Ireland, united and free!

lugha

No doubt the national question,and aspects of it, makes many appearances in these parts. I would be interested to hear people's views on one particular aspect, what shape a united Ireland would take, if and when it comes about. I have deep reservations about the whole project with one of my major concerns being that the Republican vision is shaped more by what they would hope will happen rather than what a more detached analysis might suggest.

For example, in reference to the thread title, “free” from what? Who will acquire a freedom to do something in a UI that would be impossible to attain through Stormont?

How will the massive public sector pay bill in the North be paid?

Will we retain our PR system with just a clutter of extra constituencies for NI? Isn't it probable that substantial political concessions will be made to Unionists which they might subsequently use to frustrate the workings of the new state?

On what basis is the claim made that a UI will put an end to tribal politics?

Has any serious thought gone into how to deal with the threat of a Loyalist backlash, other than to say we won't be dictated to by terrorists?

For that matter, has any serious thought gone into any practical concerns in relation to a UI, or is the plan to cross than bridge when we come to it?

BTW: Can we lead aside the past? No doubt many of us have strong opinions on the parts played by different players in the pasta and present which can be thrashed out elsewhere. Can we begin the discussion at a a point in the future when a majority of the population of NI vote for a UI and it becomes a reality?

Overheal

This thread will end well /more coffee

irishdub14

I see NI becoming an independent country more so than being reunited with the rest of Ireland.....

kev9100

To be honest, I dont think it matters as I dont see how we will ever have a United Ireland.The Unionists in the North will simply never let it happen as they would instantly be in the minority and would lose much of their privileged status, which they still hold in The North imo.

Sulmac

irishdub14 wrote: »

I see NI becoming an independent country more so than being reunited with the rest of Ireland.....

Really? That will never happen. It would collapse both economically and politically.

As a person from NI who now lives in the Republic (as is glad to be away from it), I would like to see the island united but in the long term (I'm talking a few decades or longer here). I think the Republic has enough problems at the moment than dealing with the tribal shyte that is Northern "politics" (or the lack of a real economy, coupled with dissidents that would erupt on both sides of the divide). Would anyone really want the likes of the DUP in the Dáil?

I do however view the all-island cooperation at the moment as a very positive thing and hope it continues.

lugha

irishdub14 wrote: »

I see NI becoming an independent country more so than being reunited with the rest of Ireland.....

kev9100 wrote: »

To be honest, I dont think it matters as I dont see how we will ever have a United Ireland.The Unionists in the North will simply never let it happen as they would instantly be in the minority and would lose much of their privileged status, which they still hold in The North imo.

I think it will happen because there is an agreement that a plebiscite on the matter will be held every 7 years (after the first). And the Nationalist population is rising in the North, even if not all Nationalists want a UI, but I think eventually, enough of them will.

Anyway, I said IF, IF …

View

Sulmac wrote: »

Would anyone really want the likes of the DUP in the Dáil?

I heard them described once as the NI version of FF, so they'd probably fit right in...

FlutterinBantam

In my opinion, most people south of the border want nothing to do with the North.

Personally it would not matter a whit whether Ireland was united or not.

All that would worry me is the bill for the social welfare for these people once the normal smuggling routes are gone and all the scams they exist on are snuffed out.

May sound a tad harsh, but fook me ,it's true.

wes

Well, I think no one has taught of the practicalities, as the whole idea of a untied Ireland seems remote or something that will happen in the far future, and when people see things that way, they don't give much taught to the practicalities.

sold

The republic of Ireland can't afford another 6 Counties (which is mainly funded by London)

I say leave things as they are, (otherwise where would we go for cheap booze)

After all its not like the old East/West Germany or North/South Korea, I think as it stands that Status Quo works very well.

For sure if they crackpop dissident republicans start killing policmen then we will NEVER see a united Ireland. I think we need a good 30-40 years of peace before the question could be put to a vote.

walrusgumble

Sulmac wrote: »

Really? That will never happen. It would collapse both economically and politically.

As a person from NI who now lives in the Republic (as is glad to be away from it), I would like to see the island united but in the long term (I'm talking a few decades or longer here). I think the Republic has enough problems at the moment than dealing with the tribal shyte that is Northern "politics" (or the lack of a real economy, coupled with dissidents that would erupt on both sides of the divide). Would anyone really want the likes of the DUP in the Dáil?

I do however view the all-island cooperation at the moment as a very positive thing and hope it continues.

At some point surely, maybe in 15-20years time political parties in Stormount and the manner in which the ordinary citizen votes, won't be determined by religion at least. (It is not too much to ask for, nationalit would be too much to ask for as then the whole point of "Unionism" and "Republicanism" would be gone) It would be good, in time down the future that Stormount can get into normal politics, ie government and the opposition. Others may disagree, look forward to their opinion on that. Hopefully, politicans won't pick up the bad habits of politicans in other jurisdictions ie brown envelopes etc.

