Talk:United Ireland/Archive 6

Post-BREXIT
1: Presuming BREXIT happens, which it currently looks likely, why should the EU admit a United Ireland? It only takes one naysay to keep any candidate out. Their is precedence for parts of EU countries not being part of the EU. 2: What happens if Northern Ireland votes to remain in the UK? Will they keep being forced to have referendums "until they get it right"? Or will their vote be respected by the Irish Nationalists? Not likely IMHO. Degen Earthfast (talk) 19:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Spain has in the recent past indicated it is not opposed to a United Ireland in the EU (see this article). Furthermore, I don't think changes in the borders of an existing member state require the approval of the other member states of the EU. --Bridei921302 (talk) 01:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

This isn't really the place to speculate. Iamdmonah (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Homework Hell
Came here hoping to find a simple answer. Reading the entire thing I never found ONE simple statement. Ireland has never been a single unified nation in history besides minor legislative periods and was previously nearly a dozen small kingdoms until very recently in history. I had to turn to external sources to find this out. In the migration period it was literally dozens of small kingdoms under warlords. So the argument is 'these people share a land mass and thus should be forced into one nation' which - as we know in the other island in the area - would lead to the Welsh, Scots and English being forced into one country when they are different people. You might want to make the article read a bit better for foreigners new to this topic. It's almost as though it has a specific agenda pushing forcing the two countries together to it at its core. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 16:16, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It would be good to make this basic point at the start of the history section. Johnbod (talk) 17:49, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

The statement "Ireland has never been a single unified nation in history" is probably untrue, certainly debatable at the very least. Hence why another name for the article is "Irish re-unification" and not "Irish unification". Iamdmonah (talk) 10:44, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I do have to chuckle when I see editors responding to old comments and dead conversations and I've seen you respond to older. Having said that unification and reunification depend on which Ireland you are on about. In the sense of a fully independent sovereign state it would be a unification of the island as such a thing never existed before for it be reunited as such. Mabuska (talk) 16:19, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Many would argue that it was united under Brian Boru, no matter how brief it was. Ireland was certainly sovereign entirely free of foreign rule from the period 1014 to 1169. And you do not need to "chuckle" when you see someone "responding to old comments". It helps. Even if the users I respond to don't see it, it will help people who see the conversation later or are looking to see if a certain issue had been already discussed on the talk page. No need to have a go at me for no reason Mabuska. Iamdmonah (talk) 15:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see he spent his entire period as High King fighting against rivals/rebels, and eventually died in the attempt to achieve a unified realm, which immediately collapsed. Johnbod (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

By 1012-1013 Brian Boru had control of all of Ireland without any rebellions. This is generally accepted. In late 1013 Leinster and Dublin rebelled against Brian. Brian laid siege during the winter, but had to retreat when he ran out of supplies. That is why the Battle of Clontarf took place in the spring of the next year. I would also argue Tairrdelbach Ua Conchobair and his son Ruadhrí also held similar power– obviously before the Norman invasion of Ireland in the latter's case. Some would also argue the Irish Confederacy and Patriot Parliament of 1689 also held significant power over the country. Iamdmonah (talk) 19:48, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well wothout sources its just speculation, and if there were any it would need to outweigh the commonly used phrase for the issue: Irish unification. None of what happened in the medieval period matters as there was not a single Irish state encompassing the whole island. The high kingship was primarily an Ui Neill political tool of dominance before Boru aspired to make it something more. It depended on your ability to exact tributes which dictated whether you could claim yourself as high king. Any provincial over kingdoms that didn't weren't classified as rebels as they weren't part of an actual state to rebel against. The Confederacy nor the Patriot parliament can be considered either as they were still subject to English political influence and not truly sovereign. Mabuska (talk) 19:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Countries or sovereign states aren't really defined in medieval Irish times. As Mabuska correctly stated, the measure of a High Kings power was based on his ability to collect tribute from the lesser kingdoms of Ireland. Brian collected tribute from all Kingdoms. And as detailed in writings by Brian's advisor, Brian planned to model the Irish High Kingship on that of England or France– without any lesser Kings, only one King who ruled the entire country. And I would argue it may have happened, had the O'Brien bloodline not been wiped out at the Battle of Clontarf. But based on the modern definitions of what defines a sovereign state, I would argue that Ireland during the reign of Brian Boru, with a single man ruling and collecting taxes from the entire country, and being free from any foreign rule, was a sovereign state. The Irish Confederacy only shared the same monarch as England and Scotland, therefore I would argue that it was a sovereign state– the same way Canada is a sovereign state despite having the same head of state as the UK. It spanned the vast majority of Ireland, but not the entire country. Cork was held by the Royalists, Dublin by the Parliamentarians and a small portion of North east Ulster by the Scottish. As for the Partiot Parliament, it ruled all Ireland save Derry. I don't think it was subject to any foreign influence though, it even recognized a different King to England and Scotland for example. Iamdmonah (talk) 15:26, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 3 February 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED. Clear consensus against the proposal. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

United Ireland → Irish reunification – The entity known as Ireland was united until the year 1921. For it to unite again would therefore be its RE-unification, it would not be the islands first time as a united polity. At a disregard of politics and/or controversy, the title for the unification of the island of Ireland should be "Irish reunification" as it is what the combination of the two entities of the island is called, since it is not the first time the land would be united as one. B. M. L. Peters (talk) 01:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It was united previously under British rule. A title of Irish reunification could lead many to believe it wishes to return to that state, which I'm 200% certain is not the intent. Canterbury Tail talk 01:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As stated above, the only time Ireland was unified was under British rule. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:30, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Ignoring the (historically dubious and otherwise irrelevant) notes about Ireland "only ever being united under British rule", it is WP:COMMONNAME that applies here. And the current title reflects that. "United Ireland" is, by any objective measure, the most common name for the topic. Guliolopez (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree. Even if it was united under the British, it was still united as one entity, with a paliament, the king being the king of Ireland, etc. Martin m159 (talk) 14:30, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As stated above, WP:COMMONNAME policy should be respected. -- Wendylove (talk) 01:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per all above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:47, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose A highly political proposal. WP:COMMONNAME policy should be respected. The Banner  talk 20:32, 8 February 2021 (UTC) And I seem to remember  one Brian Boru.


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Opinion Polling Section Makes no Sense
The section has a lot of data and a nice chart that says "Yes" or "No," but there is no information within that section explaining what those yes or no answers correlate to. For example, is it "yes" to a United Ireland or "yes" to a divided Ireland. Someone coming to this page for the first time would not really know what any of that information is supposed to mean because it is not curated and allows for two different readings of the same data/presentation. The person who's keeping up with, and interpreting, the polling data and knows what the results mean should provide additional clarification. --CarlsonC (talk) 02:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)