What do we do if the British leave?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo

Poblachtach wrote:

They're not occupations forces :rolleyes:

There an army liberating ireland from its own people,like the brits say they are doing in iraq.

I could be wrong, but I tend to interpret naked sarcasm as a thinly disguised way of saying "I just ran out of ways to justify my half-baked opinions."

Poblachtach wrote:

15000 troops in the north,way more than iraq,no thats not occupation is it mate :rolleyes:

How many troops are there in England? Is it occupied?

MrPudding

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

The cain link is for 1996, a bit out of date.


The document I linked to is an official budget breakdown of the 2003 - 2004 budget by the Northern Ireland Office, it seems to put the cost at just over £9 billion for that period. That is GBP not euros.


MrP

FTA69

true wrote:

Your ally FA069, has said that the people in question were killed because they were policemen or soldiers, or whatever , full time , part time or ex, or because they had connections to the "occupation forces". You now admit that they were targeted because they were protestants. Interesting.
And what about the prods who were shot or burnt out in the south in the early twenties ? What about the descrimination there , which resulted in the protestant population in the "free state" being decimated ? We do not hear you cribbing much about that. Ah shure, it wont happen again, why would it.

For your information myself and arcade have vastly differing views on the subject of the Republican Movement so don't label us as "allies" please. What he says has nothing to do with me and as such I resent your juxtaposition of our radically diverse viewpoints.

You rightly bring up the subject of anti-Protestantism in the Free State, Republicans since the 30s have continuously opposed both the Free State as well as its socially repressive laws. Your beef is with the Catholic Church, Fianna Fáil and the likes of Fine Gael who allowed this to happen. Republicans have no love nor responsibility for an establishment which interned, tortured and executed us in various decades. The Republican Movement is secular in all its ethos so a pogrom from us is the last thing you have to fear.

Besides, comparisons between now and the 20s are redundant because as I'm sure ye'll all agree, Ireland is a very different place nowadays.

FTA69

as much as this might hurt you for me to say this, whether you like it or not, the territory of Northern Ireland is a part of what is known as the United Kingdom.

I fully acknowledge the position of the Six Counties thanks, after all I am involved in trying to break said connection. What I am saying however, is that Ireland's constitutional status is an issue which is the responsibility of the Irish people as a whole, not a carefully chosen minority selected on the basis of religion.

Quebec in canada has a large french speaking population who would like to become independent of Canada. whenever referenda have been held on the issue it was only Quebec who were allowed to decide on their fate, not the whole of Canada.

An entirely redundant comparison considering Ireland has always been a national and culturally seperate entity from Britain, until a recent stage in British domination Ireland even had an indigenous language in majority use. The concept you are failing to grasp is that Ireland is one country, and always has been.

the country is the UK.

Your point is? To follow your logic it could be said that considering all of Ireland was "in the UK" in 1916 the people were therefore "British" and as such Irish Republican separatists were "traitors".

The war of independence is over, and we lost, get used to it

You might be prepared to tolerate a British prescence here but many are not, if you choose to wash your hands of the situation surely then you are not in a position to criticise those who resist the British Army or their cohorts in this country?

jbkenn

FTA69 wrote:

Republicans have no love nor responsibility for an establishment which interned, tortured and executed us

They executed you, no wonder your p****d off

jbkenn

FTA69

Can you provide a link to figures that show the majority of the 44% see the security forces as an occupying force? I know that noone in my family sees it as such. With the exception of 1 or 2 people noone that I grew up with did either. I know this is a small sample but I think you figures may very well be overstated.

Well the majority of Nationalists are Sinn Féin voters and that party's position speaks for itself. You might also like to pretend that the Republican position is simply a fringe one amongst the broader Nationalist community, but that simply is not true. The majority of Nationalists (not a vast one!) are opposed to the IRA, that is completely true, but this opposition does not equate with support for the RUC or British Army. Nationalists by no means viewed the brits as their army or the police as their reliable local bobbies.

I personally have had nothing but possitive experience with the RUC. Of course there were some assholes in it but the vast majority seem to have been OK.

