Time to bow before the queen?

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There was no attempted genocide either.

No attempted genocide where, exactly? We've rather unfortunately a wide variety of theatres to choose from. 'Empire on which the sun never sets' and all that.

Jorah

Doc Ruby wrote: »

The 21st century will not be kind to the UK, I predict.

Not to rain on your parade, but Goldman Sachs predicts that the UK will be the strongest economy in Europe in 2050 with one of the world's wealthiest populations.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080402/UK-economy-biggest-Europe-4-decades-say-experts.html

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2011/12/07/goldman-sachs-brics-in-2050/#axzz1rP1ZWHFL


You are always more than welcome to join us again. Besides, Queen Liz hasn't got long left and I doubt the monarchy will make it to William and Kate. It could be a lot of fun.

HavingCrack

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Personally I feel it will become more England, Scotland and Wales than a united kingdom to be honest. Even if the Scots don't break away this time, its going to happen.

I don't know, support for full independance is still only around 35% I think, a long way off (a huge variety of figures have been bandied about though, no one knows for sure). If the SNP fail this time the issue will be put to bed for a long time I suspect, like it was in 1979.

Welsh nationalism is a lot lower than Scotland, about 90% of Welsh people support the union I think so even if Scotland goes they'll probably stick by England.

I fear an independant Scotland could have some extremely negative consequences for Northern Ireland though.

HavingCrack

Jorah wrote: »

Not to rain on your parade, but Goldman Sachs predicts that the UK will be the strongest economy in Europe in 2050 with one of the world's wealthiest populations.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080402/UK-economy-biggest-Europe-4-decades-say-experts.html

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2011/12/07/goldman-sachs-brics-in-2050/#axzz1rP1ZWHFL


You are always more than welcome to join us again. Besides, Queen Liz hasn't got long left and I doubt the monarchy will make it to William and Kate. It could be a lot of fun.

No offence to Goldman Sachs but that's moronic. No one can possibly predict 40 years into the future, it's simply not possible. Water wars, a fossil fuel crisis etc., the collapse of the EU and the possible break up of the UK are all scenarios that I can think off off the top of my head to rubbish that report.

Could you predict WW2 in 1990?

Could you predict the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1950?

Doc Ruby

Jorah wrote: »

You are always more than welcome to join us again. Besides, Queen Liz hasn't got long left and I doubt the monarchy will make it to William and Kate. It could be a lot of fun.

Ah no, you're grand all the same.

HavingCrack wrote: »

I don't know, support for full independance is still only around 35% I think, a long way off (a huge variety of figures have been bandied about though, no one knows for sure). If the SNP fail this time the issue will be put to bed for a long time I suspect, like it was in 1979.

I wouldn't put much past the Scots to be honest, they're a canny lot. Salmond might be left off to act all statesmanlike in the EU, but there are powerful forces at play now.

HavingCrack wrote: »

Welsh nationalism is a lot lower than Scotland, about 90% of Welsh people support the union I think so even if Scotland goes they'll probably stick by England.

I fear an independant Scotland could have some extremely negative consequences for Northern Ireland though.

If by negative you mean extremely positive I agree.

shancoduff

Jorah wrote: »

Not to rain on your parade, but Goldman Sachs predicts that the UK will be the strongest economy in Europe in 2050 with one of the world's wealthiest populations.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080402/UK-economy-biggest-Europe-4-decades-say-experts.html

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2011/12/07/goldman-sachs-brics-in-2050/#axzz1rP1ZWHFL


You are always more than welcome to join us again. Besides, Queen Liz hasn't got long left and I doubt the monarchy will make it to William and Kate. It could be a lot of fun.

That's great, Goldman Sachs have never, ever got it wrong as we all know.

HavingCrack

Doc Ruby wrote: »

I wouldn't put much past the Scots to be honest, they're a canny lot. Salmond might be left off to act all statesmanlike in the EU, but there are powerful forces at play now.

We'll have to wait and see I suppose.

