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

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Imagine feeling cornered in your own Statelet as a result of the actions of your political leaders and your government and the solution in your mind is to bomb innocent people in a "foreign country".

I mean, imagine how'd they react if they couldn't vote, get housing or even jobs. Poor craturs.

downcow and others would rather point fingers at ghosts of the past than face the uncomfortable reality that they are isolated from Britain and that Britain has no intention of changing or alleviating that. They also have zero leaders capable of leading them out of the mess they have created themselves

grayzer75

FrancieBrady wrote: »

downcow and others would rather point fingers at ghosts of the past than face the uncomfortable reality that they are isolated from Britain and that Britain has no intention of changing or alleviating that. They also have zero leaders capable of leading them out of the mess they have created themselves

The big problem lies in England where the ordinary bloke is now questioning the amount of money they are pumping into the north for nothing in return. This would've been masked by the whole gripe with the EU funding up to the point of Brexit but now all eyes are looking north west across the Irish sea.

Fionn1952

FrancieBrady wrote: »

downcow and others would rather point fingers at ghosts of the past than face the uncomfortable reality that they are isolated from Britain and that Britain has no intention of changing or alleviating that. They also have zero leaders capable of leading them out of the mess they have created themselves

Went running from calling me out on misquoting Craig when I was actually correcting his own misquote (and misattribution) of the quote.....comes back with another rake of irrelevant and out of context Dev quotes, not realising that Dev is a pretty divisive character down here...

BonnieSituation

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Went running from calling me out on misquoting Craig when I was actually correcting his own misquote (and misattribution) of the quote.....comes back with another rake of irrelevant and out of context Dev quotes, not realising that Dev is a pretty divisive character down here...

The level of knowledge astounds me sometimes. From not knowing how to spell Taoiseach to knowing enough about Dev to misrepresent others' posts.

It fluctuates wildly from one level to the other.

I just don't know... * shrugs *

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

downcow and others would rather point fingers at ghosts of the past than face the uncomfortable reality that they are isolated from Britain and that Britain has no intention of changing or alleviating that. They also have zero leaders capable of leading them out of the mess they have created themselves

I laughed at the suggestion that we needed some truth commission in the South as a counterpoint to one that's drastically needed in the North. And they say they don't engage in whataboutery!!!

Sure, I'm all for it, as would most be, but I think that fact shocks some Unionists.

They really can't grasp how we view others from an equality pov. It's so alien to them.

[Deleted User]

downcow wrote: »

Thanks sunny.
Ni has the greatest equality legislation etc in the world. We are not living in the 60s now. I think nationalists get fair play. Both they and us complain a lot about the other getting special treatment.

I don’t think we’d be treated badly in Roi, but by the same account if Roi rejoined the UK I don’t think you’d be badly treated.

We are very well off (most of us) financially and (all of us) with free health care. But for me it’s about - this is my country and I am not about to wish it away.
I have zero connection to Roi. If there was a UI I would be supporting british teams, and have british interests still.

Yeah, I get what you’re saying, I feel the economic arguments are only going to be relevant for a minority. Protestants are going to want to stay with the UK regardless and Catholics will want a United Ireland. So when we do have a border poll it’ll largely be a sectarian headcount.
I’d agree that unionists won’t be ill treated in a future UI, don’t think southerners are invested in that religious division stuff, most think it’s mad.
To an extent I’d agree that Catholics are doing okay in NI now, but there are some issues. The big one I see is that Catholics were alienated from the police for so long that they still don’t want to join it, there’s no tradition of that, whereas most extended families in the south would have a Garda. Plus the Catholic areas in some places were very badly designed. Derry is a good example, the Bogside and Creggan areas were designed to fit too many people and are overly crowded.
These are legacy issues I know, but they’re still there. I’d be of the view that they need to have policies encouraging Catholic recruitment to the PSNI. Of course it won’t sit well with some Protestants, but the big picture needs to come first, if the police doesn’t reflect those being policed it’s a recipe for disaster.

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Yeah, I get what you’re saying, I feel the economic arguments are only going to be relevant for a minority. Protestants are going to want to stay with the UK regardless and Catholics will want a United Ireland. So when we do have a border poll it’ll largely be a sectarian headcount.

