Giving some of N.I. back to the Republic

on the river

the best option is have a vote in each county so they can declare a poistion .

K-9

Mod:

We've the exact same discussion about numbers going on in two threads, I don't see the point in duplicating the discussion, so keep this thread on topic please and keep the other posts to the Drive-by shootings thread please.

tdv123

junder wrote: »

Your right nobody is bothered about the murder of us prods, bur sure we where just collateral damage, weren't we?

I'm pretty sure Willie Frazer & his cronies never shut the hell up about it.

timthumbni

junder wrote: »

Your right nobody is bothered about the murder of us prods, bur sure we where just collateral damage, weren't we?

The one thing that you can take from these boards is that there are a number of vocal republicans who are/were supportive of the iras murderous campaign whilst there are few if any unionists who try to justify the loyalist paramiltaries actions.

The fact that most of the posters on here who appear to justify the actions of the ira are not from Northern Ireland speaks volumes. The closest most of them got to Norn Iron was sitting in their armchair singing along to the Wolfe tones, whilst drinking cans of beer in their tricolour boxer shorts.

It's telling that the mods on here have now created a separate Northern Ireland politics section on the boards. Lol. A bit of a slap in the face to one island republicans on here. I understand why they did though as every single thread about Northern Ireland diverges the same way. There is no point in individual threads in fact. They should just merge them all into one huge clusterf&ck. ;-)

Regarding your post you are correct in that it appears some on here don't consider protestant/unionists as victims at all. Someone even was breaking down the figures of those killed into those who carried out contract work in security bases (plastering, brickies etc) I'm not sure if this was in some way justifying their murder but it is bizarre.

The ira killed as many human beings as all of the others combined. Take from that what you will.

timthumbni

Regarding the thread I can't see it happening. (Although I doubt many unionists would be sad to see somewhere like south armagh shoved into the republic)

The could then try sort out the laundered fuel rackets that have in no way any connection to republicans at all. Oh no. ;-)


Regarding Norn irons future I've said before that I can see some form of joint authority happening in the far off future. Let dublin foot half the bill if they wish and it will give them a taster of what they are in for.

I genuinely don't see a united Ireland (in republican terms) happening due to the problems it would doubtless cause. It's certainly not going to happen in my lifetime nor anyone else's that posts on here.

A lot of people now consider themselves Northern Irish and I can only see this number growing.

Conchur

timthumbni wrote: »

Regarding the thread I can't see it happening. (Although I doubt many unionists would be sad to see somewhere like south armagh shoved into the republic)

The could then try sort out the laundered fuel rackets that have in no way any connection to republicans at all. Oh no. ;-)


Regarding Norn irons future I've said before that I can see some form of joint authority happening in the far off future. Let dublin foot half the bill if they wish and it will give them a taster of what they are in for.

I genuinely don't see a united Ireland (in republican terms) happening due to the problems it would doubtless cause. It's certainly not going to happen in my lifetime nor anyone else's that posts on here.

A lot of people now consider themselves Northern Irish and I can only see this number growing.

If I'm not mistaken, since the 2011 Census this percentage has actually dropped and, believe it or not, the number of people seeing themselves as Northern Irish has been pretty stable since the 90s. I am not postulating that this NI identity is illegitimate (if you identify with Northern Ireland, more power to you), but I do get the impression that those who see themselves as Northern Irish in the North are making a point of implying that those who see themselves are Irish/British should not.

on the river

Conchur wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, since the 2011 Census this percentage has actually dropped and, believe it or not, the number of people seeing themselves as Northern Irish has been pretty stable since the 90s. I am not postulating that this NI identity is illegitimate (if you identify with Northern Ireland, more power to you), but I do get the impression that those who see themselves as Northern Irish in the North are making a point of implying that those who see themselves are Irish/British should not.

a LOAD OF RUBBISH. your either irish or english .

its like saying : a tomoto is a vegatable

ancapailldorcha

on the river wrote: »

a LOAD OF RUBBISH. your either irish or english .

its like saying : a tomoto is a vegatable

Seriously?

Conchur

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Seriously?

Well strictly speaking "Northern Irish" isn't a nationality, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Then again, neither is "English". British is, though.

The Corinthian

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Seriously?

Yes, I believe he is being serious.

Apparently, Either you have to be Irish or English. Where this leaves the Scottish and Welsh is uncertain. It might explain Scots-Irish, as they didn't want to be seen as Scots-English, which I can totally understand.

Still it was a very erudite and well thought out pronouncement there.

timthumbni

Conchur wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, since the 2011 Census this percentage has actually dropped and, believe it or not, the number of people seeing themselves as Northern Irish has been pretty stable since the 90s. I am not postulating that this NI identity is illegitimate (if you identify with Northern Ireland, more power to you), but I do get the impression that those who see themselves as Northern Irish in the North are making a point of implying that those who see themselves are Irish/British should not.

