Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Queen Elizabeth II to visit Ireland.

18911131422

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    aDeener wrote: »
    no need for an apology :pac:

    i only pointed that out due to there being history between the bbc and rte where rte would refer to NI as the 6 counties and bbc to roi as the irish republic. really silly shite by both parties and i thought that it was all over and one with. thats all.

    From the sounds of it, both sub editors post on here... :D


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    • There has to be a way to differ southern Ireland to northern Ireland.
    • Southern Ireland is a republic
    • Southern Ireland is Irish
    • Southern Irish is the Irish republic.
    • Northern Ireland is not a republic.
    • Do you always call the Ivory Coast Côte d'Ivoire? Or America the United States of America.
    • If not should you apologise to the nation?
    See my friend, simple logic. It's a pity even such basic things seem to be beyond nationalists.

    You were doing quite well with your logic right up until your last sentence. Then you completely ruined it all by a sweeping generalisation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Kindly take the discussion of what the BBC calls this state to another thread (there's a "new thread" button, don't let it be a total stranger). Or another thread on the News/Media forum, though it could also belong on this forum. It's got sod-all to do with this topic.

    /mod


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Mary McAleese has visited Britain on numerous occassions, so I personally think the Queen's visit the the ROI will be a good thing, finally lancing one of the great Irish Republican taboos since the creation of this state. I think the visit will finally signal the 'normalisation' of relations between these two great islands. There will always be some bone heads living in the dark & murky past, but thats to be expected, the rest of us can move on & welcome (or just accept) her visit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Camelot wrote: »
    Mary McAleese has visited Britain on numerous occassions, so I personally think the Queen's visit the the ROI will be a good thing, finally lancing one of the great Irish Republican taboos since the creation of this state. I think the visit will finally signal the 'normalisation' of relations between these two great islands. There will always be some bone heads living in the dark & murky past, but thats to be expected, the rest of us can move on & welcome (or just accept) her visit.

    This is exactly the sweeping generalisation that ruins this sort of debate.

    There are a number of reasons to support or have reservations about this visit as its a complex relationship and amplified by the fact she is the chief of staff of the British army, who as you probably saw in the press have had a tough PR week in Ireland.

    Calling those with legitimate reservations 'boneheads' is childish and helps no-one. As does calling those who support it 'west brits'.

    At utterly pointless contribution camelot.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    I have no problem with this visit, like I have no problem with other state visits of other European Monarchs to Ireland. However like the rest of the other monarchs (or elected leaders) who might come to visit I won't be running out to welcome Queen Elizabeth II. (I am just too grown up/mature to be waving a flag, most countries have enough nationalist without me joining with them).


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    This is exactly the sweeping generalisation that ruins this sort of debate.
    I don't think so.
    There are a number of reasons to support or have reservations about this visit as its a complex relationship and amplified by the fact she is the chief of staff of the British army, who as you probably saw in the press have had a tough PR week in Ireland.
    Obama is the head of the American armed forces. Should he not be allowed to come either?
    Calling those with legitimate reservations 'boneheads' is childish and helps no-one. As does calling those who support it 'west brits'.
    There are no legitimate reasons for opposing her visit.
    At utterly pointless contribution camelot.
    Ditto to you.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    This is exactly the sweeping generalisation that ruins this sort of debate.

    There are a number of reasons to support or have reservations about this visit as its a complex relationship and amplified by the fact she is the chief of staff of the British army, who as you probably saw in the press have had a tough PR week in Ireland.

    Calling those with legitimate reservations 'boneheads' is childish and helps no-one. As does calling those who support it 'west brits'.

    At utterly pointless contribution camelot.

    What were the Love Ulster protesters if not boneheads:

    guardonfirecrop400.jpg

    dublin.jpg

    There is a public image problem with the "nationalist" movement like it or not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I don't think so.

    Then you are a west brit.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Obama is the head of the American armed forces. Should he not be allowed to come either?

    Are US soldiers stationed in Ireland? Did they issue an apology for a massacre of Irish citizens a few weeks ago? Are the US blocking an investigation into the murder of Irish citizens by US forces?

    Hardly the same thing, is it.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    There are no legitimate reasons for opposing her visit.

    Says you....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    This is exactly the sweeping generalisation that ruins this sort of debate.

    There are a number of reasons to support or have reservations about this visit as its a complex relationship and amplified by the fact she is the chief of staff of the British army, who as you probably saw in the press have had a tough PR week in Ireland.

    Calling those with legitimate reservations 'boneheads' is childish and helps no-one. As does calling those who support it 'west brits'.

    At utterly pointless contribution camelot.

    Ah yes, "my contribution is utterly pointless", whereas yours is somehow legit :rolleyes:
    This is exactly the sweeping 'put-down' that ruins this sort of debate. High horse, Piety, & hypocrisy are four words that come to mind.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    rovert wrote: »
    What were the Love Ulster protesters if not boneheads:



    There is a public image problem with the "nationalist" movement like it or not.

