NationStates Jolt Archive

Recently the Irish (South) Government announced it is preparing a strategy for the most likely ineffitable re-unification of Ireland. This news was strongly backed by several political groups in the North who over the past few decades have put pressure on the British Government to return the North to it's rightful owners the united irish people.

In the past decade the Independent Irish Republic (South) has prospered beyond anyone's anticipations, it has become one of the most wealthiest countries on the planet, it has the lowest unemployment rate in ALL OF EUROPE, it is home to international companies like Intel, Microsoft, Dell, Google, HP and CitiBank to name a few. It's 'Celtic Tiger' Economy is one of the strongest in the world and has among the best public services anywhere.

While the British Run North is going nowhere, its unemployment is far higher than the south's, it attracts hardly any multinationals because of it's crime, poor education system and lack of decent infrastucture. It buys most of its items from the South and relies on Southern companies to keep it operational. It has great potencial and could become a extremely prosperous place is it was allowed to return to the power of Dublin but stubborn bigots and old fashioned british politicians are intent on keeping it in limbo. :(

No. The majority of Northern Ireland is protestant and does not want to be part of the South. Let's not open this can of worms. Enough people have died and been bombed already.

Quite, it is the protestant northern irish who want to stay part of Britain, not the British government.

They just can't stand the thought of living under the catholic south.

Also, during the troubles in the 70's to 80's they had paramilitaries, just like the southern irish.

This is a really old, hashed over topic. If it wasnt for the religious state, then yes, Ireland probably should be reunited, but it can't be because of the Protestant - Catholic split, simple.

Also id like to point out that a lot of the problems you mentioned with Northern Ireland nowadays are at least in part due to the paramilitaries from the south screwing things up, and preventing people from moving on and prospering.

There is nothing "inevitable" about Irish reunification.

No. The majority of Northern Ireland is protestant and does not want to be part of the South. Let's not open this can of worms. Enough people have died and been bombed already.

Fair enough, and in fact many from the republic dont want the two states reunified, but this isn't a religious question whether they are protestant or catholic the people of Ireland should work together for a better future for the whole island. The border is a barrer between complete peace.:)

The border is a barrer between complete peace.:)

No, people being prepared to fight each other on the basis of nationality is a barrier to complete peace. If unification happens then the loyalists will likely take up arms again.

Fair enough, and in fact many from the republic dont want the two states reunified, but this isn't a religious question whether they are protestant or catholic the people of Ireland should work together for a better future for the whole island. The border is a barrer between complete peace.:)

I agree that in an ideal world the border should be torn down, but it'll lead to yet more killing and mayhem. You're talking to an English Catholic of Irish descent here. If I thought unification would bring peace, Id support it.

Recently the Irish (South) Government announced it is preparing a strategy for the most likely ineffitable re-unification of Ireland. This news was strongly backed by several political groups in the North who over the past few decades have put pressure on the British Government to return the North to it's rightful owners the united irish people.

In the past decade the Independent Irish Republic (South) has prospered beyond anyone's anticipations, it has become one of the most wealthiest countries on the planet, it has the lowest unemployment rate in ALL OF EUROPE, it is home to international companies like Intel, Microsoft, Dell, Google, HP and CitiBank to name a few. It's 'Celtic Tiger' Economy is one of the strongest in the world and has among the best public services anywhere.

While the British Run North is going nowhere, its unemployment is far higher than the south's, it attracts hardly any multinationals because of it's crime, poor education system and lack of decent infrastucture. It buys most of its items from the South and relies on Southern companies to keep it operational. It has great potencial and could become a extremely prosperous place is it was allowed to return to the power of Dublin but stubborn bigots and old fashioned british politicians are intent on keeping it in limbo. :(


If it were that simple i would have happened years ago. Probably better to understand your topic b4 posting it

If unification happens then the loyalists will likely take up arms again.[/QUOTE]

Actually the loyalists have not yet given up their arms yet, only the IRA have complied with decommissioning of arms.

If unification happens then the loyalists will likely take up arms again.

Actually the loyalists have not yet given up their arms yet, only the IRA have complied with decommissioning of arms.[/QUOTE]

Considering how the British and Irish governments pander to the IRA, it's not surprising.

I often wonder why loyalists are loyal to Britain, when governments of both colours have done so little for them.

Personally, I am just waiting for the next Cromwell to go back to Ireland all gung ho and arse things up again.

History does, after all, tend to repeat itself.

Let's not open this can of worms.
Enough people have died and been bombed already.

Seconded.

And to the overall question; No.

Irish unification would take a long time!

Actually the loyalists have not yet given up their arms yet, only the IRA have complied with decommissioning of arms.

I am aware of the situation, however I was speaking metaphorically.

As long as a majority of Northern Irish people want to remain British, Northern Island should, in my opinion, remain part of the UK.

As long as a majority of Northern Irish people want to remain British, Northern Island should, in my opinion, remain part of the UK.

I don't think any reasonable person can argue with that.

Wouldn't it be easier to make Northen Ireland into a totally independant nation, therefore not part of Britain anymore, but remaining with their right to be protestant, and perhaps British Army Buffer Zones similar to that of the UN buffer zone in Cyprus if things got out of hand.

Wouldn't it be easier to make Northen Ireland into a totally independant nation, therefore not part of Britain anymore, but remaining with their right to be protestant, and perhaps British Army Buffer Zones similar to that of the UN buffer zone in Cyprus if things got out of hand.

The question of sustainability and self sufficency would come into play. Its a touch and go area.

But why on earth would there need to be a 'Buffer Zone'? And having the British army there would hardly be indicative of an 'independent' state now would it?

Wouldn't it be easier to make Northen Ireland into a totally independant nation, therefore not part of Britain anymore, but remaining with their right to be protestant, and perhaps British Army Buffer Zones similar to that of the UN buffer zone in Cyprus if things got out of hand.

That would succeed in making everyone unhappy!

As long as a majority of Northern Irish people want to remain British, Northern Island should, in my opinion, remain part of the UK.

Exactly. Why do so many people seem to get the idea that the English are forcing Nothern Ireland to remain in the UK against their wishes?:confused:

Wouldn't it be easier to make Northen Ireland into a totally independant nation, therefore not part of Britain anymore, but remaining with their right to be protestant, and perhaps British Army Buffer Zones similar to that of the UN buffer zone in Cyprus if things got out of hand.

Becoming part of a unified Ireland would not remove the right of anyone from the North to be Protestant.

Becoming part of a unified Ireland would not remove the right of anyone from the North to be Protestant.

It would be against their wishes, and thus against the wishes of the majority of Northern Irelanders.

It would be against their wishes, and thus against the wishes of the majority of Northern Irelanders.

Isn't the present situation against the wishes if a majority of the Irish people? By Irish people I am refering to all the people that live in all of Ireland.

It would be against their wishes, and thus against the wishes of the majority of Northern Irelanders.

Indeed, but I was refering to the post by GB which seemed to carry the implication that those people living in the South are not allowed to be Protestant, which is clearly spurious.

Isn't the present situation against the wishes if a majority of the Irish people? By Irish people I am refering to all the people that live in all of Ireland.

It may well be, but such a claim to ownership is a weak one. Imagine if, for example, the majority of Americans desired ownership of Mexico, while a minority of Mexicans wanted to be part of the US. Would that be a valid comparison?

ANd thus the can of worms is opened...

It may well be, but such a claim to ownership is a weak one. Imagine if, for example, the majority of Americans desired ownership of Mexico, while a minority of Mexicans wanted to be part of the US. Would that be a valid comparison?

Evidently you don't know very much about Irish history or the colonization of Ireland by the English. Not at all a comparison to Mexico/America.

Evidently you don't know very much about Irish history or the colonization of Ireland by the English. Not at all a comparison to Mexico/America.

The fact that I chose Mexico and the US is irrelevant, I could equally have chosen Canada and the Vactican City.

The colonization of Ireland by the English is a red herring - the majority of colonists were actually Scots, who of course, had originally come from Ireland in the first place.

And when was the last time in history that a unified Ireland existed as an independent state?

The British Government actually want to give Northern Ireland back. Just like with a corner of Spain. The British Government have openly said they will give back both places but it is upto the people of the countries to decide. It is not the English that want to keep Northern Ireland. It is Southern Ireland and Northern Ireland that don't want each other. There is to much opposition to reunification that it won't occur. The catholic South wants the North but the North doesn't want the South.

