What do you think is the best course of action for Ireland to take now?

tolosenc · 15-06-2008 07:33AM #1

As I see it, we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Some people thought that by voting no, we would gain bargaining chips within the EU, but with the comments form Sarkozy et al, it is clear that the EU doesn't care about Ireland.

The possibilities I'm hearing aren't to great:

More referenda, until we agree to it
Become a sort of second class EU member
Leave the EU altogether

So, what's it to be boardsies? With the planned continuation of the ratification of the treaty, these seem to be the only possibilities.

Which one do you pick?

Sherifu · 15-06-2008 08:38AM

All of the above.

Dave! · 15-06-2008 11:06AM

Invade France

Keano · 15-06-2008 11:24AM

Dave! wrote: »

Invade France

Sounds like a plan Dave.

/grabs pitchfork

mike65 · 15-06-2008 11:32AM

Damn beatern to it! A sekrit force of green-clad Ninja Warriors should be sent to the next EU council of minsters meeting.

Or better still some Ginger Ninjas! :pac:

Mike.

trout · 15-06-2008 11:35AM

The EU Ministers are known to have perfected the Iron Claw technique ... we must counter with the Begorrah Fist and the Middle Finger.

jayok · 15-06-2008 11:53AM

Can't really blame the rest of the EU for going ahead. In reality they 800,000-odd no voters are holding up progress for 500 million-odd people. Only way Ireland now could get onboard is to vote again.

Having said that it shouldn't be a straight re-run, but with more of a structured campaign of information (not mis-information) from both sides. If we say no to Lisbon again for no other reason that because of the Treaty (not backlash at the Government or ignorance) then we should review our membership of the EU then. If we say Yes, we lick our wounds and humbly move on.

jayok · 15-06-2008 11:55AM

To the people who voted to "Leave the EU". Care to say why? I can't see any advantage of doing this and I would like someone to explain the advantages.

_JOE_ · 15-06-2008 11:57AM

Those on the No side that constantly argued that there was a deficit of knowledge will not be able to present that argument next time round...we'll realise that the "better deal promised" was a load of codswallop and you can bet you this time that all the polititions will have read the Treaty this time round...

The Artist · 15-06-2008 12:03PM

im not much into politics but leave the EU was my choice.
So it should be:
YORA MA leave the EU
ftw.

SimpleSam06 · 15-06-2008 12:05PM

obl wrote: »

it is clear that the EU doesn't care about Ireland.?

The question is, why is that a surprise to anyone.

jayok wrote: »

To the people who voted to "Leave the EU". Care to say why? I can't see any advantage of doing this and I would like someone to explain the advantages.

Can we get our fishing grounds back please? Also we would not be bound by, for example, EU regulations on water in a country with a grotesque abundance of the stuff. Sure we might miss the structural funds, but really, we've had those for years now and we still have third world infrastructure.

I'm not saying we should neccessarily leave the EU, but perhaps its time to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, consider the options. A less involved role in Europe (from both sides) might not be a bad thing.

jayok · 15-06-2008 12:10PM

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Can we get out fishing grounds back please? Also we would not be bound by, for example, EU regulations on water in a country with a grotesque abundance of the stuff. Sure we might miss the structural funds, but really, we've had those for years now and we still have third world infrastructure.

We've had great fishing grounds for years before joining the EU but we were incapable of exploiting that natural resource. We were also woefully poor are defending our water from poachers. Equally we were dependent on an inefficient Agricultural sector. Should we go back there? The membership of the EU is almost like allowing each country to specialize on what the can do best and sharing the pool of resources thoughout the Union.

Rules on water and water quality are a good thing for us no?

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

I'm not saying we should neccessarily leave the EU, but perhaps its time to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, consider the options. A less involved role in Europe (from both sides) might not be a bad thing.

Then this is a formally 2-tiered Europe - can't see that flying. Either your in or you're out.

15-06-2008 12:12PM

I think we should invade the EU. They wouldn't expect that.

biko · 15-06-2008 12:18PM

We take over UK and become an island nation, Denmark and Norway are liberated next.

