Northern Ireland- a failure 99 years on?

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So in essence they would give up for form of unity (with GB) for another form of unity (with this state)

Well that seems clear cut enough.

Sorry?

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry?

Not sure who's sorry? Am I sorry?

Am I sorry that they would chose one form of unity over another? No, not at all, whatever they chose is good, but no doubt will also bring some more division and trouble (small t).

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Not sure who's sorry? Am I sorry?

I don't know what you mean in that post.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I don't think anyone is talking about what WILL happen post unification, Downcow.

What is being discussed is what is guaranteed by the GFA.

It is possible that a devolved NI, with entitlement to British citizenship in perpetuity will be the negotiated agreement reached by Britain and Ireland, but neither of those things are guaranteed by the GFA.

I've been very clear that we don't know what the resulting settlement will be, very clear that I suspect the British government will continue to offer citizenship to the people of the area formerly known as Northern Ireland, and very clear that I would be disappointed for you and future generations from your community should this not happen. My point is purely that this is not guaranteed by the GFA, as the definition of, 'the people of Northern Ireland' as dictated by the agreement would not apply to people born there post unification.

The Irish government must offer Irish passports going forward because of the GFA, up to the point of unification, at which point it must continue to offer Irish passports because those people would be part of a unified Irish state.

The British government must offer British passports going forward because of the GFA up to the point of unification, at which point the definition which binds them to this in the GFA no longer applies.

We all suspect, and I hope it will continue beyond this point (I for one wouldn't be against the idea of at least temporarily continuing with a devolved NI gradually integrating with Ireland, or a more federal arrangement for all of Ireland) but claiming that it is guaranteed by the GFA is erroneous, I'd imagine mostly wishful thinking on your part.

I agree with most of what you say apart from the last bit i.e. your assumption that Northern Ireland would grow closer to the 26 counties as an ongoing process over the years after any hypothetical united Ireland. This is not impossible but it would buck the trend. I can think of dozens and dozens of regions that have separated and drawn further apart over the last few decades, but I am at a loss to think of any other than Germany who have actually joined and grown closer together - and of course they are very different as they were held apart against the wishes of the vast majority of both parts of Germany. Northern Ireland fits better with all those countries that were separating

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't know what you mean in that post.

I said > So in essence they would give up for form of unity (with GB) for another form of unity (with this state)

Well that seems clear cut enough.

In other words I was agreeing with you.
They vote on the question of unity with the ROI.
...while leaving the UK at the same time.

downcow

Originally Posted by FrancieBrady View Post
So let me get this straight.

If you lose the vote and a majority vote for a UI, YOU WANT a guarantee that NI will survive regardless of the the outcome of the vote and just carry on as a devolved entity?

Have you any idea how unhinged that sounds?

downcow wrote: »

Now maybe you would reference where i said that?? more fantasy

Are you going to evidence that you just did not make this up again by giving us a reference

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Originally Posted by FrancieBrady View Post
So let me get this straight.

If you lose the vote and a majority vote for a UI, YOU WANT a guarantee that NI will survive regardless of the the outcome of the vote and just carry on as a devolved entity?

Have you any idea how unhinged that sounds?




Are you going to evidence that you just did not make this up again by giving us a reference

I inferred from what you were saying that you want a garuntee of a devolved arrangement.

Is this not the case?

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I said > So in essence they would give up for form of unity (with GB) for another form of unity (with this state)

Well that seems clear cut enough.

In other words I was agreeing with you.
They vote on the question of unity with the ROI.
...while leaving the UK at the same time.

???

Is that not obvious?

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I agree with most of what you say apart from the last bit i.e. your assumption that Northern Ireland would grow closer to the 26 counties as an ongoing process over the years after any hypothetical united Ireland. This is not impossible but it would buck the trend. I can think of dozens and dozens of regions that have separated and drawn further apart over the last few decades, but I am at a loss to think of any other than Germany who have actually joined and grown closer together - and of course they are very different as they were held apart against the wishes of the vast majority of both parts of Germany. Northern Ireland fits better with all those countries that were separating

One could apply the very same logic to the UK Downcow; with Scottish independence constantly front-and-centre, a post Brexit environment which has removed Scotland and NI from the EU against their will, the UK has certainly grown apart over the last few decades.

Unification wouldn't fit with this, as by definition the majority on both sides have to want it; if it isn't wanted then it won't happen. Simple!

For 20th Century examples of Unification, you could look at Canada and Newfoundland in 1948, Ukraine (1919) Australia (1901), Romania (1918), Hatay with Turkey in 1939, South Africa and the Bantustans in 1994, and quite a few more. Certainly they haven't always been successful, but then again one could say the same of an awful lot of countries.

India also provides some interesting examples having experienced both partition with Pakistan and unification on multiple occasions (more accurately annexation to be honest). If Germany is a positive example of how unification could work, one couldn't say the same about India.

