How long before Irish reunification?

downcow

jm08 wrote: »

A number of new covid-19 cases in Northern Ireland overnight and conflicting advice been given to people by medical experts. Read what she said at the press conference as to why she changed direction.



I don't know what your problem is with this bearing in mind that no matter who decided that the schools & universities should be closed, because it was right to err on the cautious side. If it was the call of the Army Council, should you be grateful to them that they were trying to save lives, bearing in mind the age profile of unionists!

Oh I know exactly what she said, but both you and me know that there was no release of Covid cases between 12 midnight and 10 AM. Obviously she had to say something to save face, after the army council pulled her into line

downcow

jh79 wrote: »

Nothing in that explains the sudden change (was it really only 12 hours??) in opinion by SF on how to handle this.

I'd say she got some bollocking from Mary Lou for this and the PPE debacle.

It was indeed. But she probably woke up after her 11.45pm statement and told Mary that she had an apparition and an old Ra doctor had told her everything has changed and you now need to close the schools at 10am this morning

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

downcow wrote: »

Well we have been advised by the security services in both UK and ROI that Sinn Fein take all their big decisions to the army council for direction.
.... Or did you miss that somewhere?

So that's a no. You have no evidence.

jm08

20-30 years

jh79 wrote: »

Nothing in that explains the sudden change (was it really only 12 hours??) in opinion by SF on how to handle this.

I'd say she got some bollocking from Mary Lou for this and the PPE debacle.

Closure of the schools and colleges in ROI. This was an issue for anyone living on/crossing the border for school or work.



It would have been nuts to follow the English system.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Well we have been advised by the security services in both UK and ROI that Sinn Fein take all their big decisions to the army council for direction.
.... Or did you miss that somewhere?

What 'council' changed Arlene's mind?

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What 'council' changed Arlene's mind?

Change is healthy if it is thought trough and logical, although I am not sure exactly what change your talking about so it is difficult to answer the question

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So that's a no. You have no evidence.

Now Bonnie, we have been through this before. What sort of evidence would you like. When the Guards, the PSNI, and the British security services, all give the same analysis, then it is hard to argue against.

So tell me then Bonnie, who would you say got to her overnight? That is if she was not visited by an angel.

downcow

jm08 wrote: »

Closure of the schools and colleges in ROI. This was an issue for anyone living on/crossing the border for school or work.



It would have been nuts to follow the English system.

Haha JM08, the question is why it was not an issue at 11:45 PM but it was an issue at 10 AM the next morning?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Haha JM08, the question is why it was not an issue at 11:45 PM but it was an issue at 10 AM the next morning?

When you change your mind, there is a minute when you now believe something you didn't believe a minute before.


It's pretty simple stuff downcow. Maybe you are too used to politicians digging their heels in a shouting Never Never Never.

yrreg0850

In answer to question posed at start of thread ----Hopefully NEVER

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

downcow wrote: »

Now Bonnie, we have been through this before. What sort of evidence would you like. When the Guards, the PSNI, and the British security services, all give the same analysis, then it is hard to argue against.

So tell me then Bonnie, who would you say got to her overnight? That is if she was not visited by an angel.

You made a specific assertion. So I figured you'd have evidence.

But you don't. And that's okay. Just add to your bigotry pile.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

When you change your mind, there is a minute when you now believe something you didn't believe a minute before.


It's pretty simple stuff downcow. Maybe you are too used to politicians digging their heels in a shouting Never Never Never.

Stop the twisting Francie. I was very clear that change is a good thing. And I agree with you on the process of change you have outlined ie one minute changes everything - but there has to be a catalyst. The discussion here is whether the catalyst was something that came to Michelle in a dream or whether someone was leaning on her

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Stop the twisting Francie. I was very clear that change is a good thing. And I agree with you on the process of change you have outlined ie one minute changes everything - but there has to be a catalyst. The discussion here is whether the catalyst was something that came to Michelle in a dream or whether someone was leaning on her

It probably came from discussing it with colleagues?

Or if you want to believe it was an 'army council' knock yourself out. It was the right all island decision to make whoever made it.

It's what you will be doing from now on if there is a threat to the island.

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You made a specific assertion. So I figured you'd have evidence.

But you don't. And that's okay. Just add to your bigotry pile.

The same old nonsense you go back to the time. You want evidence but you can never specify what would be acceptable.
Currently we have two choices in this debate
1) we believe the Irish Guards, PSNI and British military
or
2) We believe Bonnie's whim

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

The same old nonsense you go back to the time. You want evidence but you can never specify what would be acceptable.
Currently we have two choices in this debate
1) we believe the Irish Guards, PSNI and British military
or
2) We believe Bonnie's whim

When did the guards say that the army council was controlling everything SF did?

Read what the commissioner actually said.

Hubertj

With the economic fallout from the health crisis becoming clearer it will put any hope of a United ireland back 20 years. Added to that, the behaviour of the main political parties, especially DUP, has been a disgrace over the last 4 years. Who would want these people in their country.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You made a specific assertion. So I figured you'd have evidence.

But you don't. And that's okay. Just add to your bigotry pile.

downcow wrote: »

The same old nonsense you go back to the time. You want evidence but you can never specify what would be acceptable.
Currently we have two choices in this debate
1) we believe the Irish Guards, PSNI and British military
or
2) We believe Bonnie's whim

I don't think you understand what specific means.

You said that she changed her mind on foot of a conversation with the Army Council.

That was a "specific assertion" about a very particular incident.

Because you are so sure of this happening, I figured, wrongly as it turned out, that you had evidence that she required Army Council intervention to make that change of mind occur.

It's okay though. You were just being bigoted. I just had to check though.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

Hubertj wrote: »

With the economic fallout from the health crisis becoming clearer it will put any hope of a United ireland back 20 years. Added to that, the behaviour of the main political parties, especially DUP, has been a disgrace over the last 4 years. Who would want these people in their country.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

---

Be sure to vote "no" to reunification when a border poll happens so.

downcow

Hubertj wrote: »

With the economic fallout from the health crisis becoming clearer it will put any hope of a United ireland back 20 years. Added to that, the behaviour of the main political parties, especially DUP, has been a disgrace over the last 4 years. Who would want these people in their country.

....and the feeling is mutual Hubertj. So we are all happy

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I don't think you understand what specific means.

You said that she changed her mind on foot of a conversation with the Army Council.

That was a "specific assertion" about a very particular incident.

Because you are so sure of this happening, I figured, wrongly as it turned out, that you had evidence that she required Army Council intervention to make that change of mind occur.

It's okay though. You were just being bigoted. I just had to check though.

Well Bonnie at least I provided some evidence.
I am still waiting for the evidence that she was provided with something new to base her somersault on between midnight and 10am. That was the claim and it would surely put me in my box if it was produced lol

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Well Bonnie at least I provided some evidence.
I am still waiting for the evidence that she was provided with something new to base her somersault on between midnight and 10am. That was the claim and it would surely put me in my box if it was produced lol

All she had to do was realise it was unworkable. That was the something 'new'.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

downcow wrote: »

Well Bonnie at least I provided some evidence.
I am still waiting for the evidence that she was provided with something new to base her somersault on between midnight and 10am. That was the claim and it would surely put me in my box if it was produced lol

Okay so. So you have no evidence that the Army Council made her change her mind.

That's grand. We can leave that there so.

droidman123

downcow wrote: »

....and the feeling is mutual Hubertj. So we are all happy

You wouldnt want the dup in our country either?

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

droidman123 wrote: »

You wouldnt want the dup in our country either?

They'll just be another minority party in a UI.

Be grand.

feargale

Firstly, I haven't read the thread in full so forgive me if I am missing something.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

TDavid McWilliams, Demographics are shifting towards a united Ireland - we must have a plan

Yes, Catholics are overtaking Protestants in numbers. It doesn't follow that pro-UI are overtaking unionists.I believe I detect among some, in observations on this changing demographic, a triumphalism which can only be counter-productive to a UI aspiration.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Given the enormous changes that Brexit is making on top of the demographic change,

In the wake of the Brexit vote it was clear that a significant number of soft unionists were reconsidering the wisdom of the Union. That called for a gently, gently approach.
Opinion polls some weeks before the Scottish referendum suggested a pro-independence result. The reality is that in most elections a sizeable portion of those who want change lose their nerve on D-day and opt for the status quo.
If you had a poll now you would need a good chunk of Protestants to vote for UI, probably more than you think since it is reasonable to suppose, that more Catholics than you think will vote pro-union. Any realistic person who wanted a UI would not be calling for a referendum now, because it would almost certainly fail at this time. One is left with the impression that those calling for it in the short term are more interested in acquiring an election-winning slogan than in an actual UI.
Yes, a section of Ulster Protestants were reconsidering. I leave it to yourself to speculate on how recent political developments, particularly in the south, have impacted on their thinking.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

how long do you think it will be before Ireland is reunified?

I don't know. Maybe in your life time, not in mine. Many of those who want it are more influenced by wishful thinking than stark reality.

And your poll is flawed on two counts. Firstly there is no option to answer "more than 40 years." Secondly, it is inappropriate to add the words "Ulster says no" to an option.
That slogan has extremely negative connotations among nationalist people and is calculated to create bias here.That is reminiscent of a referendum conducted by the generals who controlled Greece after the 1967 coup d'etat, where voters were issued with two papers, and were permitted to drop one in the ballot box. The one which signified the desired answer was attractively presented in the blue and white of Greece. The "no" paper was shoddy and in the red of Turkey, Another example is where you don't want Murphy to be elected, and you name him on the ballot paper as "that bollocks Murphy."
If you want an honest answer ask an honest question.
I won't be taking part in your poll.

downcow

feargale wrote: »

Firstly, I haven't read the thread in full so forgive me if I am missing something.



Yes, Catholics are overtaking Protestants in numbers. It doesn't follow that pro-UI are overtaking unionists.I believe I detect among some, in observations on this changing demographic, a triumphalism which can only be counter-productive to a UI aspiration.



In the wake of the Brexit vote it was clear that a significant number of soft unionists were reconsidering the wisdom of the Union. That called for a gently, gently approach.
Opinion polls some weeks before the Scottish referendum suggested a pro-independence result. The reality is that in most elections a sizeable portion of those who want change lose their nerve on D-day and opt for the status quo.
If you had a poll now you would need a good chunk of Protestants to vote for UI, probably more than you think since it is reasonable to suppose, that more Catholics than you think will vote pro-union. Any realistic person who wanted a UI would not be calling for a referendum now, because it would almost certainly fail at this time. One is left with the impression that those calling for it in the short term are more interested in acquiring an election-winning slogan than in an actual UI.
Yes, a section of Ulster Protestants were reconsidering. I leave it to yourself to speculate on how recent political developments, particularly in the south, have impacted on their thinking.



I don't know. Maybe in your life time, not in mine. Many of those who want it are more influenced by wishful thinking than stark reality.

And your poll is flawed on two counts. Firstly there is no option to answer "more than 40 years." Secondly, it is inappropriate to add the words "Ulster says no" to an option.
That slogan has extremely negative connotations among nationalist people and is calculated to create bias here.That is reminiscent of a referendum conducted by the generals who controlled Greece after the 1967 coup d'etat, where voters were issued with two papers, and were permitted to drop one in the ballot box. The one which signified the desired answer was attractively presented in the blue and white of Greece. The "no" paper was shoddy and in the red of Turkey, Another example is where you don't want Murphy to be elected, and you name him on the ballot paper as "that bollocks Murphy."
If you want an honest answer ask an honest question.
I won't be taking part in your poll.

Excellent post

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Okay so. So you have no evidence that the Army Council made her change her mind.

That's grand. We can leave that there so.

About the same level of evidence that Gerry was in the ira and that agent Martin didn’t leave it in 1972 or that Gerry was involved in the La Mon sectarian atrocity or that the loughgall RA men were allowed to die by their own comrades as they were in the way of the ‘peace process’ etc etc.

On your measure we don’t even have evidence that the paras intentionally killed anyone on Bloody Sunday

Yeah let’s leave it there.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

About the same level of evidence that Gerry was in the ira and that agent Martin didn’t leave it in 1972 or that Gerry was involved in the La Mon sectarian atrocity or that the loughgall RA men were allowed to die by their own comrades as they were in the way of the ‘peace process’ etc etc.

On your measure we don’t even have evidence that the paras intentionally killed anyone on Bloody Sunday

Yeah let’s leave it there.

A uniquely blinkered perspective 20 years after the GFA.

How long this abject refusal to deal with peacetime, in a democratic way, goes on in belligerent Unionism and fearful partitionism, remains to be seen.

But the evidence from the electorate north and south is that it is thankfully dying out so as an excuse it is on it's last legs.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A uniquely blinkered perspective 20 years after the GFA.

How long this abject refusal to deal with peacetime, in a democratic way, goes on in belligerent Unionism and fearful partitionism, remains to be seen.

But the evidence from the electorate north and south is that it is thankfully dying out so as an excuse it is on it's last legs.

I think you'll find that the group struggling to deal with peacetime and a progressive Norther Ireland with slowly maturing politics, are the Shinners.
All other parties are completely united during Covid crisis, while Sinn Fein is at odds and playing silly games.
I have been extreemly impressed for once with DUP, SDLP, Aliance, UUP, PBP, etc in their adult approach

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

downcow wrote: »

About the same level of evidence that Gerry was in the ira and that agent Martin didn’t leave it in 1972 or that Gerry was involved in the La Mon sectarian atrocity or that the loughgall RA men were allowed to die by their own comrades as they were in the way of the ‘peace process’ etc etc.

On your measure we don’t even have evidence that the paras intentionally killed anyone on Bloody Sunday

Yeah let’s leave it there.

"But what about themmuns"

A nice succinct summation of all of your posts on here.

---

You're so belligerent and you have what you want, ie. a little sectarian statelet. So the status quo suits you. You'd think you'd be happy.

Why oh why then are you so angry and belligerent? I mean, you think a UI is NEVER going to happen and it just seems all you keep doing is trying to convince yourself of that potential reality.

It must be hard to be so unhappy and reactionary with the status quo all the time. I pity you.