Northern Ireland- a failure 99 years on?

downcow wrote: »

Francie yous were on your knees when you entered that “internationally binding agreement between 26 sovereign governments just to function”
Hardly a strong negotiating position. Of course the shinners knew that and wanted out until recently lol

We are party to any agreement with the EU.

You are subject to an agreement between two sovereign governments.
An agreement belligerent Unionism refuses to accept to this day.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Agreed. But if things become so difficult at the Irish see border that the protocol is scrapped, do you really believe there is a snowball in hells chance of the Eu placing a trade border between ni and Eu?
That’s I serious question.
I don’t believe there is a chance that border posts will go up at Newry policed by the guards on behalf of the Eu. Nothing is going to change with regard to the unique and excellent position we find ourselves in.

After the Brexit referendum and Donald Trump's election, I'd be very reluctant to say, 'there is no chance' on anything.

Should NI/the UK decide to withdraw from the NI protocol, a trade border would be a necessity unless another agreed arrangement replaces it.

We can hand wave the difficult conversation away, but like it or not it IS a degree of uncertainty and that will inevitably have some impact on investment. To be clear, I am not suggesting that no one will invest in NI because of this, but rather pointing out that there won't be some magic floodgate of investment far beyond the normal and the transient and uncertain nature of the NI protocol is a significant reason for this. What good is it investing huge sums of money to set up an operation straddling the UK and the EU when you have a known factor that could make that no longer the case hanging over you in a very short time, to repeat every 4 years?

If it is such a unique and excellent position, would you care to explain Sammy Wilson and Ian Paisley Jr's recent statements on how badly it is impacting their constituents?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Again, you are answering a different question to the one you quote again. The question is why did you deflect the question asked of you to another poster rather than answer it yourself ?

It doesn't apply. A state, a region, a no of countie...call it what you want. The point I made about 'anywhere' stands.
Downcow believes NI is a fully fledged country as England or Ireland is...that is who you should be discussing this with. I don't care how you define it tbh.

cj maxx

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Your mistake is to consider NI a state. It is a region of a state. Asking whether a region of any state is failed or otherwise, or to assess it as if it were a state, is nonsense. It is part of the UK, and so NI in isolation cannot be considered as a state.

That in a nut shell is it. NI isn't, nor ever was ,or will be ,a state. It was a dysfunctional area of a state ( uk ). The fact that the state ,UK, government sent in their armed forces on a war footing to exert a measure of control only proves that NI as a functioning statelet/area has been an unmitigated disaster.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It doesn't apply. A state, a region, a no of countie...call it what you want. The point I made about 'anywhere' stands.
Downcow believes NI is a fully fledged country as England or Ireland is...that is who you should be discussing this with. I don't care how you define it tbh.

Thats a third deflective post out of three on the topic. Slippery and avoidance seems a fair charge.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Thats a third deflective post out of three on the topic. Slippery and avoidance seems a fair charge.

If there is a question I haven't addressed then you will have to ask again. Not a notion what you are on about.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If there is a question I haven't addressed then you will have to ask again. Not a notion what you are on about.

Thats a fourth deflection.

I can quote it back to you :

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

The question is why did you deflect the question asked of you to another poster rather than answer it yourself ?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Thats a fourth deflection.

I can quote it back to you :

You didn't ask a question:

Here is what you said...can you point to a question mark here?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote:

Your mistake is to consider NI a state. It is a region of a state. Asking whether a region of any state is failed or otherwise, or to assess it as if it were a state, is nonsense. It is part of the UK, and so NI in isolation cannot be considered as a state.

Please ASK a question and I will answer.

maccored

downcow wrote: »

The options for ira were limited to one - they just needed to stop killing people. John Hume convinced them of this. He helped them to wake up and smell the coffee

I never thought he would get them into Stormont, but lust for power and money should never be underestimated

making up your own version of history. all im going to say is its interesting how unionism didnt involve themselves in the early discussions between hume and adams. you know - the talks you pretended didnt happen as apparently republicans werent looking for a peaceful resolution (when they obviously were).

You should try facts instead of makeyuppy nonsense

maccored wrote: »

making up your own version of history. all im going to say is its interesting how unionism didnt involve themselves in the early discussions between hume and adams. you know - the talks you pretended didnt happen as apparently republicans werent looking for a peaceful resolution (when they obviously were).

You should try facts instead of makeyuppy nonsense

He ignored the facts when they were put to him in stark numbers. Par for the course.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You didn't ask a question:

Here is what you said...can you point to a question mark here?

Please ASK a question and I will answer.

Thats a fifth deflection.

Here is the question for the third time. It has always had the question mark :

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

The question is why did you deflect the question asked of you to another poster rather than answer it yourself ?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Thats a fifth deflection.

Here is the question for the third time. It has always had the question mark :

What question? Last tme I'll ask.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What question? Last tme I'll ask.

A single reading of a question suffices for most people, but for the fourth time for those who require repetition to grasp the question :

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

The question is why did you deflect the question asked of you to another poster rather than answer it yourself ?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

A single reading of a question suffices for most people, but for the fourth time for those who require repetition to grasp the question :

WHAT QUESTION? I understand this is a question...but what question are you referring to in the bolded bit?

The question is why did you deflect the question asked of you to another poster rather than answer it yourself ?

Jesus H, this is not rocket science...there was NO question asked in your original point which I referred to the person (downcow) who passionately believes NI is a country or State.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

WHAT QUESTION? I understand this is a question...but what question are you referring to in the bolded bit?

Jesus H, this is not rocket science...there was NO question asked in your original point which I referred to the person (downcow) who passionately believes NI is a country or State.

What were you referring to another poster then ? The original post was addressed to you. You make no comment other than to refer it to someone else. And slip away six time now from answering why you did this rather than address it directly yourself.

I am not familiar with all posters here. Is it that downcow is a spokesperson for you, and at times you let them answer on your behalf ?

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

What were you referring to another poster then ?

Your statement after giving my view.

The original post was addressed to you. You make no comment other than to refer it to someone else. And slip away six time now from answering why you did this rather than address it directly yourself.

No I haven't, I actually quoted the original post a number of posts ago asking you to point out the fecking question I was asked.

Man, you dug some hole there. :rolleyes:

For the seventh time then. Why did you refer my post to another poster. If you have cleared up your confusion, you are surely clear and can answer my question.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

For the seventh time then. Why did you refer my post to another poster. If you have cleared up your confusion, you are surely clear and can answer my question.

I didn't refer it. I told you to take it up with downcow...I have also ALREADY explained why.

Are we done here?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't refer it. I told you to take it up with downcow...I have also ALREADY explained why.

Are we done here?

I think so. You have proven to the jury beyond any reasonable doubt that while you quote posts and type words below them, you avoid answers repeatedly.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115949087&postcount=4139

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

I think so. You have proven to the jury beyond any reasonable doubt that while you quote posts and type words below them, you avoid answers repeatedly.

Not for the first time I have to point out that I have given my view of your statement, a huge number of posts ago:

FrancieBrady wrote:

I used 'state' with a small s to signify a place...change that to a region if you wish, point still stands.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

After the Brexit referendum and Donald Trump's election, I'd be very reluctant to say, 'there is no chance' on anything.

Should NI/the UK decide to withdraw from the NI protocol, a trade border would be a necessity unless another agreed arrangement replaces it.

We can hand wave the difficult conversation away, but like it or not it IS a degree of uncertainty and that will inevitably have some impact on investment. To be clear, I am not suggesting that no one will invest in NI because of this, but rather pointing out that there won't be some magic floodgate of investment far beyond the normal and the transient and uncertain nature of the NI protocol is a significant reason for this. What good is it investing huge sums of money to set up an operation straddling the UK and the EU when you have a known factor that could make that no longer the case hanging over you in a very short time, to repeat every 4 years?

If it is such a unique and excellent position, would you care to explain Sammy Wilson and Ian Paisley Jr's recent statements on how badly it is impacting their constituents?

No problem explaining that. They are two bigoted arrogant nutters

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It doesn't apply. A state, a region, a no of countie...call it what you want. The point I made about 'anywhere' stands.
Downcow believes NI is a fully fledged country as England or Ireland is...that is who you should be discussing this with. I don't care how you define it tbh.

Francie tell me where I said it was a “fully fledged country”. We are a devolved region of the UK. That would be rediculous

downcow wrote: »

Francie tell me where I said it was a “fully fledged country”. We are a devolved region of the UK. That would be rediculous

So you agree with Natter Jack...fair enough, not gonna argue with you.
But I ask...how many times have you referred to 'our wee country' or OWC?

Blushing for you now downcow.

cj maxx wrote: »

That in a nut shell is it. NI isn't, nor ever was ,or will be ,a state. It was a dysfunctional area of a state ( uk ). The fact that the state ,UK, government sent in their armed forces on a war footing to exert a measure of control only proves that NI as a functioning statelet/area has been an unmitigated disaster.

We are back to talking about stuff that happened half a century ago to try and find evidence of ni failing lol.
And again your starting point is absurd. The army weren’t sent in anywhere, they are my army. Indeed the largest regiment by far in the british army during the squabble was one based in ni and made up mainly by ni soldiers.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He ignored the facts when they were put to him in stark numbers. Par for the course.

So are you agreeing with McCord that since gfa republicans have killed no one and loyalists have killed loads? I thought you had more sense

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So you agree with Natter Jack...fair enough, not gonna argue with you.
But I ask...how many times have you referred to 'our wee country' or OWC?

Blushing for you now downcow.

It is affectionately referred to as OWC. It is an integral part of the United Kingdom of gb and ni.
One of you mates posted a definition of a country while trying to prove the island of ireland was a country. I pointed out that if we follow his criteria then ni is a country.

Ourweecountry upwards and onwards

Junkyard Tom

Tbh the title should be changed to 'Will NI ever work'? because it's been a failure all of its existence.

downcow wrote: »

So are you agreeing with McCord that since gfa republicans have killed no one and loyalists have killed loads? I thought you had more sense

What?

The figures I quoted are from the stats.
If they are wrong, please outline where and on what you are basing it.

downcow wrote: »

It is affectionately referred to as OWC. It is an integral part of the United Kingdom of gb and ni.
One of you mates posted a definition of a country while trying to prove the island of ireland was a country. I pointed out that if we follow his criteria then ni is a country.

Ourweecountry upwards and onwards

SO the 'country' is just a nickname. Fine, no argument from me.

It doesn't particularly bother me what you or natter jack want to call it, it has failed for the reasons stated.