How long before Irish reunification?

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is no third non-UK country involved with Scotland and Wales. They agreed with a non UK country that they have no future say in what a territory they owned decides to do. Why would you do that if you thought your ownership was legit?.

That's your opinion. But I say the UK and all its regions are legitimate, and as regards Northern Ireland, we too have agreed that it is indeed part of the UK for as long as the people living there wish it to be so, we have no claim over Northern Ireland either, they are free spirits to chose their destiny whether it is to remain as an integral part of the UK, or to leave . . .

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

That's your opinion. But I say the UK and all its regions are legitimate, and as regards Northern Ireland, we too have agreed that it is indeed part of the UK for as long as the people living there wish it to be so, we have no claim over Northern Ireland either, they are free spirits to chose their destiny whether it is to remain as an integral part of the UK, or to leave . . .

Yes and the British government did something they didn't do in the Scottish case...they guaranteed in an internationally binding agreement that they will be neutral, they will not oppose or support a UI.
There will neither be aircraft carriers as there was for The Falklands nor last minute panic and pleading (some would saying lying desperately to the Scots) to keep NI a part of the UK.

The withdrew in the GFA. (they'll never admit it, but there you go)

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There will neither be aircraft carriers as there was for The Falklands nor last minute panic and pleading (some would saying lying desperately to the Scots) to keep NI a part of the UK.

Aircraft carriers

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Aircraft carriers

It's a bit like us sending troops to defend the Irish in America and telling Waterford we couldn't give a **** really if Wales takes you.

Redgirl82

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes and the British government did something they didn't do in the Scottish case...they guaranteed in an internationally binding agreement that they will be neutral, they will not oppose or support a UI.
There will neither be aircraft carriers as there was for The Falklands nor last minute panic and pleading (some would saying lying desperately to the Scots) to keep NI a part of the UK.

The withdrew in the GFA. (they'll never admit it, but there you go)

If any of this was true they would have dumped Northern Ireland as soon as the Brexit vote happened. It was the chance to move away from it. It would have meant Brexit was resolved a lot quicker.

jm08

20-30 years

Redgirl82 wrote: »

If any of this was true they would have dumped Northern Ireland as soon as the Brexit vote happened. It was the chance to move away from it. It would have meant Brexit was resolved a lot quicker.

Except May needed the DUP vote in Westminster! Even with that she agreed to the backstop until the DUP put a stop to her gallop (with the DUP as per usual shooting themselves in the foot and ending up with a deal that was worse for them from Boris).

FrancieBrady

Redgirl82 wrote: »

If any of this was true they would have dumped Northern Ireland as soon as the Brexit vote happened. It was the chance to move away from it. It would have meant Brexit was resolved a lot quicker.

Dear me. Did you miss the point.

The British have created a scenario where they get rid of it without lifting a finger themselves...the very thing they will avoid doing because they don't want the blame or the responsibility if it goes wrong.
The GFA is a perfect screen for them. They just wait for it to happen organically.
Let the 'people of Ireland' request it.

'Nothing to do with us they will say, we're the democrats, the people of Ireland want this.
They even wrote themselves in a clause 'where they have to remain neutral'...'it is for the people of Ireland alone to decide their fate without outside impediment'.

What that would mean to me as a Unionist (and I have asked a few about this) is that they are implying they see everyone here as Irish and that they are not coming to the rescue if a UI vote is successful. They aren't even going to encourage people to stay in the Union.

Belligerent Unionist insecurity...all the fleg stuff, the Irish Language resistance, and the abstract sea border outrage etc has peaked peak since the GFA...all manifestations of chronic insecurity. Moderate Unionists are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the British saying, 'we are done'.

addaword

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Moderate Unionists are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the British saying, 'we are done'.

You could also say:

Moderate Nationalists are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the Irish saying, we give up articles 2 and 3, "we are done".

Extreme Republicans are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the IRA saying, we give up our weapons and semtex, "we are done".

Most people have moved on.

