Home › Forums › Chat Forum › Conservative coalition with DUP…..
- This topic has 460 replies, 93 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by kimbers.
-
Conservative coalition with DUP…..
-
scudFree Member
Sv, i kept seeing this ridiculous argument that Corbyn backs the IRA or similar, he held open talks with Sinn Fein, not the IRA, there is an actual difference.
What the mainstream UK media seems to have forgotten in the run up to the GE is their own reporting of the Conservatives numerous dealings and negotiations with the IRA/Sinn Fein including a Tory peer laundering money for them:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2601875.stm
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/oct/16/northernireland.thatcher
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/mar/18/northernireland.past
And a Tory peer that laundered money for the IRA
Why is OK for one and not the other?
svFree MemberYour implication is that he quietly supports/supported IRA violence, isn’t it? Thats what you’re insinuating?
Not insinuating anything, it would appear in the eighties he chose to support the Nationalist/Republican agenda, certainly didn’t support the pro unionists (you know the ones that are fellow British citizens with the English/Scottish/Welsh).
He certainly would be a compromised PM on any NI affairs in the future.
codybrennanFree Membersv
He certainly would be a compromised PM on any NI affairs in the future.
Yeah? He wouldn’t be alone….
svFree MemberSo it’s fine to have Corbyn but not May borrowing 10 votes from Foster?
Democracy eh
jimjamFree Membersv
it would appear in the eighties he chose to support the Nationalist/Republican agenda, certainly didn’t support the pro unionists (you know the ones that are fellow British citizens with the English/Scottish/Welsh).I would just point out that Nationalists/Republicans are also British Citizens.
RustySpannerFull MemberSee if you can find a single person on here who thinks it’s ok for any mainstream party to be propped up by either the DUP or SF.
I’d be very surprised if you can.
If so, please crack on.
If not, I can see no point in raking up the past.KlunkFree MemberI would just point out that Nationalists/Republicans are also
British CitizensSatan Worshipers.fify
jimjamFree MemberKlunk – Member
I would just point out that Nationalists/Republicans are also British Citizens Satan Worshipers.
fify
Ah yes, I had completely forgotten that they do literally worship the anti-christ. Which means they have no souls, so it’s no sin to kill them. If only they could be rounded up into camps and somehow disposed of like DUP MP Sammy Wilson would advocate.
oldracerFree MemberNot insinuating anything, it would appear in the eighties he chose to support the Nationalist/Republican agenda, certainly didn’t support the pro unionists (you know the ones that are fellow British citizens with the English/Scottish/Welsh)
I think you need some perspective..
Corbyn spoke to the them yes….but what about the ex-terrorist in the Tory ranks?
I don’t see you getting your knickers in a twist over that?
Now, you tell me……which one broke the fing law??
Any criticism of Corbyn HAS TO BE SEEN bearing her past in mind.
epicycloFull Member[Tinfoil hat]
Is May more cunning than we think? Perhaps she can see the potential for a bit of terrorist activity by stirring up the Irish situation.
If you can’t have a war to boost the govt’s position, a terrorist threat that you can monitor must be the next best thing…
[/Tinfoil hat]
mcmoonterFree MemberFor some reason I’m getting ads for paramilitary apparel and night vision goggles 😯
jimjamFree MemberAds you say? Hang on, let me check my phone. Yes, I’m getting intruder alarms.
zokesFree MemberVoting is indeed pointless
Sure, that’s why so many seats were decided by a few hundred votes or less. 🙄
As others have said: do crack on. It’s funny to watch ch, but don’t be under the illusion that you’re being taken seriously.
seosamh77Free Memberepicyclo – Member
[Tinfoil hat]Is May more cunning than we think? Perhaps she can see the potential for a bit of terrorist activity by stirring up the Irish situation.
If you can’t have a war to boost the govt’s position, a terrorist threat that you can monitor must be the next best thing…
[/Tinfoil hat]
You’re accrediting them with a plan. 😆
ninfanFree MemberSee if you can find a single person on here who thinks it’s ok for any mainstream party to be propped up by either the DUP or SF.
Yes, absolutely, I do
You lot still don’t seem to get that there’s a difference between before the ceasefire and after.
Once Can’t believe it’s Not IRA and the Red hand Gang, and the rest of them, renounced and permanently abandoned violence as a means to an end they became legitimate politicians*, because that’s the only way a peace process is ever going to work, see South Africa as another example
The DUP, as elected politicians have as much right to participate in the UK government as they do in NI government, the same as SF have a perfect right to be in government in NI, or here if they chose to take their seats in Westminster.
some of they may well have been odious bastards that I wouldn’t shed a tear for their passing, as I said about McGuinness when he died “I have to give him credit for changing his ways, and being instrumental in the success of the peace process, the common ground, and indeed friendship, he seems to have found in his work with Ian Paisley is nothing short of remarkable. Despite this I don’t think a thousand lifetimes in hell will make up for the misery he caused in the past.” – my objection to Corbyn is that he, and Abbott, didn’t just speak to (on a partisan basis) but publically supported and repeatedly gave a public stage to PIRA-SF whilst they were engaged in armed struggle against the Democratically elected government, Abbott even saying it herself, “is our struggle — every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.” – Corbyn entirely rejected the will of the people of NI, claimin that a United ireland was the only means to a peaceful outcome, incidentally, something that the UK & Irish governments, the armed groups and the people of NI have ultimately proved him wrong in.
seosamh77Free Memberninfan – Member
See if you can find a single person on here who thinks it’s ok for any mainstream party to be propped up by either the DUP or SF.The latter is impossible. But aye, why not, politics needs some hilarity! 😆
ninfanFree MemberShame I could rely on you to whinge about me rather than actually come forward with a coherent argument against any of the points I made though, eh aracer?
The latter is impossible.
Oh dear, Joseph failed to read on as far as the bit where I point out that SF could easily choose to take up their westminster seats if they wished
seosamh77Free Memberninfan – Member
Yes, absolutely, I doYou lot still don’t seem to get that there’s a difference between before the ceasefire and after.
Once Can’t believe it’s Not IRA and the Red hand Gang, and the rest of them, renounced and permanently abandoned violence as a means to an end they became legitimate politicians*, because that’s the only way a peace process is ever going to work, see South Africa as another example
The DUP, as elected politicians have as much right to participate in the UK government as they do in NI government, the same as SF have a perfect right to be in government in NI, or here if they chose to take their seats in Westminster.
some of they may well have been odious bastards that I wouldn’t shed a tear for their passing, as I said about McGuinness when he died “I have to give him credit for changing his ways, and being instrumental in the success of the peace process, the common ground, and indeed friendship, he seems to have found in his work with Ian Paisley is nothing short of remarkable. Despite this I don’t think a thousand lifetimes in hell will make up for the misery he caused in the past.” – my objection to Corbyn is that he, and Abbott, didn’t just speak to (on a partisan basis) but publically supported and repeatedly gave a public stage to PIRA-SF whilst they were engaged in armed struggle against the Democratically elected government, Abbott even saying it herself, “is our struggle — every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.” – Corbyn entirely rejected the will of the people of NI, claimin that a United ireland was the only means to a peaceful outcome, incidentally, something that the UK & Irish governments, the armed groups and the people of NI have ultimately proved him wrong in.
It’s extremely funny watching ninfan twist himself in knots. 😆
seosamh77Free Memberninfan – Member
Oh dear, Joseph failed to read on as far as the bit where I point out that SF could easily choose to take up their westminster seats if they wished
They could but they won’t, ever. Ergo, impossible.
ninfanFree MemberThey could but
Thanks for agreeing with me, and destroying your own argument that it’s impossible 😆
seosamh77Free MemberDescribe to me the circumstances where Sinn Fein would take up seats in the UK parliament?
These knots should be funny, go on! 😆
aracerFree MemberYou appear to misunderstand ninfan’s argument – clearly it’s no more impossible for SF to take their seats at Westminster than for ninfan to vote Labour.
ninfanFree MemberWell, one situation might be where the alternative was letting the DUP get their own way, but by taking up their seats they could team together with a certain old ally to defeat them
clearly it’s no more impossible for SF to take their seats at Westminster than for ninfan to vote Labour.
You mean like I did in ’97 ?
