This is a fascinating thread in which many things are turning out to be not as they first seem to be: English John is 'more Irish than the Irish', Maire the ardent NI nationalist is a US citizen. Am I right in believing that Ireland's main troubles stem from: 1.British conquest of Ireland and settlement of large numbers of its own people there who were (and are) loyal to her? 2.The eventual withdrawal of British authority to the north-eastern corner of Ireland to retain an area wherein the majority of the people would be loyal and be able to exercise a comfortable 'democratic' hegemony over the remainder? 3.That thus came about the forced incorporation of some half-million or more nationalists inside a specially created state with about a million unionists? 4.That the existance of that state was (and is) guaranteed by the British government which for whatever reason wishes to retain it as a part of the UK? 5.That the Brits were (and are) prepared to use military force to maintain the status quo? 6.That Britain was (and is) therefore responsible for the evils that befell NI and brought about the Civil Rights campaign in the 60sand 70s? 7.That Britain at first attempted to deal with the troubles as an 'honest broker' with no stake in the outcome other than fair dealings with all parties? 8.That almost immediately Britain turned to her 'own' people in NI to get advice on the ground and discounted any proffered advice from the 'other' side (including Dublin)? 9.That Britain thus lost the opportunity of playing a positive role and instead fell into the old attitude of taking her own very presence in Ireland as the sole arbiter of what was 'good' for the locals? 10. That Britain accordingly encouraged the unionists to adopt (or maintain the most extreme positions as regards any settlement of one of the longest running colonial wars of all?

Rationalisations about holding NI for NATO etc do not hold up. A united or even federated Ireland would surely be prepared to be 'friendly' towards her European neighbors, indeed Devalera hinted almost as much at the outbreak of WW2. No, it is an atavistic longing to retain a last fragment of empire among establishment circles in Whitehall, the military and landed gentry with interests in both countries that make it so difficult for mainstream Britain to see that she is part of the problem and needs to think 'outside the square' if she is to be part of the solution.

So long as Britain continued to guarantee the on-going existance of a separate NI state there never could be peace. Now with the Good Friday Agreement, Britain has gone further than ever before in recognising the need to take the rest of Ireland into account in any settlement of the troubles. Now she must take the most difficult step yet in undoing the mischief she created. She must bite the bullet and insist on the dismantling of the RUC in return for IRA disbandment and the creation of a new police service along 'Patten' lines. The unionists will be 'outraged' of course and Paisley will forecast 'armageddon' (once again), but if Britain holds firm most unionists will realise that its finally reality time and that they actually can share the country with the 'Free State' without losing their religious or political or economic freedoms. But this will only happen if the British people abandon simplistic notions like, 'THEY are at it again in Ireland' and 'a plague on both their boring houses'. Remember YOUR government built both houses, whether or not their purpose was benign.