Hamsterchops

FrancieBrady wrote: »

???

Is that not obvious?

I was just questioning if there was a grey area like a Crown dependency. Neither part of this State or part of the UK anymore, an independent Northern Ireland.

You have informed me that this a non runner.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

One could apply the very same logic to the UK Downcow; with Scottish independence constantly front-and-centre, a post Brexit environment which has removed Scotland and NI from the EU against their will, the UK has certainly grown apart over the last few decades.

Unification wouldn't fit with this, as by definition the majority on both sides have to want it; if it isn't wanted then it won't happen. Simple!

For 20th Century examples of Unification, you could look at Canada and Newfoundland in 1948, Ukraine (1919) Australia (1901), Romania (1918), Hatay with Turkey in 1939, South Africa and the Bantustans in 1994, and quite a few more. Certainly they haven't always been successful, but then again one could say the same of an awful lot of countries.

India also provides some interesting examples having experienced both partition with Pakistan and unification on multiple occasions (more accurately annexation to be honest). If Germany is a positive example of how unification could work, one couldn't say the same about India.

Has to be said too, that in any poll you care to mention, the vast majority of people on this island want or aspire to unity. Augurs well for a success story.

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I was just questioning if there was a grey area like a Crown dependency. Neither part of this State or part of the UK anymore, an independent Northern Ireland.

You have informed me that this a non runner.

Not within the framework of the GFA. Correct.

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

Here is the problem plain to see. Bonnie is in his own world and just making your previous posts mean what he wants them to

Not surprised you didn't understand my post in relation to ITT's nonsense. Par for the course really.

Fionn1952

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I was just questioning if there was a grey area like a Crown dependency. Neither part of this State or part of the UK anymore, an independent Northern Ireland.

You have informed me that this a non runner.

Nothing is a non-runner, strictly speaking; it's just that any outcome that isn't unification or remaining part of of UK would require an agreement between Britain, Ireland and NI to supersede the GFA. In the event that the GFA is still in place at the time of a border poll, those will be the only two options.

There is a very small NI independence movement for example, though they've never really picked up much traction or support.

BonnieSituation

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I was just questioning if there was a grey area like a Crown dependency. Neither part of this State or part of the UK anymore, an independent Northern Ireland.

You have informed me that this a non runner.

You ask or propose this (non-)solution every few weeks and then run away when it's laughed out of the place.

An independent NI isn't an option on the table at present and almost NO-ONE has any interest in having one.

FrancieBrady

This is how Chief Justice Richard Humphrey's sees the process by the way.

“The standard procedure adopted to implement an international
agreement involving legislative change in two dualist jurisdictions tends
to be along lines involving
1. Firstly signature of a bilateral agreement,
2. Secondly the introduction and enactment in both jurisdictions of such
legislation as may be necessary to implement it,
3. Thirdly the execution and delivery of instruments of ratification,

Number 1 IMO is were the GFA will be superseded and become redundant, most likely the new bilateral agreement will hold true to a lot of what was contained in the GFA.

Hamsterchops

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You ask or propose this (non-)solution every few weeks and then run away when it's laughed out of the place.

An independent NI isn't an option on the table at present and almost NO-ONE has any interest in having one.

This thread does have a tendency to go round and round in circles, (even without me) I look in the odd time and pose a question depending on what's on the screen!

Don't worry Bonnie, there are a few reasons for me not hanging around & debating in this thread, and you're one of them!

See #3954 onwards . . .

Bye for now, see you sometime next month.

RobMc59

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You ask or propose this (non-)solution every few weeks and then run away when it's laughed out of the place.

An independent NI isn't an option on the table at present and almost NO-ONE has any interest in having one.

Its only laughed at by disgruntled,delusional republicans.The rest of us who are reasonable,willing to listen to other points of view enjoy the discussion .Not instantly trying to shut down anything that displeases them or is vaguely critical of 'their 'side.
We've got you trying to shut everyone up,FrancieBrady talking about whats going to be happening in a UI in the year 2525 and junkyard Tom with his foul-mouthed rants in the middle of the night attacking anyone who doesn't think a ui is imminent.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

FrancieBrady talking about whats going to be happening in a UI in the year 2525 .

Where have I done this?


Not aware of mentioning that year and my last post actually references a document from 2018 where our CJ outlines what will happen after a successful border poll.

You may be missing the growing discussion of this amid all the increasingly desperate handwaving away.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where have I done this?


Not aware of mentioning that year and my last post actually references a document from 2018 where our CJ outlines what will happen after a successful border poll.

You may be missing the growing discussion of this amid all the increasingly desperate handwaving away.

