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

When & How could there be a united Ireland?

Options
1…2223252728…33

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    owenc wrote: »
    That won't matter unionists will follow scottish people but not to a ui remember they are unionists and they want to keep the union! I don't think scotland will leave either. English people are the head of the union thats why.
    When nationalists make a majority then we will have a UI. When a majority vote for a UI then we will have it.

    That day beckons. Remember Owen, a new Ireland will not simply be a few extra TDs. Its a chance for a new start.


  • Options
    #723
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    owenc wrote: »
    English people are the head of the union thats why.
    There's a lot of grumbling within England about the fact that every part of the union except England has its own assembly or parliament. There's a growing sentiment for English independence. It's going to be an interesting one.


  • Options
    #724
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    There's a lot of grumbling within England about the fact that every part of the union except England has its own assembly or parliament. There's a growing sentiment for English independence. It's going to be an interesting one.
    The West Lothian question.(sp?)


  • Options
    #725
    briany
    Registered Users Posts: 13,576 ✭✭✭✭briany


    If a united Ireland was to ever come about using a federal system based on the current provinces? Would that cause problems for Monaghan,Cavan and Donegal being put in with the six counties of NI, possibly being part of a region with greater autonomy than the other three provinces and political influences they may not be comfortable with.

    What are the barriers to Northern Ireland becoming something more like a dependency of the UK like the Isle of Man, not a member state? Maybe a united Ireland would not be possible but a more independent maybe even fully independent NI is? Or are the reliance on subsidisation just too great for that to work?

    What about an agreement whereby heavily nationalist areas could have some sort of Dail representation? Or at least some sort of direct political input from the RoI on a consistent basis if it was wanted? I know that would be tough and complex to arrange and probably just plain unworkable but it's just an idea.

    Realistically though for the foreseeable future the situation is good enough there so why would there be any reason to try to unite? God knows how the UK may change in the future though. If Scotland and Wales ever do become independent, might we be looking at a united kingdom of England and NI? I don't think so but it would be interesting to see what would happen.


  • Options
    #726
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    There's a lot of grumbling within England about the fact that every part of the union except England has its own assembly or parliament. There's a growing sentiment for English independence. It's going to be an interesting one.
    One thing is for certain however. The Union will not fall with a Conservative Prime Minister in power.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    One thing is for certain however. The Union will not fall with a Conservative Prime Minister in power.
    Aye, they have a history of ignoring democracy. Although the current government seems to be a breath of fresh air. I never expected that apology.


  • Options
    #728
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,662 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    it would make logical sense for a united ireland, in terms of tourism, economy, cost of government etc. Problem is, it that it cant happen over night. It cant even happen in decades as it could take centuries of dedicated work where the plan would be to keep the country running on one hand, as it is now, but in the back ground be developing a government that incorporates all parts of the country. that way theres none of this 'the south cant afford the north' etc etc, plus it give people a lot of time to change their attitudes and learn to live with each other.

    Is that actually possible considering how sh!te and petty we humans actually are in real life? As much as I'd love to think it would happen, I dont think enough people would have the actual balls to be prepared to do it. certianly not now. maybe in a few centuries - but not these days.


  • Options
    #729
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    I think it will happen in my lifetime. Hopefully.


  • Options
    #730
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I'm from Monaghan and yes! I would love to see Ulster unifyed under one political structure again.
    Exactly, the populations would be pretty balanced then. Interestingly, in the past Unionists shot that down as it would not give them a majority.


  • Options
    #731
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,662 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    owenc wrote: »
    That won't matter unionists will follow scottish people but not to a ui remember they are unionists and they want to keep the union!

    Isnt it the unionist community that likes to favour the idea of forgetting the past and getting on with the future? The future doesnt and shouldnt include more divisions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,662 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    I think it will happen in my lifetime. Hopefully.

    I dont think its possible that it will happen in a lifetime. anyones life time. theres just too much to be done. Though it would be cool if it could.


  • Options
    #733
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    maccored wrote: »
    I dont think its possible that it will happen in a lifetime. anyones life time. theres just too much to be done. Though it would be cool if it could.
    I plan on not dying.


    Seriously i think it is achievable.


  • Options
    #734
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,662 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    I plan on not dying.

    haha - ZOMBIE ATTACK!

    Seriously i think it is achievable.

    I think its achievable (in general), but you need to give people time to change plus you need to gradulally change the governance of a country - that takes more time than the average lifespan imo.


  • Options
    #735
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    I plan on not dying.


    Seriously i think it is achievable.
    I agree, it is achievable. But it will be difficult.


  • Options
    #736
    Eliot Rosewater
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    Interestingly, in the past Unionists shot that down as it would not give them a majority.

    It's not interesting really. When a certain segment of society make it pretty clear that they've no hesitancy in killing you, you'd be pretty scared ****less at the prospect of being ruled by fellows of the same side.

    Of course it works the other way too. But the point is that some nationalists have given unionists every reason not to want such a settlement.


  • Options
    #737
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,662 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Eliot Rosewater wrote: »
    It's not interesting really. When a certain segment of society make it pretty clear that they've no hesitancy in killing you, you'd be pretty scared ****less at the prospect of being ruled by fellows of the same side.

    Of course it works the other way too. But the point is that some nationalists have given unionists every reason not to want such a settlement.

    And unionist stormont never gave nationalists the impression that there was no jobs for nationalists, and that nationalists should live in squalor while wealthy unionists didnt? Or maybe Im making that up and it never happened but if it did, then thats what the unionists of 1975 seemed to want to continue with.


