nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Tokyo

Mod:

Continuation of the How long before Irish reunification? thread.

Please note that all mod warnings, actions and threadbans from the previous thread carry across to here.

I have updated the OP of this thread with a list of threadbanned users, I would advise posters to check on this before posting in the thread again or a forum sanction will be imposed for breaching same.

If you want to discuss your threadban feel free to PM the banning mod (or myself if you can't remember who that is and I'll point you in the right direction).

Threadbanned Users:
blanch152
Randy Archer
Natterjack from Kerry
littlevillage

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Edgware

jm08 wrote: »

Last I saw, SF MLAs take £26,000 a year, the rest goes to the party.

Do you think they shouldn't get paid and just claim the dole?

"goes to the party"
Ellis is entitled to an exception of course seen demand for t.v. repairs has dropped

BonnieSituation

jm08 wrote: »

Well, Limerick is doing fine on investment. Q1-2018 - unemployment was 5.2%, lower than the national average of 5.7%. That was down from 19.5% in 2012.

Just shows what can be done when people put their mind to it. It helps that Limerick has a university because it has been able to attract all sorts of industry there such as leading biotech companies like Regernon to replace Dell.

All these medical companies need highly skilled people to work for them.

One of the recent changes that has helped Limerick has in fact been the creation of the Municipal District within the nerged County, which has enlarged the "City" so instead of the Legal City being only 40000 or so when it's well over 100k as it had always been in reality.

Anyway, I digress...

BloodyBill

jm08 wrote: »

How are you going to know how to vote since both referenda will take place on the same day.

Northern Ireland was out on its own for 50 years and look how that was ended! Seriously, that will never happen.

Ah I'd say it will happen. There'll be an independent Northern Ireland with strong connections to both motherlands. We couldn't cope if the majority of the Protestants didnt want unity. We couldn't police them if they got violent. They would have serious experience from serving in the military. Wed have carnage. Imagine asking a guy from Clare to go up and police or be a soldier in the Shankill or lisburn or other such place. Wed just be copying the poor soldiers from England who had to go to Northern Ireland. Not a chance

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Technically there is no onus on us in the south to have a ref. in the GFA.
That's because constitutionally we have already said we 'aspire' to it.

Actually this is also very true. Slipped my mind that.

I can't imagine it would go down well with our Partitionists and Contrarians.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The bolded it us spot on and something I've long promoted. It's the only sensible process to my mind.

However, there is some sense to let the south vote on the same day to show that there is an appetite for a UI to stop Partitionists crowing to the contrary.

But we're a long way from that anyway.

Disagree Bonnie. It's a vote of ALL the people of the island and you cannot preempt that in any way.

There is a reason exit polls etc are not allowed to be published until ALL polling stations close.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

British SF added an amendment that would not allow abortion in the case of non fatal fetal abnormality.

Irish SF were against such an amendment in Republic.

It's a good example of partitionist politics from SF .

Aren't you edgy with your new nomenclature?

And Sinn Féin and myself have what to do with each other?

Again, SF have no monopoly on a UI or Irish Nationalism. Why you need to sidle them in to every reply is beyond me.

[Deleted User]

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Aren't you edgy with your new nomenclature?

And Sinn Féin and myself have what to do with each other?

Again, SF have no monopoly on a UI or Irish Nationalism. Why you need to sidle them in to every reply is beyond me.

You asked what their attitude to abortion is in the North and South.

On the nomenclature, there is no such country as NI so British SF is correct.

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Disagree Bonnie. It's a vote of ALL the people of the island and you cannot preempt that in any way.

There is a reason exit polls etc are not allowed to be published until ALL polling stations close.

As you know, I've long been of a view where they didn't need to be concurrent and it stemmed from the futility of a vote South of the Border when there was a No vote North of the Border. But I never really considered the idea of the Southern Vote being affected by the result in the North.

And as I said in the post above, it would be prudent to have a vote anyway I guess, regardless, to show Partitionists that there is an appetite for a UI in the South.

