Was the Republican campaign justifiable?

hoorsmelt · 03-12-2011 11:36pm #1

The PIRA's campaign began in 1969 and didn't end until 2005. They were responsible for the deaths of about 1,800 people, mostly security service personnel, with smaller Republican groups like the INLA and the OIRA responsible for another 160-200 deaths on top of that. Could/should their actions be justified? Ireland was colonised by force centuries ago, to argue that anyone who resorts to armed action to put an end to that rule does not have the right to respond to the original violence by armed struggle is hypocritical imo, and the deaths of civilians are an unfortunate side-effect of war- most of the organisations listed above tried to minimise civilian casualties with phone warnings, etc, and the majority of their casualties were security forces, who might be classed as valid targets. I reckon they were justified, and I think that groups who continue to take action today do have the right to resort to force, just that it is tactically unviable at present.

I'm a sympathiser with the IRSP fwiw.

p1akuw47h5r3it · 04-12-2011 12:05am

This will just be an absolute car crash of a thread

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 12:25am

Let me begin with the controversy

Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

trendyvicar · 04-12-2011 12:25am

You suffer from some sort of mental illness in my opinion.

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 12:29am

Was the campaign justifiable? Yes of course it was. It is the right of every nation to take up arms to combat oppression and in the name of freedom. Was the campaign worth it? That is another question. All those people left dead, Catholics, Protestants, protagonists and innocents, and what has been achieved? A political settlement that could have been reached about 15 years before the eventual conclusion.

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 12:33am

FeckinUsername wrote: »

Was the campaign justifiable? Yes of course it was. It is the right of every nation to take up arms to combat oppression and in the name of freedom. Was the campaign worth it? That is another question. All those people left dead, Catholics, Protestants, protagonists and innocents, and what has been achieved? A political settlement that could have been reached about 15 years before the eventual conclusion.

Your argument is immediately void when you bring religion into it

The republican struggle is and has always been secular and guided by socialist principles

And the settlement you speak of was never what the war was fought for

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 12:35am

trendyvicar wrote: »

You suffer from some sort of mental illness in my opinion.

Because I follow the fundementals of a political ideaology

There must be millions out there mentally ill, an infliction I dont made light of

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 12:38am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Your argument is immediately void when you bring religion into it

The republican struggle is and has always been secular and guided by socialist principles

And the settlement you speak of was never what the war was fought for

How is my argument void when I mention that all sections of the community suffered from the conflict?

I am very aware of what the Republican struggle is all about a Chara, I don't need a lecture.

And I stated that the settlement was not what the war was fought for, and thus it is debatable whether it was all worth it. I'm not sure whether you are agreeing with me or arguing against me.....

Chuck Stone · 04-12-2011 12:48am

FeckinUsername wrote: »

All those people left dead, Catholics, Protestants, protagonists and innocents, and what has been achieved? A political settlement that could have been reached about 15 years before the eventual conclusion.

15 years? Try the 1974 Sunningdale Agreement.

Scuppered by Unionist/loyalist violence and a general strike.

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 12:49am

FeckinUsername wrote: »

criticalcritic wrote: »

Your argument is immediately void when you bring religion into it

The republican struggle is and has always been secular and guided by socialist principles

And the settlement you speak of was never what the war was fought for

How is my argument void when I mention that all sections of the community suffered from the conflict?

I am very aware of what the Republican struggle is all about a Chara, I don't need a lecture.

And I stated that the settlement was not what the war was fought for, and thus it is debatable whether it was all worth it. I'm not sure whether you are agreeing with me or arguing against me.....

Im agreeing with you,

In the eyes of the revisionists, the war, all the lives lost, all those who rotted in prisons for years, all was pointless when they could could have just sold out in 69 and bought into Watered down Brit administration in Stormont

Was it all to put likes of Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly and Mary Lou McDonald into comfy partitionist positions so they can live in mansions?

later12 · 04-12-2011 12:55am

It wasn't a republican campaign. They weren't aspiring to rid themselves of monarchy or impose democracy, for example; in fact Padraig Pearse himself mulled over the possibility of having a German prince Lording it over Paddy and Josephone in place of an elected figurehead.

