Who didnt vote for the Good Friday Agreement?

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

Do you envisage any of the mainstream political partys in the Dail campaigning for a no vote should a border poll come to pass?

People underestimate the sense of nation. Kenny, Coveney and myself would be a yes. I would assume the shinners and FF, the Republican Party for defo.

Risteard81

Muahahaha wrote: »

Just watching Reeling in the Years and they covered the referendum for the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.



94% of voters in the south voted in favour. Who was the 6% who voted no? Was there any politicians or public figures campaigning against it at the time and if so what were their viewpoints?

True Republicans opposed the Stormont Agreement.

Risteard81

statesaver wrote: »

Republican Sinn Fein

The fact is that the Republican Movement's Éire Nua policy was and remains the correct answer for Ireland's problems.

Mad_maxx

Only a slim majority of unionists voted in favour, then again unionists were always good at not realising what they had gained, republicans always good at portraying looses as victories

James Brown

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Only a slim majority of unionists voted in favour, then again unionists were always good at not realising what they had gained, republicans always good at portraying looses as victories

People are complex. Otherwise all the unionists and Republicans would have voted one way or the other.
Trying to score points off an agreed peace is pretty pathetic.

Risteard81

Conall Cernach wrote: »

Actually Republican Sinn Féin opposed it on the grounds that that the Irish Republic of Easter Week 1916, ratified in 1918, is inalienable and non-judicable.

It should be mentioned that the Sinn Féin Constitution explicitly states that the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable. This is yet more proof that Sinn Féin Poblachtach is, in fact, the legitimate continuation of Sinn Féin.

Risteard81

Bonniedog wrote: »

Well you were correct about the united Ireland part.

Everyone knows it is not going to happen under GFA.

Not a chance the Brits will call a border poll, and if they do it will be beaten.

Shinners just like to pretend that this is possible as they get on with becoming another boring middle of the road partitionist party.

The Provos are traitors and Loyalists. They deserve to meet a Traitor's end.

joe40

Risteard81 wrote: »

The Provos are traitors and Loyalists. They deserve to meet a Traitor's end.

What is a traitor's end?

Risteard81

martingriff wrote: »

The thing I wonder is if a border poll is called and NI vote yes but Ireland vote no where does that leave them. Also if NI vote no does that put it to bed permanently and they are then all British

The Six Counties are every bit as much in Ireland as the Free State.


Correct your seditious terminology.

Risteard81

joe40 wrote: »

What is a traitor's end?

What do you think it is?

joe40

Risteard81 wrote: »

What do you think it is?

It doesn't matter what I think it is, I asked what you mean by a "traitor's end"

smellyoldboot

I didn't vote for it. To be fair I didn't vote again it either. I was too young.

Feisar

StackSteevens wrote: »

I voted against it.

The idea of voting in favour of freeing the terrorist vermin convicted of some of the most evil and depraved actions ever to have taken place on these islands stuck in my craw. And that was long before any of us became aware of the signed "get out of jail free" letters that war criminal Bliar had given to the IRA.

True, however they were dealing with the British Empire, what would you have them do whistle dixy? Unfortunately scum only recognise force/power/brutality.

martingriff

McMurphy wrote: »

Do you envisage any of the mainstream political partys in the Dail campaigning for a no vote should a border poll come to pass?

I would not think they would campaign for a no. May not campaign at all

McMurphy

martingriff wrote: »

I would not think they would campaign for a no. May not campaign at all

Interesting, assuming a future border poll is held here in this jurisdiction, some of the mainstream political partys might take a neutral stance?

Don't see it myself.

Bonniedog

There's not going to be one, so won't be an issue.

FF and FG played up the whole unity thing when batting for EU in the Brexit negotiations. That allowed SF to push it again even though they know it is a non starter, and have known this since 1998.

