Political Crossfire Forums

[red dragon]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: red dragon wrote: Despite two referendums, a burgeoning power sharing executive and known murderers and killers allowed out of prison. just because it's not on your terms it doesn't mean it's not a democracy.

I have posted above the two questions which were asked to be voted on in the referendums, two simple questions, no ambiguity, no leading questions and the overpowering answer was a yes to stay within the UK. I just don't get which part of it you don't think is undemocratic.......your being ridiculous.

It's undemocratic in that it was a referendum put up by a foreign government.

Would a Frenchman be expected to have to vote on a German referendum? No because it is a democracy.

Well people like you as I have posted from a site called NI elections are 22% nof the populance, may I make a suggestion, get yourself and all your friends 20 wives each and breed your way to democracy, because your not going to stop moaning until then.

[De Bhaldraithe]

You're pathetic. Why can't you realise the concept of democracy and how it is non-existant here.

It matters not the size of the population or whether it is in favour of nationalists or unionists.

I am happy to have a unionist first minister, a unionist majority in the assembly, etc, etc, because they would have been democratically elected.

What I am not happy with is some Welsh or English or Scottish fella along with about 15 chronies making decisions for me. People that are not accountable and aren't wanted to make decisions here.

[red dragon]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: You're pathetic. Why can't you realise the concept of democracy and how it is non-existant here.

It matters not the size of the population or whether it is in favour of nationalists or unionists.

I am happy to have a unionist first minister, a unionist majority in the assembly, etc, etc, because they would have been democratically elected.

What I am not happy with is some Welsh or English or Scottish fella along with about 15 chronies making decisions for me. People that are not accountable and aren't wanted to make decisions here.

WTF are you talking about?? Get your own politicians around the table, not the ones with ingrained hatred and bile, if you can't do that vote for a third way. I fail to see your justification me and others being pathetic, your not very bright are you even for a teacher.

[Pebble]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: You're pathetic. Why can't you realise the concept of democracy and how it is non-existant here.

I really think you need to explain this comment.

Quote: It matters not the size of the population or whether it is in favour of nationalists or unionists.

I'm afraid it does. You parrot claims of undemocratic proceedings and then you come out with that? Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and the majority want to remain part of the UK.

Quote: I am happy to have a unionist first minister, a unionist majority in the assembly, etc, etc, because they would have been democratically elected.

And the members you send to parliament are not democratically elected?

Quote: What I am not happy with is some Welsh or English or Scottish fella along with about 15 chronies making decisions for me.

What exactly is the problem here? They are merely regions. If you want an Irishman making decisions for the UK, then elect the leading party in the nation, for example the Labour party at the present time in your constituencies, or cede from the nation, neither of which I think you will find have the support you want.

I might have a problem with a Northerner such as Thunder making my decisions. The Prime Minister of this country is not a Londoner, does this mean that I should not respect his decisions soley based upon that? No. It does not. So I feel you should argue with substance against the decisions made by that assembely, not the people involved therein.

To deny the regional differences in opinion in the nation is sheer fallacy, but we cannot devolve power that far. What is the difference between NI making such sweeping claims and Bradford screaming blue murder about being ruled from London? No. You are part of the UK, and therefore ruled by its elected parliament you shall be.

Quote: People that are not accountable and aren't wanted to make decisions here.

Please explain further.

[De Bhaldraithe]

Pebble wrote: De Bhaldraithe wrote: You're pathetic. Why can't you realise the concept of democracy and how it is non-existant here.

I really think you need to explain this comment.


OK I'll repeat myself again for your benefit. There is no democracy in NI because we have politicians who are unrepresentative of the people of NI, who are not elected by the people of NI. We therefore cannot hold these people accountable, and we cannot also unelect these people if we so wish. Is that explained enough? If not, read some more of the thread.

Pebble wrote:
Quote: It matters not the size of the population or whether it is in favour of nationalists or unionists.

I'm afraid it does. You parrot claims of undemocratic proceedings and then you come out with that? Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and the majority want to remain part of the UK.


