We probably would have if Cameron, Brown and the Westminster head honchos hadn`t come north and organised a desperate remain campaign just prior to the vote.
Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Ireland = India
Northern Ireland = Australia
You need to be able to see the difference between them.
In your quote they are talking about the island of Ireland, Ireland the country didn't exist. there were entities far closer to current Northern Ireland than current Ireland.
Besides, we care celts too if you don't count cultural changes due to invasions, which you apparently don't.
But thats not important because you shouldn't use the past for justification for ignoring rights of the people living there now. the Catholics in Ireland have a right to choose their country as do the Catholics and protestants in northern Ireland. and as you say, the borders are drawn up so all regions have a majority in their respective countries. (according to wiki all region in Northern Ireland support staying in the uk) unless you think its good for areas to be ruled by a minority in that area?
Neither Ireland or England has any right to tell them they have to join Ireland, its their choice.
The historical province of Ulster has 9 counties and if all of them were included in NI instead of just 6 then there would be a Catholic majority, why do you think that the "troubles" exist?.
The Catholics in the north have been basically ****ed over by the partition in 1921 and have been treated as second class citizens by the Unionists over the past century. If Winston Churchill believed that there should be a united Ireland, that's good enough for me.
The Catholics in the north have been basically ****ed over by the partition in 1921 and have been treated as second class citizens by the Unionists over the past century. If Winston Churchill believed that there should be a united Ireland, that's good enough for me.
No a large number of Catholics in Ireland were helped by that and were saved from having a larger number of dissident Protestants in Ireland than we have had Catholics in Northern Ireland. (assuming that cause them to join Ireland) Just look at Hong Kong. We forced them to China and they are still protesting for rights and even independence despite being Chinese. Now i don't believe they should be a part of the UK, but giving them to China was clearly wrong, they should have been given a choice. Giving NI to Ireland would NOT solve the troubles, it would just be giving them to Ireland to deal with and harming a larger number of people.
"There were entities far closer to current Northern Ireland than current Ireland."...You are describing the province of Ulster in the north of which there are 9 counties with an overall majority of Catholics.
What the Catholics are fighting is that Ulster has been trimmed to 6 counties deliberately by the British government to give The Protestants a majority and therefore power over the Catholics and the abuse of such power led to the troubles starting in 1969.
What the Catholics are fighting is that Ulster has been trimmed to 6 counties deliberately by the British government to give The Protestants a majority and therefore power over the Catholics and the abuse of such power led to the troubles starting in 1969.
the same thing would happen to the protestants in Ireland if the situation is reversed. and if they stayed as northern Ireland rather than becoming unified, more Catholics would have been subjected to the same treatment.
A 2 state solution is the best outcome.
There is no evidence that the Catholics would treat Protestants badly, I mean I can't imagine that they would be organising triumphal marches through Protestant areas celebrating battles fought in the 17th century.
because Catholics have never treated protestants badly... its not like there have been hundreds of wars over the issue across Europe.
You seem to be determined to paint everything to do with the UK in a bad light. Its very much a 2 way hatred with both sides being militant. besides it happens pretty much everywhere in the world, so there's plenty of evidence. pick any country and you will see minority religions getting marginalized.
Last edited:
Why not? It is up to the people of NI just as it is up to the people of Scotland. Yes there is the security aspect to carefully consider with NI on the consequence of holding a referendum of that subject but ignoring those complications then yes I am in favour.
I didn't oppose the Scots having a referendum. I suppose in one way I was wishing them all the best before it happened but they decided to stay in the UK. Either way it is their choice but I would not have had a problem had they decided to leave us.
NI is a much more complicated issue than that of Scotland though because there are very realistic possibilities of a referendum itself let alone the result opening up the whole problem and terrorism re-commencing.
I think it is much more complicated than that. Australia, America NZ etc. do not have the same problems as N Ireland with it's protestant/catholic divide.
2 of my Dad's cousins are/were?? in Maze Prison due to the problems there. I say no idea because they were "disowned" and as it isn;t something that just crops up I have no idea if they are still in there or out now.
The problems are not just to do with NI itself. It crosses the border. My Dad's side of the family are from Cavan South of the border.
I'm just concerned with what I think is wrong and right and i've explained why there is an injustice towards Catholics in Ireland and why that has caused the modern day troubles. There are many people that think that a united Ireland is the right way to go in the future and I think that it will probably happen within the next 100 years.
I think that post clarifies your position much more and I pretty much agree with it. I do think there will come a time when the Island will be re-united. However I don't think it is close now because hatred is still very fresh in a lot of minds.
I also think that people are simplifying it as catholic vs protestant**. It may well have originally been about that but I would suggest it is much more an Ireland vs England issue and probably was even back when religion was the driving force behind it.
**I doubt many of those involved in violence have in their mind that they are fighting for catholic or protestant and more just about a "them and us" where religion is the easy "go to."
But I do agree in the next 100 years I expect it to happen. I think while we have all this talk of "one world" and unification at the moment it is much more likely that Scotland and Wales will eventually separate too.
Last edited:
As an aside, i do wonder if we had called it Ulster instead of Northern Ireland peoples thought patterns would be different here.