Its very complicated and it was Englands fault from the very beginning in 1900 that the spilt occured but now the British Government will gladly give Northen Ireland back.

Its a terrible situtation and i wish it didn't exsist but i doubt it will be resolved in the near future. Just like was said in the 1970's

Its very complicated and it was Englands fault from the very beginning in 1900 that the spilt occured but now the British Government will gladly give Northen Ireland back.

1900? 1920, shurely?

1900? 1920, shurely?

Nope as a history student that had to study the Irish Question, which is what it was called, the whole problem occured from about 1890, the Liberals wanted to give Ireland back completely from english rule. This included ALL of Ireland. But the Tories who had major profit and support from Northern Ireland didn't.

And in Ireland there where riots and uprisings against English rule in the South and a agreement in the North, signed in blood by some men, that even if the North was given back to the South they would still fight against the South. This would cause great amounts of Bloodshed so the Liberals under Asquith decided that it would be better to give the South independence and keep the North under British control. Which solved the problem for a short amount of time. Until it all came out again years later.

As long as the North wants to be a part of the UK, then the North should stay a part of the UK, with devolved powers to the Northern Ireland Assembly.

However, I don't think that the problem will be solved until we have a fully secular democracy. As long as the Church of England is our state religion, I don't think we can have peace between both communities.

The UK is about as far from secular western democracy as you can go in Europe, and until we have a secular federal republic I can see why the SNP, PC and irish natioanlists in the UK have a strong level of support.

Nope as a history student that had to study the Irish Question, which is what it was called, the whole problem occured from about 1890, the Liberals wanted to give Ireland back completely from english rule. This included ALL of Ireland. But the Tories who had major profit and support from Northern Ireland didn't.

Okay, I see you were using '1900' as an arbitrary label for the period leading up to dramatic changes in Ireland that were to come in the next twenty-odd years. I was wondering if you were refering to a particular incident in that single year, and thus my post.

As long as the North wants to be a part of the UK, then the North should stay a part of the UK, with devolved powers to the Northern Ireland Assembly.

However, I don't think that the problem will be solved until we have a fully secular democracy. As long as the Church of England is our state religion, I don't think we can have peace between both communities.

The UK is about as far from secular western democracy as you can go in Europe, and until we have a secular federal republic I can see why the SNP, PC and irish natioanlists in the UK have a strong level of support.

Those parties don't really have major support in England. The majority of English people sadly don't concern themselves with Ireland. The Irish Nationalists did have a large amount of support when they were in English Parliament but now they can be found in the Irish Parliament. As Southern Ireland is now another country, completely seperate from England.

But i do agree with your belief that we are not exactly a western democracy, but thats due mainly to that fact that we have a great sense of tradition which will take a while to remove.

Okay, I see you were using '1900' as an arbitrary label for the period leading up to dramatic changes in Ireland that were to come in the next twenty-odd years. I was wondering if you were refering to a particular incident in that single year, and thus my post.

Nah sorry i didn't make that clear enough.

As a British citizen I am uncomfortable with bits of my country being cut for dubious reasons. Whilst I accept that Ireland (south) is flourishing, although the has EU is stopped cashing them cheques, I do not see that as a good reason for leaving the union. London is flourishing, the north east is not should Londoners ask for a split?

crime, poor education system
HAHAHAHA

You should ask the UN about Northern Ireland's crime rate and education system.

You will find that they consider our crime rate to be the lowest in the developed world, and our education system to be in the top two or three in the entire world.


Anyhow, who would they be giving it back to? The single, unified, completely independent and sovereign Irish state that has never, in the entire course of history, existed? Against the wishes of the majority of people in Northern Ireland?

Never.

Ireland should reunify under the Union Jack and HM.

Actually the loyalists have not yet given up their arms yet, only the IRA have complied with decommissioning of arms.

Considering how the British and Irish governments pander to the IRA, it's not surprising.

I often wonder why loyalists are loyal to Britain, when governments of both colours have done so little for them.

