Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How can we integrate Unionism into a possible United Ireland?

Options
18687899192127

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    I think many people on this thread should familiarise and acquaint themselves with the Ireland Act 1949 and the and the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956.

    Would save the tortuous circular arguments.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,648 ✭✭✭ittakestwo



    The demonym or adjective for ''Ireland'' is ''Irish''....you and other sectarian people cant get around this.


    It is not British Greek or Polish tho people who identify as those nations live in Ireland and that is fine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭Jump_In_Jack


    Just looked up those two acts, what point were you making by referencing them?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,944 ✭✭✭trashcan


    What nonsense is this ? The GFA says you cant refer to people from this Island as Irish ? Really ? So I can’t refer to myself as Irish because of the GFA ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Ok, let's rephrase. The GFA means that you can't refer anymore generically or exclusively that people from this island are Irish. There are now a cohort of people from this island who are British. Who is in which category is a matter for the individual.

    Exclusive nationalist has never been able to get its head around this facet of the GFA, and the implications for any future relationships on this island. In fact, unionists, in their typical short-sightedness don't realise the significance of this concession either. Those in the middle - FF, FG, Alliance, SDLP, Greens, - they all understand this.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I have always thought Fine Gael was the natural home of the partitionist and that the partitionist mentality was fairly rare and dwindling here.

    I am convinced of it now as I see a prediction I made come true. FG getting out front and centre because they know what way the wind is blowing and there isn't a hope in hell they will advocate against a UI. The partitionist vote no longer matters to them they've just thrown them under a bus. Sweet!




  • Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It isn't something that's some old desire anymore; it's the solution to the relentless problems of Brexit. It makes sense for it to be supported in practical terms.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FG have always advocated for a united Ireland. Despite your derisory labelling, there are very few true partitionists. There are those who believe a united Ireland should have cross-community support for example, and you label those as partitionists, when they are not. Nothing in anything being said by FG would upset any of them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The lie perpetuated by partitionists that there is 'cross community' support possible before a UI (principally as a delaying tactic) has been scotched. There will never be cross community support for any new constitutional arrangement. Partition has failed for the same reason, there is no cross community support for it and there never was. Now it is the turn of those who believe that a UI can eventually command support (even if it is begrudged) by integrating those who are prepared to set aside their Unionism for a better place, socially and politically, to live.

    FG, the arch sniffers of the wind, know the time is right to start supporting a UI.

    Stage one, begin calling for a Border Poll.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Missed the point by an ocean.

    What I was clearly saying, and you ignored, is that anything said by Varadkar or Redmond on the subject recently doesn't mean a move away from anyone who advocates cross-community support. In fact, by wading into the debate, FG may be wanting to put the issue of cross-community support on the table.

    What FG are actually doing, is taking a leaf from the SF playbook, and playing to the gallery offering things that cannot be delivered.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    [He] argues for Irish unity on the basis that the whole island will rejoin the EU and also because it would represent a “consolidation” of resources.


    “Unity it's no longer just an emotional aspiration bandied about and left to one party to keep pushing, it's now something that's coming into discussions a lot more across the island, and I certainly think has been an element of a generational shift,” he said.


    Wait, that sounds awfully like reunification being an economic positive to me? And that we shouldn't be solely relying on SF to push it.

    The whiplash that our resident Partitionists are suffering from must be causing them serious discomfort. Poor craturs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    You repeat "cross-community" support so often, I'm starting to think you don't really understand what it means.

    A successful border poll is the ultimate expression of cross-community support for a UI.

    That doesn't mean that Unionists can continue to close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears and not engage. If they don't want to engage, then fine, but the rest of us don't have to wait around for them to cop on. Again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I didn't miss a single thing.

    FG where the prime advocates of cross community support for even the holding a Border Poll.

    That is gone with the wind.

    You tried to make the best of it blanch, but you have a bus on top of you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Funny, Francie, you might be able to say that if you ever get a border poll.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Still 8 or 9 years to run on my prediction on that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    They're not taking this development well at all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Another example of the impractical nature of a united Ireland and why it won't happen when people put aside the emotion and think rationally about it.

    Two completely incompatible electronic health systems are being put in place, North and South, which would cost millions to fix.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Surely not millions?

    Such an insurmountable obstacle that.

