The Troubles

124

Comments

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    The EU is trying to make things as difficult as possible for the UK who dared to leave

    No, that can't be true. Remember - we were told that Britain was a big country, the EU wouldn't be able to bully it, and we held all the cards.

    Unless, of course, we were told a load of total bullshit. Which some people here seem determined to regurgitate.
    Shame on them !!

  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    edited April 11
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?
  • Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?

    It did - the whole of the UK being in the customs union. There are lots of better solutions but the British government rejected them.
  • Ethne AlbaEthne Alba Shipmate
    edited April 11
    But which was more important?


    The Brexit S___ Show?

    Or stability and continued peace in Northern Ireland?


    No contest for the Tory Party

    (Which auto correct keeps turning to Story Party)

  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?

    I think it's possible that a technical solution could have been found, but it would have required time to develop, test and implement, and Boris Johnson was not willing to give it time.

    It's notable that the MPs most loudly calling for a technical solution were also the MPs least willing actually to find one, or even to allow time to find one.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    edited April 11
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    But which was more important?


    The Brexit S__t Show?

    Or stability and continued peace in Northern Ireland?


    No contest for the Tory Party

    (Which auto correct keeps turning to Story Party)

    The government is not responsible for disorder in Northern Ireland. Try blaming those directly involved in the disorder. If you can't do that please remember that Northern Ireland has it's own Parliament
  • The Northern Ireland Assembly has very little relevant power. It can't solve the problem by getting the whole UK to rejoin the EU, it can't change any part of the agreement between the UK and EU or do anything else to address the causes of the disorder in NI. Only the UK government has the necessary powers, which it's used to create almost the worst possible situation for NI.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    The Northern Ireland Assembly has very little relevant power. It can't solve the problem by getting the whole UK to rejoin the EU, it can't change any part of the agreement between the UK and EU or do anything else to address the causes of the disorder in NI. Only the UK government has the necessary powers, which it's used to create almost the worst possible situation for NI.

    But I assume that it is responsible for the Police service
  • Alan29Alan29 Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Alan29 wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ricardus wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    They should stop trying to break up toe UK
    That's a bit rich. You've just said that either Ireland should leave the EU or the EU should let the UK dictate to it how to amend its rules. You're trying to break up the EU or tell it what to do.
    I said none of those things.
    The EU is not trying to break up the UK. Boris Johnson is doing that all by himself.
    The EU is trying to make things as difficult as possible for the UK who dared to leave

    What specific rules do you think the EU could bend, waive, or amend to avoid the current situation?

    No controls either on land or in the sea.

    Should they do that for every other non-member country?
    Telford wrote: »
    Ricardus wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    They should stop trying to break up toe UK
    That's a bit rich. You've just said that either Ireland should leave the EU or the EU should let the UK dictate to it how to amend its rules. You're trying to break up the EU or tell it what to do.
    I said none of those things.
    The EU is not trying to break up the UK. Boris Johnson is doing that all by himself.
    The EU is trying to make things as difficult as possible for the UK who dared to leave

    What specific rules do you think the EU could bend, waive, or amend to avoid the current situation?

    No controls either on land or in the sea.

    Illegal under WTO rules.

    I have already said "The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things

    Yes that sums up a lot of Brexiteer thinking - trying to square the circle.
  • Ethne AlbaEthne Alba Shipmate
    edited April 11
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.
  • Yes but the question is what to do about it now.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.
    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?
    For reasons that have been explained several times, it is not logically possible for the EU to come up with a better solution (*). What about explanations was unclear to you?

    Besides, this is a mess of the UK's making; it's not the responsibility of Ireland or any other EU country to sort it out even if they could.

    (*) Unless the EU kicks Ireland out, which we've agreed would be unreasonable.
  • Ricardus wrote: »

    No, there were always customs checks after Irish independence and even after EEC membership. See this article.

    Highlights:
    ...During the late 1950s, the UK government decided to close all but one railway services crossing the border (see video). Only the train line connecting Dublin and Belfast survived...

