BloodyBill wrote: » The only two guys that complain about anti Irish abuse in Britain are from Derry. The footballers McLean and Duffy. Its all abit odd.
Junkyard Tom wrote: » So the IRA were British. Gerry Adams is British. Martin McGuinness was British.
lurleen lumpkin wrote: » Glad the penny finally dropped for you.
bobbysands81 wrote: » It’s precisely that attitude towards “Irishness” that will actually speed up a United Ireland.
Hamsterchops wrote: » As a matter of interest, who gains and who loses out in the event of a "United" Ireland? Who are the winners and who are the losers? I guess GB is the real winner, with not having to maintain NI as part of the UK anymore, but what of NI themselves, would they be winners or losers after leaving the UK? And what of us here in the South? Obviously we'd be in some kind of United Ireland heaven of for a short spell ... then the reality would set in, and I guess we'd have some king of massive hangover as it slowly dawn's on us that the reality may not be the same as the pipe dream
RobMc59 wrote: » It also depends on who has to pay for a UI which would be expensive I imagine.
Baggly wrote: » Mod downcow, you are done in this thread. Dont post here again.
Hamsterchops wrote: » Apart from being a Northern Ireland Unionist of the moderate variety, what has Downcow done to deserve being banned from this thread?
jh79 wrote: » How come Francie isn't posting these days?
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Francie who?
jh79 wrote: » Francie Brady, hasn't posted in any of the usual threads in a while.
downcow wrote: » Those born in the north were born british but I guess most took up their offer to declare as Irish. Still british though.
maccored wrote: » i bet you would have called people born in India british too back in the day. remember that place where the british decimated and stole the linen trade from the 1830s on? then again, 'british' is only a word. doesnt actually mean anything.
Baggly wrote: » Mod After discussion with the user via PM, downcow's threadban is lifted.
lurleen lumpkin wrote: » Back to circular arguments and IRA whataboutery every 5 minutes then. What does he get out of trolling this thread relentlessly? He took the time to beg to get back in just so he can furnish us with his on this day the IRA nuggets and advise us on how British we are.
downcow wrote: » I had said the DUP would not be forgiven easily for the Irish Sea border. Here is the first real damning evidence. Scary stuff for them but ni will be a better more secure place with them seriously diminishedhttps://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/leaked-internal-dup-minutes-show-fear-of-looming-electoral-collapse-and-dismay-at-partys-direction-3166885?fbclid=IwAR0z9-xQgOZngcsFUmYsEWtiSPM-tvTIfXfIMD8Y8qNKcNu1faETbRlM_Uo I am disappointed the uup are not really benefiting, but unfortunately they have also been tinged with some of the blame .
Fionn1952 wrote: » The issue is that the UUP offer nothing of note. There are essentially two responses to the DUP's absolute clusterf*ck; one can consider their support of Brexit to be too hardline and gravitate towards Alliance, or hark back to, 'NEVER, NEVER, NEVER' and gravitate towards Jim Allister and his TUV. It isn't so much that the UUP are tinged with blame that they are trying to be all things to all men and convincing no one, as has been their problem since the DUP started making gains on them; always chasing the hardliners they were losing to the DUP while trying not to alienate the middle class vote who hated them. The transfers to Alliance would strike me as more likely to be long term gains. The transfers to TUV might drift back to the DUP if and when all their bluster amounts to nothing.
downcow wrote: » The uup put country and peace before party 20 years ago and are still paying a heavy price.
Fionn1952 wrote: » While I won't take away from the work the UUP and SDLP did regarding the GFA, their identity right now is what is in question. With a patient strategy led by someone like Mike Nesbitt could well have been picking up those transfers breaking to Alliance by those who do strongly support the continued membership of the United Kingdom. Instead they've spent the majority of the last 20 years trying to run with the fox and hunt with the hounds; trying to appear moderate until the DUP make any gains at all and then pivoting to a comparable position to try hold onto those voters....managing to simultaneously alienate their actual moderate voters and not even manage to attract the transfers to DUP back. What do the UUP actually offer that wouldn't be better served by Alliance to the moderate or DUP/TUV to the hardline?
downcow wrote: » I agree with a fair bit of your post. And the uup are in an unenviable position squeezed between the parties you mention. There is though no party there that I could vote for currently. If you removed uup from the election, unfortunately the party I would vote for is TUV. I can’t abide some of what they stand for and their exclusiveness. And they have nearly as much arrogance as the alliance, DUP and SF. I can’t see me ever voting dup again and I certainly won’t be voting for the alliance party as I treasure diversity too much. It is a shame that NI21 imploded. I feel they were offering something new and fresh in ni - truly inclusive and diverse which doesn’t currently exist although uup are closest in my view Much as I detest the attempted neutrality and ‘all things to all people’ approach of alliance, I do recognise that their voters and MLAs are at least 75% unionist. That is healthy for the union and ironically I don’t think it would benificial to the union to see the Alliance unionists whittled away to the uup making the alliance party mainly nationalist. It’s good that the vast majority of the middle ground wants to maintain the union and we need to be careful not to destabilise that
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4b1a2e86cedae1628937f4503f2281da.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/40cd2c7cc45c017341a2e78709e5b61f.svg)