blanch152 wrote: » The EU is acting to protect the interests of its member Ireland, not any part of the UK. The concern of the EU is not for the rights of the people of Northern Ireland, it is concern for the wishes of Ireland to avoid a border with Northern Ireland. There is a subtle but important distinction. As I have said before, if there is a crash out, there will be an awful lot of other things to worry about first.
blanch152 wrote: » It's a £10 billion subvention and I am happy to accept that it is a significant barrier to any change in the constitutional status of Northern Ireland.
jm08 wrote: » You forgetting that there is approx. 800K Irish/EU citizens living in NI?
blanch152 wrote: » There are nearly 200k Irish-born living in the US, probably at least twice that with Irish citizenship. Don't see the EU worrying about them. When you include the citizens of other EU countries living in the US, it must far exceed the numbers living in Northern Ireland.
jm08 wrote: » The US is not a member of the EU and about to leave it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Nonsense, the EU have several times spelled out their commitments to and guiding principles on Ireland as an island.
Berserker wrote: » NI won't be a member in five weeks time. That'll give those people the exact same status as the Irish in the US from the EU perspective. By pushing to build a border on the island?
Imreoir2 wrote: » I don't think anyone wants a rushed border poll held in a vaccume of reliable information.
facehugger99 wrote: » The time frame for reunification is the same now as it has been for the last 30-plus years. In about 20 years time. It allows most people to harbor the belief that it's something they'll witness in their lifetime without any immediate danger of actually having to deal with any of the political, security or economic practicalities of it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » A crash out Brexit changes everything under those 3 headings - political, security and economic practicalities. The DUP shooting themselves in the foot as everyone is pointing out. And even if it isn't a crash out, their is now an imperative to sort future relationships.
Berserker wrote: » NI won't be a member in five weeks time. That'll give those people the exact same status as the Irish in the US from the EU perspective.
Matt Barrett wrote: » It's a matter of when, not if.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Not even slightly. First off they'll be in Ireland. Secondly they'll be in a portion of an Irish province. Thirdly they did not leave Ireland to move abroad, Britishness was put upon them. All the Hello magazine royal weddings in the world cannot fudge these facts.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Instead of whinging about rebel romaticism I think many pro partition types need wake up to the idea that a united Ireland will be the feel good party of the century. Any loyalist would be welcomed and free to carry on their beliefs. It will be far from a bitter antiquated tit for tat scenario. Those days are only kept alive by the DUP and some SF's. The vast majority, IMO would make reunification a positive affair. It's a matter of when, not if.
facehugger99 wrote: » Agreed - The likely economic impact on Ireland in a no-deal scenario makes the economic arguments for a UI even worse .
facehugger99 wrote: » Cool - how about in 20 years?
FrancieBrady wrote: » No. A UI will be the only practical thing to save us from massive ongoing costs.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Not even slightly. First off they'll be in Ireland. Secondly they'll be in a portion of an Irish province. Thirdly they did not leave Ireland to move abroad, Britishness was put upon them.
Infini wrote: » 20 years was the pre-brexit timetable. 2 to 5 is the likely result of a crash out brexit by an incompetent dup/conservatives. Brexit is a catalyst to speed things up not stop it.
Berserker wrote: » It was never put upon them. Ireland opted to join the UK and the RoI decided to break away from the rest of the UK after that.
Berserker wrote: » Taking on NI and the costs involved in running NI would save more money than not taking it on and letting the UK foot that bill. That makes sense for sure.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Nobody, except those shamefacedly with their hands out, sees the future of a failed state as sustainable. It will be that simple.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Ireland never opted to join the UK. Please don't spread such nonsense.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Taking on northern Ireland and the real subvention (not the 9-10-11-12 billion one we hear partitionists quoting) is the only way we can finally stop it costing us huge amounts of money and lives. The British will see it the same way. Nobody, except those shamefacedly with their hands out, sees the future of a failed state as sustainable. It will be that simple.
Berserker wrote: » Not correct. Think you'll find that a certain vote occurred on the matter. It's often skipped in Irish history lessons. Doesn't fit in with the victim sob story, I suppose.
Berserker wrote: » Not correct. Think you'll find that a certain vote occurred on the matter. It's often skipped in Irish history lessons. Doesn't fit in with the victim sob story, I suppose. NI doesn't cost us 9-10-11-12 billion at the moment. As I said above, taking it on would cost more. That's just the base cost. I'm not including policing etc in that. I see that the UK is going to buy Brazilian beef after Brexit. The first of many blows to the Irish economy. Will be interesting to see how the EU digs you guys out of that hole. That's 50% of Irish exports that need a new home.
seamus wrote: » You mean the vote that the British ran a second time after it was defeated the first time? And where members of the Irish parliament were offered money, land and titles in exchange for supporting the act of union? Let's not forget that 90% of the actual population weren't permitted to vote, so the Parliament itself represented a minority. It's often "skipped", because it can't be considered a democratic or fair vote. Ireland was joining the union one way or another, the British just decided that bribery was easier than violence.
blanch152 wrote: » Some people would label the Brexit referendum as an undemocratic or unfair vote because of people being bribed about NHS money or Russian influence or illegal spending, all modern versions of the Act of Union vote. However, there is no doubt that both results stand as democratic decisions of their time. It is also conveniently forgotten that Ireland has never been united except under British rule.
mrbrianj wrote: » Ireland was never partitioned before British rule, different political system for sure, but its a stretch to say Ireland was united by Britain.
