Brexit Discussion Thread VI

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

I have stated from early on that is was nuetral and didn't vote. So i don't think the benifits of in or out are dramatically different. Some pros and cons. I am OK with either option if we do it as UK as a whole.
If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Do you accept that a hard brexit will hit the UK economy hard? And that currently those effects are already being felt due to the loss of value of sterling and the flow of capital out of London.

Such a hit to the UK economy would inevitably reduce the amount of money available to prop up NI.

First Up

downcow wrote:

This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU.

I am not in a position to comment with any authority on the risk of "troubles" although I know that this is a concern to some people who know more about it than me.

I can however assure you that the EU is not using that or anything else to "keep" the UK in the EU. All it is doing is ensuring that responsibility for the consequences of the UK's departure fall where they should.

The EU has been working on its part since June 2016. The UK does not seem to have started its part.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

I am simply stating what i understand as facts.

2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways)
3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both

You're still confusing the regions (of England) with the constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - something that is, unfortunately, widespread amongst the loudest Tory, UKIP and English nationalist voices.

Maybe if NI unionists could accept that their country is not part of Great Britain, they'd be more successful in keeping their own government functionning effectively, and defending their country's interests.

downcow wrote: »

5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up

The "current ROI position" is based on written rules - rules that were written down years ago, and were available for everyone in the Leave campaign to see, read and understand. There's no arrogance or winding-up involved.

On the otherhand, there is no reason why the Republic should put itself at a considerable economic disadvantage by imposing checks on Ireland-France imports/exports simply because a subsection of the Tory party disagrees with the rest of the party.

downcow wrote: »

6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation.
Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?

Not unreasonable, no. But when the EU came up with exactly that kind of proposal, it was trashed by ... Northern Irish unionists. Have you written to your local MP to tell them that they're not acting in accordance with your wishes?

downcow

prawnsambo wrote: »

Do you accept that a hard brexit will hit the UK economy hard? And that currently those effects are already being felt due to the loss of value of sterling and the flow of capital out of London.

Such a hit to the UK economy would inevitably reduce the amount of money available to prop up NI.

To be really honest. here is my thoughts - uncensored
There is history which I think no of us can avoid. Some may pretend they are above it but I think it infects us deep in our thinking. and i could be wrong but my guess is that thats not just a northern problem but across the island - so much difficult history and we are all products of it.
So i don't want to rejoin ireland any more that many of you want roi to rejoin the 'kingdom'. So i suppose that is me admitting it is not all economic for me.

That said, I believe that the UK and EU and indeed UK & ROI are interdependant and stronger working together. I believe we are leaving the EU but I also believe that all parties mention firmly understand we will be better of working together and being supportive of each other.
I understand the EU need to play hard ball so as no one else considers leaving
I understand ROI need to play hard ball and use the border issue to their advantage to keep economic connections with UK
I understand NI needs to keep good solid economic connections with ROI (and more eg friends, culture, etc)
I understand UK needs to pl,ay hard ball and not just roll over to EU & ROI

That said I believe common sense will prevail at or after the 11th hour. The backstop will be watered down (or fudged) and we will all move on and build improving relationships in the years ahead. I don'r expect either poverty or the jackpot for UK or EU for that matter. I do also think ROI are in the shakiest position but trust that EU & UK will play ball and make it work in the end.

Probably setting myself up for a hammering but sure so be it

prawnsambo

First Up wrote: »

I can however assure you that the EU is not using that or anything else to "keep" the UK in the EU. All it is doing is ensuring that responsibility for the consequences of the UK's departure fall where they should.

This (the border issue) was brought up before, during and after the referendum by British politicians on both sides of the debate and whom I quoted on the previous page.

I even quoted Nigel Farage replying to a group of NI businessmen who posed the question to him in a meeting he held with them during the campaign. So the issue of the border was front and centre in the debate in NI during the campaign and was a constant every time a westminster politician went to NI while on the campaign trail.

