What Has Martin McGuinness Ever Done For The Republic of Ireland?

old hippy

maccored wrote: »

lets be even more honest here and not land the blame at the foot of one group of people.

How could the same thing happen down here unless the same kind of inequality and bull**** was going on? You're comparing apples with fish.

The country's ripe for chaos and anarchy. There's plenty of inequality there.

maccored

old hippy wrote: »

The country's ripe for chaos and anarchy. There's plenty of inequality there.

not of the same nature than caused the rise of the provos in the north.

Can'tseeme

kbannon wrote: »

I was proud that as a nation, most of us are mature enough to welcome the head of the UK. I do disagree with several actions taken by the British but is the best way forward to play the stubborn bugger and ignore them until we get everything we want?
Anyway, this has nothing to do with the Presidential election, except for the fact that what I assume are your SF sympathies show that SF has not really moved on despite the glossy PR image they are trying to portray.

You disagree with several of the actions taken by the British? Strong words.

I also thought the visit was a sucess and helped build bridges. It's the hypocrisy you show regarding Republican movement and the British Establishment that I'm showing up.

OMD

Happyman42 wrote: »

I live in the real world Foggy Lad. Who was sitting around that table thrashing out the deal? Who was accomodated and who got the British and the Unionists to recognise the Nationalist community as their EQUALS. Who got the British to agree;


IT WAS NOT THE SDLP!

So stand with those Irish men and women who bask in the freedoms others have achieved by sacrificing the ultimate but who refuse to accept what had to be done, if you wish.....but as time moves on that will be a diminishing group because the future will realise that NI was always unfinished business and successive 'Irish men and women' abandoned and then ignored what was happening. And when the lid came off they colluded with the British to make matters worse, not better.

The GFA is in reality a heap of ****e. It was basically to allow the IRA to surrender with a little dignity and not put the unionists nose too much out of joint. It offers very little beyond what was already accepted practice, except it put it in writing. A united Ireland is as far away today as it was in the 1960s. The idea that if 51% of the people of NI voted for a united Ireland that it would happen is laughable. There would be massive unionist/loyalist opposition and a bombing campaign would then start but with loyalists as the main perpetrators. SF main achievement is to make a united Ireland an impossibility in the foreseeable future.

KELTICKNIGHTT

Can'tseeme wrote: »

But I bet you thought the Queen (head of the British Army) coming over was a great idea alongside others of the British establishment. But when Enda asked Dave Cameron for files on the Dublin/Monaghan bombings he was told to stfu.

tourism ,the visit of Queen of England would help Ireland in job's,The like's of tourism ,
Which you think is more important to Irish people in Ireland
what sf party and supporters think about queen's visit or helping Ireland with job's and show Ireland moved on from dark time's
when you see post's like this,Can clearly see SF supporter's and Party haven't moved on.

Mr.Micro

OMD wrote: »

The GFA is in reality a heap of ****e. It was basically to allow the IRA to surrender with a little dignity and not put the unionists nose too much out of joint. It offers very little beyond what was already accepted practice, except it put it in writing. A united Ireland is as far away today as it was in the 1960s. The idea that if 51% of the people of NI voted for a united Ireland that it would happen is laughable. There would be massive unionist/loyalist opposition and a bombing campaign would then start but with loyalists as the main perpetrators. SF main achievement is to make a united Ireland an impossibility in the foreseeable future.

Indeed, and if by the remotest chance that 51% voted for a UI the other 49% would not take it well, and one could imagine we would have all the violence again. Not known for their tolerance in NI alas. If we carry on as we are, no violence, the country will be united in one way at least, that is unity against violence and the border will become invisible in time.

Happyman42

OMD wrote: »

The GFA is in reality a heap of ****e. It was basically to allow the IRA to surrender with a little dignity and not put the unionists nose too much out of joint. It offers very little beyond what was already accepted practice, except it put it in writing. A united Ireland is as far away today as it was in the 1960s. The idea that if 51% of the people of NI voted for a united Ireland that it would happen is laughable. There would be massive unionist/loyalist opposition and a bombing campaign would then start but with loyalists as the main perpetrators. SF main achievement is to make a united Ireland an impossibility in the foreseeable future.

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Indeed, and if by the remotest chance that 51% voted for a UI the other 49% would not take it well, and one could imagine we would have all the violence again. Not known for their tolerance in NI alas. If we carry on as we are, no violence, the country will be united in one way at least, that is unity against violence and the border will become invisible in time.

Deary me folks....clutching at straws?

Tell us how the loyalists would maintain a bombing campaign, in what would become very quickly, the hostile country called Ireland?

Can'tseeme

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

tourism ,the visit of Queen of England would help Ireland in job's,The like's of tourism ,
Which you think is more important to Irish people in Ireland
what sf party and supporters think about queen's visit or helping Ireland with job's and show Ireland moved on from dark time's
when you see post's like this,Can clearly see SF supporter's and Party haven't moved on.

I'll refer you to my last post. #844

OMD

Happyman42 wrote: »

Deary me folks....clutching at straws?

