Why the north outside EU changes everything for the island

Imreoir2

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Indeed. And again, as I say, its the less preferred option. But pragmatically recognised as a solution. And for The Republic, the benefits are far greater than is commonly realised. But its early stages as they roll out that idea on both side of the Irish sea. Fully understood, it is only the Irish equivalent of the UK Brexit brainless voter who would reject it on xenophobia and national jingoism motivations, rather than recognise it as a realistic way to deal with the Brexit event on this island.

Joining the UK is not a reaslitic way to deal with Brexit, it's fantisy land and it would be hugely damaging to our economy. Access to the single market is the number one reason we have attracted the level of FDI that we have over the last 30 years. Cutting ourselves off from the EU would be a disaster. We also do much more trade with the EU 27 than with the UK.

You don't damage your links with your two biggest economic partners, which are the US and EU in Ireland's case, to keep easy access with your third biggest partner. The UK are about to jump off a cliff, our only priority is to limit the collateral damage here, not to jump off with them.

I can't stress this enough, it's never going to happen. Roll out what ever you like, it's not going to attract more than a smirk of derision over here.

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nothing jingoistic about it. The relationship never worked and is never likely to work. Look at how they view Ireland during the Brexit debacle for instance if you are too young to see how it has been viewed since independence.
Thankfuly I know of only you and probably John Bruton who would be in favour of this craziness.

I only just cottoned on we were in AH and not Politics. I'm oot.

Imreoir2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Thankfuly I know of only you and probably John Bruton who would be in favour of this craziness.

John Bruton might like to rub shoulders with British royalty, but even he thinks Brexit is the height of folly. No way he was wants Ireland to join the UK in Brexit.

Peregrinus

ZeroThreat wrote: »

Isn't all this assuming that reunification simply results in a slightly larger RoI?
From the opinions I read on dedicated political sites (such as Slugger O'Toole) to these issues, extreme compromises may need to be taken in future to ensure peaceful unionist acceptance on a unitary state which may involve radical change of flag, anthem, constitution, legal & parliamentary structures, not to mention possible having to abolish office of president to be replaced by British monarch as head of state.

A united Ireland may require the creation of an entirely new state in every respect.

It may. But, even if so, that state, provided it is the result of reunification under the processes envisaged by the Good Friday Agreement, would be regarded as the successor state to the (present) Republic of Ireland, and therefore would be a member of the EU, and all its territory would be included in the territory of the Union. That's what the European Council has said.

J Mysterio

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Or the St Pat's Saltire.

God no.

Kermit.de.frog

Tomorrow's Times and UK's Independent newspaper have news of a poll out regarding Brexit tomorrow.


52% support for a United Ireland in the north if Brexit goes ahead. 39% would vote to remain in the UK.

It rises to 57% support for a United Ireland if there is a hard border.

FrancieBrady

I always maintained that there was a core of Unionist votes that would not be so unionist when it comes to their economic stability.

CruelCoin

I've always thought of these "lets get the 6 counties back" posts as mindless hot air.

People protested over €50 for water, and you think they'll shell 6/7 billion a year just to balance the books in the north?

NIMAN

CruelCoin wrote: »

I've always thought of these "lets get the 6 counties back" posts as mindless hot air.

People protested over €50 for water, and you think they'll shell 6/7 billion a year just to balance the books in the north?

I'd say that should a UI ever come to pass, there will be a transition period agreed where the UK will continue to fund the NI part for maybe a decade or so, gradually decreasing their commitment and letting Ireland then take over.

There wouldn't be an immediate big shock in terms of cost from Day 1 of a UI.

FrancieBrady

CruelCoin wrote: »

I've always thought of these "lets get the 6 counties back" posts as mindless hot air.

People protested over €50 for water, and you think they'll shell 6/7 billion a year just to balance the books in the north?

