How long before Irish reunification?

Rodin

15-20 years

downcow wrote: »

You said you had 3 degrees. I assume it wasn’t an album of theirs that you were referring to.

there’s not too many people remain working class after achieving 3 degrees. But maybe you are still living in a working class area on minimum wage.

I just find it’s often part of the nationalist victim mentality, a trait that they hate to admit when they have became middle class

I know nationalists who are two bmw car family with their kids doing horse riding at the weekends who love to claim they are working class and distributed against
lol

Some people have class. Some people have no class.
That's how I like to see it.

There is of course a feral underclass.

RobMc59

10-15 years

Rodin wrote: »

downcow wrote: »

You said you had 3 degrees. I assume it wasn’t an album of theirs that you were referring to.

there’s not too many people remain working class after achieving 3 degrees. But maybe you are still living in a working class area on minimum wage.

I just find it’s often part of the nationalist victim mentality, a trait that they hate to admit when they have became middle class

I know nationalists who are two bmw car family with their kids doing horse riding at the weekends who love to claim they are working class and distributed against
lol

Some people have class. Some people have no class.
That's how I like to see it.

There is of course a feral underclass.

Are you Jacob Rees mogg in disguise?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are so desperate here you are combining identity with the place you were born.

You are the desperate person here. You are like the guy without a shift at coppers come half two in the morning. Anything will do.

The GFA is quite clear on this. All else is just guff and opinion.

One can be Irish or British or both, if they so choose. They are not Irish by default. Anyone that states this is talking nonsense and are without foundation or cause.

20-30 years

As that Irish Times article makes very clear, one of the largest disparities between north and south is seen in the education system, with the system in the north decidely inferior by most if not all international standards.

Other reports have found the standard of education attained by students in loyalist areas is poorer, and much of this is because they leave the education system earlier than students in working class nationalist areas. For decades now they haven't had the old shipbuilding/ industrial jobs to go into, or get apprenticeships for so there are proportionately more poorer loyalists with no qualifications at all. Again, people who spout trite "They're all the same" analyses of the two communities miss some pretty fundamental differences.

Culturally, there has long been a greater emphasis on academic attainment among nationalist parents - nationalists being essentially excluded from the traditional unionist industries they had little choice but to focis elsewhere - and this cultural value matches much better with the modern rise in service industry and office jobs.

In essence, the problems in, and outlook of, loyalist working class areas have been neglected for many decades now and it's no surprise that their "leaders" are promoting more angst about all sorts of symbolic loyalist stuff as a distraction.

I remember talking to William "Plum" Smith on one of those EPIC/ex-loyalist prisoners tours on the Shankill years ago and he had this alternative socialist history of loyalist working class areas that was bristling with animosity towards the Trimbles/Paisleys of establishment unionism. It was refreshing to hear it being said by a loyalist. As he showed us all these streets of a once bustling loyalist area of Belfast with only the ruins of mills, factories and trades to be seen, there was absolutely no denying but that that community is its own worst enemy. It's as if being hostile to education and advancement is the most powerful cultural value in working class loyalist areas. For me, that's probably the biggest obstacle to long-term peace.

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

Here's the very relevant Cliff Taylor article in The Irish Times from yesterday,

The most relevant piece in that article is near the bottom.

The bottom line is that much work remains to be done here, if we do move into the era of planning a Border poll and beyond. A clear explanation would be needed to voters on how it might work, what it might cost and what the strategy would be.

The paper by the ESRI researchers points out that the long-term answer to the question of how to replace the UK financial subvention lies in making the North’s economy more productive and addressing its key weaknesses, likely requiring a massive investment programme. Support of a Border poll must outline how this would work and how long it would realistically take, the researchers say. And who would pay.

Indeed who would pay?

It is clear that any idea on a UI, these unknowns will have to be known before we put it to a vote and that is not even mentioning things like flags, anthems, parliamentary representation, identity and monarchy.

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, people who spout trite "They're all the same" analyses of the two communities miss some pretty fundamental differences.

Francie, are ya listening?

However, Fuaranach you make a valid point about the North.