(aracer runs up to the ball… he shoots, and he misses 😆 )
CougarFull MemberIf you can’t have a war to boost the govt’s position, a terrorist threat that you can monitor must be the next best thing…
We already have one of those, just not enough people to do the monitoring. (So clearly, what we need is a load more suspected terrorists to keep an eye on.)
CougarFull MemberYou mean like I did in ’97 ?
Weren’t we just holding Corbyn to account today for his politics in the 80s not half a breath ago?
theotherjonvFree MemberI’m going to agree with Ninfan here, that the past is the past and while there may be issues with siding with one part of the NI ‘divide’ leading to problems over impartiality when it comes to the GFA and resolving the Stormont impasse currently, working with people who now renounce violence despite their past is technically OK. Even if I’d be watching like a hawk that the say-do ratio remains appropriately balanced.
Still doesn’t satisfactorily answer why it’s OK to work with a party that has their views on other matters such as sexuality, religion, etc.
seosamh77Free Memberninfan – Member
Well, one situation might be where the alternative was letting the DUP get their own way, but by taking up their seats they could team together with a certain old ally to defeat themstill wouldn’t happen. next scenario?
seosamh77Free Membertheotherjonv – Member
I’m going to agree with Ninfan here, that the past is the pasttwist and shout, twist and shout! 😆 Could have taken that stance, pre-election, no? 😆
btw the past ain’t in the past, you’ve still got the small matter of the DUP’s utterly odious current world view, but as I say crack on. Going to great watching the tories infect themselves with it.
mikewsmithFree Membertheotherjonv – Member
I’m going to agree with Ninfan here, that the past is the pastWhich is exactly why he spent hours trying to post pics of jc meeting people and bringing it up at every opportunity as a reason not to vote for him.
Still doesn’t satisfactorily answer why it’s OK to work with a party that has their views on other matters such as sexuality, religion, etc.
Still waiting for their core voter to arrive
ninfanFree MemberCould have taken that stance, pre-election, no?
The stance that I, and I am sure many other people, took both before and after the election, is that you can’t trust the judgement of someone who allied himself with numerous terrorist groups (not just spoke to, allied himself with, categorically and publically aligning himself with their stated aims) whilst they were still engaged in a campaign of violence – Rather than anything to do with his relationship with those people after they had renounced violence, which is where, as part of the peace process, you have to accept that the past is the past.
seosamh77Free MemberYou’ll be hammering the tories for talking to sinn fein pre decommissioning/pre ceasefires? Do you even have a scooby as to the timeline of decommissioning/ceasefires?
If everyone took your, quite ridiculous, stance. We’d still be stuck in the 1980s.
Dialog is the only way forward.
molgripsFree Memberallied himself with numerous terrorist groups (not just spoke to, allied himself with, categorically and publically aligning himself with their stated aims) whilst they were still engaged in a campaign of violence
You’re talking about Corbyn? He supported Irish unification through violence?
RustySpannerFull Member….which is where, as part of the peace process, you have to accept that the past is the past.
If members of all parties waited for a ceasefire on all sides before talking to all the groups involved, we’d still be waiting now.
How many more murders would have occurred in the past 30 years if we’d not tried?
ninfanFree Memberi) Talking to and negotiating with all sides, privately, in an official capacity as elected government, in order to achieve peace
Ii) publically aligning yourself, in an unofficial capacity, and openly supporting the stated aims of one single side of the conflict, repeatedly giving a public stage and publicity to their aims and onjectives, including opposing steps towards achieving a bipartisan agreement to achieve a peaceable outcome by the respective governments.
You don’t see the difference?
If Corbyn had been talking to and working, impartially, as a go between or facilitator between both republicans and unionists, it might be different – He wasn’t, and both his own, and his bedfellow’s (arf!) statements from the time prove this
scudFree MemberNinfan.
I’ve posted it before, but i’ll post it again, why is it better to have held numerous talks in secret rather than in the open, these articles go back to 1981:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2601875.stm
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/oct/16/northernireland.thatcher
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/mar/18/northernireland.past
And a Tory peer that laundered money for the IRA
The topic ‘Conservative coalition with DUP…..’ is closed to new replies.