Enough Already?

Sleepy

Is it time to just ignore the troubles in Northern Ireland and get on with the running of our own country? When you look at the state of our health system, our falling apart at the seams education system, a national infrastructure more in-keeping with a third world country I think it makes sense. Why should we really allow our government officials to spend so much time and money trying to secure something so unattainable (in a foreign nation, no less) when they could be sorting out our country?

Now, I know there are a lot of posters here that will be very upset by this idea but the facts remain:

• We have given up our constitutional claim on the six counties that make up Northern Ireland.
• The various factions in Northern Ireland at present seem to be completely unprepared to try genuine peaceful negotiation and power-sharing
• Our government spends a disproportionate amount of time and money dealing with a foreign country's problems

Should we just forget about the north and let them sort their own problems out? Maybe give them ten years and then offer a helping hand again after we've sorted this country out somewhat first?

MT

Your post is a lot of common sense. The danger as I see it is not just that the government spends too much time on northern affairs, but that politics in the democratic south could be corrupted by the undemocratic and tribal psychosis that passes for political debate in the north. Hence, why I see the rise of Sinn Féin as such a threat. Their views have been forged in the cauldron that is the norths violent zero sum game where the competition for victimhood matters more than anything else. Personal responsibilty is a foreign concept and problems are never solved but instead kicked into the long grass by blaming everyone else.

So, I think for the future health of democracy in this Republic it's vital not to be drawn into the internecine feuding that long ago destroyed the basis for stable democracy in the neighbouring region. Furthermore, there is the need for a bulwark against the importation of the deluded world view of Sinn Féin and their armed wing. And before certain apologists take offence or cry of oppression, bashing etc. I'd say exactly the same thing were any of the other tribal movements from Northern Ireland attempting to furnish votes here.

A Dub in Glasgo

Don't see many threads on the alternative subjects you speak of discussed here

You can ignore a problem but it will not go away.

Foreign country? foreign nation? You have the laugh at the head in the sand approach.

aodh_rua

I don't think its a head in the sand approach. Given the massive cost that reunification would bring (per capita social spending in the North is way ahead of that here) and the fact that a 32-county republic and reintegration of the national territory isn't a high priority for a good proportion of the population, I think it's fair enough to ask that our government take care of our problems and let the northern statelet work itself out.

Don't see many threads on the alternative subjects you speak of discussed here

Doesn't that prove the point that the North hijacks a goodly amount of the political agenda.

A Dub in Glasgo

aodh_rua wrote:

I don't think its a head in the sand approach. Given the massive cost that reunification would bring (per capita social spending in the North is way ahead of that here) and the fact that a 32-county republic and reintegration of the national territory isn't a high priority for a good proportion of the population, I think it's fair enough to ask that our government take care of our problems and let the northern statelet work itself out.

I was talking more of the 'foreign' nation and country descriptions

Doesn't that prove the point that the North hijacks a goodly amount of the political agenda.

On this site.... certainly

bonkey

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I was talking more of the 'foreign' nation and country descriptions

Why? Are you saying that they are not legally and constitutionally accurate descriptions?

jc

aodh_rua

'Nation' refers to people not territory so describing those in the North that consider themselves Irish as being part of our nation would be in tune with the current constitution; describing them as foreign would not.

ionapaul

To be fair, the North is as foreign to me as Glasgow or London is - a similar people live there, who speak the same language (well, not in Glasgow! ) and for whom I hold some measure of friendly feelings. Our country / nation / whatever has its share of problems that need working out: our relationship with both Britain and the 'Northern statelet' being one of them. I don't think we can turn our backs entirely on the Northern problem, unfortunately.

At the same time, I would be very much opposed to a present-day unification of the 26 and the 6 counties...no upside and a whole lot of downside involved in that deal.

A Dub in Glasgo

bonkey wrote:

Why? Are you saying that they are not legally and constitutionally accurate descriptions?

jc

I know we have been through this before on this forum.

I would not describe NI as a Nation. It is a state or region within the UK.

The people in NI have every right to be Irish as anyone born in the Republic. The Irish 'nation' does not begin and end within the Republics borders.

To me, someone describing NI as foreign nation is being deliberatly provocotive. It would be akin to me saying the occupied 6 counties or the 26 county state.