Doc Ruby wrote: »

If by negative you mean extremely positive I agree.

I'm utterly, utterly indifferent to a United Ireland so I suspect what I would find positive to be different to you.

However that's not what I meant exactly. I was more referring to a destabilisation of Northern Ireland leading to renewed violence, the last thing anyone would want. There's still enough extremism under the surface in the North to make this a possibility. Even if Scotland leaves the UK I suspect some loyalists would fight for an independant Northern Ireland rather than unite with the South.

Jorah

HavingCrack wrote: »

Could you predict WW2 in 1990?

Teeheehee


I was just making the point...we still have life in us yet.

Doc Ruby

HavingCrack wrote: »

However that's not what I meant exactly. I was more referring to a destabilisation of Northern Ireland leading to renewed violence, the last thing anyone would want. There's still enough extremism under the surface in the North to make this a possibility. Even if Scotland leaves the UK I suspect some loyalists would fight for an independant Northern Ireland rather than unite with the South.

Can't see it happening to be honest. You need the cooperation of at least one government to run a campaign, and the brits will joyfully shut down the unionists. The last help they got was from apartheid-era SA, funnily enough, and that's not going to happen again.

It will be a mother of a job undoing centuries of british meddling and re-educating them to accept modern liberal values though.

KeithAFC

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Can't see it happening to be honest. You need the cooperation of at least one government to run a campaign, and the brits will joyfully shut down the unionists. The last help they got was from apartheid-era SA, funnily enough, and that's not going to happen again.

It will be a mother of a job undoing centuries of british meddling and re-educating them to accept modern liberal values though.

So patronising. Ulster Unionism would just become Ulster Nationalism.

Doc Ruby

KeithAFC wrote: »

So patronising. Ulster Unionism would just become Ulster Nationalism.

Once Ulster racism fucks off, I don't really care.

KeithAFC

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Once Ulster racism fucks off, I don't really care.

What?

I don't really know what this thread is about now. Just thought it was a bit patronising that comment. As if we need re educated on our political views.

HavingCrack

KeithAFC wrote: »

So patronising. Ulster Unionism would just become Ulster Nationalism.

To be honest Keith Ulster Unionism has always been Ulster Nationalism. Unionism in Northern Ireland has always been about how much it can screw Westminister for in funds and jobs. Why do you think the Conservatives can't get elected in Northern Ireland? Because most unionists know Conservative MP's wouldn't put Northern Ireland above the UK.

Doc Ruby

KeithAFC wrote: »

What?

I don't really know what this thread is about now. Just thought it was a bit patronising that comment. As if we need re educated on our political views.

Yes, you need re-education. Badly.

KeithAFC

HavingCrack wrote: »

To be honest Keith Ulster Unionism has always been Ulster Nationalism. Unionism in Northern Ireland has always been about how much it can screw Westminister for in funds and jobs. Why do you think the Conservatives can't get elected in Northern Ireland? Because most unionists know Conservative MP's wouldn't put Northern Ireland above the UK.

Yeah. I understand that point of view HavingCrack. There is that attitude amongst Unionism in a big way.

Fratton Fred

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Bullshit, lad. From that oul trout queen vic stopping foreign sovereigns donating more than she had to the charitable cause of the famine to the wretched armpit of the world that was the british empire spending more on revitalising a park in london than was spent helping Irish people, it's entirely on the shoulders of apologists like you.

You shouldn't believe the propaganda.

Which foreign sovereign did Queen Vic stop donating?

(are we about to hear some bull**** about Drogheda by any chance?)

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

...one of the things that always struck me about the colonialist mindset is that the langauge used - no matter the fact it was referring to being used by vastly different peoples - is that it is so similar. "blame the natives" is a classic example. Evidently this holds true for apologists for same as well.

Which is entirely different to blaming the English (or is it German bond holders, I forget) for everything.

Doc Ruby

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You shouldn't believe the propaganda.

Which foreign sovereign did Queen Vic stop donating?