Cross boarder co-operation on a public and private front should continue and be enhanced; culturaly and economically. But first and foremost, every effort and energy must be invested in to helping all parts of the community of Northern Ireland finally and truelly be able to meet eye to eye, to remove the last elements of distrust and hatred towards each other. Maybe, groups like the GAA in the north or its members should or at least consider the changing names of their clubs or grounds as a genuine act of wishing for integration and dare, I say, maturity.(Please note, its easy for me to suggest this as I am a Southerner and say this in the comfort of my home, but I do acknowlege the crack GAA members had to put up with during the troubles)

It is only then, when members of each community can safely walk into each others streets and estates that the people can work as a whole to improve the economy. In the world of argiculture, commerce, law etc we have a lot in common with the north. We should enhance those common grounds. I don't accept for one minute that a business man of the Unionist persuastion has in the past or while in the future refuse to do business with the South. Albert Reynolds is one example who was involved in business adventures with Northern Unionists in the past.

I find it arrogant and insulting to the people in the North when people down here seem to, whether intentionally or not, give the impression that people in the North are incapable of achieving goals and economic success. One must remember, the people in the South, or Irish Catholics do not have monopoly over the supposed influencial Irish community in America and far fields. Again, we should seek out their help. (As some will be aware, members of the famous "Four Horesemen" and other influencial Irish Americans had family members who hailed from the six counties.

I found it hard to swallow the reaction of some people who may normally proclaim (especially in the Pub) their "Republicanism/Nationalism" their ignorant partionist views when swaths of people went North to shop. If you wanted to blame anyone for this blame the business people and the Oireachtas (obviously not the President) for allowing, for so long, a neglect and disregard attitude towars Prices and Consumer rights. For once, for a short time, people regardless of cred and nationality in the North were making money.

Cross boarder co-operation is the only way to go. So too is patience in Stormount. For the sake of all the people in the island, real and genuine peace, trust and stability is needed. People in the North are entitled to be considered as Irish Citizens, maybe better treatment to them as oppose to the usual micky taking and patronising gaps of "oh the nordie" or making such a huge issue with their accents when they are in the South may help them not feel alien in their own area.

The sad reality is, people in Donegal, and in particular people in the very northern parts of Donegal tend to have more in common with people in Derry or even Glasgow! (God I use to hate reading the Daily Record, lol) We in the further ssssshhhhhhouth, tend to give our Donegal friends the impression that we don't give a toss for them, never mind people in the six counties. This again needs to change.

Latchy

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In my opinion, most people south of the border want nothing to do with the North.

Personally it would not matter a whit whether Ireland was united or not.

All that would worry me is the bill for the social welfare for these people once the normal smuggling routes are gone and all the scams they exist on are snuffed out.

May sound a tad harsh, but fook me ,it's true.

Quite true ,many on both sides have more to gain by keeping things the way they are

Sulmac wrote: »

As a person from NI who now lives in the Republic (as is glad to be away from it), I would like to see the island united but in the long term (I'm talking a few decades or longer here). I think the Republic has enough problems at the moment than dealing with the tribal shyte that is Northern "politics" (or the lack of a real economy, coupled with dissidents that would erupt on both sides of the divide). Would anyone really want the likes of the DUP in the Dáil?

When the troubles first broke out in NI and Catholics from the Bogside were billited down south , many of them complained that if they remained in the south to long they would loose their UK benefits which at the time I gather , were far more genorous than the Republics . I am guessing that might be at the forefront of any nationalist thinking and would come into any decision making by the same people as much anything else if they eventually had a choice ie , are we going to be better off as a whole country or better the divil ya know ? .

The Express

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In my opinion, most people south of the border want nothing to do with the North.

Personally it would not matter a whit whether Ireland was united or not.

All that would worry me is the bill for the social welfare for these people once the normal smuggling routes are gone and all the scams they exist on are snuffed out.

May sound a tad harsh, but fook me ,it's true.

Dead right, Flutt.

I knew this bird from Armagh once, worked in the south and never stopped yacking away about Brits out and all that. Then, anytime she needed any dental work done she would scuttle back 'up home' for some treatment at her majesty's expense. And the cnut had the cheek to call us 'Free Staters'

An a la carte Republican if ever there was one.

I see enough of my taxes being wasted down here. The shower of muppets in the Dail couldn't manage two counties properly, never mind 32.

The six counties are costing her maj a pretty penny. And that's fine by me.

lugha

walrusgumble wrote: »

At some point surely, maybe in 15-20years time political parties in Stormount and the manner in which the ordinary citizen votes, won't be determined by religion at least. (It is not too much to ask for, nationalit would be too much to ask for as then the whole point of "Unionism" and "Republicanism" would be gone)

The divide in NI is often lazily labeled as a religious clash. It isn't, it is a broader cultural clash between Nationalism and Unionism. And yes, this is one of the claims made by Republicans, that each community will somehow shed themselves of these cultural ties. I see absolutely no evidence that this might happen in a short time frame like 20 years. If anything, Unionists would feel more threatened and embrace their culture to a greater extent.

Bugnug

Dont worry about it as I cant see it happening this sde of 2060 at least if ever. Unionist would never allow it and we cant afford the place. Apart from the sinners nobody down here gives two hoots. Now that the dissident crazies can no longer be labelled as soldiers and there is no "war" people in the north live in some kind of peace. I would be very suprised if Sinn Fein are still around in 5 to 10 years and nobody else pushes the issue. Have you seen there economic policies. If anybody ever needs a good laugh or shock give them a read, they're great:pac::pac::pac::pac:

DoireNod

lugha wrote: »

How will the massive public sector pay bill in the North be paid?

In my opinion, one of the factors should be the British government, who should continue to contribute in some way until the re-united Ireland is able to adequately sustain itself, eventually withdrawing any kind of support. After all, this is their problem too and not just Dublin's.