15-06-2008 12:25PM

Reverse Vikings?

thecaptain · 15-06-2008 12:28PM

Leave the whole scam, the people said NO.

What is all this about another vote, the people were threatened enough the first time around.

And people still believe that this is a democracy.

ninebeanrows · 15-06-2008 12:41PM

Love to see how this poll works out, at the moment a large chunk of you actually want to leave the EU?

No wonder the No side won!

Once upon a time there was a small country with a small economy, then their big richer brothers in Europe helped their little brother out and send them lots of euro's to build up their small country and small economy. That small country got a big economy and became rich beyond their wildest dreams. Then that small country began to lose some of their richness due to poor government and a poor global economy. That small country was asked to decide whether the Europe should continue to expand and whether it was going to help the other countries in the EU because it is now a big brother. That country had now turned into a rich arrogant country and feared it would loss the euro's it had been given. The little country turned its back on its bigger brothers and a crisis ensued in the EU. That little brother was then sidelined from the EU and just as quick as it had become rich it turned back into a small country with a small economy. Would it be given help by its bigger brother in the future?

SimpleSam06 · 15-06-2008 01:54PM

jayok wrote: »

We've had great fishing grounds for years before joining the EU but we were incapable of exploiting that natural resource.

Yes but you're talking about a country struggling to pull itself together after centuries long occupation. The economic and social aftereffects were never going to be pretty, and crying about there not being a full industrial infrastructure there immediately is a bit facetious.

I honestly believe that investment capital could have been found to springboard the Irish maritime industry (which would have been better for us than the EU ever could have been). Thats all in the land of what ifs now of course, but even so we could do a lot of good if that was returned to us.

jayok wrote: »

We were also woefully poor are defending our water from poachers.

This doesn't seem like an unsolvable problem. One of the side effects of a stronger fishing industry is better shipbuilding and support indusrtries, which could easily have been used to provide better protection. One thing feeds into the next.

jayok wrote: »

Equally we were dependent on an inefficient Agricultural sector.

The agricultural sector was always humped. Unless you can employ field workers for a euro a day like the third world, you have to subsidise it.

jayok wrote: »

Rules on water and water quality are a good thing for us no?

So we need the EU to tell us to filter our water?

jayok wrote: »

Then this is a formally 2-tiered Europe - can't see that flying. Either your in or you're out.

I think the word "tiered" there is fairly loaded. That indicates some are higher up the food chain than others, whereas I think a lot of people would prefer to keep trade agreements and the common currency, but do without the other political involvement, bit like the original EC. We still have plenty to offer Europe, but we can offer that without being integrated into a beaurocratic colossus.

Weathercheck wrote:

then their big richer brothers in Europe helped their little brother out and send them lots of euro's to build up their small country and small economy. That small country got a big economy and became rich beyond their wildest dreams.

Oh would you wake up, the celtic tiger wasn't caused by European money, it was caused by a low tax rate followed by historically low interest rates, which flooded the system with very cheap money. The same thing was repeated in many countries, not in the EU.

Laying credit for the boom at the feet of the EU displays ignorance of reality at its finest.

davyjose · 15-06-2008 02:01PM

jayok wrote: »

Can't really blame the rest of the EU for going ahead. In reality they 800,000-odd no voters are holding up progress for 500 million-odd people. Only way Ireland now could get onboard is to vote again.

Really great argument there. Nice way of undermining democracy. Can I ask how many people were involved in the decision to go forward with the Lisbon Treaty? Was it more, or less, than 800,000?

RATM · 15-06-2008 02:09PM

How about having an option on the poll for Brussels having to ask the 500m people it claims to represent what they want done with the treaty?

Its the democratic deficit that made me vote No on the treaty and I will do it again and again until such time as the EU cops on and starts listening to the people they are supposed to represent rather than dressing up a constitution as a treaty in an effort to exclude all citizens except the Irish.

Guy:Incognito · 15-06-2008 02:23PM

davyjose wrote: »

Really great argument there. Nice way of undermining democracy. Can I ask how many people were involved in the decision to go forward with the Lisbon Treaty? Was it more, or less, than 800,000?