    There is a difference between protesting and rioting, and as it happens I fundamentally agree that the Love Ulster crowd are poisionous bigots who wanted to commemorate a man who killed 33 people in Dublin and those who protested were quite justified. They cannot march in Belfast for a reason.

    The rioting is a different story.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Camelot wrote: »
    Ah yes, "my contribution is utterly pointless", whereas yours is somehow legit :rolleyes:
    This is exactly the sweeping 'put-down' that ruins this sort of debate. High horse, Piety, & hypocrisy are four words that come to mind.

    You are the one calling people with opposing view points 'boneheads'.

    There is a legitmate debate here without you talking down to people with an opposing view.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 244 ✭✭RachPie


    Is it going to affect my life in any way, shape or form? No. It'll be live any other person visiting the coutry, cept we'll hear about it in the headlines. If anything, it's a good thing. Shows things are progressing. She can't help being related to her ancestors, if you know what I mean.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    You are the one calling people with opposing view points 'boneheads'.

    NO, and I am sorry if it came across that way, the boneheads I refer to are people like Martin Ferris, and others who are not only opposed (thats their right), but who wish to verbally birate those who wish Her Maj to visit! I actually heard Ferris on the radio the other day, and he listed off all kinds of murderous accusations against "The British" and "The British Monarchy", this in your face hypocrasy has no place in a decade that is trying to heal old wounds between these two islands. There will be those 'boneheads' who will try and make a (physical) point against the visit, and I think thats a shame > surely we have all moved on.

    If Mary McAleese can make a state Visit to Britain, then surely the Queen can visit here?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    There is a difference between protesting and rioting, and as it happens I fundamentally agree that the Love Ulster crowd are poisionous bigots who wanted to commemorate a man who killed 33 people in Dublin and those who protested were quite justified. They cannot march in Belfast for a reason.

    The rioting is a different story.

    "West Brits" dont riot in Soccer jerseys


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    There are no legitimate reasons for opposing her visit.

    Indeed there is not. If the Irish people genuinely had a beef with the British over the behaviour in the past or if we were semi-serious in our silly claim to the Northern state, then we could have individually and collectively refrained from embracing their culture and engaging with them economically. But we didn’t. We devoured their culture, more so than the culture of any other country and we made them our most important trading partner. And we were quite happy to have a place to go and earn a living when there was nothing in our own country for us. It is utterly ridiculous in that context to be articulating an objection to their head of state visiting, especially when we routinely meet the real political leaders of Britain on a regular basis.
    Many of the spurious objections that are routinely trotted out (e.g. the sectarian, undemocratic nature of the British head of state, the cost!!! etc.) can be readily rebutted by pointing out that the same argument would apply to other visiting monarchs. The truth is that the basis for much (perhaps not all) of the objections are rooted in good bad old fashioned anti-Englishness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Two options:

    1. Take your hand-bagging elsewhere.

    2. Have me remove your hand-bagging and you from the forum.

    I don't particularly mind which you choose.

    (that's aimed at ONYD and Camelot btw, there's since been some clarification above so I strongly advise both of you to move in with the actual topic)

    /mod


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    rovert wrote: »
    "West Brits" dont riot in Soccer jerseys

    Bohs fans do


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Camelot wrote: »
    NO, and I am sorry if it came across that way, the boneheads I refer to are people like Martin Ferris, and others who are not only opposed (thats their right), but who wish to verbally birate those who wish Her Maj to visit! I actually heard Ferris on the radio the other day, and he listed off all kinds of murderous accusations against "The British" and "The British Monarchy", this in your face hypocrasy has no place in a decade that is trying to heal old wounds between these two islands.

    PSF will support this visit


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    lugha wrote: »
    Indeed there is not. If the Irish people genuinely had a beef with the British over the behaviour in the past or if we were semi-serious in our silly claim to the Northern state, then we could have individually and collectively refrained from embracing their culture and engaging with them economically. But we didn’t. We devoured their culture, more so than the culture of any other country and we made them our most important trading partner. And we were quite happy to have a place to go and earn a living when there was nothing in our own country for us. It is utterly ridiculous in that context to be articulating an objection to their head of state visiting, especially when we routinely meet the real political leaders of Britain on a regular basis.
    Many of the spurious objections that are routinely trotted out (e.g. the sectarian, undemocratic nature of the British head of state, the cost!!! etc.) can be readily rebutted by pointing out that the same argument would apply to other visiting monarchs. The truth is that the basis for much (perhaps not all) of the objections are rooted in good bad old fashioned anti-Englishness.

    Great post, well put


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    rovert wrote: »
    There is a public image problem with the "nationalist" movement like it or not.

    Oh yeh, the non-national republicans who were arrested for rioting that day ruined any cause.

    By the way, I wouldn't trust the Gardai to control any public event like the proposed visit as they abjectly failed in 2006 and fail every day to win the streets of the city centre back from junkies, scum and aggressive beggars.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Camelot wrote: »

    If Mary McAleese can make a state Visit to Britain, then surely the Queen can visit here?