Will we retain our PR system with just a clutter of extra constituencies for NI? Isn't it probable that substantial political concessions will be made to Unionists which they might subsequently use to frustrate the workings of the new state?

What kinds of political concessions do you envisage?

Has any serious thought gone into how to deal with the threat of a Loyalist backlash, other than to say we won't be dictated to by terrorists?

I'd imagine they'd be treated similarly to how any other terrorist group would be treated.

For that matter, has any serious thought gone into any practical concerns in relation to a UI, or is the plan to cross than bridge when we come to it?

There are quite a number of practical advantages of having a one island economy and institutions. There would be a streamlining of infrastructure and a pooling of resources.

BTW: Can we lead aside the past? No doubt many of us have strong opinions on the parts played by different players in the pasta and present which can be thrashed out elsewhere. Can we begin the discussion at a a point in the future when a majority of the population of NI vote for a UI and it becomes a reality?

I know what you mean about leaving aside the past, but it is from the past that we can learn, so I think there are cases to be made by citing history.

irishdub14 wrote: »

I see NI becoming an independent country more so than being reunited with the rest of Ireland.....

Why?

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In my opinion, most people south of the border want nothing to do with the North.

Personally it would not matter a whit whether Ireland was united or not.

All that would worry me is the bill for the social welfare for these people once the normal smuggling routes are gone and all the scams they exist on are snuffed out.

May sound a tad harsh, but fook me ,it's true.

Most people probably don't care much about the North because they are so detached from it and it seems increasingly so, which saddens me. I resent your comment which suggests people from the North are nothing more than criminals and leeches. Have you ever lived in the North?

The Express wrote: »

Dead right, Flutt.

I knew this bird from Armagh once, worked in the south and never stopped yacking away about Brits out and all that. Then, anytime she needed any dental work done she would scuttle back 'up home' for some treatment at her majesty's expense. And the cnut had the cheek to call us 'Free Staters'

An a la carte Republican if ever there was one.

How is he 'dead right'? Do you normally base your opinion of an entire population on one person you happened to know? In any case, why shouldn't the girl have benefited from the free health care?

The Express

How is he 'dead right'? Do you normally base your opinion of an entire population on one person you happened to know? In any case, why shouldn't the girl have benefited from the free health care?[/quote]

I was agreeing with another poster when I posted 'dead right'.

And I wasn't judging a population by my other comments.

lugha

DoireNod wrote: »

In my opinion, one of the factors should be the British government, who should continue to contribute in some way until the re-united Ireland is able to adequately sustain itself, eventually withdrawing any kind of support. After all, this is their problem too and not just Dublin's.

I have heard this suggestion but I find it hard to believe the British would accept it, or sell it to their people. They more than likely see it as a tad cheeky. We demand our country back, but insist on still sending them the bill! And it is something they might choose to, or be forced to, row back on subsequently.

DoireNod wrote: »

What kinds of political concessions do you envisage?

Unionist will be extremely hostile to the idea and I expect there will be all sorts of efforts to sweeten the deal. Maybe the national parliament will be in Belfast. Maybe they will be afforded a veto for some aspects of legislation. My fear is that when a UI comes within touching distance Nationalists will overreach to make it happen.

DoireNod wrote: »

I'd imagine they'd be treated similarly to how any other terrorist group would be treated.

Yes. But as your republican friends will tell us, the British Army (arguably one of the best in the world) were unable to defeat what they say as the terrorist IRA. Why do you suppose that the Irish army with less resources could defeat, or even contain the Loyalists? And as I am sure you know, the Loyalists paramilitaries were a pretty psychotic bunch, even in the times when the constitutional position of NI was to their liking. They are hardly likely to came down much if they are forced in to a UI. Also, their perception will be that a UI was delivered by the IRA through violence, so they will be motivated to try to undo it with the same method.

DoireNod wrote: »

There are quite a number of practical advantages of having a one island economy and institutions. There would be a streamlining of infrastructure and a pooling of resources.

Yes, but much of this can be done without a UI.

walrusgumble

Bugnug wrote: »

Dont worry about it as I cant see it happening this sde of 2060 at least if ever. Unionist would never allow it and we cant afford the place. Apart from the sinners nobody down here gives two hoots. Now that the dissident crazies can no longer be labelled as soldiers and there is no "war" people in the north live in some kind of peace. I would be very suprised if Sinn Fein are still around in 5 to 10 years and nobody else pushes the issue. Have you seen there economic policies. If anybody ever needs a good laugh or shock give them a read, they're great:pac::pac::pac::pac:

That is fair enough, but then, people in Fine Gael and Fianna Fail don't really have much business attending the Bodenstown Annual cermony do they?

As far as the economic policies are concerned, its amazing Sinn Fein even have one considering that for over 40 years or so their energies were on Northern Issues. Its not like Fianna Fail under Dev or Cuman na nGaedheal were leading lights when their time came to deal with the economy or lack of. In time, new members of Sinn Fein may lead the way, assuming Gerry and the old heads take a step aside. The Northern branch won't be ruining all socialist or in some circles Champagne Socalist when they are trying to bring American dollars to the North. Time will tell on this.

