The British: Like, hate or feel completely indifferent??

owenc

hatful wrote: »

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75391/omnibus-obama-conspiracy-theory


Those pesky Brits even the yanks agree

Agree with what?

gurramok

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Should all of Europe revert to the boundaries of 1599 ?

No. as we are talking about colonialism in the 1600's when the plantations in NI started. Do you know your history at all?:eek:

owenc wrote: »

he's not unionist he's from down south

I don't think he's from the South or he maybe of Unionist stock in Antrim. Sure he'll tell us his true loyalities

Carlos_Ray

The funny thing about Northern Ireland is that any people I have spoken to from Britain would prefer if it wasn't part of the UK. It costs them a huge amount of money and they feel its more trouble than its worth.

I seem to remember during the last olympics, the British named their team "Team GB" totally ignoring Northern Ireland. Britain has a population of nearly 60 million, they don't feel any patriotism towards the 800,000 unionists that are just a serious drain on their resources.

There is a growing movement for Scottish independece too. As soon as that happens the Union will fall and Northern Ireland will fall with it.

drakshug

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Most of the violence tends to be found within NI, though. :mad:

Yeah. It is safer to mouth off and do the posturing if you don't actually live there. Nice wee collections in the pub. Wee parades and a bit of tradition for somehere one has never been.

gurramok

drakshug wrote: »

I've found most of the vehemence and posturing is found outside NI. America, ROI, Scotland and Northern England amongst those who have never set foot in the six counties.

Thought you had said Scotland was a harmonious place?!:eek:

Cavehill Red

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

The funny thing about Northern Ireland is that any people I have spoken to from Britain would prefer if it wasn't part of the UK. It costs them a huge amount of money and they feel its more trouble than its worth.

True, but with an additional side order of Blairite "why is this religious, medieval conflict still going on in the 21st century".
The support for jettisoning NI drops among Tories somewhat, though. I'm still struggling to square their unionism (electorally defunct though it was) with their little Englander mentalities.

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I seem to remember during the last olympics, the British named their team "Team GB" totally ignoring Northern Ireland. Britain has a population of nearly 60 million, they don't feel any patriotism towards the 800,000 unionists that are just a serious drain on their resources.

If they could wake up tomorrow and find that NI was located somewhere beyond New Zealand, they'd be delighted, so long as they could still get cheap Ryanair flights to Dublin for the weekend.

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Their is a growing movement for Scottish independece too. As soon as that happens the Union will fall and Northern Ireland will fall with it.

Less convinced of this myself.

owenc

gurramok wrote: »

Thought you had said Scotland was a harmonious place?!:eek:

It is

drakshug

gurramok wrote: »

Thought you had said Scotland was a harmonious place?!:eek:

I did. I also mentioned the minority of plastic paddy and Orangemen. They live in the past and you hardly ever come in contact with em unless you frequent pubs with no windows. Never go in a pub that looks like a bunker with no windows.

Carlos_Ray

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Less convinced of this myself.

Over the last 20 years Scotland has not benefited from the union. Quite the opposite. Westminster has pillaged its oil and gas resources with little of the profit returning to Scotland. Without the Union Scotland could have been enjoying a lifestyle similar to that of Norway.

It would also still have the spill over of tourism across the border with or without the union.

Its a pity more of them aren't pushing for independence.

gurramok

drakshug wrote: »

I did. I also mentioned the minority of plastic paddy and Orangemen. They live in the past and you hardly ever come in contact with em unless you frequent pubs with no windows. Never go in a pub that looks like a bunker with no windows.

What about wandering into the wrong suburb of Glasgow and picked upon for been on the 'wrong sectarian divide'?

ejmaztec

owenc wrote: »

It is

Not with some of the more ignorant Scots being prone to religious bigotry, it isn't.:eek:

Cavehill Red

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Over the last 20 years Scotland has not benefited from the union. Quite the opposite. Westminster has pillaged its oil and gas resources with little of the profit returning to Scotland. Without the Union Scotland could have been enjoying a lifestyle similar to that of Norway.

It would also still have the spill over of tourism across the border with or without the union.

Its a pity more of them aren't pushing for independence.

I wasn't questioning the move towards Scottish independence, though it has a ways to go yet.
I was questioning whether Scottish independence would inevitably lead to the break-up of the union between Westminster and NI.
(Although, the assumption that Scotland would be Norway had not nasty London nicked their resources rests on more slender evidence than you'd think, once the subventions north of the border are factored in.)

droicead

its not about where you are from...its where youre at

saywhatyousee

northern ireland should just become it's own republic problem solved in my eyes

Cavehill Red

saywhatyousee wrote: »

northern ireland should just become it's own republic problem solved in my eyes

Ah, the DUP position. Six county nationalism.
Doesn't make the problem go away, you know. It simply leads to Belgium - an ungovernable state no one wants or loves.