So, between that, Flanagan's "Let's have a party for the Tans," and overall perception that the shinners were something "new" the two former main parties set it up for Shinners to do well in the general election. After the locals and Euros they were in bad spot. Then they elected all manner of assholes who hopefully will have same effect as their councillors once people get to know them better :-)

FrancieBrady

Bonniedog wrote: »

There's not going to be one, so won't be an issue.

FF and FG played up the whole unity thing when batting for EU in the Brexit negotiations. That allowed SF to push it again even though they know it is a non starter, and have known this since 1998.

So how long would you expect the GFA to last if there is no Border Poll?

I love the idea that the two main parties 'self plummeted' their combined share of the vote to a new all time low...as a clever political ruse.
that's a new one on me, I have to say.
That the GFA was also 'a clever ruse hatched by the British and Dublin and Unionists, to hoodwink the gullible nationalists' I have heard before, it is the go to hidey hole for partitionists here when they get bogged down in their own argument.

McMurphy

Bonniedog wrote: »

There's not going to be one, so won't be an issue.

FF and FG played up the whole unity thing when batting for EU in the Brexit negotiations. That allowed SF to push it again even though they know it is a non starter, and have known this since 1998.

So, between that, Flanagan's "Let's have a party for the Tans," and overall perception that the shinners were something "new" the two former main parties set it up for Shinners to do well in the general election. After the locals and Euros they were in bad spot. Then they elected all manner of assholes who hopefully will have same effect as their councillors once people get to know them better :-)

Ah, ok..... So FFG deliberately funked it up so the shinners could do well.

You don't really believe that, do you?

Galwayguy35

The timing would want to be right for a border poll, no point looking for it now because it probably wouldn't pass.

RandomViewer

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

The timing would want to be right for a border poll, no point looking for it now because it probably wouldn't pass.

FG, Labour and the Greens would either call for a no or abstain, FF would be a week yes
Northern vote would probably shade a yes,
Random prediction, Republic 53/47 no draw a line from Dublin to Galway, above yes, below no,
North 55/45 yes

Be far higher towards no in Ireland when the public have it explained what it would really mean. Even in NI I couldn’t see any more than 40% for yes as people know what will keep their wallets fuller.

Bonniedog

McMurphy wrote: »

Ah, ok..... So FFG deliberately funked it up so the shinners could do well.

You don't really believe that, do you?

The whole point of the GFA was to get the vast majority of northern Catholics to accept partition.

It worked. Not only that but SF are helping to run it for them!

The current political scenario 22 years after the GFA has nothing to do with it. Almost nobody in 26 votes according to position on national question as there is no difference between any of the parties in Dáil on this.

FF and FG's fk ups that allowed SF become the biggest party had nothing to do with GFA although Flanagan's mad idea to commemorate the Tans struck an historical chord which benefited SF.

SF will most likely be in government in 26 before long and guess what? That won't bring unity any closer either.

Bonniedog

RandomViewer wrote: »

North 55/45 yes

What evidence do you have for that?

The combined SF/SDLP vote in 2019 was less than 40%. That in itself means that there is no basis for having a poll, never mind that it would be pro unity.

RandomViewer

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Be far higher towards no in Ireland when the public have it explained what it would really mean. Even in NI I couldn’t see any more than 40% for yes as people know what will keep their wallets fuller.

Scotland will be Independant in the next decade or so, That will change the way rest of UK operate, hard recession will make a lot of the state jobs in the North harder to justify, Nationalists already outnumber the unionists they just havent reached voting age yet

RandomViewer

RandomViewer wrote: »

Scotland will be Independant in the next decade or so, That will change the way rest of UK operate, hard recession will make a lot of the state jobs in the North harder to justify, Nationalists already outnumber the unionists they just havent reached voting age yet

They’d be better going with an independent Scotland. It’s closer to Scottish than Irish anyway.

RandomName2

Risteard81 wrote: »

It should be mentioned that the Sinn Féin Constitution explicitly states that the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable. This is yet more proof that Sinn Féin Poblachtach is, in fact, the legitimate continuation of Sinn Féin.