Read it in context. I said that it matters not the proportion of unionists to nationalists as long as we have the institutions up and running. Like I said, which you have cut out of that quote, I am happy for there to be a majority of unionists in the assembly and executive and for the first minister to be a unionist. Population proportion does not matter as we shall still have a democratic process.

Pebble wrote:
Quote: I am happy to have a unionist first minister, a unionist majority in the assembly, etc, etc, because they would have been democratically elected.

And the members you send to parliament are not democratically elected?


Why should they be sent to Westminster and not Stormont? Even Scotland has it's own parliament and Wales has it's own assembly.

Pebbles wrote:
Quote: What I am not happy with is some Welsh or English or Scottish fella along with about 15 chronies making decisions for me.

What exactly is the problem here? They are merely regions. If you want an Irishman making decisions for the UK, then elect the leading party in the nation, for example the Labour party at the present time in your constituencies, or cede from the nation, neither of which I think you will find have the support you want.


I don't think labour stand in one constituency here in the six counties. I may well be mistaken, but they certainly don't stand in my constituency. And if they did, why should I vote for a party I don't want to vote for?
Also I do not want an Irishman making decisions for the UK - why would I? More to the point why would I care? I want an Irishman making decisions in Ireland. Is that so hard for you to fathom?

Pebbles wrote:
I might have a problem with a Northerner such as Thunder making my decisions. The Prime Minister of this country is not a Londoner, does this mean that I should not respect his decisions soley based upon that? No. It does not. So I feel you should argue with substance against the decisions made by that assembely, not the people involved therein.


That argument isn't even nearly relevant. How is it the same? You're talking about different parts of the country. I'm talking about different "countries."

Pebbles wrote:
To deny the regional differences in opinion in the nation is sheer fallacy, but we cannot devolve power that far. What is the difference between NI making such sweeping claims and Bradford screaming blue murder about being ruled from London? No. You are part of the UK, and therefore ruled by its elected parliament you shall be.


Well your Prime Minister seemingly has a different opinion. He is of the opinion that NI should have it's own assembly and government. How can you not devolve power so far, considering that you have done so in the past and considering that you do so today in Scotland, and to a lesser extent I believe, in Wales?

Pebbles wrote:
Quote: People that are not accountable and aren't wanted to make decisions here.

Please explain further.

OK I'll repeat myself for your benefit. The people that govern NI are not accountable. The few elected officials that do take part in the governance of NI are elected by people in Bradford, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London, Manchester, etc, etc. No Irish man has had a say in electing these people. Also, I did say few. The rest of the people that are involved in governing NI are high up civil servants - not elected at all. Not only is it non-democratic but it's also actively anti-democratic.

These people aren't wanted to make decisions here by the people of NI, as was illustrated in the '98 referendum.

[thundertaker]

Quote:
Why should they be sent to Westminster and not Stormont? Even Scotland has it's own parliament and Wales has it's own assembly.

NI is a part of the UK for the time being, therefore they send MPs to Westminster. Wales and Scotland still send MPs to westminster. NI was the first part of the UK to have devolution back in 1922. Unfortunately, because of the ingrained religous bigotry there, it failed, and keeps failing because you lot cannot work with each other. You've got no-one else to blame but yourselves for electing intransigent **** who cannot get along.........

[De Bhaldraithe]

thundertaker wrote: Quote:
Why should they be sent to Westminster and not Stormont? Even Scotland has it's own parliament and Wales has it's own assembly.

NI is a part of the UK for the time being, therefore they send MPs to Westminster. Wales and Scotland still send MPs to westminster. NI was the first part of the UK to have devolution back in 1922. Unfortunately, because of the ingrained religous bigotry there, it failed, and keeps failing because you lot cannot work with each other. You've got no-one else to blame but yourselves for electing intransigent ***holes who cannot get along.........

I know Wales and Scotland still send MPs to Westminster. I'm not arguing that NI shouldn't, at the minute. Though we should have our assembly. And why should I not elect whomever I wish to elect? Is it my fault if unionists refuse to compromise? No.