The majority of those protesting WC's were those who objected to how it was set up. (it was shambles from start to finish) Not because they had to pay for water. We pay for water already, always have.
And the majority of those who favour a UI know that it will make us all better off eventually, financially and socially. Because you rid the island of the root cause of the problems here.

NIMAN

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I always maintained that there was a core of Unionist votes that would not be so unionist when it comes to their economic stability.

Those farmers aren't so stupid.

CruelCoin

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The majority of those protesting WC's were those who objected to how it was set up. (it was shambles from start to finish) Not because they had to pay for water. We pay for water already, always have.
And the majority of those who favour a UI know that it will make us all better off eventually, financially and socially. Because you rid the island of the root cause of the problems here.

I'm not sure how relocating a dotted line solves our problems...

Trade across the border is free and easy as it is.

FrancieBrady

CruelCoin wrote: »

I'm not sure how relocating a dotted line solves our problems...

Trade across the border is free and easy as it is.

That would be great if that was the only problem partition caused, wouldn't it.

CruelCoin

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That would be great if that was the only problem partition caused, wouldn't it.

What problems exist within the republic do you think would be solved then?
You raised the claim. Back it up.

FrancieBrady

CruelCoin wrote: »

What problems exist within the republic do you think would be solved then?
You raised the claim. Back it up.

The entire belt along the border on both sides that have been depressed and held back for years would no longer exist.

The security issues would finally be resolved, bar a small bit of unrest from Loyalist militants who will be quickly and easily contained.

The instability potential of an outside event such as Brexit or the potential breakup of the UK (i.e Scottish independence) would no longer be a threat.

That is just the main ticket items.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The entire belt along the border on both sides that have been depressed and held back for years would no longer exist

Does that mean Cavan will cease to exist?

Where do I vote?

Taytoland

FrancieBrady wrote: »

CruelCoin wrote: »

What problems exist within the republic do you think would be solved then?
You raised the claim. Back it up.

The entire belt along the border on both sides that have been depressed and held back for years would no longer exist.

The security issues would finally be resolved, bar a small bit of unrest from Loyalist militants who will be quickly and easily contained.

The instability potential of an outside event such as Brexit or the potential breakup of the UK (i.e Scottish independence) would no longer be a threat.

That is just the main ticket items.

Imreoir2

Taytoland wrote: »

The likelyhood is that he is not wrong. The "bloodbath theory" asuming Loyalists would go on a rampage has always been a red herring. The Loyalist paramilatries have always been very ineffective and were only ever a threat when helped out by British security forces.

FrancieBrady

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The likelyhood is that he is not wrong. The "bloodbath theory" asuming Loyalists would go on a rampage has always been a red herring. The Loyalist paramilatries have always been very ineffective and were only ever a threat when helped out by British security forces.

As I said, there will probably be some belligerence but with a majority vote including unionists (who have realised that partition has failed) looking to the future for once, any violence will be within their own areas and easily contained.

Who is going to have the stomach for a fight when there is absolutely no prospect (since the GFA was signed actually) that the British will change their minds. They would literally be fighting pointlessly. Not to mention how they are going to arm themselves with the British intent on a UI being successful as well as the Irish and Americans and the EU security forces.
It is pie in the sky territory to think they could destabilise the process once the island decides.

Taytoland

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

The likelyhood is that he is not wrong. The "bloodbath theory" asuming Loyalists would go on a rampage has always been a red herring. The Loyalist paramilatries have always been very ineffective and were only ever a threat when helped out by British security forces.

Loyalist paramilitaries murdered hundreds of people, would be no reason why they couldn't with Irish army soldiers, Irish police force etc, actual visible targets in Protestant areas and further afield.

Zebra3

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I always maintained that there was a core of Unionist votes that would not be so unionist when it comes to their economic stability.

Ditto re nationalists.

FrancieBrady

Taytoland wrote: »

Loyalist paramilitaries murdered hundreds of people, would be no reason why they couldn't with Irish army soldiers, Irish police force etc, actual visible targets in Protestant areas and further afield.

Remember the British know these guys inside out, know their arms suppliers and routes.

Not a mission they could mount a sustainable campaign. They couldn't do it in any sustained way with British aid during the conflict/war and resorted to sectarian killing in retaliation.
With even greater odds stacked against them now and boxed into a province with adversaries on all sides, a unionist community already convinced of a UI and nothing tangible to achieve, it will be another case of 'Never Never...Ok then, Maybe', as we have seen up to the GFA and since.

Zebra3

What goal would a loyalist military campaign have?

A 4 county “Ulster”?

Taytoland

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

Loyalist paramilitaries murdered hundreds of people, would be no reason why they couldn't with Irish army soldiers, Irish police force etc, actual visible targets in Protestant areas and further afield.

Remember the British know these guys inside out, know their arms suppliers and routes.

Not a mission they could mount a sustainable campaign. They couldn't do it in any sustained way with British aid during the conflict/war and resorted to sectarian killing in retaliation.
With even greater odds stacked against them now and boxed into a province with adversaries on all sides, a unionist community already convinced of a UI and nothing tangible to achieve, it will be another case of 'Never Never...Ok then, Maybe', as we have seen up to the GFA and since.

It's an irrelevant debate really but to just dismiss what I think is the obvious is foolish.

blinding

Zebra3 wrote: »

What goal would a loyalist military campaign have?

A 4 county “Ulster”?

That where they went wrong in 1922 . Their eyes were bigger than their brains :eek:

Had they been more sensible back then the probably could have kept a smaller sate for a lot longer .

Can they get anything right ?

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

That where they went wrong in 1922 . Their eyes were bigger than their brains :eek:

Had they been more sensible back then the probably could have kept a smaller sate for a lot longer .

Can they get anything right ?

It was never meant to be anything more than a temporary arrangement. If the forebears of the present powershare FFFG had kept the pressure on that was all it would have been. But they got comfy.

J Mysterio

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Or the St Pat's Saltire.

No! Its awful (and very English looking).

Sunny Disposition

Hundreds of years after the plantation of Ulster and it’s still not a normal society, Catholics still alienated from the State. Given that they will be in a majority soon the end of Northern Ireland is probably inevitable, it’s just as well it is coming at a time when it is clear partition was an economic disaster for the North. Hopefully that will help appease the remaining unionists.

steddyeddy

Taytoland wrote: »

Loyalist paramilitaries murdered hundreds of people, would be no reason why they couldn't with Irish army soldiers, Irish police force etc, actual visible targets in Protestant areas and further afield.

Most of the loyalist victims were civilians. I don't think they'd have a chance against actual trained soldiers.

The Rape of Lucretia

Zebra3 wrote: »

What goal would a loyalist military campaign have?

A 4 county “Ulster”?

Easily avoided if the 26 rejoin the 6. Reboot to 1921, with a more mature, realist, post-catholic south without the chip on its shoulder, that can fully embrace being part of the UK, and minimise the hit from the Brexit fiasco.
A proper working together of all communities on this island can be a leading light inspiring the mainland to a successful Brexit (in the long run granted - the short term will be a rocky ride alright), and make the British Isles an economic powerhouse specialising in the areas the EU is weak, being a more nimble sea trading nation with a broader reach, and rebuilding mutually beneficial links with old allies all around the world.

Imreoir2

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Easily avoided if the 26 rejoin the 6. Reboot to 1921, with a more mature, realist, post-catholic south without the chip on its shoulder, that can fully embrace being part of the UK, and minimise the hit from the Brexit fiasco.
A proper working together of all communities on this island can be a leading light inspiring the mainland to a successful Brexit (in the long run granted - the short term will be a rocky ride alright), and make the British Isles an economic powerhouse specialising in the areas the EU is weak, being a more nimble sea trading nation with a broader reach, and rebuilding mutually beneficial links with old allies all around the world.

Have you been looking over JRM's next statement on the border issue?

The Rape of Lucretia

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Have you been looking over JRM's next statement on the border issue?

Yes. And border check are backwards and unworkable. Thats why we need an imaginative and creative solution, that shakes off the hangups of the past of both North and South, and realises the mutual benefit of full integration both on Ireland, and as part of Great Britain. It removes the threat of any violence. Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands strengthens everybody, and insulates what today is the republic, from the the harshest impact that Brexit would have on it if it tries to maintain its EU membership in the face of an overwhelming Brexit hurricane.

FrancieBrady

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes. And border check are backwards and unworkable. Thats why we need an imaginative and creative solution, that shakes off the hangups of the past of both North and South, and realises the mutual benefit of full integration both on Ireland, and as part of Great Britain. It removes the threat of any violence. Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands strengthens everybody, and insulates what today is the republic, from the the harshest impact that Brexit would have on it if it tries to maintain its EU membership in the face of an overwhelming Brexit hurricane.

So there would be no borders around this new utopia? Or would we all just stay within it's confines swilling Pimms and toasting our economic luck with our new monarchy?

Junkyard Tom

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands.

Honestly this is utter fantasy. Anyone who even tried to propose it in an election manifesto, in Ireland, would be laughed at. A lot of us would consider it treasonous.

You'd be better off trying to keep together what remains of the failing English/Wales/Scotland 'union'. Just give up on the northeast of Ireland, it's a lost cause, a sectarian project born of the threat of terror against the Irish people that will come to an end sooner or later.

Peregrinus

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes. And border check are backwards and unworkable. Thats why we need an imaginative and creative solution, that shakes off the hangups of the past of both North and South, and realises the mutual benefit of full integration both on Ireland, and as part of Great Britain. It removes the threat of any violence. Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands strengthens everybody . . .

Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands is what we have right now, and what we'd love to keep. But the British - the English, really - won't have it.

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

. . . and insulates what today is the republic, from the the harshest impact that Brexit would have on it

This is obviously wrong, since right now we have the full economic union that you call for and yet it's not protecting us from Brexit.

The rock on which your fantasies founder is the the British will always make their own decisions and are not accountable to us for them. They may be good decisions; they may be bad decisions; but, either way, they will not be our decisions. Being in a "full economic union" with them has not stopped them threatening us with harm through Brexit. And if you imagine that it would be any different if we were in a full economic union with them and only them, well, we tried that, and it didn't stop them making decisions harmful to us then, either.

Bottom line: It is never, ever in Ireland's interest to increase its dependency on Great Britain.

The Rape of Lucretia

Yes, we have it right now, but post Brexit we will NOT. Unless we become players not spectators.
We need true political leadership from Leo, Mary Louise, and Miche to communicate this vision.
Most of Ireland has moved on from its UK bad, independence good obsession. We are a much more sophisticated country than 100 years ago, and are fit to take a pragmatic decision now, and restore Dublin as the second city of the Empire.

FrancieBrady

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes, we have it right now, but post Brexit we will NOT. Unless we become players not spectators.
We need true political leadership from Leo, Mary Louise, and Miche to communicate this vision.
Most of Ireland has moved on from its UK bad, independence good obsession. We are a much more sophisticated country than 100 years ago, and are fit to take a pragmatic decision now, and restore Dublin as the second city of the Empire.

The vision you are struggling to communicate without the use of vague dreaming about being a part of a monarchy again?

Would there be any onus on Britain to fundamentally change their direction in order to join with us, or is this just a tired old John Brutonesque genuflection and 'sorry we made a mess of it your Majesty, please take us back' plea?

Peregrinus

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes, we have it right now, but post Brexit we will NOT. Unless we become players not spectators.
We need true political leadership from Leo, Mary Louise, and Miche to communicate this vision.
Most of Ireland has moved on from its UK bad, independence good obsession. We are a much more sophisticated country than 100 years ago, and are fit to take a pragmatic decision now, and restore Dublin as the second city of the Empire.

Even if there were still an empire (or even an Empire), I cannot see what possible advantage would accrue to Dublin from being its second city. We were the second city of the empire before, and were then noted mainly for the huge proportion of the city's population that lived in slum tenements, and for having one of the largest sex industries in Europe.

Right now, we have full economic union with 27 other countries. Because the Brits are throwing their toys out of the pram, post-Brexit we must choose between full economic union with 26 other countries, or full economic union with the UK. I struggle to see why picking one of these things would make us a "player", but picking the other would make us a "spectator".

You don't have to make this choice by invoking what you call a "UK bad, independence good obsession". It is true that our experience of being in the UK was very bad, and our experience of independence has been much better. But even if you ignore this you can just ask whether it's in Ireland better interests to be in a "full economic union" with the UK, or to be in a full economic union with the rest of the EU-27? The answer, obviously, is the latter, for countless reasons - we do far more trade with them, they are a far bigger market, they are a stronger economic performer, they're a first-rate economic power, they are open to the world in a way that the UK is not, they take us seriously in a way that Britain never has, etc, etc. And that's even before we compare our experience of being in the two kinds of union, both of which we have tried before. One was, objectively viewed, really bad; the other, objectively viewed, really good. There's no contest here.

swampgas

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes, we have it right now, but post Brexit we will NOT. Unless we become players not spectators.
We need true political leadership from Leo, Mary Louise, and Miche to communicate this vision.
Most of Ireland has moved on from its UK bad, independence good obsession. We are a much more sophisticated country than 100 years ago, and are fit to take a pragmatic decision now, and restore Dublin as the second city of the Empire.

Ireland has outstripped the UK in many ways. (Our more modern form of democracy (PR-STV) is, in my opinion, a huge part of that.)

Perhaps the UK could rejoin Ireland and London could be the second city of the expanded new Irish state, ruled from Dublin?

No? It's about as likely as what you're suggesting, to be honest.

Hotblack Desiato

Peregrinus wrote: »

Full economic union both on the island and between the two islands is what we have right now

You are using a very odd definition of full economic union.

No we don't have this, because full economic union would mean taxation and spending being decided in London and having a common currency, so interest rates set in London as well (unless they join the euro!)

What's being proposed goes a lot further than the relationship we now have with other EU member states and even with other eurozone members. It is de jure or de facto returning to UK rule over all of Ireland. Didn't work out the last time did it?

What we do have is the customs union and single market, and we'd certainly like to keep those with regard to the UK. The loss of either means inevitable massive disruption and an almost certain hard border for goods either on the ground or in the Irish Sea. There is no avoiding this. Technology or political waffle will not make these issues go away.

The rock on which your fantasies founder is the the British will always make their own decisions and are not accountable to us for them.

Exactly, which is why any measure which integrates us more closely with the UK rather than with the EU as a whole is a seriously bad idea.

The Rape of Lucretia

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So there would be no borders around this new utopia? Or would we all just stay within it's confines swilling Pimms and toasting our economic luck with our new monarchy?

There would be of course boarders with outside the UK with the rest of the world. No borders on the island of Ireland or between Ireland and the mainland is clearly what I meant.

I wouldnt get so uppity about the monarchy either - I dont think anyone could argue that its better than a TV style celebrity contest that has somehow gone a step too far into the real world. (and what the story with the rest of the dragons while we are at it, apart from three, there would seem to be others who have not clearly said whether they are running for president or not?).

The Rape of Lucretia

swampgas wrote: »

Ireland has outstripped the UK in many ways. (Our more modern form of democracy (PR-STV) is, in my opinion, a huge part of that.)

Perhaps the UK could rejoin Ireland and London could be the second city of the expanded new Irish state, ruled from Dublin?

No? It's about as likely as what you're suggesting, to be honest.

I wouldnt say out stripped. Closed the gap. Or sufficently close to be fully integratable now. That was not the case 100+ years ago.