I don't think that those who consider themselves Northern Irish are trying to imply anything on others who see themselves as British or Irish.

You can of course be Northern Irish and British (or Irish for that matter)

I would always refer to being Northern Irish when on holidays and someone asks where I'm from. No one has ever questioned this aside from a drunk Scotsman (who was wearing an Irish footie top for some reason) he looked and sounded like groundskeeper willie from the Simpsons.

What surprised me in the census was the relatively low number who considered themselves Irish only. Sinn Fein detest the term Northern Ireland and its funny watching them tongue tieing themselves sometimes to use any term whatsoever as long as it's not Northern Ireland. It's a bit like kryptonite to them and spontaneous human combustion may occur if they ever did say it.

on the river

Conchur wrote: »

Well strictly speaking "Northern Irish" isn't a nationality, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Then again, neither is "English". British is, though.

Northern Ireland citizens can either claim a british passport or irish one .


i am not floating any boat. this is the law so abide by it MATE!.

So DONT start more daft sugestions GOT IT

Conchur

on the river wrote: »

Northern Ireland citizens can either claim a british passport or irish one .


i am not floating any boat. this is the law so abide by it MATE!.

So DONT start more daft sugestions GOT IT

How stupid are you? You think I don't know this?

I am not your mate, and I don't need you telling me what I must "abide by".

If you were semi-literate and read the post, I was actually backing you up to a degree.

But I suppose it's baby steps with a weshty.

on the river

Conchur wrote: »

How stupid are you? You think I don't know this?

I am not your mate, and I don't need you telling me what I must "abide by".

If you were semi-literate and read the post, I was actually backing you up to a degree.

But I suppose it's baby steps with a weshty.

its great to see you finally agreed with my point of view . secondly read over your posts before you post them ( spelling errors)

finally boards is a place for debate so if you cant deal with that get out

The Corinthian

on the river wrote: »

secondly read over your posts before you post them ( spelling errors)

Says Mr "your either irish or english". Three grammatical and one factual error in five words. Impressive.

ancapailldorcha

Conchur wrote: »

Well strictly speaking "Northern Irish" isn't a nationality, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Then again, neither is "English". British is, though.

Well, Northern Ireland is a sovereign state which exists within the UK. It has it's own government, football team, etc... Northern Irish is every bit as much a nationality as Irish, English, Scottish, etc...

Conchur

on the river wrote: »

its great to see you finally agreed with my point of view . secondly read over your posts before you post them ( spelling errors)

finally boards is a place for debate so if you cant deal with that get out

Not sure if troll or...?

It is a place for debate, yet after I made a legitimate point you jumped right down my throat.

Feel free to point out any of my spelling errors and I'll be happy to correct them. Just don't ask me to look over your posts or we'll be here all night.

Conchur

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, Northern Ireland is a sovereign state which exists within the UK. It has it's own government, football team, etc... Northern Irish is every bit as much a nationality as Irish, English, Scottish, etc...

Well I can't argue with that. One small nitpick - it isn't a sovereign state, as the government of Northern Ireland exists only as long as Westminster sees fit, and is answerable to the powers that be in London. A sovereign state is defined as one which is officially not dependent on any supreme power (e.g. Germany or the UK).

ancapailldorcha

Conchur wrote: »

Well I can't argue with that. One small nitpick - it isn't a sovereign state, as the government of Northern Ireland exists only as long as Westminster sees fit, and is answerable to the powers that be in London. A sovereign state is defined as one which is officially not dependent on any supreme power (e.g. Germany or the UK).

Fair enough but I still maintain that it's a completely legitimate nationality.

Dr.Tank Adams

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, Northern Ireland is a sovereign state which exists within the UK. It has it's own government, football team, etc... Northern Irish is every bit as much a nationality as Irish, English, Scottish, etc...

Actually it's a "province of the UK", so certainly not a nationality, in any sense of the word.

ancapailldorcha

Dr.Tank Adams wrote: »

Actually it's a "province of the UK", so certainly not a nationality, in any sense of the word.

So you'd say there's no such nationality as English, Scottish or Welsh then?

Conchur

Dr.Tank Adams wrote: »

Actually it's a "province of the UK", so certainly not a nationality, in any sense of the word.

There is one aspect of the Northern Ireland identity that I cannot get my head around, and that sets it apart from the Scottish/Welsh/Kurdish/English/etc. identities. Nations are normally accepted as being groups of people who share a common culture and customs. Based on that definition, what exactly is Northern Irish culture? What makes it so different to Irish - or, for that matter, English - culture? How are the differences (if any) significant enough to afford it any more legitimacy than a regional identity (e.g. in England, a northerner is still English, but of course is a little different to someone from, say, Plymouth)? To me, Northern Ireland has not existed for long enough - and, indeed, has never existed united enough - to forge its own distinct character and customs.

