Skelet0n wrote: » 2 soldiers killed, 2 wounded, 2 civilians wounded. 1 PSNI officer. MI5 informant. 5 car bombs in one day. 1 PSNI officer leg amputated after bomb under his car. 1 prison officer. 1 Garda detective. They’re the ones listed. That’s just on the republican side.
VinLieger wrote: » FYPFY Another referendum for either remain or the deal on the table, would be completely sensible and in fact was suggested by many arch bexiteers well before the refgerendum, Mogg being the prime example
Zubeneschamali wrote: » It's why, when May trash talks the backstop, she talks about its potential impact on our Union if Northern Ireland is treated differently from the rest of the UK.
downcow wrote: » So i guess you reckon we should have had a rerun of the gfa referendum when we found out there had been secret deals and lies eg Gerry Kelly and 200 other republicans had recieved secret letters to get them over the line from Tony Blair. Ironically putting their own freedom well ahead of their beloved unification
downcow wrote: » So i guess you reckon we should have had a rerun of the gfa referendum when we found out there had been secret deals
downcow wrote: » There is serious whataboutery going on here. I am simply stating what i understand as facts. ie 1)to all intense and purpose the troubles are over and the current generation will not lend its support to another murderous sectarian campaign 2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways) 3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both 4) another referendum would be ridiculous. As ridiculous as it would have been for the anti GFA people to call for a new referendum eg at the time we were all watching murderers being released two years in which my have swung it the other way in the North 5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up 6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation. Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?
downcow wrote: » A backstop in the Irish Sea has never been offered. That would solve dup concerns immediately I believe
downcow wrote: » �� well I was neutral and hence didn’t vote. Couldn’t be sure which way to go. If there was a vote tomorrow I would vote leave as I feel the eu and Eire have fairly disgracefully used our hard earned peace as a bargaining chip to make brexit so painfull that UK won’t leave. I have one solution thought Agree a backstop in the Irish see exactly the same as border backstop with same conditions for removal. I think the majority could wear that. What you think?
downcow wrote: » Exactly my point. If they say exactly the same about the Irish Sea then we are all happy. ie not border in Irish Sea. Which, they no is equally important under gfa. But they really don’t give a toss about gfa or they would be staring this clearly.
downcow wrote: » You are being a little disingenuous. I said 2 prison officers and it turns out to be 1 prison officer and 1 psni. I have no idea who the 2 soldiers are that you are referring to. I missed the IRA/British agent who the IRA (who don't exist of course) shot for collusion. And I hadn't intended including those killed by terrorism in ROI in last decade (you seem to have missed a few there) So what part of my estimate of 3 troubles related deaths in NI in last decade was not true. Don't worry you don't need to apologise, rather just accept my point that to all intense and purpose the troubles are over. By the way there were about 6 psni officer killed in car accidents during the same period - just to put it in perspective
downcow wrote: » 'upperhand' The lady doth protest too much, me thinks lol
downcow wrote: » The thing we are angry about is that many of us took a big step and voted for gfa for peace and now we see roi supported by Europe using it for their own agenda .
downcow wrote: » 6)NI cannot be in a situation where they are separated from UK with EU making the rules and no democratic representation. Is any of that inaccurate or unreasonable?
downcow wrote: » I agree with you but it would have been very wrong to have rerun the GFA referendum before it was implimented. I agree same for EU. ther day after its implimented people can and no doubt will begin a campaign for a referendum and they are entitled to it
downcow wrote: » 5) i believe most people, brexiteers included, would accept some sensible additional checks at the Irish Sea - but we need to see some compromise of sharing some checking maybe at NI border and even some at ROI France border. Current ROI position reeks of arrogace and is winding people up
downcow wrote: » It was extremely difficulty for most unionists. We had suffered a 30 year sectarian campaign against us and just when the terrorists were running out of energy and support we were asked to let them save face by giving them an honourable way out. Enough of us done it to get it through. Not pleasant finding out that grinning Tony Blair had done them a deal behind everyones back. Replicate that to your gansters in Dublin and how you would feel if you had reduced their sentences etc in return for them stopping killing you because they didn't like your identity/religion existing on this Island and then finding out you priminsiter had done them other deals and lied to you about it
Peregrinus wrote: » 7. So important question becomes, what is May’s Plan C? If she secures the assent of the DUP but not of the ERG, the deal will be voted down again, and at that point May has to decide whether she will hew towards crash-out Brexit, or opt for revoking Art 50 or trying for a second referendum. From here point of view these are all appalling options; but she will just has to choose which is the least appalling.
Leroy42 wrote: » So, back to Brexit. What benefits are coming to NI from Brexit?
Leroy42 wrote: » Downcow, why are you trying to revisit the GFA and the troubles? What purpose does it have in relation to Brexit? You didn't like it, we get it. But the majority in NI accepted it. It, despite having some serious issues, has brought stability, peace, cooperation and a normality to NI. It is a model of how to solve what appears to be an intractable problem for the rest of the world. So, back to Brexit. What benefits are coming to NI from Brexit?
downcow wrote: » This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU. You may not agree with me but do not misrepresent what i am saying. I supported the GFA and still do but detest the cherry picking and misrepresentation of what is in it. And i am the one saying that we are not threatened with violence in the North we are comfortable and confident that our culture is starting to find room to exist on this island
downcow wrote: » Yes lots of mis information floatinf about on this. There has never be an amnesty. there was an early release scheme. Sorry let me correct myself - obviously there was an amnesty for 200 key IRA members but that was a sectret deal done with Tony Blair in dark rooms https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/11342495/Tony-Blair-On-The-Run-letters-to-IRA-members-vital-for-Northern-Ireland-peace.html this only applied to republicans and the public and indeed the GB police when an IRA member was tried for the Hyde Park bombings and he produced his secret letter in court and the judge had to let him go. I can understand your disbelief at how it could be done secretly and only given to one side
Former Prime Minister Mr Blair began the peace process scheme in 2000. It saw 95 of the so-called letters of comfort issued by the Government to suspects linked by intelligence to almost 300 murders.They told people they were not wanted at that time, but did not rule out future prosecutions if new evidence became available.
downcow wrote: » Are you suggesting the IRA didnt target civilians and simply because they were protestant. I doubt someone has fed you a very romantic view of a dirty sectarian campaign
FrancieBrady wrote: » The benefits are all airy fairy nebulous things. I would be interested to hear a unionist, spell out in factual terms, what they would be for northern Ireland specifically.
FreudianSlippers wrote: » His boss is singing from a different hymn sheet though and, given his boss is President of the European Council (Donald Tusk), I'll take the Polish views from the horse's mouth.
downcow wrote: » I have stated from early on that is was nuetral and didn't vote. So i don't think the benifits of in or out are dramatically different. Some pros and cons. I am OK with either option if we do it as UK as a whole. If UK goes out on a fairly hard Brexit then I think we are benifitted in going also because we are so closely connected in every way and finacially supported by them. Any fear of leaving the EU can be multiplied many times when we consider leaving UK, economically, culturally,etc does that help?
downcow wrote: This is ironic. You can look back and you will find i have not riased the troubles. my issue is that the gfa and a threrat of conflict is being used very disingenuously by ROI and EU to keep UK in EU.
downcow wrote: » I am simply stating what i understand as facts. 2) The UK voted out (regions swung both ways) 3) the vote was close both overall and in the regions and therefore we need to work hard to respect both
prawnsambo wrote: » Do you accept that a hard brexit will hit the UK economy hard? And that currently those effects are already being felt due to the loss of value of sterling and the flow of capital out of London. Such a hit to the UK economy would inevitably reduce the amount of money available to prop up NI.
First Up wrote: » I can however assure you that the EU is not using that or anything else to "keep" the UK in the EU. All it is doing is ensuring that responsibility for the consequences of the UK's departure fall where they should.
CelticRambler wrote: » You're still confusing the regions (of England) with the constituent countries of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - something that is, unfortunately, widespread amongst the loudest Tory, UKIP and English nationalist voices. Maybe if NI unionists could accept that their country is not part of Great Britain, they'd be more successful in keeping their own government functionning effectively, and defending their country's interests. On the otherhand, there is no reason why the Republic should put itself at a considerable economic disadvantage by imposing checks on Ireland-France imports/exports simply because a subsection of the Tory party disagrees with the rest of the party.