FrancieBrady

addaword wrote: »

You could also say:

Moderate Nationalists are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the Irish saying, we give up articles 2 and 3, "we are done".

I disagree, we still constitutionally aspire to Unity.
Same thing really (we were never going to invade and take it back, so the 'claim' stuff was a nonsense in reality)

Extreme Republicans are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the IRA saying, we give up our weapons and semtex, "we are done".

Most people have moved on.

The IRA did say openly that 'they were done', that the next phase would be political.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I disagree, we still constitutionally aspire to Unity.

Do we? I don't remember any additions to the constitution but it was over 20 years ago.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Do we? I don't remember any additions to the constitution but it was over 20 years ago.

**

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent

Brendan Bendar

addaword wrote: »

You could also say:

Moderate Nationalists are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the Irish saying, we give up articles 2 and 3, "we are done".

Extreme Republicans are reluctant to talk about it but they know it, the GFA was the IRA saying, we give up our weapons and semtex, "we are done".

Most people have moved on.

Uhmmmm .... Few down in Waterford and the RDS don’t seem to moved too far.....

Fionn1952

15-20 years

jh79 wrote: »

Do we? I don't remember any additions to the constitution but it was over 20 years ago.

It is the replacement text following the deletion of Article 3 that is being referred to.

Rather than the territorial claim made in Article 2 and 3 pre-GFA, the nineteenth amendment replaced it with support for self determination and Article 3 states an aspiration towards the peaceful unification of the island.

"It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution."

Edgware

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Uhmmmm .... Few down in Waterford and the RDS don’t seem to moved too far.....

The usual bar stool republicans have to have their day in the sun

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

You want to 'assess the electorate psychologically'??
Has a more arrogant derogatory post about people ever been made here?
Did you read/think about that before posting?

LMFAO.
They are done all the time. Have you ever heard of a national youth mental health study? We just had one done in Ireland to see how people were coping with covid-19 and what the response would be to a vaccine and I can tell you that 66% of people would take a vaccine and give it to their kids. They are called studies and surveys and often times have fancy names.

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

LMFAO.
They are done all the time. Have you ever heard of a national youth mental health study? We just had one done in Ireland to see how people were coping with covid-19 and what the response would be to a vaccine and I can tell you that 66% of people would take a vaccine and give it to their kids. They are called studies and surveys and often times have fancy names.

So if your 'study' returned a verdict that the 'people were not ready' Eagle Eye would be denying them self determination?

Good lord...I thought you had the sense to drop that craziness when you didn't reply earlier.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

So if your 'study' returned a verdict that the 'people were not ready' Eagle Eye would be denying them self determination?

Good lord...I thought you had the sense to drop that craziness when you didn't reply earlier.

I didn't say that, the electorate need to have that information.

jm08

20-30 years

eagle eye wrote: »

LMFAO.
They are done all the time. Have you ever heard of a national youth mental health study? We just had one done in Ireland to see how people were coping with covid-19 and what the response would be to a vaccine and I can tell you that 66% of people would take a vaccine and give it to their kids. They are called studies and surveys and often times have fancy names.

So, in other words, a poll or a .... referendum!

Whats your issue with a referendum?

Brendan Bendar

Edgware wrote: »

The usual bar stool republicans have to have their day in the sun

Imagine having worked your butt off for the last three months, day and night and then be put on the stand by a coin who said” we’ll break the free state bastards” .

T’would be too much for this poster anyway......

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

jm08 wrote:

So, in other words, a poll or a .... referendum!
Whats your issue with a referendum?

A referendum about what?
I'm talking about a national psychology study done in advance of any voting.
The idea is to inform the public of how people feel about these major steps.
It could find that a UI suits most people. It could find that a UI will cause a return to the troubles. It could say that a vote against a UI will cause a return to the troubles.
Then you can have a vote on whether to proceed with any of the steps necessary to make it happen.
The electorate need this information in advance of any form of referendum.