Good for you, I personally have seen nothing positive about them. I have seen the injuries, both physical and psychological, they inflicted on people as well as seen the impact left on people after they had a loved one killed by this force. To make a political analysis of the RUC one most look at the legacy of the force as a whole, collusion with the UVF and UDA was widespread and supported by the British government; they have killed many children and innocent people with plastic bullets; they have routinely tortured innocent people in Castlereagh interrogation centre; they have aided Loyalist mobs in pogroms against Catholics; they stand condemned by Amnesty International. As far as I'm concerned, these examples outweigh your "positive experience" with them.

Have you lived in NI?

No, but to confine the Republican agenda to the Six Counties is simply disingenious. Republicanism is about Ireland in general, aspects include the occupation but also the inequitable social system we have on both sides of the border. This struggle is as relevant to me as it is to someone in Dublin, Ballymurphy or the Shankill.

Do you have any personal experience of the security forces in NI

I've seen their thuggery and the results of it first hand, so yes.

WhiteWashMan

im kinda curious why the country of northern ireland is the responsiblity of the cistizens of another country, namely republic of ireland.

now, my history is not great, but hasnt northern ireland been part of the british empire for ohhhhh, several hundred years?

but even then, it seems your angst is aimed at the wrong people. i have no idea why you continually talk about the british forces who occupy northern ireland. surely you struggle is against the protestant population of northern ireland.
lets face it, there is still only a hand full of people left interested in a perticularly pointless argument.

i never erally understood what people gained by getting back 6 counties. i mean, their pretty where the there hasnt been a bomb detonated, but after that, erm, what is there? a bunch of moany people.

FTA69

im kinda curious why the country of northern ireland is the responsiblity of the cistizens of another country, namely republic of ireland.

Another country? You need to learn the difference between a "country" and a "state". Ireland is a distinct national and cultural unit and always has been. Partition is only a relatively recent phenomenon.

now, my history is not great, but hasnt northern ireland been part of the british empire for ohhhhh, several hundred years?

The 26 Counties were under British domination for 753 years, by your logic they should remain part of the UK.

surely you struggle is against the protestant population of northern ireland.

Republicans view the Protestant community in Ireland as Irish people and recognise the need to "replace the terms Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter with the common name of Irishman". Partition was instigated, and is being supported by Britain.

i never erally understood what people gained by getting back 6 counties.

What had the 26 Counties to "gain" by independence? Ireland is one country and has a national, inalienable right to be entirely free.

arcadegame2004

Originally posted by Whitewashman
im kinda curious why the country of northern ireland is the responsiblity of the cistizens of another country, namely republic of ireland.

now, my history is not great, but hasnt northern ireland been part of the british empire for ohhhhh, several hundred years?

So was Southern Ireland. Are you saying that Southern Ireland wasn't "occupied but was part of the UK"? Translated, your position is like this: 'something has been this way for centuries. Thus it must continue'. Kind of like women being treated like second-class citizens in Western countries for thousands of years, being denied the vote etc. Would you prefer that to have continued? After all, using your apparent outlook "it was that way for centuries, thererfore it must stay the same!".

No-one here is denying the legal reality that NI is constitutionally part of the United Kingdom. What we are debating here is "Should it be?". That is the question and I believe the answer is NO. Brazil, Mozambique and Angola were ruled by Portugal for 500 years. Do you feel then that they should have been forced to continue like that? Do you feel the same about Spanish-speaking South and Central America? Presumably you also feel Britain should have stayed in India, Kenya, present-day US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Burma? You are entitled to that view, but I believe it is a very tiny minority in terms of public opinion in the UK. Are you from the UK BTW? No offence, I am just asking since it is unusual for a Southerner to express such devotion to imperialism.

but even then, it seems your angst is aimed at the wrong people. i have no idea why you continually talk about the british forces who occupy northern ireland. surely you struggle is against the protestant population of northern ireland.
lets face it, there is still only a hand full of people left interested in a perticularly pointless argument.

Anti-Protestantism in Southern Ireland is virtually non-existent at this stage. The majority in the South who support re-unification of this island are not holding that position just to annoy NI Protestants. It is a constitutional position, not a sectarian one.

MrPudding

FTA69 wrote:

Good for you, I personally have seen nothing positive about them. I have seen the injuries, both physical and psychological, they inflicted on people as well as seen the impact left on people after they had a loved one killed by this force. ....... they have killed many children and innocent people ........ they have routinely tortured innocent people ........ As far as I'm concerned, these examples outweigh your "positive experience" with them.