So the contention that this is an invention by the EU/Ireland is demonstrably untrue. It was always an issue and was identified by people north of the border as an issue when the whole sorry mess started off.

downcow

CelticRambler wrote: »

You're still confusing the regions (of England) with the constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - something that is, unfortunately, widespread amongst the loudest Tory, UKIP and English nationalist voices.

Maybe if NI unionists could accept that their country is not part of Great Britain, they'd be more successful in keeping their own government functionning effectively, and defending their country's interests.

On the otherhand, there is no reason why the Republic should put itself at a considerable economic disadvantage by imposing checks on Ireland-France imports/exports simply because a subsection of the Tory party disagrees with the rest of the party.

GB is not a country anf there is no international border between NI and GB. I havent checked but i am pretty sure the two nations on the islands recognised by the UN are ROI and UK of GB & NI. and some of you are reading far to much into a name - the nation of the UK was formed by bringing together GB & NI and that is recognised in the name - I really like it that way and would hate to see that bit of history erased

and your second point is the arrogant bit that you need to let go of and i have no doubt you will at the 11th hour - you will need to work with us and not cut off your nose to spite your face (and i don't mean you personally - i mean your nation)

spacecoyote

downcow wrote: »

4) another referendum would be ridiculous. As ridiculous as it would have been for the anti GFA people to call for a new referendum eg at the time we were all watching murderers being released two years in which my have swung it the other way in the North

Did we not, in essence, have this situation in Ireland with Lisbon?

It was rejected originally, partly down to some lies & scaremongering that was put out through the media.

We went back, got clarifications, the relevant guarantees, and the full picture & put it back to the people, and as a result the second referendum passed.

To me, its almost a perfect parallel, except the Irish don't get so caught up in similar, Rule Britannia style reactions, as they do in the UK. Why get so entrenched & dig your heels in, when, in essence, you know you've made the wrong decision.

If you put something to the people & they vote on it, and then can provide evidence that the reason they voted was based on lies & scaremongering, is it not a fair & just idea to put the choice to the people again?

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc
does that help?

Does it help? No!

NI is not connected to GB in every way. For a start, there's 13 miles of sea between NI and Scotland. You've also got your own version of pounds sterling that you'll struggle to pass off as legal tender in London. And there are precious few places in Northern Ireland that a happily married lesbian could get an abortion.

On the flip side, you have unfettered access to every part of the Republic of Ireland, you can play for any local or national Irish sports team, you can market yourself or your business or your exports as "Irish" and no-one will accuse you of false advertising.

As for that financial dependency on Westminster handouts, if (or when) NI is dragged out of the EU as part of a hard, chaotic, no-deal Brexit, there's going to be a lot less cash in the Westminster coffers, and many more English regions ahead of NI in the queue.

So what, exactly, are the advantages to NI of forging deeper ties with a post-Brexit England in preference to maintaining the status quo?

downcow

spacecoyote wrote: »

Did we not, in essence, have this situation in Ireland with Lisbon?

It was rejected originally, partly down to some lies & scaremongering that was put out through the media.

We went back, got clarifications, the relevant guarantees, and the full picture & put it back to the people, and as a result the second referendum passed.

To me, its almost a perfect parallel, except the Irish don't get so caught up in similar, Rule Britannia style reactions, as they do in the UK. Why get so entrenched & dig your heels in, when, in essence, you know you've made the wrong decision.

If you put something to the people & they vote on it, and then can provide evidence that the reason they voted was based on lies & scaremongering, is it not a fair & just idea to put the choice to the people again?

Are you sure people will vote remain - im not so sure. people may not take kindly about being told you are stupid go back and get the correct answer.
I would also worry about the UK going forward if this is overturned. we will be divided for decades and some nasty people will get support who would normally

LuckyLloyd

downcow wrote: »

There is serious whataboutery going on here.
I am simply stating what i understand as facts.
ie
1)to all intense and purpose the troubles are over and the current generation will not lend its support to another murderous sectarian campaign

You don't know what the current generation might do in a situation where there is a Hard Border reimposed and the UK / NI is thrown into a deep recession. Their will be a feeling of imposition and that will create the kind of motivations that existed before the GFA.

