How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

Five Eighth

Finty Lemon wrote: »

When was Ireland last simultaneously United and Independent? I am struggling; perhaps the students of history on here can define it? Did it deliver prosperity and peace?

"...There have been 800 years of attention from London but there were some 8,000 years of human life in Ireland before that...And yet, despite their tribal groupings...these people shared a common language, a common code of law (the Brehon Law), a common tradition of oral poetry and music and a common history adapted from ancient legend. And when they came to write down their language they wrote of themselves as as 'Men of Ireland'. At a time when no country was a nation in a modern centralised sense...Ireland had its own individual cultural unity which you could certainly call a sort of nationhood." - Robert Kee (Revised & Updated, 1995) Ireland: A History. p23-24.

Natterjack from Kerry

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why would that matter to people who want to look to the future ?

Looking to the future does not necessarily involve incorporating one part of a foreign country ? That is no justification at all for desiring a UI. Is there really no solid grounds or benefits to justify a UI ?

BonnieSituation

Five Eighth wrote: »

"...There have been 800 years of attention from London but there were some 8,000 years of human life in Ireland before that...And yet, despite their tribal groupings...these people shared a common language, a common code of law (the Brehon Law), a common tradition of oral poetry and music and a common history adapted from ancient legend. And when they came to write down their language they wrote of themselves as as 'Men of Ireland'. At a time when no country was a nation in a modern centralised sense...Ireland had its own individual cultural unity which you could certainly call a sort of nationhood." - Robert Kee (Revised & Updated, 1995) Ireland: A History. p23-24.

Yeah but Unionists or something...

Natterjack from Kerry

Deleted User wrote: »

A better future for all the citizens of the island.....everyone there is already an irish citizen

Is it not extraordinarily condescending to half a million people who absolutely do not a want to be part of a UI, and wish strongly to remain in the UK, that people in the south consider that they know what is better for unionists than unionists themselves ? As a southerner do you not see your view is seen as threatening to unionists rather than as the good samaritan coming through altruism to them to help them improve their country ?

Junkyard Tom

Natterjack from Kerry

Deleted User wrote: »

Theres no moral nor rational reason not to unite the country....ni has failed as independant state,failed under westminster rule,failed under powersharing,

NI is not an independent state. It is part of the UK.

If a region has problems, why do you think transfering it from one country to another is in itself a solution ?

dd973

Relief will be the unexpected and beneficial effect of reunification, there'll no longer be a British Question in the North of Ireland and no reason for any IRA of any stripe to exist. Nationalists in the North are relaxed about being Irish and being in Ireland which is why they don't do ridiculous things like paint the roadside kerb or festoon their neighbourhoods with flags, as per the GFA, people whom identify as British can continue to do so.

The all island economy will benefit the border counties and Donegal, a mixture of EU, Irish and UK government reunification funds can subsidy projects like High Speed Rail linking Befast to Dublin to Cork and motorways from Dublin to the North West.

Belfast if it wants it has the potential to be a renaissance city, the second city of an EU state of 5 million people and a counterbalance to the current Dublin centric situation, government departments can be moved up there as well as huge investment with peace walls coming down and murals replaced or reduced in number, people moving there from the beleaguered UK and other parts of Ireland and property prices rising.

BonnieSituation

dd973 wrote: »

Relief will be the unexpected and beneficial effect of reunification, there'll no longer be a British Question in the North of Ireland and no reason for any IRA of any stripe to exist. Nationalists in the North are relaxed about being Irish and being in Ireland which is why they don't do ridiculous things like paint the roadside kerb or festoon their neighbourhoods with flags, as per the GFA, people whom identify as British can continue to do so.

The all island economy will benefit the border counties and Donegal, a mixture of EU, Irish and UK government reunification funds can subsidy projects like High Speed Rail linking Befast to Dublin to Cork and motorways from Dublin to the North West.

Belfast if it wants it has the potential to be a renaissance city, the second city of an EU state of 5 million people and a counterbalance to the current Dublin centric situation, government departments can be moved up there as well as huge investment with peace walls coming down and murals replaced or reduced in number, people moving there from the beleaguered UK and other parts of Ireland and property prices rising.

Even better, it can be the second city of an EU Nation of 7m! (6.8m ATM)

Five Eighth

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Looking to the future does not necessarily involve incorporating one part of a foreign country ? That is no justification at all for desiring a UI. Is there really no solid grounds or benefits to justify a UI ?