Loyalists are usually not loyal but protestant, Britian is protestant while Ireland is Catholic

Isn't the present situation against the wishes if a majority of the Irish people? By Irish people I am refering to all the people that live in all of Ireland.
That's part of the issue - Northern Ireland is an artificial state, carved out in 1922 in order to create a Protestant majority, so it can be argued that it is wrong speak of the "Northern Irish" people.

Nevertheless, Northern Ireland as a political entity has been around over 80 years (longer than many other countries), so we have to live with that reality until the people there choose to change it.

While the people in the Irish republic will probably always profess to want a united Ireland, I wonder how many would really want it if it became a realistic prospect? The republic is doing very nicely thank you, and Northern Ireland would bring huge new burdens and problems (and who the hell wants the likes of Ian Paisley as a fellow citizen? :)).

Attitudes might change over time, but it will be a slow process. The Northern protestants' fear of Catholic domination is misplaced (and little more than bigotry), because Ireland (Eire) is rapidly becoming a much less Catholic Church-influenced state, and the presence of a sizable Protestant minority would hasten that trend. The whole of Ireland is also in the EU, so on an important number of issues it's no longer a question of decisions being taken in London or Dublin - they're taken in Brussels.

If Northern Ireland were to rejoin the republic, I don't see why that should necessarily mean it becoming fully integrated anyway. It could retain a separate devolved government, just as it has had in the UK.

Loyalists are usually not loyal but protestant, Britian is protestant while Ireland is Catholic
That may once have been so, but, despite the continued presence of established churches in England and Scotland, Britain is now a largely secular, multi-faith and a tolerant culture. Northern Ireland is a misfit.

Evidently you don't know very much about Irish history or the colonization of Ireland by the English. Not at all a comparison to Mexico/America.
I note you are living in America Celtland. Perhaps a better comparison would be giving America back to its owners, the Indians. I take it you would be in favour of this?

Never.

Ireland should reunify under the Union Jack and HM.

You deserve a smackin'.

HAHAHAHA

You should ask the UN about Northern Ireland's crime rate and education system.

You will find that they consider our crime rate to be the lowest in the developed world, and our education system to be in the top two or three in the entire world.Indeed; dum de dum (http://www.investni.com/index/locate/lc-why-northern-ireland/quality_of_life.htm#crime) and don't you feel a bit daft now, Cianland? (http://www.investni.com/index/locate/lc-why-northern-ireland/quality_of_life.htm#education) Maybe, just maybe, it would be a good idea to check your facts before you make ludicrous, clearly untrue and totally unfounded allegations.

As far as unifying Ireland goes, I ultimately don't give a fuck personally. In theory, I support it, but in practice it would be a logistical nightmare - and anyway, the Republic have sold out to European bureaucratic (the Tenth Amendment to the Bunreacht na hÉireann). The British may have treated the Irish badly in the past, but there's this silly myth that they treat us like dirt now. That's a load of horseshit. Someone already made the point that mainland Britian may, for the most part, be indifferent to whether NI is part of the UK or not, but they don't oppress us, sneer at us or otherwise cause us any harm.

In terms of day to day life, what the fuck would change anyway apart from the currency? We'd still have the same friends, go to the same jobs, frequent the same pubs, make the same dinners, live in the same houses.....

I note you are living in America Celtland. Perhaps a better comparison would be giving America back to its owners, the Indians. I take it you would be in favour of this?Indeed. I have wondered a number of times if any Native American terrorist groups were ever to arise seeking 'freedom' and/or 'independence', would those Americans that funded and revered the IRA's so-called struggle for same be happy to fund them.

Well the British really F***** NI up.

As for North Ireland, it is true it has a Protestant Majority, BUT it has a Catholic population of about 30% (Hence why the South wants it, a lot of Catholics live there too, it was the North Irish Catholics who fought the North Irish Protestants).

I will admit however the Americans cough*Boston*cough didn't help with sending such monetary, popular , and weapon support. not that what they did was wrong, just screwed Britain more up da ass with more blood and havoc.

Well the British really F***** NI up.

I won't pretend that Northern Ireland is the best example of a good solution, but I think that's a little unfair. I'm not an expert on the partition, but it was because the north wanted to stay. And if that's what a democratic majority want, then that's what should happen. Often trying to solve the problem by negociating with one side upseats the other.