    This is a small pedantic point, but I think worth making for the sake of accuracy: according to my copy of this book it was the devolved Northern Ireland government who closed those railway lines; I've followed the link from the article that you quote, and documents such as this are indeed from the Ministry of Commerce for Northern Ireland.

  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Shipmate
    edited April 11
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.
    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?
    For reasons that have been explained several times, it is not logically possible for the EU to come up with a better solution (*). What about explanations was unclear to you?

    Besides, this is a mess of the UK's making; it's not the responsibility of Ireland or any other EU country to sort it out even if they could.

    (*) Unless the EU kicks Ireland out, which we've agreed would be unreasonable.

    It would perhaps be possible to put checks between RoI and the rest of Europe (sometimes called a "Celtic Sea" border) instead of between GB and NI. That would not be "kicking out Ireland": although it would still be a most unreasonable thing for Ireland and the rest of the EU to accept, it's not "logically impossible".
  • Ricardus wrote: »

    No, there were always customs checks after Irish independence and even after EEC membership. See this article.

    Highlights:
    ...During the late 1950s, the UK government decided to close all but one railway services crossing the border (see video). Only the train line connecting Dublin and Belfast survived...

    This is a small pedantic point, but I think worth making for the sake of accuracy: according to my copy of this book it was the devolved Northern Ireland government who closed those railway lines; I've followed the link from the article that you quote, and documents such as this are indeed from the Ministry of Commerce for Northern Ireland.

    Broadly speaking, the Republic of Ireland would have preferred to keep at least some of the railways concerned open, with necessary subsidies, but the NI government was firmly anti-rail, and pro-road...

    Hence the draconian closures of 1957, which left the government in Dublin with little option but to shut down the remnants left behind, isolated and unworkable, in the Republic's territory.

    A sad story. On one line, the international (and independent) Sligo, Leitrim, and Northern Counties Railway (Sligo to Enniskillen), traffic was reputed to actually be on the increase when closure was forced upon the Company by the NI government - with the cutting off of the railway's eastern connection at Enniskillen - at the end of September 1957.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    I find all the rioting to be offensive. Do you think it is justified ?
  • Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    It's actually ahistorical. It's like saying that wars happen because men get a thrill from it.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    It's actually ahistorical. It's like saying that wars happen because men get a thrill from it.

    No it's not. Nothing like wars. This is violence just for the sake of it.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    @telford - your explanation fails to explain why now, and not in all the years following the GFA until now.

    As such I reject it as inadequate.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    An accurate translation of Telford's position is: We don't give a flying fuck about Ireland, north or south. If they want to get it the way of what I want Britain to do, they can go and get fucked. It's not my problem.

    There is very little difference between Telford's position and that of a lager lout rioting in the Netherlands.
    I thought we were in purgatory ????

    I apologise. I think I can make the argument stick, but I could have made my point in many other less offensive ways. I will withdraw from the thread for a bit.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    edited April 12
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?

    A customs border in the Irish Sea, between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, doesn't affect any of the countries in the EU.

    PS The word is "its" without an apostrophe. You keep doing this. The possessive form doesn't have an apostrophe (unlike other possessive forms) because "it's" means "it is".
  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    A customs border in the Irish Sea doesn't affect any of the countries in the EU.

    Is Ireland no longer in the EU? When did that come about?
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    A customs border in the Irish Sea doesn't affect any of the countries in the EU.

    Is Ireland no longer in the EU? When did that come about?

    When did Ireland get split by the Irish Sea?
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?

    A customs border in the Irish Sea, between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, doesn't affect any of the countries in the EU.

    PS The word is "its" without an apostrophe. You keep doing this. The possessive form doesn't have an apostrophe (unlike other possessive forms) because "it's" means "it is".

    /tangent - to be fair, his, hers, yours, ours don't have apostrophes either - "its" only looks like an exception because "it's" also exists.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    orfeo wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    The Rejoin the EU crowd all opt to complain about leaving the Customs Union. That's the thing that's gone wrong here. There isn't anything the EU can do about it. Everything else is just the logical consequence of that. You can either stop being precious or agree with us.
    The situation that we have and the situation that I would like us to have are two different things
    That's true of all of us. The question is how to fix it, and we cannot fix it while people are blaming the EU for the situation when it is not the EU's fault, and while passing along lies by claiming the EU are trying to break up the UK as punishment for leaving
    We need to blame the right people, who are Johnson and other Tory Brexiteers.

