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

Towards a United Ireland

Options
1…1213151718…33

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    No, I'm saying they don't think they will ever have to follow through on the agreement, because NI will never vote for a United Ireland.

    That's a pretty big risk to take, and I think you are quite profoundly wrong.
    All the signals and asides and private comments seem to suggest that Britain believes a UI is an inevitability. Maybe no in the near future, but certainly eventually. The results of this poll and the response to it backs that up. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/aug/21/northernireland.northernireland1
    But British officials have spoken privately of a limited public patience in Britain with Northern Ireland and its problems - and today's poll seems to vindicate that.

    Unionists have very few friends left in Britain, the 'flag' issue, once again pointing that up.


  • Options
    #423
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    That's a pretty big risk to take, and I think you are quite profoundly wrong.
    All the signals and asides and private comments seem to suggest that Britain believes a UI is an inevitability. Maybe no in the near future, but certainly eventually. The results of this poll and the response to it backs that up. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/aug/21/northernireland.northernireland1


    Unionists have very few friends left in Britain, the 'flag' issue, once again pointing that up.

    Have you any more recent polls ? Than one is 12 years old , lot of water under the bridge since then.


  • Options
    #424
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    That's a pretty big risk to take, and I think you are quite profoundly wrong.
    All the signals and asides and private comments seem to suggest that Britain believes a UI is an inevitability. Maybe no in the near future, but certainly eventually. The results of this poll and the response to it backs that up. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/aug/21/northernireland.northernireland1


    Unionists have very few friends left in Britain, the 'flag' issue, once again pointing that up.

    Oh my god the guardnizters don't like us. But what about the children !!!!!


  • Options
    #425
    Bertie Woot
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 352 ✭✭Bertie Woot


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    It's quite the dilemma for Loyalism isn't it?
    I'd be interested in the thoughts of Unionists on here on the implications of Britain's intention to withdraw and what that says about what Britain thinks of Unionists/Loyalists notions of citizenship. Nobody seems to be confronting it.

    The British pay lip service to Unionism/Loyalism by telling them that their presence in the UK is valuable and wanted on one hand, and on the other hand are gently pushing NI towards the exit door via the GFA. This duplicity towards Unionism has been a staple characteristic of the British government's relationship with Unionism in what effectively has been a barely disguised withdrawal process.

    Unionists know this, but because the GFA stipulates that reunification shall only come about democratically and peacefully via referendum, Unionists foolishly feel that because they are still the majority in NI the "union is safe". 56% of middle class Nationalist SDLP voters stating that they would vote for NI to remain part of the UK consolidates the Unionist false sense of security, as most of them can't see further than the end of their nose.

    What Unionists essentially fail to realise and appreciate is that from 1609 and the Ulster plantation they have been pawns in a colonial power game which the British have been playing with the indigenous Irish. It's not nice to think of yourself and your ancestors as mere colonial pawns in a numbers game, but that has been the case, and successive British administrations since the early 70's have been attempting to extinguish the loyalty of British Ulstermen and create the conditions for a full withdrawal from a former colony, thus orphaning their colonial children and leaving them in the excrement.


  • Options
    #426
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I think you are quite profoundly wrong.

    You think NI will someday vote for a united Ireland. You don't think Loyalists have the bottle for a campaign. You think dissident Republican violence will mushroom and they'll bomb people into submission.

    I think you are wrong on all counts. The next 50 or 100 years will tell who is right.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    marienbad wrote: »
    Have you any more recent polls ? Than one is 12 years old , lot of water under the bridge since then.
    Yes a lot of water has flowed under the bridge but most of it has been of more Unionist belligerence, so I wouldn't imagine things have changed.
    I read Tony Blair's book, and he was of the opinion that Unionism was the hardest ideology to deal with too. Perception is everything.
    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    You think NI will someday vote for a united Ireland.
    Yes, I do.
    You don't think Loyalists have the bottle for a campaign. You think dissident Republican violence will mushroom and they'll bomb people into submission.
    No, I said that they would be unable to sustain a campaign, that's different.
    Dissident republicanism can threaten the entire process, that is my point.