I mean Mussollini called himself the legal successor to the Roman Empire. It didn't mean anything.

In much the same way that a statement like 'the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable' is meaningless

the delegates to the 82nd Ard-Fheis of Sinn Féin have today voted to allow their elected representatives to recognize the26-County Parliament at Leinster House and take part in its administration: and,

Whereas such a decision conflicts with the two fundamental principles on which the organization is based and which are enshrined in the Constitution of Sinn Féin, viz."(a) That the allegiance of Irishmen and Irishwomen is due to the Sovereign Irish Republic proclaimed in 1916. (b) That the sovereignty and unity of the Republic are inalienable and non-judicable": and,

Whereas [..]

Whereas, no group, minority or majority, claiming to serve the historic cause of national freedom and sovereignty, can grant recognition to the British-created institutions of Leinster House, Stormont and Westminster. We, Irish Republicans who wish to uphold the basic Republican position enshrined in the Sinn Féin Constitution until today and meeting in public session declare as follows:

We renew our allegiance to the Sovereign Irish Republic proclaimed in 1916 and which was endorsed by the majority of the people of Ireland, acting as a unit, in 1918.

So this is clearly Ruairi OBradaigh talking out of his hole. As usual it's Sinn Fein saying two different things. They don't recognize Leinster House, but they recognize Leinster House.

They claim 1916, as if it had anything to do with them, and leave out the real Sinn Fein party of 1905, because they are already contradicting themselves without embarrassing themselves by endorsing a party whose sole principle was dual-monarchy.

The Irish state had already ruled that Sinn Fein was not the legal successor to either Sinn Fein or Sinn Fein (leaving aside Sinn Fein altogehter), but since Sinn Fein didn't recognize the Irish state at that time it could handily ignore that decision. Of course even going so far as to say that Sinn Fein recognized Leinster House to the extent that it would no longer be abstentionist caused the split of Sinn Fein and Sinn Fein.

The fact that you have republican political movements that have a fetish with calling themselves Sinn Fein, and republican paramilitary movements having a fetish with calling themselves IRA, is frankly simply confusing. It is particularly cringe worthy that they claim ownership of 1916, since all the participants of 1916, and their decedents who were political, went into the FF and CnG/FG parties, but since Sinn Fein (the one that emerged in NI) considered itself so much better than everyone else, it could also ignore that.

I am not going to even go into the fact that your original statement is contradicted, yet again, by the Good Friday agreement, which actually recognizes the legitimacy of NI.

RandomViewer

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

They’d be better going with an independent Scotland. It’s closer to Scottish than Irish anyway.

Not where I'm from, Donegal people have more in common with someone from Belfast than Cork, Midlands and Southernmost counties of Ireland is odd to us

Muahahaha

RandomViewer wrote: »

Scotland will be Independant in the next decade or so, That will change the way rest of UK operate, hard recession will make a lot of the state jobs in the North harder to justify, Nationalists already outnumber the unionists they just havent reached voting age yet

yeah I actually think that events in Scotland combined with Brexit will have a sizeable influence on what happens in NI. Scottish independence is now polling at 55-45 which is giving it a clear lead outside the margin of error for the first time. Only problem is the Tories wont allow a second referendum but there is only so long they can hold that off, if they keep delaying it indefinitely eventually we will see mass protests on the streets.

Greta_Funberg

It was lucky timing for the PIRA. A few more years, and the Americans might have had something to say upon seeing shopping centres being blown up, people used as human bombs and other republican glories, against their ally in the "war on terror".

James Brown

Greta_Funberg wrote: »

It was lucky timing for the PIRA. A few more years, and the Americans might have had something to say upon seeing shopping centres being blown up, people used as human bombs and other republican glories, against their ally in the "war on terror".

Because the Americans have the moral high ground