Posted on 03/26/2007 6:59:22 AM PDT by presidio9
The feeling here heading into a potentially historic week, when British unionists and Irish nationalists could agree to form a government, might be described as one of prerelief. Relief because there is a sense that things are finally going to go right this time, but only a preliminary one because, well, they've been down this road before.
Today we'll learn what it will be this time: devolution of a raft of governing powers from London to a local assembly elected March 7, or dissolution of the assembly and an undefined joint custody between Britain and the Republic of Ireland to the south. After years of waiting for the Provisional Irish Republican Army and its political wing, Sinn Féin, to lay down their arms and accept the rule of law, all now hinges on the hard-line Democratic Unionist Party's agreeing to work with the nationalists. Over the weekend DUP leader Ian Paisley, the Protestant minister dubbed "Dr. No" for his refusal even to speak with Sinn Féin, demanded a six-week extension. For all the bluster, though, there is still a decent chance that an arrangement will be made.
If anyone embodies Northern Ireland's incomplete transition to self rule, it's Gerry Adams. The Sinn Féin leader is widely accused of, and always denies, having ties to the highest levels of the IRA. Either way, and right or wrong, the fact is that he's become a legitimate actor on the political stage in the eyes of the British. That the onus is on Mr. Paisley and the DUP to go along with power-sharing, or risk absorbing the public's outrage for failing to do so, goes to show just how much the perception of Mr. Adams and Sinn Féin has changed. The IRA, remember, is blamed
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Amen.
As to where they eventually land politically, I care not as long as it is peacefully arrived at with the support of a majority and the preservation of fights for the minority.
Obviously that should be "...preservation of rights..."
No...you misunderstand..some of my own relatives were Ulster Scotch-Irish. What I mean is that both need to have equal say in whatever Government is chosen, and as long as that Gov is IRISH.
The Ulster Irish have murdered enough Catholics in other ways....there is EQUAL blood on their hands.
No. Whatever government is chosen, the Catholics should have equal say, and that government needs to be fully Irish.
Now if that government chooses to be part of the Commonwealth, then so be it.
Good God, you surely are looking for a fight no doubt. My Grandfather would have thrashed you within an inch of your life :) (in his younger days, God rest him....)
He used to talk about "damned orangemen".......:)
It has been tried...without success. The drunk ones were the hardest to deal with. One hates to injure someone who is basically defenseless, but they were also the most agressive.
However, its mostly a troll of those in the US who actually know something about history...damn few found.
Both sides should not have even say, since together they may not even represent a quater of the population. Both are nasty fringe groups, nothing more.
There is no principle that says the result has to be an Irish government. It should be freely chosen, whatever it is.
Southern California
There is still hope that somehow the modern day Northern Irish Protestants can come out of their 17th century shell and realize that the Pope does not want to convert them to Catholocism.
My experience is that the hardcore Catholics hate the non-Catholics with about the same fervor that the hard core Protestants hate the non-Protestants. There is more that enough hate to go around from both sides. Paisley and his ilk are no better or no worse that the Gerry Adams and boys. Your one sided position is somewhere between silly and shameful.
My mother's family is Scot-Irish and many still live in NI, spread throughout the 6 counties. Though technically Protestant, like just about all of the NI citizens I have met over the years, they are secular and want the fighting to stop from all sides and have no desire to leave the UK. I don't see NI becoming part of the Irish Republic anytime soon. Dad's family is from Dingwall, Scotland which may well break from the UK before NI.
You are wrong. The colours represent those people you correctly said, but because they fight "England". The colour Orange represents not just Potestantism, but more specifically Orangeism. You won't find an Orangeman fighting "England."
The flag therefore represents peace between Irish Catholicism/Nationalism and Orangeism.
You are also right that "Irish is Irish" but just as you can be Irish-American, many people who are Northern Irish are also British.
I think your continual use of "England" instead of "Britain" shows that you do not quite grasp the sharing of identity that all the peoples of "The Isles" or "British Isles" share and also do not share. Many British people are not, never have been, and don't want to be English.
The British need to LEAVE. PERIOD.
They are the cause and effect of the problem. Once they are gone, the Irish will settle the problem themselves.
The great shame is that it is those who left Ireland who kept many of the hatreds going.
If it wasn't for those "damned Orangemen" many of the US presidents wouldn't exist.
Who are the British you speak of?
In case you hadn't noticed, the Catholics in the north do have equal say in the government they choose.
It's in the process of happening here because of immigration, legal and illegal. Our Belfasts and Londonderrys will be Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Antonio, etc.
The British need to LEAVE. PERIOD.
Is British different than UK citizens? If not Northern Ireland would be empty if all of them left, since they are almost all UK citizens.
At this point it is immpossible to say who is truly Irish and who is something else. My family there is as much Irish as most, and they clearly have Calvinist and Scot roots.
The British need to LEAVE. PERIOD.
Is British different than UK citizens? If not Northern Ireland would be empty if all of them left, since they are almost all UK citizens. At this point it is immpossible to say who is truly Irish and who is something else. My family there is as much Irish as most and should be no less qualified to participate in the decision making process even though they clearly have Calvinist and Scot roots. You are starting to frame it in a manner similar to the Quebecois and the vrai lane
The English.
Apparently, they disagree......
In discussions like this, the meaing of words is critically important. Your use of the term "Brtish" is still ambiguous. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles_%28terminology%29 should give you some insight.
British notionally means someone with a UK passport, which includes the non-foreign residents of Northern Ireland. Surely that is not your intent. Is it possible to parse the Irish from non-Irish in Northern Ireland today. Its like trying to parse New Yorkers from New Jerseyians (sp?). How long does you family have to be there before you get a voice?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.