I will admit however the Americans cough*Boston*cough didn't help with sending such monetary, popular , and weapon support. not that what they did was wrong, just screwed Britain more up da ass with more blood and havoc.

Is that actually true? I've heard rumours of it, but find it hard to believe the USA or US citizens would support the IRA.

Is that actually true? I've heard rumours of it, but find it hard to believe the USA or US citizens would support the IRA.

Uh-huh: NORAID's foreign principal is registered as the Provos.

Is that actually true? I've heard rumours of it, but find it hard to believe the USA or US citizens would support the IRA.

The US government has a history of undermining British interests, whatever they say on the surface. After the war, Britain expected to get large loans from the USA, in order to finance the transition to a peace-time economy whilst maintaining order in the colonies. The fact that America cut off all aid in 1945 meant that the empire had to be ended 20 years before the original plans, with terrible consequences, particularly in Africa. An exchange of jet technology was also agreed at the end of the war, but it turned out the Americans had exaggerated their level of understanding, meaning that we effectively gave away our technological superiority.

Apart from selling Britain AIM-9L sidewinders in the Falklands war, America has done nothing for British interests.

I won't pretend that Northern Ireland is the best example of a good solution, but I think that's a little unfair. I'm not an expert on the partition, but it was because the north wanted to stay. And if that's what a democratic majority want, then that's what should happen. Often trying to solve the problem by negociating with one side upseats the other.



Is that actually true? I've heard rumours of it, but find it hard to believe the USA or US citizens would support the IRA.
Coca Cola and Mcdonalds have both openly given substantial amounts of money to NORAID and Sinn Fein, as have several other prominent US businesses, and IIRC a few Senators, too.

Is that actually true? I've heard rumours of it, but find it hard to believe the USA or US citizens would support the IRA.

Sadly it happens. If you look deep enough you can find many things. The USA had a large Irish population that wanted the problem solved so America could send Arms to Ireland.

But there are worse things like London banks funding the Nazi party as there was profit in it. Which eventually lead to Hitler getting into power.

This things i learnt in my history classes.

No we shouldnt give it back. Should america give back Alaska? I think not. Should America give back ALLL of its land to natives? I THINK NOT.
Beside IReland was ours and the south rebelled. So they Took south of us not other way round. Plus im an Internationalist-Nationalist. Im all for unity, provided its OUR kind of unity ;p

. I'm not an expert on the partition, but it was because the north wanted to stay. And if that's what a democratic majority want, then that's what should happen.

Its a REALLY complex issue, that is probably best not even attempting to solve via NS :p but there were various issues at hand during partition. The 'majority' you speak of back in 1920/21 was located east of the Bann. In Tyrone, Fermanagh, possibly Derry there would have been much of a more majority towards joining the Free State.

A lot of political backscratching, gerrymandering and ineptness from all sides helped create the mess post-1920.

Having said all that, becoming an independent state would be the most viable solution for eveyone I personally think.

To be honest, the idea that as soon as reunification occurs, "everything will be alright and we'll march on to our rightful place in history" blah blah blah is nonsense. A new generation has grwon up in the 'South' that doesn't really care one way or another. Politically, reunification would mean the UUP/DUP becoming the second largest party in the country. I doubt many politicans south of the border really wish that despite the rhetoric! :D

Although, one thing Nothern Ireland? Join the bloody Euro!! Its a pain in the ass going up to Belfast and having to exchange currency for a night out :mad: :p Bad exchange rate too!

Having said all that, becoming an independent state would be the most viable solution for eveyone I personally think.In theory, I too would support this. However, many people from both sides of the divide would argue that we simply couldn't function, politically, socially or economically; the country is simply too small (c. 1.6 million people, I think). Having said that, Luxembourg for example is a much smaller country in both terms of land and population and yet it's the heart of the European Union. A lot of European money is injected into it, I'm sure, but that's true of the Republic of Ireland too - if Northern Ireland went independent, I'm sure there would be at least some funding to help us sustain ourselves.

Nonetheless, no doubt both loyalists and republicans would still continue to whine as it was not exactly the way they wanted it. I think both sides need to accept that it's not going to be the way they want it exactly - at least, not for a very long time. If we join the Republic, I think there will be at least some connection left with Britain. If we stay part of the UK, there will still be some connection with Ireland (such as the Council of the Isle ((or whatever it was called)) under the Good Friday Agreement).

