How long before Irish reunification?

armaghlad

10-15 years

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well indeed, No difference is correct, but then you could say that about anyone straddling a border anywhere in the world. What's the difference between Swiss Catholic Vs German Catholic, two families straddling the German/Swiss border. Two jurisdictions, two different governments, two different languages etc etc . . .

Borders happen.

Borders happen and borders end. This particular border that divides this country has been disputed from the day it was created. Imagine having to make a 20 mile round trip to visit relatives who live 2 mile down the road because the queens own blew up the bridge to stop people crossing it.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

Junkyard Tom wrote:

What a dumb thing to write. The latest poll in the south returns one third of respondents believing a UI will happen in the next 10 years - I suppose they're all

Love the way you took one little line out if my response but I'll respond anyways.

Those people, for the most part, are the less well educated and when this thing gets air time most will come to understand that it's not a good idea.

munsterlegend

eagle eye wrote: »

Love the way you took one little line out if my response but I'll respond anyways.

Those people, for the most part, are the less well educated and when this thing gets air time most will come to understand that it's not a good idea.

Well I have always been of the view you should have a 2.1 degree or above to vote. Maybe a good old bit of gerrymandering to make sure you get the result you want.

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

The best solution is an independent northern Ireland if there is going to be a change.

How is this the 'best' solution? It is by far and away the worst solution given that NI has not had a proper government for 100 years. It would tear itself apart because of the imbalance created by partition.

NOBODY is suggesting ruling Unionists from Dublin either...you need to listen to those who propose a UI and what they are saying.

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

eagle eye wrote: »

Those people, for the most part, are the less well educated

How do you know? That sounds like a pretty dumb thing to write.

and when this thing gets air time most will come to understand that it's not a good idea.

Most will come to understand that it's better to pull the plaster off the wound quickly rather than slowly. Get it over with as the issue isn't going away until people like you come up with a vision for a permanently separated nation and you can forget about using the current Flag, Anthem, Constitution, Name and so on.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

Junkyard Tom wrote:

Most will come to understand that it's better to pull the plaster off the wound quickly rather than slowly. Get it over with as the issue isn't going away until people like you come up with a vision for a permanently separated nation and you can forget about using the current Flag, Anthem, Constitution, Name and so on.

You remind me of the Brits 100 years ago, you are just like them.

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

From I am looking at was very logical. You had 1 million people who had incredible fear of 4 million who would have been out to get them. This is 100 years ago. Law and order was very different. There would have been a total bloodbath if you had tried to put 1 million fairly well armed Protestants under the rule of a church from state that hated them.
So no it was not perfect, but what would you have done?

There are lots of countries with different cultures in them living together. Maybe a Federation of Ireland may have been possible. Look at Belgium where you have two even more distinct cultures than in Ireland.

I think this idea of being wiped out is based on a lot of assumptions. Whilst there were some reprisals in the Republic, there were mild compared to any bloodbath that might have happened. i mean in many of the towns around me, shops are still owned by Protestants, passed down generation to generation. Hardly reeks of being wiped out.

Despite the efforts of the IRA, the Republic has never tried to take the North by force. Why? Because they realise the British could just destroy them any time they wanted and take over the whole Island once again. If the British government had put conditions agreed with all parties involved on a full handover based on taking back control if Unionist's were mistreated. I think most Irish people would have been smart enough to not push it. Still would have needed a lot of things to have been thrashed out admittedly.

Any Unionists who didn't want to live in this new state could be moved to Britain like happened with many Protestants moving across the border to Northern Ireland. As I said it would probably have been cheaper for Britain in the long run to do this.

On a personal note, I would have no issue with changing flag or anthems. I don't really care much for anthems in general. Should be played at international events and that't it. Even then I usually turn the volume down when they come on before games or events, well except the French one because that is a cracking tune.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

What exactly would Unionists hope to achieve if they started shooting old men in pubs again? Unionists are a minority in the north, a minority in Belfast, a minority in Derry, and a minority in four of the six counties. Do you think they could get an army together and ethnically cleanse the six counties of Nationalists/Catholics?

