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

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

The Republic put in a huge effort to curtail the IRA something is curiously misrepresented by some unionist politicians. The Gardai had a genuine revulsion for what they were doing and a determination to thwart them. Anyone who knows any Gardai knows this, it still endures. The IRA killed a number of Garda members.
Basically the IRA were pariahs in the South, hated by the vast majority. It is sometimes forgotten now but they were despised. And rightly so.

Nonsense. Complete wishful thinking.
Let’s say the Uvf were murdering Catholics at will on the southern side of the border and escaping back over to the safety of the ‘north’. If the Roi has thousands of army all along the border to try and stop their people being murdered but the british government has none on their side and were turning a blind eye to it.
Let’s say the Uvf could murder the Irish army, who were trying to defend the border, by setting off remote bombs and then shooting those coming to help from the safety of the ‘north’.
Let’s say the british put more energy into stopping the Irish army straying over the border than Uvf men going the he other way to murder catholic land owners.
Let’s say lots of Uvf men who lived in the south, but had committed multiple murders of southern Catholics, went and lived openly in the ‘north’
I could go on and on.

When you go to bed at night just thank god that your community was not under murderous attack for 30 years while your neighbouring country gave the killers cover.

[Deleted User]

On the constitutional issue of course the Irish State wants to end partition. But on any practical issues I can’t see how it has done anything negative to unionists. Southern politics largely seeks to ignore the north and when it can’t it just wants to calm nationalism. The current government despises SF and is against a border poll in the next five years.

Hamsterchops

I can only presume that if the NI protocol stays in its current format then trade between GB and NI will permanently dry up in favour of trade between North & the EU via the South.

As things stand with the NI Protocol East West trade between NI & GB s certainly being surpresed & slowly strangled.

That's the impression I get anyway.

Nqp15hhu

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.

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.

I don't know if I agree. Throughout the negotiations and beyond, Unionist (NOT DUP) pleas, and indeed pleas from the wider NI community about the negative impacts of the NI Protocol have been ignored. Not once have the EU, Ireland or American Congress listened to or acknowledged these plea's.

They are all trying to intensify the trade barriers and harm the economic and social well being of the people here.

As above I wouldn't be surprised if they had the goal of harming the economy in NI to sway people towards a United Ireland. I don't want to be part of a country where such hatred is in place.

Nqp15hhu

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

They don't seem to actually support either community behind closed doors. A close examination of the reaction to the protocol would see that they view the NI situation as a negotiation between the EU, UK and Ireland rather than an actual consultation with the people here.

They have used American Congressmen to manipulate the process here in their favour. Not once have they worked to remedy the impacts of this protocol, infact they have actually tried to intensify its implementation; despite many pleas from all quarters to limit its influence.

And when you see posts such as that, that confirms my belief that they're using NI. So, they're not friends of anyone in Northern Ireland in my opinion.

beerguts wrote: »

I would have described myself as very lukewarm to reunification until recently. Some of the shinners on here would probably describe me as a blueshirt and that would be apt. However the recent English manoeuvres and the ulster loyalists provocations have made me reassess my views. I now wholeheartedly want the destruction of the northern Irish state economically as I believe this will lead to the reunification the quickest and protect our place in Europe. I would still class myself as a right of centre voter and I cannot stand the Northern irish politics but we will have to put an end to that statelet.
Not very popular opinion but if northern Ireland does well out of this protocol and as a result stays within the UK as there will be no incentive to leave the Brits will have us over a barrel. They could be continually messing with our sovereignty just to distract from whatever domestic issue they want to hide.

Please somebody explain to me why I would aspire to join a country with people such as the above who actively want Northern Ireland to fail economically and our people to suffer? This is such a hateful and unempathetic post, there is a long way to go clearly.

Nqp15hhu

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Partisan how?? Irish government fought the IRA for decades, worked very hard on the Belfast Agreement, have really done an awful lot to make NI function. I know there is always a lot of suspicion towards the South among unionism, but for decades the Irish government has been very helpful to unionism.