  • Options
    #428
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    junder wrote: »
    Oh my god the guardnizters don't like us. But what about the children !!!!!

    Was it not you that was championing polls a while back? ;)


  • Options
    #429
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    Bertie Woot wrote: »
    The British pay lip service to Unionism/Loyalism by telling them that their presence in the UK is valuable and wanted on one hand, and on the other hand are gently pushing NI towards the exit door via the GFA. This duplicity towards Unionism has been a staple characteristic of the British government's relationship with Unionism in what effectively has been a barely disguised withdrawal process.

    Unionists know this, but because the GFA stipulates that reunification shall only come about democratically and peacefully via referendum, Unionists foolishly feel that because they are still the majority in NI the "union is safe". 56% of middle class Nationalist SDLP voters stating that they would vote for NI to remain part of the UK consolidates the Unionist false sense of security, as most of them can't see further than the end of their nose.

    What Unionists essentially fail to realise and appreciate is that from 1609 and the Ulster plantation they have been pawns in a colonial power game which the British have been playing with the indigenous Irish. It's not nice to think of yourself and your ancestors as mere colonial pawns in a numbers game, but that has been the case, and successive British administrations since the early 70's have been attempting to extinguish the loyalty of British Ulstermen and create the conditions for a full withdrawal from a former colony, thus orphaning their colonial children and leaving them in the excrement.

    Those poor dumb prods, so stupid and naive, thank god we have people like you to point out the errors of our ways. Has it ever crossed your mind that we know exactly what England thinks of us, and lets be honest it's England we are talking about. Ironic considering the Irish government wants nothing to do with northern Irish republicans either, just look at the hammering Adams and Martin got in his abortive presidential campaign, got everything's they appeared on Irish tv. Finna foil went as far as saying they would never Share power with Sinn Fein. Moreover Sinn Fein have completely failed to capitalise on the present economic problems in the republic and translate them into votes. The Irish government knows that the republic can not afford Northern Ireland wether its paying for its public services or dealing with the very real possibility of civil unrest, and they will not sacrifice the well being of the 26 county Republic of Ireland, just placate Irish republicans wet dream. Neither are the rest of Europe interested in the setting up of an unstable state on its fringes. Northern Ireland is the poison chalice that the British government are stuck with and the Irish government does not want


  • Options
    #430
    Bertie Woot
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 352 ✭✭Bertie Woot


    junder wrote: »
    Those poor dumb prods, so stupid and naive, thank god we have people like you to point out the errors of our ways.

    9/10 for sarcasm.
    Has it ever crossed your mind that we know exactly what England thinks of us, and lets be honest it's England we are talking about. Ironic considering the Irish government wants nothing to do with northern Irish republicans either, just look at the hammering Adams and Martin got in his abortive presidential campaign, got everything's they appeared on Irish tv. Finna foil went as far as saying they would never Share power with Sinn Fein. Moreover Sinn Fein have completely failed to capitalise on the present economic problems in the republic and translate them into votes. The Irish government knows that the republic can not afford Northern Ireland wether its paying for its public services or dealing with the very real possibility of civil unrest, and they will not sacrifice the well being of the 26 county Republic of Ireland, just placate Irish republicans wet dream. Neither are the rest of Europe interested in the setting up of an unstable state on its fringes. Northern Ireland is the poison chalice that the British government are stuck with and the Irish government does not want

    Absolutely, and Northern Ireland is a Unionist self creation which the British government in 1921 sanctioned. But considering NI's history, the English tax-payer would gladly sacrifice NI tomorrow as they resent us for benefitting under the Barnett formula, generally look upon NI as a constant source of trouble, and view us all as "Irish" and whether you are Unionist or Nationalist. We are foreign to them, and despite being descended from them.

    I can understand the Irish government's reluctance to embrace Sinn Fein and comply with their demands for a "green paper on Irish unity", as the truth is that most people in the ROI, including successive Irish governments, were opposed to PIRA violence. Gerry and Martin naively thought that if they gave up the gun their electoral popularity North and South would soar, and whilst they have gained in both jurisdictions, it's been far from a landslide in the South.