Absolute rubbish. Didn't read anymore after this.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

Eamon de Valera’s statement in 1932 welcoming the Papal Legate, "It is most fitting that the Irish Government should not only assist in every way the great and solemn function of the Eucharistic Congress here in Ireland, but also should take their due part and place in its proceedings", and his later remarks: "Since the coming of St Patrick 1500 years ago Ireland has been a Christian and a Catholic nation. She remains a Catholic nation."

Thats factual. Whats your issue with that statement.

De Valera’s basic Catholic Nationalism was highlighted at a Dublin election meeting in February 1932, when he said:”The majority of the people of Ireland are Catholic and we believe in Catholic principles. And as the majority are Catholics it is right and natural that the principles to be applied by us will be principles consistent with Catholicity.” In October 1933 his deputy premier, Sean T O’Kelly declared that “the Free State Government was inspired in its every administrative action by Catholic principles and doctrine”.

Also factual. The majority of people were RC. Of course the country is going to be culturally catholic. I'd be interested in knowing what your issue is with this.

De Valera’s basic Catholic nationalism was further highlighted by a radio broadcast on St Patrick’s Day 1935 when he said “since the coming of St Patrick, Ireland has been a Christian and a Catholic nation, she remains a Catholic nation.” This statement demonstrates, according to Conor Cruise O’Brien the peculiar nature of Irish Nationalism, as it is actually felt, not as it is rhetorically expressed. The nation is felt to be the Gaelic nation, Catholic in religion. Protestants are welcome to join this nation. If they do, they may or may not retain their religious profession, but they become as it were, Catholic by nationality. In 1937, de Valera was thus able to produce a new constitution, which was in essence a documentation of contemporary Roman Catholic social theory."

I'm not sure what point you or the Cruiser is trying to make here. Compare the situation to that in England. The established church in England is the Church of England with the Queen as its Head. England can be regarded as a protestant country. Thats factual. What is the problem with that if the majority of the people who live in England are protestant.

Taoiseach Éamon de Valera said in 1951:
"I am an Irishman second: I am a Catholic first and I accept without qualification in all respects the teaching of the hierarchy and the church to which I belong."

Factual. Whats the issue with saying that if that is what he believed. The essence of being a republic is to respect everyone's beliefs.

Of course there was no cold house for prods in Roi. Catch yourselves on!

How was ROI a cold house for protestants?Was there widespread discrimination against Protestants (bearing in mind that the banks, professional occupations, major manufacturing were all protestant owned and managed)?

Dev wrote into the Irish Constitution of 1937 equality and freedom to practice your beliefs for all.

https://twitter.com/JimAllister/status/1361978133210087428

Almost Jim. All chilled meats including sausages will be banned completely from GB from July

They'll have to eat Irish sausages. :eek:

Natterjack from Kerry

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The level of knowledge astounds me sometimes. From not knowing how to spell Taoiseach

Most people are arent the best spellers of foreign, let alone borderline dead, languages, especially when the spelling is alien to the languages you do know.

Natterjack from Kerry

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. Didn't read anymore after this.

It was nonsense alright. The middle ground is the decider in this matter, not the extremes, and those not blinkered by history are choosing the most sensible option, which is to stay in the UK.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Most people are arent the best spellers of foreign, let alone borderline dead, languages, especially when the spelling is alien to the languages you do know.

How is Irish a "foreign" language? And who are you to know who speaks it or not?

Natterjack from Kerry

maccored wrote: »

of course it was as we wouldnt have a peace process without it.

I dont think I have ever read something so illogical in my life !

It was necessary to have a terrorist campaign so that there would be a peace process !!! What about no terrorism in the first place ?

"Well we had to have the Great War, otherwise we wouldnt have had been able to have the ceasefire and agree the Treaty of Versailles, so of course the war was worth it".

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

I dont think I have ever read something so illogical in my life !

It was necessary to have a terrorist campaign so that there would be a peace process !!! What about no terrorism in the first place ?

"Well we had to have the Great War, otherwise we wouldnt have had been able to have the ceasefire and agree the Treaty of Versailles, so of course the war was worth it".

How about no oppression or gerrymandering of the Catholic and nationalist population in the first place?

That would have been a better starting point for avoiding aggravation.

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

I dont think I have ever read something so illogical in my life !

It was necessary to have a terrorist campaign so that there would be a peace process !!! What about no terrorism in the first place ?

Yes, the reaction to civil rights requests were absolutely criminal. Should never have happened after decades of oppression and terrorising people of one religion into submission.

Junkyard Tom

One of those many Unionists who have a peculiarly poor understanding of cause-and-effect.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Nobody has denied any of this downcow. We were unduly influenced by the RC church but you have been presented with facts and now you are off on a mission to ignore those facts.
What we didn't have and what you are running from is members of government actively encouraging sectarianism.

Please stop inventing 'hero's' for me, I have a practical and fact based opinion of Devalera and I am as anti RC church as any citizen of this island.

I will not LIE about the facts though.

So let’s just be clear.
Are you saying de Valera was not a member of the government or are you saying he was not actively encouraging sectarianism with the statements I outlined?

So Monday is D-Day in the HoC. Getting the popcorn in.

maccored wrote: »

of course it was as we wouldnt have a peace process without it. was it necessary? Only because Unionists thought they were gods and superior to their catholic neighbours. If unionism had been in any way peaceful, there would have been no conflict in the first place.

So it seems you are legitimatising loyalist violence going forward

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So Monday is D-Day in the HoC. Getting the popcorn in.

For what?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

downcow and others would rather point fingers at ghosts of the past than face the uncomfortable reality that they are isolated from Britain and that Britain has no intention of changing or alleviating that. They also have zero leaders capable of leading them out of the mess they have created themselves

I am not the one pointing to the past, I am responding to others dragging us back to Carson. I am very happy to ban any mention of the past on this thread. Onwards and upwards

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

So let’s just be clear.
Are you saying de Valera was not a member of the government or are you saying he was not actively encouraging sectarianism with the statements I outlined?

The victims of the Catholic Church were Catholics. The victims of the Protestant statelet were Catholics.

You're all over the place such is your zeal to create equivalence between the treatment of the minority in your rotten little orange ethnostate and the privileges Protestants in the south retained.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

For what?

Debate on the Protocol. In response to Unionist petition.

grayzer75 wrote: »

The big problem lies in England where the ordinary bloke is now questioning the amount of money they are pumping into the north for nothing in return. This would've been masked by the whole gripe with the EU funding up to the point of Brexit but now all eyes are looking north west across the Irish sea.

Have you got stats for that? The last poll I saw on the subject a few weeks ago (posted on here) more English people say they would be annoyed to see ni leave UK than would be pleased to see ni leave

Junkyard Tom

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

For what?

DUP gets speaking time in the House of Common to denounce the Irish Sea border they created.

Cause and effect shocks Unionists again.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Went running from calling me out on misquoting Craig when I was actually correcting his own misquote (and misattribution) of the quote.....comes back with another rake of irrelevant and out of context Dev quotes, not realising that Dev is a pretty divisive character down here...

Sorry Fionn. I meant to get back to you.
You were correct. I was wrong. I have listened to so much propaganda crap from republicans that I actually thought Carson (or someone) had said an Protestant state for a Protestant people’ but clearly that was republican crap.

Thanks I am a more educated person today and more able to challenge this crap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Debate on the Protocol. In response to Unionist petition.

There are no meaningful votes though? Or are there?

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The victims of the Catholic Church were Catholics. The victims of the Protestant statelet were Catholics.

You're all over the place such is your zeal to create equivalence between the treatment of the minority in your rotten little orange ethnostate and the privileges Protestants in the south retained.

He gets presented with several senior Unionist politicians being sectarian, now he 'doesn't want to talk about the past'.

All of those sectarian politicians honoured by the monarchy too.

Rotten state is an understatement.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Sorry Fionn. I meant to get back to you.
You were correct. I was wrong. I have listened to so much propaganda crap from republicans that I actually thought Carson (or someone) had said an Protestant state for a Protestant people’ but clearly that was republican crap.

Thanks I am a more educated person today and more able to challenge this crap

While I'm glad to see you acknowledge your mistake, trying to blame even your lack of knowledge of YOUR OWN history on Republicans.....that's pretty grim.