Think I will prefer to rely on the verified sources rather than any anonymous internet poster.
Even some of those that you allege to have been gone were just high walls replaced by high fences. Not removed at all.
I think SF would get a bump in support but things would quickly settle back to concerns about housing and health. We would see parties come and go as priorities change. I would expect the like of FG to sidle up to the DUP and maybe the SD's with the SDLP etc.
The SDLP alliance with FF seems to be coming asunder already. I think they might disappear altogether in a UI.
"Continued SF dominance"?????
Pray tell me, when did this fabled SF dominance begin?
Dominance of the all island vote? Largest party on the island by vote?
What are you contesting now?
Have never spent a day in proper government?
After all, you are fond of telling us that the SF government in Stormont doesn't mean anything (I suppose that will change if she gets First Minister).
By the way, will you ever answer the question as to whether you consider the men of 1916 equivalent to the RIRA and CIRA. You have run away from that question about six times now.
More misrepresentation = tiresome.
You are creating strawmen to argue against.
the sources are saying what i am saying, some walls were built, mainly extensions that were planned earlier to existing walls with a couple of other ones that were in planning.
yes replacement of walls with fences mean that the walls have ultimately been removed as the walls are no longer there.
Fences divide communities as much as walls.
1% of the city of Belfast where the vast majority are.
Communities across the north largely live apart because of the division a partition designed to cater for the majority caused and because the Unionist 'never have a Taig about the place' controlled statelet designed it thus.
Let's end partition in the North first then. Then we can end partition between North and South. Start with the small steps to show that the two communities can live in harmony.
which is why a UI is needed, to remove those fences and thus devision.
partition created the walls and fences, the partition you support and want to continue.
Last night you had calls (un-condemned by any Unionist party) to raise an army like Carson did at a Unionist meeting.
Good luck in your crusade but you will be defeated trying to cure the damage partition did by continuing partition.
Thats very naive. Partition caused the problems that required divisions. Why would leaving it fester as is solve anything? Partition failed. It was a selfish experiment that simply isn’t practical. A UI will help solve many of the issues caused be Partition.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Partition may have been wrong, but it happened 100 years ago, and doing a wrong to the people of Northern Ireland by ending it now won't correct that earlier wrong. The real solution is for the people of Northern Ireland to first learn to live with one another, without peace walls, without sectarian education, without the two sectarian political parties DUP and SF, and then see where they want the future to go.
Partition is as real today as it was 100 years ago and has never succeeded for the people. See the health security issues raised by the pandemic and the re-rise of Unionist suprematism with Brexit and the Protocol.
Interesting take on the border poll issue.
If analysis is correct, can't see a border poll for a very very long time.
Seems to be an expected opinion peddled by a biased opinion writer. Might as well start quoting An Phoblacht for as fair minded interesting articles.
Here's an interesting take..
He's right in a sense. The British can continue to ignore and subjugate Irish aspirations until kingdom come, if they want to.
As I will repeat, partition was inevitable.
But I guess one could have always invaded the North, a sovereign NATO country and passed it off as "peacekeeping"
ROFL!
That one has not aged well at all at all.
An interesting take from Siobhan Fenton who is a SF advisor... and of course she takes the most positive line possible when it comes to a UI.....
Wont be fooling ol' Marko Brucie!
Why did the PIRA sign a peace deal if the British can continue to subjugate Irish aspirations, as per their soft veto in calling a border poll.
Sounds like they surrendered if you ask me.
Awkward.
This may come as a surprise Mark, if you sign a 'deal' you trust that your co-signee will be honest and faithful to that deal.
The 'deal' at issue here is the Belfast Agreement/GFA which was signed NOT by PIRA but by the British and Irish Governments.
You would have very little to do, to convince me that the power swap would roll over like a well fed lapdog but thankfully because the opposition now has a strong mandate across the island they won't be allowed to do that.
Looks like you fooled yourself. The point was we can all find opinion pieces to suit our view.
You need to understand why the British sat down with an illegal terrorist organisation responsible for killing many of their number and signed a peace deal giving them credibility and a say on the future of NI. That's 'awkward'.
If you think the future of NI is all about people like yourself disrespecting a hard won peace because SF might take seats off you, it's not. It's bigger than petty minded bots and any one party. It's about people wanting to live and move on from it.
As the British government sat down with Sinn Fein, but not the PIRA, are you therefore accepting that they are one and the same thing.
And Ukraine is not even a member of NATO, imagine what would have happened if we had been as stupid as Francie wanted us to be, and sent our troops over the border in 1969/70. A UN Protectorate with the infrastructure and living standards of Lebanon would have been an optimistic outcome.
I'm smiling here at the amount of mis-representation you have to resort to these days.
So the PIRA had no involement in the GFA? SF their political wing didn't sign it?
In your quest to be obtuse you are getting more ridiculous by the day.