The IRA in both its modern and historic forms have sullied the term 'republican'. They were, and are, militant nationalists.

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 1:05am

later10 wrote: »

It wasn't a republican campaign. They weren't aspiring to rid themselves of monarchy or impose democracy, for example; in fact Padraig Pearse himself mulled over the possibility of having a German prince Lording it over Paddy and Josephone in place of an elected figurehead.

The IRA in both its modern and historic forms have sullied the term 'republican'. They were, and are, militant nationalists.

Pure sh*te

James Connolly, Seamus Costelloe, Frank Ryan were militant nationalists?

The principles of Irish republicanism has been guided by revolutionary socialist principles, the opposite militant nationalism

Read the proclamation which is basis for all republican groups exist,
Nothing nationalist about it

domkk · 04-12-2011 1:10am

seen quite a good few of the ol red white and blue flag down here south of the border

hoorsmelt · 04-12-2011 1:14am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Let me begin with the controversy

Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

I'd broadly agree with that perspective a chara. To clarify, I'm not an Irp, just a sympathiser, and I wanted to see how widespread this analysis would be when put to people like that.

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 1:19am

The Democratic Programme of the First Dáil is also inherently socialist and republican in nature.

Revisionism knows no bounds it seems.....

Surely the poster does not honestly believe that the IRA, of any era, were willing to accept the continuation of the monarchy in Ireland?

Of course it should also be noted that Pearse's alleged statement regarding the German Kaisers son becoming monarch of Ireland is based on hear say. There is no reference to it anywhere in his writings. He is alleged to have suggested it during Easter Week, according to the father of Garret Fitzgerald. If in fact he did suggest it, I am sure that men such as Connolly would have dismissed it out of hand almost immediately.

irishh_bob · 04-12-2011 1:21am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Let me begin with the controversy

Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

the movement from the sixties was an obvious reaction to the orange fascists state of northern ireland but thier is a new dispensation in place which the elected reps of the nationalist people are signed up to

deal with that

LordSutch · 04-12-2011 1:27am

hoorsmelt wrote: »

Was the Republican campaign justifiable?

NO

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 1:29am

FeckinUsername wrote: »

The Democratic Programme of the First Dáil is also inherently socialist and republican in nature.

Revisionism knows no bounds it seems.....
K
Surely the poster does not honestly believe that the IRA, of any era, were willing to accept the continuation of the monarchy in Ireland?

Of course it should also be noted that Pearse's alleged statement regarding the German Kaisers son becoming monarch of Ireland is based on hear say. There is no reference to it anywhere in his writings. He is alleged to have suggested it during Easter Week, according to the father of Garret Fitzgerald. If in fact he did suggest it, I am sure that men such as Connolly would have dismissed it out of hand almost immediately.

Sure werent the Fitzgeralds great friends to Irish republicans in subsequent years?

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 1:32am

irishh_bob wrote: »

the movement from the sixties was an obvious reaction to the orange fascists state of northern ireland but thier is a new dispensation in place which the elected reps of the nationalist people are signed up to

deal with that

The leadership of the IRA following the OIRA split included men who had been active back as far as the 1950's and beyond. Men such as Ruairi O Bradaigh. There have often been attempts to cast the struggle in a reactionary light, to portray it as a struggle for civil rights, or to demolish the Orange state. It was never any such thing. It was a fight for Irish freedom, the same fight that has been ongoing for centuries.

The new political dispensation holds potential but I sometimes wonder what kind of Ireland might it create? Look at the current situation involving the SF Mayor of Belfast. Seemingly in the new Ireland Republicanism shall be something to be ashamed of. Something to apologise for.