The Turkish one I believe although damned if I could be bothered to look it up now. Tell me champ, have they started teaching the War of Independence in English schools yet? Harry Potter and the Black and Tans eh. Oooh 'arry I done raped a granny wotevah shall oi do.

Fratton Fred

Doc Ruby wrote: »

The Turkish one I believe although damned if I could be bothered to look it up now. Tell me champ, have they started teaching the War of Independence in English schools yet? Harry Potter and the Black and Tans eh.

Who knows, they didn't teach about the act of union either when I was at school.

Wild Bill

Public Service Announcement.

I'd just like to clear something up here; the famine was genocide, not attempted genocide - per the definition of the Geneva Convention.

You don't have to manage to kill all of your target culture/people to qualify. The Nazis didn't mange to kill all the jews being the most obvious example - yet nobody (in Europe), bar some politically motivated loopers would claim the Holocaust wasn't genocide.

Wild Bill

Deleted User wrote: »

You can't change history, nor should you get too hung up on it either!

That is true.

But denial of history is what we are dealing with here. In some EU countries that is a criminal offence.

Clearly those countries are also aware that they can't change history yet are sufficiently hung up about it to pass criminal laws about it!

By those standards we Irish are a pretty tolerant lot.

Too tolerant?

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Which is entirely different to blaming the English (or is it German bond holders, I forget) for everything.

I don't recall blaming either for "everything", and most certainly didn't do so in this thread. Should you have some evidence of this unlikely event, I'd be glad to see it.

HavingCrack

HavingCrack wrote: »

No offence to Goldman Sachs but that's moronic. No one can possibly predict 40 years into the future, it's simply not possible. Water wars, a fossil fuel crisis etc., the collapse of the EU and the possible break up of the UK are all scenarios that I can think off off the top of my head to rubbish that report.

Could you predict WW2 in 1990?

Could you predict the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1950?

Not only that, but they're completely ignoring peak oil and the depletion of other resources. The only thing we can be sure of is that the next 20 years will be completely different than the last 20 years.

Just compare 2000 - 2006 to 2007 - 2011 periods for example, the first period was "Celtic tiger madness" quickly followed by the biggest bust in Irish history.

The US & the EU are next, Greece are already there.

Doc Ruby

Doc Ruby wrote: »

The Turkish one I believe although damned if I could be bothered to look it up now. Tell me champ, have they started teaching the War of Independence in English schools yet? Harry Potter and the Black and Tans eh. Oooh 'arry I done raped a granny wotevah shall oi do.

I was educated in England and I learned about Irish history of the 19th and early 20th century including the famine, Easter rising, black and tans & the civil war the six counties etc.

That was in the 1970's at the same time as the troubles were headline news every day.

Wild Bill

HavingCrack wrote: »

Could you predict WW2 in 1990?

Hmmm......

Could you predict the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1950?

It didn't collapse in 1950.

OK, enough of this.

"Peak Oil" is getting pushed further back by the day - "they" couldn't even predict that five years ago at height of the "peak oil" hysteria.

Wild Bill

We're straying here a bit from the British Queen. Which, ironically, is a potato.

Bow down to the mighty spud! :cool:

Wild Bill

Deleted User wrote: »

The US & the EU are next

One can only hope

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

I don't recall blaming either for "everything", and most certainly didn't do so in this thread. Should you have some evidence of this unlikely event, I'd be glad to see it.

So there was no genocide in Ireland then.

Fratton Fred

Wild Bill wrote: »

Public Service Announcement.

I'd just like to clear something up here; the famine was genocide, not attempted genocide - per the definition of the Geneva Convention.

You don't have to manage to kill all of your target culture/people to qualify. The Nazis didn't mange to kill all the jews being the most obvious example - yet nobody (in Europe), bar some politically motivated loopers would claim the Holocaust wasn't genocide.

here's a public service announcement for you. The famine was not genocide. The politicising of the famine was a handy way for the De Valera's and McQuaids of this world to deflect attention from their money grabbing, incompetence and subjugation of the Irish people.

