United Ireland Poll

kreuzberger

thelordofcheese wrote: »

You're acting under the assumption that the Special branch were aware of nature of the talks.
But seeing as you classified them as "machine gun toting" i imagine it's easier to just go with the on going caricture of those phantom 'west brits' that ruin everything.

of course they were aware . Are you suggesting they were running about arresting people purely at random ?

No matter how many times you refer to it as solid facts a conspiracy theory is still just that.

3 years ago 70,000 files on the Dublin Monaghan bombings along with every last duplicate walked out of the department of justice with no explanation . All files and duplicates also disappeared from garda headquarters . Further investgations revealed all files and duplicates were aslo missing from Dundlak , Castleblaney and Monaghan Garda stations . The Gardai have been proven to have lied . That is a conspiracy

Some would say that a hyper optimistic idea for a united ireland is clearly not rational behaviour.

Eoghan Harris perhaps ? are you in agreement with him ?

Because i'm not agreeing with you?

no because your points arent remotely logical

No you havn't, you've made vague allusions to 'democracy' and 'talking' solving everything.
While it's a noble idea it's not a clear example or anything more than wishful thinking

it genrally helps as opposed to not talking to people , not reaching agreements , not implementing democracy . Ysee, people used to live in caves , and then they invented the wheel and then..aww forget it

If i understand you're poorly punctuated ramblings correctly, you believe that the unionist (and only unionists) firstly don't pay taxes which is why the riot with impunity

this is nonsense . Of course they pay taxes but as they make up such a tiny fraction of the British taxpayer the bill for wrecking the place doesnt hit them in the pocket . To all intents and purposes a foreign taxpayer picks up the bill . In a united Ireland where they make up a substantial portion of the national tax bracket thats a very different equation , wrecking the place hits them right in the pocket . The biggest idiot could see that .

and secondly that should a united ireland happen they'd become a minority so they'd best just get with the program. Because as you've gone out of your way to point out they "bully a minority" to get what they want so when the tables are turned they'll just be treated with respect and dignity?
really?

why would anyone want to bully them , walk over them or discriminate against them ? what would be the point ? how would that be in our interests ?

Well, i think i've got an accurate picture about how you think a united ireland should work

mmmm

kreuzberger

Deleted User wrote: »

They live there....

who does ?

K-9

rb_ie wrote: »

LOLOLOLOLOL.

The UK government probably provide a load of jobs up there, so when they leave that's a good chunk of people unemployed.

The amount of public sector and Govt. funded jobs is very, very high in NI. If I remember correctly it's about 30%. Far higher than other countries. I'll dig out a source if needed.

cournioni

kreuzberger wrote: »

then if such fears arise we should do what others do , this should be a matter for the UN . The hardened unionists never even managed to take short strand , one tiny enclave defended by a handful . I think your over exaggerating the threat . Those too bigotted to stomach a united Ireland would most likely just leave .


well over a million extra citizens , extra territory , peace and stability for all time . The issue settled .

4 million extra citizens , extra territory , peace stability etc issue settled for good . A no brainer that this is a gain

OK a number of things from what you have posted... I'm not over exaggerating the threat, a threat is a threat and it has to be dealt with to protect the people. Maybe the threat might not be as huge, but you have to prepare for the worst case scenarios. And that would cost huge amounts of money that the Republic would never have had to deal with before. The Brits could handle these huge costs but could we??

You say over a million citizens and extra territory for the Republic, but these extra million and the extra territory they live on have been knocking the **** out of each other and costing money rather than being useful to an economy. I don't think "peace and stability for all time" is as black and white as you say it is, there would be some pissed off heads in the Unionist community and they would certainly not take it lightly. The UN would do SFA imo. Far bigger fish to fry.

The North has plenty going for it as it is, it may have 4 million extra people to live with but its losing what? 56 million in doing so? Huge change and alot of people including some catholics I know living in the north would prefer not to happen.