2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways)

They voted "out", but "out" was not defined. The issue the UK have faced during this process is the various devils that exist in the details of "out". And many of those details have potentially destabilizing effects in NI even if they are considered preferential from an English perspective.

3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both

A Hard Brexit position hardly represents a close vote. The DUP positioning throughout the process hardly is representative of a close vote.

4) another referendum would be ridiculous. As ridiculous as it would have been for the anti GFA people to call for a new referendum eg at the time we were all watching murderers being released two years in which my have swung it the other way in the North

Utter nonsense. It is also an opinion, not a fact. On the former point, Brexit now has a negotiated definition in the form of the agreed WA. And numerous points have surfaced and been worked through over the course of the negotiations that could substantively back up the legitimacy of a second vote.

As to the latter point, that was signposted in the GFA. It was agreed then that releases would occur. The DUP campaigned against ratification for such reasons. The rest of the country voted by a massive margin in full knowledge of the agreed deal and its implications. The situation is the antithesis of Brexit in that regard.

5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up

This is another opinion, not a fact. The ROI has not voted to leave the EU. It is not tied to the UK in any way. Why on earth would there be checks on its border with Single Market partners on the continent? There is zero arrogance in that position. Upholding British commitments defined by an International agreement in the context of Brexit is an entirely self created problem for the UK to solve. Ireland did nothing to threaten the status quo of agreements it has signed up to. Nor did the EU.

6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation.

That again is an opinion, not a fact. The deal as negotiated is a brilliant one for peace, business and prosperity in NI: providing it with the best of both worlds in terms of EU / UK membership. Hence the legion of business / agriculture voices in NI who came out to support it. The DUP position is out of touch with the people of NI. They want this deal, they would vote for this deal. They do not want a hard border and the actions of the DUP which trend towards that are out of touch with the people of NI.

Just as they were out of touch on the GFA.

Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?

Yes, as pointed out above. And through all of this, the DUP protestations of how NI must be treated the exact same as the UK rings hollow when gay people in NI cannot marry and pregnant women in NI cannot seek the same range of medical services available to women in Wales, Scotland and England.

Your position is bankrupt if I'm being honest, which is in keeping with the long tradition of DUP politics.

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

To be really honest. here is my thoughts - uncensored
There is history which I think no of us can avoid. Some may pretend they are above it but I think it infects us deep in our thinking. and i could be wrong but my guess is that thats not just a northern problem but across the island - so much difficult history and we are all products of it.
So i don't want to rejoin ireland any more that many of you want roi to rejoin the 'kingdom'. So i suppose that is me admitting it is not all economic for me.

I think we all understand the feelings on both sides of the divide. This is what the GFA sought to address. And largely succeeded in doing. And like all such agreements, people on both sides were disgruntled by certain aspects of it, but in the main saw it as the best way forward. I think we can agree on that. So yes, economic arguments are maybe not as important, but they aren't far off either. Because economic recession has a habit of bringing other things to the surface.

downcow wrote: »

That said, I believe that the UK and EU and indeed UK & ROI are interdependant and stronger working together. I believe we are leaving the EU but I also believe that all parties mention firmly understand we will be better of working together and being supportive of each other.
I understand the EU need to play hard ball so as no one else considers leaving
I understand ROI need to play hard ball and use the border issue to their advantage to keep economic connections with UK
I understand NI needs to keep good solid economic connections with ROI (and more eg friends, culture, etc)
I understand UK needs to play hard ball and not just roll over to EU & ROI

I've pointed out above why the pov that this is an EU/ROI 'ploy' is untrue. People in NI brought it up during the referendum. Business people amongst others. It is an issue that should concern everyone involved, not just Ireland and the EU.

downcow wrote: »

That said I believe common sense will prevail at or after the 11th hour. The backstop will be watered down (or fudged) and we will all move on and build improving relationships in the years ahead. I don'r expect either poverty or the jackpot for UK or EU for that matter. I do also think ROI are in the shakiest position but trust that EU & UK will play ball and make it work in the end.

