We'll take the Syrians but we still don't want the Irish!

[Insidious Von]

Rugby World Cup: Ireland 50 Canada 7

The caption only says "Ireland" so I'm assuming that they are playing as a united team. Meanwhile the cold troubles in Northern Ireland continues, the murder of a former Ulster militant is threatening to dissolve the parliament. If they can put their differences behind them in athletics why not politically. Will George Best's dying wish ever be realized?

Howard Johnson was right:

 

[SkyRider]

If they can put their differences behind them in athletics why not politically.

The political solution is to reunite Northern Ireland with Ireland. Northern Ireland as a part of the U.K. is an aberration.

 

[mandrill]

The political solution is to reunite Northern Ireland with Ireland. Northern Ireland as a part of the U.K. is an aberration.

:crazy:

Only thing is that the vast majority of Northern Irish don't agree with you. Right?

 

[basketcase]

Ignoring the politics, I'm not surprised at the loss. Canada hasn't had a good summer. I'm actually surprised they scored a try.


And yes, the team does represent all 4 provinces. At the opposite end though, Rugby dissolves the UK into 3 different national teams.

 

[SkyRider]

:crazy:

Only thing is that the vast majority of Northern Irish don't agree with you. Right?

Not to belabor the point, but you do know that Northern Ireland is conquered land, right.

“Ireland’s sectarian divisions, which had opened up during religious wars in the 17th century” Excuse me but are you referring to the Tudor conquest of Ireland? You know when the British invaded Ireland and resorted to a scorch earth policy after the Irish had proved difficult to conquer? Are you talking about the plantations (arrival of protestant settlers) which saw to it that by the close of the 17th century the native Irish (catholics) owned less than 5% of the land and were subject to laws that Edmund Burke called: "a machine of wise and elaborate contrivance, as well fitted for the oppression, impoverishment and degradation of a people, and the debasement in them of human nature itself, as ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of man." Why does the article begin by hiding the truth? The Economist should remove this article."

 

[SkyRider]

"This is an incredibly simplistic interpretation of a complex and sensitive historical issue. Firstly , yes Ireland became a part of the UK in 1801, but this is a largely irrelevant legislative event in the context of Britain,s 800 year occupation of Ireland. I assume this article was written by a well meaning British educated writer, because inferring causality for revolution from religious and economic factors completely misses the point (and I gather the UKs education system doesn't give a well grounded version of how the British Empire treated the nations it invaded). The economic imbalances were created by the oppressive occupation, the famine wasn't a famine in the natural definition of the word, food and resources were plentiful, the oppressive British occupation just made it so that average Irish people were malnourished and dependent on one crop in particular . Also stating 'North East ulster did not want join them is largely offensive to the to the 40+% of people who lived there and certainly didn't want to remain in the UK. While I appreciate this article wasn't written with intended bias or agenda, it is offensive to the the hundreds of thousands (millions if you include the famine) of Irish people who lost there lives struggling with British imperialism. I have come to expect better than this from the economist."

 

[Aardvark154]

Not to belabor the point, but you do know that Northern Ireland is conquered land, right. "

Which is rather like saying all of North America is conquered land. Are you planing on leaving anytime soon?

 

[SkyRider]

Which is rather like saying all of North America is conquered land. Are you planing on leaving anytime soon?

A united Ireland does not mean anyone has to leave. Nobody leaves. Not you nor I or the guy behind the tree. Everybody stays.

 

[mandrill]

A united Ireland does not mean anyone has to leave. Nobody leaves. Not you nor I or the guy behind the tree. Everybody stays.

But the majority of Ulster people don't want to join the South. Bringing up stuff that happened in 1640 doesn't change that fact. Are you saying that majority shouldn't rule when you happen to be cheering for the minority?

You rant on with some angry 3 sentence precis of Irish history quoted from fuck knows where. But it doesn't change the fact that most Northern Irish like Britain and the queen.

 

[mandrill]

Ignoring the politics, I'm not surprised at the loss. Canada hasn't had a good summer. I'm actually surprised they scored a try.


And yes, the team does represent all 4 provinces. At the opposite end though, Rugby dissolves the UK into 3 different national teams.

Four, for fuck's sake! FOUR! England, Scotland, Ireland AND WALES.

 

[SkyRider]

In another thread you supported how British did exactly the same thing in their former colonies in India

It wasn't me who wanted the creation of Pakistan, it was the Muslims who wanted the creation of Pakistan because they couldn't live in peace in the same country with the Hindus and Sikhs.

 

[SkyRider]

Are you saying that majority shouldn't rule when you happen to be cheering for the minority?

I'm saying the majority of Irish people want a united Ireland.

 

[spankingman]

Four, for fuck's sake! FOUR! England, Scotland, Ireland AND WALES.

Might be 41/2! Isle of Man

 

[mandrill]

I'm saying the majority of Irish people want a united Ireland.

Not the ones in the North.

Maybe people from Ontario could ask to vote in the Quebec referendum too?

 

[mandrill]

It wasn't me who wanted the creation of Pakistan, it was the Muslims who wanted the creation of Pakistan because they couldn't live in peace in the same country with the Hindus and Sikhs.

And you don't see the parallel with Ulster?

 

[SkyRider]

Not the ones in the North.

Maybe people from Ontario could ask to vote in the Quebec referendum too?

"Haughey saw similarities between Ireland and Germany and cited "I have expressed a personal view that coming as we do from a country which is also divided many of us would have sympathy with any wish of the people of the two German States for unification".[SUP][28][/SUP] "

 

[SkyRider]

And how come that Muslims and Hindus lived together for centuries in the same villages before Brits came?

My knowledge of India does not go back centuries. What was India before the Brits arrived? Wasn't it the Brits who united India?

 

[SkyRider]

And you don't see the parallel with Ulster?

If the good people of Ulster voted in a peaceful democratic referendum to separate from the U.K. and form their own independent country. Same with Scotland and Quebec.

(Ulster is actually an artificial entity created by the British conqueror as a fiefdom for the Orangemen. The last remnant of the colonial British Empire. Britain should let it go.)

 

[SkyRider]

I did a bit of research into who were the slaveowners in the American south. No surprise, many or most were Orangemen.

"The early slave owners were mostly of English background. Some Scots and Scotch Irish (called Ulster Scots in Britain) later owned slaves." For those who may not know, Scotch Irish and Ulster Scots are Protestant Orangemen, not to be confused with good Irish Catholics.

 

[basketcase]

And how come that Muslims and Hindus lived together for centuries in the same villages before Brits came?

Like your views about Jews living peacefully in Arab lands, you might want to actually read up on pre-British India before you make these kinds of claims.