. When the British government were handling the situation as what they saw as a 'domestic issue', what could the republic have done? Lynch only had to utter the words "we will not stand idly by" to spark a threat of war, so yeh can only imagine what would've happened if any type of invasion was mounted...

    THe UK made it very clear at the outbreak that the Republic's involvement was not required, and tried to use its huge influence to convince other states, when paddy hillery was sent to the UN about this matter. Jesus, you damned if you do damned if you don't when it comes to taking Constitutional steps. Ireland also risky fecking up its application (which Britian assisted) to enter the EEC, by taking an important case against Britain to the ECHR over its treatment of Republican prisoners.

    Who ever was involved in the smuggling of arms during the Arms Trial did try and help the north. Where were the refugees going to when they were burned out of their homes in the north? hardly mainland britian


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    walrusgumble
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    Happy Monday wrote: »
    They were originally deployed in that role but the 'true defenders' of Irish freedom decided to take pot shots at them to stir up a war against British rule in NI. Ultimately their role was to ensure that the democratic wishes of the people in NI were upheld and this they achieved with the IRA accepting British rule in Ireland. This belies the belief held by nationalists that the British people on the mainland are unconcerned about the British people in NI.



    If the people of the North meant anything to people down here then surely that would have been a risk worth taking.

    aye, its easy for british to say this, half the world might hate britain but it won't care and it will get on with things. If the Irish do something violent, its all terrorism, fighting brutes etc, back to the old days of Punch cartoons or propoaganda of murder gangs during the tan war etc (of course, having the cope on that my violent means, ireland on both sides of the boarder would have been severely damaged, not alone the possible security risks in britain amongst the Irish disasporia .

    And where do you think support would come from? British bossed Ireland about when the matter came before the UN. Britain nearly sabogated Irish & Irish American's co-opt with Bill Clinton when efforts where made to get a US visa for Gerry Adams, Irish Citizen.

    WOuld suggest try make an effort as to Irish diplomacy during this period.


  • Options
    #83
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    :confused::rolleyes:

    jaysus!!


  • Options
    #84
    Zuiderzee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 593 ✭✭✭Zuiderzee


    Look, we just saw the entrenchment of sectarian, apartheid government when power remained with one tribe, e.g. power not being transferred to the deputy leader.

    The mindset is that the other group must be kept in their place, and any change of that is unacceptable to a large body of people


  • Options
    #85
    DoireNod
    Registered Users Posts: 863 ✭✭✭DoireNod


    rovert wrote: »
    Yes with your use of obviously hence the question mark
    You don't think that most nationalists and republicans agree that a re-united Ireland will have positive practical effects? What do you think most nationalists and republicans think?
    lugha wrote: »
    Well one of the more bizarre claims is that a UI will bring an end to the tribal politics of NI. I don't see a shred of evidence for that happening.
    We can't really predict what will happen, but tribal politics certainly doesn't seem like it's ever going to end in the current system. In a re-united Ireland, I would imagine it would begin to dissipate over time.
    lugha wrote: »
    Not just Republicans, Nationalists as well. I don't think there is a smidgen of respect for their culture or traditions. We are just not at honest about this as they are.
    Why do you think this? While there may be sporadic vandalism and confrontation between the two communities, it certainly has decreased dramatically in recent times, despite the 'riots' last year at Orange marches. To me, this is an indication of a relative growth in the level of 'respect' (possible indifference) for typically unionist traditions.


  • Options
    #86
    Zuiderzee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 593 ✭✭✭Zuiderzee


    Screw a united Irland, the Republic of Connaught should be reformed, annex Clare (we need a brewery) and Donegal, reocgnise the Peoples Republc of Cork and give it a shot - :D we cant do any worse than the current shower


  • Options
    #87
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    DoireNod wrote: »
    We can't really predict what will happen, but tribal politics certainly doesn't seem like it's ever going to end in the current system. In a re-united Ireland, I would imagine it would begin to dissipate over time.
    I would suggest the opposite. The reason why both traditions in the North assert their identity and culture to the extent that they do is because they each perceive theirs to be under threat. Unionists in a UI will determine the threat to be even greater.
    DoireNod wrote: »
    Why do you think this?
    Well let me give an example. Nothing of any great importance, but indicative of an attitude. From time to time a flare up occurs in relation to the policy of the IRFU with respect to playing Amhráin na bhFiann at Irish internationals. There are invariably cart loads of people from the Nationalists tradition who utterly fail to get, that for some people on this Island, that is not their national anthem. It's not that they are extreme republicans who think Unionists should all go back to Scotland. They simply believe, and you will see plenty of letters in the paper to this effect, that being Irish means being Irish in the Nationalists tradition. For such people, Unionists may be welcome in a UI, but only if they become Natiionaists.


  • Options
    #88
    Bigdeadlydave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 611 ✭✭✭Bigdeadlydave


    I hope it will happen before I die.


  • Options
    #89
    Zuiderzee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 593 ✭✭✭Zuiderzee


    united ireland or republic of connaught?


  • Options
    #90
    rovert
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    DoireNod wrote: »
    You don't think that most nationalists and republicans agree that a re-united Ireland will have positive practical effects? What do you think most nationalists and republicans think?

    It is not about what you and I think. All I what is proof of what you've been saying. Most people I encounter down here who are in favour of a United Ireland have either never visited NI for more than a weekend or their sole rational is based on getting one over on the Brits.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    junder wrote: »
    As for the tricolour i am well aware of what it supposedly means but it will never mean that to me, it will never be my flag, nor will your anthem ever be mine nor your police force, your army, your president, your primeminster, your Dail, they are, and will forever be Foreign to me.

    But they are not foriegn to 40% of people in NI. Those 40% must be foreign to you also I guess?

    I know that anti-Catholic doctrine in biblical Protestantism has to bear a large responsibility for the segregation over 400 years in NE Ireland.

    Giving these religious fundamentalists more control over the zero sum society by establishing NI is a mistake that the British would certainly reverse, if at all possible.


Advertisement