That's the least they could do. It doesn't mean though that they supported or aided Unionists. The Irish government has never been vocally impartial towards Northern Ireland, infact recently they have upped their rhetoric towards a United Ireland.

But on the same token expect the British government to be impartial.

UDAWINNER

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

The Republic put in a huge effort to curtail the IRA something is curiously misrepresented by some unionist politicians. The Gardai had a genuine revulsion for what they were doing and a determination to thwart them. Anyone who knows any Gardai knows this, it still endures. The IRA killed a number of Garda members.
Basically the IRA were pariahs in the South, hated by the vast majority. It is sometimes forgotten now but they were despised. And rightly so.

Yet you will have posters on here who seem to think they colluded with them in the same way that that the British did with loyalist scum, baffles me

[Deleted User]

Ffff221 wrote: »

It didn't really look like that to unionists since Northern Ireland was disputed territory claimed by both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom up until the late 80s.

Claiming they "fought the IRA" is a bit of an exaggeration the Gardai were able to "fight the IRA" unarmed when a few miles up the road was the most heavily militarized zone on the planet with 25,000 British soldiers (more soldiers than were in the whole of Ireland during the war of independence) plus armed police with some places like South Armagh being under 24 hour surveillance, you could be an average Joe and there's still a fair chance you could be under 24 hour surveillance.

The Republic put in a huge effort to curtail the IRA something is curiously misrepresented by some unionist politicians. The Gardai had a genuine revulsion for what they were doing and a determination to thwart them. Anyone who knows any Gardai knows this, it still endures. The IRA killed a number of Garda members.
Basically the IRA were pariahs in the South, hated by the vast majority. It is sometimes forgotten now but they were despised. And rightly so.

downcow

Apologies this is 5 x 10sec links. I don’t see it on YouTube.
Best watch them in order I’d be keen to hear if you accept the facts on them?

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMekoyQFy/
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMekoMNaK/
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMekoygbJ/
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMekoUhnb/
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMekoLWxu/

Ffff221

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Partisan how?? Irish government fought the IRA for decades, worked very hard on the Belfast Agreement, have really done an awful lot to make NI function. I know there is always a lot of suspicion towards the South among unionism, but for decades the Irish government has been very helpful to unionism.

It didn't really look like that to unionists since Northern Ireland was disputed territory claimed by both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom up until the late 80s.

Claiming they "fought the IRA" is a bit of an exaggeration the Gardai were able to "fight the IRA" unarmed when a few miles up the road was the most heavily militarized zone on the planet with 25,000 British soldiers (more soldiers than were in the whole of Ireland during the war of independence) plus armed police with some places like South Armagh being under 24 hour surveillance, you could be an average Joe and there's still a fair chance you could be under 24 hour surveillance.

downcow

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Here is a list of where they are not.or were not.onntje same page.

1) Border poll
2) unification preparation
3) The EU (SF are very eurosceptic)
4) Resumption of power sharing (before it was resumed).

Oh yeah,. Also, BORDER POLL, and number 1 above, and let's not forget the old border poll.

Did I mention Border Poll ?

I have no idea what this all means so I can’t really respond

[Deleted User]

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

It's hard to make sense of this blather, unless of course you've just arrived back in 2021 from the future. Next time you're in the future will you get the lotto numbers for me? Good man.

What's the point of ignoring the two polls that came since that one?

The last two had remaining in the UK well ahead.

wexfordman2

downcow wrote: »

I can’t think of a single issue that they are not on the same page as ni nationalists. And that’s fine because they clearly see them as their people and want to support them.

Here is a list of where they are not.or were not.onntje same page.

1) Border poll
2) unification preparation
3) The EU (SF are very eurosceptic)
4) Resumption of power sharing (before it was resumed).

Oh yeah,. Also, BORDER POLL, and number 1 above, and let's not forget the old border poll.

Did I mention Border Poll ?

Junkyard Tom

jh79 wrote: »

Looks likes the lesson didn't work as the polls since then show a good majority in favour of remaining in the UK.

It's hard to make sense of this blather, unless of course you've just arrived back in 2021 from the future. Next time you're in the future will you get the lotto numbers for me? Good man.

[Deleted User]

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

All those 18-to-60 year olds who support a UI at considerably greater numbers than those who don't are getting a good lesson in why they need to bring this poisonous little unionist experiment to a permanent end.

Looks likes the lesson didn't work as the polls since then show a good majority in favour of remaining in the UK.

Junkyard Tom

All those 18-to-60 year olds who support a UI at considerably greater numbers than those who don't are getting a good lesson in why they need to bring this poisonous little unionist experiment to a permanent end.

downcow

UDAWINNER wrote: »

[/B]
There's one thing for sure that the Irish Govt in the event of an United Ireland won't collude with any group to burn out Loyalists from their home, murder their solicitors and plant bombs in the UK. Not evryone will treat the minoririty the way that the British Army and loyalists did.

This is exactly the biggest problem for unionists. Nationalist are not even at square one in recognising the partisan approach of the Irish government over the last 100 years - which continues today.
Nationalists still sanitise what the ira done with the tacit support of nationalists and Roi government and often in ‘collusion’ with members of British forces (I know you like to call them agents when they are republican)

Here is a blast from the past someone whatsapped me yesterday

https://m.youtube.com/watch?fbclid=IwAR2nTGDjUtEYQREfwfBQqlaWr9EHWqqChANeHwsInHGXVV4xLwB9eN7aOZ8&v=YSoReCRTzo4&feature=youtu.be

UDAWINNER

downcow wrote: »

There needs to be a bit of growing up in gear. Continually hating back to the partition of the state to allow Roi to separate from the UK family.
100 years ago. Name any single country and I will show you disgusting, systematic discrimination and abuse against minorities.
You seem to think that Irish Catholics in ni had some Devine right to be more special than black people in USA, Asians in England, Unionists and travellers in Roi etc etc etc All discrimination is wrong.

Time for you guys to move into this century

There's one thing for sure that the Irish Govt in the event of an United Ireland won't collude with any group to burn out Loyalists from their home, murder their solicitors and plant bombs in the UK. Not evryone will treat the minoririty the way that the British Army and loyalists did.

downcow

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Partisan how?? Irish government fought the IRA for decades, worked very hard on the Belfast Agreement, have really done an awful lot to make NI function. I know there is always a lot of suspicion towards the South among unionism, but for decades the Irish government has been very helpful to unionism.

I can’t think of a single issue that they are not on the same page as ni nationalists. And that’s fine because they clearly see them as their people and want to support them.

Dyr

jm08 wrote: »

I don't think that is the reason she was appointed Commission President. If Manfred Weber (a man) had any ministerial experience, he would have been Commission President.

Take a look at the EU commisions policy on gender parity, they make being female a reason to promote. Ursulas only ministerial experience was a spectacular failure and now she's running the Commision and failing. Perfectly reasonable to point out that her gender is a large factor in her ascent to high position

[Deleted User]

downcow wrote: »

A lot of misquoting going on. I didn’t say they acted against the Protestant community. I said they are unashamedly partisan and there is no reason to expect that to change in a UI

Partisan how?? Irish government fought the IRA for decades, worked very hard on the Belfast Agreement, have really done an awful lot to make NI function. I know there is always a lot of suspicion towards the South among unionism, but for decades the Irish government has been very helpful to unionism.

downcow

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Really don’t act against the Protestant community in the north, can’t think of an Irish government that had much to do with it to be honest. But I would agree that should change and the centrist parties here do need to engage as much as possible with unionism from now on.