Wolfe Tone

And I doubt it is large enough to economically support itself either.

Nulty

I voted indifferent but I have to say they give me real enjoyment. Their sports are great (crickets not great though)...its lovable the way they *think* they can drink....we can always rely on them to look more pathetic than us in so many ways...its adorable the way they sometimes act as if they still have an empire...

I will think of more later but wont be arsed to post them....

drakshug

Enough of us do want independence. We are just taking it slowly and peacefully.
As for wandering into the wrong part of Glasgow and the mythical sectarian divide...... No peace Walls in Glasgow. Like any city there are areas where the locals don't go for non sectarian reasons. There are areas of any city in Europe I'd be loathe to go to. There is a certain sub species of humanity who will go for anyone who isn't local. You'll find it is more footie based in Glasgow. Me? I'm a jags fan.

owenc

drakshug wrote: »

Enough of us do want independence. We are just taking it slowly and peacefully.
As for wandering into the wrong part of Glasgow and the mythical sectarian divide...... No peace Walls in Glasgow. Like any city there are areas where the locals don't go for non sectarian reasons. There are areas of any city in Europe I'd be loathe to go to. There is a certain sub species of humanity who will go for anyone who isn't local. You'll find it is more footie based in Glasgow. Me? I'm a jags fan.

What's a jags fan

Cavehill Red

owenc wrote: »

What's a jags fan

Partick Thistle. Glesgae's third team - the choice of the enlightened and/or the fence-sitters, depending on one's perspective.
It's a bit like voting Alliance in the North.
Personally, I'm a Jambo.

owenc

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Partick Thistle. Glesgae's third team - the choice of the enlightened and/or the fence-sitters, depending on one's perspective.
It's a bit like voting Alliance in the North.
Personally, I'm a Jambo.

Ok.. I really have no clue

Cavehill Red

owenc wrote: »

Ok.. I really have no clue

Jags = Partick Thistle, the non-sectarian footballing choice in Glasgow.
Jambos = Heart of Midlothian. The mostly Protestant supported team of Edinburgh. Occasionally known as 'Rangers without busfare', but generally a lot nicer than Scotland's shame or indeed that hoops lot.

gurramok

drakshug wrote: »

Enough of us do want independence. We are just taking it slowly and peacefully.
As for wandering into the wrong part of Glasgow and the mythical sectarian divide...... No peace Walls in Glasgow. Like any city there are areas where the locals don't go for non sectarian reasons. There are areas of any city in Europe I'd be loathe to go to. There is a certain sub species of humanity who will go for anyone who isn't local. You'll find it is more footie based in Glasgow. Me? I'm a jags fan.

And that footie has its sectarian overtones drawn from the wider society itself. Maybe its just a co-incidence Rangers have British loving fans(Scottish) and Celtic have Irish loving fans(Scottish) all with their different symbols and flags.:rolleyes:

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

That is one of the most ridiculous things I have read! How does the past not matter? Of course it does!
Does the past matter to the families of those murdered by the BA in Derry? Yes! The past is incredibly important.
Should we apply your logic to other things, like the RCC? Do the crimes that they did in the past not matter?
The present is indeed important, but people need accountability and closure and a sense of having received justice before moving on. That is only right.

one day maybe. At the moment people just want to wounds to heal.

gurramok wrote: »

Planting settlers is colonising a territory which was not belonging to Britain in 1599.

2010 - 1599 = 411 years. Who owned it for the other 399?

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Over the last 20 years Scotland has not benefited from the union. Quite the opposite. Westminster has pillaged its oil and gas resources with little of the profit returning to Scotland. Without the Union Scotland could have been enjoying a lifestyle similar to that of Norway.

Maybe, but without the Union Scotland would have been bankrupt and ravaged by famine decades, if not centuries ago. They only joined the Union in the forst place because their overseas colonies were a complete disaster.

Besides, you ought to take a look at where the UK gets it's money from, the square mile creates a lot more revenue than North Sea oil (and bear in mind not all the north sea is in Scotland)

drakshug

Anything but the Huns.
Jambos in the west and hibees in the east of Edinburgh.