Probably setting myself up for a hammering but sure so be it

I have a profound difficulty in understanding why people feel the backstop is a bad idea. Foremost amongst those protesting it are the same people who have insisted that it won't be needed. And this is the crux of the matter. It won't be needed if those pushing for brexit are honest in their statements that they will agree something with the EU post brexit that will render a backstop unnecessary. To me, it's a non-issue and the backstop is an insurance policy that (providing the UK match their words with deeds) will never be called upon.

And that's the crux of it. The more screaming about the backstop, the less trust that it won't be needed.

Sam Russell

downcow wrote: »

GB is not a country anf there is no international border between NI and GB. I havent checked but i am pretty sure the two nations on the islands recognised by the UN are ROI and UK of GB & NI. and some of you are reading far to much into a name - the nation of the UK was formed by bringing together GB & NI and that is recognised in the name - I really like it that way and would hate to see that bit of history erased

and your second point is the arrogant bit that you need to let go of and i have no doubt you will at the 11th hour - you will need to work with us and not cut off your nose to spite your face (and i don't mean you personally - i mean your nation)

It is unfortunate that the GFA failed to identify the terms used in it.

1. The GFA is also known as the 'Belfast Agreement' by some.

2. The term for NI is also known as 'the Six Counties' or 'Ulster'.

3. The UK of GB and NI is referred to as 'Britain' by some and as 'England' by others.

Much confusion would be avoided if they had defined all terms in the agreement and that all parties would only use those definitions in any matters dealing with the GFA, particularly the two Governments.

It would also be helpful if the UK Gov had implemented regional assemblies in England equivalent to those in the rest of the UK.

downcow

CelticRambler wrote: »

Does it help? No!

On the flip side, you have unfettered access to every part of the Republic of Ireland, you can play for any local or national Irish sports team, you can market yourself or your business or your exports as "Irish" and no-one will accuse you of false advertising.

You just don't get it that i am not Irish and would never ever describe myself as such. I am British and Norther Irish. I also fully recognise that some of my neighbours are Irish and Northern Irish or maybe all three or maybe none. You need to get out of the mindset that everyone in NI is Irish

Dyr

downcow wrote: »

I would also worry about the UK going forward if this is overturned. we will be divided for decades and some nasty people will get support who would normally

Ah don't worry, the DUP won't run on the mainland


TBH I have a feeling a second referendum would in no way be a forgone conclusion for the remain side.

Tell me how

downcow wrote: »

Are you sure people will vote remain - im not so sure. people may not take kindly about being told you are stupid go back and get the correct answer.
I would also worry about the UK going forward if this is overturned. we will be divided for decades and some nasty people will get support who would normally

Let's be clear. It would definitely not be about saying vote again so we can get the correct answer.

It would be a case of,"you now know the following, do you still want to leave".

• The EU will not be begging us to sign a deal which is more favourable for us than them.
• Germany/France will not push the EU aside to talk directly to us
• Countries will not be pushing each other out of the way to strike deals with us
• Logisitics and shipping are not going to run smoothly
• There will not be €350M/week for the NHS.
• The border in Northern Ireland is a big deal and can not be solved easily.
• Technology does not yet exist to solve customs checks issues.
• Many companies are going to close down and move their business abroad.

Please stop repeating this BS of democracy being rail roaded when JRM and Farage both spoke before the last referendum that even if the vote was to remain, the fight would go on.

downcow

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yes, as pointed out above. And through all of this, the DUP protestations of how NI must be treated the exact same as the UK rings hollow when gay people in NI cannot marry and pregnant women in NI cannot seek the same range of medical services available to women in Wales, Scotland and England.

Your position is bankrupt if I'm being honest, which is in keeping with the long tradition of DUP politics.

Stop trying to get me to fit in your little box. I am pro gay marriage, i see two sides to the very complicated abortion debate and I am currently an ulster uniounist voter.
The regions of the UK have a range of differences, indeed scotland is more different that the rest re laws, Wales has a thriving language. I wojuld love to see equal marriage here but we cant get it because of a crazy undemocratic devolved assembly. that does not make me any less british or more irish

downcow

Tell me how wrote: »

Let's be clear. It would definitely not be about saying vote again so we can get the correct answer.

