How long before Irish reunification?

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

And I genuinely think that's a totally reasonable position to hold, Blanch. If you look back over what I've been asking, at no point have I tried to 'sucker' you into 'admitting' that the security forces in the North had no democratic legitimacy.

I've asked if you could understand how, given the parts we agree on at least, that SOME would question their democratic legitimacy, and while disagreeing with them, you could reach a point where you understood this position.

No traps, I'm not going to try and extrapolate that into support for the IRA or any nonsense like that. We're not going to address responses to that perceived lack of democratic legitimacy here,

I just want to know whether you can see the grey (which you've described quite well) enough to understand[\I] the holding of an opinion which doesnt match your, 'despite this, they are still democratically legitimate' stance?

Many opinions can be legitimately held, we are all prisoners of our own lens that we see things through. I can understand why people living on a plain who never travelled more than 5 miles from their own home believed the world was flat.

Most of the world is grey, very few things are black and white. So, to answer your question, I can understand that some people would hold certain opinions, and even why they hold those opinions, without agreeing with them.

_blaaz

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Jesus Christ - read a dictionary and come back to us.

Whats wrong with what i have said?

Killing people.is immoral?

RobMc59

10-15 years

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

I find it difficult to comprehend there are people suggesting legitimate state representatives shouldn't be armed if it's deemed necessary.-Balaclavas slipping is an understatement!..

In my particular case, I'm just trying to get some consistency on what Blanch reckons constitutes a legitimate states representative. As your security forces applied different standards in the North compared with your country, Rob, I wouldn't say your experience is terribly relevant.

Your mask of, 'curious English bystander just looking for some information' is in tatters at this point though.

Correct me if I'm wrong,I thought you were from Derry which makes you British by birth?You give an air of impartiality which doesn't stand up under examination-can you give an opinion as to whether state representatives in NI should be armed if the state deems it necessary?

Consider yourself corrected. I am not from Derry. Even if I was, I would be an Irish citizen. I have never claimed to be impartial, quite the opposite- I've been quite open about the fact that I have Nationalist aspirations towards unification.

I'll happily answer any questions you have once you withdraw your previous statement accusing me of presenting, 'unsubstantiated opinion', and acknowledge that my initial statement regarding the different standards applied in the North was a fact. With that show of good faith in admitting you were mistaken, we can perhaps engage more positively, and I may be more predisposed towards answering your leading questions.

I mistakenly thought you were from Derry, I wrongly thought you had mentioned on an old thread living there and attending Altnagelvin Hospital and that your family name was on the Ulster Covenant.I apologise for that.
Beyond that whilst you believe your opinion correct, I disagree with you.

I spent quite some time I'm the Altnagelvin as a child due to having a particularly severe leg break, which could only be treated there or the Royal in Belfast. The Altnagelvin was closer, after a few weeks as an inpatient I spent quite some time having regular (weekly at first, down to monthly after around 18 months) trips back to the Altnagelvin. Ancestors of mine did sign the Ulster covenant (one of my grandparents was from a Unionist background), don't see what that has to do with Derry.

Regarding what you term my 'opinion' - is it a matter of fact or opinion that army forces were deployed in the North as part of the policing strategy, whereas in the rest of the UK they were not? Is it an opinion or a matter of fact that baton rounds/rubber bullets and water cannons formed a part of the policing arsenal in the North, and did not in the rest of the UK?

I would think normal policing methods totally inadequate for NI due to extremist republican terrorist activities.

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Hmm exact i didnt say they have equal legtimacy??

Where did i??


I said morally they are the same?,in that people are killed....soldier open fire on crowd (like say,em.bloody sunday,springfield massacre)and terrorsist shoot him/her dead....surely they are morally the same too?.



The fact yous have see moral difference with killing people is something you will have to come to terms with and we will just have to agree to disagree imo

Morally, they are not the same.

What about self-defence?

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Morally, they are not the same.

What about self-defence?

As ive said i have no sympathy for gunmen (or anyone) killed attacking people?