To be honest, the idea that as soon as reunification occurs, "everything will be alright and we'll march on to our rightful place in history" blah blah blah is nonsense. A new generation has grwon up in the 'South' that doesn't really care one way or another. I think a lot of outsiders consistently miss this point. Very few people I've ever met from the Republic could care less if Ireland was unified - and some of those that do actually care are opposed to it, as they feel there are still a lot of negative things about NI, especially in reference to the economy. I would dispute this, as the economy is on the up, it's no longer an employment blackspot etc - but I'm not expert on such issues. The point is though that, as you say, for the most part the division between North and South is no longer a big issue for Southerners - it's up here that people actually care.

Although, one thing Nothern Ireland? Join the bloody Euro!! Its a pain in the ass going up to Belfast and having to exchange currency for a night out Bad exchange rate too!Nah, you lot should have kept the Punt! :p It was cool, and it was easy to establish how much you held in your hand. And what's the craic with pints costing E5 a go in many bars?! As soon as the currency change took place, prices went up :( I'm impoverished after this weekend's drinking in Dublin :D

As for North Ireland, it is true it has a Protestant Majority, BUT it has a Catholic population of about 30% (Hence why the South wants it, a lot of Catholics live there too, it was the North Irish Catholics who fought the North Irish Protestants).


It might surprise you, but they really don't want it. The Irish government is not really terribly interested.

As for someone who asked what the Americans have to do with the IRA, well roughly half the founders of the IRA were Americans, who returned to Ireland to fight the struggle. Also in the States almost no one will view the IRA as terrorist, even politicians sometimes make a show of supporting the IRA or Sinn Fein inorder to win the Irish vote. Sam with corporations run by Irish immigrants, donating millions to the IRA , and many weapons the American military no longer needed, ended up in the hands of middlemen, who sent it straight to North Ireland, an Irish-America colonel or Leuitenent wouldn't have much pangs about writing the weapons were destroyed like forseen, instead of in North Ireland killing people. Also Mexican or other South American guards or military men weren't that turned off by helping there Catholic brothers in the Struggle, on and on :rolleyes:

There is still wide sympathy for the IRA here in the US, just wait the second another uprising comes and they beg for money from American Catholics so that they can protect themselves from them Evil Loyalist Protestants, the IRA will flow with weaponry and money again, the disarmement isn't much of a blow.

There is still wide sympathy for the IRA here in the US, just wait the second another uprising comes and they beg for money from American Catholics so that they can protect themselves from them Evil Loyalist Protestants, the IRA will flow with weaponry and money again, the disarmement isn't much of a blow.

and thats the attitude which doesn't help us to move forward. the disarmement means a shit-load more than that....if its the keystone that when removed leads to the removal of all arms from the north...if it even has the potential to do it then it should be given a chance and not dumped on before we see were it leads.....if it offers a chance that kids no longer go to school with brits looking down their sight at them, or protestants can walk through areas without worrying about a kickin, without fathers not letting their sons and daughters out on marching days in case they get involved in riots, if it means that we get a say in whatever happens in this poor, sad little contry then...... then it means a shitlod my friend.

i believe in a united ireland....unashamedly but i'd happily leave it to democracy any day if it meant that the next innocent doesn't bite the bullet.

we all know the arguements here folks....as always they dont get us very far.

but as to the thread aye i'd want the 6 counties my own included back in the free state.

but as to the thread aye i'd want the 6 counties my own included back in the free state.

Fair enough, but they never were part of the Free State.

In terms of day to day life, what the fuck would change anyway apart from the currency? We'd still have the same friends, go to the same jobs, frequent the same pubs, make the same dinners, live in the same houses.....


There is a fear (and a legitamate one at that) that if Ireland were to be re-unified, the Catholics would put the Protestants under the same kind of persecution that the Protestants put the Catholics under in Norethen Ireland previously (but not any more though)

Fair enough, but they never were part of the Free State.
Not to mention the fact that the Free State hasn't existed for 68 years.

