How long before Irish reunification?

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Poor Francie - simultaneously crying crocodile tears on how bad a hard-Brexit will be for the Island while whipping yourself in a froth over the thoughts of it happening.


Along comes big shaggy Boris to put the wind up you.


Delightful to watch.

On record here FH as saying a UI coming from a hard Brexit is far from ideal as it will be divisive.

What is delightful from this vantage is the level of argument you have got, not to mention your maths skills that has 37% as the 'vast majority'.

blinding

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Poor Francie - simultaneously crying crocodile tears on how bad a hard-Brexit will be for the Island while whipping yourself in a froth over the thoughts of it happening.


Along comes big shaggy Boris to put the wind up you.


Delightful to watch.

Its only when / if Boris puts on the pressure that they will see how little the Irish Southern Establishment are in favour ( i.e. not at all in favour ) of a United Ireland .

They have no intention of taking on the cost of Northern Ireland and the people of Northern Ireland . The hypocrisy they spout will be laid bare .

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

Instead the Re-Mainers have used every ruse in the book to distance the time since the referendum in an attempt to subvert Democracy .

We only need to look at Hong Kong and Russia to see how important Democracy is but tis nah bother to Eu-Phile anti-democrats to play fast and loose with Democracy .

The British will not have their Democracy taken away from them . They are not that foolish .

Does democracy mean more/something else when you use a capital letter?

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

On record here FH as saying a UI coming from a hard Brexit is far from ideal as it will be divisive.
What is delightful from this vantage is the level of argument you have got, not to mention your maths skills that has 37% as the 'vast majority'.

It doesn't have to be a majority to be a huge problem.
You cannot disregard the views of a sizeable minority. You cannot just decide they get their whole lives changed because a few more people want it.

blinding

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Does democracy mean more/something else when you use a capital letter?

Democracy means a lot to me . I would certainly not play fast and loose with it like re-mainers .

I look to Hong Kong and Russia and see how important it is to Respect the Democratic decision of the People .

Long live Democracy and those that Respect It .:D

FrancieBrady

eagle eye wrote: »

It doesn't have to be a majority to be a huge problem.
You cannot disregard the views of a sizeable minority. You cannot just decide they get their whole lives changed because a few more people want it.

Nobody is suggesting 'disregarding' their views.
There is always going to be a minority against a UI, this was was known at the signing of the GFA and should have been known by those voting for it and it's terms of agreement.

Trying to move the goalposts now will be more tragically wrong simply because you are ignoring those who signed up to it, built the peace and expect it to deliver when the TERMS are met.

You are being the exact opposite of a democrat to continue this line.

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

Democracy means a lot to me . I would certainly not play fast and loose with it like re-mainers .

I look to Hong Kong and Russia and see how important it is to Respect the Democratic decision of the People .

Long live Democracy and those that Respect It .:D

If Britain wants democracy, then it needs to deliver for it's people who decided to leave.

Have they left yet and what exactly is stopping them???

blinding

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If Britain wants democracy, then it needs to deliver for it's people who decided to leave.

Have they left yet and what exactly is stopping them???

Anti-Democratic Eu-Philes in their own Country:eek:

Its not rocket science !:eek:

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

Anti-Democratic Eu-Philes in their own Country:eek:

Its not rocket science !:eek:

That's for Britain to sort so.

Next.

blinding

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That's for Britain to sort so.

Next.

Just out of curiosity have you any polls suggesting that you have 50% + 1 for a United Ireland . You’d think it would be a doddle in these days:eek:

I’d say Leo would have to do a load of dampener photo shoots if you do .

Leo and the Southern Establishment have absolutely no intention of coming up with £11 Billion ( every year ) and no intention of taking on the people of Northern Ireland .

One good thing about whats going on now is it lays bare all the hypocrisy by the Southern Political establishment about Northern Ireland .

They talk a good story but would in practice do everything in their power to stop it happening for about 50 years at least .

Always good to see hypocrisy exposed .

FrancieBrady

blinding wrote: »

Just out of curiosity have you any polls suggesting that you have 50% + 1 for a United Ireland . You’d think it would be a doddle in these days:eek:

I’d say Leo would have to do a load of dampener photo shoots if you do .

Leo and the Southern Establishment have absolutely no intention of coming up with £11 Billion ( every year ) and no intention of taking on the people of Northern Ireland .

One good thing about whats going on now is it lays bare all the hypocrisy by the Southern Political establishment about Northern Ireland .

They talk a good story but would in practice do everything in their power to stop it happening for about 50 years at least .

Always good to see hypocrisy exposed .

You mention 11 billion...begob it's getting cheaper by the post.

blinding

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You mention 11 billion...begob it's getting cheaper by the post.