[Pebble]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: OK I'll repeat myself again for your benefit. There is no democracy in NI because we have politicians who are unrepresentative of the people of NI, who are not elected by the people of NI. We therefore cannot hold these people accountable, and we cannot also unelect these people if we so wish. Is that explained enough? If not, read some more of the thread.

Did you not elect your own MPs? If they are unrepresentative of your people then I might recommend not voting them in next time.

You also elected your own representatives to the Stormont. See. Problem is they can't agree to be in the same room as each other so that's currently suspended.

Quote:
Read it in context. I said that it matters not the proportion of unionists to nationalists as long as we have the institutions up and running. Like I said, which you have cut out of that quote, I am happy for there to be a majority of unionists in the assembly and executive and for the first minister to be a unionist. Population proportion does not matter as we shall still have a democratic process.

I thought I read it in context, you've placed it alone in your post. If I misrepresented you then i'm sorry.

Quote:
Why should they be sent to Westminster and not Stormont? Even Scotland has it's own parliament and Wales has it's own assembly.

Both Scotland and Wales send their own MPs to parliament as the national assembelies only legislate in some matters. What it seems from your posts that you are arguing towards is that all politicians you elect should be in positions of power.

There are just over twenty positions in the cabinet from over six hundred MPs. Therefore by your logic, most of the country is being ruled by people it had no power to elect.

Quote:
That argument isn't even nearly relevant. How is it the same? You're talking about different parts of the country. I'm talking about different "countries."

Counties and countrys are merely connventions, the differences are across regions, however you choose to define them.

Quote:

Well your Prime Minister seemingly has a different opinion. He is of the opinion that NI should have it's own assembly and government. How can you not devolve power so far, considering that you have done so in the past and considering that you do so today in Scotland, and to a lesser extent I believe, in Wales?

As am I. I do not oppose devolution, I think I may have expressed myself in the wrong way there. However, what you argue is that your policy should always be decided by Irishmen, and until either an Irishman is represented in the cabinet or you cede from the crown, major policy decisions will come from Westminster.

Quote:

OK I'll repeat myself for your benefit. The people that govern NI are not accountable. The few elected officials that do take part in the governance of NI are elected by people in Bradford, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London, Manchester, etc, etc. No Irish man has had a say in electing these people. Also, I did say few. The rest of the people that are involved in governing NI are high up civil servants - not elected at all. Not only is it non-democratic but it's also actively anti-democratic.

Now you see, here my point across regions is apparent again. Like it or not, you are part of the United Kingdom and therefore ruled by the Parliament in Westminster, cornwall is, I believe unrepresented by a member of the cabinet, they have no say in electing these people, yet they quite glady take decisions from Westminster. It is no different for you I am afraid.

Once again I ask you to criticise the policies that this cabinet has made, rather than object to those in it on the grounds of their birth.

[De Bhaldraithe]

Pebble wrote: De Bhaldraithe wrote: OK I'll repeat myself again for your benefit. There is no democracy in NI because we have politicians who are unrepresentative of the people of NI, who are not elected by the people of NI. We therefore cannot hold these people accountable, and we cannot also unelect these people if we so wish. Is that explained enough? If not, read some more of the thread.

Did you not elect your own MPs? If they are unrepresentative of your people then I might recommend not voting them in next time.

Why should the people I vote for go and sit in an English parliament?

Pebble wrote:
You also elected your own representatives to the Stormont. See. Problem is they can't agree to be in the same room as each other so that's currently suspended.


Yes we did. The people I voted for however are more than willing to be "in the same room" though so where have I went wrong?

Pebble wrote:
Quote:
Read it in context. I said that it matters not the proportion of unionists to nationalists as long as we have the institutions up and running. Like I said, which you have cut out of that quote, I am happy for there to be a majority of unionists in the assembly and executive and for the first minister to be a unionist. Population proportion does not matter as we shall still have a democratic process.

