why does the U.S.  NOT support the reunification of Northern Ireland to the rest of the republic ?
146426
it's all about the maintenance of alliance with the Brits. these guys (the two gov'ts) walk in lock-step, and especially since the beginning of the so-called "war on terror," all freedom fighters have too much of the "terrorist" stink on them (fomented of course, by the dominant government force) for any sort of change. don't look for the US to change their stance anytime soon, no matter how many Irish-Americans push for it.
606398
Interesting (and nauseating) to sift through the illiterate anglophobic rants of the terrorist supporters who've contaminated this perfectly legitimate question with their hateful bile. The truth is that just about the only silver lining to the horrific atrocities committed against innocent civilians on 9/11 was that it did indeed awaken many Americans -- including Irish-Americans who had previously supported the IRA -- to the ugly truth about terrorism. It matters not what your cause is nor how legitimate your grievances, terrorist acts committed against individuals or states, civilian or military, are absolutely unacceptable. While it is doubtless true that there are still die-hard IRA supporters amongst America's Irish-Catholic population, they are very definitely a rapidly shrinking minority. The very fact that the IRA finally renounced terrorism and has moved forward with their own commitment to the Good Friday peace accords is proof of the fact that their support from donor organizations in the States and elsewhere has been evaporating. \n\nIn summation, I am not interested in hearing any further rationalization for the armed struggle (read terrorist activities) of the IRA against the British government and people. I am thankfully not alone in this view. Whatever your cause and however sympathetic it may or may not be, the use of terrorist violence to achieve your aims is condemned almost universally. The horrors of 9/11 directly contributed to that viewpoint and that is the only good thing to come of all that tragic and unnecessary carnage.\n\nAs to the issue of a united Ireland, take it from this American of mixed English, Irish and Scottish heritage, it is inevitable but it will happen through peaceful means only. The IRA has finally figured that out and it's high time the rest of you did, as well. A negotiated peace, an end to terrorist campaigns, the cessation of sectarian violence and a common will to live in peace and harmony will ultimately achieve what a vicious and violent chapter of Anglo-Irish history failed completely to achieve: a united Ireland and lasting peace. \n\nEnd note: Being a student of history who comes from a long line of English, Irish and Scottish Catholics, yet being an American no longer affiliated with any religion whatsoever, I feel well qualified to state my case in an impartial manner. Feel free to disagree if you wish, but peace, understanding and reconciliation will accomplish what hatred, violence and terrorism so abjectly failed to. If we've learned nothing else from 9/11, let us at least agree on this much.
866339
i will let you know something that a few usa citizens know,you are asking that from an usa perpective,because if you go around the world you will understand that in the usa the media is not bringing international information very well,so the most of the time you see everything thinking that the earth is spinning around only one country,big mistake,the opposite ,the usa needs of the rest of the world like the countries with a thought of freedom need the usa,right now bush is searching for support outside did you know that?like the leftist parties(communists) are winning more countries around the world?why?the politic of bush and the republicans,the world not, the usa, is moving into a change,i agreed about safety measurements but i do not agreed about the way that they are dealing with the inter. relations,they are losting friends countries.
177205
There is only one government in N.Ireland but other governments interested in helping to solve the problem. At the moment all legislative and political decisions are taken by direct rule ministers from Westminister in the United Kingdom. If the dinosaurs in the N.I. political parties could agree we would return to a local devolved government at Stormont
393411
Because the US is too busy trying to tell people how to live thier life. The world will never be unified until they all have the freedom they deserve.
710909
I don't know what that first person above me is talking about, but the problem is Iran and Syria. They are the ones propagating the violence in Iraq AND in Lebanon in order to better suit their own interests, that being to give the US hell to prevent the US from helping Israel in case Iran wants to attack Israel and to use the violence as a way to get the US to talk to Iran and Syria so that the US government can hear their case, that being their agenda in the Middle East. Also, Iran does not want a stable Iraq. Iran and Iraq had a long eight-year war with one another and over a million people were killed. If Iraq was stable and still under Saddam or any stable government, Iran would have a nation to contend with. Iran and Iraq have hated each other for more than two-thousand years, going all the way back to when Persia (modern Iran) conquered Babylon (modern Iraq).\nIt was stupid for us, the United States, to attack Iraq. It would have been in our better interests to leave that country alone, because now that Iraq is in shambles, there is no nation in the Middle East that can be used (besides Israel) to help fight Iran.
411280
As a non American or European,\nI feel EU has a long way to go in terms of the "U". Besides, at the end of the day, Europe united or not will always side up with the US on the really important issues. And unlike the other superpower contenders, Europe shares most of the American values - and actually makes them work better in most cases.
914464
Ah, the mythical NAU. Ain't gonna happen, wouldn't be prudent.\n\nAmerica is not going to saddle itself with a bunch of socialist freeloaders from the north, or uneducated socialist whiners from the south. Qui bono? Certainly not the US!
