[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Bad Girls @ Thursday, Nov 10 2011, 22:17)

I think it should be 101% up to the people who live in Northern Ireland, whether they want to be part of the UK, part of the Irish Republic or even their own little country altogether. I really don't think people who live in the mainland of the UK, Republic of Ireland or anywhere else like many of the so-called "Irish-Americans" in the USA for that matter should have an opinion (one that 'counts' at least). Why should people who don't even live there have a say in what happens or even dictate what happens? Of course, the issue is that the people there are very divided about what they want and it won't be completely resolved any time soon. IMO.

The problem is this- Northern Ireland is very factional. There appears to be a pretty even split between those who want to remain part of the UK (Unionists/Loyalists) and those who want to be part of the Irish Republic (Republicans). The Republic, on the whole, couldn't give a toss- they don't care either way. Under the current establishment, the only individuals who are involved in large-scale violence are the Republican splinter groups, armed with Libyan-supplied weapons and explosives. However, if the tables were turned and the Six Counties became part of the Republic, then all you'd have is the Loyalist paramilitary organisations conducting a guerilla campaign against the Irish mainland in order to re-establish connections with the Union. It's one of those Catch 22s which is always going to leave one group marginalised and prone to sectarian violence.

[Bad Girls]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Thursday, Nov 10 2011, 21:29)

QUOTE (Bad Girls @ Thursday, Nov 10 2011, 22:17) I think it should be 101% up to the people who live in Northern Ireland, whether they want to be part of the UK, part of the Irish Republic or even their own little country altogether. I really don't think people who live in the mainland of the UK, Republic of Ireland or anywhere else like many of the so-called "Irish-Americans" in the USA for that matter should have an opinion (one that 'counts' at least). Why should people who don't even live there have a say in what happens or even dictate what happens? Of course, the issue is that the people there are very divided about what they want and it won't be completely resolved any time soon. IMO. The problem is this- Northern Ireland is very factional. There appears to be a pretty even split between those who want to remain part of the UK (Unionists/Loyalists) and those who want to be part of the Irish Republic (Republicans). The Republic, on the whole, couldn't give a toss- they don't care either way. Under the current establishment, the only individuals who are involved in large-scale violence are the Republican splinter groups, armed with Libyan-supplied weapons and explosives. However, if the tables were turned and the Six Counties became part of the Republic, then all you'd have is the Loyalist paramilitary organisations conducting a guerilla campaign against the Irish mainland in order to re-establish connections with the Union. It's one of those Catch 22s which is always going to leave one group marginalised and prone to sectarian violence.

I know. Hence my last line.

I just notice that there's a lot of people who don't even live in Northern Ireland who sound off thinking they're qualified to state what's best for the region when they don't even live there. Republicans from the south think they have an automatic geographic and historical "right" to it, people with Unionist sympathies in the mailand UK have some idealistic view of it being part of the UK and everyone living happily ever when that's clearly not the case either.

If this is ever gonna be resolved the least that should be done is everyone else butting out.

[glenn tha killer]

it was our county at first,but yes its too much of a mess and to be honest if we didn't create it why should we be responsible or try to free it, all the same if someone in the north considers them selves Irish I accept it and consider them Irish the same with the lads who are British.

[myhame]

Enough.

This post has been edited by sivispacem on Wednesday, Nov 16 2011, 23:36

[leaflinks]

Northern Ireland is still a complicated territory.

During the problems in the last century, all the IDF soldiers were withdrawn from the couple of UN peacekeeping missions in 1974 for four years and sent to the border, to protect the rest of the country from the problems in that province whilst the British military was stationed there.

Though the government had plans to send in soldiers to protect the catholic community, it would of lead to somewhere else but most likely the government probably remembered president De Valera's statement that he spoke to a crowd on the 50th anniversary of the Easter Rising in April 1966. Eitherway, Prime minister Lynch was correct to agree to a movement of soldiers into the province.



^President De Valera, he was very old when in office, was in his 80's. Two term president. Fourteen years. 1959-1973. Met President Johnson and also spoke to the congress in 1964.

He said in April 1966 - "A real friendship that would stand the test, because in the long run the fate of these two islands, the people's of these two neighbouring islands, is likely to be the same, ultimately we must go our different ways, have our different intellectual and spiritual ideas. But materially and otherwise these two islands to a large extent set by nature here off the coast of Europe and they are destined to be neighbours and they should be friends."


When Eamon De Valera was PM in the 30's, 40's, he would again in the fifties, PM churchill offered the North back, but the deal was send Irish soldiers to fight the white race empire in Europe. Which he would not agree to.

His statement as president was very progressive compared to his radio address during his time as PM, to PM Churchill after world war 2, May 1945. Put the question to him, why should we have fought with an empire that did what it did. World war 2 was about competing empires.

The way history goes, and the events that shape our ancestors and ultimately our own in where we live to day. So it was a fair point at the time, but it looks very different today.

The former president Mary McAleese, during her two terms as president 1997-2011, her optional theme as president was "building bridges", a noble way of trying to create a bridge for the communities to walk across and be one, with their differences, but live in calm and cause. President McAleese was a very different president than her predecessors, the time and attitude was different in the past. As well as the office has changed to include a president to make a mark in the country domestically.



Though one thing could faulted with the previous president, she didn't remind the government that possibly an election should of taken place in 2004, she was never elected. The government decided with the help of the other parties to not have an election. That ment that a few independent candidates could not contest in an election.

Personally if you want my view, I'm a nationalist living in England, I more interested in English renaissance than a Union or Kingdom an English state, a nation of our own.

Thanks for reading.

[Vercetti27]

Has there ever been an idea to split up the catholics in NE with the protestants? The idea of NE is that it is for people who want to be part of britian is what I've assumed. But catholics and republicans want to live where they come from in NE without being persecuted for having a different religion, so they won't leave. There are protestant areas of belfast and catholic areas, but I think there is often violence between the different neighbourhoods, especially during that Orange march of whatever its called.

The ideal solution would be to make NE independent from both Ireland and Britain , although I'm sure there are thousands of possible disadvantages.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Vercetti27 @ Monday, Nov 21 2011, 19:38)

Has there ever been an idea to split up the catholics in NE with the protestants?

That's basically how NI looks right now. Belfast has changed a lot since the early-mid 1990s (I have family on both sides of the border), and it's regained some modicum of normality, but it's still like being in Southern Israel or Baghdad. There are 30-foot-high razor-wire and steel-reinforced-concrete walls 3 feet thick separating some Catholic communities from Protestant ones. There are big metal gates that can be drawn across major thoroughfares that can be used to physical segregate communities in times of trouble. It's very alien to most mainland British citizens. Doesn't work that well, either. You can't segregate communities in that way without some kind of agreed national or political border, and that just doesn't exist.

[glenn tha killer]

I think now that it should be left the way it is.

[leaflinks]

QUOTE (glenn tha killer @ Sunday, Jan 8 2012, 13:51)

I think now that it should be left the way it is.

How long do you think that would remain that way?

Do you think that the Irish state would ever be in a position like Israel? Sort of having a defensive military strategy towards the North? That would be a twisted possbility for those that want an independent England.

But that question cannot be answered unless the Union between England, Scotland and Nothern Ireland changes, and not forgetting the English-Welsh union.

[TheTrikstar]

PIRA. Tiocfaidh Ar La. Up the RA

-Warned- SVP-

This post has been edited by sivispacem on Monday, Jan 23 2012, 12:44

[Irviding]

QUOTE (leaflinks @ Sunday, Jan 8 2012, 11:01)

QUOTE (glenn tha killer @ Sunday, Jan 8 2012, 13:51) I think now that it should be left the way it is. How long do you think that would remain that way? Do you think that the Irish state would ever be in a position like Israel? Sort of having a defensive military strategy towards the North? That would be a twisted possbility for those that want an independent England. But that question cannot be answered unless the Union between England, Scotland and Nothern Ireland changes, and not forgetting the English-Welsh union.

Why would they ever need a defensive military strategy? I don't think the problem is state vs. state, as in UK vs Irish Republic, but simply factional violence. The idea that it would become a warzone between the UK and Ireland is just nonsensical.

[Straznicy]

I am unashamedly a Republican. The majority of my ancestry is Irish, I have close relatives who reside there and I frequently visit the island. It is very much a second home to me after Scotland, so I care about it a fair deal more than other countries.

Loyalism has always struck me as a belief system with a basis in sheer paranoia. Fears that a united, independent Ireland would be nothing more than a Papal pawn. Or that Protestants and/or Ulster Scots will face persecution at the hands of an Irish Catholic majority. Several hundred years ago I would accept this as a valid argument; Protestants and settlers certainly were at times persecuted because of their ethnicity/religious conviction, and the Catholic Church very much commanded the loyalty of its adherents. However, this argument is invalid, and has been for some time. The 1798 rebellion saw the United Irishmen strive for an independent Ireland, and was characterised by co-operation between Catholics and Protestants. This desire for harmony and unity between the religious sects was made symbolic with the creation of the tricolour - it still amazes me how ignorant many seem to be of the meaning of the flag. In short, I view loyalism as irrational and based on pure fear. There is no reason why loyalists in the six counties could not retain their religion, heritage or traditions as part of an united Ireland in my mind, moreso nowadays than ever before.

Fundamentally, Northern Ireland is a colony. One of, if not the oldest of Britain. That the majority of its denizens wish to remain part of the United Kingdom is fairly irrelevant to me; the state was arbitrarily created to ensure a loyalist majority, thus diminishing the credibility of any appeal to democratic principles. The UK ought to cede the territory to the Irish Republic, but I understand that this will not occur without a democratic precedent. At least now there exists a situation where Irish Catholics in the north do not face state-sanction persecution and inequality, which can hopefully be built upon.