    Give it up man.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    If dual-consent was the concern of partitionists (it's not, we all know that) then NI should not exist. Partitonists want us to seek the consent of those who seized a part of our country, by threat of mass-murder, for its return. Forget it, not happening.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,346 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    A step towards creating an atmosphere that may integrate unionists would be for the Irish government to take a serious look at what part they and their security forces played in colluding with the IRA aattacking unionists in the north (and the south)

    instead we have a visit yesterday from your PM telling our government that they need to do more in this regard. The arrogance and the ostrich type behaviour is remarkable



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    If evidence emerged about collusion it was investigated downcow. There is zero reason for the failure to do the same in NI.

    You guys locked away the files on Dublin/Monaghan/Belturbet for a further period than normal in just one example of an alleged cover-up. We know there was a 40 year cover-up of Bloody Sunday for instance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,923 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    You're not suggesting that DC would be engaging in another round of playing the victim?

    You know as well as I do that there's always another issue and roadblock tomorrow.

    It's time to give up trying to bring belligerent Unionists along. They're exhausting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,346 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    We all know well that if I dared to refer to atrocities like francie mentions above as ‘playing the victim’ then I would not get time to collect my coat, I’d simply be gone, and rightly so. I would have no inclination to refer to references to atrocities carried out against catholics as ‘playing the victim’ But sure it’s only unionists that we are talking about. This is the default republican spout, to try and stop an honest discussion about the past

    https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/victims-group-accuses-dublin-of-double-standards-over-legacy-bill-41668637.html

    ‘The victims’ campaigner claimed that Dublin had failed “over 500 families who were murdered through circumstances which had a cross-border element”.’



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,346 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Here’s one of today’s anniversaries. No doubt some think it was a good days work. How could unionists integrate until this gets the same attention as the events francie names above

    “21 May 1994: 

    Reginald McCollum, 19-year-old Protestant civilian, single was a full-time member of the Royal Irish Regiment holding the rank of Private and was from Sandholes, Cookstown. After a stag party in an Armagh pub he was kidnapped and shot by the IRA. He was last seen alive around 2:30AM at a chip shop. The IRA said in a statement that they had abducted, interrogated and killed him claiming he was a spy. His body was found dumped close to a hedge in a field between the Callanbridge and Mullacreevie estates. It was said at the inquest that Pte McCollum may have fought off his attackers. A pathologist said at the inquest that there had been a considerable number of abrasions and bruises which indicated at considerable struggle. Pte McCollum had been shot nine times. Lieutenant Colonel. Kevin Hodgson, Pte McCollum's commanding officer, said: "Pte McCollum was a dedicated and conscientious soldier". He was the third member of his family that had been murdered by the IRA. In 1994, after the IRA ceasefire, Pte McCollum's father died. It is believed his father died of a broken heart. LEST WE FORGET!”



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,490 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You made an unbacked up accusation of Irish government collusion with the IRA.

    Funny that, because I saw the Irish government fight tooth and nail to stop the IRA.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,620 ✭✭✭votecounts


    How can one be a civilian and also in the Armed Forces? At the the time whether you agree with it or not , he would have been seen by many as a legitimate target especially given the mass murders conducted by the BA. Thank god, those killings are well behind us and if they were to occur again would likely be loyalists attacks egged by scum in the UV.UDA, DUP and Bin Boy Bryson. At the moment, it's your crowd threatening violence and even targeted Simon Coveney, I assume you've condemned these Scum



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,346 ✭✭✭✭downcow




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,620 ✭✭✭votecounts


    The fact that you think that the Irish Govt or the Gardai colluded with the IRA proves how little you know on Irish affairs. Fact, is that British Army, RUC, UDR colluded with Loyalist Scum to massacre the Nationalist Community and now your precious British Govt want to give these feckers an Amnesty. Hell has any Unionist condemned this plan. [Mod Snip]

    Post edited by Ten of Swords on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,346 ✭✭✭✭downcow


    Another sad partisan post. Anyhow I think you will find I unequivocally condemned the attorney general on this thread the other day for referring to recent Uvf violence as a reason for taking action against the protocol. I said it was reckless and wrong.

    I see your government and Simon coveney have been at it again since saying that we need to keep the protocol to protect the peace. More reckless nonsense but I have given up calling out your government on this stuff.

    as for your question. I am guessing that they are referring to him as a civilian as he was a soldier off duty



Advertisement