    Don't you think that the EU might have been able to come up with a better solution as it affects one of it's countries ?

    A customs border in the Irish Sea, between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, doesn't affect any of the countries in the EU.

    PS The word is "its" without an apostrophe. You keep doing this. The possessive form doesn't have an apostrophe (unlike other possessive forms) because "it's" means "it is".

    /tangent - to be fair, his, hers, yours, ours don't have apostrophes either - "its" only looks like an exception because "it's" also exists.

    True.
  • Telford wrote: »
    The Northern Ireland Assembly has very little relevant power. It can't solve the problem by getting the whole UK to rejoin the EU, it can't change any part of the agreement between the UK and EU or do anything else to address the causes of the disorder in NI. Only the UK government has the necessary powers, which it's used to create almost the worst possible situation for NI.

    But I assume that it is responsible for the Police service
    So, you're saying the violence in NI is caused by actions of the Police? I know we've seen lots of events recently where the police have been at fault, but this to me doesn't appear to be one of them.

    Actually, we'd been talking about Brexit (specifically the deal hammered out at the last minute by a UK government unconcerned about the impact on the people of NI which places a customs border in the Irish Sea between NI and the rest of the UK) as the problem. But, there's also a lot of anger about the lack of prosecution of people who broke lock down rules to attend the funeral of a former IRA commander - and, yes, that would have been a decision of Stormont to not press for those prosecutions.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.
    There are times when violence and disorder is an appropriate response to a situation. There are times when it seems that other approaches have been exhausted or tried so many times without impact (something like the BLM protests could be an example), or when the circumstances are extreme (what we're currently seeing in Myanmar could be an example). The question is, after 5 years since that stupid public vote with the communities of NI being severely impacted by decisions made in Westminster but with virtually no say in those, have things reached the point where violence is appropriate?
  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    I've no connections to either Northern Ireland or the Republic, so this may be a dumb thing to say, but ...

    I read that the Shankill has the lowest rate of educational attainment in Europe. Now ISTM that when teenagers in comparable parts of London start stabbing people, those teenagers may well (in their heads) have legitimate grievances about What The Other Postcode Gang Did To Them, but, generally speaking, when we are thinking about how to deal with the violence, we don't look into those grievances, but talk about the lack of opportunities and the closure of youth centres. But because some adults also buy into loyalist teenagers' grievances, we don't do that in Northern Ireland, but we should do.
  • Alan29Alan29 Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    It's actually ahistorical. It's like saying that wars happen because men get a thrill from it.

    No it's not. Nothing like wars. This is violence just for the sake of it.

    Sometimes it is better to say nothing when you know nothing.
  • FirenzeFirenze Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    edited April 12
    Telford wrote: »
    Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    I find all the rioting to be offensive. Do you think it is justified ?

    There are people on the thread much more affected by it than you, and with considerably stronger feelings than mere offence.

    You appear to think any attempt at contextualising it in terms of history or politics - anything in fact other your nihilistic, knee-jerk reaction - is 'justification'.

    And I see your idol Johnson doesn't think the matter worth interrupting his Easter hols for. Perhaps he is insufficiently offended.
  • GarethMoonGarethMoon Shipmate
    edited April 12
    I voted remain. I don't think there ever should have even been a referendum, although I hope against hope there will be another one.

    But to those who seem to be suggesting that the Good Friday Agreement means that Brexit should never legally have been allowed to go ahead after the referendum was held, or that a full withdrawal from the EU automatically endangers the peace process I have a wonderment.

    If we had voted to remain and subsequently Ireland voted to leave both the EU and the customs union, would you be so quick to tell them that the Good Friday Agreement meant that they weren't allowed to, or use whatever arguments you currently have against the UK gvt against those supporting Dublin?