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 1:34am

irishh_bob wrote: »

criticalcritic wrote: »

Let me begin with the controversy

Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

the movement from the sixties was an obvious reaction to the orange fascists state of northern ireland but thier is a new dispensation in place which the elected reps of the nationalist people are signed up to

deal with that

The nationalist people have been led up a hill but areant being led back down

While the Shinners may be getting their fifteen minutes down South

Their going down a lead balloon up North

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 1:38am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Sure werent the Fitzgeralds great friends to Irish republicans in subsequent years?

Haha, indeed....

I wouldn't like to throw around wild accusations but....

It has often been the case that revisionists and anti-Republican's have targeted Pearse in an attempt to sully the name of Republicanism in general.

In fact it has happened on this thread already..... 2 pages in.

walrusgumble · 04-12-2011 1:38am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Let me begin with the controversy

Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

As someone who is sympathetic to the Republican movement,and what Sinn Féin are trying to do (bar economics) , imho your the type of bar stooler that the movement need to got rid of.

The ordianary Northern Catholic Nationalist - Republican are doing a whole lot better than they were years ago, via University, being able to walk the street and work, having a voice in Politics, and people like you are trying to drag it back down to square one, if, what you appear to imply is violence. You will need to clarify. If you refer to Constitutional means, fair enough so.

As for Southern Unionism, some people have no time for Northerners, which in my opinion is wrong, but many others believe the first step is to get both communities to trust each other and move on by way of politics and democracy. That has not fully happened yet.

Devoid of culture? Many Northerns on both sides have more in common with the Scots than people down South, and many come down here with chips on their shoulders. Being able to speak pigeon Irish (well done Mr Adams) is nothing to shout about. A need to not to hang on to the god awful sean nos miserable music or diddly iddy crap is hardly , and less said about some of the rebels songs the better. Black armbands and black flags for fallen hero's and a love for military uniform/black caps and sun glasses (nazi cough) is hardly culture. Northerns are just as keen on Scottish - English football, watch the same tv, play gaelic and a bit of hurling, listen to the same music etc

People in the South did have some sympathy for the problems in the 1970-1980's as burning of the British Embassy and Hunger strikes shall show. Granted view every knew what it was really like but any of the carry on now has no justification,

Ya there is definitely self hating in the South, sadly, but some of your stuff is off the wall.

walrusgumble · 04-12-2011 1:46am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Im agreeing with you,

In the eyes of the revisionists, the war, all the lives lost, all those who rotted in prisons for years, all was pointless when they could could have just sold out in 69 and bought into Watered down Brit administration in Stormont

Was it all to put likes of Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly and Mary Lou McDonald into comfy partitionist positions so they can live in mansions?

Eh, they take industrial salaries. Adams makes additional money from writing. He clearly came down South to improve the rates in the Dail. Jesus you would be complaining if the Southern movement were stagnant.

Mary Lou is from the South, why would she run in the north were she probably would not get in? Were has Mary Lou spouted partitionist attitudes?

Your living in cloud cuckoo land if you really taught that militant means and militant means alone were ever going to win the day

Did you ever use a gun for the cause, by the way?. You seem very bitter

Gerry Kelly, what is your problem with him?

K-9 · 04-12-2011 1:50am

The IRPS will eventually cop on that that the armed struggle doesn't work in the long run, and some other group will come along to call them traitors.

History repeats itself, particularly Irish history and nobody learns anything!

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 1:52am

walrusgumble wrote: »

criticalcritic wrote: »

Let me begin with the controversy
I
Yes it was

And republican resistance is alive and well, dont mind what Sinn Fein tell you

Britain still occupys the North of this island, aslong as they do there will be resistance

People can object to that but tough, not all Irish people are lemmings willing to swallow half their country being denied sovereignty while the other half is glorified Commonwealth territory devoid of Irish culture propped up by money of ex-colonial super powers

'Ireland unfree will never will be at peace' - Padraig Pearse

Southern unionism and national self hating is rife nowadays

Im a republican, deal with it

I hope Irps areant developing Provo style revisionism

As someone who is sympathetic to the Republican movement,and what Sinn Féin are trying to do (bar economics) , imho your the type of bar stooler that the movement need to got rid of.