For far too long the North has picked the pocket of Westminister where both communities were more than happy to take advantage of socio-economic resentment against the ruling class and forgo individual endeavor to better their own causes.

For nationalists, it was easy. Blame London for all your ills.
For Unionists, it was more nuanced but essentially spun to blame traitors to Unionism like David Irvine for all your ills and of course blame Catholics

In my opinion, neither community has been served all that well by the SF/DUP duopoly of the past 15 years.
Indeed, in the event of a UI, poor nationalists in the likes of the Creegan and poor nationalists in East Belfast would have a common enemy in the Dublin government.

trashcan

downcow wrote: »

The uk whether you like it or not is British. That’s fact.

downcow wrote: »

I think we were all in agreement from the beginning that ni is an integral part of the UK of gb&ni. I think it was francie thought it was part of roi. I hope he’s ok now that he’s discovered this

So, we're not fully agreed then, since not all of the UK is British.

downcow

trashcan wrote: »

So, we're not fully agreed then, since not all of the UK is British.

What are you on. Of course all of the UK is British.

jh79

trashcan wrote: »

So, we're not fully agreed then, since not all of the UK is British.

Because NI was never officially clasified as a sate or country it is considered part of Britian.

Whatever way you spin it it is not Ireland as the GFA recognises partition as legitimate.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

You are the desperate person here. You are like the guy without a shift at coppers come half two in the morning. Anything will do.

The GFA is quite clear on this. All else is just guff and opinion.

One can be Irish or British or both, if they so choose. They are not Irish by default. Anyone that states this is talking nonsense and are without foundation or cause.

The GFA deals with identity mark and agrees that everyone has the birthright to identify as British or Irish when they are ready. Before that they are what everyone born on an island called Ireland are = Irish.

It really isn't anything to be scared of, it is just one of the unassailable truths of place.

downcow wrote: »

What are you on. Of course all of the UK is British.

Part of it 'identifies as British', but isn't a part of Britain.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The GFA deals with identity mark and agrees that everyone has the birthright to identify as British or Irish when they are ready. Before that they are what everyone born on an island called Ireland are = Irish.

It really isn't anything to be scared of, it is just one of the unassailable truths of place.



Part of it 'identifies as British', but isn't a part of Britain.

The faulklands are British afaik

The stuff your on about. Everyone is Irish until they decide otherwise is wishful thinking nonsense.
Find me some evidence in gfa or other for your fanciful idea

janfebmar

"British" is shorthand for "part of the United Kingdom".

"American" - if someone is American they are from the US Of A. They could be from Hawaii, a few thousand km away, but it is unlikely they are from Mexico or Montreal.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

The faulklands are British afaik

The stuff your on about. Everyone is Irish until they decide otherwise is wishful thinking nonsense.
Find me some evidence in gfa or other for your fanciful idea

The GFA is only 20 years old. The island has been here a tad longer.

You Unionists aren't very good at the old geography, you think Ulster only has 6 counties too.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The GFA is only 20 years old. The island has been here a tad longer.

You Unionists aren't very good at the old geography, you think Ulster only has 6 counties too.

Now who ever said Ulster had 6 counties?

Fionn1952

15-20 years

downcow wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The GFA is only 20 years old. The island has been here a tad longer.

You Unionists aren't very good at the old geography, you think Ulster only has 6 counties too.

Now who ever said Ulster had 6 counties?

Didn't you state that Ulster was an alternative name for the North, or was that Jan?

Whichever one of you it was either seems to think Ulster has 6 counties or the North has 9.

trashcan

downcow wrote: »

What are you on. Of course all of the UK is British.

Ok, let me repeat this again for the slow learners.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. "And" is a word in the English language used to signify the addition of something. If Northern Ireland was part of Great Britain there would be no need for the word "and" Therfore, Northern Ireland, while part of the UK, is not part of Great Britain, ergo, not all the UK is Britain. Is it really that difficult?

trashcan

janfebmar wrote: »

"British" is shorthand for "part of the United Kingdom".

"American" - if someone is American they are from the US Of A. They could be from Hawaii, a few thousand km away, but it is unlikely they are from Mexico or Montreal.