    Unlikely I know, but it's an interesting thought experiment. I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    The position of the EU appears to be that the Good Friday agreement overides the right of the UK to be an independent country able to freely move goods about within it's borders.

    The EU are more or less saying that they have the right to decide how independent we are.

    That should, of course, be within its borders, but that's not the only mistake you've made.

    I typed it as within the borders of it. it being the UK

    That's not at all what you typed.
  • AnselminaAnselmina Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Firenze wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Ethne Alba wrote: »
    @Telford I think what annoys me most about the current situation in Northern Ireland is that history has cast a long and not always helpful shadow there. So in such situations it is best to go carefully.

    It took years of negotiations to get to The Good Friday Agreement. Language had to be tempered. New ways of speaking about and to each other had to be suggested, tried out, practiced, experienced.

    Then the UK govt decided that Brexit is more important than peace. ( over there)



    The UK government is directly and unequivocally responsible for destabilising Northern Ireland.
    But apparently that was a risk worth taking, for a higher prize.


    The situation is heartbreaking
    I do not disagree with anything you say, but I do not see that it justifies violence and disorder.

    Again you're confusing explanation with justification. To explain why someone does something is not the same as excusing it.

    I explained why these young louts do it days ago. They find it exciting and enjoyable

    Your 'explanation' is adequate only for you. It is shallow, dismissive and to those of us who have lived with and through The Troubles, offensive. You literally do not know what you are talking about.

    It's actually ahistorical. It's like saying that wars happen because men get a thrill from it.

    No it's not. Nothing like wars. This is violence just for the sake of it.

    I lived in England many years and I love the country and the people. But your attitude really does seem to represent a view that prevails amongst many, that is essentially historically ignorant, blinkered and foundationally the reason why countries that have been colonized for centuries by English governance have struggled and continue to struggle (even after de-colonialism). You say NI has its own parliament. Yes, in a limited way (when it can be bothered to assemble!). NI also had its own response to Brexit. Much good it did them. Westminster is the supreme authority, and therefore where the buck stops.

    Under-resourced, overly deprived areas of narrow nationalistic loyalties, such as exist in Northern Ireland, where centuries of exploitative politics inculcate vulnerability and insecurities, are very naturally producers of 'louts' on the streets who enjoy throwing stones and petrol bombs. (It is also, incidentally, no surprise why such underclass, brutalised regions historically have provided the British military for many years with its toughest and most expendable security forces.) It's hardly a revelation or a coincidence that it's places like Belfast and Toxteth and Lozells that have had this kind of violence and not places like Edgbaston, St John's Wood or the Cotswolds.

    I know it's boring to repeat this. But it was predicted that an inept Brexit would produce exactly these results. If you know your ineptitude and false dealing with the electorate is likely to give excuses to stone-throwing louts, then it is your responsibility not to be inept and false. Sadly, the Leave campaign didn't follow this simple guidance. In the aim of fulfilling a plethora of personal, and sometimes conflicting, ambitions and agendas, realism and truth were not prioritised. It's bad enough when there is mob violence purely out of idle mischief-making. But it's another category of accountability when it can be related very directly to a deliberate negligence and untruthful manipulation of the political process for specific ends.

    Just because the 'louts' are behaving in inexcusable ways to a certain unrest doesn't mean the reasons for that unrest don't exist and shouldn't be properly examined, or that those who created those reasons are not accountable and shouldn't be judged as having either behaved rightly or negligently.


  • GarethMoon wrote: »
    I voted remain. I don't think there ever should have even been a referendum, although I hope against hope there will be another one.

    But to those who seem to be suggesting that the Good Friday Agreement means that Brexit should never legally have been allowed to go ahead after the referendum was held, or that a full withdrawal from the EU automatically endangers the peace process I have a wonderment.

    If we had voted to remain and subsequently Ireland voted to leave both the EU and the customs union, would you be so quick to tell them that the Good Friday Agreement meant that they weren't allowed to, or use whatever arguments you currently have against the UK gvt against those supporting Dublin?

    Unlikely I know, but it's an interesting thought experiment. I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.

