What is the MATTER with people in East Belfast?

[Stoo82]

Let's face it English were f***ing horrible to the irish and we deserved a fight. We didn't deserve a sustained terrorist attack on our women and children but you cannot undestimate a people who have been the subject of tyranny no-matter how many generations pass.

You have to understand why the English state went into Ireland first over 1000 years ago. And it was not for 'onionisum', but as a mean to control the ports and stop piracy.

 

[Simster]

And you are ignorant if you think they weren't.

I didn't say that.

he didnt say they werent though , he said they arent now , and havent been for a long time .

Exactly. They were indeed oppressed, certainly until well into the 1970s, arguably until the 1980s if you consider the blatant collusion between the RUC, the army and the loyalist paramilitaries.

But Catholics like Rory Mcllroy and Martin O'Neill have always walked the tightrope of feeling both British and Irish with a heavy heart, not wanting to offend either group. If they felt truly oppressed in this day and age, as CallumTulley would have us believe, they'd have nailed their colours to the Irish tricolour.

 

[CT1]

You sound like a right cock if you think nationalist catholics are being oppressed now (or were in 1998).

As someone has already said, you are ignorant if you think they weren't.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Having lived in Holywood, a small town outside East Belfast in the eighties (as a civvy), I have to say it is very difficult to put the finger of blame on either side of the divide. It is so entrenched now that it has got lost in the annals of time. It seems no-one is right or wrong and what seems to us to be bigotted pettiness is very important for both sides when they feel they are having their identity taken away in small chunks. Whoever comes up with the finite definition to cease hostilities will be a genius of our time!

 

[CT1]

How are the nationalists " oppressed " ? as for colonialism, you cant even spell what you're supposed to be opposed to.

I didn't say they were being oppressed now. Im on my iphone so you will have to put up with my spelling.

 

[Nibble]

You have to understand why the English state went into Ireland first over 1000 years ago. And it was not for 'onionisum', but as a mean to control the ports and stop piracy.

I understand that, however anyone who thinks the English weren't bastards to the irish is kidding themselves. The English went into a lot of territories under the banner of solving problems.

 

[User removed 4]

I understand that, however anyone who thinks the English weren't bastards to the irish is kidding themselves. The English went into a lot of territories under the banner of solving problems.

Yes we were , BY THE STANDARDS OF THE TIME, we also used to send 8 year old kids with rickets up chimneys and down mines, in casre it had escaped your attention, that doesnt happen anymore.

 

[Simster]

As someone has already said, you are ignorant if you think they weren't.

You reckon? Well give me one example of Irish Catholic oppression since 1998.

 

[Nibble]

Yes we were , BY THE STANDARDS OF THE TIME, we also used to send 8 year old kids with rickets up chimneys and down mines, in casre it had escaped your attention, that doesnt happen anymore.

Picture a dog chasing it's own tail.

 

[Simster]

Picture a dog chasing it's own tail.

I do agree with you here Nibble. [MENTION=11956]bushy[/MENTION], we're not arguing whether or not the English were any worse than any other colonial power, just a recognition that colonialism brought brutality and fuelled the anti-English sentiment we see today.

Where I agree with bushy is that anyone who uses the excuse that the Irish Catholics were still being brutaility oppressed and were still victims of "colonialism" in 1998 when Sinn Fein decided to stop bombing and talk, as an excuse to suggest they sold out their people, is a complete mong. Especially when, as a consequence of the GFA, Northern Ireland is the most democratic place in Europe.

 

[User removed 4]

I do agree with you here Nibble. [MENTION=11956]bushy[/MENTION], we're not arguing whether or not the English were any worse than any other colonial power, just a recognition that colonialism brought brutality and fuelled the anti-English sentiment we see today.Where I agree with bushy is that anyone who uses the excuse that the Irish Catholics were still being brutaility oppressed and were still victims of "colonialism" in 1998 when Sinn Fein decided to stop bombing and talk, as an excuse to suggest they sold out their people, is a complete mong. Especially when, as a consequence of the GFA, Northern Ireland is the most democratic place in Europe.

I havent argued otherwise, merely pointed out the iniquity of citing behaviour from a long time ago , to justify behaviour or views today.

 

[Nibble]

I havent argued otherwise, merely pointed out the iniquity of citing behaviour from a long time ago , to justify behaviour or views today.

I'm not justifying it at all, I don't think anyone is. Just explaining it but I think we are all sort of arguing the same point here.

 

[User removed 4]

I'm not justifying it at all, I don't think anyone is. Just explaining it but I think we are all sort of arguing the same point here.

i know you werentt, young mr tullley was.

 

[Stoo82]

I understand that, however anyone who thinks the English weren't bastards to the irish is kidding themselves. The English went into a lot of territories under the banner of solving problems.

As did everyone else. It's not a quintessentially 'English' thing. It's a 'human' thing.

 

[Nibble]

As did everyone else. It's not a quintessentially 'English' thing. It's a 'human' thing.

True, I think it was us assuming rule of their land that was what irked the the most, or letting their kids starve, yeah I think that may have stuck in their craw somewhat?

 

[Stoo82]

True, I think it was us assuming rule of their land that was what irked the the most, or letting their kids starve, yeah I think that may have stuck in their craw somewhat?

The has never been a United Ireland.

There were several different mini-kingoms much like England, as was the fasion of the time.

The potatoe famine was to do with the free market, and letting the market decide. Many Irish people could not afford food. So they went without and died. I'm not saying this was not, how should we put this, in the British governments thoughts? But, it wrong to suggest the government just went in and starved everyone. It was the same in india, and at home too. NOTHING was to get in the way of free trade. Not even human life.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Could have sworn there was a potato famine and as such that being the staple diet of the poor meant they starved? Perhaps I mis-interpreted history?

 

[Nibble]

The has never been a United Ireland.

There were several different mini-kingoms much like England, as was the fasion of the time.

The potatoe famine was to do with the free market, and letting the market decide. Many Irish people could not afford food. So they went without and died. I'm not saying this was not, how should we put this, in the British governments thoughts? But, it wrong to suggest the government just went in and starved everyone. It was the same in india, and at home too. NOTHING was to get in the way of free trade. Not even human life.

Not entirely accurate. English Landlords took the good, fertile land by force, leaving many Irish with land no good for farming this systematically starving them to force them into cheap, almost slave labour. But you have got it mostly correct.

 

[Stoo82]

Not entirely accurate. English Landlords took the good, fertile land by force, leaving many Irish with land no good for farming this systematically starving them to force them into cheap, almost slave labour. But you have got it mostly correct.

Its true. But not just English landlords. Irish landlords did the same.

 

[Nibble]

Its true. But not just English landlords. Irish landlords did the same.

I have no doubt. I think they were the subject of much hatred too.