United Ireland Poll - please vote

Fionn1952

Hamsterchops wrote: »

That's why I mentioned the Northern Irish identity, which seems to be a newish thing, possibly with in-built Unionist leanings? Maybe not?

If a border poll was called what way would the Northern Irish vote? They might vote for a United Ireland, but then they'd lose their Northern Irish Identity wouldn't they?

Me and my ideas

I don't see Dubs, Cork folk, those from Galway or anywhere else in the country having any issues maintaining an identity tied to the part of the country they're from while simultaneously being part of Ireland?

I'm Irish, I'm a Fermanagh man, I'm an Ulster man, I'm Northern Irish. None of those are prevented by the others, nor will they disappear because of Unification any more than they did when I moved away from Fermanagh.

FrancieBrady

Hamsterchops wrote: »

That's why I mentioned the Northern Irish identity, which seems to be a newish thing, possibly with in-built Unionist leanings? Maybe not?

If a border poll was called what way would the Northern Irish vote? They might vote for a United Ireland, but then they'd lose their Northern Irish Identity wouldn't they?

Me and my ideas

Those switching from a British identity to a NI one obviously see themselves as no longer British you would imagine. Those switching from Irish to Northern Irish are refining their identity to the northern part of Ireland,

Junkyard Tom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

they'd lose their Northern Irish Identity wouldn't they?

They'd still be living in the north of Ireland after a pro-UI vote.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those switching from a British identity to a NI one obviously see themselves as no longer British you would imagine. Those switching from Irish to Northern Irish are refining their identity to the northern part of Ireland,

You would imagine wrongly

Seathrun66

Where's Blanch btw, still searching for the evidence of German reunification turning it into a basket case economy?

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

You would imagine wrongly

The threat [to the union] also comes from within Northern Ireland. Witness the comments of former Ireland international rugby player Andrew Trimble on Claire Byrne Live – many unionists fear his articulate sentiments about a fused British, Irish and Northern Irish identity are the true threat to the union. Keep diluting Britishness and it will cease to be relevant.

irishtimes.com

The rise of introspective, and hostile, English Nationalism with its useful idiots who are 'British' Nationalists will see fewer-and-fewer people in the north of Ireland self-identifying as British. Meanwhile the opposite is true for the Irish, we are outward-looking, open-minded, Europeans.

downcow

downcow wrote: »

My Irish history is not good. But I understand it was your Parliament who democratically decided that Stormont should decide whether ni stays in U.K. or leaves along with the 26 counties. Stormont then took up that offer and democratically decided to stay in uk.
Is this correct? I would love to know for sure. Can anyone help me?

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me. I am honestly interested whether it is accurate or not.

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

My Irish history is not good. But I understand it was your Parliament who democratically decided that Stormont should decide whether ni stays in U.K. or leaves along with the 26 counties. Stormont then took up that offer and democratically decided to stay in uk.
Is this correct? I would love to know for sure. Can anyone help me?

Well this is more hyporcisy from, you are whinging Leo used the threat of violence to get the big brother(the EU) to use their influence to put the Border in the Irish sea.

Well the Unionists got their big brother(Britain) to coerce the Irish into signing a treaty with a far more blatant threat of violence. The Irish had no say in the issue of a border and were forced into it and the Border Commission that was set up to look at the issue was blatantly biased with one Brit, one Unionist and one Nationalist so was disbanded. If does not surprise me one bit that coercion and gerrymandering is what Unionists consider democracy.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Can anyone confirm or deny this for me. I am honestly interested whether it is accurate or not.

Playing games now downcow? Funny that you seemed to know all about it on the Reunification thread.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116401142&postcount=5856

FrancieBrady

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Well this is more hyporcisy from, you are whinging Leo used the threat of violence to get the big brother(the EU) to use their influence to put the Border in the Irish sea.

Well the Unionists got their big brother(Britain) to coerce the Irish into signing a treaty with a far more blatant threat of violence. The Irish had no say in the issue of a border and were forced into it and the Border Commission that was set up to look at the issue was blatantly biased with one Brit, one Unionist and one Nationalist so was disbanded. If does not surprise me one bit that coercion and gerrymandering is what Unionists consider democracy.

A threat of 'immediate and terrible war' from Westminster, with Carson and his gun running sedition in the background. 'Sir' Edward Carson, gun running and private armies made no difference to the king.

Fr D Maugire

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A threat of 'immediate and terrible war' from Westminster, with Carson and his gun running sedition in the background. 'Sir' Edward Carson, gun running and private armies made no difference to the king.

Yes, but Leo pointing out the real possibility of a return to violence is the exact same as Britain saying 'sign the treaty or we go to war in the morning'. Well, in the mind of a Unionist, it is anyways.

BonnieSituation

Hamsterchops wrote: »

That's why I mentioned the Northern Irish identity, which seems to be a newish thing, possibly with in-built Unionist leanings? Maybe not?

If a border poll was called what way would the Northern Irish vote? They might vote for a United Ireland, but then they'd lose their Northern Irish Identity wouldn't they?

Me and my ideas

You and your repetitive ideas that 'other' northern nationalists. Give over.

FrancieBrady

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Yes, but Leo pointing out the real possibility of a return to violence is the exact same as Britain saying 'sign the treaty or we go to war in the morning'. Well, in the mind of a Unionist, it is anyways.

Yes, a 'threat' to the British who we have seen in the last few weeks couldn't care less if it tuns into a bloodbath they are over in Brussels copperfastening the Protocol.

Monkey arris

Even if Ulster says 'yes' there'll still be an Ulster.

downcow

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Well this is more hyporcisy from, you are whinging Leo used the threat of violence to get the big brother(the EU) to use their influence to put the Border in the Irish sea.

Well the Unionists got their big brother(Britain) to coerce the Irish into signing a treaty with a far more blatant threat of violence. The Irish had no say in the issue of a border and were forced into it and the Border Commission that was set up to look at the issue was blatantly biased with one Brit, one Unionist and one Nationalist so was disbanded. If does not surprise me one bit that coercion and gerrymandering is what Unionists consider democracy.

I was asking the question. I honestly read about this on this board. I never knew it until then and each time I have asked for clarification I get zero.
Still not sure mind you. But at least you are engaging with it.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I was asking the question. I honestly read about this on this board. I never knew it until then and each time I have asked for clarification I get zero.
Still not sure mind you. But at least you are engaging with it.

You got the same clarification on the other thread. Ridiculous game playing.

downcow

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Yes, but Leo pointing out the real possibility of a return to violence is the exact same as Britain saying 'sign the treaty or we go to war in the morning'. Well, in the mind of a Unionist, it is anyways.

Yeah. That is my reading of it.

downcow

downcow wrote: »

My Irish history is not good. But I understand it was your Parliament who democratically decided that Stormont should decide whether ni stays in U.K. or leaves along with the 26 counties. Stormont then took up that offer and democratically decided to stay in uk.
Is this correct? I would love to know for sure. Can anyone help me?

The responses to this, whilst I appreciate the engagement, produced lots of heat and very little light.
Would anyone have the balls to give me a direct answer? Or point me to where I could have it answered categorically?

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

The responses to this, whilst I appreciate the engagement, produced lots of heat and very little light.
Would anyone have the balls to give me a direct answer? Or point me to where I could have it answered categorically?

You've had it answered categorically and with context previously. The, 'oh I just don't know' act wears thin after a while.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You got the same clarification on the other thread. Ridiculous game playing.

Well maybe you could tell me clearly, is it true?
I was sheltered from this and until a few months ago on this forum, I had no idea that your parliament had voted to allow patrician.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You've had it answered categorically and with context previously. The, 'oh I just don't know' act wears thin after a while.

So I take it the answer is YES?
Quite amazing how we have all been hoodwinked.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

So I take it the answer is YES?
Quite amazing how we have all been hoodwinked.

Who has been hoodwinked?!! I've never come across someone so proud of their lack of knowledge of history.....particularly when that history concerns the formation of the state they're so proud of.

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

I was asking the question. I honestly read about this on this board. I never knew it until then and each time I have asked for clarification I get zero.
Still not sure mind you. But at least you are engaging with it.

Seriously, you seem to know so little about your little state and it's history. This is really basic, basic stuff.

The Unionists import guns illegally to prevent a process(Home Rule) that was Democratically processed through London. No coercion, no threats.

They went against the Democratic 75% majority of the people of Ireland who elected politicans to see Ireland leave the Union.

They used their influence to have the British put the border in the treaty as they wished. You think Nationalists had any say on where the border was drawn? The British then blatantly threatened Ireland with all out war if they didn't sign the treaty. The Border Commission that was included in the treaty to look at the border never got off the ground as it was biased from the start, thus ensuring the majority for Unionists to vote themselves out of any possibility of joining Ireland.

How much democracy can one handle.

downcow

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Seriously, you seem to know so little about your little state and it's history. This is really basic, basic stuff.

The Unionists import guns illegally to prevent a process(Home Rule) that was Democratically processed through London. No coercion, no threats.

They went against the Democratic 75% majority of the people of Ireland who elected politicans to see Ireland leave the Union.

They used their influence to have the British put the border in the treaty as they wished. You think Nationalists had any say on where the border was drawn? The British then blatantly threatened Ireland with all out war if they didn't sign the treaty. The Border Commission that was included in the treaty to look at the border never got off the ground as it was biased from the start, thus ensuring the majority for Unionists to vote themselves out of any possibility of joining Ireland.

How much democracy can one handle.

Why would the british threaten the Irish if they did not get keeping ni, or as many here refer to it the basket case? Doesn’t seem to make sense. Are you sure you are not missing something?

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

Why would the british threaten the Irish if they did not get keeping ni, or as many here refer to it the basket case? Doesn’t seem to make sense. Are you sure you are not missing something?

Not missing anything.

Lets keep this more simple, Scotland want to have an independence vote. I think the support for independence is less than it was in Ireland in 1918. Anyways, now lets say that people know Edinburgh will vote against Independence. Then imagine London basically saying, Scotalnd you can have independence if Edinburgh stays in GB, otherwise you cannot have independence even if a majority vote for it. Do you think in any shape or form that is a democratic process?

And lets be clear here, you are on record more than once as saying you were against Brexit, but as a democrat you accepted it as it was a Countrywide vote.

Fr D Maugire

downcow wrote: »

Why would the british threaten the Irish if they did not get keeping ni, or as many here refer to it the basket case? Doesn’t seem to make sense. Are you sure you are not missing something?

Maybe keep this closer to home. British government decide that NI will continue to exist, but only Antrim and Down will remain part of the UK. The other counties rejoin the Republic. If Unionists do not agree to this, the whole of NI will join the Republic. What would you choose?

mehico

Was looking at some recent poll results earlier that seemed to indicate that less than a third of people in Britain would be upset if NI left UK and the majority stated that they did not care either way if NI left or stayed. Was this the view of British citizens before Brexit or has it become more prevalent since Brexit?

(Poll was from this month on Yougov website).

FrancieBrady

mehico wrote: »

Was looking at some recent poll results earlier that seemed to indicate that less than a third of people in Britain would be upset if NI left UK and the majority stated that they did not care either way if NI left or stayed. Was this the view of British citizens before Brexit or has it become more prevalent since Brexit?

(Poll was from this month on Yougov website).

That's why a UI is now in Ireland's interests, the rest of the EU interests, and in Britain's interests and it is all to do with Brexit with the 2nd two. A triple whammy so to speak.

The Dark Knight

mehico wrote: »

Was looking at some recent poll results earlier that seemed to indicate that less than a third of people in Britain would be upset if NI left UK and the majority stated that they did not care either way if NI left or stayed. Was this the view of British citizens before Brexit or has it become more prevalent since Brexit?

(Poll was from this month on Yougov website).

Wonder what a similar poll here would say! Our boards poll gives us an indication.

Why should any of us care about the North. They don't even care about themselves. If they did, they would be voting for more moderate parties on both sides of the divide.

The Dark Knight

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That's why a UI is now in Ireland's interests, the rest of the EU interests, and in Britain's interests and it is all to do with Brexit with the 2nd two. A triple whammy so to speak.

How can you say that a UI is in Ireland's interest.
- Decades and decades of violence (imagine the troubles in reverse).
- Fundamental swing in the makeup of the Daíl (or whatever we end up calling it), paralysing politics and decision making. We're bad enough as it is.
- Cost of integration and sustaining a higher cost social system.

Can somebody convince me of the benefit of a UI to Ireland that outways these real issues? I'm open to any logical points.
Other than romantic nationalism, there are no substantial benefits worth the risk a UI brings.