Tell us how the loyalists would maintain a bombing campaign, in what would become very quickly, the hostile country called Ireland?

In much the same way as the much smaller IRA did in the hostile UK. Or how the much, much , much smaller muslin terrorist groups manage it.

KELTICKNIGHTT

Can'tseeme wrote: »

I'll refer you to my last post. #844

Wan't meant for you , but was general comment.
apologise

Happyman42

OMD wrote: »

In much the same way as the much smaller IRA did in the hostile UK. Or how the much, much , much smaller muslin terrorist groups manage it.

Very easy to counter, if we really wanted to.
However I was asking more from an ideology point of view, what would be their claim and more to point who would support that claim?

Mr.Micro

Happyman42 wrote: »

Deary me folks....clutching at straws?

Tell us how the loyalists would maintain a bombing campaign, in what would become very quickly, the hostile country called Ireland?

Who mentioned bombing? I am not even going to go into such a scenario that is not going to happen. As long as people are living their lives without the fear of being killed who cares?

Bannasidhe

Happyman42 wrote: »

Very easy to counter, if we really wanted to.
However I was asking more from an ideology point of view, what would be their claim and more to point who would support that claim?

How - by introducing the same measures against those who would not wish to be forced to live under Irish jurisdiction as were introduced against those who do not want to under the British?

If one claims Irish nationalists have the right to live under Irish jurisdiction then surely Unionists have the right to live under British jurisdiction? Only a referendum can determine the percentages...

Seth Brundle

Happyman42 wrote: »

lol....nice try. SF have not set the recrimination and retribution agenda nor are they ignoring the positives.

I'm not sure what you meant to say but SF have been ignoring plenty.
Let's see what the HET has to say now that the IRA murders will soon be under the spotlight. I would presume that given the way several loyalists have been caught because of their comrades coming forward is really concentrating people's minds! Naturally, SF are uncomfortable with the HET but I don't recall them complaining about the findings so far (maybe you have a link to show some criticism?)!

Seth Brundle

Bannasidhe wrote: »

How - by introducing the same measures against those who would not wish to be forced to live under Irish jurisdiction as were introduced against those who do not want to under the British?

If one claims Irish nationalists have the right to live under Irish jurisdiction then surely Unionists have the right to live under British jurisdiction? Only a referendum can determine the percentages...

For the last 10-15 years, I've felt that nationalists would probably (upon reflection) prefer to stay as part of the UK.
* Better health service
* Cheaper groceries
* Cheaper cars (plus cheaper road tax and insurance)
* Cheaper homes
* better infrastructure (although the RoI has been catching up)
* etc.

I wonder if there was a referendum tomorrow, what way would most informed nationalists vote!

Bannasidhe

Martin McGuinness has said he knew there would be attempts to undermine his campaign for the presidency.

However, he has said many people in the North were surprised by the backlash.

The Presidential hopeful also said his wife would have no problem moving out of Derry's Bogside if he wins the race for the Áras.

Bernie McGuinness has lived in the area all her life but the Sinn Féin member said she would adapt well to life in the Phoenix Park.

Mr McGuinness said: "It's a bigger move for Bernie than it is for me.

"Obviously I've been moving all my life - Washington, New York, just back from Los Angeles with Peter Robinson on a trade mission where we managed to convince HBO to continue filming the 'Games of Thrones' in the North - 700 jobs which is fantastic for people from all-over Ireland.

"I think Bernie will make the move quite easily because she's so committed to everything that I'm doing.

Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/breakingnews/ireland/mcguinness-people-in-north-surprised-by-backlash-525310.html#ixzz1bQKi8G8w

A bit of clarification needed here re: the 700 jobs 'for people all-over Ireland' - this is not actually correct. I know many of the extras who worked on series one of GOT's - they were not able to work on series two (recently filmed) as they changed the eligibility criteria to extras have to be resident in NI. So that's 700 jobs for NI - not people from all-over Ireland as McGuinness claims here.

Happyman42

Bannasidhe wrote: »

How - by introducing the same measures against those who would not wish to be forced to live under Irish jurisdiction as were introduced against those who do not want to under the British?

If one claims Irish nationalists have the right to live under Irish jurisdiction then surely Unionists have the right to live under British jurisdiction? Only a referendum can determine the percentages...

I can only produce the Agreement to counter that argument. If the GFA is broken then who knows what will happen.
Do I believe that the signatories are genuine?.....yes I do.....will future leaders see fit to break the terms....maybe. Strong governance required. Once shot of the North I suspect the British will do all in their power to make sure it doesn't implode again.

OMD

kbannon wrote: »

For the last 10-15 years, I've felt that nationalists would probably (upon reflection) prefer to stay as part of the UK.
* Better health service
* Cheaper groceries
* Cheaper cars (plus cheaper road tax and insurance)
* Cheaper homes
* better infrastructure (although the RoI has been catching up)
* etc.

I wonder if there was a referendum tomorrow, what way would most informed nationalists vote!