Way too Rich for the Southern Establishment . They’d be looking for £11 billion from the Brits unless of course the Eu Commanded them to take Northern Ireland .

Then they’d nod like Donkeys alright;);)

Dammo

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You're talking about possibilities as eventualities though, Francie. A no-deal Brexit isn't guaranteed, even if it is, who knows how long that will last.

In the event of a no deal Brexit that doesnt get resolved, if Ireland begins to suffer, there is also a significant chance that the North could be viewed (rightly or wrongly) as an anchor round the neck of recovery.

There certainly hasnt been enough economic modelling on the matter to confidently call unification a panacea for all the woes of Brexit either.

It's all well and good hand waving these objections aside with regards to me. I'm in favour of unification and open to discussing them. Others would find your answers quite lacking in substance, disregard it and quietly tick No in the referendum.

I think Facehugger's fantasy statistics are useless, but there are always going to be a significant cohort who like things the way they are, and unless you can point to tangible benefits to these people, with EVIDENCE, and hard evidence at that, they're just not going to be interested in romantic reasoning.

This is an excellent point. Look at the Scottish Independence vote for example.

To persuade people they need detail. What will the new police force look like? Will it be armed?, etc.

Romantic notions won't do it, and rightly so imo.

FrancieBrady

Dammo wrote: »

This is an excellent point. Look at the Scottish Independence vote for example.

To persuade people they need detail. What will the new police force look like? Will it be armed?, etc.

Romantic notions won't do it, and rightly so imo.

Totally agree with that.

And we need unionist voices too and moderate Unionism in the form of Mike Nesbitt and elements within the UUP seem to be willing to get involved. Even Peter Robinson (formerly of the DUP parish) sees a need to have a voice. It would be foolish for Unionism to do again what they did at Independence, ignor and withdraw from the new state.

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody is suggesting 'disregarding' their views.
There is always going to be a minority against a UI, this was was known at the signing of the GFA and should have been known by those voting for it and it's terms of agreement.

Trying to move the goalposts now will be more tragically wrong simply because you are ignoring those who signed up to it, built the peace and expect it to deliver when the TERMS are met.

You are being the exact opposite of a democrat to continue this line.

Nobody has to move any goalposts. The ROI has a veto on unification. It will be up to us to decide is we want to take on a NI with 50.1% have voted for unification and 49.9% have voted against.

Can't see there being much appetite among regular folk to do that somehow.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Nobody has to move any goalposts. The ROI has a veto on unification. It will be up to us to decide is we want to take on a NI with 50.1% have voted for unification and 49.9% have voted against.

Can't see there being much appetite among regular folk to do that somehow.

Well at least you understand what a majority is now.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It would be foolish for Unionism to do again what they did at Independence, ignor and withdraw from the new state.

If you look in to it you will find that many minorities found it a cold house, to say the least. Look at the controversy when a protestant got a job as a librarian in co. Mayo once, there was a huge outcry in case a non Catholic would lend out books not suitable for Catholics! She had to leave the job just in case. And remember the Fethard on Sea boycott..

blinding

10-15 years

janfebmar wrote: »

If you look in to it you will find that many minorities found it a cold house, to say the least. Look at the controversy when a protestant got a job as a librarian in co. Mayo once, there was a huge outcry in case a non Catholic would lend out books not suitable for Catholics! She had to leave the job just in case. And remember the Fethard on Sea boycott..

I’d say the catholics in the North have plenty of similar and worse to mention .

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

If you look in to it you will find that many minorities found it a cold house, to say the least. Look at the controversy when a protestant got a job as a librarian in co. Mayo once, there was a huge outcry in case a non Catholic would lend out books not suitable for Catholics! She had to leave the job just in case. And remember the Fethard on Sea boycott..

No wrong, she didn't have to leave, she was offered another job by the government in Dublin, which she accepted. Rather than give into Mayo CC, the government abolished it in support of her appointment.

She previously worked, without incident in Dublin County Library, UCD, and Rathmines.

Nobody for a second denied that there were not sectarian incidents before you go off on one of your 'I educated you' divergences.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

FrancieBrady wrote:

You are being the exact opposite of a democrat to continue this line.

Democracy is not the be all and end all. We have to consider the needs of everybody. There are a lot of people living in NI who don't want a UI. There are lots of people in the Republic if Ireland who are against a UI.

Dammo

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

That Mayo case is from 1930 ffs! Ireland is like a different galaxy never mind country now.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No wrong, she didn't have to leave, she was offered another job by the government in Dublin, which she accepted. Rather than give into Mayo CC, the government abolished it in support of her appointment.

She previously worked, without incident in Dublin County Library, UCD, and Rathmines.
.