263320
That is a good question.  If you look at American history you can see that from the Spanish American war to now, the US has no inhibitions against using military force to support its vested interests whether they are the United Fruit company in the Central American nations, colonial commerce in China, or suppressing resistance to American occupation in the Phillipines.  After WWII, under the doctrines of Cold War\nidiology there wasn't a year we were not engaged in undermining countries with political leaders we did not like\n( Domincan Republic, Chile, Indonesia, Congo,) or creating puppet governments and fomenting civil war, ( Vietnam ).\n\nAs an American I am NOT in support of these actions,\n\nDuring the Reagan Admin, the US supported dictators such as  Park, ( S Korea), Marcos, ( Phillipines ), Botha,( S.Africa), Pinochet, ( Chile), and others that oppressed their own citizens.  This was fine as long at they opposed communism. \n\nI don't doubt in this current crusade to maintain access to oil in the Middle East, we are behaving like the Roman Empire and supporting governments that support our aims, no matter how badly they treat their citizens. \n\nI don't think Americans in general support these actions.\nTo a great extent we are goverened by corporations, big business, idiology, short term economic policy and now, \nNEOCON doctrine, wars are inevitable and beyond our ability to prevent.\n\nIn earlier history, we had a civil war over soveignity and slavery as well an on ongoing genocide of the indigenious\ninhabitants. Americans execute more people than any other country in the world except for China.  We are a violent society.\n\n  When I travel abroad, I tell people I am a Canadian.
707077
Israel is a terrorist state and the US are supporting them because they have an interest in keeping the region unstable, also because public opinion in the US is mainly geared towards supporting Israel against its Arab neighbours. There is a good deal of hidden racism there, Israel is seen as "one of us" against those non-Christian barbarians.\nUnless the US public start demanding a change in politics, the slaughter of civilians and the total disregard for the rights of the Palestinians will go on.\n\nIn Europe there is already a visible swing away from that, and I hope it will spread over the Atlantic.
744255
They don't...the media, the democrats and the celebraties all do because they can't keep there mouths shut overseas while they play up to their audiences...\n\nThe Dems support the same agenda that the terrorists do...and it is all about hating america...why do you think they want the UN to control US actions?  Not becasue they love it....nope, no sir...\n\nThanks the Republicans who love america and then thank your troops...the vote Liberterian and get all those politicians that voted for the war out.....    :)
987624
The humanism countries should be united and all together boycotted american government.I think most american do not  agree to send troops to Iraq.It is only the decision of the government of Bush's administration..American gvernment is supported by  the government ofsome other countries such as England.But the majority of mankind do not agree with american aggression.American occupied Iraq has no strong basis.Sadam Husein had no destroyable weapons.really.The American governmaent had slander Sadam government.Slandering is heated by Allah Almighty.Slander is more cruel than murder.\nBush government is very arrogant.He think that american can do everything they want.
249393
Their are subtle differences between the two. While a Unionist wants Northern Ireland to remain a part of the UK, both the Irish Republicans and Nationalists want to see the whole Island united as one Ireland.\n\nTypically, Republicanism is associated with Sinn Fein, those who want to sever the ties between Britain and Northern Ireland by force, while Nationalism, today refers to those who would like to see it done by voting, diplomacy, etc. \n\nIn the past, "nationalism" refered to both groups.\n\nAlso, the move to seek a united Ireland isn't as much a "religious war" as some in the media say it is. Typically, those who are Catholic tend to have ancestors who spoke Irish (Gaelic) while those who are Protestant have ancestors who spoke English, so the tense feelings are more ethnic than religious (although there is a religious element).\n\nSome of the most ardent supporters of a united Ireland are Protestants (the first President of the Irish Free State, Douglas Hyde was Protestant). In some of the Gaeltachts (Irish speaking) areas of the Irish Republic, there are a lot of evangelical Protestants. They are among the strongest supporters of a United Ireland.
250846
Because they want all the goodies the US has to offer, but they want to be loyal to their own country that gives them nothing.\n\nit's just like Puerto Rico not wanting to become a state because they like being able to suck on our resources (example - welfare) but they don't want to have to give anything (example - pay taxes) back.
522599
because the USA wont allow it
431588
I will disagree in the case of the IRA mentioned here.\n\nThe IRA had support in the USA for a long time, despite it killing many civilians. The turning point was after the Enniskllen Bomb in 1988, and even after this millions of dollars was donated to the IRA every year from American sympathisers.\n\nThe IRA got what it wanted through terrorism. If it had not started an armed campaign it would not have got Sinn Fein into an assembly, or greater links towards an 'united Ireland'. They didn't kill for the sake of it. Terrorists kill because they can get something out of it. Are you seriously telling me that if they would get what they wanted without fighting then they would fight? Terrorism brings rewards. Also, terrorism remains a last resort - unless the terrorists are fantasists or just plain criminals.\n\nThe question is very difficult to answer. Every person must ask themselves what would they do if something happened that they disagreed with AND all democratic means of protest against this were exhausted or forbidden.\n\nMy definition of freedom fighter is fighting when all other possible non-violent ways of protest are exhausted (thus Al Qu'ida are terrorists because they did not seek to pursue democratic, peaceful means from their conception). Civil disobedience is not terrorism. Otherwise we would lable the Civil Rights Movement in America terrorists, and that would be completely inaccurate.\n\nI recommend people read 'Les Justes' by Camus, to help put themselves in such a position, if only in thought.
248498
Because this country just can't seem to keep it's nose out of other countries affairs .  It thinks every other country should be just like it. Not all countries want to be like the U.s and the sooner the USA realizes that the better