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

A referendum about what?
I'm talking about a national psychology study done in advance of any voting.
The idea is to inform the public of how people feel about these major steps.
It could find that a UI suits most people. It could find that a UI will cause a return to the troubles. It could say that a vote against a UI will cause a return to the troubles.
Then you can have a vote on whether to proceed with any of the steps necessary to make it happen.
The electorate need this information in advance of any form of referendum.

Do we get a report on the state of mind of partitionists in this?

Seems to me the graph is twitching in the '****ting themselves' zone.

Seriously, carrying out a physcological test on one part of the electorate for the benefit of another part???

This is comedy gold.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't think Doherty was predicting the cost of a UI.
He was just rubbishing the idea that the subvention is as high as the 'big bullions and bullions scary figures' bandied about.
Makes the Trinity guys look a bit amateur to be honest.

Watching the news now and Leo's speech about access to cheap funding.

Given the study predicted costs of harmonization and the required inward investment NI needs to match the Republic's ( the recognised level for a functioning economy) we are decades from even considering an UI .

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Watching the news now and Leo's speech about access to cheap funding.

Given the study predicted costs of harmonization and the required inward investment NI needs to match the Republic's ( the recognised level for a functioning economy) we are decades from even considering an UI .

Just one report (that will always be suspect because of that wilful ignoring of the headline figure) of many that has 'predicted' outcomes, good and bad.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

Just one report (that will always be suspect because of that wilful ignoring of the headline figure) of many that has 'predicted' outcomes, good and bad.

Take out the headline figure and it reduces one year, what about all the other years?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Just one report (that will always be suspect because of that wilful ignoring of the headline figure) of many that has 'predicted' outcomes, good and bad.

No the rest of the report is based on figures that are readily available, you really should give it another read.

Also what you are doing is known as "anomaly hunting" common in conspiracy theories.

In my opinion if you are 50+ you'll never see a UI in your lifetime.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

No the rest of the report is based on figures that are readily available, you really should give it another read.

Also what you are doing is known as "anomaly hunting" common in conspiracy theories.

In my opinion if you are 50+ you'll never see a UI in your lifetime.

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree because a UI is not just about economic prosperity it is about many other things too.

'Anomaly hunting'? Getting the 'base cost' wrong is not an anomaly' it is either sinister or a sign of complete incompetence/lack of expertise.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree because a UI is not just about economic prosperity it is about many other things too.

Money makes the world go around.

FrancieBrady wrote:

'Anomaly hunting'? Getting the 'base cost' wrong is not an anomaly' it is either sinister or a sign of complete incompetence/lack of expertise.

You are trying ludicrous angles of attack on a fair and impartial study. Give over, as has been said the subvention figure doesn't really matter than much.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree because a UI is not just about economic prosperity it is about many other things too.

'Anomaly hunting'? Getting the 'base cost' wrong is not an anomaly' it is either sinister or a sign of complete incompetence/lack of expertise.

It's "anomaly hunting" because you are using to dismiss aspects of the paper not related to the anomaly.

The cost of funding the 6 counties to Irish levels is based on already available budgetary data. The anomaly is due to lack of detail available on the unidentifiable costs (hint is in the name).

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree because a UI is not just about economic prosperity it is about many other things too.

'Anomaly hunting'? Getting the 'base cost' wrong is not an anomaly' it is either sinister or a sign of complete incompetence/lack of expertise.

I said it before but thank feck for the referendum commission 'cause the electorate would know the true sacrifice of an UI in a post COVID economy.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

It's "anomaly hunting" because you are using to dismiss aspects of the paper not related to the anomaly.

The cost of funding the 6 counties to Irish levels is based on already available budgetary data. The anomaly is due to lack of detail available on the unidentifiable costs (hint is in the name).

Scroll back to where I said NOBODY will be able to predict accurately until such time as we get transparency from governments.

All reports are suspect, dodgy as a result.

making 'not in my lifetime' predictions are therefore nonsense too. And I will call your predictions nonsense as a result.