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

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

And if they did you'd complain anyway, likely parroting some nonsense about a foreign government trying to tell you what to do.
.

A contemptible response and very poor excuse.
They have no problem commenting to support nationalists when they don’t even run the place. I am suggesting they comment on what they might do in the future to show an even hand if they ever did run the place.

But we all know they won’t

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I don’t actually care who the Roi government supports in ni. I am challenging the notion that somehow they will be sympathetic to unionists in a UI. The evidence is that they support the nationalist community in ni 100% and don’t give a toss about the unionist community.

Here is a simple example of what they could do.
They could make a statement that Irish language signage in a UI would not go up in communities who resist it.
That would be groundbreaking for them to take the unionist side on just one controversial issue.
I know there is not a chance of it as I know there is not a chance of fair play for unionists in a UI

And if they did you'd complain anyway, likely parroting some nonsense about a foreign government trying to tell you what to do.

Probably not worth pointing out Jeffrey Donaldson's attendance (and the applause he received) at a Fine Gael national conference, or recent engagement from Leo Varadkar with the DUP despite him having to hold his nose any time he has to deal with SF.

Realistically it is all about fear though, fear that what was done at the foundation of the state would be repeated from the other side. Ireland is a much more modern, outward looking place than NI even now though, let alone in comparison with the NI of a hundred years ago. The corrupt, self serving mess that was the government of NI back then wouldn't be tolerated in any modern democracy now and there would be international outrage (and immense political pressure brought to bear) if your community was to be discriminated against in that manner.

downcow

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Im sorry but why would we support either community in an obviously conflicted area? WHat good does that do anything. We SHOULD have standards we don't abandon. We can't support violence or threats of violence nor bigotry. Human rights are human rights.

Ideally we should be nuetral ...perhaps the Irish govt has not managed that.

But the idea we should support either side in this when neither of them act morally to the other is troublesome.

Your community and the nationalist community have both done and supported questionable things. Both communities have a long long way to come in terms of ideology and human rights.
The idea that you see the other community as your enemy says it all really ...and yes the other community prob sees you as the enemy too ..which saddens me.

I don't want to support either of you but i want to see you support each other.

Because the TWO of you ...are the ONLY ones that can help you get out of this.

No one else. You build the peace and the relationship.

Only unionists and nationalists can save NI and thus each other by building a relationship. No one else.

I don’t actually care who the Roi government supports in ni. I am challenging the notion that somehow they will be sympathetic to unionists in a UI. The evidence is that they support the nationalist community in ni 100% and don’t give a toss about the unionist community.

Here is a simple example of what they could do.
They could make a statement that Irish language signage in a UI would not go up in communities who resist it.
That would be groundbreaking for them to take the unionist side on just one controversial issue.
I know there is not a chance of it as I know there is not a chance of fair play for unionists in a UI

Tokyo

littlevillage wrote: »

Urlsla va der Leyn.

Female in a mans job.

Mod: Try Harder. Don't post in the thread again.

ILoveYourVibes

littlevillage wrote: »

Urlsla va der Leyn.

Female in a mans job.

ugh just why???:rolleyes:

You can't just say she is bad at her job?

littlevillage

Urlsla va der Leyn.

Female in a mans job.

ILoveYourVibes

downcow wrote: »

A very simple way to evidence that (if it were true) would not be by cozying up to us, but rather supporting our community a little and not rowing in 100% behind nationalist community on every issue.

Im sorry but why would we support either community in an obviously conflicted area? WHat good does that do anything. We SHOULD have standards we don't abandon. We can't support violence or threats of violence nor bigotry. Human rights are human rights.

Ideally we should be nuetral ...perhaps the Irish govt has not managed that.

But the idea we should support either side in this when neither of them act morally to the other is troublesome.

Your community and the nationalist community have both done and supported questionable things. Both communities have a long long way to come in terms of ideology and human rights.
The idea that you see the other community as your enemy says it all really ...and yes the other community prob sees you as the enemy too ..which saddens me.

I don't want to support either of you but i want to see you support each other.

Because the TWO of you ...are the ONLY ones that can help you get out of this.

No one else. You build the peace and the relationship.

