Belfast Disturbances

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They will use violence against a British government to get their way = Loyalist, as per my description above.

I think you are just making up descriptions.
I see little difference in them.
Unionist certainly support the union, that does not mean they cannot oppose the government of the day - ie the union comes first before supporting any particular government
Loyalist are the same but I may agree that there is a slight nuanced difference in that those who would say they are first and foremost a loyalist would, I believe, contemplate arrangements outside the UK but maintaining NI and for some that would need to have the british monarch

I think loyalists are first and foremost loyal to OWC with the UK a very important thing to also hold on to.

Dufflecoat Fanny

dd973 wrote: »

It's odd how thousands of U.K citizens live happily in the ROI yet it's obvious these Loyalists/Unionists will never be happy here even after being here for generations. They seem to hate Ireland and Irish people and culture but are strident about living here, if I lived in France but hated France and the French I'd just leave.

They're basically an abandoned caravan of a failed invasion

Zebra3

downcow wrote: »

I think you are just making up descriptions.
I see little difference in them.
Unionist certainly support the union, that does not mean they cannot oppose the government of the day - ie the union comes first before supporting any particular government
Loyalist are the same but I may agree that there is a slight nuanced difference in that those who would say they are first and foremost a loyalist would, I believe, contemplate arrangements outside the UK but maintaining NI and for some that would need to have the british monarch

I think loyalists are first and foremost loyal to OWC with the UK a very important thing to also hold on to.

Is the loyalty not about the loyalty to the unelected head of state?

FrancieBrady

Zebra3 wrote: »

Is the loyalty not about the loyalty to the unelected head of state?

Of course it is. You can be a Unionist and hate monarchy.

20silkcut

briany wrote: »

It could do the same for the UK, maybe.

It did. The U.K. has done fairly well since 1973.

20silkcut

Dufflecoat Fanny wrote: »

They're basically an abandoned caravan of a failed invasion

Very accurate description that’s exactly what they are.
Ireland as an entity would be better off if they never came and would be equally better off ( not from an Irish catholic POV obviously) if they had successfully planted the entire country. But that didn’t happen.
They are like the Japanese soldier who kept fighting World War Two in the Indonesian jungle until the mid 70’s someone needs to tell them the cause is lost and stand down.

jimmycrackcorm

downcow wrote:

I disagree strongly with some of it. The lie was sold that a border in the Irish Sea would protect gfa and peace. This is the root of the problem and the anger. The dup were completely incompetent allowing this lie to take legs.

The root of the problem is that the DUP refused to back Mays plan. The lie is that they're were doing it for a proper Brexit when we all know it was to try to reintroduce the land border to spite nationalists.

If that isn't true then how else did the DUP envisage that the EU / UK border would work? Clearly they're were banking on their hold of the Tories at the time.

jimmycrackcorm

downcow wrote:

Those bad unionists! We could say exactly the same about a few checks on seed potatoes at Dundalk

What do you think magically happens to imports at southern ports with good from mainland UK?

A staunch unionist actually joined me and my friend, who is a very very English Brexit voter, for beers a few weeks ago. (Asia) It's not an interesting story really but I definitely had a closer affinity with the guy than my friend had. There would be no question in my friend's mind about who the unionist was. He's "Irish".

It was a bit of an awkward conversation but we got through it. I genuinely have little interest in these things but this guy really cared. It was bizarre and out of place.

It's my most recent experience with a real life version of downcow. They simply don't understand how completely separate they are from the mainland. The EU has brought a greater shared identity between an Irishman and a German than the UK has resulted in between a Yorkshireman and a Northern Irish Unionist.

They don't want to rule themselves. They don't want anything to do with the country that cares most about them. They just want to be part of a country that doesn't even know who they are. A failed caravan indeed. My friend is very against the idea of Scotland leaving but would give away Northern Ireland for a fiver.

I have another English friend who thinks I'm British. He told his wife, a friend of my ex, that we only say we're Irish as a cultural thing, and I kid you not, he's a Geography teacher in an international school. It's beyond comprehension. The apathy to Ireland and even trying to understand it is engrained in the culture.

downcow

Zebra3 wrote: »

Is the loyalty not about the loyalty to the unelected head of state?

It def means different things to different.
Theses things evolve. Francie wants all loyalists to fit into the same we box.
I would say the vast majority of the PUL community in ni regard themselves as loyal to the monarch and certainly respect the monarch.
Our nation is a constitutional monarchy (thanks to King Billy). So loyalty to the monarch is very different to being loyal to James ll or Kim Jung.
I regard myself as a loyalist and loyalist to ni comes above loyalty to either the queen or the British Parliament. It is though a pleasure to be loyal to a wonderful monarch like our queen.