Once again, I would like to see a United Ireland, but there would be some MAJOR obsticles in the way of that.

kreuzberger

kreuzberger wrote: »

Of course they pay taxes but as they make up such a tiny fraction of the British taxpayer the bill for wrecking the place doesnt hit them in the pocket . To all intents and purposes a foreign taxpayer picks up the bill . In a united Ireland where they make up a substantial portion of the national tax bracket thats a very different equation , wrecking the place hits them right in the pocket . The biggest idiot could see that .

A very good reason for no don't you think! It's bad enough taking responsibility for the place without having to keep fixing it up after "the young ones" have trashed it again.

kreuzberger

kreuzberger wrote: »

who does ?

The Army are locals, the british army doesn't do "tours" there anymore.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

kreuzberger wrote: »

you can call youself westy the wild west cowboy for all i care . But you seem to be displaying a major aversion to just calling yourself Irish like a normal person would .

Good. So I won't labeled a West Brit then?

I have an eversion to afixing any pre-packaged lables to myself. I am an indiviaual before I am Irish. I have ideas, interests and beliefs that are not even slightly 'Irish', but they are mine and that's waaaaaaay more important than a word on a passport.

Rb

Seanies32 wrote: »

The amount of public sector and Govt. funded jobs is very, very high in NI. If I remember correctly it's about 30%. Far higher than other countries. I'll dig out a source if needed.

Indeed, so the costs of a "United Ireland" to the Republic far outweighs any "benefit" of it.

leninbenjamin

leninbenjamin wrote: »

i dont think the UK will consent anytime soon either. i think it's fair to say that they still have some deep rooted fears going back to WWII that ireland could be a platform for invasion should WWIII breakout. hence they keep a foothold in the north to invade from themselves should they ever feel the need.

If WWIII ever broke out, it's unlikely to be in this part of the world, more likely the middle east. Strategically the west cost of Ireland is worth much more to the UK than Northern Ireland, in WWII the U-boats were the biggest threat. way off topic of course. If there were huge oil reserves just off the Antrim coast then all bets are off.

Seanies32

Seanies32 wrote: »

The amount of public sector and Govt. funded jobs is very, very high in NI. If I remember correctly it's about 30%. Far higher than other countries. I'll dig out a source if needed.

Someone posted earlier in this thread that the figure was in the region of 70%.

I believe that 30% is the norm.

kreuzberger

PORNAPSTER wrote: »

there would be some pissed off heads in the Unionist community and they would certainly not take it lightly.

and do what exactly ? Beg Britian to come back ?

The UN would do SFA imo. Far bigger fish to fry.

Id be confident enough that the UN troops wouldnt import arms shipments for the loyalists , instruct them to kill solicitors or make bombs for them to plant in Dublin . That might just lessen their lethal capabilities just a tad , hey..call me an optimist

The North has plenty going for it as it is, it may have 4 million extra people to live with but its losing what? 56 million in doing so?

Not even loyalists have a huge affinity with 56 million foreigners . They certainly have no huge affinity with them , theyre all paddies . the north is bubbling away below the surface as the issue of British rule has not been addressed . Its dawning upon nationalists in greater numbers that a UI is not coming as was promised . Eventually this is leading to more conflcit . That has repercussions for everyone . Untill theres a UI this is just going to keep on happening .

Once again, I would like to see a United Ireland, but there would be some MAJOR obsticles in the way of that.

then it makes sense to sit down and tackle the obstacles as opposed to balking at them and using them as a justification to put the issue on the back burner yet again until it inevitably blows up in peoples faces . In 1916 people were very happy with British rule , prepared to live with it anyway and then things changed overnight as the issue was brought to a head. Trouble will alwaysbe just round the corner with British rule in Ireland . And getting rid of a British intelligence headquarters on this island is in all our interests given the activity both sides of the border they have engaged in in the past and may well do again in the future .

kreuzberger

Deleted User wrote: »

The Army are locals, the british army doesn't do "tours" there anymore.

they arent locals theyre from bloody yorkshire and places like that stationed over here . Theyre a foreign garrison . Irish troops in lebanon arent flipping locals .

kreuzberger

leninbenjamin
i dont think the UK will consent anytime soon either. i think it's fair to say that they still have some deep rooted fears going back to WWII that ireland could be a platform for invasion should WWIII breakout. hence they keep a foothold in the north to invade from themselves should they ever feel the need.