Only unionists and nationalists can save NI and thus each other by building a relationship. No one else.

downcow

James Brown wrote: »

He was willing to do a photo op, not discuss anything, so they declined the photo op.

If you get a chance catchup with Bbc ni news at 6.30 last night. It’s very very funny.
John Finucane MP is being interviewed where he complains twice on the short interview about boris photo op. Where did he ask the bbc to film the interview? Haha in front of a big sign advertising his own business. Lol you couldn’t dream up the hypocrisy

ILoveYourVibes

But it is important to show them there won’t be any anti unionist stuff in a post border poll Ireland.

..but there would be

I mean at least from a lot of people in what is now the north. I mean any upheaval will only make tensions worse between the two communities.

And of course there would be anti unionist sentiment in the south. There are arseholes everywhere.

Its only a fraction of the people in the north causing all the hassle ..but i mean LOOK at the hassle they can cause.

Most people in NI are just normal ..like us.

Imagine the whole island getting in on it.

A UI won't solve the problems between the 2 communities in the north. It would make a lot of unionists target dublin though.

downcow

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Nah, of course not, but it’s not comparable. If half of Ireland identified as British and we were on the island of Britain maybe it’d be comparable.
Btw we all know many unionists are going to be disappointed if a border poll goes against them. But it is important to show them there won’t be any anti unionist stuff in a post border poll Ireland. There are many voices in the unionist community who would have you believe southerners are anti Protestant.

A very simple way to evidence that (if it were true) would not be by cozying up to us, but rather supporting our community a little and not rowing in 100% behind nationalist community on every issue.

Actions speak louder than words!

Why would we think that suddenly when there is a UI you would take an interest in our rights, culture and identity when you act 100% against it currently?

[Deleted User]

downcow wrote: »

Tell me.
If british parties showed some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to nationalists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the UK.
Would you consider Roi reuniting with the UK?

Nah, of course not, but it’s not comparable. If half of Ireland identified as British and we were on the island of Britain maybe it’d be comparable.
Btw we all know many unionists are going to be disappointed if a border poll goes against them. But it is important to show them there won’t be any anti unionist stuff in a post border poll Ireland. There are many voices in the unionist community who would have you believe southerners are anti Protestant.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Now you are just making stuff up. Boris, Michelle, mary Lou and Arlene have all gone public to say sf were invited to meet boris - and you are saying there are mixed reports as to whether they were invited or not. I am not sure how you ever start believing anything other that just what you want to believe

As per RTE;

Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald has accused the British Prime Minister of trying to evade his responsibilities.

She and Stormont's Deputy First Minister Michelle O'Neill had sought a meeting with Boris Johnson during his visit to Northern Ireland today.

Ms McDonald said that the Prime Minister's decision to meet with the DUP and not Sinn Féin sent "a very clear signal as to what the priorities of Boris Johnson are

The BBC put a different slant on it with

Sinn Féin has refused to meet Prime Minister Boris Johnson on his visit to Northern Ireland.

The party described his trip on Friday as a publicity stunt.

Mr Johnson said he was "always happy to meet all sides" but had been told Deputy First Minister Michelle O'Neill of Sinn Féin was "otherwise engaged".

So as per my original post, yes there are mixed reports.

Of course, as usual you'll take Boris' word as gospel before meekly bending over again.

I'm also presuming you missed my reply to your other post regarding Ireland rejoining the UK rather than actively choosing to not respond to it; understandable given that for me on mobile at least, it got caught on a page transition, but I would highlight it to you again should you wish to respond.

James Brown

downcow wrote: »

Now you are just making stuff up. Boris, Michelle, mary Lou and Arlene have all gone public to say sf were invited to meet boris - and you are saying there are mixed reports as to whether they were invited or not. I am not sure how you ever start believing anything other that just what you want to believe

He was willing to do a photo op, not discuss anything, so they declined the photo op.

downcow

trashcan wrote: »

And I’m pointing out that you’re not comparing like with like. I don’t doubt by the way that Unionists won’t be convinced by the Irish Govt talking nicely to them, but there are more than Unionists involved. A fact which you consistently seem to want to ignore.

That’s a fair point. I understood you were suggesting that the Roi being nice would lead to a near consensus that a UIwould be a good idea

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

To be fair, he would say that wouldn't he? I've seen very mixed reports on it. Wouldn't trust Michelle O'Neill as far as I could throw her, but I'll be damned if I believe a word out of Boris' mouth considering how, 'honest' his track record is with regards to the North.

Now you are just making stuff up. Boris, Michelle, mary Lou and Arlene have all gone public to say sf were invited to meet boris - and you are saying there are mixed reports as to whether they were invited or not. I am not sure how you ever start believing anything other that just what you want to believe

trashcan

downcow wrote: »

I am pointing out that it is a silly argument that suddenly those who don’t want to unite will change their mind over tea and traybakes

And I’m pointing out that you’re not comparing like with like. I don’t doubt by the way that Unionists won’t be convinced by the Irish Govt talking nicely to them, but there are more than Unionists involved. A fact which you consistently seem to want to ignore.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Check your facts before you put your foot in it. He told bbc reporter when asked about it that he had asked to meet Michelle but she was busy. Michelle and her line manager have both came out to say that they refused to meet him.
So who was at fault? Your old victimhood is in overdrive tonight

To be fair, he would say that wouldn't he? I've seen very mixed reports on it. Wouldn't trust Michelle O'Neill as far as I could throw her, but I'll be damned if I believe a word out of Boris' mouth considering how, 'honest' his track record is with regards to the North.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I am pointing out that it is a silly argument that suddenly those who don’t want to unite will change their mind over tea and traybakes

Except we're talking about a transition from (conservatively) 43% wishing for Unification with Ireland, versus what I'd say very generously is a single figure percentage for Ireland rejoining the UK. One of those is actively being discussed with a significant middle ground known to be open to convincing one way or the other, with an actual legal agreement in place that allows for the transition, the other isn't.

While both are certainly possible (given enough time), and while I'd fully accept both as democratic decisions should the people wish for it, only one is in any way plausible to see in the lifetime of people living today.

That being said, I'm sure there are SOME folk out there who (for whatever simple minded reason) have watched Brexit and thought that rejoining the UK outside the EU was preferable to our current situation, or (slightly more logically) have watched the rather successful UK vaccination gamble seeming to pay off (despite a poor early performance during the pandemic) and thought that would be preferable. People are convinced all the time, Downcow. I honestly have even spoke with people who have discussed the merits of Ireland becoming part of the UK in recent times, but given the absolutely brutal history and sometimes painfully long memories the Irish have, I can't see it getting much of a head of steam.

downcow

trashcan wrote: »

Tell me, do you think there is a significant number of people in the ROI who want to “re-unite” with the UK ? If there were, maybe you could compare the two.

I am pointing out that it is a silly argument that suddenly those who don’t want to unite will change their mind over tea and traybakes

downcow

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Great Leadership by Boris today to only meet the Unionist Leader, says it all to all the nationalist community what he thinks of them.

Check your facts before you put your foot in it. He told bbc reporter when asked about it that he had asked to meet Michelle but she was busy. Michelle and her line manager have both came out to say that they refused to meet him.
So who was at fault? Your old victimhood is in overdrive tonight

briany

trashcan wrote: »

Tell me, do you think there is a significant number of people in the ROI who want to “re-unite” with the UK ? If there were, maybe you could compare the two.

When Ireland became a full part of the UK, it became an unwilling participant, coming off the back of one rebellion, with 3 more during the 19th century, plus nationalism growing at a steady clip in the later half of the 1800s. And it signed up at a time when it was really only the landed gentry who had a say in the way politics was run and stuff the commoner.

So, if the RoI held a referendum to rejoin the UK and it passed, you could but say, 'OK', because we have much better enfranchisement than we did the first time around. Similarly, if NI held a referendum to unify with the Republic, people could but say fair enough.

trashcan

downcow wrote: »

Tell me.
If british parties showed some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to nationalists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the UK.
Would you consider Roi reuniting with the UK?

Tell me, do you think there is a significant number of people in the ROI who want to “re-unite” with the UK ? If there were, maybe you could compare the two.