It would be a case of,"you now know the following, do you still want to leave".

• The EU will not be begging us to sign a deal which is more favourable for us than them.
• Germany/France will not push the EU aside to talk directly to us
• Countries will not be pushing each other out of the way to strike deals with us
• Logisitics and shipping are not going to run smoothly
• There will not be €350M/week for the NHS.
• The border in Northern Ireland is a big deal and can not be solved easily.
• Technology does not yet exist to solve customs checks issues.
• Many companies are going to close down and move their business abroad.

.

And therein is the problem. No one knows what deal will evolve between the UK and EU. You state it like you know what the outcome of the next two years negotiations will be. Will we vote again then if you are wrong

Leroy42

Downcow, this is not an attack on Unionism, or NI. Brexit created all this mess. You cannot articulate any upsides and even your answer to the benefits mentioned continued reliance on subsidies from the UK.

Yet this all started because you seem to believe that this is somehow Irelands or the EUS fault, when time and again you have acknowledged that it is all because of the vote the UK had and the interpretation of that vote by the Tory party.

none, of this, I repeat, none of this, needs to happen. Call off Brexit and NI remains fully aligned (except for those parts you don't like!) with the UK. Brexit requires a decision to be made. Remain fully aligned to the UK and have a hard border, or split from the UK in trade terms.

It really is that straightforward. The DUP have decided, despite the majority in NI voting the other way, that a hard border is the way to go.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

GB is not a country anf there is no international border between NI and GB. I havent checked but i am pretty sure the two nations on the islands recognised by the UN are ROI and UK of GB & NI. and some of you are reading far to much into a name - the nation of the UK was formed by bringing together GB & NI and that is recognised in the name - I really like it that way and would hate to see that bit of history erased

Yeahhhh.... you might want to re-read your history. The "nation" of the UK was formed by England invading its neighbours, first the Welsh, then the Scots, leading to the Union of England and Scotland.

There was an ephemeral United Kingdom of Great Britain, France and Ireland, but the French got antsy, so that never got a look in and England settled the forced marriage labelled the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

Then the Irish got antsy, and about 100 years ago, England agreed to lop off 26/32nds of the territory and added "Northern" to the title of the state. None of that history will be erased by Brexit ... but it will certainly hasten the removal of the phrase "and Northern Ireland" if the unionists continue to act in the worst interests of their country.

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

And therein is the problem. No one knows what deal will evolve between the UK and EU. You state it like you know what the outcome of the next two years negotiations will be. Will we vote again then if you are wrong

What do you mean? We have a pretty good idea as we have the likes of Norway, Switzerland etc to look at. Any FTA agreement is going to require alignment of regulations, yet the UK have stated that they will not accept that.

So, unless the magic technology can be unearthed, then the decision will remain pretty much the same as it is now.

The WA should have been the easy bit. There is no way that a FTA will be completed within two years.

Tell me how

downcow wrote: »

And therein is the problem. No one knows what deal will evolve between the UK and EU. You state it like you know what the outcome of the next two years negotiations will be. Will we vote again then if you are wrong

What are you talking about "the next two years of negotiations"? You do realise today is the 22 of January 2019, not the 25th of June 2016?
The 2 years of negotiations have been completed.

All my points above can be considered as fact given what we are aware of today.

Hurrache

According to the Indo government sources believe the Polish foreign minister coming out with his statement was a set up between themselves and the UK. It's not that far fetched as the Polish statement came out just shortly after a Tory MP tweeted that they had called upon their Polish friends in support for movement on the backstop.

spacecoyote

downcow wrote: »

And therein is the problem. No one knows what deal will evolve between the UK and EU. You state it like you know what the outcome of the next two years negotiations will be. Will we vote again then if you are wrong

No-one can predict the exact outcome, no. But I think one thing that can be definitively stated though is... you don't give a better deal to people outside than you give to your members inside.

Does anyone really think that they are going to get better terms from the EU, by leaving the EU?

I would say that, in the best case scenario, they'll end up with slightly worse terms than they have today.

