Avatar MIA wrote: » So, your worst fear has come through a UI is agreed. Then the above bombs to off, what then?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Why is everything designed so we don't offend/discommode unionism? I asked downcow and was ignored, what is unionism prepared to compromise/accomodate if a UI would come to pass by majority. They accepted all this in the GFA
facehugger99 wrote: » Surely a question for the proponents of a UI to answer - no? I'm quite happy with the current arrangement.
Peregrinus wrote: » The economy of NI has persistently underperformed that of the Republic for decades now. We're long past the point where this can be attributed to the decline of the shipbuilding and linen industries. It's at least plausible, to put it no higher, that this underperformance is to a material degree atrributable to partition, and the political problems resulting from it, and therefore that an end to partition would open up the possibility of a significant change to NI's requirement for a subvention.
jm08 wrote: » I'd be interested in hearing what these 'lengths' are. The best thing that Ireland could do is provide good education and well paying jobs. (I saw last week where the CEO of Northern Ireland Invest resigned which he had been in charge of for the last 10 years). I wasn't impressed with his cv (a former policy advisor to the DUP!). That reeks of jobs for the boys and that will need to stop.
murphaph wrote: » Sorry that's a ridiculous post. You are using deliberately emotive language to elicit a response. Let me turn the tables and see how you like it. You are prepared to cast aside children needing operations and make them wait because you would rather spend the limited funds on erasing a border between two EU member states. You might like to pretend there's an unlimited supply of money to fund unification but that is devoid of reality. It will cost money and that money will come from things that tug at the heartstrings too. You'd swear all the nationalists in the north were clamouring to cross the border and I was standing there booting them in the face the way you phrased your post.
downcow wrote: » Your last point first - we could go on and on and i could point out eg that the attorney general was gerry adams solicitor etc etc I am not sure people want bored with a long list of things ni does to accommodate irish nationalists, or want to here you coming back to misrepresent what i am saying and suggesting i dont think they are fair enough things to. but anyhow Irish signage in many areas huge funding to developing irish language removing our flag of many public buildings making it an offence to fly our flag under certain circumstances curtailing various parades - indeed the very existence of a parades commission positive discrimination eg 50% Catholic recruitment to psni while all other minorities & unionists together could only be 50% max releasing sectarian murderers who killed many of our people letters of comfort to IRA killers to prevent their prosecution Tribunal after tribunal eg £100m+ spent on bloody sunday allowing convicted terrorists into ministerial positions .....and then the is the endless subtle unspoken stuff eg don't put parking tickets on cars at GAA games no matter how ridiculously parked they are allow memorials to IRA on public property without planning permission etc etc thats just a few to get you started
Avatar MIA wrote: » Some of those are :pac: Question for you how much do English signs and funding to develop the English language cost? You forgot the biggest one of all. Allowing them to vote. That one hurt.
downcow wrote: » If i understand your question correctly then it is not really something i can contribute to. You are right, GFA says if there is a majority then UI happens. I am a democrat and will accept that decision. But then it will be over to ROI. My community will have zero bargaining power and the challenges will be for ROI or those in power in the New Ireland (NI) - did you like what i done there) to sort out the way ahead. You will have decisions to make ie do we bend over backwards to accommodate this unionist community now in our midst who are feeling hurt, downtrodden, defeated, dejected, without a home. or do we say sod them and allow those who are able to move across to the mainland and let the Guards police the enclaves that are left behind. So I am not avoiding the question - its just not a question that my community will be able to contribute to other than say, I can't imagine we will be in the mood for compromise under the circumstances - we will become the crocodiles that you will have to keep feeding
downcow wrote: » No that right was not upheld. The guards asked them to get onto buses to travel to the Dail because the bully boys were blocking their route
Avatar MIA wrote: » It was YOUR scenario :pac: Anyway, nothing would be achieved by it so it wouldn't happen.
downcow wrote: » A very predictable response. .....and check your history with regard to voting, i think you'll find no one was ever prevented from voting because of their religion of national aspirations - but sure don't let the facts get in the way of a good story
Matt Barrett wrote: » So people acted illegally. Would you prefer the Garda left you all to it?