Then again ,in hindsight, not many of the established parties here (well Enda did set up the "Rip off Ireland campaign) have not been too clever in the past ten years

walrusgumble

lugha wrote: »

I have heard this suggestion but I find it hard to believe the British would accept it, or sell it to their people. They more than likely see it as a tad cheeky. We demand our country back, but insist on still sending them the bill! And it is something they might choose to, or be forced to, row back on subsequently.


Unionist will be extremely hostile to the idea and I expect there will be all sorts of efforts to sweeten the deal. Maybe the national parliament will be in Belfast. Maybe they will be afforded a veto for some aspects of legislation. My fear is that when a UI comes within touching distance Nationalists will overreach to make it happen.


Yes. But as your republican friends will tell us, the British Army (arguably one of the best in the world) were unable to defeat what they say as the terrorist IRA. Why do you suppose that the Irish army with less resources could defeat, or even contain the Loyalists? And as I am sure you know, the Loyalists paramilitaries were a pretty psychotic bunch, even in the times when the constitutional position of NI was to their liking. They are hardly likely to came down much if they are forced in to a UI. Also, their perception will be that a UI was delivered by the IRA through violence, so they will be motivated to try to undo it with the same method.


Yes, but much of this can be done without a UI.

1. With regard to expecting the Brits to continue paying, aye it is a tad bit cheeky and possibly would not work. then again, the brits had no problem laying down similar payment conditions under the Treaty.

2.If a United Ireland comes, a majority of Unionists and & Loyalists would have voted in favour. No Unionist leader is going to dare put his head above the line until it was fully ascertained that a majority of Loyalists and Unionists fully agree to UI. the lead up might be violent, hence why none of the governments will touch this for another 50 years.

3. You make National Parliament going to Belfast sound bad? Why, its only a location,maybe Belfast civil service personel would do a better service that what we have here in running the Dail? What really counts is that your local TD/MP does their job in looking after your county and the country. Stormount would hardly be kept idle. Its a small price to pay for a United Ireland. With regard to veto, there is such thing as teaming up with other parties in support of matters, it maybe quite possible that Unionist who sign up for UI and support its structures, may have exactly the same opinions and attitudes as you or I.

How does or how has other countries similar to this, deal with veto for minority groups? Again. providing some preference to Unionists would be a small price to pay for eg extra seats (as proposed by Arthur Griffith during the Truce)

Over the years, Unionists fears about Ireland have in some instances been proven correct. (note Unionists seem to fear everything and anything, of course, Ireland has changed, and most of their fears of the south are no longer justified)

Out of interest, could you give a few examples of possible concessions to Unionists?

4. With regard to Loyalist threats, you may have a successful point here. But for debate argument, there would be no UI until a majority of them wanted and voted for one. Ok, there would probably always be some dissidents. One huge factor though, during the troubles it was and has being argued and sometimes proven that Loyalists paramilitary enjoyed support/assistance or lack of supervision from the British Army and RUC. Will they interfere and help the Loyalists then? (Of course, there maybe nothing stopping them from seeking help elsewhere, other countries won't be pushed who they sell arms too) Will the former Unionist people support them if a majority of same wanted an UI.

You seem to underestimate the strength and quality of the Garda Special Branch when they dealt with Republicans / IRA in the South. Of course let's not underestimate the strenght of Loyalists. But we are talking about possibly a good 60-70 years or more before the notion of UI may realistically be achieved. Who knows what will happen in 20-30 years.

5. Whilst I tend to dispise the notion that UI will be achieved mererly because of a growing nationalist population, as I find it too simplistic. However, the matter cannot be ignored. The Nationalist minded population is growing and is becoming more educated and are now and will become more involved in Public life (now of course, whether they themselves would want to give up their priviledges and be taken over by Dublin is another matter which can't be to easily assumed)

The reality is this, a majority of the population (no reference to what a majority is to achieve same - is it a simple one?) of both jurisdictions would have to go to the voting booth separately. If a majority is voted, even if overwhelmingly, then a United Ireland would be proposed to Westminister. Under the terms of Good Friday and others (and previous incarinations of same), the voice of the majority can not be ignorned, no more so than the voice of a majority in Dublin, Cork and elsewhere in the established Republic! Would world opinion tolerate this? Unionists have being long aware of this threat, its up to them to convence peacefully (fat chance) people others, or will they try to resort to their usual tactics? This time at least, it won't be so easy. - then again, we are all assuming, none of us know what's going to happen in the future. For purpose of debate, I would respectively disagree in parts to your comment

lugha

walrusgumble wrote: »

If a United Ireland comes, a majority of Unionists and & Loyalists would have voted in favour. No Unionist leader is going to dare put his head above the line until it was fully ascertained that a majority of Loyalists and Unionists fully agree to UI.

The majority (or even a sizable minority for that matter) of Unionist will never. ever agree to a UI. That has about the same chance of happening as a majority of Nationalists agreeing to being ruled by Britain again. It simply will not happen, nor is it required to happen. It is only necessary for a majority in NI to vote yes. Every single Unionist could conceivably say no, but a UI could still happen if a sufficient number of Nationalists said yes. If Unionists could be persuaded to partake in a UI it would be a different matter, but they can't be persuaded and never will be.

oscarBravo

DoireNod wrote: »

In my opinion, one of the factors should be the British government, who should continue to contribute in some way until the re-united Ireland is able to adequately sustain itself, eventually withdrawing any kind of support. After all, this is their problem too and not just Dublin's.

United and free, and taking the Queen's shilling.

Man, that sent me to bed in a good mood...

walrusgumble

oscarBravo wrote: »

United and free, and taking the Queen's shilling.

Man, that sent me to bed in a good mood...

How is it any different to seeking health care and or health care benefits which they may be entitled too (whether working or residing) in another jurisdicition (UK) or within another country of the Euorpean Union? Don't many other Irish people go to Europe & America to seek medicial treatment (and maybe, due to either employment/residency, be entilted free services of another country or similar access as nationals of that country).

I take it (I know) you are aware of the European Treaty provision of freedom to access / provide services and prohibition of discrimination on basis of nationality. This is no different to you or me, assuming we normally worked in UK or resided, seeking our entitlement to any potential health service benefit which are conferred on basis of employment/residency.

How many went north to shop and alledgely prevented the Republican Jurisdiction of VAT etc? (or head to US etc for Christmas shopping) How does that deface or put a dent to the lady's entitlement to be considered and treated Irish? Of course she would go north to take the benefits. You would too if you had the chance!

This not double standards?

walrusgumble

lugha wrote: »

The majority (or even a sizable minority for that matter) of Unionist will never. ever agree to a UI. That has about the same chance of happening as a majority of Nationalists agreeing to being ruled by Britain again. It simply will not happen, nor is it required to happen. It is only necessary for a majority in NI to vote yes. Every single Unionist could conceivably say no, but a UI could still happen if a sufficient number of Nationalists said yes. If Unionists could be persuaded to partake in a UI it would be a different matter, but they can't be persuaded and never will be.

I set out a very detailed reply to another post. However, for purpose of debate, I will clarify one or two things.

That particular paragraph was dealing with the previous posts fears of Loylaist violence. My reply, the paragraph you refer to is me giving my opionion that Loyalist violence may not occur if an United Ireland was granted. It would mean those lads or some of them would have to say yes.

In subsequent paragraphs dealing with separate or over lapping issues raised by the previous post, I acknowledged that most loyalists would likely never say yes and the potential of serious problems. I also acknowledged that it will take years, decades in fact. However, I also stressed that none of us have a crystal ball, however, it seems some in the South seem keen on prejudicing the future.

I also highlighted the possibility of Nationalists outvoting the unionists. No doubt, unionists would make up some issue as to what a majority is.

In my opinion, whislt I fully agree with you with regard to even a majority of the population, who are Nationalist, were successful in getting an United Ireland; I feel that Nationalist will require some agreement with a decent proportion of Unionist or by then former Unionist to get over the line.

Bascially, I am of the opinion that Nationalists can not and should not sit on their laurels and think with the population boom they enjoy will simply get them on the road again. Continued efforts need to be made to make Unionist feel welcome, "cheerished" (as in the Constition Artilce 2 & 3) and respected. That attitudes of some people in the South, makes you wonder why Nationalists in the north even bother. Still don't worry boys and girls, come 20 years time or so, boarders etc may not matter as we might be saluting to the United State of Europe (maybe that won't be too bad afterall)

Many seem to have a problem with even attempting to consider the debate of what needs to be done or how a UI could be achieved, and the more important question, what do we do if it was achieved. Negativity, although in some respect valid, seems posionous. It seems its more to do with people here in the South being more concerned with them loosing whatever priviledges they have over our neighbours. I believe it would be a more honest debate if poster actually, before making their first comments state where they stand on this matter. It is my genuine believ, after looking at this thread and similar, some people, although fully entitled to say what they want to say, have some very false and/or misunderstandings of what the north is really like or have ever set foot in the place, yet seem qualified to make, at times some rather arrogant remarks about the place.

Without then, slagging or abusing that person, we will see if there are any conflicted interests. It would also rid any assumptionn or allegded assumptions that a majority in this country, or at least in the house of boards.ie wish to seem an United Ireland

Although, for the craic, in areas like Afterhours, we slag off other counties and put threads up on which county would you blow up etc, its all fun and games when at least Cork, Kerry, Leitrim, Wicklow etc enjoy automatic rights to been part of Rep Ireland.

__________________________________________________________

For purpose of debate and returning to your points

If somehow, a debate was allowed to occur and election/poll was allowed to be taken (highly unlikely of course) in the coming decade, where it might be possible, that Sinn Fein out poll the other parties (somehow, maybe wishful thinking) and if a nationalist majority mustered up enough support and voted, as your example pointed out

1. Do anyone think that the UK would back down from previous legislative promises and / or pander to probably Unionist & Loyalist threats and commission of violence and political absentation?

2. Would this look bad on them in the eyes of the international world?

3. Would the people down South, ignore the Constitution, GFA and other works of previous Constitutionlists and ignore their right to be part of the south when or if they go to the polling booth? Surely, the issue of Unionists is then not really relevant as, in the much loved words of Unionists of yesteryear, majority rules

4. Would the British government provide the much need "support" of yester year to loyalists in order to sustain some form of fight?

FlutterinBantam

DoireNod wrote: »

Most people probably don't care much about the North because they are so detached from it and it seems increasingly so, which saddens me. I resent your comment which suggests people from the North are nothing more than criminals and leeches. Have you ever lived in the North?

No, thank God, any jurisdiction in which the inhabitants resort to kerbpainting and flying flags to denote their political affiliation would do nothing for me my friend.

DoireNod wrote: »

How is he 'dead right'? Do you normally base your opinion of an entire population on one person you happened to know? In any case, why shouldn't the girl have benefited from the free health care?