    I'm afraid you've fallen for the lie that Brexit is only really Brexit if we leave the customs union, something I am sure will be a surprise to the government in Ankara. The UK left the EU in January 2020, but the border problems in Ireland only arose once we left the customs union this year.

    And yes, I'm pretty sure that whoever was forcing a need to check goods in a way that conflicts with the GFA would get it in the neck. Part of the point, of course, is that no Irish government would be so fecking insane in the first place. It seems to be a uniquely British English problem.
  • GarethMoonGarethMoon Shipmate
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I voted remain. I don't think there ever should have even been a referendum, although I hope against hope there will be another one.

    But to those who seem to be suggesting that the Good Friday Agreement means that Brexit should never legally have been allowed to go ahead after the referendum was held, or that a full withdrawal from the EU automatically endangers the peace process I have a wonderment.

    If we had voted to remain and subsequently Ireland voted to leave both the EU and the customs union, would you be so quick to tell them that the Good Friday Agreement meant that they weren't allowed to, or use whatever arguments you currently have against the UK gvt against those supporting Dublin?

    Unlikely I know, but it's an interesting thought experiment. I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.

    I'm afraid you've fallen for the lie that Brexit is only really Brexit if we leave the customs union, something I am sure will be a surprise to the government in Ankara.

    Not really, and why I specified what if Dublin voted to leave the EU and the customs union. It might not make sense but if they had done it and we remained in I'd have been wary of critizing their right to as a Brit.

    One of the many reasons the referendum should never have happened is the wording was far, far too vague.

  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    (*) Unless the EU kicks Ireland out, which we've agreed would be unreasonable.

    It would perhaps be possible to put checks between RoI and the rest of Europe (sometimes called a "Celtic Sea" border) instead of between GB and NI. That would not be "kicking out Ireland": although it would still be a most unreasonable thing for Ireland and the rest of the EU to accept, it's not "logically impossible".
    Given that the basic purpose of EU membership is free trade I think it's appropriate to say imposing customs checks between Ireland and the rest of the EU would for most practical purposes effectively amount to kicking out Ireland.

  • GarethMoonGarethMoon Shipmate
    Part of the point, of course, is that no Irish government would be so fecking insane in the first place. It seems to be a uniquely British English problem.

    Or maybe just a problem with countries that want a say (rightly or wrongly) in Ireland's policies and don't fully understand the consequences?

    As the European Commission found out when they messed up and announced a "hard border"/"triggering of the safeguarding clause" (depending on your views) and u-turned after getting slapped down by Dublin.

    What was surprising is an acquaintance living in Ireland said that at times in Covid when Ireland was in lockdown there were arguments being made in favour of a temporary hard border stopping people from NI going into the Republic, and at times the Irish police were turning back NI cars from entering.

    I realise that these are unique times, but in the aftermath of Brexit I never in my wildest dreams thought that in 2020 the Irish state would be policing the border.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
    I think that's just a reasonable unwillingness to criticise groups you don't belong to, especially if they're the weaker partner.

    I think under the hypothetical circumstances you describe the UK government could well maintain that in the Good Friday Agreement Ireland had committed itself to not doing anything to change the customs relations of Northern Ireland without the consent of Northern Ireland.
  • GarethMoonGarethMoon Shipmate
    edited April 12
    Dafyd wrote: »
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
    I think that's just a reasonable unwillingness to criticise groups you don't belong to, especially if they're the weaker partner.

    I think under the hypothetical circumstances you describe the UK government could well maintain that in the Good Friday Agreement Ireland had committed itself to not doing anything to change the customs relations of Northern Ireland without the consent of Northern Ireland.

    Mmm. Yes, maybe it's the power aspect.

    I would be horrified if a British gvt (fully in the EU) told Ireland that the Irish people had no right to decide to leave the EU and the EU customs union without some NI loyalist/DUP approval, given the history of our colonisation of them.

    I'd also be horrified with the EU saying it too, but less so with the likes of the USA telling Ireland that.

