Hoboo wrote: » From the Oireachtas page..... A petition is only admissable if it; "does not contain the name or names of individuals". How does that work?
golfball37 wrote: » Micheal Martin showing he is not fit for the highest office over his non position on this. Saying he didn't get an invite when scores of opposition TDs have gotten one is pathetic. Using this as an excuse to not take a position is also troubling.
FrancieBrady wrote: » We 'manage' referendums very well in comparison to the ****show Brexit was. How is the whole 'RIC' thing part of 'it'? A majority after a properly run referendum were all opinions are transparent and properly aired, debated and tested is a perfectly adequate expression of democracy.
Nift wrote: » I mean even typing those things (i mean many Republicans would rather no UI than doing those things) and then seeing how you cannot put yourself into a position to imagine the compromises needed is just evidence many people aren't ready for a UI.
jmcc wrote: » Trying to save face? The Irish people did not vote on the Act of Union. The vast majority of Irish people were disenfranchised. Regards...jmcc
gormdubhgorm wrote: » I also think it the this protests are a good opportunity for Sinn Fein to hide behind, If you look at Sinn Fein's aims from thier website -https://www.sinnfein.ie/what-sinn-fein-stands-forUnited Ireland "Sinn F is a 32-County party striving for an end to partition on the island of Ireland and the establishment of a democratic socialist republic."= failed (have never brought the Unionists onside nor will they as evidenced by thier attitude to the DMP and RIC memorials)Accountability and governance "We oppose the politics of cronyism, sectarianism and exclusion which has been at the heart of political culture North and South in the past and the present"= failed (They have never looked close to even getting in opposition in the Dail, got hammered in the last election. They have played childish games up North for years while not governing in Stormont) --- So it is much easier for SF to play the Republican card now as it will play well with the grassroots and distract them from their real issues/failings. The other parties/individuals who jumped on this protest against the DMP/RIC memorial are only playing for votes from the simple minded.
Sean.3516 wrote: » Genuinely sorry for not using the capital “C” for Catholic. Normally I’m the grammar nazi. Also I would bet that I’m more historically knowledgeable than yourself. So unionists have a monopoly on the word “Fenian”? Didn’t know that. I also didn’t know that it was a term of derision only used by Unionists against Republicans. Didn’t the Republicans call themselves “The Fenian Brotherhood” for a while?
Deleted User wrote: » Put the shoe on the other foot.........we'll commemorate the RIC when Arlene commemorates the poor IRA lads lost to the troubles.
Zebra3 wrote: » 750,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes by Zionist terrorists. Hundreds of Palestinian towns and villages were destroyed or taken over by foreign colonialists.
Zebra3 wrote: » And my point about 1914 was that going to fight for your occupier was a stupid thing to do. You make it sound like it was no big deal.
Nift wrote: » Brexit has nothing to do with us "managing" better. Its an expression of a majority of English (stupid or not) people beliving in nationalism. Shock horror, de English can be nationalists too. Its no more stupid than believing that a United Ireland will be a Catholic, green, Republic with a few orange prods tacked on. The common rebuttal...is but the flag has orange in it..
How can you not see the relevance of it? In a United Ireland do you not think these factors become a live issue. the Battle of the Boyne, the signing of the covenant. Abhorrent to Irish Nationalists. Sacred to Irish Unionists. I mean even typing those things (i mean many Republicans would rather no UI than doing those things) and then seeing how you cannot put yourself into a position to imagine the compromises needed is just evidence many people aren't ready for a UI. I agree with your last point. Thats true. But it doesn't mean the afters won't be a **** show.