A Dub in Glasgo

ionapaul wrote:

To be fair, the North is as foreign to me as Glasgow or London is - a similar people live there, who speak the same language (well, not in Glasgow! ) and for whom I hold some measure of friendly feelings. Our country / nation / whatever has its share of problems that need working out: our relationship with both Britain and the 'Northern statelet' being one of them. I don't think we can turn our backs entirely on the Northern problem, unfortunately.

At the same time, I would be very much opposed to a present-day unification of the 26 and the 6 counties...no upside and a whole lot of downside involved in that deal.

Well to be fair, I moved from Dublin to Waterford for 3 years. Waterford (and most other towns & cities in Ireland) would be as foreign to most Dubliners (at that time) as Belfast or Glasgow or London. A lot of people were very insular and parochial then. Has it really changed? I don't think so.

Glasgow - I can understand the Glasgow accent very well

ionapaul

In that case I will argue to welcome the beautiful city of Berkeley, CA into our nation, as I feel as at home there as Galway or Dublin, and who knows would other Irishmen and women would feel any different

Remember Rabb C Nesbitt? Was that English? A Swedish friend of mine has a funny story about a summer spent in Glasgow - one of the Swedish girls started going out with a local lad, who had to call an airline booking office in London one day to change a flight. The London lass on the other end of the telephone line simply could not understand her fellow Briton, and they needed to use the Swedish girlfriend to act as interpreter for a finish! Divided by the same language...

bonkey

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I know we have been through this before on this forum.

My memory must be failing me.

I would not describe NI as a Nation.

Nor did the OP. What was referred to was that they were problems in a foreign nation, and of a foreign country.

It is a state or region within the UK.

Yes, and as such, it belongs to a foreign nation and/or country, and the problems of the state/region can accurately be described as problems of the UK's and problems that occur within the UK.

The people in NI have every right to be Irish as anyone born in the Republic.

Many people born in the US have that same right. It doesn't make parts fo the US "ours", does it?

The Irish 'nation' does not begin and end within the Republics borders.

Bit like what aodh rua says - that a nation is the people.

It can be either. To selectively choose one and say "if we only use this definition, you're wrnog" is a bit unfair, wouldn't you say? Especially when the other definition - that a nation is just as validly the land occupied by a people as the people themselves.

So...unless you're going to tell me that my flat here in Switzerland is part of the Irish Nation, because an Irish person lives there, and not part of the Swiss nation despite being subject to Swiss law and being inside Swiss borders...then I can only conclude that you're deliberately choosing the definition that suits your perspective, rather than the one which is just as valid and more clearly the one intended by the OP.

To me, someone describing NI as foreign nation is being deliberatly provocotive.

No-one did.

The OP said its problems were problems which occur in a foreign nation, and its problems were those of a foreign country's. You took this to say that NI was in and of itself a foreign nation/country, and you took this to be offensive, but thats not what it said...

...again, unless you're suggesting that either NI is not in the UK, or that the UK is not a foreign nation/country.

It would be akin to me saying the occupied 6 counties or the 26 county state.

No, it wouldn't, because neither of those are accurate (merely emotive), whereas what the OP actually posted was entirely accurate.

jc

Sleepy

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

You can ignore a problem but it will not go away.

Is that a veiled threat? I'll take it not to be, but as such it still doesn't make much sense.

The violence in Northern Ireland is not our problem in the Republic of Ireland. Sure, it would be nice to be able to help them end their petty feuding but at the end of the day, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, not the Republic of Ireland. Maybe the terrorists (on both sides of the political divide) will never stop their campaigns of violence. Neither side seem prepared to do so at the moment so I say we take a break from trying to fix their problems and take a good look at some of our own.

Foreign country? foreign nation? You have the laugh at the head in the sand approach.

Why? Constitutionally Northern Ireland is not part of the Republic of Ireland. Are you trying to tell us that out-dated beliefs outweigh the constitution? :rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo

Sleepy wrote:

Is that a veiled threat?

You need to get out more for even suggesting such nonsense

Why? Constitutionally Northern Ireland is not part of the Republic of Ireland. Are you trying to tell us that out-dated beliefs outweigh the constitution? :rolleyes:

Nope I am suggesting that the mindset that ignores the people of NI and calls them foreign is a head in the sand approach.

bonkey

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Nope I am suggesting that the mindset that ignores the people of NI and calls them foreign is a head in the sand approach.

And again, I'll point out that you've determined this from a post suggesting no more than that Northern Ireland is part of another nation/country.

