Martin McGuiness for President?

Betsy Og said:
Anyway, back to the topic, would you concur with the view that Marty & the lads knocked 2 decades more out of it than were "necessary", commiting some awful deeds along the way, and as a result of that Marty is unsuitable for the role?
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable argument, but I think its far more complex than that -

  • how much of their attitude was down to the intransigence of members who had suffered a loss of a friend or family due to the security forces or loyalist murder squads who just wanted payback?
  • how much of it was down to "stickie" and/or criminal elements in or associated with the IRA who wanted their authority within their communities to remain unquestioned?
  • how much was down to the British spies in their midst intent on keeping things going to justify the British Military budget?
  • how much of it was down to the intransigence of Unionists who wanted the status quo to be maintained at all costs?
The situation in Northern Ireland was very complex.
 

I think you're well off the mark there. Is there not 1 man 1 vote and transparent electoral system in ROI?, isnt social housing allocated on a needs basis?, dont the institutions of the State have general support and interact with citizens without sectarian bias? Contrast that to the position in Norn Iron in 1969.

At the moment the Seanie Fitz circle are rightly seen as a point of injustice, but at the end of the day its the middle class are largely picking up the tab. SW in ROI is among the most generous around, and clearly better than NI since they have to police welfare tourists coming over the border. There's plenty of problems in ROI of course, like everywhere, but it isnt the State behind it, the absence of personal responsibility is the biggest thing - the state doesnt make anyone stick a needle in their arm, or raid a post office with a gun, or make their neighbourhood a misery for everyone there.

I dont think a hostile foreign state was that big an issue either, the arms importation never worked. OK the ROI provided a hiding ground, and arms storage, but that was contrary to the efforts of the State. You may argue the State didnt try hard enough, but in no way (AFAI concerned) did the ROI State (i.e. the government) help create or sustain the conflict.
 
onq said:
how much of their attitude was down to the intransigence of members who had suffered a loss of a friend or family due to the security forces or loyalist murder squads who just wanted payback?
Click to expand...

I agree with all your points, but I suppose thats where leadership comes in, you can let the nutters rule the roost. McGuinness is no doubt an intelligent man, so while you have to try to bring the movement with you, did he not realise it was all such a futile waste and why carry on so long.

Like the point quoted above, Bernadette Sands McKevitt thinks her brother starving himself to death gives her the right to carry on a terror campaign that has miniscule support and huge opposition. Who's to say what Bobby Sands would now want, but I'm fairly sure it wasnt 29 innocents slaughtered in Omagh - and yes no doubt that wasnt their goal, but thats what can happen when you park a car full of explosives in a busy town centre.
 
Betsy Og

I can see you believe that version of events and it does sound plausible, but let me question a few of the mantras.

Unemployment in RoI has always been higher than in NI, including its catholics, except for the illusion of the Celtic Tiger.

Back in 1969 no way had the RoI a superior SW system. It has now for sure but that is a whole different folly.

My sense, having lived in both jurisdictions, but I stand to be corrected, is that there is far more upward mobility in NI even for catholics (these days especially for catholics). MC and WC went to the same grammar schools. WC kids could genuinely rise up through the social strata.

Ever go to a disadvantaged area of Dublin (I recommend Fettercairn). It is not pretty, these are practically no go areas.

But now my main point. No way could a successful and sophisticated terrorist campaign be launched and sustained from the housing estates of Belfast and BTW neither will it ever happen in Fettercairn either.

A successful terrorist campaign needs the support of very senior figures in the establishment of a hostile country if not quite in the government itself. CH et al founded and succoured the Provisional IRA, fact.

This State really let itself down over Sunningdale. It should have introduced internment in support of that initiative (Dev did to save the RoI from the IRA in the 30s). Instead the IRA were free to accelerate its bombing campaign to the point where the whole thing became intolerable for the protestant majority and they cried Halt.

Ironic thing is that 30 years and many deaths later Martin and the IRA are hailing a dispensation which is almost indistinguishable from Sunningdale as a victory.

If only our government had shown real guts back in 1973 we would now have fair governance of NI without ceding control to the IRA and we would have saved thousands of lives to boot.
 
Whatever about events in the North - and as a unionist I will doubtless have different views from some of the nationalist posters - may i ask those nationalists/pro-McGuiness posters ..

.... do you accept that members of your own state's security services were killed by the IRA in this state during the time that McG was the boss (or at least influential figure) in the IRA ?
 
If McGuinness is good enough to be the North's Deputy First Minister why isn't he good enough to be President of Ireland?

The past is past .... we should be focussing on the future.
 
As I have already said on this thread, McGuinness's stubborn refusal to meet Queen Elizabeth 11 when she paid a very symbolic 'moving on' visit to Ireland last May, hardly inspires confidence that he has truly put the past behind him. He still seems to be entrenched in bitterness towards our nearest neighbours at a time when the rest of us have truly 'moved on'. Therefore, I would not be happy having him represent the people of Ireland at home or abroad.
 
PaddyBloggit said:
If McGuinness is good enough to be the North's Deputy First Minister why isn't he good enough to be President of Ireland?
Click to expand...

Because there is no equivalence between some administrative role in the UK with being Head of State for this country.

The assembly in Northern Ireland is a regional assembly. They are like kids with pocket money deciding what to spend on comics and what to spend of sweets. The office of Deputy First Minister is an artificial construct to give the SDLP or Sinn Féin some credibility with their electorate. The UUP and DUP have to suck it down and deal with the reality of having to work alongside a Nationalist MLA, if they want to wield what little power has been devolved to them from London.

The President of the Republic of Ireland is a completely different job and presents an entirely different set of duties and responsibilities.

Martin McGiunness' candidacy to be President of Ireland seems, to me, to be based on the following.

Deputy First Minister - see above
The Peace Process - and why did we need a peace process ?
He met Nelson Mandela. So too did the Spice Girls.
 
But there is (an equivalence) .... it's that Joe Public won't see the difference between the two roles.

They'll see him jumping from one role as a leader to another role as a leader except than one is South, the other North.

The voters will decide on election day ..... if he wins we get on with life ... if he loses we get on with life.

The whole role of President is over rated at any rate and the race for the Áras this time round has turned the whole thing into a Keystone Cops type of farce.

........... and to prove my point - David Norris is yelling his head off on the TV3 news at the moment!

To allow for real choice on election day the ballot paper should have a box for 'None of the Above'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register