Daily Telegraph data adds credence to Ireland being united in less than 20 years

WilyCoyote

This might take some people by surprise. The old order in the North, the West Brits in the South and, yes, The Torygraph and Express readers. Not forgetting The Irish Times and the usual suspects in boards.ie
The leitmotif at the end is in easily understandable Queen's english

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kayfjq636gg

DrumSteve

NEEEEEEVVVEEERRRRR!!!!

WilyCoyote

DrumSteve wrote: »

NEEEEEEVVVEEERRRRR!!!!

You should never say "NEEEEEEVVVEEERRRRR!!!!". A polite "NO" should suffice

Mycroft H

The UK can keep the North. I don't want them.

mikom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAa4xPkk2Pw

WoollyRedHat

BX 19 wrote: »

The UK can keep the North. I don't want them.

Not even over for a cup of tea?

Kiltennel

I've never understood this fascination with taking on the North. We don't have the economy to support what is in essence an economic parasite while the Loyalists will raise hell and there will certainly be killings. Look how they reacted to the flag coming down from city hall, riots for weeks. One can only imagine what would happen if the country was reunited.

mikemac1

Cork would be relegated to third city of Ireland

Because of this I say yay to a united Ireland!

dj jarvis

such tripe

no mention of the unionists waging a IRA type war against the new united Ireland

do people really think the loyalist bully boys will just shrug their shoulders and go home ??

dream on

Kylo Ren

Is that Ringo Star narrating? I was waiting for Thomas the tank engine to make an appearance.

diomed

I say "NO SURRENDER".
That will confuse them.

Sunnyisland

Who made that video ?

AnonoBoy

Wait... there's a Northern Ireland now?

Sunnyisland

Kiltennel wrote: »

I've never understood this fascination with taking on the North. We don't have the economy to support what is in essence an economic parasite while the Loyalists will raise hell and there will certainly be killings. Look how they reacted to the flag coming down from city hall, riots for weeks. One can only imagine what would happen if the country was reunited.

I never understand people who don't understand the north, A quick google or read of Irelands history would explain a lot about why the problem in N Ireland is forever with us.

Muise...

realies wrote: »

I never understand people who don't understand the north, A quick google or read of Irelands history would explain a lot about why the problem in N Ireland is forever with us.

Aye.

The North Remembers.

minidazzler

BX 19 wrote: »

The UK can keep the North. I don't want them.

Same, the place costs more in welfare payments and state jobs than it's worth.

My name is URL

BX 19 wrote: »

The UK can keep the North. I don't want them.

The UK doesn't want them either :pac:

minidazzler wrote: »

Same, the place costs more in welfare payments and state jobs than it's worth.

They do a lot of stuff better than we do, though. Look at how the film & TV industry is booming up there atm due to incentives etc.

Keno

Keno wrote: »

Is that Ringo Star narrating? I was waiting for Thomas the tank engine to make an appearance.

Sounds like some synthesised speech to me, no one could speak like that in real life.

realies

realies wrote: »

Who made that video ?

Made by a "Protestant Irish Republican", well the first home rule brigade was protestant.

Muise...

Deleted User wrote: »

Made by a "Protestant Irish Republican", well the first home rule brigade was protestant.

hmmm

Ulster says b'fhéidir.

Knob Longman

realies wrote: »

I never understand people who don't understand the north, A quick google or read of Irelands history would explain a lot about why the problem in N Ireland is forever with us.

For a lot of people it's a case of Ignorance is bliss !!

freevoice

minidazzler wrote: »

Same, the place costs more in welfare payments and state jobs than it's worth.

Same could be said about the South .
Personally I think a United Ireland would be a good thing , save time explaining to the yank tourists what Northern Ireland is all the time and generally make map making more easier and tidier .
Wouldn't get too worked up with this , newspapers generally make stuff up a regarding surveys and data , take this awesome troll by the Belfast Telegraph http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/despite-low-performance-marks-peter-robinson-and-martin-mcguinness-are-still-judged-northern-irelands-best-hope-29586780.html

To the people that " don't want the North" , How about we split the country up into four provinces and give that a go for a while , as there seems to be little nationalistic pride around anymore .