The ordianary Northern Catholic Nationalist - Republican are doing a whole lot better than they were years ago, via University, being able to walk the street and work, having a voice in Politics, and people like you are trying to drag it back down to square one, if, what you appear to imply is violence. You will need to clarify. If you refer to Constitutional means, fair enough so.

As for Southern Unionism, some people have no time for Northerners, which in my opinion is wrong, but many others believe the first step is to get both communities to trust each other and move on by way of politics and democracy. That has not fully happened yet.

Devoid of culture? Many Northerns on both sides have more in common with the Scots than people down South, and many come down here with chips on their shoulders. Being able to speak pigeon Irish (well done Mr Adams) is nothing to shout about. A need to not to hang on to the god awful sean nos miserable music or diddly iddy crap is hardly , and less said about some of the rebels songs the better. Black armbands and black flags for fallen hero's and a love for military uniform/black caps and sun glasses (nazi cough) is hardly culture. Northerns are just as keen on Scottish - English football, watch the same tv, play gaelic and a bit of hurling, listen to the same music etc

People in the South did have some sympathy for the problems in the 1970-1980's as burning of the British Embassy and Hunger strikes shall show. Granted view every knew what it was really like but any of the carry on now has no justification,

Ya there is definitely self hating in the South, sadly, but some of your stuff is off the wall.

Can assure you Im no barstooler as you put it and Im by no means part of your 'movement'
Just today I was at picket supporting republican POWs, who your 'movment now condemn'

Sinn Fein is not a movement anymore it is a populist collection of opportunists who shame republicanism by still claiming be its bastion

But its folk like your yourself with your watered down psuedo republicanism we need rid of

Because I hate to break it to you, you aint republican, supporting Sinn Fein your a moderate nationalist at best

Supporting British police who continually repress the republican/nationalist community

Destroying thousands of arms at behest of British government

Watering down every ebb of revolutionary tendency your party had

Abandoning POWS who served decades for Provo leadership

What will be end result?

Hang your head lad and cope on

walrusgumble · 04-12-2011 1:54am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Pure sh*te

James Connolly, Seamus Costelloe, Frank Ryan were militant nationalists?

The principles of Irish republicanism has been guided by revolutionary socialist principles, the opposite militant nationalism

Read the proclamation which is basis for all republican groups exist,
Nothing nationalist about it

I don't think Clarke, McDonagh, Pearse , Plunkett and co were too gone in Connolly's Socialist-Nationalist views, if you look at their backgrounds. The tone of the Proclamation was a sop to Connolly to get him on board with them. Sadly, and despite the repeat of it in the 1919 Declaration, the movement quickly got rid of such notions . To say that all Provo's were dye in the wool socialists is nonsense.

dlofnep · 04-12-2011 2:01am

It was absolutely justified. The partition of this country had no merit, and was wholly against the will of the majority of the people. Compare and contrast how the British state treated the nationalist population post-partition. The state was gerrymandered, the security services murdered civilians and were never made accountable for it, the police service colluded with loyalist terrorists and bullied and harassed the nationalist population. Innocent people were thrown in prison without ever receiving a trial, families were torn apart.

Trying to liberate a people through armed force is nothing new, and will continue for times to come.

The IRA campaign against loyalists paramilitaries, the RUC and the British security services was absolutely justified. I just don't see how anyone could support the role that Britain played post-partition in the north of this country, and couldn't empathise with those who felt that they had no other choice but to take up arms in the pursuit of freedom.

criticalcritic · 04-12-2011 2:02am

walrusgumble wrote: »

criticalcritic wrote: »

Im agreeing with you,

In the eyes of the revisionists, the war, all the lives lost, all those who rotted in prisons for years, all was pointless when they could could have just sold out in 69 and bought into Watered down Brit administration in Stormont

Was it all to put likes of Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly and Mary Lou McDonald into comfy partitionist positions so they can live in mansions?