The very best you could hope for is to have a devolved-from-Dublin parliament in Stormont and retention of the PSNI which I wouldn't be against.

a disgustingly edited quote of my post. Doesn't even deserve a response

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

You remind me of the Brits 100 years ago, you are just like them.

And you remind the nationalists of NI of them as well. And successive governments here who more or less abandoned them to their fate, coz 'I'm alright jack and I want to continue that way'. etc etc etc.

downcow

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

There are lots of countries with different cultures in them living together. Maybe a Federation of Ireland may have been possible. Look at Belgium where you have two even more distinct cultures than in Ireland.

I think this idea of being wiped out is based on a lot of assumptions. Whilst there were some reprisals in the Republic, there were mild compared to any bloodbath that might have happened. i mean in many of the towns around me, shops are still owned by Protestants, passed down generation to generation. Hardly reeks of being wiped out.

Despite the efforts of the IRA, the Republic has never tried to take the North by force. Why? Because they realise the British could just destroy them any time they wanted and take over the whole Island once again. If the British government had put conditions agreed with all parties involved on a full handover based on taking back control if Unionist's were mistreated. I think most Irish people would have been smart enough to not push it. Still would have needed a lot of things to have been thrashed out admittedly.

Any Unionists who didn't want to live in this new state could be moved to Britain like happened with many Protestants moving across the border to Northern Ireland. As I said it would probably have been cheaper for Britain in the long run to do this.

On a personal note, I would have no issue with changing flag or anthems. I don't really care much for anthems in general. Should be played at international events and that't it. Even then I usually turn the volume down when they come on before games or events, well except the French one because that is a cracking tune.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. But how many people have died through conflict since, and because of, partition. This is a complete guess, but is it between 5000 and 10,000? I think you could have put at least another '0' on that figure had the two sides been allowed to fight it out for control 100 years ago.
..... And of course what junkyard etc have not considered is that the Unionists were very heavily armed, the battle would have been close, and who knows who would have won, and would Britain have been put back into the bloodbath, and what then - a minority Unionist government ruling over a vastly majority Catholic population - South Africa style.
Those who paint it as simple 100 years ago, are definitely missing something

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

eagle eye wrote: »

You remind me of the Brits 100 years ago, you are just like them.

Another bad take. The Brits wanted to leave Ireland (still do) to the Irish after the War of Independence - partition was never meant to be permanent.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

And you remind the nationalists of NI of them as well. And successive governments here who more or less abandoned them to their fate, coz 'I'm alright jack and I want to continue that way'. etc etc etc.

Yeah, I've gone through being taught how important a United Ireland is, being a sympathiser when I was very young, then realising that they were cold-blooded killers when they murdered kids off the coast of Sligo. As time passed and I became more aware of attrocities carried out against innocent Protestants I realised that there was no right side in this thing.
There were murderers on both sides and then the innocent people in the middle.
Then you become a father and that becomes your primary concern. So now it's about financial security and keeping my kids safe. I'm happy with how things are now and I don't want any trouble in the South. I don't want to pay for a United Ireland either.
It's becoming me very clear to me that it's unimportant in the grand scheme of things. I think that no decision should be taken about it until all those who suffered through the troubles are gone. It's the young people of the future who need to make that decision.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

No, that is where you are wrong. I personally don't think NI should be forced to rejoin the Republic against it's will. I think it will happen eventually, but is far down the road. First and foremost I would like to see peace and normality in NI, unfortunately I think Brexit will set that back quite a bit. I am not a Republican or not even a very strong Nationalist.

That doesn't mean we cannot look at history and say that partition was illogical as was Israel as I mentioned or look at why there is such divisions. You can say Ireland was never united, but people lived on an island with a single, culture and language. Chances are left unmolested by outsiders, a Nation would have developed at some point. Realistically the British never completed the job they started as they needed to wipe out the entire culture to do what they wished.

As I pointed out before, Ireland as a country had a 75% Nationalist population who wanted to leave Britain. Do you think partition was the correct decision? And by that I don't mean the decision of Collins, Griffith etc in Downing St. I mean as a logical solution put forward by the British government.

It won't be against anyone's will.

It can only be achieved by a positive result in two referenda.

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't care who you decide I'm standing with.
There are two Ireland's, the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
You say what happened 100 or so years ago was wrong. How do you think it's right now? Have you learned nothing from history?

Good for you.

And you're free to vote no on any referendum on.the matter.

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. But how many people have died through conflict since, and because of, partition. This is a complete guess, but is it between 5000 and 10,000? I think you could have put at least another '0' on that figure had the two sides been allowed to fight it out for control 100 years ago.
..... And of course what junkyard etc have not considered is that the Unionists were very heavily armed, the battle would have been close, and who knows who would have won, and would Britain have been put back into the bloodbath, and what then - a minority Unionist government ruling over a vastly majority Catholic population - South Africa style.
Those who paint it as simple 100 years ago, are definitely missing something

A better question would be, why were Unionists so opposed to home rule? They would still be part of Britain. Issues like peace, war, defence, treaties, trade & the RIC would have still been under British control who could take back full control at any point. If nothing else it would have been a chance to see if Ireland could govern itself. Maybe if it had been given a chance, a platform could have been built so that all parties could have eventually agreed on a shared future together, either within or without the UK

Yet Unionists were totally opposed to it. Why?

BonnieSituation

20-30 years

Did Downcow ever watch that ITV news video?

Or did we move on to another strawman?

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

Yeah, I've gone through being taught how important a United Ireland is, being a sympathiser when I was very young, then realising that they were cold-blooded killers when they murdered kids off the coast of Sligo. As time passed and I became more aware of attrocities carried out against innocent Protestants I realised that there was no right side in this thing.
There were murderers on both sides and then the innocent people in the middle.
Then you become a father and that becomes your primary concern. So now it's about financial security and keeping my kids safe. I'm happy with how things are now and I don't want any trouble in the South. I don't want to pay for a United Ireland either.
It's becoming me very clear to me that it's unimportant in the grand scheme of things. I think that no decision should be taken about it until all those who suffered through the troubles are gone. It's the young people of the future who need to make that decision.

So you are just gonna suit yourself and hope the world will be kind to your children. Fair enough. Just as well not everyone is as selfish or we would be back in feudal times with ladders to pull up to protect us from others.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Did Downcow ever watch that ITV news video?

Or did we move on to another strawman?

Wasn't able to refute it. So pretends it doesn't exist.

Panorama last night was full of reasons why we need all island security and autonomy here.

Hamsterchops

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Unionists are a minority in the north, a minority in Belfast, a minority in Derry, and a minority in four of the six counties.

Unionists are now the minority in Northern Ireland, seriously, is that a fact? Because if so, then what's the delay in pulling NI out of the United Kingdom?

Serious question.

munsterlegend

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Unionists are now the minority in Northern Ireland, seriously, is that a fact? Because if so, then what's the delay in pulling NI out of the United Kingdom?

Serious question.

Solely unionist parties no longer have the majority of seats. That doesn’t mean necessarily a majority would vote in favour of a United Ireland but it is symbolic considering they had the majority of seats in every election since the creation of the north.

The SNP also have a large majority but Scotland still don’t have independence.

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Unionists are now the minority in Northern Ireland, seriously, is that a fact?

To be more circumspect - those of Unionist heritage are a minority now.

Because if so, then what's the delay in pulling NI out of the United Kingdom?

It's not in the gift of SF or the Irish Government to call for a border poll. SF want a poll they'd probably lose and Unionists don't want one they'd probably win.

I don't think the first border poll would return a pro-UI vote because the British state still puts a lot of money in the pockets of people in the north including people who wouldn't describe themselves as Unionist. The Civil/Public service in the north is full of young Catholics and old Protestants and turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

So you are just gonna suit yourself and hope the world will be kind to your children. Fair enough. Just as well not everyone is as selfish or we would be back in feudal times with ladders to pull up to protect us from others.

You are going to call me on my admitted reasons for not wanting a UI which are both financial and from a security viewpoint. I don't want troubles in the South so that my family is safe, what's wrong with that? I don't want to pay for a UI because I want to pay my kids way through college and have money to set them up for life.
You are the unrealistic one with ideals that you feel allows you to disregard the feelings of hundreds of thousands of people living in Northern Ireland.

eire4

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

To be more circumspect - those of Unionist heritage are a minority now.



It's not in the gift of SF or the Irish Government to call for a border poll. SF want a poll they'd probably lose and Unionists don't want one they'd probably win.

I don't think the first border poll would return a pro-UI vote because the British state still puts a lot of money in the pockets of people in the north including people who wouldn't describe themselves as Unionist. The Civil/Public service in the north is full of young Catholics and old Protestants and turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

Give the effects of Brexit a few years and that might make for some very interesting polling especially if the UK dos not agree a trade deal by December 31st this year which looks like a very realistic outcome as things stand currently.

FrancieBrady

eire4 wrote: »

Give the effects of Brexit a few years and that might make for some very interesting polling especially if the UK dos not agree a trade deal by December 31st this year which looks like a very realistic outcome as things stand currently.

Then let's see how Covid and it's aftermath play out. We have the EU already putting huge contingency in to deal with it. The UK is on it's own.

eire4

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Then let's see how Covid and it's aftermath play out. We have the EU already putting huge contingency in to deal with it. The UK is on it's own.

Agreed. You add in the massive effects of the virus and then add in no trade deal between the UK and the EU and it could be very interesting to see how polls look in a few years time.

FrancieBrady

eire4 wrote: »

Agreed. You add in the massive effects of the virus and then add in no trade deal between the UK and the EU and it could be very interesting to see how polls look in a few years time.

It's funny that no unionist or partitionist has addressed two things mentioned here.

The acceptance of the border in the Irish Sea after the usual Never Never marching of men up the hill.

Nor the setting up of a 'Unity Unit' proposed by the prospective government here. Which IMO is not a fluke. I think they are sure there is a border poll coming soon.

downcow

eagle eye wrote: »

Yeah, I've gone through being taught how important a United Ireland is, being a sympathiser when I was very young, then realising that they were cold-blooded killers when they murdered kids off the coast of Sligo. As time passed and I became more aware of attrocities carried out against innocent Protestants I realised that there was no right side in this thing.
There were murderers on both sides and then the innocent people in the middle.
Then you become a father and that becomes your primary concern. So now it's about financial security and keeping my kids safe. I'm happy with how things are now and I don't want any trouble in the South. I don't want to pay for a United Ireland either.
It's becoming me very clear to me that it's unimportant in the grand scheme of things. I think that no decision should be taken about it until all those who suffered through the troubles are gone. It's the young people of the future who need to make that decision.

Very honest realistic post

downcow

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Unionists are now the minority in Northern Ireland, seriously, is that a fact? Because if so, then what's the delay in pulling NI out of the United Kingdom?

Serious question.

I think junkyards point was a sectarian one. He is linking unionist with Protestant. He knows rightly that polls show desire to maintain the union strengthening

Sinbad_NI

eagle eye wrote: »

Yeah, I've gone through being taught how important a United Ireland is, being a sympathiser when I was very young, then realising that they were cold-blooded killers when they murdered kids off the coast of Sligo. As time passed and I became more aware of attrocities carried out against innocent Protestants I realised that there was no right side in this thing.
There were murderers on both sides and then the innocent people in the middle.
Then you become a father and that becomes your primary concern. So now it's about financial security and keeping my kids safe. I'm happy with how things are now and I don't want any trouble in the South. I don't want to pay for a United Ireland either.
It's becoming me very clear to me that it's unimportant in the grand scheme of things. I think that no decision should be taken about it until all those who suffered through the troubles are gone. It's the young people of the future who need to make that decision.

I think the vast majority of ordinary people have had similar experiences growing up. Certainly I had anyway.

munsterlegend

downcow wrote: »

I think junkyards point was a sectarian one. He is linking unionist with Protestant. He knows rightly that polls show desire to maintain the union strengthening

He is linking it to elections where there is a clear trend that Unionist parties are no longer commanding a majority vote which is quite a change in the last 20/30 years. There is now a middle ground/floating voter in the north. The recent Westminster and european elections are clear evidence of this.