Havockk wrote: » Too much use of 'our' in your last post. This is the fundamental point that unionists have always failed to grasp; The North is contested. It is a special case, and as an Irishman in the north why can I not have my heritage acknowledged and respected?
downcow wrote: » You are missing the point of the question i was answering. I was stating some modifications in place that would not be required if there were no nationalists in the North. hence the 'our'
downcow wrote: » Ulster-scots signage in many areas That's fine. More culture is grand. huge funding to developing ulster scots culture eg bands What huge funding would be required, new drums, sashes. Would you like for trips to be funded. More information required, don't see why it would be huge. removing Irish flag of many public buildings Why would you like the new agreed flag removed from buildings? But, flags doesn't aren't that big a deal down here. But, in the cold light of day I don't think any unionist politician would seek this. making it an offence to fly Irish flag under certain circumstances Again, who would be asking for this? curtailing various parades - indeed the very existence of a parades commission Okay, if you insist we'll curtail parades. Bloody St. Patrick's day parades in freezing weather. positive discrimination eg 50% Protestant recruitment to psni while all other minorities & catholics together could only be 50% max Does this even still exist? You know the reasons why this was brought in. The reciprocal figure would be approx. 20%, and shur why not. Although, be careful what you ask for. It might have a negative effect on Public Sector jobs. :P releasing sectarian murderers who killed many of irish people Wasn't that done on both sides. Noses had to be held for that for sure. letters of comfort to Hutch and Kinahan gangs to prevent their prosecution Tribunal after tribunal eg £100m+ spent on examining Guard collusion with IRA It can be held at the same time as the RUC collusion inquiry. Neither are likely to happen. allowing Hutch and Kinahan gang members into ministerial positions Sure, we'll even allow Peter Robinson back into politics. .....and then the is the endless subtle unspoken stuff eg don't put parking tickets on cars at Orange parades no matter how ridiculously parked they are allow memorials to british victims on public property without planning permission etc etc If travellers can be accommodated for similar we might be able to do the same for Protestants. How does that look now. is it still just a laugh that you would be happy to accept?
downcow wrote: » How would people feel about an independent NI being helped by both UK and ROI? You get Britain out of Ireland and it doesn't cost you as much - a win win
downcow wrote: » I would prefer they upheld the law and removed the law breakers
downcow wrote: » .....and check your history with regard to voting, i think you'll find no one was ever prevented from voting because of their religion of national aspirations - but sure don't let the facts get in the way of a good story
facehugger99 wrote: » The increased security spending is likely to be eye-wateringly high to deal with dissident loyalist terrorists. Not to mention the effect on our economy of a few well-placed bombs in the IFSC or GCD. We are already indebted up to the eye-balls. We will struggle to pay the pensions of our existing PS. We will not take on a 'workforce' made up of 30% PS.
downcow wrote: » Your last point first - we could go on and on and i could point out eg that the attorney general was gerry adams solicitor etc etc
I am not sure people want bored with a long list of things ni does to accommodate irish nationalists, or want to here you coming back to misrepresent what i am saying and suggesting i dont think they are fair enough things to. but anyhow
Irish signage in many areas - signage needs to be put up anyway.
Huge funding to developing irish language - I think plenty of that is coming from the Irish Government.
Removing our flag of many public buildings You should consider banning all flags in NI.
Imreoir2 wrote: » You can scream never never never from the rooftops if you want, but until you can start supporting your assertions with actual evidence, then your assertions are not contributing much to the discussion.
facehugger99 wrote: » I'm sure if the issues are without evidence they would be easily dismissed the UI proponents. Haven't seen that happen yet though.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Your assertions are opinion masquerading as fact. You assert that once the cost of unification is known that the Irish tax payer will reject it in the referendum, this is your opinion, you have not backed it up.
Imreoir2 wrote: » this is your opinion, you have not backed it up.