That is certainly the case according to their military strategists , their belief is leaving Ireland will never be in British interests . However their strategic fears are not justification for us allowing them to occupy our territory . Their interests may well dictate in the future more sectarian strife isneccessary to prevent a UI occuring . Hence the pressing necessity to have that intelligence HQ removed .

kreuzberger

Deleted User wrote: »

If there were huge oil reserves just off the Antrim coast then all bets are off.

if there were huge oil reserves off the antrim coast surely thats all the more reason for us claiming all our national territory rather than giving them up

although Fianna Fail would probably just sell them to Tony OReilly for a fiver .

Rb

kreuzberger wrote: »

they arent locals theyre from bloody yorkshire and places like that stationed over here . Theyre a foreign garrison . Irish troops in lebanon arent flipping locals .

Bleedin' foddiners comin' over and takin' our jawbs and women, eh?

kreuzberger

kreuzberger wrote: »

they arent locals theyre from bloody yorkshire and places like that stationed over here . Theyre a foreign garrison . Irish troops in lebanon arent flipping locals .

In a peacetime situation, you have your Army spread evenly over the whole of your country, just in case! This is true of every country that is large enough to support more than one army base, we have a garrison here in Athlone, the squaddies come from all over the country.

kreuzberger

rb_ie wrote: »

Bleedin' foddiners comin' over and takin' our jawbs and women, eh?

no , just part of our country

kreuzberger

Deleted User wrote: »

In a peacetime situation, you have your Army spread evenly over the whole of your country, just in case! This is true of every country that is large enough to support more than one army base, we have a garrison here in Athlone, the squaddies come from all over the country.

right , and the ones in the north come from all over england . Hence they arent locals , theyre brits .

kreuzberger

kreuzberger wrote: »

right , and the ones in the north come from all over england . Hence they arent locals , theyre brits .

Wrong they're English

Rb

Deleted User wrote: »

Wrong they're English

Lol, nicely done.

kreuzberger

Deleted User wrote: »

Wrong they're English

yeah , brits

kreuzberger

kreuzberger wrote: »

yeah , brits

English

kreuzberger

so english people are local

Rb

kreuzberger wrote: »

so english people are local

So if some Polish immigrants decided to move in down the road from you, you wouldn't accept them as your neighbours/locals and just remind them constantly about where they're from and how they're not Irish?

kreuzberger

rb_ie wrote: »

So if some Polish immigrants decided to move in down the road from you, you wouldn't accept them as your neighbours/locals and just remind them constantly about where they're from and how they're not Irish?

No , id make a point of telling them all Irish people arent like you and we have dreadful problems with post colonial angst , so please dont judge us too harshly .

Rb

kreuzberger wrote: »

No , id make a point of telling them all Irish people arent like you and we have dreadful problems with post colonial angst , so please dont judge us too harshly .

I'd be more worried about the type of impact people such as yourself would leave on our immigrants tbh. You're coming across as nothing but racist at this point.

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone posted earlier in this thread that the figure was in the region of 70%.

I believe that 30% is the norm.

Nah it's not 70, though it probably could be argued.

The fact is it's far higher than the UK or ROI Rate.

kreuzberger

no , your now telling lies because you clealry havent a logical point to make and made a fool of yourself earlier with your snobby remarks about people from lower income brackets which went down like a lead balloon .
But by all means please attempt to portray me as a racist , ive enjoyed watching your credibility nose dive thus far

K-9

kreuzberger wrote: »

right , and the ones in the north come from all over england . Hence they arent locals , theyre brits .

I think the way you refer to Brits is different to the way the Unionists would refer to Brits!

kreuzberger

people from england call themselves brits , both unionist and nationalists refer to the British army as " the brits" . So please tell me what way Im saying "brits" about brits that is so awful .