The Rape of Lucretia

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It is de jure or de facto returning to UK rule over all of Ireland. Didn't work out the last time did it?

This is being blinded by the now irrelevant past. We nead leadership to nurse people beyond this backward looking bias, and take things as they truly are today. Ireland is not a rural backwater any more. Discarding the historical hangups, prejudices, and (admittedly brainwashed anti English rhetoric many Irish people have been subjected to for 100 years) knee jerk republic-is-better line, a united British Isles is clearly a natural union, and one that in this difficult unexpected situation of Brexit (of course no-Brexit is a superior outcome to all), must be reconsidered with fresh and open minds.

Hotblack Desiato

The "mainland" ?

Hotblack Desiato

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Ireland is not a rural backwater any more.

Which is precisely why we should not shackle ourselves to a failing, and likely disintegrating, UK.

Taytoland

steddyeddy wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

Loyalist paramilitaries murdered hundreds of people, would be no reason why they couldn't with Irish army soldiers, Irish police force etc, actual visible targets in Protestant areas and further afield.

Most of the loyalist victims were civilians. I don't think they'd have a chance against actual trained soldiers.

IEDs, ambushes, off duty traps etc.

swampgas

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

This is being blinded by the now irrelevant past. We nead leadership to nurse people beyond this backward looking bias, and take things as they truly are today. Ireland is not a rural backwater any more. Discarding the historical hangups, prejudices, and (admittedly brainwashed anti English rhetoric many Irish people have been subjected to for 100 years) knee jerk republic-is-better line, a united British Isles is clearly a natural union, and one that in this difficult unexpected situation of Brexit (of course no-Brexit is a superior outcome to all), must be reconsidered with fresh and open minds.

I think a fresh and open mind would be better suited to yourself, to be honest. You truly seem to be living in the past, and a victim of a different kind of brainwashing. We (in Ireland) have, to a large extent, moved on from the past: IMO it is the UK that is still mired in past glories, and which seems determined to turn the clock back rather than move ahead.

We (the Irish people) have our own distinct vibrant culture and economy. We have our own political system, hard fought for, and while not perfect, working pretty well. We would not be better off in the UK. It would be the very death of us as a nation. How you can't see this is beyond me.

We are lucky to be a member of the EU, an entity which far better reflects the values of Ireland than the class-ridden, elitist, monarchist, England first-above-all-others, ex-colonial master that faces us across the Irish sea.

Given the choice between the EU and the UK, there is only one option for Ireland that makes any sense to anyone who has the vaguest inkling of what makes this country of ours tick. And it certainly isn't John Bull.

As for needing leadership - are you blind? Ireland has strong leadership right now. If anyone is in need of leadership, just cast your eyes across the water.

Imreoir2

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

This is being blinded by the now irrelevant past. We nead leadership to nurse people beyond this backward looking bias, and take things as they truly are today. Ireland is not a rural backwater any more. Discarding the historical hangups, prejudices, and (admittedly brainwashed anti English rhetoric many Irish people have been subjected to for 100 years) knee jerk republic-is-better line, a united British Isles is clearly a natural union, and one that in this difficult unexpected situation of Brexit (of course no-Brexit is a superior outcome to all), must be reconsidered with fresh and open minds.

Thats some nice trolling there Lucretia.

FrancieBrady

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

There would be of course boarders with outside the UK with the rest of the world. No borders on the island of Ireland or between Ireland and the mainland is clearly what I meant.

:D:cool:

I wouldnt get so uppity about the monarchy either - I dont think anyone could argue that its better than a TV style celebrity contest that has somehow gone a step too far into the real world. (and what the story with the rest of the dragons while we are at it, apart from three, there would seem to be others who have not clearly said whether they are running for president or not?).

When I see generations of Michael D's family born into privilege and wealth I will agree with you.

J Mysterio

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

between Ireland and the mainland

:pac: