How long before Irish reunification?

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

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

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

He might work for the British army...but you say he 'runs' it? As I say, you are desperate to try to twist and turn.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

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...;)

This 'shinnerbot, Brit hating' (can't think what else I have been called, when people's arguments run out of steam or posters start sensationally claiming Irish men are running the BA ) was using his yearly membership of the British National Trust and was within touching distance of William Of Orange's travelling trunk today and his mustard pot.
Great man William, it's a shame a few of his 'followers' didn't take his mission of 'civil and religious liberties' for all a bit more to heart. We wouldn't be having these threads at all if they had.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He might work for the British army...but you say he 'runs' it? As I say, you are desperate to try to twist and turn.

The Gulf war was a long time ago Francie. You should brush up on your history as well as English.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The Gulf war was a long time ago Francie. You should brush up on your history as well as English.

Oh my goodness...how does it run without him??? :D:D:D

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Oh my goodness...how does it run without him??? :D:D:D

Well , he was only one commanding officer, there were others;)


You are just jealous it was his speech which got to hang in the oval office.

downcow

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

Francie. I have just noticed on that link they off examples of some random nationalities around the world. And would you believe it northern Irish is one of them lol. Click on the northern Irish link. I hope you also get the nice warm fuzzy feeling I got when I read it. Lol.
WE EXIST

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Francie. I have just noticed on that link they off examples of some random nationalities around the world. And would you believe it northern Irish is one of them lol. Click on the northern Irish link. I hope you also get the nice warm fuzzy feeling I got when I read it. Lol.
WE EXIST

What island is referenced in 'Northern Irish' again downcow?

FrancieBrady

Just to scotch the nonsense about northern Ireland being 'run' by the ROI.

A UI will be run by a government which will have unionist representation.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Just to scotch the nonsense about northern Ireland being 'run' by the ROI.

A UI will be run by a government which will have unionist representation.

My point exactly. The British government had nationalist representation until sf ousted sdlp. That didn’t exactly solve the problem for nationalists

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

My point exactly. The British government had nationalist representation until sf ousted sdlp. That didn’t exactly solve the problem for nationalists

The problems for nationalists only started being sorted when the British Gov ended the Unionist veto with the Anglo Irish Argeement.

David Trimble threatened an amount of violence to get rid of that, but we know how that worked out.

downcow

Did a series of comments disappear/delete there?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Did a series of comments disappear/delete there?

Yes. Re-reg poster or somebody with dual accounts.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The problems for nationalists only started being sorted when the British Gov ended the Unionist veto with the Anglo Irish Argeement.

Wrong, there was anti-discrimination legislation etc in place long before the Anglo Irish agreement, in the early eighties for example. The problems for nationalists were caused by Republicans who engaged in the armed struggle, whose aim was engage in an offensive campaign of bombing, shooting etc to get the British out of Ireland, and which failed.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Wrong, there was anti-discrimination legislation etc in place long before the Anglo Irish agreement, in the early eighties for example. The problems for nationalists were caused by Republicans who engaged in the armed struggle, whose aim was engage in an offensive campaign of bombing, shooting etc to get the British out of Ireland, and which failed.

This is what happened as a direct result of the AIA being signed janfebmar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Resistance

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is what happened as a direct result of the AIA being signed janfebmar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Resistance

And you link says, and I quote:
"Paisley spoke of a need for an extra-governmental Third Force to fight against the aims of Irish republicanism".

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

And you link says, and I quote:
"Paisley spoke of a need for an extra-governmental Third Force to fight against the aims of Irish republicanism".

So the British government were Irish republicans? I suppose if there were Irish lads 'running' the British Army, he might have had a point.

You have lost all credibility again jan, go to bed or deflect again.

markodaly

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.

What do you mean when they are ready?

The GFA does not make any reference to this 'readiness', so stop making **** up and excusing your bigoted view onto the rest of us.

Educate yourself and stop being a bigot and supremacist.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So the British government were Irish republicans?

No Francie the British government were not Irish Republicans. I do not know how you make that out. You got the wrong end of the stick yet again and your lack of understanding of the northern troubles is exposed. You spent too long reading an Phoblocht in your youth, and have a confused, sectarian mind now.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

What do you mean when they are ready?

The GFA does not make any reference to this 'readiness', so stop making **** up and excusing your bigoted view onto the rest of us.

Educate yourself and stop being a bigot and supremacist.

It stands to reason that you cannot identity as anything until you have the awareness to do it. i.e. when you are ready.

You are not born with an identity and you can 'change' identity whenever you wish.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

No Francie the British government were not Irish Republicans. I do not know how you make that out. You got the wrong end of the stick yet again and your lack of understanding of the northern troubles is exposed. You spent too long reading an Phoblocht in your youth, and have a confused, sectarian mind now.

This is your usual behaviour when caught out on your knowledge of the conflict/war.
Have a read of the chronology here.
The AIA was the pivotal moment when the British Gov. said enough. Unionism had said NO (Never Never Never) for too long.
The British government accepted that the Irish government had to have a role, instantly making northern Ireland different to Scotland, Wales or England. Unionism has NEVER gotten over that, because they know it means they are not truly a 'part' of Britain and that that 'AND' in the United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland means something.
You are seeing the exact same 'Never Never Never's' over the backstop, because they think that is a a further wedge between them.
As regards who Ulster Resisitence where set up to resist, here is what the British thought:

Tom King, then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, speaking in the House of Commons said that Unionist Members of Parliament (MPs) had made common cause with men in paramilitary uniforms.

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/events/aia/chron.htm

trashcan

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.

LOL indeed (Loyal Orange Lodge perhaps

I can't imagine what killer point you thought you were making here,but you're just babbling incoherently now.

janfebmar

trashcan wrote: »

LOL indeed (Loyal Orange Lodge perhaps

I can't imagine what killer point you thought you were making here,but you're just babbling incoherently now.

