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

Why the north outside EU changes everything for the island

Options
1121315171820

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,182 ✭✭✭ZeroThreat


    Stop reading or accepting as holy writ unionist centric sites like Slugger maybe?

    Any one who thinks we are going to hitch ourselves to the entity at the core of the problem in this island is delusional.

    No problem recognizing a unionist identity and culture. What modern state is going to place a 'monarch' at it's head? We might as well listen to those in the south who would have the pope as head of state. :rolleyes:


    Australia, NZ & Canada are in many respects more 'modern' (or advanced) than RoI and they have Betty Windsor as head of state ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,761 ✭✭✭✭bilston


    ZeroThreat wrote: »
    Isn't all this assuming that reunification simply results in a slightly larger RoI?
    From the opinions I read on dedicated political sites (such as Slugger O'Toole) to these issues, extreme compromises may need to be taken in future to ensure peaceful unionist acceptance on a unitary state which may involve radical change of flag, anthem, constitution, legal & parliamentary structures, not to mention possible having to abolish office of president to be replaced by British monarch as head of state.

    A united Ireland may require the creation of an entirely new state in every respect.

    Stop reading or accepting as holy writ unionist centric sites like Slugger maybe?

    Any one who thinks we are going to hitch ourselves to the entity at the core of the problem in this island is delusional.

    No problem recognizing a unionist identity and culture. What modern state is going to place a 'monarch' at it's head? We might as well listen to those in the south who would have the pope as head of state. :rolleyes:

    Well the anthem would have to change given that I and almost a million other Ulster Prods wouldn't be able to pronounce it properly never mind have any idea what we are signing.

    The flag, while well meaning, is too connected in the eyes of Unionists to PIRA coffins so I can see that being a bone of contention.

    I guess on those two issues alone people down south have to ask whether they would be prepared to budge. As a big rugby fan I can see the emotion that the Soldiers Song (I'm sorry I can't spell the Irish name and don't want to disrepsect it by trying and getting it wrong) brings out in the players and some of the fans. It would be a big ask for some to agree to a change. I suppose it depends on whether they consider a song to be more important than a country.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,067 ✭✭✭Taytoland


    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Taytoland wrote: »
    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.

    What's wrong with Leinster House?

    What's wrong with having a President who has as much clout as the Queen?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    Taytoland wrote: »
    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.
    Who are you suggesting for head of state .

    Surely it must be an elected President . Ian Og Paisley could run . He like's paid for , holidays .


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,217 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    bilston wrote: »
    Well the anthem would have to change given that I and almost a million other Ulster Prods wouldn't be able to pronounce it properly never mind have any idea what we are signing.


    The flag, while well meaning, is too connected in the eyes of Unionists to PIRA coffins so I can see that being a bone of contention.

    I guess on those two issues alone people down south have to ask whether they would be prepared to budge. As a big rugby fan I can see the emotion that the Soldiers Song (I'm sorry I can't spell the Irish name and don't want to disrepsect it by trying and getting it wrong) brings out in the players and some of the fans. It would be a big ask for some to agree to a change. I suppose it depends on whether they consider a song to be more important than a country.
    Not that fripperies like flags and anthems matter a damn to me what is the problem with pronouncing 'The Soldiers Song'?

    Have you been brought up on the cultish myth that you will be frogmarched into the republic and made to speak as Gaelige?

    Might be time for Unionism to grow up a bit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,751 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Taytoland wrote: »
    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.


    For what reason? A new country would not be formed so i see no reason for any of the above


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,751 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Stop reading or accepting as holy writ unionist centric sites like Slugger maybe?


    LOL @ calling slugger unionist centric,the old classic republican outlook of 100% with us or 100% against us ehh?


  • Registered Users Posts: 67,217 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    VinLieger wrote: »
    LOL @ calling slugger unionist centric,the old classic republican outlook of 100% with us or 100% against us ehh?

    No.
    Just reading the Slugger with a functioning brain.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Taytoland wrote: »
    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.

    Very immature. The republic was prepared to use the former residence of a Duke for their Parliament... What would be your problem with it? You'd want to do what instead?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,067 ✭✭✭Taytoland


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Taytoland wrote: »
    Head of state, flag, anthem and Parliament building would all need to go.


    For what reason? A new country would not be formed so i see no reason for any of the above
    Not what Sinn Fein say, they talk about a New Ireland. Which is bollocks really like most things they say but that's what they say.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,038 ✭✭✭✭citytillidie


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Very immature. The republic was prepared to use the former residence of a Duke for their Parliament... What would be your problem with it? You'd want to do what instead?