The year was a reference to an old song(in the year 2525)which predicted what would happen far in the future.
I also agree with Hamsterchops that the discussion(if it can be called that)just goes round in circles . it's obvious there will be no agreement with one set of people adamant there will be a UI,regardless of the current world situation and another set unconvinced of the possibility of a UI anytime soon.
Nothing wrong with discussing that but no chance of any meeting of minds I'd say.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

The year was a reference to an old song(in the year 2525)which predicted what would happen far in the future.
I also agree with Hamsterchops that the discussion(if it can be called that)just goes round in circles . it's obvious there will be no agreement with one set of people adamant there will be a UI,regardless of the current world situation and another set unconvinced of the possibility of a UI anytime soon.
Nothing wrong with discussing that but no chance of any meeting of minds I'd say.

You will find that on any thread on politics. Srems to be a bugbear of our Unionist advocates.
Maybe that has something to do with their fear of a border poll.
They can't help trying to shut down discussion.
Why is it only Unionists and partitionists make this complaint?

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You will find that on any thread on politics. Srems to be a bugbear of our Unionist advocates.
Maybe that has something to do with their fear of a border poll.
They can't help trying to shut down discussion.
Why is it only Unionists and partitionists make this complaint?

I had posted about bonnie doing his usual party piece and shutting down meaningful discussion because he doesn't like people having a different opinion to his.
I'm a British person who believes in the Union,I have no axe to grind particularly with anyone wanting a UI but do think some of those in favour of it happening(you included)aren't very practical about the unlikelyhood(imo)of it happening anytime soon.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I had posted about bonnie doing his usual party piece and shutting down meaningful discussion because he doesn't like people having a different opinion to his.
I'm a British person who believes in the Union,I have no axe to grind particularly with anyone wanting a UI but do think some of those in favour of it happening(you included)aren't very practical about the unlikelyhood(imo)of it happening anytime soon.

Bonnie, like several other poster had tried several times to explain their point of view to a poster before the post you responded to. He more than adequately showed he knew the concepts and legalities involved in the topic.

There was nothing 'meaningful' in what downcow had to say to him, other than a dig at Bonnie. Then you weighed in.

By the way, while you protest no great concern, neither your posting history backs that up nor your claim to possess some tremendous insight into when it will happen.
WE ARE ALL just giving opinions.

jm08

RobMc59 wrote: »

I had posted about bonnie doing his usual party piece and shutting down meaningful discussion because he doesn't like people having a different opinion to his.
I'm a British person who believes in the Union,I have no axe to grind particularly with anyone wanting a UI but do think some of those in favour of it happening(you included)aren't very practical about the unlikelyhood(imo)of it happening anytime soon.

Whats so great about the Union? Sell it to us. Whats in it for someone from South Armagh?

RobMc59

jm08 wrote: »

Whats so great about the Union? Sell it to us. Whats in it for someone from South Armagh?

Who says I have to sell it to anyone,I've grown up in the UK most of my life and it's a great place to be imo.The diversity and qualities of the different nations within it is unique,whats not to like?
I'd like to add I think Ireland is also a fantastic place.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'd like to add I think Ireland is also a fantastic place.

So Unionists have nothing to fear if we give Irish unity a go for 100 years so.

mfceiling

jm08 wrote: »

Whats so great about the Union? Sell it to us. Whats in it for someone from South Armagh?

Well according to my mate who lives in forkhill...the free dental care, free health care, free education for his daughter, low tax rate on his car, cheap groceries, no water bills, low alcohol prices, low medicine costs and a range of government subsidies towards his living expenses he seems happy enough!!

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So Unionists have nothing to fear if we give Irish unity a go for 100 years so.

Maybe not but aren't you concerned that NI does appear to have advantages now which could make the prospect of a UI less attractive to voters?

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Maybe not but aren't you concerned that NI does appear to have advantages now which could make the prospect of a UI less attractive to voters?

No, we are already seeing the volatile route they have been taken down. I'm with the Scots, wash your hands of the English Tories asap. Tories were never any good for Ireland and Scotland is finding out the hard way they they aren't much use to them either.

jm08

RobMc59 wrote: »

Who says I have to sell it to anyone,I've grown up in the UK most of my life and it's a great place to be imo.The diversity and qualities of the different nations within it is unique,whats not to like?
I'd like to add I think Ireland is also a fantastic place.

No one says you have to sell it (though it might be a good idea to try and sell it to the nationalist community who are in Northern Ireland).


Not being part of the Union doesn't prevent people from enjoying the diversity and qualities of different nations. For instance, most people can really appreciate the French nation without being ruled by them.


As for Ireland being a fantastic nation - are we less or more fantastic than the welsh for the Scots? On the whole, I would think that your average English person has far more respect for Irish people than they do the Scots or the Welsh and visa versa (Irish people really like English people and get on better with them than we do with the Scots or Welsh despite being part of the Celtic nations).