I had thought that I had encountered the most inane and myopic comments from another poster on this and its 'sister' sites but this takes the biscuit... is it a bot?

BonnieSituation

Five Eighth wrote: »

I had thought that I had encountered the most inane and myopic comments from another poster on this and its 'sister' sites but this takes the biscuit... is it a bot?

At this stage the trick is to let it off. Absolute waste of energy and time. I'm finding this place a wee bit more tolerable ignoring such pointless posts.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Our nation was divided by the threat of internecine terrorism by Unionists and then all out war by the British government. Those were wrongs, morally, that need to be put right.

The British state continues to be a danger to the well-being of our nation as has become patently clear with the threat of physical division of our people having to be negotiated away in the face of Brexit.

Not saying I agree with your narrative but let’s assume for now you are correct, do you believe the USA and Canada should be handed back the the 1st nation people? Same question for Aussie and NZ?

downcow

Five Eighth wrote: »

"...There have been 800 years of attention from London but there were some 8,000 years of human life in Ireland before that...And yet, despite their tribal groupings...these people shared a common language, a common code of law (the Brehon Law), a common tradition of oral poetry and music and a common history adapted from ancient legend. And when they came to write down their language they wrote of themselves as as 'Men of Ireland'. At a time when no country was a nation in a modern centralised sense...Ireland had its own individual cultural unity which you could certainly call a sort of nationhood." - Robert Kee (Revised & Updated, 1995) Ireland: A History. p23-24.

So are you suggesting we redraw world borders to where they were 800 years ago?

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

Not saying I agree with your narrative but let’s assume for now you are correct, do you believe the USA and Canada should be handed back the the 1st nation people? Same question for Aussie and NZ?

How in the name of muppetry would a UI be in any way comparable to 'handing back' US/CAN/AUS/NZ to the native people?

What does 'handing back' even mean?

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

How in the name of muppetry would a UI be in any way comparable to 'handing back' US/CAN/AUS/NZ to the native people?

What does 'handing back' even mean?

Well you tell me what the difference is? You want ni handed back when the people living in it don’t want it handed back.

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

Well you tell me what the difference is? You want ni handed back

I want Ireland to be governed by the people that live in Ireland. I want the British border to be consigned to history.

when the people living in it don’t want it handed back.

A border poll will decide when people are ready for a UI.

A question to all the posters supporting a United Ireland

What do you think should be done to help persuade unionists that becoming part of Ireland would be a positive thing for them?
And what should be done to welcome them, or how would you allow them to somehow keep their identity and feel like they had a place in this new country?

Natterjack from Kerry

I think we can all agree that it's interesting, that despite it being such a strongly felt view by some, none can advance any support for why people from southern Ireland should push for a UI. The argument that NI is a wretched place and so the Republic needs to take it in from the cold and raise the people to the superior living standard of those in the south is arrogance and imperialist thinking of a most obsolete style. And other than the 'altruism' of interfering in another state, offers no justifying benefit to those in the south.
It's a matter one would have thought well thought through at this stage. Given that the goal seems without solid basis, would it prompt many of you to revise your position from one of aspiring to a UI?

Natterjack from Kerry

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

A border poll will decide when people are ready for a UI.

That's arguable. If passed it would only mean that some portion of them are, not 'people'.

And then, only those in NI. What is the interest of those in the Republic in such a merger and what would be its structure? Would an independent UI but with say the UK monarch as its head of state be plausible, in the manner of Australia for example? Or would it be an absobtion by the South in the manner of German reunification?

Junkyard Tom

bubblypop wrote: »

What do you think should be done to help persuade unionists that becoming part of Ireland would be a positive thing for them?

A simple numeric majority is required not some bizarre renegotiation of the GFA that requires charming the minority Unionist population of the north into a United Ireland.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

A simple numeric majority is required not some bizarre renegotiation of the GFA that requires charming the minority Unionist population of the north into a United Ireland.

Oh right, so basically you could not give a crap about how a large portion of Northern Ireland feel.

FrancieBrady

bubblypop wrote: »

A question to all the posters supporting a United Ireland

What do you think should be done to help persuade unionists that becoming part of Ireland would be a positive thing for them?
And what should be done to welcome them, or how would you allow them to somehow keep their identity and feel like they had a place in this new country?

How hung up on that should we get?

I think more than is given credit for are persuaded. Not of a UI but that they will not be discriminated against and that they will have a part to play in any new arrangement
I think more are convinced the UK doesn't give a damn about them past sound bites.
I also think they know they have to be involved and I have a standing bet with downcow that they will be involved (not belligerents) in modelling what a UI might look like. It would frankly be lemming like not to be.