Sean.3516 wrote: » Woah okay, now you’re jumping ahead to 1948 when Britain had left and the first Arab-Israeli War was happening. I was talking about the early Jewish immigration to Palestine in the late 1800s and and early 1900s. The point was that you were saying that Britain had screwed over the Arabs by selling them out to the Jews. My point is that the Jews had been migrating to Palestine and buying land decades before the British took over the mandate. Once they were in charge they pursued the best policy of a two state solution. The expulsion of Arabs took place in 1948 after the British left and wouldn’t have happened had the Arabs accepted the UN Partition Plan. Again with the occupation thing. Ireland was not under an occupation. I’m not saying it wasn’t a big deal. I’m saying it wasn’t a bad deal all things considered. Helping fight WWI in exchange for Home Rule compared with fighting the War of Independence instead wouldn’t have been a bad deal.
jmcc wrote: » Garrison towns and a paramilitary force (RIC) keeping order are the facts that blow your fantasy out of the water.
jmcc wrote: » So not only are you ignorant of history and geography, you are illiterate as well? Ireland was still Ireland and even the formal titles for the British government posts in Ireland reflected that.
Nift wrote: » Brexit has nothing to do with us "managing" better. Its an expression of a majority of English (stupid or not) people beliving in nationalism.
Sean.3516 wrote: » The RIC was not a “paramilitary”. They were the police. They’re presence in the country doesn’t constitute a military occupation. Their misbehaviour at certain times makes absolutely no difference in this.
Zebra3 wrote: » SF don't need to bring unionists on side. The apartheid style voting system that the unionists loved is long since gone. Demographic changes and higher standard of living in the south will bring about a UI. There is no unionist veto any more. SF are in opposition in DE. Your lack of understanding of politics is plain embarrassing. And issues over Stormont are because of unionist opposition to an ILA and their corruption over the cash for ash scandal.
ricero wrote: » Expect a huge backlash in the up coming general election because of this on top of many other reasons. Varadkar and Fine Gaels ignorance and arrogance have left an open goal for Finna fail return.
Nift wrote: » Where did i say any of that? I'm saying that's where the idea of a "mature" position comes from. It has nothing to do with Fine Gael or anything. A common refrain on here or the journal is...phuck them the orange prods and send them back to Scotland/UK. Its a moronic line of thinking that must be called out every time. Sinn Fein themselves have talked of the changes needed if we do ever re-unite. New flag, anthem, federalism, capitals. Commemorations 100 per cent will come into it as well. this whole debacle has highlighted how unready we are for any border poll. It needs to be very carefully managed. The whole RIC thing is part of it, rightly or wrongly. Personally i don't think there will be a United Ireland in the next 50 years at least. You can see the reasons all over here, reddit, the journal. Or if it did happen, there would be guaranteed bloodshed. You have to laugh at the misty eyed romantic Republicanism. When it comes face to face with reality there will be tears. As we see with Brexit, a 50 plus one majority may be democratic but its not necessarily good for democracy.
gormdubhgorm wrote: » I doubt this single issue will bring back Fianna Fail, maybe if they countered it with a 1970's style 'arms crisis' they could claim to be the Republican Party again?
ChikiChiki wrote: » Have you been hiding under a rock? Fianna Fail are level in the polls with FG. They are essentially back from the cesspit they somehow crawled out of. FG gifted them the comeback when they should really have been consigned to the dustbins of history.
Nift wrote: » It's clear to see that this RIC malarky is part of the softly softly approach. Its not some sinister west brit plan to rejoin the commonwealth.
is_that_so wrote: » Do you really think anyone outside of those seemingly affronted by it cares? If anything they'll get it in the next for housing or health but not some obscure commemoration. Here's a reflective piece on this question of commemoration.https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0107/1104764-why-commemorating-the-enemy-is-so-contentious/
FrancieBrady wrote: » FG are so out of touch on this decade of centenaries that they ignored the fact that many many people DO CARE about how it is treated and care about the future of this island. They have already had to embarrassingly take down a video they produced on 1916. Will their arrogance ever abate...doesn't seem so.
JupiterKid wrote: » I do understand the need to recognise the the complex role that men in the RIC and DMP played in the years of this country pre-Independence, and also the need to accommodate the unisonist perspective if we really want re-unification of this island in the medium to long-term... ...but this "commemoration" is simply is a step too far and the Govt will pay the price for this - amongst their many, many abject policy failures in housing, health and rural Ireland to name but a few - in the forthcoming GE.