So yeah, I reckon I can temper my thoughts on that and change my view on this.

BonnieSituation

BloodyBill wrote: »

Ah I'd say it will happen. There'll be an independent Northern Ireland with strong connections to both motherlands. We couldn't cope if the majority of the Protestants didnt want unity. We couldn't police them if they got violent. They would have serious experience from serving in the military. Wed have carnage. Imagine asking a guy from Clare to go up and police or be a soldier in the Shankill or lisburn or other such place. Wed just be copying the poor soldiers from England who had to go to Northern Ireland. Not a chance

You'd say?

Based on your own opinion?

So, despite the fact that almost zero people are campaigning for this, you think it's more likely than either a UI or NI staying in the UK?

FrancieBrady

BloodyBill wrote: »

Ah I'd say it will happen. There'll be an independent Northern Ireland with strong connections to both motherlands. We couldn't cope if the majority of the Protestants didnt want unity. We couldn't police them if they got violent. They would have serious experience from serving in the military. Wed have carnage. Imagine asking a guy from Clare to go up and police or be a soldier in the Shankill or lisburn or other such place. Wed just be copying the poor soldiers from England who had to go to Northern Ireland. Not a chance

So rather than fulfil an agreement that took forty bloody and tragic years to get to, you would ask nationalists to go into a state, they don't have any expressed wish to go into, to appease unionists who might get violent?
Don't go into politics my friend.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

You asked what their attitude to abortion is in the North and South.

On the nomenclature, there is no such country as NI so British SF is correct.

So Northern Ireland isn't a country and Northern Irish isn't a valid demonym? Glad we agree on something.

But yeah. British, edgy!

---

So are they getting rid of abortion or are they bringing amendments to non binding motions that the other parties are proposing?

I didn't check out the nitty gritty of what the DUP MLAs proposed.

Anyway...

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

As you know, I've long been of a view where they didn't need to be concurrent and it stemmed from the futility of a vote South of the Border when there was a No vote North of the Border. But I never really considered the idea of the Southern Vote being affected by the result in the North.

And as I said in the post above, it would be prudent to have a vote anyway I guess, regardless, to show Partitionists that there is an appetite for a UI in the South.

So yeah, I reckon I can temper my thoughts on that and change my view on this.

There would be immediate claims that people didn't bother going to vote because they saw the result elsewhere. Messy and litigious...not a hope they won't be on the same day.

I agree that we would be better having one even though we have already and recently constitutionally said yes.

I genuinely want to hear these partitionists speak up with some of the stuff they come out with here. The Peter Casey's, John Watters, Gemma O'Doherty's need a cause.

Junkyard Tom

jh79 wrote: »

Turning NI in to an economic mess

jh79 wrote: »

IRA tried and succeeded in ruining NI's economy. Up to SF to fix it.

This lame excuse. The conflict ended over 20 years ago. Germany, Japan and Britain were booming not long after WWII after being destroyed. The north's economic problems are systemic.

The Troubles probably stabilised the economy in the north as the British pumped billions of GBP into the place and created lots of well-paying jobs for Unionists in the security forces. One of the reasons it was hard to get an agreement with Unionists was because people who could barely read-and-write got well remunerated jobs in the RUC/UDR and Prison Service and faced losing their livelihoods.

Randy Archer wrote: »

We don’t want that baggage, it took us decades to get rid of civil war bitterness .

I don't know who your 'we' is but leave the majority of Irish people out of it, okay? And if you think rejecting a UI won't reanimate those demons of the past then you are utterly clueless and haven't given it much thought.

BloodyBill wrote: »

There'll be an independent Northern Ireland

BloodyBill

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You'd say?

Based on your own opinion?

So, despite the fact that almost zero people are campaigning for this, you think it's more likely than either a UI or NI staying in the UK?

Well all we are doing here is giving opinions. Theres no real party platforms in forums such as this. Yes I'd say in the cold light of day they ll go it alone and they ll get on well. Alot more equality than in the past.

