BonnieSituation wrote: » Blame Mícheal Martin all you want. The "Shared Island" Unit is just another sop to Unionist and their frail sensibilities. Probing ideas are all well and good, but with the existence of an already fraught agreement, why would you try to open that wound again? It doesn't make a lick of sense. Why not probe repartition and let Antrim and Down off on their own and let Fermanagh, Tyrone, Derry and Armagh rejoin with us and be all happy together? Let's probe that idea.
ittakestwo wrote: » When the UK is finally breaking up there will be a call for NI independence by some unionists. Ones like you who have deluded yourself that you aren't Irish even tho you are born and bread in Ireland will never want to see the irish nation back in one jurisdiction as the tole of growing up in a apartheid has long term effects. But for other irish unionists and most nationalist they will go with a UI and this will greatly out number people calling for an independent NI.
View wrote: » Given that the two nationalist parties have a combined vote share of circa 37% in NI, the issue of a UI is effectively dead in the water. Like it or not, the border on this island is actually one of the older borders in Europe (as most date from post WWII or the 90s), and it is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Ah yes, the oldest border trope. Early enough in the week for that one.
Bambi wrote: » Safe as houses. That's why the poor oul Loyalists are terrified that the next First Minister of the tin pot assembly is going to be a Taig.
mehico wrote: » Yes, there are parallel conversations taking place around both Irish Unity and a shared island. Nobody suggesting a shared island necessarily means unity, though there is inevitably some common ground.
downcow wrote: » In my view we currently have a shared island
BonnieSituation wrote: » It's also your current view that the people of Ballymurphy and Derry were asking for it.
Whatcar212 wrote: » Out of curiosity, a question for the partitionists on here: What is your reason for not wanting a United Ireland? Is it all about the money in your pocket, or is there more to it?
For Beattie, part of this offering is its multiplicity of identities. He has “always viewed myself as Irish . . . clearly I’m British as well but my whole life I’ve identified as Irish.” He loves the “uniqueness” of being Irish and from Northern Ireland, but still belonging to the United Kingdom, with “Ireland as a country that I want to be our best friend.” “I say to people, there’s so much that represents me. Gaelic games, the Irish language, shamrock, Guinness, God Save the Queen, the Sash, Ulster rugby, Irish rugby – all of these things represent me. And the point is, how do we show respect not just to each of those aspects, but respect in how we promote our different identities?” This is only one of the challenges ahead for Beattie. It has been a long time since the UUP stood, apparently unassailable, as the party of unionism. In the last Assembly elections in 2017, it won just 12.9 per cent of the vote and Beattie – the party’s third leader in four years – will be under pressure to demonstrate that he can reverse its decline in the elections due next year.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Irish Unionism reverting to type after decades of the fearful hate filled belligerence of DUPism. There is nothing to fear in what this man says. This is who FG should be allying with, not the toxic anti-Irishness of the DUP. He can, if a majority decide on a UI, be accommodated in a new Ireland. His culture is a part of mine. Encouraging to see this at this time.
blanch152 wrote: » Surely Sinn Fein should take the first step, and ally themselves with him? After all, they run candidates in the same jurisdiction? FG will have no problem listening to him, after all they have invited UUP reps to previous party conferences.
jh79 wrote: » For me it's all about the money. I think making 6 million worse off
View wrote: » You are asking the wrong questions. It is up to people who want to change the status quo to persuade a majority of those in NI - ie including a significant chunk of those who currently identify themselves as unionist (or neither) - to want a united Ireland.
Whatcar212 wrote: » Can you define worse off? (I doubt anyone would actually see a change in quality of life) Is there a financial limit to your stance or is it just any personal cost to you at all is not worth it? As in would 100 per year in extra tax be too much? What is your limit?
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » How about just waiting until NI is economically self-sufficient that it isn't a drain on our resources. It's funny how SF complains about a lack of investment in housing and health when they'd prefer to throw money at integrating NI with no real benefits other than a fuzzy nationalistic feeling. No one has explained what the hurry is to have unification. It should do better economically with its dual EU/UK market status; demographics point in the right direction, so why not simply wait until the conditions are right. But I think the reason for the rush now is that the soft nationalist in the north will start to have it too good and won't want to lose those benefits. As I've said before, once people in the North, just as much as the South see how their voting choice will hit them in the pocket, even some northern SF voters will baulk at the choice.
Whatcar212 wrote: » No I am asking a question I want an answer to. I don't care for your side rant on who should convince who, that's your own agenda. I want to know the reasoning of the people on here who have posted re the cost. Is it solely the cost or is there more to it. Be awful to ignore the wishes of a majority of northern Ireland citizens all because you're worried if you can afford that extra pint on a Friday night. (assuming a majority in the north vote for reunification).
Shebean wrote: » I can't see N.I. ever being self sufficient. They are an after thought answerable to Westminister. There will never be a time were the north is doing so well, people interested in such things, will want to unite. And if doing so well, why would their counterparts in the north concerned about such things want to rock the boat?N.I. will flourish under a united Ireland, as will Ireland. The rush is every day that passes is more shame on us leaving our fellow Irish people/families is such a situation.
blanch152 wrote: » United Ireland ?????? Profit Is that how it works? I really wish the United Irelanders would stop taking the rest of us for fools.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Aren't you the poster trumpeting how the power swap has made us one of the top places in the world in which to live? Why couldn't NI be the same as Munster or Leinster or Connacht?
blanch152 wrote: » It would drag us down, Francie, that's why. Stop taking people for fools all the time. Address the realities of the cost of a united Ireland up front, and stop hiding behind platitudes about investment in unicorns.
bobbysands81 wrote: » What is the cost of this UI? I hear this all the time but it’s never backed up with figures. Any chance you could back your assertion up with some specific figures instead of generalising?
FrancieBrady wrote: » 'Dragging us down' is every bit as much a platitude. I'm confident a transition period arranged between partners who will be very committed to making it work (for their own reasons) will be arranged. Stop taking people for fools blanch ahead of any plan. The only thing you have in your arsenal is negativity and it ill wear thin quick enough.