Conall Cernach

minidazzler wrote: »

Same, the place costs more in welfare payments and state jobs than it's worth.

The same could be said of other places in the country. Should other areas of high unemployment such as Tallaght, Limerick etc. be given over as well?

Cool_CM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Wait... there's a Northern Ireland now?

It's just north of the north and northeast of southern Ireland.

Agricola

Purely from an OCD point of view, it would be nice for the whole island to be one political/economic entity. From every other point of view, no fúckin way.

wp_rathead

brilliant - the "Sept 18th Gov Lockout" thread seems to be dying down so am hoping for some more top class entertainment in this thread

hmmm

What's in it for the South? We get an extra half million Sinn Fein voters, a half million people who will be going mental and a bill for tens of billions.

No thanks.

hmmm

hmmm wrote: »

What's in it for the South? We get an extra half million Sinn Fein voters, a half million people who will be going mental and a bill for tens of billions.

No thanks.

Just wait, 'till all those British civil servant jobs disappear, then the fun will start!

shruikan2553

hmmm wrote: »

What's in it for the South? We get an extra half million Sinn Fein voters, a half million people who will be going mental and a bill for tens of billions.

No thanks.

We get lots of nice feeling and pride over having a united country or saome other bollocks.

ArnoldJRimmer

We would get an extra bank holiday for the glorious 12th. Bring it on

LordSutch

Would be ironic if this island became one political entity, while Britain as an island became two parts!

PS; Hard to believe that the video is from the Telegraph, I did notice several references to 'The North of Ireland' instead of Northern Ireland, which makes me suspect that its not what it seems :cool:

Calibos

If rejoining the commonwealth was enough to keep a lid on loyalist violence then I'd be ok with a united Ireland. I guess I am a bit of a west Brit and don't think we should have left the commonwealth. I flip flop on whether I think we should have left the Union

kowloon

Was this narrated by a smartphone?

dd972

If you remove all the other aspects regarding civil unrest and such, I wonder what the fiscal cost of reunifying would be ?, the currency would be the most obvious thing that comes to mind, I wouldn't see the point of making all the road signage up there ROI style apart from the speed ones.

Karl Stein

dj jarvis wrote: »

no mention of the unionists waging a IRA type war against the new united Ireland

Against who and to what ends? See: Parade of Horribles fallacy.

Agricola wrote: »

Purely from an OCD point of view, it would be nice for the whole island to be one political/economic entity. From every other point of view, no fúckin way.

British control of a part of the body of this island will be a problem as long as it remains and has been for hundreds of years.

The end of the border. Cross border smuggling, welfare tourism, differing VAT rates, economic deprivation in border counties all these are problems associated with the border.

The economics of having two political jurisdictions, two bureaucracies on one small island is bananas. An all-island rationalisation could take place.

Tourism would benefit.

Having lots of Protestants in the Dail would probably speed up the retreat of the Catholic Church from Irish institutions.

Elbaston

Not that unbelievable.
Majority of people on both islands would prefer to see Ireland united.

Totality of nationalists (north+south) is growing exponentially quicker than unionists.

dd972

dd972 wrote: »

If you remove all the other aspects regarding civil unrest and such, I wonder what the fiscal cost of reunifying would be ?, the currency would be the most obvious thing that comes to mind, I wouldn't see the point of making all the road signage up there ROI style apart from the speed ones.

You could have a compromise on the others, bilingual direction signs up north and European warning signs down south (rather than these US style ones)

Painted Pony

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Against who and to what ends? See: Parade of Horribles fallacy.

You think loyalists devise strategies that guide their actions to some end? I must say a lot of what I have seen them get up to in the past did not show much evidence of any kind of strategic thinking that you credit them with.

In recent times they got in to a right state because the union fly was to be flown in line with other British jurisdictions. Don’t you think they might be just a tad miffed at a united Ireland?

I don’t know if there is an opposite fallacy to your parade of horribles. But if there is, completely dismissing a possible loyalist response would be a nice example of it.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

British control of a part of the body of this island will be a problem as long as it remains and has been for hundreds of years.