Not to mention the fact that the Free State hasn't existed for 68 years.

pOtaato potahto

whatever...i live near the border and thats how its refered to

call it what you will

pOtaato potahto

whatever...i live near the border and thats how its refered to

call it what you will
You realise that if NI was to be given "back" to the Free State, the Republic would have to end, and Ireland would most likely have to come back under the British Crown?

It's very much not a matter of 'pOtaato potahto', it's a major difference.

You realise that if NI was to be given "back" to the Free State, the Republic would have to end, and Ireland would most likely have to come back under the British Crown?

It's very much not a matter of 'pOtaato potahto', it's a major difference.


i have no idea were you get this from but i am sure your just dying to tell me

i have no idea were you get this from but i am sure your just dying to tell me
Dying to tell you what?

Oh, I get 'this' from a place called History. You might have heard of it?

Dying to tell you what?

Oh, I get 'this' from a place called History. You might have heard of it?

dying to tell me why if the north unified with the south it would have to come back under british rule

You realise that if NI was to be given "back" to the Free State, the Republic would have to end, and Ireland would most likely have to come back under the British Crown?

It's very much not a matter of 'pOtaato potahto', it's a major difference.

If the North were ceded to the Free State, why would Ireland have to come back under the Crown? Not arguing, just would like to know why.

If the North were ceded to the Free State, why would Ireland have to come back under the Crown? Not arguing, just would like to know why.
Oh, I was going purely by the historical Free State which ended in 1937, was under the Crown and, apparently, still somehow exists.

Oh, I was going purely by the historical Free State which ended in 1937, was under the Crown and, apparently, still somehow exists.

i already explained my use of the term... there is no point in repeating myself

i already explained my use of the term... there is no point in repeating myself
Well, if you're going to debate what entity could go where, you could at least try to get the names of the various states involved correct. It's not that big an ask.

I don't really see why we should give it back... nobody's causing for it to be given back... in fact the ira are disarming...

The question that I have is if (assuming that the reunification were to take place) if it wouldn't become another incident like the Berlin Wall during the Cold War. What I mean is this: once you have two clashing economies, currencies, and unemployment rates, people are going to have to assume one cultural identity over another, because it seems that they aren't completely compatible. Because of this, there have been some people in Germany (although the number I cannot say, because I was told this by my European history and Hamburg-born German teacher) believe that the Wall should be brought back up because East Germany is dragging the West into the ground economically with all of the repairs necessary to keep the East functioning.

A lot of European money is injected into it, I'm sure, but that's true of the Republic of Ireland too - if Northern Ireland went independent, I'm sure there would be at least some funding to help us sustain ourselves.


As of 2004, Ireland gives more than it gets.


I think a lot of outsiders consistently miss this point. Very few people I've ever met from the Republic could care less if Ireland was unified - and some of those that do actually care are opposed to it, as they feel there are still a lot of negative things about NI, especially in reference to the economy. I would dispute this, as the economy is on the up, it's no longer an employment blackspot etc - but I'm not expert on such issues. The point is though that, as you say, for the most part the division between North and South is no longer a big issue for Southerners - it's up here that people actually care.


Well spotted. Northern Ireland costs far more to maintain than it makes. Reunification might also cause the Loyalists to start bombing Dublin and Cork. (The first one's no great loss, but I'd feel deep pain at seeing Cork destroyed)

The only way I'd vote for a united Ireland was if the terrorist groups were completely gone, and the vast majority of Northern Irish agreed with it. Anything else would be foolish and coercive.

That being said, I can see it happening in my lifetime.

There is a fear (and a legitamate one at that) that if Ireland were to be re-unified, the Catholics would put the Protestants under the same kind of persecution that the Protestants put the Catholics under in Norethen Ireland previously (but not any more though)I can understand that worry I suppose, but I don't think there is much likelihood of it happening. At the time when the Irish were persecuted by the British, we had none of the modern laws that we have today such as the various different codifications on human rights. There's also lots of equality legislation in Northern Ireland, that I'm sure already applies in the South - and if it doesn't, I would suspect it would be brought in for this reason.

Having said all that, though, I'm sure there would be ways to manipulate statistics to make it look as if things are more equal, at least in theory. For example, if law x states that employers are to have roughly proportionate numbers of Catholics and Protestants working for them, I'm sure they could simply claim that any Protestant applying for a job there simply didn't have the right credentials/do a good enough interview/whatever to be successful. But then again, the religion thing in such circumstances is meant to be anonymous...but if you come from the Shankill and your name is Billy, or if you come from the Falls and your name is Seamus, let's face it, it isn't really!

In short, I think there would be good levels of protection to combat this sort of discrimination, but it's never easy to say if they'd work in practice.

i believe in a united ireland....unashamedly but i'd happily leave it to democracy any day if it meant that the next innocent doesn't bite the bullet.Ditto. I ultimately remain pretty ambivalent about our future, so long as whatever outcome comes only through democracy and peace. As Cybach said, in some quarters the IRA simply wouldn't be seen as terrorists - merely "freedom fighters" (:rolleyes:) (side note - does that mean that the UVF and co are merely seen as defenders, then?) - but it's hard to see it that way if you're just an average person from either persuasion who had to witness bombs and killings on a regular basis. The causes may be admirable, depending on your viewpoint, but the methods employed most certainly were not, and I really fail to see how any reasonable, decent person can believe that they were.

I don't really see why we should give it back... nobody's causing for it to be given back... in fact the ira are disarming...

Because they expect it to happen through political means. They're not like "Fuck it, lets be British after all"

i'm sorry but the last time we tried to give it back we almost started another civil war which would not have been a good thing

There's also lots of equality legislation in Northern Ireland, that I'm sure already applies in the South - and if it doesn't, I would suspect it would be brought in for this reason.

Correct. It is illegal to discriminate on basis of religion in the Republic. Of course, you can discriminate on hair colour if you like, so it's a pretty weak regulation unless you're really unsubtle about it.

The causes may be admirable, depending on your viewpoint, but the methods employed most certainly were not, and I really fail to see how any reasonable, decent person can believe that they were.

Violence can get you what you want, and history usually forgives people for it. It's difficult to justify in the short term, but with hindsight can be seen as the correct thing to do. Have you ever seen anyone condem the American Revolution for example, despite the fact that thousands of redcoats were killed?

i'm sorry but the last time we tried to give it back we almost started another civil war which would not have been a good thing

Time moves on. Back then a union of all major European powers would have been unthinkable. Now, it's taken for granted.

Violence can get you what you want, and history usually forgives people for it. It's difficult to justify in the short term, but with hindsight can be seen as the correct thing to do. Have you ever seen anyone condem the American Revolution for example, despite the fact that thousands of redcoats were killed?Well, I know very little about that specific example except that it established America as an independent nation, so would feel unqualified to comment. However, your point is a valid one - but it's all very easy to look back x years later with a romanticised ideal of political violence. Here, at least, many, many of those killed had at most little active involvement in the pursuit of their beliefs - in other words, they were innocents.

Inevitably, innocent people are killed during wars, but there was never an official war declared in Ireland. The groups that perpetrated the various atrocities are officially illegal, and in my understanding at least, that means they are not capable of conducting a legal war. Therefore, any killings at their hands are legally murder.

I'm sure those that truly believe in the form of Islamic fundamentalism that gave us 11 September and the London bombings really believe they are doing a good thing (in their belief that the West is oppressive, immoral, misguided or whatever) but that doesn't mean everyone else thinks so. The numbers and timeframes may be completely divergent, but the comparison seems valid: these people all fight for a cause in which they fundamentally believe, and in doing so kill lots of innocent people that have no real involvement in the structures that the their killers fight against.

Well, my masterplan...

1)Move the Houses of Parliament to, let's say, the Isle of Man.
2)Prince William could have a child with a Catholic.
3)Remember that it would be required to make the religion of the monarch unregulated for this. Do what we just remembered to do.
4)Build a new Royal Palace on, let's say, the Isle of Man.
5)Remember that we'd first have to repatriate the Isle of Man (not that this would be too hard - they rely on us for their defence)
6)Re-unify Ireland with Britain, or Britain with Ireland. However you want to put it.
7)Get rid of the Euro, use the Punt over all Britain and Ireland.
8)Bask in the glory of my dream.

Because they expect it to happen through political means. They're not like "Fuck it, lets be British after all"

Again, the majority of the population of Northern Ireland want to be British.