BloodyBill

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So rather than fulfil an agreement that took forty bloody and tragic years to get to, you would ask nationalists to go into a state, they don't have any expressed wish to go into, to appease unionists who might get violent?
Don't go into politics my friend.

I'd say the majority of nationalists would be happy enough by that stage in an independent Northern Ireland . It's the majority of both communities that's important to me. Didnt our Taoiseach say as much when dismissing the 51% idea.. The Good Friday Agreement is good..a good roadmap. It ll be superseded by something even better in years to come.

Shefwedfan

Once SF clean up the mess they have made of the North we can discuss unified Ireland. Until then let the UK pay for it.

No reason rep of Ireland should waste millions on a vote to take over a shambles

Yeah_Right

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I called them anti-democratic because they valued a Protestant vote over a Catholic vote.

50%+1 of the electorate wasn't enough for Bill. We need 50%+1 of Protestants as well.

He can have his reasoning and he can vote how he wants. He can't escape the description of that decision as "anti-democratic". Because that's what it is.

What has Sinn Féin got to do with my post? Sinn Féin don't own Irish Nationalism or reunification. So pipe down.

Pipe down. Such a SF response. If someone disagrees, they should shut up. You do realise that in a democracy people can vote how they choose? And just because you disagree with it doesn't make it anti-democratic.

BonnieSituation

BloodyBill wrote: »

Well all we are doing here is giving opinions. Theres no real party platforms in forums such as this. Yes I'd say in the cold light of day they ll go it alone and they ll get on well. Alot more equality than in the past.

My opinion is backed up and based on the current reality and a long agreed treaty and peace agreement.

Yours is based on, I don't know what actually. It's bizarre.

BonnieSituation

BloodyBill wrote: »

I'd say the majority of nationalists would be happy enough by that stage in an independent Northern Ireland . It's the majority of both communities that's important to me. Didnt our Taoiseach say as much when dismissing the 51% idea.. The Good Friday Agreement is good..a good roadmap. It ll be superseded by something even better in years to come.

You'd say? Have you talked to a majority of Nationalists? Seems odd that you have established this "fact" and yet I have never seen anyone call for an independent NI nor have I seen poll figures showing it is wanted by anyone.

---

The GFA s a roadmap to a UI.

For another roadmap, to say your ill-thought out independent NI, would require an All Island consensus and a buy in from everybody, that is plainly not there, to replace what we have.

Who is going to do that? It's cracked.

BonnieSituation

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Pipe down. Such a SF response. If someone disagrees, they should shut up. You do realise that in a democracy people can vote how they choose? And just because you disagree with it doesn't make it anti-democratic.

Constantly weasling SF into EVERY response is a very disingenuous way to debate.

If you can't talk about a UI or Irish Nationalism without talking about Sinn Féin, then perhaps it's not really the subject for you.

---

You do realise that if you read the posts as they are and don't put your own spin on what you wish they meant, then you might have an easier time of it.

Bill values Protestant votes more than Catholic votes. End of. It's an anti-democratic stance. How is it so hard to understand this?

[Deleted User]

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So Northern Ireland isn't a country and Northern Irish isn't a valid demonym? Glad we agree on something.

But yeah. British, edgy!

---

So are they getting rid of abortion or are they bringing amendments to non binding motions that the other parties are proposing?

I didn't check out the nitty gritty of what the DUP MLAs proposed.

Anyway...

The end result is irrelevant. SF in the case of abortion had different policies for each jurisdiction, the very definition of partitionism.

[Deleted User]

jh79 wrote: »

The end result is irrelevant. SF in the case of abortion had different policies for each jurisdiction, the very definition of partitionism.

Francie, what's your view on this? Reproductive rights are different to, for example the economy, where a different approach might be warranted.

Would you agree that in this case SF didn't have an all island approach?

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

The end result is irrelevant. SF in the case of abortion had different policies for each jurisdiction, the very definition of partitionism.

Well, that's for SF and their voters and supporters to contend with.

Either way, abortion is legal in Ireland. And not before time, no thanks to the DUP.