I thought I read it in context, you've placed it alone in your post. If I misrepresented you then i'm sorry.

Your apology is accepted, yes you misrepresented me. Like I have said, when I mentioned that the proportional population was not an issue, I meant that it was not an issue as long as we had a democratic system vizzavi the GFA.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:
Why should they be sent to Westminster and not Stormont? Even Scotland has it's own parliament and Wales has it's own assembly.

Both Scotland and Wales send their own MPs to parliament as the national assembelies only legislate in some matters. What it seems from your posts that you are arguing towards is that all politicians you elect should be in positions of power.


That's a decent point you have. Looking back on my posts, I realise that I haven't really elaborated on the position I expect and desire should be the case - mainly because I have been too busy trying to dumb it down for people ignorant of the situation that have the cheek to share their ill-founded opinions.

Of course, the politicians of NI should not have ultimate power. That would be ludicrous. Even I can admit that they are not capable of running a country - let alone a self-deminishing statelet such as these six counties. I never once said that I thought that they should have ultimate power. They should however have the powers that the "big government" over in westminster are willing to grant them. Not only would it create a more stable and accountable political environment for the people of the six counties, but it would also be suited to everyone - except of course the DUP. These powers are also a very important issue and might I suggest that they even merit having their own thread to discuss what powers an NI executive should and should not have. I'd enjoy discussion on that.

Pebble wrote:
There are just over twenty positions in the cabinet from over six hundred MPs. Therefore by your logic, most of the country is being ruled by people it had no power to elect.


No no Pebble, you are misinterpreting words again. Read them carefully before you reply. NI is being ruled by, effectively, one elected politician. He is not from NI and was not elected by the people of NI. Now by my logic, I find it difficult to imagine that any Welsh man would find it acceptable for Gerry Adams to solely govern Wales. Come to think of it, there would be uproar from not only the Welsh but all over the UK. Now, accepting the inevitability that your reply will be "But ooooh Gerry Adams is an IRA apologist, etc, etc," I will take the example of John Hume even. It simply would not be allowed. So why on earth should a Welsh MP be allowed to govern NI, yet the same could not be said reversed?

Pebble wrote:
Quote:
That argument isn't even nearly relevant. How is it the same? You're talking about different parts of the country. I'm talking about different "countries."

Counties and countrys are merely connventions, the differences are across regions, however you choose to define them.


You honestly think so? So I assume you're one of those people that thinks that the UK is the UK is the UK - Scotland, Wales, England and NI are just regions, yes? I find that difficult to swallow. Although in recent years of course, the cultural differences between all of these "regions" have grown ever so similar to each other, these are still different countries, and are recognised as different countries by the British government, through their degrees of devolution.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:
Well your Prime Minister seemingly has a different opinion. He is of the opinion that NI should have it's own assembly and government. How can you not devolve power so far, considering that you have done so in the past and considering that you do so today in Scotland, and to a lesser extent I believe, in Wales?

As am I. I do not oppose devolution, I think I may have expressed myself in the wrong way there. However, what you argue is that your policy should always be decided by Irishmen, and until either an Irishman is represented in the cabinet or you cede from the crown, major policy decisions will come from Westminster.


That's true yes. There are some policy decisions that will never be devolved to an NI government. That's only logical - a "country" so small could not for example form a legitimate army, or even produce an adequate health system. We, as "NI", will always need help from somewhere. NI is not functional without a sugar daddy - i.e. the Brits. Not only in terms of us using up your well-earned taxes, but also the fact that realistically, we could not completely govern ourselves. I haven't suggested once that we could. We should however be taking control of the areas where we can.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:
OK I'll repeat myself for your benefit. The people that govern NI are not accountable. The few elected officials that do take part in the governance of NI are elected by people in Bradford, Cardiff, Edinburgh, London, Manchester, etc, etc. No Irish man has had a say in electing these people. Also, I did say few. The rest of the people that are involved in governing NI are high up civil servants - not elected at all. Not only is it non-democratic but it's also actively anti-democratic.