Also what way would most people vote in the Republic of Ireland? Pre IRA/SF violence that question would have been a no brainer. Now, while I believe the majority probably still support a united Ireland I would not be convinced by the large size of that majority.

OMD

Happyman42 wrote: »

Very easy to counter, if we really wanted to.
However I was asking more from an ideology point of view, what would be their claim and more to point who would support that claim?

Their claim would be that they would wish to continue to be part of the UK. In terms of who would support them well the IRA carried on against the wishes of the majority of people.

OMD

Happyman42 wrote: »

I can only produce the Agreement to counter that argument. If the GFA is broken then who knows what will happen.
Do I believe that the signatories are genuine?.....yes I do.....will future leaders see fit to break the terms....maybe. Strong governance required. Once shot of the North I suspect the British will do all in their power to make sure it doesn't implode again.

You keep on bringing up the GFA as if it was some great achievement. If the PIRA were told in the 1960s, they were going on a bombing and murdering campaign for 40 years but eventually they would "succeed" and get the GFA they would have laughed you out of it. 3,500 people died. The achievement was the GFA.

KeithAFC

Can'tseeme wrote: »

I'm sorry but it was the UVF, RUC violence and Paisley's anti-catholic/nationalist rally calls that kicked things off in the late 60's.

It was the IRA in the 50s in the boarder war.

RandomName2

KeithAFC wrote: »

It was the IRA in the 50s in the boarder war.

To be fair, although the border campaign predated the violence in the 60s - it completely collapsed without a whimper, with even nationalists shunning all forms of the IRA.

Can'tseeme

OMD wrote: »

You keep on bringing up the GFA as if it was some great achievement. If the PIRA were told in the 1960s, they were going on a bombing and murdering campaign for 40 years but eventually they would "succeed" and get the GFA they would have laughed you out of it. 3,500 people died. The achievement was the GFA.

What a lazy, simplistic pov to have.

It's a very important agreement. Something that offers a better future for my generation, for future generations and that puts in place a framework based on equality and the rights of all the people living in the north.

Something you might take for granted in the free state but its something my parents and grandparents never had.

Happyman42

OMD wrote: »

If the PIRA were told in the 1960s, they were going on a bombing and murdering campaign for 40 years but eventually they would "succeed" and get the GFA they would have laughed you out of it.

Possibly. The killing by the IRA, The British, The Loyalist has stopped though and the Nationalists SHARE power, a few of my recent ancestors would have laughed too, at the absurdity of that aspiration coming true .

When Mao Tse Tung was asked what had been the consequences of the French Revolution, he replied that it was too early to tell.

Give it time and give it hope OMD and give the signatories the benefit of the doubt.

KeithAFC

RandomName2 wrote: »

To be fair, although the border campaign predated the violence in the 60s - it completely collapsed without a whimper, with even nationalists shunning all forms of the IRA.

The IRA was trying to bomb people into a United Ireland in the 50s. And they are still trying to do it today. A RIRA man has been sent to jail for 12 years for trying to smuggle weapons into Ulster to carry on the vicious IRA campaign which involves killing PSNI officers.

It will be interesting if Martin Mcguinness will comment on this latest case.

Tiocfaidh Armani

OMD wrote: »

Their claim would be that they would wish to continue to be part of the UK. In terms of who would support them well the IRA carried on against the wishes of the majority of people.

Did Pádraig Pearse conduct a straw poll even before undertaking the 1916 Rising? Yet they're great fellows altogether. I'm a Dub but the people of the 26 counties are just revisionists it's embarassing. It was okay for us to shot and kill people, but not them Nordy feckers even though they had it a lot worse than we ever did!

Can'tseeme

KeithAFC wrote: »

It was the IRA in the 50s in the boarder war.

I'll refer you to Randomname2's last post.

Tiocfaidh Armani

KeithAFC wrote: »

It was the IRA in the 50s in the boarder war.

Border war, b-o-r-d-e-r.:rolleyes:

The border campaign stopped due to lack of support in 1962, there was virtually no support for it in the six counties, it was mainly southern based. expect revisionism by you so no hard feelings, happy to set you straight.

OMD

Happyman42 wrote: »

Possibly. The killing by the IRA, The British, The Loyalist has stopped though

Sectarian and nationalist killings haven't stopped. Merely greatly reduced.

Happyman42 wrote: »

and the Nationalists SHARE power, a few of my recent ancestors would have laughed too, at the absurdity of that aspiration coming true .

.

But they don't share power. Haven't all the SF people been saying we can't judge Martin McG's record in the northern assembly because it has no powers? Also are you really saying sharing power was an aspiration of nationalists?

KeithAFC

Tiocfaidh Armani wrote: »

Border war, b-o-r-d-e-r.:rolleyes:

The border campaign stopped due to lack of support in 1962, there was virtually no support for it in the six counties, it was mainly southern based. expect revisionism by you so no hard feelings, happy to set you straight.

It doesn't need support. The fact is the IRA was taking part in a border war and it is still happening. People who aren't from Northern Ireland coming across the border and trying to kill PSNI officers and then going back to the Republic again.

It didn't start in the 1960s.