Brendan Bendar

Bigger problems than that to sort out, my friend.

Wouldn’t waste too much time dancing on the head of a pin.

Annd9

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh right, so basically you could not give a crap about how a large portion of Northern Ireland feel.

Do you care about people in the south who voted against Gay marriage/abortion or divorce ? Of course you don't because that is democracy .

The Brexit situation showed that the British government do not care what unionists/loyalists think or feel . On the other hand the Irish government have been warning about the North and Brexit from day 1 .
Unionists will say it was self serving , but at least they care about this Island .

At this point I feel unionists/loyalists have to look deep down and ask who or what are they loyal to ? Is it benefiting their community and more importantly their youth staying part of the UK ? All statistics say it is not .

I for one want unionist input into how a new state might be formed and how it can be beneficial to working class people from both sides of the community . They are the people with most in common , not JRM or Boris they don't give two ****s about the north and that is getting clearer every single day !

BonnieSituation

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh right, so basically you could not give a crap about how a large portion of Northern Ireland feel.

Same way Partitionists like yourself don't give a crap about Nationalists currently therein. Obviously they're the wrong kind of 'large portion'.

The days of the Unionist veto are over.

There will be no cajoling the bitter belligerents.

All citizens will be treated equally as is their right. All citizens will have their culture respected. That is the essence of a republic.

I don't know what else you could want really. But then again I'm not stamping my feet at the thought of a democratic mandate of from the people bringing a UI about.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Same way Partitionists like yourself don't give a crap about Nationalists currently therein. Obviously they're the wrong kind of 'large portion'.

The days of the Unionist veto are over.

There will be no cajoling the bitter belligerents.

All citizens will be treated equally as is their right. All citizens will have their culture respected. That is the essence of a republic.

I don't know what else you could want really. But then again I'm not stamping my feet at the thought of a democratic mandate of from the people bringing a UI about.

Our partitionists will want us to be a tiny version of the UK in order to appease Unionists, join the commonwealth, doff our hats to a monarchy etc. that would be just like partition - creating trouble for future generations.

BonnieSituation

But they'll get the warm feels "looking out for" Unionists. Screw the rest.

It's such a shame people have taken to cowing to Unionists and confusing it with equality and parity of esteem.

Same sort of dopes who love to "cheer on" England at a World Cup to show how modern and open they are. You know the sort. Confusing neighbourly rivalry with hatred, but ignore hatred in the name of kulchare in the summer.

As I said last night, I cannot wait for them to shack up with the Belligerents, we'll soon see the courage of their convictions.

jh79

BonnieSituation wrote: »

As I said last night, I cannot wait for them to shack up with the Belligerents, we'll soon see the courage of their convictions.

Never understood this claim. Those that will vote no will mainly be doing so because of the huge cost of unification. This is already reflected in opinion polls with only 30% willing to pay anything.

Other might vote no because of fears of violence from the Unionist community.

Why do either cohort need to "shack up with the Belligerents"?

Annd9

Annd9 wrote: »

Do you care about people in the south who voted against Gay marriage/abortion or divorce ? Of course you don't because that is democracy . !

How do you know how I voted?
Perhaps i.voted against those things.
And it's in no way comparable. A vote on a United Ireland would mean a completely new country for some of the people in the North. Their feelings on who they are and how they express it are very important.
They should not be ignored

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Never understood this claim. Those that will vote no will mainly be doing so because of the huge cost of unification. This is already reflected in opinion polls with only 30% willing to pay anything.

Other might vote no because of fears of violence from the Unionist community.

Why do either cohort need to "shack up with the Belligerents"?

The 'costs' that haven't been determined yet?

There'll be a NO side and a YES side. If you are NO then you are allying with others who say NO. Stands to reason really.

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Same way Partitionists like yourself don't give a crap about Nationalists currently therein. Obviously they're the wrong kind of 'large portion'.

The days of the Unionist veto are over.

There will be no cajoling the bitter belligerents.

All citizens will be treated equally as is their right. All citizens will have their culture respected. That is the essence of a republic.

I don't know what else you could want really. But then again I'm not stamping my feet at the thought of a democratic mandate of from the people bringing a UI about.

What makes you think I'm a 'partitionist '?
And presuming to guess how I feel about nationalists in the north?
Very presumptuous of you