Morally the scenarios i stated was more or less identical to yours??
How do you not see the hyprocrisy of your position????you are welcome to hold hypocritical beliefs btw....just that you should challenge yourself on why you feel this way



Here is another actual real scenario....what was more wrong/immoral soldier F emptying clip into that teenager lying on ground injured back,or those 2 INLA members who done similar to billy wright??


Your logic and position you hold seems to make soldier f action ok,but not those inla members

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

As ive said i have no sympathy for gunmen (or anyone) killed attacking people?



Morally the scenarios i stated was more or less identical to yours??
How do you not see the hyprocrisy of your position????you are welcome to hold hypocritical beliefs btw....just that you should challenge yourself on why you feel this way

Some killings are morally justified.

A police sniper who kills a terrorist who is using a machine gun on a crowd is morally justified if he kills that terrorist. End of.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

I find it difficult to comprehend there are people suggesting legitimate state representatives shouldn't be armed if it's deemed necessary.-Balaclavas slipping is an understatement!..

In my particular case, I'm just trying to get some consistency on what Blanch reckons constitutes a legitimate states representative. As your security forces applied different standards in the North compared with your country, Rob, I wouldn't say your experience is terribly relevant.

Your mask of, 'curious English bystander just looking for some information' is in tatters at this point though.

Correct me if I'm wrong,I thought you were from Derry which makes you British by birth?You give an air of impartiality which doesn't stand up under examination-can you give an opinion as to whether state representatives in NI should be armed if the state deems it necessary?

Consider yourself corrected. I am not from Derry. Even if I was, I would be an Irish citizen. I have never claimed to be impartial, quite the opposite- I've been quite open about the fact that I have Nationalist aspirations towards unification.

I'll happily answer any questions you have once you withdraw your previous statement accusing me of presenting, 'unsubstantiated opinion', and acknowledge that my initial statement regarding the different standards applied in the North was a fact. With that show of good faith in admitting you were mistaken, we can perhaps engage more positively, and I may be more predisposed towards answering your leading questions.

I mistakenly thought you were from Derry, I wrongly thought you had mentioned on an old thread living there and attending Altnagelvin Hospital and that your family name was on the Ulster Covenant.I apologise for that.
Beyond that whilst you believe your opinion correct, I disagree with you.

I spent quite some time I'm the Altnagelvin as a child due to having a particularly severe leg break, which could only be treated there or the Royal in Belfast. The Altnagelvin was closer, after a few weeks as an inpatient I spent quite some time having regular (weekly at first, down to monthly after around 18 months) trips back to the Altnagelvin. Ancestors of mine did sign the Ulster covenant (one of my grandparents was from a Unionist background), don't see what that has to do with Derry.

Regarding what you term my 'opinion' - is it a matter of fact or opinion that army forces were deployed in the North as part of the policing strategy, whereas in the rest of the UK they were not? Is it an opinion or a matter of fact that baton rounds/rubber bullets and water cannons formed a part of the policing arsenal in the North, and did not in the rest of the UK?

I would think normal policing methods totally inadequate for NI due to extremist republican terrorist activities.

And THAT is an opinion. I wasn't saying that the North should or should not have been policed differently (which I agree would've been my opinion). I stated as a matter of fact that it WAS policed differently, which you seem to agree with now.

I'll await your retraction of your previous point suggesting I was passing off opinion as fact.

FrancieBrady

_blaaz wrote: »

As ive said i have no sympathy for gunmen (or anyone) killed attacking people?



Morally the scenarios i stated was more or less identical to yours??
How do you not see the hyprocrisy of your position????you are welcome to hold hypocritical beliefs btw....just that you should challenge yourself on why you feel this way

Psychopaths would believe that killing was morally ok, or societies that accept the death penalty. I think most sane modern people would say that while it cannot be avoided, killing another human being is fundamentally wrong and to be avoided.
It is why we have instituted the utmost scrutiny around state killings.

What happened in northern Ireland is that that scrutiny fully failed one community. And while the moral highgrounders had the luxury to sit around on the head of their pin, others didn't have that luxury and society did as it always does in those situations...it went up in flames, that once started proved almost impossible to put out.

It was all wrong is the only consensus for democrats to arrive at.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Some killings are morally justified.