So goes the republican mantra. An alternative explanation is that there are two competing constitutional aspirations amongst the people of Northern Ireland and they cannot both be kept happy. Zero sum game. What one side loses (constitutionally), the other gains.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

The economics of having two political jurisdictions, two bureaucracies on one small island is bananas. An all-island rationalisation could take place.

Is that an argument for a united Ireland or for a merging of the R of I and the UK?

Karl Stein

Painted Pony wrote: »

You think loyalists devise strategies that guide their actions to some end?

You're answering a question with a question

In recent times they got in to a right state because the union fly was to be flown in line with other British jurisdictions. Don’t you think they might be just a tad miffed at a united Ireland?

So in the event of a vote for a UI we allow a hardcore minority to dictate the aspirations of everyone else? That was done before on the island (can you think of when and by who?) and all it did was kick the can down the road.

I don’t know if there is an opposite fallacy to your parade of horribles. But if there is, completely dismissing a possible loyalist response would be a nice example of it.

To what ends would this Loyalist response be and with the support of who?

So goes the republican mantra. An alternative explanation is that there are two competing constitutional aspirations amongst the people of Northern Ireland and they cannot both be kept happy. Zero sum game. What one side loses (constitutionally), the other gains.

Right. You're comparing hundreds of years of strife on this island due to opposition to British interference with the modern history of a sectarian state created by the British on the threat of violence by a minority on the island (that might help you answer my question above).

Is that an argument for a united Ireland or for a merging of the R of I and the UK?

If you manage to push the two land masses together so that they are the one island then the question wouldn't be so utterly pointless and irrelevant.

dd972

Instead of rejoining the UK how about subsuming the UK into the Irish Republic ? :pac:

markesmith

I'd like to see the country united. Historically, we never were really united, but neither was Spain, Italy or Russia until relatively recently. So, a united Ireland, if only to stop my kids asking, "Daddy, why is there two Irelands?"

It's an unresolved question. Doesn't mean that we'll kill all the Protestants or anything like that. I don't mind having a few Protestants in the country :P

Painted Pony

Charlie Rock wrote: »

You're answering a question with a question

It was a rhetorical question. The anser is no, their actions were not always rationally designed to being a particular end. Did you perceive any particular rational consequence of the actions of the Shankill butchers or their ilk?

Charlie Rock wrote: »

So in the event of a vote for a UI we allow a hardcore minority to dictate the aspirations of everyone else? That was done before on the island (can you think of when and by who?) and all it did was kick the can down the road.

I dispute your interpretation of what happened 90 years ago but that is besides the point that I am making. It would be foolish to think there would be no issue with this minority just because they would have no democratic grounds to object a united Ireland. They might, and likely would, take their cue from another Irish minority (can you think of when and by who?) who similarly disregarded the democratic wishes of the Irish people.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

To what ends would this Loyalist response be and with the support of who?

Again you assume they would have a well defined end. And they wouldn’t necessarily need support. That they got a helping hand from British forces in the past does not mean that they would be impotent without them.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Right. You're comparing hundreds of years of strife on this island due to opposition to British interference with the modern history of a sectarian state created by the British on the threat of violence by a minority on the island (that might help you answer my question above).

Er, wrong. I’m not saying anything like that. I’m saying northern nationalists (supposedly!) want a united Ireland and unionists want to retain the link with Britain, and they can’t both have their way.

Charlie Rock wrote: »

If you manage to push the two land masses together so that they are the one island then the question wouldn't be so utterly pointless and irrelevant.

You miss the point. If economy of scale is an argument to have single institutions for the island then it is even a better argument for a union of Ireland and the UK. Nobody of course argues of the latter, which exposes the spuriousness of this argument.

The quest for a united Ireland is an emotional aspiration, not a rational one. Those who want one have decided as much in advance and seek to retrofit rational arguments to give credibility to their positions. Almost nobody who favours a UI will ever change their mind, no matter what rational arguments there might be for them to do so.

Dyr

markesmith wrote: »

It's an unresolved question. Doesn't mean that we'll kill all the Protestants or anything like that. I don't mind having a few Protestants in the country :P

Not too many though :pac:

That said, if scotland leaves the union first where are all our loyal brethren going to have to f**k off to?

Bambi

Bambi wrote: »

Not too many though :pac:

That said, if Scotland leaves the union first where are all our loyal brethren going to have to f**k off to?

They're not called Ulster Scots for nothing! :pac:

You know that ad on UTV for old age pensioners making sure they're claiming everything they're entitled to?

For me it sums up why there won't be a united Ireland anytime soon.

TeddyTedson

Agricola wrote: »

Purely from an OCD point of view, it would be nice for the whole island to be one political/economic entity. From every other point of view, no fúckin way.

I'm all for a united Ireland, however I do like the fact that we can avail of the border. I keeps the government from going OTT on our VAT.
I hate that "**** the north we don't want them attitude", I meant we don't want several counties and we're stuck with them bhoy :P

Sleepy

freevoice wrote: »

To the people that " don't want the North" , How about we split the country up into four provinces and give that a go for a while , as there seems to be little nationalistic pride around anymore .

I think that would work out extremely well for Leinster while Ulster would be utterly ****ed. Unless of course the UK is going to continue to subsidize them which might suit Donegal (which even as the most heavily subsidized county in the Republic isn't subsidized to anything like the extent the six counties currently are).

LordSutch

To all you posters who really want a so called "United Ireland" I say 'consider the cost to your nationalist ideals'. Take the national anthem for example, there is no way that could carry on as the anthem of a new Ireland which included the Unionist North, as they just wouldn't stand for it (literally), same goes for the current flag which would have to be binned too! then what about compulsory Irish in NI schools for all Unionist children!!! Me thinks NOT.

As part of a United Ireland would we expect Northerners to drop the NHS? Would we expect them to obey the Dail? would they really drop the pound too? Would we expect them to renounce their Britishness? The list of compromises is endless, so before people say they want a United Ireland, they should first be aware that current flags, symbols, anthems, etc will all be changed to accommodate Unionism & Loyalism.

If we want to make a start, we could rejoin the Commonwealth, just to show that we are making an effort to be more united.

Karl Stein

LordSutch wrote: »

Take the national anthem for example, there is no way that could carry on as the anthem of a new Ireland which included the Unionist North, as they just wouldn't stand for it (literally)

No problem.

same goes for the current flag which would have to be binned too! then what about compulsory Irish in NI schools for all Unionist children!!! Me thinks NOT.

No problem.

As part of a United Ireland would we expect Northerners to drop the NHS? Would we expect them to obey the Dail? would they really drop the pound too?

Em... that would be the nature of a UI so yes.

Would we expect them to renounce their Britishness?

Absolutely not. In the event of a UI freedom to be British would have to be written into the constitution.

The list of compromises is endless, so before people say they want a United Ireland, they should first be aware that current flags, symbols, anthems, etc will all be changed to accommodate Unionism & Loyalism.

No problem.

If we want to make a start, we could rejoin the Commonwealth, just to show that we are making an effort to be more united.

We could but the new Ireland would put that to a democratic vote. I'd vote no. I don't like the imperial undertones of the British Commonwealth (whose wealth?) and having a head of state by virtue of birth. No.

LordSutch

Charlie Rock wrote: »

We could but the new Ireland would put that to a democratic vote. I'd vote no. I don't like the imperial undertones of the British Commonwealth (whose wealth?) and having a head of state by virtue of birth. No.

So after all your 'No problems' you say the Commonwealth would be a bridge too far for Nationalist Ireland. Interesting. Of all the consessions & compromises (flag/anthem/etc), I would never have thought that rejoining the Commonwealth would be the main stubling block to a UI.

Karl Stein

LordSutch wrote: »

I would never have thought that rejoining the Commonwealth would be the main stubling block to a UI.

Your nit-picky stumbling block is it? The 'commonwealth' is one of those Orwellian phrases that has the opposite meaning to its connotation where Britain's colonies suffered and Britain prospered.

There was no 'common wealth' there was British backed terrorists plundering less technologically advanced people - if they didn't comply they were subject to destruction, torture and murder.

No thanks. I want nothing to do with the exceptional wealth derived from common misery.