    Again, this inane two sides of the coin argument.

    Does the Irish military have the same previous in regards to murdering British citizens? Does the military she is head of occupy part of the UK?

    Completly different context.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Then you are a west brit.
    Nope. I'm a catholic Irish citizen.
    Are US soldiers stationed in Ireland? Did they issue an apology for a massacre of Irish citizens a few weeks ago? Are the US blocking an investigation into the murder of Irish citizens by US forces?
    1. There are no British soldiers stationed in Ireland. The official name of southern Ireland after all is Ireland. They are stationed in northern Ireland though. But that is a country of the U.K so that's no big surprise.
    2. No they didn't. But you would think the British apology for the killings would have helped to heal a few scars. I consider the matter over now after the reigning prime minister apologized on behalf of the British military and indeed Britain as a whole. Perhaps you should also move on? Holding a vitriolic grudge is bad for your health.
    3. I presume you mean the Saville report? In that case they didn't block the report. It was released last week.
    4. None of these are reasons why The Queen shouldn't visit.
    Hardly the same thing, is it.
    Yes, it is.
    Says you....
    ....And yet you haven't proven me wrong.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Nope. I'm a catholic Irish citizen.

    My point being you objected to me saying the use of west brit is inflammitory and pointless. So why are you objecting to being called it.
    1. There are no British soldiers stationed in Ireland. The official name of southern Ireland after all is Ireland. They are stationed in northern Ireland though. But that is a country of the U.K so that's no big surprise.

    Are you for real? Belfast isn't in Ireland?
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    [*]No they didn't. But you would think the British apology for the killings would have helped to heal a few scars. I consider the matter over now after the reigning prime minister apologized on behalf of the British military and indeed Britain as a whole. Perhaps you should also move on? Holding a vitriolic grudge is bad for your health.

    I'm not holding a grudge. I'm saying she has been chief of staff of the British military for the whole of the troubles and never once commented on atrocities done in her name by crown forces or loyalists. Thats why I am opposed to this peace and love bull that this woman is just another head of state.

    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Yes, it is.


    Yes, the historical narrative between Ireland and the US is the same as between Ireland and Britain... Give me strength


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    My point being you objected to me saying the use of west brit is inflammitory and pointless. So why are you objecting to being called it.
    Because as you say yourself it is inflammitory and pointless.
    Are you for real? Belfast isn't in Ireland?
    Belfast is on the Island of Ireland, however according to the constitution, Bunreacht Na hEreann, the official name of the state Ireland. That obviously does not include territory outside the state, namely northern Ireland. Which is part of the U.K.
    I'm not holding a grudge. I'm saying she has been chief of staff of the British military for the whole of the troubles and never once commented on atrocities done in her name by crown forces or loyalists. Thats why I am opposed to this peace and love bull that this woman is just another head of state.
    The Queen has no active power over the military. She could not have stopped bloody sunday even if she wanted to. What's more the current British Prime Minister has apologised on behalf of the British military and State. You really need to move on.

    In the famous words of John Lennon, "Give peace a chance".
    Yes, the historical narrative between Ireland and the US is the same as between Ireland and Britain... Give me strength
    I'm not talking about history. I'm talking about today. The history is in the past and the people of both our islands deserve the chance of a fresh start and lasting peace. Opposing The Queens visit will not help us achieve that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    Queen Elizabeth has been invited here to the Republic by the President, and/or the Taoiseach, so I ask you OhNoYouDidn't "what would be the conditions whereby you would agree to her visit"? What would be your pre-conditions for allowing Her Maj to set foot in the Republic?

    Curious.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    What's more the current British Prime Minister has apologised on behalf of the British military and State.

    For one incident. Another 150+ to go! http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055946134


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    gurramok wrote: »
    Just as soon as McGuinness apologises for all the soldiers killed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Because as you say yourself it is inflammitory and pointless..

    So why did you disagree with me.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Belfast is on the Island of Ireland, however according to the constitution, Bunreacht Na hEreann, the official name of the state Ireland. That obviously does not include territory outside the state, namely northern Ireland. Which is part of the U.K..

    So in short, you are contradicting yourself....

    Articles 2 and 3 chief - we still have a claim over the whole island.

    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The Queen has no active power over the military. She could not have stopped bloody sunday even if she wanted to. What's more the current British Prime Minister has apologised on behalf of the British military and State. You really need to move on..

    So you don't find it odd that Mrs Winsdor has never once condemned the violence carried out in her name?
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    In the famous words of John Lennon, "Give peace a chance"..

    Grow up.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I'm not talking about history. I'm talking about today. The history is in the past and the people of both our islands deserve the chance of a fresh start and lasting peace. Opposing The Queens visit will not help us achieve that.

    So now those with reservations are foaming at the mouths to get back to having a blatter at the Brits? :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Just as soon as McGuinness apologises for all the soldiers killed.

    the IRA apologised in 2002.

    can the EU step in and say 'I don't care who started it, play nice'


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement