They made the mess, over, as you say, a period of 600 years; they should clean it up.
On this we agree.

The province of Ulster is very much a part of Irish history and culture. Also, logically, the island should be united because it's a geographic unit. But politics doesn't yield to logic.

By the same logic Alaska should be part of Canada. That's not logical.

The idea that one must be a Catholic to be an Irishman is silly; some of the foremost spokesmen for Irish independence and unity have been Protestant. There's something else going on in Ulster, and it has to do with privilege.

Perhaps, but may also be due to nationality. Religion is the excuse - but you cant remove it from the equation.
The average Proddy wants to remain British. The average catholic wants to be Irish. There are always exceptions.
There are a large number who dont care one way or the other. There are a fair number who care passionately. There are a good number of sectarian bigots on both sides.

If the British want to stand for law and order, they're going to have to stand for justice as well, and that means the end to privilege based on religion. Let's see them get on that bandwagon.

I agree, but I feel you'll find that its getting better. Not perfect coz old prejudices die hard, but better.

If Ulster still wants to be ruled from London rather than Dublin after that, well, at least there may be peace. There certainly would be a lot less to attract the average Ulster Catholic to the IRA if there were justice, though I wonder if it would have the opposite effect on some of the Protestants, but it would matter less because they would have nowhere to go.

Economic elevation for everyone. Justice for all. It's getting there.
Recruitment to the IRA/UDA these days is more about crime in general. You don't shoot people for The Cause, you shoot them because you either like it or it makes you richer.

Incidentally, I doubt you know this, but the WASPs, during the second wave of Irish immigration to America in the wake of the Famine, also made remarks about Irish (Catholic) breeding proclivity. Later, when the Italians came, at the turn of the 20th century, the same argument was used to encourage quotas for Italian (Catholic) immigrants. In the 1950s, similar remarks were made about Puerto Rican (Catholic) migrants, but since the US had conquered Puerto Rico, nobody could say much about limiting immigration, because it wasn't really immigration. It seems that the people what has are prone to characterize those what hasn't as inveterate reproducers. This makes them seem both ruled by animal instincts and somehow Machiavellian in their reproductive activity, all at the same time: a double threat.

Oh but I did know that. They say the same about Mexicans/Hispanics here now, and Muslims in Europe.
I said it somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but it's also marginally true. Catholic birth rates were slightly higher than Protestant in the eighties, though both were declining. Populations are slowly converging........