Will Unionists accept a Sinn Féin 1st Minister?

[Wasp]

Why do you think setanta? An ira leader being first minister of the country he tried to destroy, who was part of an organisation that killed and maimed thousands etc and not forgetting how his part are constantly tring to provoke Unionists.

IMO the trouble at Drumcree will be minute compared to what will happen in such a scenario. PERhaps through time it may not, but as things stand God help us.

[Jim]

Then you're no better than the IRA.

[Wasp]

Well you are entitled to your opinion.

[He_Who_Walks_in_The_Wilderness]

There was never a plan b, it was just a fudge to scare the unionist voters, as to the question no, not ever as far as i am concerned that would be like isreal having hitler as its primeminster

[bearhunter]

Jim, they are nothing to do with the IRA. They are simply continuing a long tradition going back 94 years of threatening to take up arms if they don't get their way. When they do it it's called a solemn covenant. When anyone else does it it's terrorism. Please try and keep up....:-)

[Wasp]

Yes quite BH, that is exacly err right.

Exactly wilderness, very good point.

[Jim]

halflife said:

There was never a plan b, it was just a fudge to scare the unionist voters, as to the question no, not ever as far as i am concerned that would be like isreal having hitler as its primeminster

I'm sure it would be, how do you think I feel with Paisley? Doesnt make a difference though.

Plan B was exactly that, to scare unionist voters, and it worked. If it fails now then the only answer for Westminster will be to bring the Dáil into the picture even more. Westminster honestly can not be bothered, no one here gives a flying fuck as long as its their sons not being shot, so you'll get not get as much support as you think here, either.

[Harry]

I'd accept it and probably think fuck the whole lot of them. It will eventually happen and while hard to accept its what democracy is all about. What would make me come to the conclusion of fuck the lot of them is because Unionism will of brought it on themselves. Continually splitting their vote, back stabbing each other, targetting all their energy into toppling fellow Unionists rather than challenging republicans.

Its all about me me me with Unionism. Very rarely is UNIONISM put first. When do Unionists behave in the interest of Unionism and not because of some personal motive or vendetta. From a selfish point of view i want Unionism to get the most votes, i want Unionism to be heard and to be the largest democratically elected movement. Unionists barely vote because we think what the hell is the point. How about a Unionist election campaign which all Unionist parties participate in which is targetted at getting Unionists out to vote. Tribal politics put to one side with the sole aim of encouraging a maximum Unionist turnout. Door to door to check and help people get on the election register and ensure no vote is wasted. No slating each other just simple promotion of Unionism. How many would get involved in something like that?? Not very fucking many i would guess.

[earl]

halflife said:

There was never a plan b, it was just a fudge to scare the unionist voters, as to the question no, not ever as far as i am concerned that would be like isreal having hitler as its primeminster

It was enough of a fudge to scare the DUP, famous for not scaring easily. If Stormont were to fail, the most likely reason for it failing would probably be Unionist based. The British government will try and deter this as much as possible. They were bullied once before out of a solution which could have saved many lives, and was a better deal for Unionists than the current one. Once bitten, twice shy. The British government are no mugs. They've seen the exit door and they're not going to lose site of it. If Stormont fails, I'd be very, very suprised if the direct rule imposed in the aftermath is the same as that of the 80's and 90's. The Irish government are now too involved and relations between the governments are too good. This is the reality. Plan B can be easily carried out. The systems are in place. You simply take NI politicians out of the equation, and voila, intergovernmental power sharing between Dublin and London.

[Jim]

Which im my opinion is a fate worse than the union.

[earl]

And to be fair to WASP, he never condoned violence here. He was asked for an opinion on a hypothetical situation as to what may happen. He answered honestly.

[Blue Angel]

Yep it's been said that WASP is scare-mongering when he predicts outburst of violence in situations like this or in the case of more moves towards a united Ireland. But I think the reality of that happening is a strong possibility and to pretend those possibilties don't exsist is foolish. Everything has to go softly, softly little by little - it is important to me that Unionists are convinced (and not via lip service or mere rhetoric) that if there ever was a United Ireland in some form that they would be treated with respect within it. I wish to see no more situations in Ireland where either community holds the whip hand in any form. I want a country devoid of the gerrymandering and obsession with the 'evil catholic church' that seemed to permeate the north and equally devoid of church interference or control of state bodies as happened in the south for too long a time.

[Jim]

Actually, I believe Wasp.

I reckon there would be a lot of loyalists baying for blood if McGuinness or even Adams was made First Minister. Its up to the loyalist people to stop that, to not support paramilitaries, and to respect the vote, otherwise they will lose the entire state and I'll not be complaining. It'll achieve a system that I don't want and a system that wont benefit anyone on the ground, money knows no religion and it knows no politics.

I was talking to a lecturer today about NI (wrote an essay on it, was getting feed back) and they said outright "Unionists are a dying breed", I actually argued in favour of loyalists for once because I don't like to see an English person down talk anyone from Ireland, but I could only go so far, is unionism really a dying breed of politics?

[Blue Angel]

That's certainly a common perception amongst the more polititcally aware class. More than once I've heard the old comparision between the Afrikaaners just prior to apartheid's end and the Unionist position right now. Although the two situations are not as comaprable as some (including SF) have tried to make them out to be in the past.

You get a shit load of comments about Ireland here though and a lot do serve to reinforce ideas whether mistaken or true that the English have built up about both the Irish back home and Irish people living here. Some of them relate to an Ireland that hasn't exsisted in decades if it ever did indeed exsist.

[earl]

Unionism is hereditary, it has nothing new to offer to those not born into it. Immigration, defection and a slightly higher nationalist birth rate could see it's end. We've already seen a UUP councillor jump ship as soon as a republican party with no baggage has set up shop. As regards immigration, most immigrant bodies are set up on an all-Ireland basis. Immigrants are mingling with each other from both sides of the border. They are on this island for economic reasons rather than cultural, so they will go with whichever side grants them a greater opportunity to earn a larger wage.