How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

RobMc59 wrote:

Textbook 'look over there 'tactics from you francie-who mentioned brexit?
I understand as a disgruntled republican supporter you will try to agitate interest in a UI but the fact is although there has been some speculation about the possibility of that it remains far in the distance.Do you think the EU will be willing to cough up in the near future?I certainly don't.

eagle eye wrote:

No, I don't want to partition anything. In order to be a partitionist there must be intent to partition something.

jm08 wrote: »

RobMc59

In response to two of your comments in the old thread about the hunger strikes and how Charlie Haughey was unreliable (or something like that).

Garrett FitzGerald (Fine Gael) was Taoiseach at the time, not Haughey.

Garrett wrote to Ronald Reagan at the time to talk Maggie down (which he did). Irish America were up in arms over the whole thing.
Article from the Boston Globe:

RobMc59 wrote: »

My comments about haughy referred to his duplicity,secret deals with terrorists etc.I realise he wasn't the Taoiseach at the time of the hunger strikes but British attempts of a treaty where hampered by him during that early 80s period.Its interesting to note that despite disgruntled republicans claims in regards to the effectiveness of the strikes it was years later an agreement was made but that's airbrushed out by many who would like to rewrite history.

Bew and Gillespie (1993) Northern Ireland A Chronology of the Troubles 1968-1993 wrote:

The hunger strike of 1981 had very important and far-reaching consequences for Northern Ireland and proved to be one of the key turning points of 'the Troubles'. The Republican movement had achieved a huge propaganda victory over the British government and had obtained a lot of international sympathy. Active and tacit support for the Irish Republican Army (IRA) increased in Nationalist areas. Political support for Sinn Féin (SF) was demonstrated in two by-elections (and the general election in the Republic of Ireland) and eventually led to the emergence of SF as a significant political force in Northern Ireland. The British government's fear that SF would overtake the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) as the main representative of the Catholic population of Northern Ireland was a key reason for the government signing the Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA) on 15 November 1985.

RobMc59 wrote: »

[B]

[/B]

I`m surprised you`re quoting from a book which describes all this as `the troubles`:rolleyes:

RobMc59 wrote: »

It`s a difference of opinion that`s all,I checked my facts before posting.

RobMc59 wrote: »

I never claimed haughey was Taoiseach at that time,i said the British did`nt want to negotiate with him over the anglo-irish agreement in the early 80`s as he was untrustworthy and a known colluder with terrorists.
Please keep up.

RobMc59 wrote: »

Rather strange statement francie as the ira were against the treaty with gerry adams apparently incandescent with rage over it.

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I found Part One very depressing & demoralising, so let's hope there's a glimmer of light and positivity (from both Tribes) in Part Two

Part one was obsessed with the past, The British Empire came up quite a lot, as did the Northern Ireland Troubles 1968-98. Oliver Cromwell (1643-51) made a few appearances, the Great Famine (1845-49), genocide got a mention as did the Nazis, and the "dirty protests" /Maze prison (1981), while the Provos were praised by some, and The Brits were despised by others. Brits out, up the RA. You are not British, Oh Yes We Are, oh no you're not, Oh Yes We Are!

We hate you, we hate you too...

Dear God it makes for grim reading, and yet, the title of the Thread was ...

How long before Irish Unification?

Let's hope Part Two is a more upbeat thread (that looks to the future) moreso than dwelling in the bleak and bloody past. Maybe there never will be a United Ireland as per the Republican dream, but maybe there will be something close to a Union between North & South, with GB pushed out of the picture, Who knows what a border poll will show?

BloodyBill wrote: »

As a Southerner that bit about the free state prospering beyond recognition is incorrect.

Around 1916 we were the 11th richest country in the world. We weren't in the 50s 60s 70s or 80s. I can tell you that. Where I'm from we needed snorkles driving the car for fear of falling into a pothole. Things are ok now but didnt we go insolvent a few years ago. Now if your a civil servant in Ireland you're on the pigs back but for the rest of us lifes as hard or soft as anywhere in the UK.

downcow wrote: »

I always think it’s funny when Irish talk about how they hoodwinked the British security.
Do you really think, given the level of spying, the major wars, etc the brits were involved in worldwide, that a few paddy’s who had zero experience of such would lead them a-dance.
You are simply emphasising how effective the brits were at convincing the Irish that they had fell for their pretty basic predictable tactic.

...but sure if it makes you feel better.

Lord Fairlord wrote: »

Around 1916 Dublin had some of the worst slums to be found among western European cities.

maccored wrote: »

its not up to the shinners to outline what a UI is - its up to everyone on the island. the first thing to do is discuss it, and SF have regularly called for a nationwide discussion on the subject

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They will take part in the discussion like everyone else when the work begins in earnest.
The anti-UIers will be asked to back up their eleventy seventy billions too.

downcow wrote: »

Would you be up for a nationwide discussion on options for the island going forward. Eg rejoining uk, joining commonwealth, roi leaving eu with the uk, Northern Ireland committing to next 200 years as part of uk, independent ni and uniting the island for the first time in history?
Don’t ask unionists to be part of a UI discussion unless absolutely everything is on the table.