I think he is more referring to the double standards of whinging and moaning about Brits out on one hand and then using every opportunity to benefit from the advantages that situation accrues is the issue.
IOW shut the fook up about the Brits out, or get yer gnashers treated in the South. that's what would appear is his point which i agree with.

getz

there is no easy answer to the north south problem,if i was a protestant loyalist,i would not like to be part of a country that education /health/welfair is still under the control of the church,who are still allowed to discriminate who they except in their institutions,and if i was a irish catholic from the south i would not like to take on all the racism and cost of trying to intergrate both northern parties, maybe like china and hong kong, one country two systems will be a first step

DublinWriter

I've worked with quite a few Ulster Protestants over the years, some of whom were in the Orange Order.

Once the subject of politics is breached, the weirdest thing they've told me to a man is that they feel that a United Ireland is an inevitability. That's to say they don't don't object to the notion, but they repeatedly told me that they know it is coming down the line.

More interesting still is the planned ballot in Scotland this year to be held by the SNP to determine if the Scottish people want to break from the Union and become a Republic. Should Scotland leave the Union, how feasible is a potentially fractious Union of just England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Now add to the mix a slowly growing voice of English who want, and wait for this, their own parliament! The British Houses of Parliament represent the entire UK and contains members serving in both it and regional assemblies. The question being asked is if NI, Wales and Scotland have regional assemblies, then why not one for England.

I'm 50/50 on weather the UK will remain in it's present form in the next 50 years. People tend to forget that the Union is only a fairly recent political construct in the entire history of these isles.

junder

DublinWriter wrote: »

I've worked with quite a few Ulster Protestants over the years, some of whom were in the Orange Order.

Once the subject of politics is breached, the weirdest thing they've told me to a man is that they feel that a United Ireland is an inevitability. That's to say they don't don't object to the notion, but they repeatedly told me that they know it is coming down the line.

More interesting still is the planned ballot in Scotland this year to be held by the SNP to determine if the Scottish people want to break from the Union and become a Republic. Should Scotland leave the Union, how feasible is a potentially fractious Union of just England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Now add to the mix a slowly growing voice of English who want, and wait for this, their own parliament! The British Houses of Parliament represent the entire UK and contains members serving in both it and regional assemblies. The question being asked is if NI, Wales and Scotland have regional assemblies, then why not one for England.

I'm 50/50 on weather the UK will remain in it's present form in the next 50 years. People tend to forget that the Union is only a fairly recent political construct in the entire history of these isles.

Well this is one loyalist that does not see a united ireland as inevitabul, I certianly don't believe i will ever see a united ireland in my life time, and i am not an old man. Moreover there is nothing that will convince me to want to be part of a united ireland. As somebody has already pointed out on this thread or another is that the biggest mistake those of you that live in the republic of ireland make in realtionship to northern ireland is trying to apply rational normal every day politics to life in northern ireland

junder

View wrote: »

I heard them described once as the NI version of FF, so they'd probably fit right in...

think you will find they are closer to FG

Fratton Fred

Create a united and get the English to pay for it, at a time when the English are already pissed off at having to foot the bill for Scotland, Wales and NI? It would be political suicide for whoever agrees it and would be soon changed at the next election.

Ireland's best hope is even more money from the EU, although hopefully that won't be squandered next time.

Tipp Man

If the Republic went to a referendum in the morning about whether we should unite the island or not, how would the vote go?? Do people think that if the same vote was taken in 20 years the result would be the same??

blinding

We should send up all the unemployed and just take over the place.

A sort of a reverse plantation if you like.

If they did it to us why can't we do it to them.

It would'nt even be real emmigration;)

And the British might even let them claim the dole and housing benefit as well.

It would keep loads of people busy. I think I would go into the Undertaker and coffin making business.

walrusgumble

blinding wrote: »

We should send up all the unemployed and just take over the place.

A sort of a reverse plantation if you like.

If they did it to us why can't we do it to them.

It would'nt even be real emmigration;)

And the British might even let them claim the dole and housing benefit as well.

It would keep loads of people busy. I think I would go into the Undertaker and coffin making business.

Respectively, with ignorant comments like that, you might be your first customer.

getz

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Create a united and get the English to pay for it, at a time when the English are already pissed off at having to foot the bill for Scotland, Wales and NI? It would be political suicide for whoever agrees it and would be soon changed at the next election.

Ireland's best hope is even more money from the EU, although hopefully that won't be squandered next time.

yes but dont forget the british tax payer paid for that as well.

Sleepy

My daughter will be paying enough in tax due to NAMA, don't ask me to even countenance adding NI to her future financial woes.

getz

Sleepy wrote: »

My daughter will be paying enough in tax due to NAMA, don't ask me to even countenance adding NI to her future financial woes.

just think how we feel in the UK, for every man woman and child we are paying[this year] into the EU £1,000,to prop up other states ,no wonder we are in a mess.

DublinWriter

junder wrote: »

Well this is one loyalist that does not see a united ireland as inevitabul, I certianly don't believe i will ever see a united ireland in my life time, and i am not an old man. Moreover there is nothing that will convince me to want to be part of a united ireland. As somebody has already pointed out on this thread or another is that the biggest mistake those of you that live in the republic of ireland make in realtionship to northern ireland is trying to apply rational normal every day politics to life in northern ireland

I don't see a united Ireland as inevitable either myself.