Remember people, no matter how badly we **** the economy, no matter how bad we beat and abuse you, you should thank us for saving you from those nasty Brits.

Wild Bill

Fratton Fred wrote: »

here's a public service announcement for you. The famine was not genocide.

Beep! Wrong.

Read the Geneva Convention; don't bore me with waffle about Dev and JC effin' McQuaid.

The famine was genocide; whether Dev and McQuaid used it for political reasons (as you are now denying it for political reasons) is totally irrelevant.

The fact that modern Zionists continually harp back to the Holocaust to justify land-grabbing in the West Bank doesn't mean the Holocaust didn't happen, or that it wasn't genocide.

Fratton Fred

Wild Bill wrote: »

Beep! Wrong.

Read the Geneva Convention; don't bore me with waffle about Dev and JC effin' McQuaid.

The famine was genocide; whether Dev and McQuaid used it for political reasons (as you are now denying it for political reasons) is totally irrelevant.

The fact that modern Zionists continually harp back to the Holocaust to justify land-grabbing in the West Bank doesn't mean the Holocaust didn't happen, or that it wasn't genocide.

beep beep, wrong, the famine was not genocide.

bwatson

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Britain has a deep debt to pay, and not just to Ireland. I wouldn't want to be british, being honest, the future will not be a pleasant place.

Hello there, its been rather amusing reading your emotive responses to this thread! I don't think it is necessary to engage in any sort of debate on this one.

However, could you further expand on the above comment? What sort of future are you predicting? As a young Briton I am actually very positive about our future. We are in a better position to recover from the economic troubles tormenting much of the world at the moment than many nations (including yours) for starters.

Added to that, I have great faith in the best and brightest of my generation to bring success on all levels in the next few decades. I believe that we are not the bunch of idiots you branded our entire population in your racist outburst and economically, socially, and politically we will continue to lead the way.

Are you suggesting that reparations may be coerced out of Britain, maybe by the instigation of further campaigns of terror? I just don't understand your ramblings at this point so an expansion on yesterday's post would be gratefully recieved.

bwatson

dlofnep wrote: »

The same planters that evicted Catholics from their homes, and pushed them off their land? My heart bleeds. That's not genocide, it's retribution.

Retribution eh? Its estimated that between 20 and 100 thousand people were murdered in the "rebellions". This included men, women, and young children. Hacked down and killed in cold blood on a scale far greater than any alive today could imagine.

You appear to have an attitude of not just apathy, but of advocacy of these acts by your forefathers. Maybe it is the fact that they occured so long ago that means you are unable to identify with the terror and anguish which you so readily identify with when it comes to events such as "bloody sunday". I hope it is simply that, because should you really be a defender of the massacres of defenceless women and children by hate filled murderous bands of men simply because they were British than you would be a vicious little man. I sadly suspect the latter might be true.

I'm sure you would find it abhorrant if British people shrugged off, or even justified, events such as Oliver Cromwell's reaction to this, as "retribution".

bwatson

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Tell me champ, have they started teaching the War of Independence in English schools yet? Harry Potter and the Black and Tans eh. Oooh 'arry I done raped a granny wotevah shall oi do.

What is your intention here? I assume you are intending to mock what you see as a stereotypical English accent? Is this just another example of your bigotry shining through or is there some relevance to it?

By the way, when I was in 6th form I was taught about history a little more relevant to my country as a whole. Your history is far more relevant to you than it is to us. In fact, I suggest that most in the United Kingdom would see it as almost insignificant, is that one of the things bothering you?

dvpower

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmUiUXMEyRw

bwatson

shancoduff wrote: »

That's great, Goldman Sachs have never, ever got it wrong as we all know.

True.

Still, I suspect that a little more analysis has gone into the prediction made by Goldman Sachs than the prediction made by Doc Ruby.

bwatson

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So there was no genocide in Ireland then.

If they want to define the events of the mid nineteenth century in their country as a genocide then thats fine isn't it? I'm sure many will agree, and many will disagree and will back up their viewpoints with equally valid evidence. That is what history is.