    And Enda Kenny would be insane to consider a drive towards reunification with the state the Irish economy is in at present, but that shall change in time, as shall the shifting political landscape here in the North.


  • Options
    #431
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    You are completely underestimating the threat because you are discounting the fact that there is a large proportion of that quite large section of the BA which has destroyed whatever ounce or two of humanity they might once have posessed and become utterly vile and subhuman that sympathizes with the "Loyalist cause"- these people have the skills needed. That is why what is needed in the short term is a complete ban on anyone from Northern Ireland joining the British Army and courses in all the schools on the evils of British militarism.

    I'd love to see your evidence for this. This kind of fantasist nonsense actually made me laugh.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    I'd love to see your evidence for this. This kind of fantasist nonsense actually made me laugh.

    You already have a Loyalist who supports the fleg protests and is a member of the British Army posting on this forum.


  • Options
    #433
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    You already have a Loyalist who supports the fleg protests and is a member of the British Army posting on this forum.

    So one person who is in the BA and happens to be a loyalist is your evidence that a large section BA are "subhuman" supporters of militant loyalism?

    You'll have to try harder than that.

    Im a member of the BA and im not a loyalist nor do i support the flag supporters and im not "subhuman" either. How does that affect your evidence?


  • Options
    #434
    johnnydeep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 197 ✭✭johnnydeep


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's just another way of saying that some republicans will always reject democracy and use terrorism to try to overrule the democratically-expressed will of the people. Do you agree with Happyman42's assertion that loyalism doesn't have the same indelible murderous streak, and that only republicans are incapable of permanently turning their backs on violence? It's really rather pathetic that you see this puerile analogy as anything other than a transparent attempt to avoid giving a straight answer to a straight question.

    the difference between loyalist and republicans was that one had a genuine cause and lots of support and was well organised. the other had no motive other than sectarian murder and despite having support from the british army and government, they weren't able to maintain any sort of coherent campaign.they are now just a group of drug dealing criminals.
    one had a realistic and worthwhile goal, the other had killing people because of their religion as their only goal.
    you speak about terrorism and democracy and I am not sure if you are speaking of the british army as terrorists who forced irish people to live under british rule against their democratically expressed will.
    when a united Ireland happens the loyalists will not have the support of the british terrorists and will have no realistic goal or objective to fight for. as has been admitted by everyone when England get rid of the 6 counties they definetly wont be taking them back


  • Options
    #435
    johnnydeep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 197 ✭✭johnnydeep


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    So one person who is in the BA and happens to be a loyalist is your evidence that a large section BA are "subhuman" supporters of militant loyalism?

    You'll have to try harder than that.

    Im a member of the BA and im not a loyalist nor do i support the flag supporters and im not "subhuman" either. How does that affect your evidence?

    what will you do then when your faced with the dilemma of shooting an innocent child or mother. or lying when your buddy does


  • Options
    #436
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    johnnydeep wrote: »
    what will you do then when your faced with the dilemma of shooting an innocent child or mother. or lying when your buddy does

    I wouldnt do that nor would i stick up for someone who did. I actually have principles and a conscience. Shame militant republicans couldnt say the same of themselves.


  • Options
    #437
    johnnydeep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 197 ✭✭johnnydeep


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    I wouldnt do that nor would i stick up for someone who did. I actually have principles and a conscience. Shame militant republicans couldnt say the same of themselves.
    irish republicans never killed even 1% of what the british army have. the ira don't have a history of invading other countries to rob them of their wealth. the british army have a real proud history alright


  • Options
    #438
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    I wouldnt do that nor would i stick up for someone who did. I actually have principles and a conscience. Shame militant republicans couldnt say the same of themselves.

    Being from the south of Ireland would known have known well the history of the British Army in this country and a bit of research would have shown you that they have never changed their spots- you are not stupid person at all clearly so you dont have that in your defense. Your argument is as full of holes as a hungry squaddie in Masserene.


  • Options
    #439
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    johnnydeep wrote: »
    irish republicans never killed even 1% of what the british army have. the ira don't have a history of invading other countries to rob them of their wealth. the british army have a real proud history alright

    No different to the French,Spanish or Germans? Try getting off your high horse. Hysterical nonsense like what you and soulandform are posting about the BA have no relevance to the topic in any case.