A lot of misquoting going on. I didn’t say they acted against the Protestant community. I said they are unashamedly partisan and there is no reason to expect that to change in a UI

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Both points are irrelevant
Boris is not trying to woo Irish nationalists to join the UK
As for 100 years. I am pointing out you guys are barking back 100 years and suggesting ni was some how different because there was discrimination. I am pointing out that there was discrimination in every state

And there's the problem with much of Unionism laid bare. There is absolutely just as much responsibility from the British side to convince those from a Nationalist background to remain part of the UK as there is for those on the Irish side to convince in favour of Unification. The complete and utter inability to see this and to do anything about it is precisely what continues to keep keep constitutional question relevant.

I pointed out that your fear of history being repeated are unfounded, I didn't make any comment on the historical context of that discrimination. It is however entirely unsurprising that you don't think it was a problem because discrimination existed elsewhere. I don't see too many normal, rational Americans trying to say that slavery and then Jim Crow laws weren't really a big deal because there was discrimination in other countries, most acknowledge that it was wrong, has led to problems America still faces today, and don't try and ham fistedly justify it.

jm08

Bambi wrote: »

If the EU did not have a policy of using gender as a major factor in appointing commisioners you would have a point, but they are and you don't.

I don't think that is the reason she was appointed Commission President. If Manfred Weber (a man) had any ministerial experience, he would have been Commission President.

[Deleted User]

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.

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?

Really don’t act against the Protestant community in the north, can’t think of an Irish government that had much to do with it to be honest. But I would agree that should change and the centrist parties here do need to engage as much as possible with unionism from now on.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

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

Or alternatively, the BBC interviewed him outside his office (which is heavily of Graffitid - hardly a PR opportunity for any upwardly mobile law company). By the way, that wasn't an ad, it was the company nameplate.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I'm sure you can furnish us with a long list of times when Boris Johnson has commented in support of Nationalists? Perhaps taking their side on the Irish Language Act (the same sort of legislation that hasn't been at all problematic in Scotland and Wales, and which the British government agreed to as part of the GFA) like you expect the Irish government to take the Unionist side on for some bizarre reason?

An interesting response to me stating that the events of a hundred years ago couldn't happen again with the shoe on the other foot as the world has changed. I don't know how pointing out that the world has changed counters that point in any way.

Both points are irrelevant
Boris is not trying to woo Irish nationalists to join the UK
As for 100 years. I am pointing out you guys are barking back 100 years and suggesting ni was some how different because there was discrimination. I am pointing out that there was discrimination in every state

Dyr

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

ugh just why???:rolleyes:

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

If the EU did not have a policy of using gender as a major factor in appointing commisioners you would have a point, but they are and you don't.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

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

I'm sure you can furnish us with a long list of times when Boris Johnson has commented in support of Nationalists? Perhaps taking their side on the Irish Language Act (the same sort of legislation that hasn't been at all problematic in Scotland and Wales, and which the British government agreed to as part of the GFA) like you expect the Irish government to take the Unionist side on for some bizarre reason?

downcow wrote: »

There needs to be a bit of growing up in gear. Continually hating back to the partition of the state to allow Roi to separate from the UK family.
100 years ago. Name any single country and I will show you disgusting, systematic discrimination and abuse against minorities.
You seem to think that Irish Catholics in ni had some Devine right to be more special than black people in USA, Asians in England, Unionists and travellers in Roi etc etc etc All discrimination is wrong.

Time for you guys to move into this century

An interesting response to me stating that the events of a hundred years ago couldn't happen again with the shoe on the other foot as the world has changed. I don't know how pointing out that the world has changed counters that point in any way.

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.

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.

There needs to be a bit of growing up in gear. Continually hating back to the partition of the state to allow Roi to separate from the UK family.
100 years ago. Name any single country and I will show you disgusting, systematic discrimination and abuse against minorities.
You seem to think that Irish Catholics in ni had some Devine right to be more special than black people in USA, Asians in England, Unionists and travellers in Roi etc etc etc All discrimination is wrong.

Time for you guys to move into this century