How would you see the difference (if any) between nationalist and republican in ni context ?

downcow

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The root of the problem is that the DUP refused to back Mays plan. The lie is that they're were doing it for a proper Brexit when we all know it was to try to reintroduce the land border to spite nationalists.

If that isn't true then how else did the DUP envisage that the EU / UK border would work? Clearly they're were banking on their hold of the Tories at the time.

I honestly don’t believe they were interested in creating a land border, but I can’t get inside their head to be sure

Del.Monte

The more things change, the more they stay the same - from my 1972 press cuttings archive.

cameramonkey

downcow wrote: »

I honestly don’t believe they were interested in creating a land border, but I can’t get inside their head to be sure

They want the GFA agreement gone, that is clear and also where did they think the border would be? I mean if they did not think about the repercussions of Brexit in terms of where the border would be they are politically inept. They are now working with loyalist terror gangs so I think we know how they are thinking.

Del.Monte

And Derry from 1972.

FrancieBrady

cameramonkey wrote: »

They want the GFA agreement gone, that is clear and also where did they think the border would be? I mean if they did not think about the repercussions of Brexit in terms of where the border would be they are politically inept.

Where do they think it should be now.

Care to tell is downcow as you are against the Protocol?

downcow

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A staunch unionist actually joined me and my friend, who is a very very English Brexit voter, for beers a few weeks ago. (Asia) It's not an interesting story really but I definitely had a closer affinity with the guy than my friend had. There would be no question in my friend's mind about who the unionist was. He's "Irish".

It was a bit of an awkward conversation but we got through it. I genuinely have little interest in these things but this guy really cared. It was bizarre and out of place.

It's my most recent experience with a real life version of downcow. They simply don't understand how completely separate they are from the mainland. The EU has brought a greater shared identity between an Irishman and a German than the UK has resulted in between a Yorkshireman and a Northern Irish Unionist.

They don't want to rule themselves. They don't want anything to do with the country that cares most about them. They just want to be part of a country that doesn't even know who they are. A failed caravan indeed. My friend is very against the idea of Scotland leaving but would give away Northern Ireland for a fiver.

I have another English friend who thinks I'm British. He told his wife, a friend of my ex, that we only say we're Irish as a cultural thing, and I kid you not, he's a Geography teacher in an international school. It's beyond comprehension. The apathy to Ireland and even trying to understand it is engrained in the culture.

Haha do you are british and I am Irish. You have entertaining friends.

You are a tad patronising and arrogant.
I belong to a nation of 70 million people, from the isles of Scotland to the city of London A melting pot of diversity which I love. I know nothing of the issues of independence for Cornwall and I actually don’t know for sure if the outer Hebrides or jersey are part of the UK. I am not exactly sure what the relationship is with the Isle of Man and UK Is it in is it out. I dunno.
You seem to think that every UK person should be infatuated with my wee place. Arrogant nonsense. Tbh ni has got far far more attention than it deserves.
I can understand why you just don’t get it as you live in a wee monocultural place of 5 million people.

It’s funny what you friend thinks but it’s not relevant to me.
Remind your friend that the one way ni is different from every other region of the UK is that there is an international agreement the copper fastens our place in the union for as long as we want it. No where else, not even the city of London has that. And who got it for us - john Hume and the ira lol

Lol if Scotland wales and England all leave, we will still be the UK Makes a change from the occupied 6

cameramonkey

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where do they think it should be now.

Care to tell is downcow as you are against the Protocol?

can you rephrase that.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where do they think it should be now.

Care to tell is downcow as you are against the Protocol?

I have told you so many times including in this very thread

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I have told you so many times including in this very thread

Tell us again. I must have missed it.

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

I belong to a nation of 70 million people

The UK is not a nation, it's three nations (Scotland, England and Wales) with a region in Ireland currently under UK jurisdiction.

Unionists are not a 'nation' and the north of Ireland is not a country.

antgal23

downcow wrote: »

It def means different things to different.
Theses things evolve. Francie wants all loyalists to fit into the same we box.
I would say the vast majority of the PUL community in ni regard themselves as loyal to the monarch and certainly respect the monarch.
Our nation is a constitutional monarchy (thanks to King Billy). So loyalty to the monarch is very different to being loyal to James ll or Kim Jung.
I regard myself as a loyalist and loyalist to ni comes above loyalty to either the queen or the British Parliament. It is though a pleasure to be loyal to a wonderful monarch like our queen.

