From: mbrennan@bbn.com (Maeve Brennan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Economist Article On Irish Election
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:04:00 GMT
Reply-To: mbrennan@spca.bbn.com (Maeve Brennan)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Dec15.145918.28845@news.nd.edu> ulick@michaelangelo.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford) writes:
>Thanks for posting - the typical British Propaganda type piffle I have 
>come to expect from 'Business' publications.  To describe Fianna Fail as
>'uncompromisingly nationalist' is such utter bullshit I have to publicly
>laugh at it.  More Nationalist than the idiots in the PD's and FG who are

I don't know to what extent Fianna Fail is 'uncompromisingly 
nationalist'.  However, having read your postings for several years,
I have come to the conclusion that you are uncompromisingly
nationalist and anti-British.  You also indicate in your postings
that you come from a Fianna Fail background.  Is one to understand
that your uncompromisingly nationalist stance is atypical of the
Fianna Fail party?  I really hope it is.

>laugh at it.  More Nationalist than the idiots in the PD's and FG who are
>naive enough to think that delting articles 2 and 3 of the constitution
>will do anything other than harm, but they have extradited too many 

Articles 2 and 3 have no practical merit, only symbolic.  I am in favour 
of removing them from the Irish constitution since they are understandably 
repugnant to Ulster Unionists.  I think that anything which Ireland can 
reasonably do to reduce the suspicion and fears of Ulster Unionists that 
they are being coerced into a united Ireland, is a good thing.  It is 
only natural for people to resent coercion.

Furthermore, it is consistent with the Anglo-Irish agreement which 
the Irish government signed:

"Status of Northern Ireland

Article 1

The two Governments

(a) affirm that any change in the status of Northern Ireland would
    only come about with the consent of a majority of the people of
    Northern Ireland;

(b) recognise that the present wish of a majority of the people of
    Northern Ireland if for no change in the status of Northern
    Ireland;

(c) declare that, if in the future a majority of the people of
    Northern Ireland clearly wish for and formally consent to the
    establishment of a united Ireland, they will introduce and
    support in the respective Parliaments legislation to give effect
    to that wish."

>
>(But at least we in Ireland have the sense not to totally piss off our 
>powerful neighbour, unlike those idiots in the Balkans, who now want
>the rest of the world to fight their fight.  But I guess Ireland has the
>wrong agressor.  Some idiot countries will be dying for the joke nation
>Bosnia-Hercegovina before the end of the year.)
>

You seem to want war between the two countries, and believe that the
rest of the world would join in if the adversary wasn't Britain.

While it is inevitable that we will have disputes, especially given
our history, it makes more sense to strive for friendly relations, 
especially as partners in the EEC.  

Having read the Anglo-Irish agreement, it seems to me that both
governments wish to diminish the divisions between the communities, 
towards achieving lasting peace and stability.

I have found your postings discouraging, since they seem to accept that
the two traditions of Northern Ireland will always be violently hostile.  
You sneer at all attempts to reduce this hostility, and affirm that
the only way of achieving your goals of a united Ireland is through 
violence and coercion.  It's hard to see the violence coming to an end
if that came to pass.

How much time have you spent in Northern Ireland?  Have you talked to
ordinary Ulster Unionists?  Have you ever tried to understand their
point of view?
Xref: sparky soc.culture.celtic:8277 rec.music.folk:8634