    EDIT- Actually it's depend on the president. I'd be horrified at tRump, Bush or Regan telling Ireland they couldn't leave but would be fine with it coming from JFK, Obama, Clinton or Biden. Maybe because they have Irish roots?
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited April 12
    @GarethMoon
    Actually it's depend on the president. I'd be horrified at tRump, Bush or Regan telling Ireland that but would be fine with JFK, Obama, Clinton or Biden. Maybe because they have Irish roots?

    Defending a president's right to make such a statement on grounds of Irish heritage would leave Irish Americans open to charges of dual lotalty, it seems to me. Because you'd be essentially saying that being Irish American gives him a POLITICAL connection to Ireland that he wouldn't otherwise have.

    Before the Brexit vote, Obama went to the UK and told the British public that their nation would get no special trade agreements from the US in the event of a Leave vote. That seemed to me entirely proper: as the POTUS, he has every right to make statements about who he wants to sign trade agreements with.

    And he wasn't telling them to do or not do anything: they were still free to vote Leave, as long as they understood what the US trade-position would be. And, as it turned out, most voters didn't much care.

    Bu the way, Ronald Reagan was also of Irish descent, but unlike ancestral Orangeman Clinton, Reagan's family were Catholics who converted to protestantism. (I've always had the idea that his claims to being culturally Irish were pretty sketchy, and at least partly propped up by those football films he did.)

  • Dafyd wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    (*) Unless the EU kicks Ireland out, which we've agreed would be unreasonable.

    It would perhaps be possible to put checks between RoI and the rest of Europe (sometimes called a "Celtic Sea" border) instead of between GB and NI. That would not be "kicking out Ireland": although it would still be a most unreasonable thing for Ireland and the rest of the EU to accept, it's not "logically impossible".
    Given that the basic purpose of EU membership is free trade I think it's appropriate to say imposing customs checks between Ireland and the rest of the EU would for most practical purposes effectively amount to kicking out Ireland.

    No, I think "for most practical purposes" is massively overstating it. There wouldn't be any actual barriers to trade or movement between Ireland and the EU, just checks. In the same way, the current checks between NI and GB do not amount to "kicking NI out of the UK", whatever Unionists say and feel about it.
  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
    I think that's just a reasonable unwillingness to criticise groups you don't belong to, especially if they're the weaker partner.

    I also have a sense that the GFA was largely solving a British problem - in the sense that most of the armed people involved were UK citizens even if they didn't want to be. So it would be easier for the Irish government to say ' Well screw you, we didn't create the conditions that made the GFA necessary.'
  • GarethMoonGarethMoon Shipmate
    Ricardus wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
    I think that's just a reasonable unwillingness to criticise groups you don't belong to, especially if they're the weaker partner.

    I also have a sense that the GFA was largely solving a British problem - in the sense that most of the armed people involved were UK citizens even if they didn't want to be. So it would be easier for the Irish government to say ' Well screw you, we didn't create the conditions that made the GFA necessary.'

    I thought the GFA allowed NI born residents to choose whether they identified primarily as Irish or British or both?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    @telford - your explanation fails to explain why now, and not in all the years following the GFA until now.

    As such I reject it as inadequate.

    Good point and I accept your rejection
  • Ricardus wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    GarethMoon wrote: »
    I found myself much less willing to criticize a theoretical Irish leave vote than I do the British one.
    I think that's just a reasonable unwillingness to criticise groups you don't belong to, especially if they're the weaker partner.

    I also have a sense that the GFA was largely solving a British problem - in the sense that most of the armed people involved were UK citizens even if they didn't want to be. So it would be easier for the Irish government to say ' Well screw you, we didn't create the conditions that made the GFA necessary.'

    This doesn't quite make sense to me - it's sort of begging the question. The issue at stake is, in fact, whether this is a British problem or not. Throughout the 70s and 80s the UK indeed attempted to treat N.I. as an internal British problem, with mixed results. This wasn't entirely Westminster's fault - whenever they attempted to involve outside parties things seemed to go even worse (c.f. Sunningdale 1973, Anglo-Irish Agreement 1985). The GFA had relative success because it involved everyone acknowledging that it wasn't simply a British or an Irish problem but required the local communities, the British and Irish governments and the international community all to have an input.
Sign In or Register to comment.