This could be one of a number of groups in the North, you buddies being one of them.

FTA69 wrote:

No, but to confine the Republican agenda to the Six Counties is simply disingenious. Republicanism is about Ireland in general, aspects include the occupation but also the inequitable social system we have on both sides of the border. This struggle is as relevant to me as it is to someone in Dublin, Ballymurphy or the Shankill.

Given that we are talking about the RUC/PSNI I would think that being in the North would be kind of relevent.

FTA69 wrote:

I've seen their thuggery and the results of it first hand, so yes.

Very good. I have seem the good side. Who wins?

MrP

FTA69

This could be one of a number of groups in the North, you buddies being one of them.

True, but when one examines the context in which both sets of actions took place it becomes less black and white. One side was fighting a repressive military power while another was fighting to maintain a foreign imperialist presence in the country.

Given that we are talking about the RUC/PSNI I would think that being in the North would be kind of relevent.

I thought you were reffering to the conflict in general with that statement, most people who use that argument are, apologies. However, you don't have to live in the Six Counties to know what the RUC/PSNI are like. The facts speak for themselves.

marco murphy

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

They never even came :rolleyes:

oscarBravo

Poblachtach wrote:

the french didnt stay there to oppress the people, steal the food and kill of a load of people

Poblachtach wrote:

They never even came :rolleyes:

Ah, the futility of consistency.

Raskolnikov

MrPudding wrote:

it seems to put the cost at just over £9 billion for that period. That is GBP not euros.

Is that the cost before N. Ireland taxes are brought into the equation or not?

The link that Daveirl provided; states that

Without counting the roughly £1bn in annual security costs, the province receives about £2bn more a year than it contributes in tax revenue - a transfer known as subvention.

. That gives us a figure of £3bn. Also, we'll only ever get a united Ireland with the acceptance of the unionists. If that happenes, that would slash the cost of the £1bn security bill thus giving us a more managable figure, closer to £2bn.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Lorcan26

Surely what NI needs now is its OWN governement, so the people of northern ireland can decide for themselves about the issues that are affecting them. Like it or not, as many people have said NI is part of the UK. i personally am not in favour of this, but surely it isnt up to me or the people of the republic or of the UK but the people of NI. The isle of man, guernsey and jersey, gibraltar( i think) are governing themselves and are still (sort of ) part of the UK, or are 'dependenices of the crown' (am i right???) and this , in my opinion is what NI should have, and not go the same way as Scotland or Wales.

daveirl

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

To be honest with you Dave, the E.U would be funding NI if it was to join the Republic, not the Irish taxpayer.
In fact it might be a good thing in that it would drag down our GNP and we would not have to be a net contributer to the E.U.
Thus it would save us money.

A Dub in Glasgo

Lorcan26 wrote:

but surely it isnt up to me or the people of the UK but the people of NI. s.

You don't think the majority of the UK should decide? A bit crappy for the tens of millions of people who put their hand in their pocket every year to fund NI.

billy the squid

An entirely redundant comparison considering Ireland has always been a national and culturally seperate entity from Britain, until a recent stage in British domination Ireland even had an indigenous language in majority use. The concept you are failing to grasp is that Ireland is one country, and always has been.

Quebec has its own language too you know, French.

MrPudding

billy the squid wrote:

Quebec has its own language too you know, French.

And a completly separate immigration system that you need to get through after getting through the general Canadian one.

MrP

A Dub in Glasgo

Maybe they just go the whole hog and look for their indepedence, it was very close last time.

MrPudding

MrPudding wrote:

And a completly separate immigration system that you need to get through after getting through the general Canadian one.

[Off topic]I was in Quebec recently and drove on up from Toronto.
There was no immigration check, the only thing I noticed was hardly anyone certainly in Quebec City spoke english or at least they didnt want to that I met and there wasnt any english to be heard on the radio either.
I presume you mean at Montreal airport?[/off topic]

MrPudding

Earthman wrote:

[Off topic]I was in Quebec recently and drove on up from Toronto.
There was no immigration check, the only thing I noticed was hardly anyone certainly in Quebec City spoke english or at least they didnt want to that I met and there wasnt any english to be heard on the radio either.
I presume you mean at Montreal airport?[/off topic]

Sorry, I meant for the purpose of a work permit or citizenship.