Now you see, here my point across regions is apparent again. Like it or not, you are part of the United Kingdom and therefore ruled by the Parliament in Westminster, cornwall is, I believe unrepresented by a member of the cabinet, they have no say in electing these people, yet they quite glady take decisions from Westminster. It is no different for you I am afraid.

Yes, we accept that we are part of the United Kingdom. How many times must you hear this? 1998 referendum! Using your example though, Cornwall is part of England and shouldn't have it's own assembly or government. Scotland isn't part of England and has it's own assembly and government - which of the two examples would you liken NI to? Please stop making stupid comparisons.

Pebble wrote:
Once again I ask you to criticise the policies that this cabinet has made, rather than object to those in it on the grounds of their birth.

The policies the cabinet have made do not really bother me. I think the government of Britain have done quite a good job in recent years - especially in relation to NI. Tony Blair himself has put quite a lot of work into the issue. Saying that, there are some issues that do need to be discussed on a local level, which are actually being discussed by civil servants who have never lived in Ireland. This, whether you like it or not, has to be addressed. It isn't just the matter of place of birth that bothers me and most other citizens of the six counties - it's the fact that these people are not accountable to us.

[Seabird]

Pebble, You wrote: You also elected your own representatives to the Stormont. See. Problem is they can't agree to be in the same room as each other so that's currently suspended.

Actually you are wrong, Stormont was suspended the last time because the brit/irish government accused SF of spying. They arrested Denis Donaldson and his son in law however never followed through on prosecuting them. Hmm wonder why? Lo and behold Donaldson steps into the lime light professing to be a british agent and declares he was spying on SF for the brits. Now let me see, they suspend Stormont on a fabricated lie conjured up to throw the wheels of progress off course. The british government has always kept the north under control through collusion. It continues on even today.

De Bhaldraithe,
De Bhaldraithe wrote: There are some policy decisions that will never be devolved to an NI government. That's only logical - a "country" so small could not for example form a legitimate army, or even produce an adequate health system. We, as "NI", will always need help from somewhere. NI is not functional without a sugar daddy - i.e. the Brits. Not only in terms of us using up your well-earned taxes, but also the fact that realistically, we could not completely govern ourselves. I haven't suggested once that we could. We should however be taking control of the areas where we can.

I disagree with you, a sugar daddy is not needed! What is needed is a United Ireland without british influence. The north of Ireland could very easily merge with the south, in time and proper economic planning they would eventually become an asset. The beginning would be hard on the free state but the end result would be an island of equals moving forward together. Excuse me but fcuk the tax dollars, how many are American dollars that England so graciously :roll: shares with the north? They have not taken that burden on independently free from outside resources. They created the nightmare why should they not be held accountable financially.

[De Bhaldraithe]

Seabird wrote:
De Bhaldraithe,
De Bhaldraithe wrote: There are some policy decisions that will never be devolved to an NI government. That's only logical - a "country" so small could not for example form a legitimate army, or even produce an adequate health system. We, as "NI", will always need help from somewhere. NI is not functional without a sugar daddy - i.e. the Brits. Not only in terms of us using up your well-earned taxes, but also the fact that realistically, we could not completely govern ourselves. I haven't suggested once that we could. We should however be taking control of the areas where we can.

I disagree with you, a sugar daddy is not needed! What is needed is a United Ireland without british influence. The north of Ireland could very easily merge with the south, in time and proper economic planning they would eventually become an asset. The beginning would be hard on the free state but the end result would be an island of equals moving forward together. Excuse me but fcuk the tax dollars, how many are American dollars that England so graciously :roll: shares with the north? They have not taken that burden on independently free from outside resources. They created the nightmare why should they not be held accountable financially.

We really do. The Irish economy is doing much too well at the minute - if there were to be a United Ireland in the morning, this would drastically change. There would be uproar from the southerners. The Brits can continue to pay for the damage they have inflicted for the next few years anyway, while the government of the south work on a plan to embark on a United Ireland, without too many economic hinderings. At the minute, however, we do need the Brits.