Partick thistle - we are the thinking mans club in Glasgow. Many think our full name is partick thistle nil )
you can go anywhere with thistle colours in Glasgow without any hassle. Glasgow would be a poorer place without the harry rags.

gurramok

Fratton Fred wrote: »

2010 - 1599 = 411 years. Who owned it for the other 399?

Mostly British settlers. The native Irish were dispossessed by the British settlers in the 1600's.

Cavehill Red

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe, but without the Union Scotland would have been bankrupt and ravaged by famine decades, if not centuries ago. They only joined the Union in the forst place because their overseas colonies were a complete disaster.

Interesting. Tell me more about Scotland's overseas colonies, please.

Wolfe Tone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

one day maybe. At the moment people just want to wounds to heal.

And your method is simply to ignore them?

Cavehill Red

Wondering if Fratton Fred is a big Pompey fan.
Given Portsmouth's history as a British navy base, it tends to buck the trend for South of England towns in being a little - how shall we say? - lairy and rule Britannia about things.

drakshug

Fratton Fred wrote: »

one day maybe. At the moment people just want to wounds to heal.



2010 - 1599 = 411 years. Who owned it for the other 399?



Maybe, but without the Union Scotland would have been bankrupt and ravaged by famine decades, if not centuries ago. They only joined the Union in the forst place because their overseas colonies were a complete disaster.

Besides, you ought to take a look at where the UK gets it's money from, the square mile creates a lot more revenue than North Sea oil (and bear in mind not all the north sea is in Scotland)

loathe as I am to say it but ff is right. Historically the union was good for Scotland in many ways so ya get thumbs up for that. Also, we never got the chance to use the oil revenue. Neither did the rest of the uk. Most of it was squandered in the eighties. However Scotland is larger than Ireland and they are independent so I expect we can go it alone.
Ultimately I think a break up of the union would be better for both Scotland and England. It would probably bring us closer together.

drakshug

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Interesting. Tell me more about Scotland's overseas colonies, please.

The Darien disaster coupled with a cycle of bad harvests and the reluctance of the monarch to protect Scottish merchant interests bankrupted Scotland. The English weren't entirely blameless either.

Cavehill Red

drakshug wrote: »

The Darien disaster coupled with a cycle of bad harvests and the reluctance of the monarch to protect Scottish merchant interests bankrupted Scotland. The English weren't entirely blameless either.

Aye, those highland clearances genocides weren't exactly a boon to the Scottish economy or people.
What was the Darien disaster?

Junco Partner

davrho wrote: »

Pally? There are bars in West of Scotland where your accent would be enough to be asked to leave. The Scots are a very sectarian lot. Only last year "The Famine Song" was outlawed through the courts there. This Scots Irish love in is a myth. You will probably find the Scots you get on with are of Irish descent or from the north of Scotland.

i phrased whgat i said wrong what i meant to say is we dont seem to hold the same biterness towards them as we do the english

Junco Partner

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Does the past matter to the families of those murdered by the BA in Derry? Yes!

i'm sure it matters to the families of those murdered by the IRA as well

Fratton Fred

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Aye, those highland clearances genocides weren't exactly a boon to the Scottish economy or people.
What was the Darien disaster?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

Personally I think it is shocking that the irish know so little of their nearest neighbour's history:D

Cavehill Red

Fratton Fred wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

Personally I think it is shocking that the irish know so little of their nearest neighbour's history:D

According to Rory Carroll (one Irishman who seems to know quite a bit about this particular - and it must be said pretty obscure - colonial adventure), it were the English wot ruined it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/sep/11/britishidentity.past

drakshug

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Aye, those highland clearances genocides weren't exactly a boon to the Scottish economy or people.
What was the Darien disaster?

Well we thought a nice colony down in panama would be good trading post and help in the tobacco trade. It would have been a way to get round the English navigation acts.
Unfortunately the expedition was raised through public subscription which put the whole country at risk if it failed. Darien was a malignant swamp and the spaniards weren't happy. Both expeditions failed and the country went into a recession that dwarves anything. Union in 1707 was seen as the only solution.
Now. Seeing as how there was a union of crowns you'd have expected the monarch to help protect and succour the colonists. Instead it could be said that the monarch did nothing and English ships were openly hostile. The ruling class were bought by English gold.....

Fratton Fred

Cavehill Red wrote: »

According to Rory Carroll (one Irishman who seems to know quite a bit about this particular - and it must be said pretty obscure - colonial adventure), it were the English wot ruined it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/sep/11/britishidentity.past

There were a lot of reasons they failed.

They took a whole load of thick wooly jumpers and wigs with them, i'm not sure if they were to trade or to wear, but I can't imagine there was too much call for them on the equator.

Dont forget, at the time Spain was a massive superpower and claimed the entire area under a papal bull and the subsequent treaty of tordesillas (Guatemala still claims sovereignty over Belize on the basis of that treaty) so England would have been very worried about offending them.

Fratton Fred

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Wondering if Fratton Fred is a big Pompey fan.
Given Portsmouth's history as a British navy base, it tends to buck the trend for South of England towns in being a little - how shall we say? - lairy and rule Britannia about things.

It's a city thank you very much:D

Cavehill Red

Fratton Fred wrote: »

It's a city thank you very much:D

So's Lisburn, allegedly!
The Brits are way too quick off the mark making places cities.
There's still only three in the Republic.

Cavehill Red

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I'd like them a lot more if they stopped claiming jurisdiction over chunks of my country, or claiming that I'm one of them.

Do you think 'they' don't want to do exactly that? And I've yet to meet a British person who considered someone from NI British rather than Irish. Many might be confused about what's part of the UK and what isn't, but if you have an Irish accent, you're Irish. Certainly not one of them. It actually annoys my NI friends with Unionist leanings when they go to the England and suddenly they're foreigners.

Donkey Oaty

Cavehill Red wrote: »

So's Lisburn, allegedly!
The Brits are way too quick off the mark making places cities.
There's still only three in the Republic.

Six, in fact.

Cavehill Red

[quote=[Deleted User];66320880]Do you think 'they' don't want to do exactly that?[/quote]

What's stopping them? It's entirely within their remit.

[quote=[Deleted User];66320880]And I've yet to meet a British person who considered someone from NI British rather than Irish. Many might be confused about what's part of the UK and what isn't, but if you have an Irish accent, you're Irish. Certainly not one of them. It actually annoys my NI friends with Unionist leanings when they go to the England and suddenly they're foreigners.[/QUOTE]

Never experienced that. I tend to find with the English there's an almost patronising big brother endearment, as there is with the Scots and Welsh too, that ignores the Irish border.
In other words, they still see the whole island of Ireland as their sphere of influence, which in fairness is accurate.

Fratton Fred

Cavehill Red wrote: »

So's Lisburn, allegedly!
The Brits are way too quick off the mark making places cities.
There's still only three in the Republic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_Cathedral

Donkey Oaty

Fratton Fred wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_Cathedral

And for balance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_of_St_John_the_Evangelist,_Portsmouth

Cavehill Red

And if you want a cathedral, we've got one to spare...
in my Liverpool Pompey home!

owenc

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Jags = Partick Thistle, the non-sectarian footballing choice in Glasgow.
Jambos = Heart of Midlothian. The mostly Protestant supported team of Edinburgh. Occasionally known as 'Rangers without busfare', but generally a lot nicer than Scotland's shame or indeed that hoops lot.

So your telling me that celtic is not sectarian!:eek:

owenc

gurramok wrote: »

And that footie has its sectarian overtones drawn from the wider society itself. Maybe its just a co-incidence Rangers have British loving fans(Scottish) and Celtic have Irish loving fans(Scottish) all with their different symbols and flags.:rolleyes:

maybe because most of the players are from northern ireland thats why they are sectarian.

owenc

Fratton Fred wrote: »

one day maybe. At the moment people just want to wounds to heal.



2010 - 1599 = 411 years. Who owned it for the other 399?



Maybe, but without the Union Scotland would have been bankrupt and ravaged by famine decades, if not centuries ago. They only joined the Union in the forst place because their overseas colonies were a complete disaster.

Besides, you ought to take a look at where the UK gets it's money from, the square mile creates a lot more revenue than North Sea oil (and bear in mind not all the north sea is in Scotland)

Some scots came in the 14th and 15th centuries and they were catholic.:eek: Thats why i'm saying that not all catholics are irish catholic, my mothers family actually happened to be one of the families that came here before the reformation.

owenc

drakshug wrote: »

loathe as I am to say it but ff is right. Historically the union was good for Scotland in many ways so ya get thumbs up for that. Also, we never got the chance to use the oil revenue. Neither did the rest of the uk. Most of it was squandered in the eighties. However Scotland is larger than Ireland and they are independent so I expect we can go it alone.
Ultimately I think a break up of the union would be better for both Scotland and England. It would probably bring us closer together.

Yes thats one thing i didn't like, and that was that gordon brown boy selling all the oil and gold off to those foreign countries in europe so now we don't have any!