I come from the so-called "CNR" community, and grew up playing sports with the GAA (albeit badly, as I was the gay child :rolleyes:), learning to play the fiddle, watching the Late Late Toy Show etc. Apart from my dad paying taxes to HMRC rather than Revenue (and me doing GCSEs and A-Levels rather than the Junior Cert and Leaving Cert), how am I culturally different to someone from Donegal?

On the other hand, my dad - a Scot - grew up in inner-city Glasgow, uses Glaswegian vernacular, fondly recalls his many games of "fitbaw" on a Saturday morning and has shared these very uniquely Glaswegian (and uniquely Scottish) experiences with many others. There is something genuine and sincere about him calling himself Scottish, and although I can see he is different to a working class fella from a similar background who grew up in Edinburgh, these differences are, from the outside looking in, relatively subtle. In the same way, I feel that the differences between two Catholic/nationalist working class guys from Belfast and Dublin respectively are comparatively subtle.

While I can see the rationale for Ulster Unionists - who probably did not play hurling or watch RTÉ as kids - forging their own identity (I think they usually see themselves as "Ulster people" or Ulster Scots), I really don't get this "shared", "let's all get along", fence-sitting "Northern Irish" wildcard. It feels like a badly coordinated, post-Good Friday Agreement makey-uppey label of convenience, handy when you don't want to seem controversial.

I can just imagine thousands of people ticking "Northern Irish" on the census forms because it was an option which they felt avoided the stigma of calling oneself "Irish" or "British" in the six (i.e. sounding like a bitter armchair politician). If you asked any of these people what it means to be Northern Irish - or what's so unique about Northern Ireland that warrants it having a separate identity to the rest of the island - I highly doubt they'd have an answer.

I'm proud to be a Nordie and an Ulsterman, sure, but it's somewhat similar to someone from Newcastle being proud to be a Geordie - they still recognise and accept that they are English.

Dr.Tank Adams

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So you'd say there's no such nationality as English, Scottish or Welsh then?

Legally no, although they are at least defined as states within the UK and have thousands of years of history, culture and distinct identity behind them, so even if they aren't technically a nationality (well Scotland may be very soon) I would take someone saying they are English or Scottish a hell of a lot more seriously than someone saying they are Northern Irish:rolleyes:.

Dr.Tank Adams

Conchur wrote: »

There is one aspect of the Northern Ireland identity that I cannot get my head around, and that sets it apart from the Scottish/Welsh/Kurdish/English/etc. identities. Nations are normally accepted as being groups of people who share a common culture and customs. Based on that definition, what exactly is Northern Irish culture? What makes it so different to Irish - or, for that matter, English - culture? How are the differences (if any) significant enough to afford it any more legitimacy than a regional identity (e.g. in England, a northerner is still English, but of course is a little different to someone from, say, Plymouth)? To me, Northern Ireland has not existed for long enough - and, indeed, has never existed united enough - to forge its own distinct character and customs.

I come from the so-called "CNR" community, and grew up playing sports with the GAA (albeit badly, as I was the gay child :rolleyes:), learning to play the fiddle, watching the Late Late Toy Show etc. Apart from my dad paying taxes to HMRC rather than Revenue (and me doing GCSEs and A-Levels rather than the Junior Cert and Leaving Cert), how am I culturally different to someone from Donegal?

On the other hand, my dad - a Scot - grew up in inner-city Glasgow, uses Glaswegian vernacular, fondly recalls his many games of "fitbaw" on a Saturday morning and has shared these very uniquely Glaswegian (and uniquely Scottish) experiences with many others. There is something genuine and sincere about him calling himself Scottish, and although I can see he is different to a working class fella from a similar background who grew up in Edinburgh, these differences are, from the outside looking in, relatively subtle. In the same way, I feel that the differences between two Catholic/nationalist working class guys from Belfast and Dublin respectively are comparatively subtle.

While I can see the rationale for Ulster Unionists - who probably did not play hurling or watch RTÉ as kids - forging their own identity (I think they usually see themselves as "Ulster people" or Ulster Scots), I really don't get this "shared", "let's all get along", fence-sitting "Northern Irish" wildcard. It feels like a badly coordinated, post-Good Friday Agreement makey-uppey label of convenience, handy when you don't want to seem controversial.

I can just imagine thousands of people ticking "Northern Irish" on the census forms because it was an option which they felt avoided the stigma of calling oneself "Irish" or "British" in the six (i.e. sounding like a bitter armchair politician). If you asked any of these people what it means to be Northern Irish - or what's so unique about Northern Ireland that warrants it having a separate identity to the rest of the island - I highly doubt they'd have an answer.

I'm proud to be a Nordie and an Ulsterman, sure, but it's somewhat similar to someone from Newcastle being proud to be a Geordie - they still recognise and accept that they are English.