She worked for a short period in one of those places. It was sectarianism which prevented her remaining in Co. Mayo, according to one Mr Michael D Higgins, now our president. 22 out of 24 people on the board did not want a Protestant and Trinity graduate handing out books to Catholics, and some even called her a west Brit etc. Shortly after she left Mayo she had to retire as she married and could not work any more outside the home anyway.

janfebmar

Dammo wrote: »

That Mayo case is from 1930 ffs! Ireland is like a different galaxy never mind country now.

Correct, I was responding to a comment from Francie who made reference to minorities in the new state and said they " ignored and withdrew" from the new state. A bit more complicated than that.

FrancieBrady

Dammo wrote: »

That Mayo case is from 1930 ffs! Ireland is like a different galaxy never mind country now.

As recognised by Mike Nesbitt, formerly of the UUP. And any one with an eye in their head tbh.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

She worked for a short period in one of those places. It was sectarianism which prevented her remaining in Co. Mayo, according to one Mr Michael D Higgins, now our president. 22 out of 24 people on the board did not want a Protestant and Trinity graduate handing out books to Catholics, and some even called her a west Brit etc. Shortly after she left Mayo she had to retire as she married and could not work any more outside the home anyway.

Yes it was an incidence of sectarianism in an era when it was much more prevalent. The University that she came from (Trinity) to a county that was 99% Catholic and pro Independence flew the Union Jack until 1939, is there any wonder there was mistrust and suspicion?
So there were instances of two sides provoking each other, we know this.

But Protestant writers themselves admit that they largely withdrew from the functioning of the state and kept to themselves which in their opinion was a mistake. Their population is only now beginning to grow again, a growth I was only to happy to contribute to, as my children are COI.

Fionn1952

15-20 years

eagle eye wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote:

You are being the exact opposite of a democrat to continue this line.

Democracy is not the be all and end all. We have to consider the needs of everybody. There are a lot of people living in NI who don't want a UI. There are lots of people in the Republic if Ireland who are against a UI.

Can't this entire post be turned on its head and say the exact opposite without losing any logical consistency? There were a lot of people living here who didnt support same sex marriage or the repeal of the 8th amendment, should we have refused to legislate for those because some people didnt agree?

It's perfectly possible to consider the needs of everybody, but its impossible to give everybody what they want. Democracy, laden with protections for minorities is about as good as it gets. I continue to support the GFA, and as long as a majority do not want unification, I'll agree with the current position of the North. If and when it does come to pass that it is no longer the case, I will be fully in favour of supporting and protecting the culture and history of those who were not in favour of unification. What I won't do is be told that their view is more important than mine, or should count for more than mine.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Democracy, laden with protections for minorities is about as good as it gets.

That is the proper definition of it alright and it still isn't available in northern Ireland after a century of getting it even more badly wrong. At least we in south aspire to protect minorities, there are still those in the north intent on denying rights. The OO and the DUP to name two.

facehugger99

Fionn1952 wrote: »

. What I won't do is be told that their view is more important than mine, or should count for more than mine.

I presume at this stage ye're deliberately choosing to ignore the actual issue.

It is us voters in the ROI who hold the veto over NI's future - we are perfectly entitled to consider the size of a NI minority who reject unification when considering our own position. Such a right is enshrined in the very foundations of the GFA.

Parking the €10bn a year elephant for a moment - why would anyone, other than the fundamentalist pan-nationalists, think we'd choose to take on a sizable minority of ROI-hating unionists into our country?

There's no way I'd let them near the place. The security issues on their own would convince most ROI voters to run a mile from the issue.

Isn't it amazing that only 37% of people say their willing to pay for a NI and none of these fundamental issues have even been raised yet in public discourse?

Wonder what way the percentages are headed if it ever was discussed in earnest?

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

I presume at this stage ye're deliberately choosing to ignore the actual issue.

It is us voters in the ROI who hold the veto over NI's future - we are perfectly entitled to consider the size of a NI minority who reject unification when considering our own position. Such a right is enshrined in the very foundations of the GFA.

Parking the €10bn a year elephant for a moment - why would anyone, other than the fundamentalist pan-nationalists, think we'd choose to take on a sizable minority of ROI-hating unionists into our country?

There's no way I'd let them near the place. The security issues on their own would convince most ROI voters to run a mile from the issue.

Isn't it amazing that only 37% of people say their willing to pay for a NI and none of these fundamental issues have even been raised yet in public discourse?

Wonder what way the percentages are headed if it ever was discussed in earnest?

The arrogance to assume nobody has considered the issues but lil 'ol clever you.

eagle eye

Ulster Says No. It will never happen

Fionn1952 wrote:

There were a lot of people living here who didnt support same sex marriage or the repeal of the 8th amendment, should we have refused to legislate for those because some people didnt agree?

This is not even remotely close to the same thing.