Regretably il have to disagree with yous and say killing is immoral tbh

Btw...Very weak of yous to run from a tough question which challenges your position tbh.....try to challenge your beliefs and dont rely on echo chamber to back you up

A police sniper who kills a terrorist who is using a machine gun on a crowd is morally justified if he kills that terrorist. End of.

But yet if someone had done same to soldiers on bloody sunday is wrong .....your arguement has no solid foundation morally or logically

_blaaz

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Psychopaths would believe that killing was morally ok, or societies that accept the death penalty. I think most sane modern people would say that while it cannot be avoided, killing another human being is fundamentally wrong and to be avoided.
It is why we have instituted the utmost scrutiny around state killings.

What happened in northern Ireland is that that scrutiny fully failed one community. And while the moral highgrounders had the luxury to sit around on the head of their pin, others didn't have that luxury and society did as it always does in those situations...it went up in flames, that once started proved almost impossible to put out.

It was all wrong is the only consensus for democrats to arrive at.

That being said francie....while i find all killings are immoral (unlike say blanch,who oks some killings morally)

I dont condemn all killings,like say of billy wright,and in some cases abortion



But on otherhand...i do believe billy wright deserves some sympathy,as he was a product of troubles (and seen a rather interesting interview of his on youtube before-recommended viewing)......but his organisation killed too many innocent people,for me to condemn his killing,no matter immoral it was (was also collusion imo)

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

blanch152 wrote:

In my opinion, while there are questions to be asked about some actions of the security forces in Northern Ireland, as well as why those actions were not sufficiently questioned at the time, those questions are not sufficient to remove the democratic legitimacy of the security forces.

Well in all fairness you weren't living there and suffering at the hands of these people who had backing from the British government. You didn't get to see your brothers, sisters, mother's, fathers, sons and daughters treated dreadfully.
Do you know how you would have reacted back then if these things were happening to your family? These were different times, your letter was just thrown in the bin if it was against the way these people thought. The media disregarded the ordinary man on the street too.
I've nothing against people who fought to try and improve things and it got very serious and their lives were on the line if they stood up for themselves.
I don't forgive the IRA for needless killings and the murder of Gardai and children but what happened up north was truly shocking. That stuff was a hell of a lot different to what happened in Adare or off the coast of Mullaghmore.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

And I genuinely think that's a totally reasonable position to hold, Blanch. If you look back over what I've been asking, at no point have I tried to 'sucker' you into 'admitting' that the security forces in the North had no democratic legitimacy.

I've asked if you could understand how, given the parts we agree on at least, that SOME would question their democratic legitimacy, and while disagreeing with them, you could reach a point where you understood this position.

No traps, I'm not going to try and extrapolate that into support for the IRA or any nonsense like that. We're not going to address responses to that perceived lack of democratic legitimacy here,

I just want to know whether you can see the grey (which you've described quite well) enough to understand[\I] the holding of an opinion which doesnt match your, 'despite this, they are still democratically legitimate' stance?

Many opinions can be legitimately held, we are all prisoners of our own lens that we see things through. I can understand why people living on a plain who never travelled more than 5 miles from their own home believed the world was flat.

Most of the world is grey, very few things are black and white. So, to answer your question, I can understand that some people would hold certain opinions, and even why they hold those opinions, without agreeing with them.

I don't see why you cant make that point without the implication of comparison to flat earthism - one of those is provably wrong (flat earthism) the other is, at worst, a matter of perspective, which you seem to agree with.

RobMc59

10-15 years

Fionn1952 wrote: »

And THAT is an opinion. I wasn't saying that the North should or should not have been policed differently (which I agree would've been my opinion). I stated as a matter of fact that it WAS policed differently, which you seem to agree with now.

I'll await your retraction of your previous point suggesting I was passing off opinion as fact.

I`m not interested in your "riddle me this" games.If you highlight the fact NI was policed differently from mainland Britain that`s obvious-the authorities in NI had no choice other than implementing tougher policing as a direct result of ira terrorism.It`s not rocket science despite your florid,longwinded post.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

RobMc59 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

And THAT is an opinion. I wasn't saying that the North should or should not have been policed differently (which I agree would've been my opinion). I stated as a matter of fact that it WAS policed differently, which you seem to agree with now.