Exactly my thoughts on the subject, I think this whole "Northern Irish" identity is completely fabricated and has been hijacked by the Government etc. as an easy solution to their problems because they are to lazy to promote genuine respect between Irish and British peoples in the north. That would be a real solution but they can't be ars*d to do it as it would require so much work.

The really tragic thing is that, as you say, it's almost gotten to the point where it's frowned upon, seen as too extreme, to identify as Irish or British alone, and people are instead having this neutral, airy-fairy "Northern Irish" drivel forced upon them. Irish, British or even Irish-British are the legitimate identities in the north, "Northern Irish" is a manufactured cop-out.

The Corinthian

Dr.Tank Adams wrote: »

Legally no, although they are at least defined as states within the UK and have thousands of years of history, culture and distinct identity behind them, so even if they aren't technically a nationality (well Scotland may be very soon) I would take someone saying they are English or Scottish a hell of a lot more seriously than someone saying they are Northern Irish:rolleyes:.

Well, if we're using legal status as the measure of one's nationality, then the Northern Irish are clearly British. Or is this where you change your argument?

Or is your argument that one needs thousands of years of history to possess a nationality? What does that make Americans? After all, the first colonies there took place a year after the first Ulster plantations.

Dr.Tank Adams

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, if we're using legal status as the measure of one's nationality, then the Northern Irish are clearly British. Or is this where you change your argument?

Or is your argument that one needs thousands of years of history to possess a nationality? What does that make Americans? After all, the first colonies there took place a year after the first Ulster plantations.

Sorry what? Yes people born in Northern Ireland can either have British, Irish or British and Irish nationality, where did I ever say that wasn't the case?

The Corinthian

Dr.Tank Adams wrote: »

Sorry what? Yes people born in Northern Ireland can either have British, Irish or British and Irish nationality, where did I ever say that wasn't the case?

And the bit questioning your claim about "thousands of years of history, culture and distinct identity behind them" being something required for nationhood?

Dr.Tank Adams

The Corinthian wrote: »

And the bit questioning your claim about "thousands of years of history, culture and distinct identity behind them" being something required for nationhood?

Is that a separate question? If so you still haven't explained what the first one was about.. And thousands of years is not required for nationhood, we weren't talking about nationhood (which the north doesn't have anyway) we were talking about a collective identity, of which "Northern Irish" has about 10 years of government pedaling and 0% originality/distinctiveness to it's name. Northern Irishness is, at best, a chunk of Britishness and a sprinkling of Irishness, with a big, "I don't want to offend anyone" smile on it's face. That doesn't seem worthy of being referred to as an identity to me.

Karl Stein

timthumbni wrote: »

The one thing that you can take from these boards is that there are a number of vocal republicans who are/were supportive of the iras murderous campaign whilst there are few if any unionists who try to justify the loyalist paramiltaries actions.

And there are plenty of Unionist posters who like to pretend that the RUC/UDR/BA were not up to their necks in blood and misery through collusion with the degenerate loyalist murder gangs.

There's also a inability to accept the blame for trying to maintain a sectarian shit-hole at all costs up to, and including, living with a nasty conflict.

You couldn't find it in you to condemn the sectarian witch hunt against a 25 year old teacher who happened to be a SF councillor and was a child when the GFA was signed. You play the unionist moderate very badly and are anything but moderate.

Conchur

Dr.Tank Adams wrote: »

Exactly my thoughts on the subject, I think this whole "Northern Irish" identity is completely fabricated and has been hijacked by the Government etc. as an easy solution to their problems because they are to lazy to promote genuine respect between Irish and British peoples in the north. That would be a real solution but they can't be ars*d to do it as it would require so much work.

The really tragic thing is that, as you say, it's almost gotten to the point where it's frowned upon, seen as too extreme, to identify as Irish or British alone, and people are instead having this neutral, airy-fairy "Northern Irish" drivel forced upon them. Irish, British or even Irish-British are the legitimate identities in the north, "Northern Irish" is a manufactured cop-out.

If anything, the very existence of this thread goes to show just how fickle the Northern Ireland state/identity is, even if the OP's suggestion isn't totally serious. It says a lot about the frivolousness of the Northern state if those unionists who proposed repartition are prepared to haemorrhage large parts of the six just to maintain a majority. When it comes down to it, for unionists Northern Ireland is a "British" enclave in Ireland which must be defended at all costs - including, in a "doomsday scenario", redrawing the borders of the state at a moment's notice to maintain a majority (as Carson reluctantly did).

Of course, there will always be those who just want to get on with things and if, in their view, that means embracing the existence of the North in its current form then that is their prerogative and I am happy for them. Still, it bears repeating that there is something quite saddening about the move away from our true identities (be those Irish or British) for fear of causing a stir or, dare I say it, actually standing for what we believe in.