So who's got what where? Someone saying that the 6 counties actually belong to another country (which they do)? Or someone reading exactly that and deciding that what's actually being said is that the people in the 6 counties are being ignored and called foreign.

Your line of attacking the basic post would seem to be akin to someone asking me why Ireland puts more effort into humanitarian aid abroad rather than at home, and me concluding that the person is suggesting we should offer no humanitarian aid abroad until every problem inside our own borders has been solved.

I mean...do you think if you ignore the question asked in favour of the one you want to take offence to, the original will go away? Again...whats that you said about heads in sand?

jc

A Dub in Glasgo

bonkey wrote:

And again, I'll point out that you've determined this from a post suggesting no more than that Northern Ireland is part of another nation/country.

That is one way of interpreting the original post, I interpreted the sentence

'Why should we really allow our government officials to spend so much time and money trying to secure something so unattainable (in a foreign nation, no less) when they could be sorting out our country?'

in being NI. He actually meant part of?

So who's got what where? Someone saying that the 6 counties actually belong to another country (which they do)? Or someone reading exactly that and deciding that what's actually being said is that the people in the 6 counties are being ignored and called foreign.

I have not suggested that NI is not part of the UK

Your line of attacking the basic post would seem to be akin to someone asking me why Ireland puts more effort into humanitarian aid abroad rather than at home, and me concluding that the person is suggesting we should offer no humanitarian aid abroad until every problem inside our own borders has been solved.

I did not disagree with the 'let us concentrate on ourselves' suggestion. I disagreed with the motives behind that suggestion

I mean...do you think if you ignore the question asked in favour of the one you want to take offence to, the original will go away? Again...whats that you said about heads in sand?

Your interpretation of the question. Mine is outline above.

Sleepy

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

You need to get out more for even suggesting such nonsense

The phrase "hasn't gone away" has been used as a threat many times recently by republicans. You should word your posts more carefully if you don't want them to be mis-interpretted.

Nope I am suggesting that the mindset that ignores the people of NI and calls them foreign is a head in the sand approach.

Why is it a head in the sand approach? The phrase "head in the sand" implies that one is ignoring something that it isn't in one's best interest to ignore. The people of Northern Ireland are not our governments primary concern, the people of our own country are. At present, I believe that concentrating on our own country's problems is the duty of the Irish government. Instead, they seem to be wasting a lot of time trying to sort out another country's problems with parties who quite obviously are negotiating in bad faith. It is in the best interest of the Irish people to ignore the North's problems at the present time.

Sleepy

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I did not disagree with the 'let us concentrate on ourselves' suggestion. I disagreed with the motives behind that suggestion.

So you agree that the Irish government should forget about the north but disagree with me saying it?

bonkey

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

That is one way of interpreting the original post, I interpreted the sentence

yes...but you're quite clearly reading what you want to see into it, rather than trying to determine whether or not what the OP was trying to say.

in being NI. He actually meant part of?
I have not suggested that NI is not part of the UK

If you are in Northern Ireland, are you in the nation of the United Kingdom. Yes?

Well, its a foreign nation, isn't it?

So when you are in NI you are in a foreign nation, because you are not in your own.

Same logic using the term in a foreign country.

I did not disagree with the 'let us concentrate on ourselves' suggestion. I disagreed with the motives behind that suggestion

You seem to have decided what those motices are based on your interpretation of what is clearly not a cut-and-dried one-interpretation-possible statement. Don't you think you should have asked which of the interpretations the OP meant before deciding what he/she was motivated by?

Your interpretation of the question. Mine is outline above.

Indeed. The difference being that I have not suggested the OP (or anyone) has his/her head in the sand based on what I've decided that they have said. I've simply clarified that your accusations of the same are not based on the sole possible interpretation of what was meant.

I just find it funny that up until you've acknowledged that my interpretation is valid, you've more-or-less refused to acknowledge that there is an entirely inoccuous interpretation of the original statement which is entirely accurate, carries none of the implications that you choose to see...and while closing your eyes to all of this suggest that someone believing your interpretation has their head in the sand.

If I was more cynical, I'd be thinking it was a way of avoiding answering the original question...but seeing as you've said that you don't disagree on the "focus on our internal issues first" idea, you're clearly not doing that

jc

A Dub in Glasgo

bonkey wrote:

yes...but you're quite clearly reading what you want to see into it, rather than trying to determine whether or not what the OP was trying to say.