MrP

FTA69

billy the squid wrote:

Quebec has its own language too you know, French.

What's your point? Quebec and Ireland are two vastly differing places with two vastly differing political situations.

true

FTA69 wrote:

What's your point? Quebec and Ireland are two vastly differing places with two vastly differing political situations.

One of the reasons Canada is successful is because it is one big country. Do you think the US would be successful if every state wanted it own government , embassies, etc? The people of Canada know that to split Canada up is to duplicate a lot of costs , even though they may have two languages , cultural backgrounds etc

Like it or not, the majority in N. Ireland see themselves as belonging to the UK, in every sense. 99% of protestants and 33% of catholics want to remain with the UK. The real trouble would come if they were forced out of the UK in to a united Ireland. I can see the new minister for education, introducing compulsory Irish and re-education / revised history ( republican indoctrination ) classes already.

arcadegame2004

true wrote:

One of the reasons Canada is successful is because it is one big country. Do you think the US would be successful if every state wanted it own government , embassies, etc? The people of Canada know that to split Canada up is to duplicate a lot of costs , even though they may have two languages , cultural backgrounds etc

Like it or not, the majority in N. Ireland see themselves as belonging to the UK, in every sense. 99% of protestants and 33% of catholics want to remain with the UK. The real trouble would come if they were forced out of the UK in to a united Ireland. I can see the new minister for education, introducing compulsory Irish and re-education / revised history ( republican indoctrination ) classes already.

The Algerian precedent suggests strongly that a withdrawal of the colonial power can be accomplished even in a context similar to NI, as there were also 1 million pro-French colonial loyalists who committed acts of terrorism to oppose Algerian independence.

BTW I don't think NI should be forced to have compulsory Irish teaching. Regarding the 33% of Catholics, I remind you that in the first poll in the GFA referendum campaign, about 20% of NI Catholics said they would vote "No", as did 20% in the Republic. 95% of each voted "Yes". Also, over 90% of Catholics in NI vote for parties that support a United Ireland. They could vote for the Alliance or Unionists if they opposed this. Almost no NI Catholics would use force against a UI.

ionapaul

You mean we could have our very own Algeria here in Ireland? And it will only cost each of us €2,000 + per annum? It's like Sale of the Century, except everyone's a winner!

We need to forget about those polls, as we all have indicated, almost any result wanted can be found by sculpting your question in a given way. Not certain how NI Catholics would use force against a United Ireland - but can see clearly how certain groups would use force against the government of a United Ireland they didn't control or couldn't dominate. That said, I am sure that the government of a United Ireland would have to include Sinn Fein, power-sharing and all that.

true

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The Algerian precedent suggests strongly that a withdrawal of the colonial power can be accomplished even in a context similar to NI, as there were also 1 million pro-French colonial loyalists who committed acts of terrorism to oppose Algerian independence.

BTW I don't think NI should be forced to have compulsory Irish teaching. Regarding the 33% of Catholics, I remind you that in the first poll in the GFA referendum campaign, about 20% of NI Catholics said they would vote "No", as did 20% in the Republic. 95% of each voted "Yes". Also, over 90% of Catholics in NI vote for parties that support a United Ireland. They could vote for the Alliance or Unionists if they opposed this. Almost no NI Catholics would use force against a UI.

How can you compare Algeria with the UK ? There is no analagy. There was bloodshed in Algeria : France did leave but Algeria was always a different continent, different people, different religion, different language, etc. N. Ireland is as integral a part of the UK as the southern island of New Zealand is an integral part of New Zealand as a whole, even though most of New Zealands population live on the north island.
If you scour the world and think Algeria leaving the protection of France is a great example, then God help us. Is Algeria such a great country now that millions of people want to go and live there ? No, they are leaving Algeria to live in places like France, legally or illegially, if they can.

