Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I don't know, I've only ever visited one city in India. You?

They certainly aren't obsessed with Britain though, unlike certain posters on these boards.

Mind you, I knew a guy once that was really homophobic, but it turned out he was hiding his own sexuality and his homophobia was just his way of covering his own feelings and his jealousy of those who could disply their sexuality openly.

Maybe you and Francie and closet Brits, you never know.

As I said my grandfather was from India. As for the rest of the post I don't know where to start.

You see Fred, I don't hate the Brits. I can do what you and some posters here cannot, separate colonialism from being British. Very few people I met over here seem to have views like yours.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I don't know, I've only ever visited one city in India. You?

They certainly aren't obsessed with Britain though, unlike certain posters on these boards.

Mind you, I knew a guy once that was really homophobic, but it turned out he was hiding his own sexuality and his homophobia was just his way of covering his own feelings and his jealousy of those who could disply their sexuality openly.

Maybe you and Francie and closet Brits, you never know.

How can you judge 'obsession' by looking at posting on an internet forum? That doesn't make any sense.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

well you must know it all then. My Grandad was from Cork.



no, seriously Eddy, you can't. That is why you feel obliged to bring it up every five minutes.

You might keep trying to kid yourself, but your own prejudice keeps showing through.

Oddly enough, very few people I've met in ireland have views like yours.

Strange that.

If it was predujice it would be easy to criticise my points but you can't.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That's pretty poor trying to claim Jo Cox's murder was blamed on immigrants to be honest. The whole country was sickened by it so I'm not sure what sad points scoring you are trying to achieve there.

Not the whole country.

MrP

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Irish do scapegoat everything on the British. They aren't adverse to blaming the eu for a lot as well, no more, no less than the British do. They were to blame for the property bubble, the property crash, water charges, local property tax, repaying German bond holders and all that before conscription to an eu army and forced abortions.

Didnt you witness the collapse of Fianna Fail here?

people like to blame johnny foreigner for things.

And some cultures (former empires) like to blame Johnny foregner more than others.
A former empire that still insists on calling itself 'great' clearly has issues with how it views other nationalities. This isn't true of all English people, most are fair minded, but just read the daily mail, express, telegraph etc to see how different attitudes are in the UK compared to Ireland and just how deep the problem is.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

not sure if this is serious

Ofcourse you are as the name of your country is the UK and not Great Britian.
British (English) exceptionalism and proud history is instilled at every phase of development. Cultures who think they are exceptional tend to take a dim view of Johnny foreigner.

MrPudding wrote: »

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I've been through this (a lot) with Francie. It's a waste of time as his mind wasn't open to change and no disrespect but I have no intention of rehashing everything out again.

Needless to say the terms the UK laid down re NI where no different to the terms laid down for Scotland and Gibraltar. No independent unless the majority of people want independence.I find that to be a logical acceptable position.

So would it be fair to say that you have absolutely no evidence to support your claim that the British government lied in an international treaty it negotiated and signed? I understand you don't want to re-hash everything again, so I am trying to be helpful, as simple yes or no is all that is required. In fact, I will make it even easier. If you have any evidence present it, if you don't simply say nothing and that will confirm what we all know, that you have no evidence and you are just making stuff up.

MrP

Do you have anything to suggest that the sentiments expressed in the treaty were ever true at the time and if they even were that they are still true today?

You see you're the one making the claim, the onus is not on me to prove a negative.

Picking out one line from a treaty signed 20 years ago to project upon British government policy is laughable and I think you know this.

If the British wanted to pull out of NI they would have done so with no GFA. Instead they secured NI's place in the Union for the foreseeable future.

If the price of that was to bring nationalists into the fold then it was a price well worth paying for unionists.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Not post brexit it doesn't.

Post Brexit the UK being the second wealthiest country in Europe with its own currency may be an island of stability if the EU starts to fracture.

Doesn't need to be France leaving, could be something as simple as Turkey turning in the migrant tap and countries responding by imposing borders again.

MrPudding wrote: »

Are you serious? Treaties are not signed lightly. The reason treaties work, and why countries accept them and bind themselves to the obligations set out in them, is because there is a, not unreasonable, assumption that the signatories to the treaty weren't lying and meant what they said.

You are calling into question the entire foundation of international law, and you have the neck to ask me for evidence. Are you serious? I have given you a treatie signed by two governments, a treatie that has an entire theme running through it, not a single line, and you are dismissing it with some juvenile hand weaving and asking me for evidence! Just wow. Seriously, where is your evidence the the UK government lied in that treaty?

MrP

On the contrary. The entire theme of the treaty was securing NI's place in the UK for the foreseeable future. Had the British wanted to leave NI at the time they could have done so without any treaty.

You are the one trying to challenge the theme of the treaty based on one line that the UK has no "special interest in NI".

A position it should be noted that is not even mutually exclusive. The UK could very well have no special interest but still want to keep the area regardless. Or it may have been true at the time but grumblings from Scotland now mean it is in the UK's national interest to hold onto NI now.

Even if we accept with 100% confidence that the statement was true twenty years ago (and thats a massive if) it is clearly more relevant to consider the current state of UK unionist policy. May has repeatedly emphasized her unionist tendencies and is extremely unlikely to allow a border poll without substantial evidence that the majority would leave. Unfortunately for nationalists there's is still a minority view so they don't meet the qualifications to call a referendum.

ECO_Mental wrote: »

That's great news but my worry is that Ireland can't handle all these new jobs. We hardly have enough houses for the people we have now. Also they will be high paying jobs which will drive up the house prices in Dublin even higher

Time to relax building restrictions then.

It's not in our interests to talk down our capabilities.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

On the contrary. The entire theme of the treaty was securing NI's place in the UK for the foreseeable future. Had the British wanted to leave NI at the time they could have done so without any treaty.

You are the one trying to challenge the theme of the treaty based on one line that the UK has no "special interest in NI".

A position it should be noted that is not even mutually exclusive. The UK could very well have no special interest but still want to keep the area regardless. Or it may have been true at the time but grumblings from Scotland now mean it is in the UK's national interest to hold onto NI now.

Even if we accept with 100% confidence that the statement was true twenty years ago (and thats a massive if) it is clearly more relevant to consider the current state of UK unionist policy. May has repeatedly emphasized her unionist tendencies and is extremely unlikely to allow a border poll without substantial evidence that the majority would leave. Unfortunately for nationalists there's is still a minority view so they don't meet the qualifications to call a referendum.

It has to be one of the saddest most pathetic stances taken by a unionist on here.

Peter Robinson took it seriously at the time. He called it 'a slow road to a united Ireland' and a declaration that showed that unionists were not wanted.

Google it, inform yourself before you embarrass yourself any further.