And by extension, does anyone think that they can negotiate better terms for a trade agreement with another country when you're offering a market of 60m versus a market of 500-600m?

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

According to the Indo government sources believe the Polish foreign minister coming out with his statement was a set up between themselves and Poland. It's not that far fetched as the Polish statement came out just shortly after a Tory MP tweeted that they had called upon their Polish friends in support for movement on the backstop.

Right wing party supporting a right wing party. You know people by their friends.

Oafley Jones

downcow wrote: »

You just don't get it that i am not Irish and would never ever describe myself as such. I am British and Norther Irish. I also fully recognise that some of my neighbours are Irish and Northern Irish or maybe all three or maybe none. You need to get out of the mindset that everyone in NI is Irish

True; but honestly, I'd be more concerned with how they regard you in Britain. Whether Unionist or Nationalist, you're simply "Irish" to a number of English people I know. And I doubt they're isolated. NI and it's inhabitants are a peculiarity (and inconvenience) that they'd love to be rid of.

Captain Obvious

downcow wrote: »

And therein is the problem. No one knows what deal will evolve between the UK and EU. You state it like you know what the outcome of the next two years negotiations will be. Will we vote again then if you are wrong

What? The next two years?

prawnsambo

downcow wrote: »

Stop trying to get me to fit in your little box. I am pro gay marriage, i see two sides to the very complicated abortion debate and I am currently an ulster uniounist voter.
The regions of the UK have a range of differences, indeed scotland is more different that the rest re laws, Wales has a thriving language. I wojuld love to see equal marriage here but we cant get it because of a crazy undemocratic devolved assembly. that does not make me any less british or more irish

The box I have you fitted out for is the one where you pose questions and then ignore the answers. It's entirely frustrating to carry on a debate on those terms, so I'm coming to the conclusion that you are not honest in wanting an open debate.

Oafley Jones

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is unfortunate that the GFA failed to identify the terms used in it.

1. The GFA is also known as the 'Belfast Agreement' by some.

2. The term for NI is also known as 'the Six Counties' or 'Ulster'.

3. The UK of GB and NI is referred to as 'Britain' by some and as 'England' by others.

Much confusion would be avoided if they had defined all terms in the agreement and that all parties would only use those definitions in any matters dealing with the GFA, particularly the two Governments.

It would also be helpful if the UK Gov had implemented regional assemblies in England equivalent to those in the rest of the UK.

Nor does the GFA refer to the "Republic of Ireland", which of course is a soccer team and not a country.

CelticRambler

downcow wrote: »

You just don't get it that i am not Irish and would never ever describe myself as such. I am British and Norther Irish. I also fully recognise that some of my neighbours are Irish and Northern Irish or maybe all three or maybe none. You need to get out of the mindset that everyone in NI is Irish

You might identify as British, but Northern Ireland (the country) is not. I identify as Irish, even though all my neighbours are French. I fit in with the French laws of the land because I chose to live here, but emphasise my Irish differentness when I need to take the job of a Frenchman :cool:

If there is one thing that has made a basket case of the NI economy over the last 50 years, it's the absolute determination of hard-core unionists to portray themselves as pure-blooded Brits when the real Brits treat them as Irish, because - you know - they live in ... Ireland. :rolleyes:

But once again: as a Northern Irish small-U unionist, what do you believe are the (guaranteed) advantages for NI in hitching your wagon to the Brexit bus, in preference to remaining in the EU through a special-status arrangement?

Silent Running

downcow wrote: »

You just don't get it that i am not Irish and would never ever describe myself as such. I am British and Norther Irish. I also fully recognise that some of my neighbours are Irish and Northern Irish or maybe all three or maybe none. You need to get out of the mindset that everyone in NI is Irish

You might not describe yourself as such, but the British will forever call you, and see you as Irish.

It was good enough for Edward Carson and Big Ian, who described themselves as Irish, but not good enough for downcow. I'm afraid that says more about you than you would like to have exposed in public. I would say you probably belong in the extremist category.

I would further say that you haven't realised yet that the rest of Britain doesn't give a tiny rats ass about you, as a region. Just my humble opinion, of course.