Whats democratic about a quarter of 1% of the population of Europe deciding it's future?

davyjose · 15-06-2008 02:43PM

Stekelly wrote: »

Whats democratic about a quarter of 1% of the population of Europe deciding it's future?

Because we were asked. You think the couple of hundred people in Brussels deciding to push ahead with this, without asking one member of their country their opinion, is more democratic? Cop on :rolleyes:

Rb · 15-06-2008 02:50PM

Stekelly wrote: »

Whats democratic about a quarter of 1% of the population of Europe deciding it's future?

What's fair about writing a rule saying that every nation must ratify in order for the Treaty to be passed, and then massively backpeddling the minute one rejects it?

ejmaztec · 15-06-2008 02:53PM

davyjose wrote: »

Because we were asked. You think the couple of hundred people in Brussels deciding to push ahead with this, without asking one member of their country their opinion, is more democratic? Cop on :rolleyes:

All of the governments in the EU are democratically elected to represent the interests of their countries.:rolleyes:

Annatar · 15-06-2008 03:01PM

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Oh would you wake up, the celtic tiger wasn't caused by European money, it was caused by a low tax rate followed by historically low interest rates, which flooded the system with very cheap money. The same thing was repeated in many countries, not in the EU.

Laying credit for the boom at the feet of the EU displays ignorance of reality at its finest.

Ohh Dear God!
If it wasnt for the EU we would be getting handouts from an Ethiopean version of Concern. "we may be starving, but look at those poor basstard Irish"

Celtic Tiger Arrogance, the belief we are more important than we actually are.
Ireland is at the mercy of the big players. Best we dont stab our EU friends in the back.
Compare the amount of cash Brown had lying around to bail out northern rock with ROI total budget spend.
We are small cheese. We are not required in the EU. We need them, not the other way around.
It doesnt mean we think of Ireland and take it up the aras if some twat in Brussels says so, but we should have the decency to say no to something not based on lies and shhiittteeeee

ejmaztec · 15-06-2008 03:40PM

Annatar wrote: »

Ohh Dear God!
If it wasnt for the EU we would be getting handouts from an Ethiopean version of Concern. "we may be starving, but look at those poor basstard Irish"

Celtic Tiger Arrogance, the belief we are more important than we actually are.
Ireland is at the mercy of the big players. Best we dont stab our EU friends in the back.
Compare the amount of cash Brown had lying around to bail out northern rock with ROI total budget spend.
We are small cheese. We are not required in the EU. We need them, not the other way around.
It doesnt mean we think of Ireland and take it up the aras if some twat in Brussels says so, but we should have the decency to say no to something not based on lies and shhiittteeeee

I think that just about sums it up.

Many people refuse to accept that Ireland would not have been an economic powerhouse (short-lived though it's been), without having firstly joined the EU. These people, as well as living in Ireland, have dual nationality with the residents of cloud-cuckoo-land. I remember what Ireland was like before it joined, a stone-age backwater, especially outside Dublin.

Rb · 15-06-2008 03:43PM

ejmaztec wrote: »

a stone-age backwater, especially outside Dublin.

Some would argue that it remains that way :pac:

ejmaztec · 15-06-2008 03:49PM

Rb wrote: »

Some would argue that it remains that way :pac:

Probably, but at least we don't have to go outside for a sh1t anymore.:p

davyjose · 15-06-2008 03:55PM

ejmaztec wrote: »

All of the governments in the EU are democratically elected to represent the interests of their countries.:rolleyes:

You're naive to believe they have the full backing of their people.

Rb · 15-06-2008 03:57PM

ejmaztec wrote: »

Probably, but at least we don't have to go outside for a sh1t anymore.:p

Thank God for the EU!

ejmaztec · 15-06-2008 04:00PM

davyjose wrote: »

You're naive to believe they have the full backing of their people.

I believe nothing of the kind. The "majority" elected them. That's what democracy is all about.

What do you think is the best course of action for Ireland to take now?

What do you want us to do now? 64 votes

Comments