Oh, Jesus. Will you give it up with the Hawaiian thing. It's one of the 50 States of the USA. It's not the United States of America and Hawaii.

And since when is the term British shorthand for part of the UK. ? As far as I know it refers to the island of Britain.

janfebmar

trashcan wrote: »

Oh, Jesus. Will you give it up with the Hawaiian thing. It's one of the 50 States of the USA. It's not the United States of America and Hawaii.

And since when is the term British shorthand for part of the UK. ? As far as I know it refers to the island of Britain.

Lol. The American army and navy for example will include people from, and stationed in mainland America as well as from / in Hawaii.

The British army will include a regiment and people from N Ireland. The term British means from the UK.

janfebmar

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Didn't you state that Ulster was an alternative name for the North, or was that Jan?

Whichever one of you it was either seems to think Ulster has 6 counties or the North has 9.

It was not me, I never used the term Ulster. If a northerner used the term during the troubles I would know what he or she meant though. Like you, I am aware Ulster has 9 counties and if I knew them well enough I may even remind them of that.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Lol. The American army and navy for example will include people from, and stationed in mainland America as well as from / in Hawaii.

The British army will include a regiment and people from N Ireland. The term British means from the UK.

The British Army has Gurkhas in it, from Nepal. It is called the 'British' Army because the British run it.

Jaysus, the twisting to try and make stuff true. :rolleyes:

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British Army has Gurkhas in it, from Nepal. It is called the 'British' Army because the British run it.

It has been run by people like Northern Irelands Col. Tim Collins, whose inspirational eve of battle speech to his troops ( many from N Ireland) during the gulf war is reputed to hang on the wall of the oval office in Washington.

An inclusive army is the British army, but it the army of the UK, it is not the army of the UK and Nepal Francie. You are getting worse.;)

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Didn't you state that Ulster was an alternative name for the North, or was that Jan?

Whichever one of you it was either seems to think Ulster has 6 counties or the North has 9.

This is my actual quote below fionne. Note ‘affectionate names’
I no more thought that Ni was officially called Ulster than I thought the six counties were ever really occupied or that it was a sectarian statelet.

“One of the 4 very proud countries that make up the union that is the UK.
Known by various affectionate names eg NI, Ulster, the province, the occupied 6, the sectarian statelet, the black north, and my favourite, OurWeeCountry.”

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

It has been run by people like Northern Irelands Col. Tim Collins, whose inspirational eve of battle speech to his troops ( many from N Ireland) during the gulf war is reputed to hang on the wall of the oval office in Washington.

An inclusive army is the British army, but it the army of the UK, it is not the army of the UK and Nepal Francie. You are getting worse.;)

An Irishman 'runs' the British Army? You on the drink early there jan? :D:D

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

An Irishman 'runs' the British Army? You in the drink early there jan? :D:D

I said "people like" . You really need to go to specsavers Francie.

downcow

Here francie. This will sort it out for you and allow you to sleep easy tonight.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/british

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

I said "people like" . You really need to go to specsavers Francie.

You think he 'runs' the BA...you are gonna double down on that contention? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Here francie. This will sort it out for you and allow you to sleep easy tonight.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/british

Great Britain, a large island in Western Europe
United Kingdom, a sovereign state comprising the island of Great Britain, the north-eastern part of the island of Ireland and many smaller islands

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You think he 'runs' the BA...you are gonna double down on that contention? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I said " has been run by people like...."

Are you too proud to go to specsavers Francie? Maybe because it is British company?

janfebmar

downcow wrote: »

Here francie. This will sort it out for you and allow you to sleep easy tonight.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/british

Well said downcow. Poor old Francie is flustering himself over the meaning of a noun instead.

Francie lost again. If he loses many more arguments he'll be out of a job.

RobMc59

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Great Britain, a large island in Western Europe
United Kingdom, a sovereign state comprising the island of Great Britain, the north-eastern part of the island of Ireland and many smaller islands

I`m beginning to think you`ve got a secret crush on the UK,in the last couple of days that`s where you spend your time and talking about all aspects of Britain,it`s citizens, culture and customs is your favourite pastime...;)