    Belfast of course is where he would want it

    ******



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Belfast of course is where he would want it

    Well that would be self evidently stupid


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    bilston wrote: »
    Well the anthem would have to change given that I and almost a million other Ulster Prods wouldn't be able to pronounce it properly never mind have any idea what we are signing.

    The flag, while well meaning, is too connected in the eyes of Unionists to PIRA coffins so I can see that being a bone of contention.

    I guess on those two issues alone people down south have to ask whether they would be prepared to budge. As a big rugby fan I can see the emotion that the Soldiers Song (I'm sorry I can't spell the Irish name and don't want to disrepsect it by trying and getting it wrong) brings out in the players and some of the fans. It would be a big ask for some to agree to a change. I suppose it depends on whether they consider a song to be more important than a country.

    Wouldn't be a big fan of the flag either myself. Too derivative.

    I'd like to see the old dark green with the gold harp personally.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,751 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Taytoland wrote: »
    Not what Sinn Fein say, they talk about a New Ireland. Which is bollocks really like most things they say but that's what they say.


    Jesus christ on a bike you and francie are as bad as each other, 2 sides of the same stupid pig headed moronic coin.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Wouldn't be a big fan of the flag either myself. Too derivative.

    I'd like to see the old dark green with the gold harp personally.

    far more distinctive than the tri colour, but "McDonaghs pub Ballybunnion summer tour COYBIG" scrawled across the front would obscure the harp too much.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,067 ✭✭✭Taytoland


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Taytoland wrote: »
    Not what Sinn Fein say, they talk about a New Ireland. Which is bollocks really like most things they say but that's what they say.


    Jesus christ on a bike you and francie are as bad as each other, 2 sides of the same stupid pig headed moronic coin.
    I was asked a question and answered it. How can it not be a new country if it's a New Ireland? :dizzy:


  • Registered Users Posts: 67,217 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Jesus christ on a bike you and francie are as bad as each other, 2 sides of the same stupid pig headed moronic coin.

    The only thing on the unionist list I object to is a monarch as head of state.

    All else can be negotiated, flags anthems etc.

    Not a classic 'pigheaded moronic' stance really. Keep the hair on there Vin.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    The anthem could go as well - that's be little loss


  • Registered Users Posts: 34,222 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    The anthem is terrible and the convention (even though it was written in English) of singing it in Irish - or in reality mumbling it - makes it even worse.

    The tricolour stands for the values of the United Irishmen and must stay.

    If we abolish it as the official flag, it really will become a symbol of extreme republicanism (and they're not going to go away, unfortunately) like the Imperial Germany-era flags are the banners of choice for the knuckle draggers over there.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    The anthem is terrible and the convention (even though it was written in English) of singing it in Irish - or in reality mumbling it - makes it even worse.

    The tricolour stands for the values of the United Irishmen and must stay.

    If we abolish it as the official flag, it really will become a symbol of extreme republicanism (and they're not going to go away, unfortunately) like the Imperial Germany-era flags are the banners of choice for the knuckle draggers over there.

    Nah dark green with a harp is the way to go. The tricolor is insipid


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    The anthem is terrible and the convention (even though it was written in English) of singing it in Irish - or in reality mumbling it - makes it even worse.

    The tricolour stands for the values of the United Irishmen and must stay.

    If we abolish it as the official flag, it really will become a symbol of extreme republicanism (and they're not going to go away, unfortunately) like the Imperial Germany-era flags are the banners of choice for the knuckle draggers over there.

    What's wrong with singing it in Irish?

    I love how people consistently go on about how no one knows it too. Bizarre. I sang it with gusto last Saturday evening in Irish.
    lawred2 wrote: »
    Nah dark green with a harp is the way to go. The tricolor is insipid

    Or the St Pat's Saltire.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,296 ✭✭✭✭lawred2



    Or the St Pat's Saltire.

    Nah you're alright.. a red cross on a white background and with British origins.

    Would certainly keep some people happy I suppose

    I'd prefer the tricolor if that was the alternative


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Nah you're alright.. a red cross on a white background and with British origins.

