Junkyard Tom wrote: » And those in the South who'd step forward as being against a United Ireland would be some laugh too.
ELM327 wrote: » Nothing to do with this thread. 0 "babies died" anyway but there's other threads if you want to discuss that.
FrancieBrady wrote: » That one will be fascinating. Utterly fascinating...Kevin Myers? Eoghan Harris? Peter Casey? Gemma? Who will lead the anti UI vanguard?
jm08 wrote: » Won't that be the job of the unionists. Expect to see Sammy Wilson etc. a lot more on Irish TV. I don't think any politician from FF/FG would chance it.
trashcan wrote: » Myers and Harris are racing certainties I’d say. And don’t forget Ruth “Cuddly” Edwards.
jh79 wrote: » Gemma is more aligned to the Dissidents and Aontu these days. SF are just Soros shills according to her.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The Irish in NI only secured a 'birthright' in 1998' I.E. it's in the gift of the British to bestow that to NI citizens and there is no onus on them to bestow it if NI no longer exists.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Literally posted pages back at this isn't the case. Citizenship was granted in the 1956 act.@ittakestwo, it's clear reading posts to you isn't a strong suit. So we'll try again... The granting of UK citizenship after a UI is in the gift of the UK. No one else. You would imagine that the negotiations for a UI would have discussions on extending UK Citizenship rights for a period after a UI comes into force. This would mirror the situation that occured after the Irish Free State came into being right up until the Republic of Ireland Act in 1949. Do you get it now?
FrancieBrady wrote: » So, only Gemma is anathema to you on that list. My fascination levels rise. Can we run a tester campaign for the craic? I can barely wait to hear the campaign.
jh79 wrote: » Never said that. Just don't understand why you think Gemma would be against a UI? She was flavour of the month with SF for a while.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Gemma's theory that 'the 'Troubles' were a staged event' would be more linked to the partitionist attitude than anything else I would have thought. They think it was all the 'RA and SF and nobody else was involved or responsible.
jh79 wrote: » According to this about 20 years away.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-nireland-poll/poll-shows-northern-ireland-majority-against-united-ireland-idUSKBN20C0WI
blanch152 wrote: » So silly notions of who would oppose a border poll in the South can be ignored
ittakestwo wrote: » But is it a gift they're are obliged to make with respect to the terms of the GFA which they signed? "Recognise the birthright of all people of Northan Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British or both as they may do choose and accordingly confirm their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both governments and would not be affected by any future changes to the status of Northan Ireland" The above can be read in a way that suggests the UK will be obliged to offer this gift to people born in the 6 counties in the case of a UI. Has there been a definitive legal answer in the form of yes they are or no they're not obliged to offer this gift after a UI.
FrancieBrady wrote: » It appears there isn't a sinner to stand up politically against it in the south, now or in 20 years time.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Mother of Christ. Are you for real?
ittakestwo wrote: » Yes.
ELM327 wrote: » I don't think NI can even refer to North Korea as a failure, relatively speaking. Let alone the ROI. Those in glass houses cannot throw stones, and NI as a region is a fine palace of delicate crystal
downcow wrote: » Nor would most people in Northern Ireland. We are not taken to pointing fingers at others. We have enough problems of our own. This is something some in ROI seem to specialise in ie holier than thou tut-tuting at their neighbours. Is that not what this thread is all about? I haven't seen a thread from a northerner suggesting that the Republic is a failure
FrancieBrady wrote: » Set a thread up if you are interested. For now this thread is about NI, a state which had failed by evidence of the fact that it takes an international agreement between two sovereign nations for it to even function and even though that is there it has still collapsed into non governance on a number of occasions. In short - it cannot be left to it's own devices to govern itself like normal states. It has, after 100 years of dysfunction, failed.
Fionn1952 wrote: » Literally explained this repeatedly. Northern Ireland would no longer exist in the event of unification, ergo there could be no legal obligations to people born in Northern Ireland post unification on account of it not existing. You keep pointing out phrasing which shows that people born in NI pre Unification would not be able to have their citizenship invoked by the British government without breaking the GFA, you have yet to put forward any reasonable argument which suggests this obligation would continue after unification; I'll repeat that the definition of the People of Northern Ireland as expressed in the GFA would no longer apply to people born post unification. Instead of repeating the same question over and over, if you disagree with the analysis put forward, point out the flaw in my reasoning.
blanch152 wrote: » You obviously missed the 30 pages or so where we were repeatedly told again and again that people born on this island were Irish by default and couldn't be British, no matter what the GFA said.
blanch152 wrote: » Wow, just wow, deny people their rights is the plan. I have absolutely no doubt that in the extremely unlikely event of the unification of this island, there will be a continuing right for anyone born in the future in Northern Ireland to be British. That is at the heart of the GFA, that both traditions are recognised, protected and cherished.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4b1a2e86cedae1628937f4503f2281da.svg)