  • Options
    #738
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Eliot Rosewater wrote: »
    It's not interesting really. When a certain segment of society make it pretty clear that they've no hesitancy in killing you, you'd be pretty scared ****less at the prospect of being ruled by fellows of the same side.

    Of course it works the other way too. But the point is that some nationalists have given unionists every reason not to want such a settlement.
    I thought it was interesting. And what you said works both ways, as you acknowledged. Unionists have given nationalists every reason to not want them in charge.


    However I was referring back to the original partition of Ireland.


  • Options
    #739
    Le King
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭Le King


    It's an achievable goal. But not under the current political system. I think most likely the American system would have to be adopted. It's very hard to envisage a United Ireland right now. Perhaps we could divide the country by province.

    Either way, I think it makes perfect sense for a united Ireland to exist. Scottish independence will probably come first. Then the English independence momentum will gain much more support. Then it will definitely come to the table.

    I can see Scottish independence happening in the next 15 years, 20 at most.


  • Options
    #740
    Eliot Rosewater
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    maccored wrote: »
    And unionist stormont never gave nationalists the impression that there was no jobs for nationalists...

    ...
    Eliot Rosewater wrote: »
    Of course it works the other way too.


  • Options
    #741
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    This thread has an amazingly short lifespan if you guys can't keep an eye to what the thread is about. The misty distances of past time is only relevant in context, not as a replacement primary focus for the thread. I suggest posting with an eye to the present, and more presciently, the future - that's what the topic of the thread actually is.

    Aside, I've deleted the most recent page from the discussion. Most of it reduces the value of discussion as a concept and those of you with cards for personalising the discussion have personal reminders of that. I could go back and delete further back but I'm relying upon those of you with cop-on to use it and those of you without cop-on to fake it.

    /mod


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    sceptre wrote: »
    ... I suggest posting with an eye to the present, and more presciently, the future - that's what the topic of the thread actually is....

    There's power for you: one mod warning brings the whole argument juddering to a halt.


  • Options
    #743
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Osu wrote: »
    It's an achievable goal. But not under the current political system. I think most likely the American system would have to be adopted. It's very hard to envisage a United Ireland right now. Perhaps we could divide the country by province.

    Either way, I think it makes perfect sense for a united Ireland to exist. Scottish independence will probably come first. Then the English independence momentum will gain much more support. Then it will definitely come to the table.

    I can see Scottish independence happening in the next 15 years, 20 at most.
    Yes, the american system would be one to consider. I would favour this type of arrangement: something along these lines.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ire_Nua


  • Options
    #744
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    Yes, the american system would be one to consider. I would favour this type of arrangement: something along these lines.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ire_Nua
    I like that idea. But what is with making Athlone the capital?


  • Options
    #745
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I like that idea. But what is with making Athlone the capital?
    I presume its central location?


  • Options
    #746
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    I presume its central location?
    Yeah but it's still kind of weird. Is there even a building suitable to hold parliament in Athlone?


  • Options
    #747
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Yeah but it's still kind of weird. Is there even a building suitable to hold parliament in Athlone?
    I have no idea.

    Here is a link to the RSF site were there is more detail on it. I am not saying that this is how it should be, but I like the 4 provinces having parliaments etc. Its an "interesting" read.


    http://www.rsf.ie/eirenua.htm


  • Options
    #748
    briany
    Registered Users Posts: 13,576 ✭✭✭✭briany


    It seems like a reasonable idea but when they say a parliament in Athlone, it just sounds so weird upon hearing it first that it takes away from the idea's credibility. It's a bit like when mormons say that they believe the Garden of Eden was located in Jackson, Missouri. That doesn't mean either idea is inherently ridiculous just that they are leftfield of our political/religious mainstream so they cause a double-take and a :confused: in my opinion. Also it doesn't help RSF that they are a fringe party perceived as living in the past, anti British not much above the level of eirígí and if our system works then that must mean that public opinion doesn't favour them when it comes to the polls.

    I still think November will be interesting in relation to all this and could be the lynchpin for a very interesting decade ahead in the political divisions of these islands if Scotland does indeed decide to become independent.

    If UI was on the cards tomorrow though and all it required was the negotiation of a good Friday type agreement, how much latitude would nationalists be willing to give the unionists in the terms of said agreement to make it so I wonder?


  • Options
    #749
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Just to be clear I am not saying that RSF are the way forward, simply that the Éire Nua idea has potential. Someone else can always opt for a similar policy.

    I just think that a federal system similar to that is a good idea.


    Well I cant speak for everyone, but under a federal system Ulster would have a much bigger say in how Ulster was run than the current agreement, or even the old Stormount.

    The idea would be that by including all of Ulster there would be less scope for either unionists or nationalists to abuse any power. Which was the original idea for partition I believe, but was shot down by both sides I believe. But then again, it was said that partition would be temporary to nationalists, and unionists were told the opposite. Built on a foundation of lies all around.


  • Options
    #750
    Le King
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭Le King


    Ireland is a tiny country. Making Athlone our parliament city would be stupid IMO. Dublin has the biggest Airport, best roads leading to it etc.

    We will probably need to wait another generation for this to happen though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    briany wrote: »
    Also it doesn't help RSF that they are a fringe party perceived as living in the past, anti British not much above the level of eirígí and if our system works then that must mean that public opinion doesn't favour them when it comes to the polls.

    RSF are generally seen as the political wing of the Continuity IRA. Eirigi have no paramilitary wing and as much as the UK media and Sinn Fein might like to link them to 'dissident republicans' they've no links to political violence. Its stupid to reference them that way regarding RSF and public opinion


Advertisement