I don't think it would make any difference. It is still a "them and us" colonisers vs "indigineous." The name doesn't really matter.
We have these same problems with India/Pakistan and Israel/Palestine.
You can't take places like Australia or the US because the colonisers are still in charge there. They just separated from the country they came from.
Not overly sure if it is just in UK terms or in Ireland too but officially UK calls EIRE simply Ireland these days and the "Republic of" has been dropped.
Last edited:
I wasn't referring to the troubles, i was referring to thinking they will unify rather than stay with us or go independent.
I don't think a name makes much difference. If they called it Ulster and people still clung to the Union flag then there would be the same problem. I think NI is much more likely to become separate from both Ireland and the UK before it can ever join Ireland. And it would take a long time to transition to the latter. Public opinion is similar to Scotland though.
I don't know if there are polls about separation. Are they just polls of Irish re-unification? Are there any polls of simply doing a Scotland and being NI but not part of the UK?
EDIT: While I say that a name doesn't make that much difference I am having second thoughts. Taking the whole Greece/FYROM argument over the use of Macedonia it might have been even worse if the UK (perceived as England) had taken control of the name "Ulster."
I've not heard of them so i don't know. but as you said earlier, the world is breaking up right now into smaller chunks, (which i actually think is due to the world becoming more integrated, funnily enough) and to me if you just look at it as groups of people and their beliefs without taking into account labels, i see wales as closer to England for example than NI is to Ireland. And i do wonder myself if they wouldnt rather be self governed. I used a similiar argument earlier about Hong Kong and whether they would chose independence over unification with china (not sure if you would be allowed to do such polls there) but i would have liked them to have been given that choice. may have resulted in war though.
Another factor in Irelands future that hasn't been mentioned is the EU. Ireland itself might become a bit different politically over the next 100 years. what happens in the next 2 years might even play a big role in both their futures.
These are just musing at this point. whatever happens i hope its chosen by the people of NI without pressure from other nations like us or Ireland.
I think Imps makes a good point on religion. It's pretty clear the conflict in Northern Ireland is tribal rather particularly religious. Religion is the shorthand but people haven't been bombing each other because of their respective positions on Papal infallibility, women priests, the Virgin Mary or transubstantiation. It's all about Ireland vs England really.
You can talk all day about the past and it's clear the Irish suffered greatly under British rule, just as most people ruled by 'others' end up suffering. However we are where we are and very few people were even born when Northern Ireland was created. You have to deal with today's situation and try not to get bogged down in what happened decades ago.
On Hong Kong, it would have been better if the people there were given a say but there was no way the Chinese would agree to that and Britain had no real choice but to hand it back.
You can talk all day about the past and it's clear the Irish suffered greatly under British rule, just as most people ruled by 'others' end up suffering. However we are where we are and very few people were even born when Northern Ireland was created. You have to deal with today's situation and try not to get bogged down in what happened decades ago.
On Hong Kong, it would have been better if the people there were given a say but there was no way the Chinese would agree to that and Britain had no real choice but to hand it back.
Are there polls on Irish opinion on the EU? They voted against the Lisbon Treaty the first time and when they voted the second time had lost faith in their government and were in bailout territory. Not so sure they voted for the "positives" of the rose garden called the EU so much as feeling they had no choice. Not something I've researched overly though!
Last time I went to see the relatives was early noughties and it seemed quite a happy place at that time although I seem to remember there was a Sinn Fein demo on the second day in Dublin.
Last edited:
I agree on all but the latter point. We could have held on to Hong Kong but decided not to. You can argue there might have been some hostility but at the end of the day it was our colony and we could have put it to the people. We decided not to and I bet that decision (like all decisions made by all western governments) was nothing to do with thoughts about the people of Hong Kong and much more to do with $$$. Whether that be costing us more than we got out or cost of possible wars small or big it would have been a financial decision and nothing to do with the well being of the people.
And I would include in that "how people see us" as being a financial decision. If "how people see us" wasn't such a key feature in money decisions I have no doubt that we would have deserted NI in the past few decades ignoring those that want to remain!! And if Hong Kong was off our coast we would still be in charge of it.
Look at the Falklands. Yes back then it was a powerplay for Thatcher at that moment but today our government(s) sell the idea of "doing the right thing" but it is all about how abandoning it would be perceived. Gibraltar was a key holding in times of old naval dominance just as Cueta and Melilla the other side are for Spain.
These days at first point it is keeping the entry to the Med in European hands but in European terms it doesn't matter so much who in Europe holds those because whether we are in EU or not, The UK is a civilised country with "law abiding" government as is Spain. We keep Gibraltar out of principle because it would be seen as bad if we just abandoned it.
The days of needing to hold that point on the European side are gone. Spain on the other side with Ceuta/Melilla is much more necessary because of "dubious" governments on the Northern African continent.
Countries are holding onto a lot of overseas territories because of perception. Not because they care. It gives political points. Something to grandstand about. Something to show their "caring " credentials but like everything else. If they could get away with ditching the cost without looking bad/damaging their votability they would not think twice.
Last edited: