Aye, but don't tell the paranoid.
;)
Printable View
Aye, but don't tell the paranoid.
;)
You know rightly why it's lasted 54 pages, and why it'll inevitably be followed by another when this one peters out or is deleted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom Kerry
As I said up-thread, you're daydreaming about those trends seeing an end to the NI football team. Nationalists are getting 42% in NI elections- that's 16% behind. A few extra Catholic christenings doesn't mean nationalist voters in 20 years time. Even if it did, there's no guarantee that voters in the Republic will vote for re-unity, particularly if the country remains in serious recession for any length of time. And ultimately a small adjustment to the border (running it along the river Foyle, say) would likely vanish any notional nationalist majority.
But even more fundamentally than all that, there's already an all-Ireland-plus-various-Brits team for you to support. Go and support it and stop stirring.
That site convinces me that people should make love not war:pQuote:
Originally Posted by kingdomkerry
I'd guess that yourself and Not Brazil have made up the vast bulk of something between 400 - 500 posts, replying to what you regard as a significant minority of stirrers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
:D
But then, as is the traditional sport in N-E Ulster, Hypocrisy is the order of the day!
That. And a failure to grasp basic Maths.
Aye, like I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Luckily, even I can't be arsed to reply to every post by Ardee Bhoy- or you could add 100 more to your figure above.
Its not "end of" just because you say so. You're a disgraceQuote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
Im not daydreaming. You are living in denial. The face is the relative strengths of the two blocks are approximately: Unionist 50%, Nationalist 43%. The outcome of the last NI election was 49% unionist, 42.2% nationalist. Don't assume "others" ie 7% are unionist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
People in the republic would overwhelmingly vote for unity.
The GFA makes no allowances for repartition. Over 80% of Irelands population would be totally against it even if it is the unionists doomsday strategy.
Im not stirring. Im saying there is going to be a nationalist majority in the north. This increases the chance of a UI. A UI could mean that the FAI and IFA have to merge. Thats what I thought the point of the thread is.
I don't, merely pointing out the obvious that they aren't nationalist. A nationalist majority in NI means more than 50%, not merely outnumbering unionists. If Alliance, Green and other voters were that keen on a united Ireland, they'd vote for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom Kerry
I doubt they would, if it ever became more than a notional possibility. Think of the increased costs to the state, the large and disaffected minority with no identification with it and so on. You simply can't say with any certainty, it 'd be your favorite denial to think so.Quote:
People in the republic would overwhelmingly vote for unity
So what? Do you think the GFA is set in stone forever, like a 1,000 year reich or something?Quote:
The GFA makes no allowances for repartition
Yes, to stir. There isn't going to be a united Ireland in the next generation; maybe not in the foreseeable future; regardless of all that you don't need it to have an all-Ireland side to support.Quote:
Thats what I thought the point of the thread is
They aren't unionist either though. Many nationalists vote for alliance in strong majority unionist areas. The greens are neither pro or anti union. The fact is the nationalist block is approx 7% behind the unionist block and about 42,000 votes. This is simple fact and from the research I have done the nationalist block will be greater than the unionist one in the not too distant future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
I have lived in Dublin, Cork, Kerry and Galway and I have never met a southern unionist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
No but I do believe repartition will never be allowed to happen. In fact im sure of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Demographics suggest otherwise. Considering the close allignment between religion and political preference in NI, I would disagree, not because of some romantic aspiration but because of demographic fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Dear Lord. Do you think the UK government would trim the border, and have the same problem come back again in 50 years or so?Quote:
And ultimately a small adjustment to the border (running it along the river Foyle, say) would likely vanish any notional nationalist majority.
Dear oh dear. If there was to be repartition, some Unionists seem to think that simply the cityside of Derry and Newry would be trimmed away to suit them. More likely there would be a big wedge cut through the current NI jurisdiction. Tyrone, Fermanagh, most of Derry, S Armgh & Down would be "lost". West Belfast and the Glens may also be "lost". Realisically over half of the 6 counties would leave the union in this depressing scenario.
Furthermore, I fail to understand how people who consider NI to be "their country", would consider cutting it in half again? Surely its one for all and all for one. Would Fermanagh now be as foreign as Derry and Donegal are for each other? Its beyond any logical comprehension.
I remember reading somewhere that:
-for nationalists, Ulster represents the ancient province of Ireland
-for unionists, Ulster represents the maximum possible area of land mass on the island of Ireland they can control.
Its a startling difference, and the doomsday repartition analogy goes a long way to confirming this. It does little to cement a NI identity!!
Additionally the Unionists preach that the will of the majority of the people of NI should be respected. Respected that is while the majority of the people are Unionists. Then the borders should be re-drawn. Yet again. The will of the majority of the people of this new state should then be repsected. All the while paid for by the long suffering English taxpayer. It's a strange from of democracy.