    Would certainly keep some people happy I suppose

    I'd prefer the tricolor if that was the alternative

    I dunno. Given that Nationalists tend to be more accomodating I wouldn't mind that as an alternative if it meant unionists piped down.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    NI is a problem for the UK. Always has been. Its clear that part of the Tory Brexit stategy is to delay as long as possible, in the hope/expectation that eventually (partly what the lengthy transition period is all about) that either
    - NI jumps ship and joins the Eire (the optimum outcome : getting rid of a problem, and solving the unsolvable cake and eat it Brexit headache par excellence)
    - Eire joins the UK (less optimum but still a workable solution : the pain in the ass of the UK, NI, remains, but Dublin will dilute its issues and take over dealing with much of it, and, the Irish border deadlock is, crucially, resolved by this option also.

    They know what they are at to a greater degree than many realise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    bilston wrote: »
    Well the anthem would have to change given that I and almost a million other Ulster Prods wouldn't be able to pronounce it properly never mind have any idea what we are signing.

    You'll learn!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Imreoir2


    NI is a problem for the UK. Always has been. Its clear that part of the Tory Brexit stategy is to delay as long as possible, in the hope/expectation that eventually (partly what the lengthy transition period is all about) that either
    - NI jumps ship and joins the Eire (the optimum outcome : getting rid of a problem, and solving the unsolvable cake and eat it Brexit headache par excellence)
    - Eire joins the UK (less optimum but still a workable solution : the pain in the ass of the UK, NI, remains, but Dublin will dilute its issues and take over dealing with much of it, and, the Irish border deadlock is, crucially, resolved by this option also.

    They know what they are at to a greater degree than many realise.

    If they are hoping/expecting Ireland to join the UK as a result of Brexit, they haven't a notion of what they are at.


  • Registered Users Posts: 67,217 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    NI is a problem for the UK. Always has been. Its clear that part of the Tory Brexit stategy is to delay as long as possible, in the hope/expectation that eventually (partly what the lengthy transition period is all about) that either
    - NI jumps ship and joins the Eire (the optimum outcome : getting rid of a problem, and solving the unsolvable cake and eat it Brexit headache par excellence)
    - Eire joins the UK (less optimum but still a workable solution : the pain in the ass of the UK, NI, remains, but Dublin will dilute its issues and take over dealing with much of it, and, the Irish border deadlock is, crucially, resolved by this option also.

    They know what they are at to a greater degree than many realise.

    Personally I think the ideal solution for a Great Britain - tired of northern Ireland and fed up to the back teeth with belligerent unionism - is to create a circumstance were it votes to leave the UK itself.

    That is why it signed the GFA, the roadmap to a UI and announced it was no longer interested. The 'watershed' Unionism dare not speak out loud about.

    It is happening quicker than they thought though.
    Britain is no more interested in revisiting/re-invigourating the problem Ireland was for them by joining with them. In fact, mentioning that 'Eire' was joining the UK even as an idea would get them an earful. :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Personally I think the ideal solution for a Great Britain - tired of northern Ireland and fed up to the back teeth with belligerent unionism - is to create a circumstance were it votes to leave the UK itself.
    Exactly, as I say. Celebrations on the mainland by anyone who cared or knew it was part of the UK in the first place would be joyous.
    Britain is no more interested in revisiting/re-invigourating the problem Ireland was for them by joining with them. In fact, mentioning that 'Eire' was joining the UK even as an idea would get them an earful. :D
    Indeed. And again, as I say, its the less preferred option. But pragmatically recognised as a solution. And for The Republic, the benefits are far greater than is commonly realised. But its early stages as they roll out that idea on both side of the Irish sea. Fully understood, it is only the Irish equivalent of the UK Brexit brainless voter who would reject it on xenophobia and national jingoism motivations, rather than recognise it as a realistic way to deal with the Brexit event on this island.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,217 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Exactly, as I say. Celebrations on the mainland by anyone who cared or knew it was part of the UK in the first place would be joyous.


    Indeed. And again, as I say, its the less preferred option. But pragmatically recognised as a solution. And for The Republic, the benefits are far greater than is commonly realised. But its early stages as they roll out that idea on both side of the Irish sea. Fully understood, it is only the Irish equivalent of the UK Brexit brainless voter who would reject it on xenophobia and national jingoism motivations, rather than recognise it as a realistic way to deal with the Brexit event on this island.

    Nothing jingoistic about it. The relationship never worked and is never likely to work. Look at how they view Ireland during the Brexit debacle for instance if you are too young to see how it has been viewed since independence.
    Thankfuly I know of only you and probably John Bruton who would be in favour of this craziness.


Advertisement