[red dragon]

Seabird wrote: Pebble, You wrote: You also elected your own representatives to the Stormont. See. Problem is they can't agree to be in the same room as each other so that's currently suspended.

Actually you are wrong, Stormont was suspended the last time because the brit/irish government accused SF of spying. They arrested Denis Donaldson and his son in law however never followed through on prosecuting them. Hmm wonder why? Lo and behold Donaldson steps into the lime light professing to be a british agent and declares he was spying on SF for the brits. Now let me see, they suspend Stormont on a fabricated lie conjured up to throw the wheels of progress off course. The british government has always kept the north under control through collusion. It continues on even today.

De Bhaldraithe,
De Bhaldraithe wrote: There are some policy decisions that will never be devolved to an NI government. That's only logical - a "country" so small could not for example form a legitimate army, or even produce an adequate health system. We, as "NI", will always need help from somewhere. NI is not functional without a sugar daddy - i.e. the Brits. Not only in terms of us using up your well-earned taxes, but also the fact that realistically, we could not completely govern ourselves. I haven't suggested once that we could. We should however be taking control of the areas where we can.

I disagree with you, a sugar daddy is not needed! What is needed is a United Ireland without british influence. The north of Ireland could very easily merge with the south, in time and proper economic planning they would eventually become an asset. The beginning would be hard on the free state but the end result would be an island of equals moving forward together. Excuse me but fcuk the tax dollars, how many are American dollars that England so graciously :roll: shares with the north? They have not taken that burden on independently free from outside resources. They created the nightmare why should they not be held accountable financially.

they didn't prosecute Donaldson because they would have had to prosecute the whole of SF putting back the process years, that means locking up Adams and Mcguiness for spying, they would have been privy to that information also from the files in the spy ring
. Remember Donaldson was a double agent, he had no allegiance to the authorities. Stop this weird paranoid conspiracy crap, your reading far too much into it.


Quote: The north of Ireland could very easily merge with the south, in time and proper economic planning they would eventually become an asset.

So your now admitting the reason which most of us have been banging on about for the last week. :roll: :roll: It's not going to happen over night. Secondly Southern Ireland does not have security arrangements in place to stop sectarianism, where almost 20% of the population will not want to be part of Eire and would reactivate it's old war horse. But the final point is you are still not getting, is that people don't want to join Ireland, which part of it you don't understand??

Why would those companies in the north which you claim would be an asset want to stay in Ireland? You have just assumed that they would integrate into Ireland. You haven't considered they may want to stay within the pound and not the Euro zone.Traditionally the north has always had the industries because they were more closely married with the British economy. So your being naive and short sighted in your assumptions of a united Ireland.

[De Bhaldraithe]

Where are you pulling this 20% figure from?

[red dragon]

Irelands population for round figures is 4 million add 1.5 million from NI, yep your right it's about 15% sorry my bad.

[De Bhaldraithe]

red dragon wrote: Irelands population for round figures is 4 million add 1.5 million from NI, yep your right it's about 15% sorry my bad.

How is it 15%?

[Pebble]

De Bhaldraithe wrote:

Why should the people I vote for go and sit in an English parliament?


They don't. They sit in the British parliament, because, NI is and for the foreseeable future will continue to be...British.

Quote:

Yes we did. The people I voted for however are more than willing to be "in the same room" though so where have I went wrong?

Who did you vote for? Just out of interest...

Quote:

Your apology is accepted, yes you misrepresented me. Like I have said, when I mentioned that the proportional population was not an issue, I meant that it was not an issue as long as we had a democratic system vizzavi the GFA.

Ah, ok. The standalone comment seemed like a condemnation of any sort of majority, rather against democracy! :lol:

Quote:

That's a decent point you have. Looking back on my posts, I realise that I haven't really elaborated on the position I expect and desire should be the case - mainly because I have been too busy trying to dumb it down for people ignorant of the situation that have the cheek to share their ill-founded opinions.