How would you see the difference (if any) between nationalist and republican in ni context ?

Whatever way you package it, you are Irish with a big or small i

steddyeddy

Del.Monte wrote: »

And Derry from 1972.

Del what do you think would stop the rioting?

steddyeddy

antgal23 wrote: »

Whatever way you package it, you are Irish with a big or small i

In fairness he/she is whatever they want to be.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Tell us again. I must have missed it.

I think
The Eu Roi and UK should be big girls and cooperate a little.
Firstly there are endless checks etc ongoing which are not required, eg my daughters dog requiring a rabies jab to move from rabies-free gb into rabies-free ni. Problem is that Eu, which has rabies, wants it jabbed in case they get more rabies lol. One of hundreds of crazy Eu beurocratic nonsense.
So reduce checks.
Have electronic system to log movements (UK has said they will take responsibility for anything that breaches this and Eu can sue)
Have some sensible checks on Irish Sea
Have some camera / digital checks on Irish border
Maybe some stuff at Cherbourg if it’s more appropriate
Etc etc.
It’s just about being grown up and getting a win win

downcow

antgal23 wrote: »

Whatever way you package it, you are Irish with a big or small i

There is an ‘n’ in front of it

igCorcaigh

Meh, all national identities are fabrications anyway.
As long as whatever state structure that exists acts fairly, and in the interests of all of its people, the rest of it is back seat stuff for me.

nullzero

downcow wrote: »

There is an ‘n’ in front of it

There's the thing.

You're not Irish, and Unionists will never identify as Irish, mainly because they view themselves as better than the Irish.

In all honesty, you cannot negotiate with bigotry that is as ingrained as that found with Unionists.

Unionists don't want anything to do with us, any United Ireland would only end in one way; a bloody unending civil war.

Were it not for the civil rights movement in the 1960s there would still the an apartheid system in place in Northern Ireland. Unionists hate us, they hate all nationalists in the North and they hate the Republic of Ireland and all it represents, mainly that we've scraped our way to being a success story while Northern Ireland is by all metrics a failed state. Why should we entertain Unionists and all the baggage that comes with them? Let Britain deal with them. My sincere condolences to all rational people in the North because their lives are ruled by these imbeciles.

O'Neill

Oh Yeah! wrote: »

Nobody cares. This is major level cope. The "face" phenomenon is really nothing more than the musings of sexually frustrated bisexual millenial males. Its 18-22 year olds who have no outlet for their homoeroticism. They're also statistically proven to be the most sexually hopeless generation of men ever. They should not be listened to.

The face must simply be symmetrical. The "facial aesthetic" ideals miscers seem to like are actually at odds with science which says that women are attracted to feminine male faces. Considering black men actually have more feminine faces (bigger lips, less prominent jaws, rounder heads) it would seem to suggest that your "facially attractive" nonsense doesnt really hold true. Besides, if Ryan fukking Gosling can be considered aesthetic then I dont really know what to believe anymore.

Its about sex appeal. It doesnt start and stop with the face. But, just like some 19% bodyfat manlet gymcel with bad hygiene and poor communication skills would be seen as sexually unappealing, so too would some beta twink with a pretty face and no masculinity.

Best explanation yet

Junkyard Tom

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Meh, all national identities are fabrications anyway.

Identity is complex and fluid which is good for Unionists as they are welcome to be part of the Irish nation. I believe it's only 30%, or thereabouts, who describe themselves as 'British' now in the north with the remainder as Irish/North-Irish.

It bodes well for a future as a united country and people.

20silkcut

Oh Yeah! wrote: »

Nobody cares. This is major level cope. The "face" phenomenon is really nothing more than the musings of sexually frustrated bisexual millenial males. Its 18-22 year olds who have no outlet for their homoeroticism. They're also statistically proven to be the most sexually hopeless generation of men ever. They should not be listened to.

The face must simply be symmetrical. The "facial aesthetic" ideals miscers seem to like are actually at odds with science which says that women are attracted to feminine male faces. Considering black men actually have more feminine faces (bigger lips, less prominent jaws, rounder heads) it would seem to suggest that your "facially attractive" nonsense doesnt really hold true. Besides, if Ryan fukking Gosling can be considered aesthetic then I dont really know what to believe anymore.

Its about sex appeal. It doesnt start and stop with the face. But, just like some 19% bodyfat manlet gymcel with bad hygiene and poor communication skills would be seen as sexually unappealing, so too would some beta twink with a pretty face and no masculinity.

Arlene foster has a very prominent jawline. She definitely no a beta twink.