Exactly. Most unionists are in denial about a UI (if not a nationalist majority) in the not too distant future. The ones who do not deny their doomsday scenario will argue for repartition.
In 1921 the British would not take Ulster (9 counties) because the nationalist block was 43%. They knew in this scenario nationalists would eventually form a majority. They then decided to take the 6 counties as the nationalist block was only 33%. The British will not repartition the country again as they will have the same problems all over again.
The Irish gov will never allow partition as it knows when they have 50% + 1 there is an internationally recognised agreement that will pave the way for a British withdrawl.
Dan,
My only confusion is why you might 'support' (despite the local links) such a notional area??
I'm still waiting for a reasoned approach on here from the other side;John B. (& occasionally NB) have been closest....
One can only live in hope.
I'm certainly not in denial about - if it is the wish of the majority of the electorate in Northern Ireland (and in the Republic of Ireland seperately), then, so will it be.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingdomkerry
I just don't think, after due analysis, that it will be happening any time soon.
I know of many, many people who don't vote at "ordinary" elections - look at the turnout figures to see the % who don't bother.
I belive, strongly, that many of the abstainers would certainly vote in a "border poll" - the question is, how would they vote? I don't know, any more than you do.
With regard to British "withdrawal", whilst the British Govt would "withdraw" in such circumstances, British people in Northern Ireland wouldn't be "withdrawing" anywhere. Furthermore, many of the children, grandchildren, great grandchildren etc of those British people will remain British Citizens.
I gave a tip earlier, but I'll try again.
Nobody will "unite" anything on this island by demonising/vilifying the very people they seek to be "united" with.
Unless people are "united", things just aren't "united".
That includes football teams.
There will be unification eventually, don't you worry.
Im glad to hear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
I can give you analysis that says the majority of births are catholic/nationalist, the majority of people in school are nationalist, the majority of people in college are nationalist, that far more unionists go to college in Britain than nationalists and that 2/3s of deaths in NI are unionist/prodestant. This should all add up to change your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
I know of many hardcore nationalists who will never vote in a British election except for a border poll. "I'll wait for the big one".Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
True. but you have to take it that the turnout is representative of both sides.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Agree 100%. Nobody wants them to go anywhere. They are very welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Rather than base my analysis/hopes about "the big one" on crude sectarian headcounts, I would be more minded to study what peoples attitudes are.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingdomkerry
eg,
http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Polit.../NIRELND2.html
Furthermore, with the Celtic Tiger falling apart, I don't think a lot of the 66% of those favouring the Union, will be changing their mind any time soon.
By the way, if I can be convinced that me and my family would be better off in a "United" Ireland than by remaining part of the UK, i'll vote for it.
Similarly, if anyone can convince me why it would be a good idea that the International football team I support disappears, I'll buy the ticket.
Unfortunately, people demonising/vilifying/labelling me for making considered, grown up, decisions on such issues won't be going anyway towards convincing me that those people are right.
Hmm. 'Sectarian' headcounts have been embraced by the vast majority for probably too long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
However if you're genuinely honest about the economic argument*, that's fair enough. Which matters far more :rolleyes: to the general populace than two 'mediocre' international teams, or even if it was just the one!
;)
Accept the Irish economy is pretty fecked and will be for a while;Though don't forget the Brits' one isn't too great either just now. And certain parts of it are net beneficiaries, which maybe one day they'll apply a similar economic logic to and jettison them.....
* Kind of ironic, given how certain people arrived intially in Ulster! Including my own ancestors.
And my only problem with KK & dtm's replies is that it will almost certainly generate another long-winded, pompous and repetitive reply from a certain quarter.
I agree 100% with your assertion that sectarian headcounts have been embraced by too many for too long.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I , "genuinely", couldn't give two flying ones about where people choose to say their prayers. In this (short) life, I'm more concerned about the wellbeing of my family. At this point in time, I believe that is best served with Northern Ireland remaining part of the United Kingdom. I'll listen to anyone who has a contrary view, who doesn't disrespect my starting position.
Perhaps Dundee United and Dundee should merge - two mediocre teams.
Why don't they merge under a "Dundee City" banner? - I'm sure that would make sense to both sets of supporters.
Well the economic argument is the most compelling. Otherwise why would the Scots hang round with the English for so long? Or vice versa.
Though as a good English 'republican' pal said, why should "we hang onto Wales and the North either, apart for sentimental reasons"?
He said besides Hong Kong, England should jettison the rest of their former colonies as economically they were a drain on a country that was or is hardly 'efficient' in any case.
And he's not the only one, to give credit to the English.
Though not sure too many Dundonians would share your own vision of rationalisation. Know a few United fans, who besides being v.pro-UI (!!!!) would just about share a ground, but don't seem too keen on their neighbours.
Partly they claim on what some might label, 'sectarian' grounds. Though given they label 'Weegee' clubs as 'Celgers', reckon they 'doth protest too much' on that front.