In what way are Catholics currently being treated as second class citizens?
Northern Ireland Thread
- Thread starter Gaz.
- Start date
In what way are Catholics currently being treated as second class citizens?
Nope because its relevant, feels like I am debating a teenager.
Acnumber9, why can you not answer a question and then pose your own after that instead of just answering a question with a question?
I asked the question of why things would be better and why it was necessary days ago. Nobody has bothered to answer.
In reality it' s because you have no answer. If you had you would give one rather than linking pointless Wikipedia articles.
The IRA handed their guns over as part of the peace process. Hasn't stopped the dissidents from having the ability to shoot and bomb their targets in recent years. Where did those weapons come from?
You've two options here, one which blows a hole in your point and one which blows a hole in Sinn Fein/IRA's dedication to the peace process. Either the IRA didn't hand over all their weapons, or the dissident republican organisations have been able to source them. Which would you say it is?
The answer is in the question, they are not called dissidents for nothing.
I would guess at both. You can't run a criminal organisation without guns.
What does that mean?
Have you any recent examples. I was able to get behind the nationalist community to some degree over the obvious civil rights issues in the past, but we have to move on and not cling to every reason possible for divisions.
The point being, if you can't source weapons in this day and age, where are the Real IRA the Continuity IRA etc getting their weapons from?
It's obviously not comparable to what it used to be like but there are certainly some discrepancies. Example;
An Irish Red said:
On the procuring weapons debate I would hazard a guess that it's fifty-fifty. I don't think anyone truly believes that any organisation decommisioned all of their weapons, so I'd imagine there's still a fair few lying about the six counties, but it's fair to say they wouldn't have much bother getting new ones anyway.
Things may not necessairly be better. They may not necessairly be worse either. Who knows what the state of play of both countries will be if/when the time for a referendum comes.
Your slant on "better" almost seems to be wholly economic. As I said yesterday people will take into account other factors than solely economic ones when it is put to the vote. From my own personal poit of view a UI is the correct and proper thing to have historically and that would be a huge factor for me. It's not all about the money.
If people do not think it would be better then why do they want it? If they want it then why? Think back to what I first said on the subject. The failure to answer the question and your second paragraph pretty much confirms my initial thoughts.
Where do those figures come from?
I have answered it -
From my own personal poit of view a UI is the correct and proper thing to have historically and that would be a huge factor for me. It's not all about the money.
Which is what his point was initially, that people didn't necessarily want it because it would improve our lives, just that they wanted a United Ireland purely to have a United Ireland.
EDIT: For clarity, I'm not having a go at anyone who wants a United Ireland, I understand why people would want it.
What the other fella said. In doing this Ramshock told me I was talking shit and he has avoided answering questions on it since.
So what?
The flip side of the argument is that if theoretically th Irish economy overtook tr UK economy you would all be running into a united Ireland?
Which as we know is absolute balls...
I don't think you're reading things clearly, so I'll just leave it there. You've jumped into a discussion without reading the posts. It's ok, we've all done it.
Reading things perfectly clearly. But thanks for the advice anyway
Then how aren't you getting what has been said? Some posters have been prattling on about economic benefits etc, when the reality is nobody has a clue if we'd be better off economically under a United Ireland. Truth is, most want it because of what it is, and for that reason alone. Might as well be honest about it.
Jesus, I give up. You're arguing with another poster (ac) who stated that's why he thought most people wanted it, not because it would make their lives any better.
So you argued with him, whilst backing up and proving his statement.
Definite wires being crossed here.
Let me clearly state my point. Ac's point seems to be that it won't be "better" to be in a UI. His driver for this seems to be mainly economic reasons (correct me if I am wrong ac).
I am simply saying that people will not vote on this issue from an economic view point alone. And in addition to that how are we to know what the economic positions of both the UK and ROI will be at the time of a referendum? The economic argument is almost a moot point as there will be no referendum in the near future by which stage the economies could be hugely different.
Now the flip side to ac's argument is that IF the Irish economy was better (say a second Celtic tiger came along) then He would happily go into a UI?? It may be presumptuous of me here - but of course he wouldn't. Why? Because he wants to remain part of the UK and probably for the same reasons as I want a UI!
It's the same argument TN to be honest, just on the flip side. And on honesty not sure how your quip "may as well be honest about it" applies to me. Have I not been??
Let me clearly state my point. Ac's point seems to be that it won't be "better" to be in a UI. His driver for this seems to be mainly economic reasons (correct me if I am wrong ac).
I am simply saying that people will not vote on this issue from an economic view point alone. And in addition to that how are we to know what the economic positions of both the UK and ROI will be at the time of a referendum? The economic argument is almost a moot point as there will be no referendum in the near future by which stage the economies could be hugely different.
Now the flip side to ac's argument is that IF the Irish economy was better (say a second Celtic tiger came along) then He would happily go into a UI?? It may be presumptuous of me here - but of course he wouldn't. Why? Because he wants to remain part of the UK and probably for the same reasons as I want a UI!
It's the same argument TN to be honest, just on the flip side. And on honesty not sure how your quip "may as well be honest about it" applies to me. Have I not been??
His argument was that people won't think about whether it's better for us or not when they decide. They may use it as a reason now, but they'll choose a UI for other reasons, not if it makes our lives better.
And the "be honest about it" wasn't aimed at you either.
And the "be honest about it" wasn't aimed at you either.
TN read back. I have said exactly that many times in the last few posts.
Does that mean they abhor you to the point where you don't believe them?
Yeah sorry, I read back. You can always get guns.
Stolen shotguns, fertiliser bombs and crappy old handguns. Hardly the arsenal of a lean mean fighting machine.
Good enough to gun down a Catholic policeman on the motorway on his way to work.
No. I just wonder how they have these figures. If they're true and they've been published by police then they need to have a good reason for it or it should be investigated.
A gun is a gun, it doesn't matter if it's a stolen shotgun / rifle / handgun or an AK47, people will still die at the hands of them.
Does anybody here actually believe the paramilitaries have given up all their weapons or anywhere close?
They haven't gone away you know...
I'd say a majority of weapons were decommissioned. I don't know wether that majority is 51% or 99%, but I'd be certain that all organisations kept a reasonable amount of weapons to themselves.
How can you run a criminal gang without them?
I'd say a majority of weapons were decommissioned. I don't know wether that majority is 51% or 99%, but I'd be certain that all organisations kept a reasonable amount of weapons to themselves.
How can you run a criminal gang without them?
Exactly. And I doubt they'd have major problems sourcing more. We don't know if they haven't been doing that just incase.
They'd have to be utter morons to disarm completely. That'd leave them totally defenseless when the hard liners on the loyalist side decide to kick it off. You know darn well that the IRA weren't the only ones with guns and its not like the nationalist community has been well protected in the past by the Queens security forces.
And that's without factoring in the criminal element.
This is retarded. You have all been arguing the same points for ages now!
Well, we are Irish, arguing over the same problems for hundreds of years, it's kind of our thing.