If you read the whole post and previous post you may understand. British can mean "from the UK".

A person can be both Hawaiian and American too, even though Hawaii is thousands of km from America.

RobMc59

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

janfebmar wrote: »

No Francie the British government were not Irish Republicans. I do not know how you make that out. You got the wrong end of the stick yet again and your lack of understanding of the northern troubles is exposed. You spent too long reading an Phoblocht in your youth, and have a confused, sectarian mind now.

This is your usual behaviour when caught out on your knowledge of the conflict/war.
Have a read of the chronology here.
The AIA was the pivotal moment when the British Gov. said enough. Unionism had said NO (Never Never Never) for too long.
The British government accepted that the Irish government had to have a role, instantly making northern Ireland different to Scotland, Wales or England. Unionism has NEVER gotten over that, because they know it means they are not truly a 'part' of Britain and that that 'AND' in the United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland means something.
You are seeing the exact same 'Never Never Never's' over the backstop, because they think that is a a further wedge between them.
As regards who Ulster Resisitence where set up to resist, here is what the British thought:

Tom King, then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, speaking in the House of Commons said that Unionist Members of Parliament (MPs) had made common cause with men in paramilitary uniforms.

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/events/aia/chron.htm

The British way of thinking which has stood them in good stead since they were a founder member of NATO is "an attack on one is an attack on all".you'd do well to remember that when you're getting on your belligerent extremist republican soap box.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

The British way of thinking which has stood them in good stead since they were a founder member of NATO is "an attack on one is an attack on all".you'd do well to remember that when you're getting on your belligerent extremist republican soap box.

I have no doubt that the British government would see an attack on Northern Ireland as an attack on the UK.

But that wasn't the point of the AIA.

The AIA agreement was an acceptance that we had an official role in the affairs of northern Ireland Rob.
Something that would never happen for the integral parts of Britain.

That is why more British troops were sent to northern Ireland at that time, to resist Loyalist and Unionist threats against the AIA.

Read the facts posted in the chronology. You will understand why the 'backstop' is so important to the last few belligerent Unionists who still want the AIA, and GFA gone.

We know they are still living in Never Never Never Land.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The AIA agreement was an acceptance that we had an official role in the affairs of northern Ireland Rob.
Something that would never happen for the integral parts of Britain.

That is why more British troops were sent to northern Ireland at that time, to resist Loyalist and Unionist threats against the AIA.

The Anglo Irish Agreement got the Republic to accept that there would be no change in the status of N I without the majority there wanting it. It mean the Republic accepted partition, which is why the Republicans and even FF opposed it.

The main threat to troops and police and the forces of law and order in N Ireland was from extremist Republicans, they were the ones carrying out the armed struggle and blowing up everything from courthouses to shopping centres etc etc. Paisley and the third force were not doing that.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The main threat to troops and police and the forces of law and order in N Ireland was from extremist Republicans,

Thursday 13 March 1986
It was announced that additional British Army soldiers would be sent to Northern Ireland to support the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC). The move was the result of Unionist protests against the Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA)

Tuesday 20 May 1986
Nicholas Scott, then a Northern Ireland Office (NIO) Minister, provided information in the House of Commons on the level of intimidation that Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) officers had faced from Loyalists during protests at the Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA). Scott said that there had been 368 cases of intimidation. [Later information provided by the RUC indicated that the final number was over 500 homes attacked and 150 RUC families forced to move.]

Sure janfebmar...sure!


When in a hole, suspend digging!

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sure janfebmar...sure!


When in a hole, suspend digging!

All of which proves the RUC were a relatively impartial force of law and order. Despite that, the vast majority of murders, violence and intimidation against the RUC came from the extremist Republican community.

Thank you for confirming that Francie

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

All of which proves the RUC were a relatively impartial force of law and order. Despite that, the vast majority of murders, violence and intimidation against the RUC came from the extremist Republican community.

Thank you for confirming that Francie

The RUC no longer exists janfebmar...renamed and reformed in disgrace, same as the UDR.

That happened after we achieved an official role in the affairs of northern Ireland.

That is why belligerent Unionism is so angry, they no longer control a 'sectarian' police force or a sectarian government.

See their behaviour over the 'backstop' too. More signals that they will plunge northern Ireland into economic ruin rather than allow any more separation of it from a state (Britain) that has long since said it is separate and different to Scotland, England and Wales.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The RUC no longer exists janfebmar...renamed and reformed .

Not the point Francie. Telecom Eireann no longer exists either, it was renamed and reformed. You confirmed the RUC were relatively impartial, in fact as you said 500 RUC homes were attacked and 150 forced to move because of loyalist threats.

The original point was there was anti-discrimination legislation in N Ireland before the Anglo Irish Agreement.
The problem was the paramilitaries, which you have condoned on one side of course.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Not the point Francie. Telecom Eireann no longer exists either, it was renamed and reformed. You confirmed the RUC were relatively impartial, in fact as you said 500 RUC homes were attacked and 150 forced to move because of loyalist threats.

The original point was there was anti-discrimination legislation in N Ireland before the Anglo Irish Agreement.
The problem was the paramilitaries, which you have condoned on one side of course.

Telecom Eireann had a number of damming reports into them, showing that they were players in a conflict and largely sectarian in their make-up????

I didn't 'confirm' any such thing.

I showed that Loyalism and Unionism turned on their own when the British ended their veto. Which was what the AIA was.


Had your much vaunted 'anti discrimination' legislation had any effect at all then the AIA and the GFA that it made way for wouldn't have been neccessary at all.

Keep clinging on to the nonsense janfebmar...facts once again show you up.