For the record, what do you consider yourself to be, nationality wise?

Sleepy

getz wrote: »

just think how we feel in the UK, for every man woman and child we are paying[this year] into the EU £1,000,to prop up other states ,no wonder we are in a mess.

Take a look at the French sometime and you'll feel better. They pump billions into their former colonies which are now regarded as being no different to mainland France.

junder

DublinWriter wrote: »

I don't see a united Ireland as inevitable either myself.

For the record, what do you consider yourself to be, nationality wise?

I see myself as British

DublinWriter

junder wrote: »

I see myself as British

Do you see yourself as being Irish/Northern Irish at all?

The reason I ask is that I always find it a bit curious how most Unionists deny that they are Irish as all, a bit like someone being born in Wales stating that
they're not Welsh but British, or a bit like me saying I'm not Irish, but European.

LordSutch

DublinWriter wrote: »

Do you see yourself as being Irish/Northern Irish at all? The reason I ask is that I always find it a bit curious how most Unionists deny that they are Irish as all, a bit like someone being born in Wales stating that they're not Welsh but British, or a bit like me saying I'm not Irish, but European.

I think you'll find that most Irish Unionists are Irish (but in a British context)! in the same way as the majority of Scots & Welsh are also British whilst being distinctly proud of their own Countries/regions within. Personally I see the 'British badge' as meaing a 'belonging to' a larger family & cultural identity, (which includes the English, Scots, Welsh & many Irish people too). Ian Paisley has said in the past that he is a proud Irish man, needless to say if anyone told him that he was not British he would strongly protest

P.S. Ireland is free, and free to do what it likes!

junder

DublinWriter wrote: »

Do you see yourself as being Irish/Northern Irish at all?

The reason I ask is that I always find it a bit curious how most Unionists deny that they are Irish as all, a bit like someone being born in Wales stating that
they're not Welsh but British, or a bit like me saying I'm not Irish, but European.

My identy is a little more complex as i am half English, I do regard myself as Northern Irish, and i do not deny that i have a irish dimension to my identy but i do not see myself as irish. I see myself as Ulster-scot because i have a family history that goes back to scotland from the time of the plantations, my family being one of the more famous reiver clans exiled from scotland by king james.

http://www.borderreivers.co.uk/

http://www.sorbie.net/border_reivers.htm

oppenheimer1

lugha wrote: »

The majority (or even a sizable minority for that matter) of Unionist will never. ever agree to a UI. That has about the same chance of happening as a majority of Nationalists agreeing to being ruled by Britain again. It simply will not happen, nor is it required to happen. It is only necessary for a majority in NI to vote yes. Every single Unionist could conceivably say no, but a UI could still happen if a sufficient number of Nationalists said yes. If Unionists could be persuaded to partake in a UI it would be a different matter, but they can't be persuaded and never will be.

The majority of the unionist population will never agree, but in years to come, I hope people won't define themselves as either. We are a good bit away from it yet but I'm hoping the secularisation of society will in general break down those barriers.

As for what shape a united Ireland would take, well there would have to be wholesale changes in the political structures,probably looking at some sort of federal country based on the provinces in order that the unionists will have a substantial say in how their corner is run. We may have to rejoin the commonwealth or perhaps give up our president as head of state. A united Ireland wouldn't be an overnight thing either, when the mood seems right I would expect the UK government to start the process of convergence, possibly 10 years before a vote, and have a total withdrawl over a possible further 5 to 7 years. I'm guessing the hand-over of Hong Kong would be an example of how it would be handled.

A united Ireland could happen sooner than we think though as the Union itself will be in big trouble if Scotland secedes. Considering that the tories are looking likely to win the next election, a referendum on the question certainly isn't out of the question. Without Scotland, England would probably like to be on its own, and you may end up with a loose federation of nations, with the possibility of the only link being common foreign and security policy (if even that). In that situation I don't think the english would like to have NI being an expensive leech. Having looked at some unionist forums it seemse to be something they are worried about.

I'm guessing it may be 20 years before the first plebiscite, as the current crop of bigots (all sides) will have to be replaced by moderates before progress can be made. All we can hope for is that something doesn't happen in the mean time to radicalise the young people or we will be back to the start again.

Dr. Baltar

A United Ireland - that is an Ireland entirely ruled from Dublin will not happen in our lifetime, nor in the lifetime of our great-grandchildren.
Unionists will not agree to become apart of that state.

The closest one could hope for is a united Ireland with devolved status for the North.

Jim236

lugha wrote: »

For example, in reference to the thread title, “free” from what? Who will acquire a freedom to do something in a UI that would be impossible to attain through Stormont?

Free from British rule, how is that not obvious?

lugha wrote: »

How will the massive public sector pay bill in the North be paid?

It'd obviously have to be cut, but you also have to take into account that people in the North would be paying tax like everyone else in the other 26 counties. Also a huge amount of money(billions) would be saved by eliminating the duplication of public services that exists atm, which would be one of many economic benefits of a United Ireland.

If Sinn Féin had any sense though they'd be trying to reduce Stormont's reliance on British subventions, instead they're agreeing to increases in it, which will only hinder their chances of winning the economic debate on any United Ireland.

lugha wrote: »

Will we retain our PR system with just a clutter of extra constituencies for NI? Isn't it probable that substantial political concessions will be made to Unionists which they might subsequently use to frustrate the workings of the new state?