Now, back to reunification, something which is for is all to discuss.

Sinn Féin don't have complete ownership of reunification. Need it be said again.

[Deleted User]

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Well, that's for SF and their voters and supporters to contend with.

Either way, abortion is legal in Ireland. And not before time, no thanks to the DUP.

Now, back to reunification, something which is for is all to discuss.

Sinn Féin don't have complete ownership of reunification. Need it be said again.

As i said the end result is irrelevant. Did SF have an all island policy on abortion or not?

Yeah_Right

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Constantly weasling SF into EVERY response is a very disingenuous way to debate.

If you can't talk about a UI or Irish Nationalism without talking about Sinn Féin, then perhaps it's not really the subject for you.

---

You do realise that if you read the posts as they are and don't put your own spin on what you wish they meant, then you might have an easier time of it.

Bill values Protestant votes more than Catholic votes. End of. It's an anti-democratic stance. How is it so hard to understand this?

Once again you tell me to but out of the conversation. I may be a foreigner but I live in Ireland and have every right to vote in Ireland. You may not like the way I or others vote but it's a democracy not a dictatorship where everyone votes the same. Like what you want.

jm08

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Once again you tell me to but out of the conversation. I may be a foreigner but I live in Ireland and have every right to vote in Ireland. You may not like the way I or others vote but it's a democracy not a dictatorship where everyone votes the same. Like what you want.

I think you will find that Irish people understand very well how a democracy works, bearing in mind that Ireland has a codified Constitution that can only be changed by the people in a Referendum. Constitutional referenda in this republic are binding and definately not something that any Government or political party can decide whether the result is binding or not (as in the UK and in your home country of NZ).

Edgware

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I don't call it the troubles out of respect for those for whom it was much more than a 'trouble'. My own family included.

But if it helps you to avoid the point...work away.

Wake me up when you get to 2020

BonnieSituation

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Once again you tell me to but out of the conversation. I may be a foreigner but I live in Ireland and have every right to vote in Ireland. You may not like the way I or others vote but it's a democracy not a dictatorship where everyone votes the same. Like what you want.

I didn't bring your Nationality into it at all. You've done that. Another disingenuous tactic.

I also didn't tell you to "butt out of it":

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Constantly weasling SF into EVERY response is a very disingenuous way to debate.

If you can't talk about a UI or Irish Nationalism without talking about Sinn Féin, then perhaps it's not really the subject for you.

---

You do realise that if you read the posts as they are and don't put your own spin on what you wish they meant, then you might have an easier time of it.

Bill values Protestant votes more than Catholic votes. End of. It's an anti-democratic stance. How is it so hard to understand this?

I'm presuming you read the bolded part as some sort of command to move on. It was not. But like JH79 and others, the weird obsession with Sinn Féin has to stop. Conflating Nationalists with Sinn Féin supporters has to stop.

---

Anyway, I'll repeat what i have said in several posts over several pages at this stage, that may I add was directed at another poster, but has somehow become your white whale this evening;

Bill values Protestant votes more than Catholic votes. End of. It's an anti-democratic stance.

How you or him or anyone uses their vote is immaterial and none of my business, but to value, on a sectarian level, one citizens' vote over another is inherently anti-democratic. I don't really get why it needed to be repeated. But here we are.

jm08

jh79 wrote: »

The end result is irrelevant. SF in the case of abortion had different policies for each jurisdiction, the very definition of partitionism.

Abortion was imposed in Northern Ireland. Every person here in Ireland had a say and with the draft legislation published prior to the referendum, we knew what we were going to get.

BonnieSituation

jh79 wrote: »

As i said the end result is irrelevant. Did SF have an all island policy on abortion or not?

The end result is irrelevant?

Sheesh, so women's reproductive rights are merely a political football to kick around so you can belatedly try and get one up on Sinn Féin?

That's a pretty awful stance to have.

Who yet again I noticed you've continued to bring into the conversation. They may need to take out a restraining order at this point.