I think it is inevitable that we will see Irish re-unification, and likely within our lifetime. The oft-cited reason is the higher Catholic birth-rate, and while this undoubtedly will have an impact, it alone will not be enough. The end of The Troubles has enabled the Republican movement to begin trying to win over loyalists to the notion of Irishness and unity. There is already some suggestion this is occuring. Increasing numbers of Protestant youth consider themselves 'Irish or Northern Irish' rather than 'British' (I cannot recall the exact figures but will happily dig them up if anyone is interested.) As we saw in 1798, and with other movements such as the Irish Parliamentary Party, Protestants and Catholics in Ireland can be united behind a shared identity and desire for independence. I see no reason why this could not occur again.

[Irviding]

But straz - what about self determination? I have Irish people in my family too who try to go on about how it should be part of the republic. My sympathies tend to lie with the UK on this issue because, very simply, the people there have time and time again decided to remain part of the UK. Even if they identify themselves as Northern Irish, you have a very clear distinction - they are happy with the UK and don't want to be part of the republic. I mean people went after the British since Wilson's 14 points about self determination for their territories, and now they are essentially being asked to ignore it. It's just nonsensical.

[SWOT]

Im from the Republic and Im a true Irish man and I even say UK, even though it should be part of Ireland. I mean why should UK own six counties of another island when colonisation is long gone?

[Irviding]

QUOTE (SWOT @ Monday, Jan 23 2012, 20:12)

Im from the Republic and Im a true Irish man and I even say UK, even though it should be part of Ireland. I mean why should UK own six counties of another island when colonisation is long gone?

Why should the US own Hawaii? Why should we own Alaska? Why should Russia own Sakhalin?

[Chorup]

I don't have a great understanding in regards to the Northern Ireland dispute, however I do find myself feeling sympathetic towards the Irish. They practically suffered a similar fate to my people, therefore I feel I can relate with the Irish in terms of historical atrocities.

Here's an interesting quote by Roger Casement who was an Irish Revolutionary.

“I know of two tragic histories in the world - that of Ireland and that of Macedonia. Both of them have been deprived and tormented.” - Roger Casement (Irish Patriot, executed by the British in 1916)

Here's another quote of interest:
"The moral failure of Turkey, her inability to govern her Christian Peoples is only the pretext: but just as the moral argument brings its strange revenges and shows an Ireland that has suffered all that Macedonia has suffered, and this at the hands of Christians, and not of Moslems, so the triumph of the Balkan Allies, far from benefiting Britain must in the end react to her detriment."

[glenn tha killer]

QUOTE (Irviding @ Tuesday, Jan 24 2012, 01:25)

QUOTE (SWOT @ Monday, Jan 23 2012, 20:12) Im from the Republic and Im a true Irish man and I even say UK, even though it should be part of Ireland. I mean why should UK own six counties of another island when colonisation is long gone? Why should the US own Hawaii? Why should we own Alaska? Why should Russia own Sakhalin?

who said they should?

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (glenn tha killer @ Wednesday, Mar 7 2012, 16:12)

QUOTE (Irviding @ Tuesday, Jan 24 2012, 01:25) QUOTE (SWOT @ Monday, Jan 23 2012, 20:12) Im from the Republic and Im a true Irish man and I even say UK, even though it should be part of Ireland. I mean why should UK own six counties of another island when colonisation is long gone? Why should the US own Hawaii? Why should we own Alaska? Why should Russia own Sakhalin? who said they should?

You necro'd a two month old thread for that? If you're going to revive dead threads, at least contribute something worthwhile.

[Irviding]

QUOTE (glenn tha killer @ Wednesday, Mar 7 2012, 10:12)

QUOTE (Irviding @ Tuesday, Jan 24 2012, 01:25) QUOTE (SWOT @ Monday, Jan 23 2012, 20:12) Im from the Republic and Im a true Irish man and I even say UK, even though it should be part of Ireland. I mean why should UK own six counties of another island when colonisation is long gone? Why should the US own Hawaii? Why should we own Alaska? Why should Russia own Sakhalin? who said they should?

Because the people that live there are American and want to be American. Same with all the US territories overseas.

[ThePinkFloydSound]

Very interesting reading guys.

I'd like to see Britain hand over Northern Ireland. It's a romantic notion embedded in me since I was a child growing up in Ireland.

It's very complex and it wont be easy and may never happen. I'm lucky that 'the troubles' would not have effected me directly. I can't really comment, living my 'sheltered' life in the republic.

I've met some very nice people from both sides of the fence that just want the violence to stop. I wish everyone could be a winner.

Wow, I sound like such a hippy.