Of course, the politicians of NI should not have ultimate power. That would be ludicrous. Even I can admit that they are not capable of running a country - let alone a self-deminishing statelet such as these six counties. I never once said that I thought that they should have ultimate power. They should however have the powers that the "big government" over in westminster are willing to grant them. Not only would it create a more stable and accountable political environment for the people of the six counties, but it would also be suited to everyone - except of course the DUP. These powers are also a very important issue and might I suggest that they even merit having their own thread to discuss what powers an NI executive should and should not have. I'd enjoy discussion on that.

I'll create such a thread right away. ;)

Quote:

No no Pebble, you are misinterpreting words again. Read them carefully before you reply. NI is being ruled by, effectively, one elected politician. He is not from NI and was not elected by the people of NI. Now by my logic, I find it difficult to imagine that any Welsh man would find it acceptable for Gerry Adams to solely govern Wales. Come to think of it, there would be uproar from not only the Welsh but all over the UK. Now, accepting the inevitability that your reply will be "But ooooh Gerry Adams is an IRA apologist, etc, etc," I will take the example of John Hume even. It simply would not be allowed. So why on earth should a Welsh MP be allowed to govern NI, yet the same could not be said reversed?

Ah, but if Gerry Adams were elected into a position of power then he'd have a large support base wouldn't he? He would have been democratically elected. Democracy is, as I previously remarked, the tyranny of the majority. Your parties do not have a large following in the Isles and so do not gain much of the power. Neither does mine. In fact, the party I am supporting at the present time has a negligable share of the power.

Quote: You honestly think so? So I assume you're one of those people that thinks that the UK is the UK is the UK - Scotland, Wales, England and NI are just regions, yes? I find that difficult to swallow. Although in recent years of course, the cultural differences between all of these "regions" have grown ever so similar to each other, these are still different countries, and are recognised as different countries by the British government, through their degrees of devolution.

Not really. Devolution isn't recognistion as a state, it is the recognition that certain powers need to be decentralised and returned to the grassroots in order to maintain stability.

Quote:

That's true yes. There are some policy decisions that will never be devolved to an NI government. That's only logical - a "country" so small could not for example form a legitimate army, or even produce an adequate health system. We, as "NI", will always need help from somewhere. NI is not functional without a sugar daddy - i.e. the Brits. Not only in terms of us using up your well-earned taxes, but also the fact that realistically, we could not completely govern ourselves. I haven't suggested once that we could. We should however be taking control of the areas where we can.

I agree mostly, the first step would be to rid the Stormont of suspension, though that I fear is a tall order.

Quote:

Yes, we accept that we are part of the United Kingdom. How many times must you hear this? 1998 referendum! Using your example though, Cornwall is part of England and shouldn't have it's own assembly or government. Scotland isn't part of England and has it's own assembly and government - which of the two examples would you liken NI to? Please stop making stupid comparisons.

It is still the same for the Scottish and the Welsh. They must accept major policy decisions from London.

Quote:

The policies the cabinet have made do not really bother me. I think the government of Britain have done quite a good job in recent years - especially in relation to NI. Tony Blair himself has put quite a lot of work into the issue. Saying that, there are some issues that do need to be discussed on a local level, which are actually being discussed by civil servants who have never lived in Ireland. This, whether you like it or not, has to be addressed. It isn't just the matter of place of birth that bothers me and most other citizens of the six counties - it's the fact that these people are not accountable to us.

I think I see part of your point here, but those politicians are only 'accountable' in their own constituencies anyway...

Quote:

Actually you are wrong, Stormont was suspended the last time because the brit/irish government accused SF of spying. They arrested Denis Donaldson and his son in law however never followed through on prosecuting them. Hmm wonder why? Lo and behold Donaldson steps into the lime light professing to be a british agent and declares he was spying on SF for the brits. Now let me see, they suspend Stormont on a fabricated lie conjured up to throw the wheels of progress off course. The british government has always kept the north under control through collusion. It continues on even today.


Actually the suspension began when the unionists walked out as a result, not because of the investigation itself.