The use of 'UK' is deliberate and refers to the timescale I was talking about. At one point the most loyal royalist area of the UK was Ireland when Mr Cromwell came along.
Even before this particular unhinged religious maniac arrived to conduct his murderous war crimes, loyalty to the crown in Ireland was limited to the area around Dublin known as The Pale. It was the fact that British control outside this area was largely illusiory that he came over in the first place.
Sorry, the history of the British occupation was punctuated by frequent rebellions and upheavals.
But more recently the fact London totally buggered it up by shooting a few 'rogues' like they were legally unimportant is why a nation that didn't specifically have very strong goals of independance from the union suddenly found a voice based on repulsion.
The shooting of the 1916 leaders was the incident that tipped it over the edge certainly, but if not that, something would have triggered it eventually.
P.S. There is more that links us than divides us - and even when I visit Dublin the place looks like another great British city
You are right there. Relations between our countries have never been better, and long may they improve. I believe much of that (and much of the good relationships between other former foes in Europe) is due to the European Union, which has focussed European peoples on what they have in common, and the fact that our way of life through the Union is broadly similar.
As for metrication, it is ironic that in both our countries, it is seen as inextricably linked to the EU (which as you know is not correct for the UK anyway, as its decision to metricate was made before joining the Common Market as part of a British Commonwealth decision). Whereas the largely positive attitude towards the EU here has helped metrication, the irresponsible use of the natural resistance to change by Eurosceptics to link the two has denied British citizens the benefits of enjoying an easier way to manage weights and measures.
Tom Wade