You say, "BTW, I do not think N. I. should be forced to have compulsory Irish teaching." Good for you, but would happen do you think in the extremly unlikely event of a United Ireland : would Irish be compulsory then. You could not have one law for the 6 counties and another law down here, could you : that is what you are trying to get away from. Irish is compulsory here : not too long ago if you failed Irish you failed you whole Leaving cert. Try to get in to UCD or UCG or UCC without it : try to get a job as a Guard without it.
Look at how Sinn Fein are putting so much emphasis on Irish language signage in places like Queens university. Protestants were discriminated against once in the Free State : the Northern Prods will not let it happen again,but to themselves.

In the polls, one third of Northern Irish Catholics want to stay in the UK. 99% of Protestants do NOT want to join a United Ireland, they want to stay as part of the U.K. That is a fact which I think even the extremists from both communities accept.

arcadegame2004

true wrote:

How can you compare Algeria with the UK ? There is no analagy. There was bloodshed in Algeria : France did leave but Algeria was always a different continent, different people, different religion, different language, etc. N. Ireland is as integral a part of the UK as the southern island of New Zealand is an integral part of New Zealand as a whole, even though most of New Zealands population live on the north island.
If you scour the world and think Algeria leaving the protection of France is a great example, then God help us. Is Algeria such a great country now that millions of people want to go and live there ? No, they are leaving Algeria to live in places like France, legally or illegially, if they can.

Yes but that reflects the poverty found in Algeria. Southern Ireland was also very poor for 70 years after independence but that doesn't mean it would have been better for us to remain in the UK. NI was only created in 1920 to give the Unionists an artificial majority in an artificial country with NO history of being administratively separate from Southern Ireland before 1920. For example,. when the Irish Parliament existed before 1800, its remit included the Six Counties. Even if you concede (which I don't) the necessity of created the statelet of NI, surely the borders drawn up are indefensible, given that Co.Fermanagh (which was a constituency at the time) had a SF MP, and given that it and Co.Tyrone had Nationalist majorities. The economic damage this has caused to the Border, Midlands and West regions demonstrate the undesirability of partition, especially if you live in Co.Donegal.

You say, "BTW, I do not think N. I. should be forced to have compulsory Irish teaching." Good for you, but would happen do you think in the extremly unlikely event of a United Ireland : would Irish be compulsory then. You could not have one law for the 6 counties and another law down here, could you : that is what you are trying to get away from. Irish is compulsory here : not too long ago if you failed Irish you failed you whole Leaving cert. Try to get in to UCD or UCG or UCC without it : try to get a job as a Guard without it.

It is unlikely there will be a Nationalist majority in NI for 30 years. I am fairly confident that by then, the annoying (even to me) laws on compulsory Irish will have been gotten rid of or downgraded. Even if not, I am confident that in a referendum on the issue the Southern government would offer NI examption from these compulsory Irish rules. After all, they would be trying toi win over Protestants.

Look at how Sinn Fein are putting so much emphasis on Irish language signage in places like Queens university. Protestants were discriminated against once in the Free State : the Northern Prods will not let it happen again,but to themselves.

You can not compare in scale state-sponsored discrimination against the minority community in the South with that against the Catholics in the North. Protestants were represented in government from Day 1 of our independence. The Unionists dogmatically rejected having a single Catholic in a ministry in the Stormont regime. It is laughable to draw comparisons between the southern Protestants and the NI Catholics. Post-independence, the vast majority of the decline in Protestant numbers is accounted for by voluntary immigration to what Southern Unionists considered the "motherland" i.e. the UK, the withdrawl of the British army, and the widespread intermarriage between Catholics and Protestants. Also, the decline in Protestants as a % of the Southern population owes more to the rapid birth-rate amongst Catholics than to a decline in Protestant numbers. Yes, the Protestant numbers declined by 2/3rds, but there % decline was a decline by 4/5ths, so the decline in % can overstate the decline.

In the polls, one third of Northern Irish Catholics want to stay in the UK. 99% of Protestants do NOT want to join a United Ireland, they want to stay as part of the U.K. That is a fact which I think even the extremists from both communities accept.

I agree with your point on the Protestants but with regard to the Catholic issue, I respond by asking if this were true why they don't vote for pro-Union parties? over 90% of them are voting for pro-United Ireland parties and the only poll that really matters at the end of the day is the one where people actually vote. Also, the polls in question have never really delved deeper into this supposed Catholic Unionist minority, to ask what if questions, e.g. are you opposed forever or just now, would you favour it in 30 years time etc.