Doesn't the North already use the same PR system as us?

Regarding Unionist concessions, I doubt they'll get many. The time for concessions is now, because by the time any referendum is held on a United Ireland there'd have to be a realistic chance of achieving a YES vote. When that happens, Unionists will have missed the boat on getting any concessions and won't be in any position to be calling the shots.

lugha wrote: »

On what basis is the claim made that a UI will put an end to tribal politics?

Has any serious thought gone into how to deal with the threat of a Loyalist backlash, other than to say we won't be dictated to by terrorists?

I doubt it'll truely end all tribal politics in the North. But the Irish Army is the one of the best trained armies in the world, and has direct experience in outside conflicts such as Kosovo, Lebanon and Liberia. But if another troubles breaks out in the North over the issue, then I hope the Irish government will not make the same mistake the British government made in 1969, and will call in UN peacekeepers to deal with the situation.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In my opinion, most people south of the border want nothing to do with the North.

Thats your opinion but its clearly not fact because according to a Sunday Business Post poll in 2006, 80% want a United Ireland.

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2006/04/02/story13121.asp

Also According to a 2001 Guardian poll, 41% of people in Britain also support a United Ireland.

http://www.4ni.co.uk/northern_ireland_news.asp?id=13422

DublinWriter wrote: »

More interesting still is the planned ballot in Scotland this year to be held by the SNP to determine if the Scottish people want to break from the Union and become a Republic. Should Scotland leave the Union, how feasible is a potentially fractious Union of just England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

There won't be a referendum as the Unionist parties blocked the referendum bill, so unless the SNP can get a majaority in the next Scottish elections, they'll still be in the UK for the next few years at least.

DublinWriter

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The majority of the unionist population will never agree, but in years to come, I hope people won't define themselves as either. We are a good bit away from it yet but I'm hoping the secularisation of society will in general break down those barriers.

Man is inherently tribal by nature, I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I personally dislike the tricolour as a national flag and prefer the older Fenian gold harp on a plain blue or green background.

Unionists do not want any hand, act or part in this state, so why we insist on representing their culture via one-third of our flag is beyond me.

The most we can hope for after hundreds of years of dysfunctional history is to live as good neighbours, remove violence from politics and respect the civil rights of our respective minority citizens and subjects.

Jim236

Btw some people might be interested in this: http://www.londonirishunityconference.org/

Sinn Féin will be hosting a conference on Irish Unity in London on 20th February. Speakers to include:

Sinn Féin President, Gerry Adams
Former Mayor of London, Ken Livingston
British Labour MP, Diane Abbott
British Labour MP, Jeremy Corbyn
British Cllr and anti-war activist, Salma Yaqoob
Unite union Ireland Secretary, Jimmy Kelly
Irish Times columnist, David Adams
GAA member, Jarlath Burns
National Industrial Secretary of SIPTU, Mick Halpenny
Historian, Prof Christine Kinealy
Unison official, Patricia McKeown

Jim236

DublinWriter wrote: »

I personally dislike the tricolour as a national flag and prefer the older Fenian gold harp on a plain blue or green background.

How can you dislike a flag that clearly stands for peace between Catholics and Protestants? Surely thats more representative of the orange tradition than a blue flag with a gold harp, which btw is already used by the President.

Happy Monday

Jim236 wrote: »

Btw some people might be interested in this: http://www.londonirishunityconference.org/

Sinn Féin will be hosting a conference on Irish Unity in London on 20th February. Speakers to include:

Sinn Féin President, Gerry Adams
Former Mayor of London, Ken Livingston
British Labour MP, Diane Abbott
British Labour MP, Jeremy Corbyn
British Cllr and anti-war activist, Salma Yaqoob
Unite union Ireland Secretary, Jimmy Kelly
Irish Times columnist, David Adams
GAA member, Jarlath Burns
National Industrial Secretary of SIPTU, Mick Halpenny
Historian, Prof Christine Kinealy
Unison official, Patricia McKeown

These speakers demonstrate why Irish unity is still so far away.
The topic remains the preserve of the radical, the leftists and extreme once physical force republicans.

This has to change and maybe in time it will.
The people listed above would in many cases want Ireland to leave the EU as well.

Ain't going to happen - until people from the great majority in both parts of the island are involved in this discussion and persuaded of its benefits a United Ireland will not happen.

lugha

DublinWriter wrote: »

Man is inherently tribal by nature, I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Absolutely. It is strange that you would risk being assaulted if you suggested to even a mild mannered nationalist that we might rejoin the commonwealth or in some other way, restore any political links with Britain. But the same people seem to think that Unionist is some kind of a phase that them up there are going through, and eventually they will grow out of it. :rolleyes:

DublinWriter wrote: »

I personally dislike the tricolour as a national flag and prefer the older Fenian gold harp on a plain blue or green background.

I agree. Apart from the fact that the tricolor has been hijacked by physical (ok formerly :P) physical force republicanism, the symbolism of the flag is a nonsense. Unionists clearly want no truck with a united Ireland and the tripe that Nationalists wheel out, that they would welcome Unionists playing a role in a UI is clearly a blatant lie.
Perhaps we should paint a "peace" wall on to the white part? :P
I like the idea of a harp on a green background I must say? (Why would you suggest blue? )

Sleepy

Because Blue is actually our national colour.