That is what I believed the OP was saying

You seem to have decided what those motices are based on your interpretation of what is clearly not a cut-and-dried one-interpretation-possible statement.

If a statement is open to interpretation.....

Don't you think you should have asked which of the interpretations the OP meant before deciding what he/she was motivated by?

Quote possibly but that assumes I have the luxury of that time

Indeed. The difference being that I have not suggested the OP (or anyone) has his/her head in the sand based on what I've decided that they have said. I've simply clarified that your accusations of the same are not based on the sole possible interpretation of what was meant.

With my interpretation, it is head in the sand (in my opinion of course)

I just find it funny that up until you've acknowledged that my interpretation is valid, you've more-or-less refused to acknowledge that there is an entirely inoccuous interpretation of the original statement which is entirely accurate, carries none of the implications that you choose to see...and while closing your eyes to all of this suggest that someone believing your interpretation has their head in the sand.

Of course I have acknowleged. Interpretation eh?

If I was more cynical, I'd be thinking it was a way of avoiding answering the original question...but seeing as you've said that you don't disagree on the "focus on our internal issues first" idea, you're clearly not doing that

Of course you are not the cynical type maybe just the pedantic type

Sleepy

So do either of ye fancy discussing the subject of the thread? Or would you rather debate what it was that I *meant* to say?

[ Daithí ]

Sleepy wrote:

The phrase "hasn't gone away" has been used as a threat many times recently by republicans. You should word your posts more carefully if you don't want them to be mis-interpretted.

...what the hell?

Just because he stated the truth, you misinterpret it as a "veiled threat"?

Jesus Christ. How could he be threatening you? He stated a fact. Unless you don't want to hear factual information...? Sounds like paranoia to me.

Are you just using every available opportunity to discredit Republicans, and now you've moved on to saying A Dub in Glasgow is threatening you? If you genuinely misinterpeted that, you need to get out more.

A Dub in Glasgow's right. If we ignore the North, it won't go away. Re-unification is not economically viable as of yet, because the North's economy is so crap and it just leeches off the Brits. Maybe things will get better in the future and allow for reunification.

What are people's opinions on independence for the North? :rolleyes:

Hydroquinone

I've long thought that the government should pay more attention to what's going on at home.
A cursory glance of the news any day of the week shows far too many scandals, fraudulent carryings on and never-ending, never resolved tribunals. If they sorted that out and figured out where teh hell we're going to get the money for the upkeep of the bypasses and dual carriageways, once Europe stops handing us out money like it was going out of fashion, then when that's all figured out maybe the government might have a bit more time and money to spend on the people who live in NI.

Yes I know the people who live there can be caled Irish citizens, but it's a farce really, isn't it? They buy their groceries in sterling and they pay their taxes at the UK levels.
Can they vote for a TD? No.
When the last constitutional referendum was on, concerning - of all ironical things - the rights of citizenship, Northern Ireland people didn't get a vote.
So how are they Irish citizens?

If I went to live in England tomorrow, I'd be able to vote and work there. Would that make me a British citizen? Nope.

I live here and get paid in Euro and pay the delightful 42% tax and 7% PRSI that teh governement demands, so by my reckoning, and half my wages, I reckon the government's first priority, by a long margin, should be the likes of me and the people who live here, vote them in and pay their wages.

Sleepy

[ Daith&#237 wrote: »

...what the hell?

Just because he stated the truth, you misinterpret it as a "veiled threat"?

Jesus Christ. How could he be threatening you? He stated a fact. Unless you don't want to hear factual information...? Sounds like paranoia to me.

Are you just using every available opportunity to discredit Republicans, and now you've moved on to saying A Dub in Glasgow is threatening you? If you genuinely misinterpeted that, you need to get out more.

A Dub in Glasgow's right. If we ignore the North, it won't go away. Re-unification is not economically viable as of yet, because the North's economy is so crap and it just leeches off the Brits. Maybe things will get better in the future and allow for reunification.

What are people's opinions on independence for the North? :rolleyes:

To me, it sounded like the standard IRA/Sinn Fein threat of "ignore us at your peril".

Independence for the North sounds like the most sensible thing for them imho. Let the Brits cut off the cash and our government keep their noses out of it as well and Northerners would then be forced to actually sort out their problems instead of just paying lip service to them.

Sure, there'd be turbulence initially but I believe that after a very short period of time the silent majority of northerner's that want peace and have no time for the paramilitaries would stand up to them and the beginnings of a real peace process could begin.

bonkey

Sleepy wrote:

So do either of ye fancy discussing the subject of the thread? Or would you rather debate what it was that I *meant* to say?