    Seems like you just want to take cheap shots at me and junder because of our profession because you're unable to make a valid case for your arguement on this thread.


  • Options
    #440
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    No different to the French,Spanish or Germans? Try getting off your high horse. Hysterical nonsense like what you and soulandform are posting about the BA have no relevance to the topic in any case.

    Seems like you just want to take cheap shots at me and junder because of our profession because you're unable to make a valid case for your arguement on this thread.

    Actually they are- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9653497/British-have-invaded-nine-out-of-ten-countries-so-look-out-Luxembourg.html


  • Options
    #441
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    johnnydeep wrote: »
    irish republicans never killed even 1% of what the british army have. the ira don't have a history of invading other countries to rob them of their wealth. the british army have a real proud history alright

    Bullcrap

    http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/charts/troubles_deaths_by_status_organisation.gif


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    Being from the south of Ireland would known have known well the history of the British Army in this country and a bit of research would have shown you that they have never changed their spots- you are not stupid person at all clearly so you dont have that in your defense. Your argument is as full of holes as a hungry squaddie in Masserene.

    Im also well aware of the juvenile backwards and bitter republican mindset of people like yourself having been like that when i was younger. I was able to rise above the brainwashing and propaganda of republicanism as i matured. Ive nothing to answer to the likes of you as to what i choose to do with my life.


  • Options
    #443
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    Actually they are- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9653497/British-have-invaded-nine-out-of-ten-countries-so-look-out-Luxembourg.html

    You might want to actually read that article beyond the headline.
    Only a comparatively small proportion of the total in Mr Laycock's list of invaded states actually formed an official part of the empire.
    The remainder have been included because the British were found to have achieved some sort of military presence in the territory – however transitory – either through force, the threat of force, negotiation or payment.
    Incursions by British pirates, privateers or armed explorers have also been included, provided they were operating with the approval of their government.


  • Options
    #444
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    Being from the south of Ireland would known have known well the history of the British Army in this country and a bit of research would have shown you that they have never changed their spots- you are not stupid person at all clearly so you dont have that in your defense. Your argument is as full of holes as a hungry squaddie in Masserene.

    "Full of holes as a hungry squaddie in masserene" that one comment has destroyed any argument you have to make. To make jokes about the cold blooded murder of young men is not only sick, it's puerile. When you resort to things like that, you have lost any argument


  • Options
    #445
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,803 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    Your argument is as full of holes as a hungry squaddie in Masserene.
    That's one of the most disgusting things I've read on this website in my twelve years here. You should be ashamed of yourself.


  • Options
    #446
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    junder wrote: »
    "Full of holes as a hungry squaddie in masserene" that one comment has destroyed any argument you have to make. To make jokes about the cold blooded murder of young men is not only sick, it's puerile. When you resort to things like that, you have lost any argument

    They were soldiers on there way to murder and rape in Afghanistan. What the Real IRA did was wrong but it wasnt murder.


  • Options
    #447
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Totally agree, no call for that SoulandForm.


  • Options
    #448
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's one of the most disgusting things I've read on this website in my twelve years here. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Catch yourself. You are talking about people filled with blood lust on their way to commit murder who ended getting a taste of their own medicine. Far worse things have been said on this forum. Dont be a drama queen.


  • Options
    #449
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    They were soldiers on there way to murder and rape in Afghanistan. What the Real IRA did was wrong but it wasnt murder.

    More hysterical nonsense. You're making ridiculous claims with no proof whatsoever to back them up. You're just making a fool of yourself at this point.


  • Options
    #450
    SoulandForm
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,096 ✭✭✭SoulandForm


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    More hysterical nonsense. You're making ridiculous claims with no proof whatsoever to back them up. You're just making a fool of yourself at this point.

    What do you think British soldiers do in Afghanistan?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    SoulandForm wrote: »
    What do you think British soldiers do in Afghanistan?

    I donno ? Maybe what soldiers of all stripes have done for thousands of years .


Advertisement