UDAWINNER

downcow wrote: »

Tell me.
If british parties showed some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to nationalists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the UK.
Would you consider Roi reuniting with the UK?

Great Leadership by Boris today to only meet the Unionist Leader, says it all to all the nationalist community what he thinks of them.

UDAWINNER

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Now is not the time I think, but the time is close. Maybe a 60% chance of reunification within ten years, would say almost no chance of partition still being in place by 2041.
SF are not the people to lead the movement towards reunification, they are toxic to Protestants, with good reason. Need the Southern parties to show some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to unionists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the Republic.
If the unionist leaders keep doing what they’re doing reunification will come sooner rather than later, but many in the Protestant community won’t be ready for it.

You should tell Leo that, he was a making a big deal out of religion only the other day and this is a man who doesn't say things to score political points:)

downcow

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Now is not the time I think, but the time is close. Maybe a 60% chance of reunification within ten years, would say almost no chance of partition still being in place by 2041.
SF are not the people to lead the movement towards reunification, they are toxic to Protestants, with good reason. Need the Southern parties to show some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to unionists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the Republic.
If the unionist leaders keep doing what they’re doing reunification will come sooner rather than later, but many in the Protestant community won’t be ready for it.

Tell me.
If british parties showed some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to nationalists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the UK.
Would you consider Roi reuniting with the UK?

[Deleted User]

maestroamado wrote: »

I wonder if there was a poll done today what %%% of people would want a United Ireland?
I do not see SF jumping up and down and now is the time... but do we want it?

Now is not the time I think, but the time is close. Maybe a 60% chance of reunification within ten years, would say almost no chance of partition still being in place by 2041.
SF are not the people to lead the movement towards reunification, they are toxic to Protestants, with good reason. Need the Southern parties to show some leadership in the issue, make themselves known to unionists and show them that religion is not a factor in daily life in the Republic.
If the unionist leaders keep doing what they’re doing reunification will come sooner rather than later, but many in the Protestant community won’t be ready for it.

[Deleted User]

The unionist fretting over the NI protocol is way off. There has to be a border post Brexit, the question is where.
Suppose they got their way, no barriers at all East-West but one between North and South instead. That’d be a great boost for those seeking to end partition. It’d give republicans of every hue something to rail against and probably galvanise the Irish diaspora. There may be some inconvenience with the NI protocol but in the long run it is better for them.

maestroamado

I wonder if there was a poll done today what %%% of people would want a United Ireland?
I do not see SF jumping up and down and now is the time... but do we want it?

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

At this stage I'd say DC watches more RTE News than any one on this thread.

Yeah I’d agree. I have probably watched it 10 times in my life and 3 of those have been in the last week.
I’ll see if I can get some therapy to deal with my addiction

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I don’t expect RTÉ to cover stuff of interest to unionists. I am just saying some on here seem to think they do.
I watched this evenings news on RTÉ and timed it. They spent over 5 times as long talking about the after match celebrations than they did talking about the win. This was not the case on ni news
I know it is sad that I timed it but I don’t know how else to get you to take your head out of the sand.

It is pretty sad alright. So we're back to my initial comment; what do you expect? 'We interrupt this programme to bring you breaking news' broadcast at the final whistle of the Celtic game? An hour long special broadcast instead of the news?

What is your actual suggestion here? That RTE covering the non compliant celebrations is for sectarian reasons (then you'd want to have a word with pretty much every major news outlet, who also covered it)? That you won't support Unification because Irish people aren't interested enough in the SPL?

The thing is, television broadcasts are about numbers. A few hundred thousand extra Rangers fans in the event of Unification and I'm confident that the amount of coverage Rangers would get would increase.

News reflects the needs and interests of its viewers, if more people cared about Rangers, there would be increased coverage. At present, given the global pandemic, more people are concerned about large groups of people having non regulation compliant celebrations than they are a soccer result.

I suggest that you take a look at the amount of coverage say Manchester United get in NI papers versus Rangers before you continue on with this genuinely insane ramble.

Out of interest, care to share which news broadcast you watched, and your numbers on the amount of time spend on coverage of their victory versus coverage of the non compliant celebrations?