I'll await your retraction of your previous point suggesting I was passing off opinion as fact.

I`m not interested in your "riddle me this" games.If you highlight the fact NI was policed differently from mainland Britain that`s obvious-the authorities in NI had no choice other than implementing tougher policing as a direct result of ira terrorism.It`s not rocket science despite your florid,longwinded post.

Nope, that they had no choice is opinion, that it happened is fact.

Thanks for subtly withdrawing your previous accusations that I was passing off opinion as fact. Quite ironic that it should occur in a post where you're doing the same thing.

Still playing the, 'unbiased English bloke who's just trying to find some information' lark?

_blaaz

10-15 years

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Still playing the, 'unbiased English bloke who's just trying to find some information' lark?

That lad has been pulled up for gaslighting before



Trying to rise and barely subtle abuse posters he dont agree with to get discussion shut down (accused me of backtracking on a 100% consistant position to discourage others from engaging)

blanch152

eagle eye wrote: »

Well in all fairness you weren't living there and suffering at the hands of these people who had backing from the British government. You didn't get to see your brothers, sisters, mother's, fathers, sons and daughters treated dreadfully.
Do you know how you would have reacted back then if these things were happening to your family? These were different times, your letter was just thrown in the bin if it was against the way these people thought. The media disregarded the ordinary man on the street too.
I've nothing against people who fought to try and improve things and it got very serious and their lives were on the line if they stood up for themselves.
I don't forgive the IRA for needless killings and the murder of Gardai and children but what happened up north was truly shocking. That stuff was a hell of a lot different to what happened in Adare or off the coast of Mullaghmore.

I couldn't have lived in a community where the IRA ruled by fear and intimidation. I would have ended up kneecapped or shot by the IRA for defying them if I didn't have the sense to emigrate early.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

I couldn't have lived in a community where the IRA ruled by fear and intimidation. I would have ended up kneecapped or shot by the IRA for defying them if I didn't have the sense to emigrate early.

Didnt put you down for a joyrider or drug dealer :pac:


If yous lived where ira was heavily active....they wouldnt be what drive you away....daily hassle and abuse/searches from security forces since school going age...would get you down long beforehand

blanch152

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't see why you cant make that point without the implication of comparison to flat earthism - one of those is provably wrong (flat earthism) the other is, at worst, a matter of perspective, which you seem to agree with.

Flat earthism is a matter of perspective, travel far enough and you get the perspective to see how silly that flat earthism is.

Funnily, Northern Ireland is something of the same, travel far enough and you get the perspective that the policing isn't as bad as you might think and the pettiness of the dispute between the communities is just seen for what it is.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I couldn't have lived in a community where the IRA ruled by fear and intimidation. I would have ended up kneecapped or shot by the IRA for defying them if I didn't have the sense to emigrate early.

How would you have fared in one run by OO bigots and suprematists with the support of a sectartian police force? Because that covered a much bigger area for much longer.

_blaaz

10-15 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Funnily, Northern Ireland is something of the same, travel far enough and you get the perspective that the policing isn't as bad as you might think and the pettiness of the dispute between the communities is just seen for what it is.

Did you not one time boast saying you never set foot there :pac:

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

RobMc59 wrote:

I`m not interested in your "riddle me this" games.If you highlight the fact NI was policed differently from mainland Britain that`s obvious-the authorities in NI had no choice other than implementing tougher policing as a direct result of ira terrorism.It`s not rocket science despite your florid,longwinded post.

They went way over the top. Innocent people were taken away, beaten up and jailed. Nobody has the right to do that. It made the whole thing a hell if a lot worse.

blanch152 wrote:

I couldn't have lived in a community where the IRA ruled by fear and intimidation. I would have ended up kneecapped or shot by the IRA for defying them if I didn't have the sense to emigrate early.

This is very childish.
You do realise that I'm not a supporter of SF, I'm not a sympathiser either and I'm against a UI?
I just had to respond to that post earlier because you seem to think it was all one side doing wrong when the police force and the army were the reason it escalated out if control.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

blanch152 wrote: »

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't see why you cant make that point without the implication of comparison to flat earthism - one of those is provably wrong (flat earthism) the other is, at worst, a matter of perspective, which you seem to agree with.

Flat earthism is a matter of perspective, travel far enough and you get the perspective to see how silly that flat earthism is.

Funnily, Northern Ireland is something of the same, travel far enough and you get the perspective that the policing isn't as bad as you might think and the pettiness of the dispute between the communities is just seen for what it is.

Funnily I've travelled loads, and this is patronising nonsense.

Barring Antarctica, I've spent time on every continent at some point, and I think you're talking absolute rubbish.

To simplify The Troubles down to, 'pettiness between communities' is absolutely despicable.

Was the policing the worst in the world? Absolutely not! Was it far below the standard one should expect in a first world country? Absolutely.

Christ almighty, it really is abundantly clear you have no knowledge whatsoever beyond hypothetically boasting about how you'd bravely stand up to the IRA.

bilbot79

Let the demographics shift first. Much nicer.

Leo lit a fire acknowledging Irish Unity. It was a Brexit backlash where he thought he'd spook them all with the consequences of Brexit but this topic should be left firmly off the table until the demographic truly shifts. Faux pas if you ask me especially since the last thing I reckon Leo wants is a United Ireland before time.

blanch152

_blaaz wrote: »

Did you not one time boast saying you never set foot there :pac:

Nope, quite the opposite. I know Northern Ireland very well. Have travelled all over it for work and pleasure.

This is the second time in a few posts that you have turned on an individual poster, calling someone out for gaslighting a few posts back. Are you losing it?

facehugger99

_blaaz wrote: »

If yous lived where ira was heavily active....they wouldnt be what drive you away....daily hassle and abuse/searches from security forces since school going age...would get you down long beforehand

The IRA murdered more Catholics than were killed by the BA or any of the Loyalist Terrorists groups.

If you were a Catholic living in an IRA controlled area you were statistically far more likely to be killed by them than any other group.

Maybe you should educate yourself on some of the basics before you come onto the internet - this is just embarrassing stuff by yourself TBH.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

_blaaz wrote: »

If yous lived where ira was heavily active....they wouldnt be what drive you away....daily hassle and abuse/searches from security forces since school going age...would get you down long beforehand

The IRA murdered more Catholics than were killed by the BA or any of the Loyalist Terrorists groups.

If you were a Catholic living in an IRA controlled area you were statistically far more likely to be killed by them than any other group.

Maybe you should educate yourself on some of the basics before you come onto the internet - this is just embarrassing stuff by yourself TBH.

If you were a Catholic living in an IRA controlled area, statistically you were more likely to be killed by a 'British' force. The splintering of British forces between loyalist paramilitaries and state forces doesn't change this.

This obviously doesn't excuse the murders committed by the IRA, but let's not pretend you're not selectively presenting numbers to push your agenda.

facehugger99

Fionn1952 wrote: »

This obviously doesn't excuse the murders committed by the IRA, .

and yet here you are (again), with another post attempting (and failing) to do just that.

Methinks this lady doth protest too much.

Dyr

blanch152 wrote: »

I couldn't have lived in a community where the IRA ruled by fear and intimidation. I would have ended up kneecapped or shot by the IRA for defying them if I didn't have the sense to emigrate early.

You could have just moved to Portadown, you might have learned that no matter how closely you align yourself with loyalism, you're still just a taig to them.

janfebmar

Bambi wrote: »

You could have just moved to Portadown, you might have learned that no matter how closely you align yourself with loyalism, you're still just a taig to them.

Or you could have moved to a Republican area of Belfast like Jean McColville did, and no matter how close she aligned herself with Republicanism / bringing her kids up Catholics and republicans, was always still still just a prod to them.

Dyr

janfebmar wrote: »

Or you could have moved to a Republican area of Belfast like Jean McColville did, and always still still just a prod to them.

Remind me why she wound up in the Divis flats? Run out of her home by loyalists for being a Taig.