Fair cop guv

Personally, I don't think the government is paying too much attention to the North, to the detriment of the running of the nation.

Yes, we did indeed "sign away" our claim on the North as part of the GFA, but we also comitted to be engaged in assisting in the finding of a solution there. It is only right that we take such a commitment seriously.

I'd also be surprised if it actually consisted of that significant a portion of our government's time either....but I admit to not having seen anything number-wise either way.

I would say, however, that the public may be overly-focussed on it, to the detriment of paying attention to national issues. Why this is, I can't say - media-directed focus...the preference to point at the failings of others rather than the failing of self...the belief that we can't change our Usual Suspects and so are powerless, whilst the North can be changed despite its Usual Suspects and so is more worthy of attention...or something else? I honestly don't know.

gandalf

Well my opinion on this is clear. We have had nearly 10 years of a ceasefire, 7 years since the Good Friday Agreement and while there has been progress in Northern Ireland they keep sliding backwards into the old habits of blame and counter blame. The time has come for the Irish Government to decouple from this process and leave the sides in the North to come to terms with the fact they have to live together.

How we in the South can even countenance the possibility of Northern Ireland being united with the Republic is beyond me. Until the people of Northern Ireland learn to live with each other there will never be a united ireland. We are imho at least 2 generations away from Ireland being united. In the meantime I would prefer the politicians that I have voted on and the Government I pay taxes take care of issues that effect my everyday life like the Health Service, Traffic, Infrastructure, Crime and leave the British Government clean up their "post imperialist oil slick" that is Northern Ireland today. If anything it may speed up their exit from the statelet and when they in Northern Ireland can prove to us that they deserve to be part of the Republic then we can let them in.

Villain

I may be wrong here, but doesn't every party sitting in the Dail want a United Ireland?

It's part of their mandate so if you voted for a member of that party you supported that mandate. Now FF promised a lot of things in their last pre-election manifesto (sp?) including clearing waiting lists and providing 2000 extra Gardai, maybe the North is the only thing they are actually working towards.

I don't see how the issue can affect the Health system, I mean I believe Ms Harney has never attended a meeting with SF, so you can't exactly say "I know theres hundreds of people on trolleys but I think we should go over this Northern issue again"

IMO Dermot Ahern (Minister for Foreign Affairs) should be the only Minister who devotes the majority of his time to the North, every other Minister should work on their own area, then at cabinet meetings let people have their say. I think McDowell has probably spent more time slagging off the SF than sorting out the Justice system.

cdebru

just a quickie if the six counties is a foreign country do you consider the president of Ireland to be a foreigner

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

just a quickie if the six counties is a foreign country do you consider the president of Ireland to be a foreigner

No one that holds an Irish passport could be considered a foreigner, they are protected by a promise from the minister for foreign affairs of the Republic of Ireland.
As you know that would include for example an Arabic friend iirc of Albert Reynolds, who I think got a passport for investing in his dogfood factory.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

No one that holds an Irish passport could be considered a foreigner, they are protected by a promise from the minister for foreign affairs of the Republic of Ireland.
As you know that would include for example an Arabic friend iirc of Albert Reynolds, who I think got a passport for investing in his dogfood factory.

does that mean you put her in the same group as arab businessmen who bought Irish citizenship


it is a simple question people are contending that the 6 counties are a foreign country
the president of this state was born and reared there that is her home do the people who consider the 6 counties as a foreign country consider we have a foreigner as our president

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

it is a simple question people are contending that the 6 counties are a foreign country
the president of this state was born and reared there that is her home do the people who consider the 6 counties as a foreign country consider we have a foreigner as our president

you should know perfectly well that according to the laws of this country and our constitution, anyone born on the island of Ireland is entitled to Irish citizenship.
A son or daughter is also entitled even if they are born outside the island.
Legal citizenship rights and legal territorial rights are two entirely different matters.
The laws of the Republic of Ireland apply to the 26 counties only because the Republic of Ireland is legally defined and as a member of the UN as representing the territory of the 26 counties.
Have a smoke in a newry bar and that should be clear enough.
The laws of the United kingdom apply to the 6 counties but not to the Republic of Ireland because it is legally and teritorially a foreign country and vice versa.
Aspirationally of course is an entirely different matter.