Wild Bill

Wild Bill wrote: »

Hmmm......




"Peak Oil" is getting pushed further back by the day - "they" couldn't even predict that five years ago at height of the "peak oil" hysteria.

Peak oil is "today", just look at the price of petrol and how much more it cost to fill that heating oil tank! Look at where they are trying to extract oil from and the fact that places like Indonesia have been forced out of OPEC because they don't export oil anymore, the fact that the UK changed from oil exporter to oil importer in 2005.

I can go on and on, to make to point "peak oil is real and IS happening now!

JMSE

"Blast it with piss!"

Like that humour, out of the blue :-D

bwatson

Doc Ruby wrote: »

What people? There are millions of people who should be here who aren't. Does it matter to them? Someone has to speak up.

If this is something that causes you much sadness and anger then I genuinely feel sorry for you. I often think of the lives lost by my country in the First and Second World Wars for instance and it brings me great sadness that many hundreds of thousands of young men were denied the chance to experience all that life can offer.

I imagine you feel the same way about the victims of genocide/famine among Irish people.

It also saddens me that you harbour such negative feelings towards my nation though, considering just about every person I know does not carry with them an intense dislike of the nations of the Axis Powers.

bwatson

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Once Ulster racism fucks off, I don't really care.

The extraordinary levels of hipocrisy are the one annoying thing to come from this thread in truth. You see it acceptable to define an entire nation as idiots (which in itself would take stunning levels of stupidity and ignorance on your part) and then give us a retort such as this?

awec

bwatson wrote: »

The extraordinary levels of hipocrisy are the one annoying thing to come from this thread in truth. You see it acceptable to define an entire nation as idiots (which in itself would take stunning levels of stupidity and ignorance on your part) and then give us a retort such as this?

He's a wind up merchant. You really think there are people here that think like that? :pac:

bwatson

awec wrote: »

He's a wind up merchant. You really think there are people here that think like that? :pac:

Of course I don't. I would not brand a whole nation as wind up merchants, or racists, or idiots, or whatever. If I didn't like the people of the Republic of Ireland or the majority of people who posted on this message board I wouldn't post on it any more!

You aren't required to be hugely suspicious and intolerant of the Irish to be a Northern Unionist!

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So there was no genocide in Ireland then.

I believe the plantation and deportations qualify. Likewise the penal laws.

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

I believe the plantation and deportations qualify. Likewise the penal laws.

I'm sure you do. You believe wrong though.

woodoo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm sure you do. You believe wrong though.

Are you an authority on these matters? You seem to believe yourself to be.

bwatson

Nodin wrote: »

I believe the plantation and deportations qualify. Likewise the penal laws.

Nodin - As someone who takes any available opportunity to denounce any form of bigotry and racism in order to ensure that your online image as a beacon of tolerance and progressive thinking is maintained, why did you not see fit to pull up your brother-in-arms (a certain Doc Ruby) on any of his racist generalizations with regard to the British?

Not that you are obliged to do so and not that your defence or backing is needed, but it is quite interesting that you chose not to when a particular nationality are on the recieving end of racist castigation.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm sure you do. You believe wrong though.

Another wonderful and in-depth refutation. Well done Sir, well done.

Nodin

bwatson wrote: »

Nodin - As someone who takes any available opportunity to denounce any form of bigotry and racism in order to ensure that your online image as a beacon of tolerance and progressive thinking is maintained,.

An "online image" is worth as much as the paper a verbal agreement is written on. I don't do what you suggest. I just don't like racism. Or sectarianism.

bwatson wrote: »

why did you not see fit to pull up your brother-in-arms (a certain Doc Ruby) on any of his racist generalizations with regard to the British?,.

He hasn't made any. And the British are not a race.

HavingCrack

Nodin wrote: »

I believe the plantation and deportations qualify. Likewise the penal laws.

There's certainly elements of discrimination and ethnic cleansing but it's a big jump to genocide. Anyway this has gone off topic.