Bonniedog wrote: » It did actually. They even held a border poll, something which is about the height of SF ambitions! Sunningdale, Hillsborough and GFA all included as main proposal that unity would only be on basis of majority within Six counties. Republicans rejected this, and rejected power sharing in Stormont. SF accepted both the internal consent and the administration of north as part of UK. IRA surrendering in 1973 would have appeared more abject than it did in 1990s, but it was still a surrender of the republican position. Not by calling a ceasefire which was the right thing to do, but following that by the acceptance of Partition. Republican objectives could have been pursued without that and least of all by running the place for them which has been anathema to republicans for 200 years.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Bull****, SUnningdale didn't even include the principle of consent. .
FrancieBrady wrote: » It's like a riot, they are just picking up anything negative and flinging it in desperation now.
McMurphy wrote: » As I said, Farelly brothers stuff. You were on this site asking this. Then literally minutes later (13 minutes later to be precise) you were linking to a blog from some randomer, but the cherry on top for me is you don't even know who Andrew Dunne is, despite linking to his blog. That blog could have been penned by Dora the explorer for all you knew. I can't take you seriously now, stop it, I can't breathe. :pac:
markodaly wrote: » Who is Andrew Dunne? Honest question. See I don't spend my days travelling Twitter looking for outrage or laughs in this idiotic political meme games that some like to go on about.
markodaly wrote: » Who is Conor O Driscoll? Is he the new Roman Shorthall, whose every utterance will be copied and parroted here by the usual crew as if they are an authority on something?
grayzer75 wrote: » lol, you haven't a clue. It was the LOYALIST general strike under the umbrella of the Ulster Workers Council and the UUUC that brought it to a halt as they had no interest in powersharing with nationalists - it was only the UUP, SDLP and Alliance who signed up for it. The vast majority of protestants / loyalist were absolutely against it.
blanch152 wrote: » Sunningdale wasn't a failure, it stood the test of time and formed the core of the GFA. It was SF/IRA and extreme unionism who failed the people by their reaction to Sunningdale. Those slow learners, to use a Stanleyesque phrase, took over 20 years to realise it was the only possible deal. If you are looking for failures, look no further than those that killed people for twenty years before accepting the deal that was on the table already.
FrancieBrady wrote: » And Unionism ACTUALLY scuppered it. It FAILED mark, is the point.
markodaly wrote: » See, that is why your have your world view. You are blinkered into thinking everything is a war or a battle to be won. The thing is John Hume would have been OK at having 'failed' at politics as you put it, if it got NI a peace deal and people stopped killing each other. That is why he was the great man he was, not the type of people in SF today who want to rewrite history in their own pen, largely Adams. The fact you try and divide everything down to a win or loss is why SF and their types are the biggest hurdles to a UI, and you don't even know it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » ...and he didn't succeed as a politician until he accepted that everyone had to be at the table. Many 'visionary' people fail at politics mark.
markodaly wrote: » That in fairness is horse****. The IRA/SF had no interest in Sunningdale because it didn't achieve the glorious goal of a UI. The PIRA had zero interest in compromise in those days. Its on the public record from all the leaders. SF/IRA actively tried to scupper it.... only to come back to the table 25 years later and accept the same deal.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Because Unionism wasn't ready to negotiate, sadly and tragically, and because it was exclusionary. It was an attempt to seek a pathway without everyone having a say. One of the reasons why the north went up in flames in the first place.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Any of us who call ourselves Irish and who have pride in our sovereignty and freedom has 'blood on our hands' whether you were physically involved or not. Don't be hypocritical about it. Dying for a cause in 1916 was just as real and savage as it was in 1976.
markodaly wrote: » Just on John Hume.. If he was a failure, I would love to be one.
Bonniedog wrote: » Hume was unsuccessful in that when SF adopted the SDLP's acceptance of Partition, his party collapsed. He was successful in being part of a four pronged political/intelligence effort to neuter the republican movement. Am intrigued by your description of Sunnngdale. Given that it's constitutional guarantee on Partition differed in no way from GFA, how was it "premature"? Only difference was that republicans rejected Partition and Stormont in 1973 and in the main accepted it in 1998.
Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "John Hume was a political titan; a visionary who refused to believe the future had to be the same as the past."[36] The Dalai Lama said on Twitter: "John Hume's deep conviction in the power of dialogue and negotiations to resolve conflict was unwavering... It was his leadership and his faith in the power of negotiations that enabled the 1998 Good Friday Agreement to be reached. His steady persistence set an example for us all to follow."
blanch152 wrote: » He persuaded a bunch of psychopaths to stop killing people in return for which they got nothing. A remarkable achievement.
FrancieBrady wrote: » John Hume was a failed politician who arguably made the situation worse at times (the violence against the premature and exclusionary Sunningdale shambles. .
FrancieBrady wrote: » Fabulous idealistic man, no doubt. But a failed politician sadly until he teamed up with Adams. Adams had failed as a politician up to that too BTW
You look down your nose at somebody from Dublin getting involved in a fight against British occupation of his own country, when your own party members sailed off to various foreign countries to fight on behalf of other countries interets and TELL ME to look in mirrors???
FrancieBrady wrote: » All ears. List his achievements.
blanch152 wrote: » A pathetic attempt to rewrite history. Hume a failed politician? Of all the drivel on this thread, you have taken the prize for worst drivel with that statement. It is Stanleyesque in ignoring reality.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Grist to the mill I am not a member then Bish. What is 'drivel' about what I said? It is bang on the money in my view. Hume failed to achieve anything until he teamed up with Adams and ignored the rest of the SDLP to do it.
Bishop of hope wrote: » If you call achieving a goal by peaceful means a failure. At the end of the day he was there and can look back with no blood on his hands, regardless of whether you can justify the blood or not.
Bishop of hope wrote: » Desperate old drivel. Typical SF slanting of history of course. You need to move with the times as the party has moved on and is apologising for that sort of stuff now Francie. You're putting yourself in danger of being ostracised from official pr and maybe even censored. They're closing accounts with that sort of sentiment you know.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Not even light getting out of SF now Francie, as you well know. They have ridden out some heavy turbulence recently, watch for a (fake)softening of attitude for a few months, you’ll see more co operation with the ‘Free State’ They’ll leave the 70s and living in the past to bhoys like yersell. As MLMCD is rumored to have said.. “ Leave the past to those who relish boring folk ad nauseam for months- we will move on”
FrancieBrady wrote: » Lets ignore all those from Mr Duffy's Blueshirts who flocked off to Spain to fight, not to mention those from the south who stupidly gave themselves to Britain's various war efforts eh? Once again your myopic hypocrisy rings true. John Hume was a failed politician who arguably made the situation worse at times (the violence against the premature and exclusionary Sunningdale shambles. He only achieved success when he responded positively to Alex Reid's suggestion he team up with Adams and the Hume-Adams Initiative was born. He deserves credit for that.
markodaly wrote: » Haha, fantastic! Arguably the greatest Irishman of the latter half of the 20th century labelled a 'failed' politician.
I think you need a long hard look in the mirror there before you can use those words against anyone else Francie. The last comment alone is a good example on that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Rumour mill dried up Brendi?