Eh, they take industrial salaries. Adams makes additional money from writing. He clearly came down South to improve the rates in the Dail. Jesus you would be complaining if the Southern movement were stagnant.

Mary Lou is from the South, why would she run in the north were she probably would not get in? Were has Mary Lou spouted partitionist attitudes?

Your living in cloud cuckoo land if you really taught that militant means and militant means alone were ever going to win the day

Did you ever use a gun for the cause, by the way?. You seem very bitter

Gerry Kelly, what is your problem with him?

Mary Lou is a careerist with no knowledge of Irish history nor republican ideals who jumped on the bandwagon of Sinn Feins revisionism, all to forge a career for herself
Hardly what the likes of Bobby Sands perished for straving in **** covered cell?

Gerry Kelly is reformist who used his republican past to garner votes in Belfast.
When he got elected he bought good few houses in West Belfast and now profits off backs of people he claims represent
His former comrade and prison mate Marian Price is currently locked up for speaking at a rally and he is doing nothing for her

The lie that Sinn Fein reps live off industrial wage is farce

And if I was ever involved in militant republicanism, would I admit it here on public forum?

AhSureTisGrand · 04-12-2011 2:02am

Bringing socialism into the mix seems a bit pointless to me. If a united Ireland is your main aim, then murder in the name of a united Ireland and nothing else. Don't confuse things by introducing other ideologies

walrusgumble · 04-12-2011 2:05am

criticalcritic wrote: »

Can assure you Im no barstooler as you put it and Im by no means part of your 'movement'
Just today I was at picket supporting republican POWs, who your 'movment now condemn'

Sinn Fein is not a movement anymore it is a populist collection of opportunists who shame republicanism by still claiming be its bastion

But its folk like your yourself with your watered down psuedo republicanism we need rid of

Because I hate to break it to you, you aint republican, supporting Sinn Fein your a moderate nationalist at best

Supporting British police who continually repress the republican/nationalist community

Destroying thousands of arms at behest of British government

Watering down every ebb of revolutionary tendency your party had

Abandoning POWS who served decades for Provo leadership

What will be end result?

Hang your head lad and cope on

I am in no movement, but I am not one who is quick to be critical on everything that has happened in the North. If you are unable to read, that is your problem

Your a bar stooler. Picketing is not the same thing. So, when the new dawn rises as you suggest, you will be in the dug outs with hand on gun so?

What is the alternative to Sinn Féin? SDLP, Éirgi, IRSP, Republican Sinn Féin?

Your chip on the shoulder Northern pissing and moaning is the perfect example of why Southerners don't tolerate people like you trying to speak on behalf of the country. Our grandparents and great grandparents actually fought for their freedom, Northerns did not even try to put up much of an effort during the Tan War, (in with the same energy as the Provos in the 1960's) And before you start point out the natural difficulties compared to the South, Cork men got sfa in the way of guns and ammo (they got their own) and Cork was not exactly the bastion of republicans in those days either.

Are you really saying that armed rebellion is the way to go? Or, are you seeking a Constitutional method?

I never said I was Republican, I said that I was sympathetic to it. You really are an embarrassment.

Where is the evidence of "repression " in 2011?

Don't go assuming that you are talking to a member of Sinn Féin. I never put myself out as one. Sympathetic and being a member or claiming to be a member are too different things

FeckinUsername · 04-12-2011 2:09am

dlofnep wrote: »

It was absolutely justified. The partition of this country had no merit, and was wholly against the will of the majority of the people. Compare and contrast how the British state treated the nationalist population post-partition. The state was gerrymandered, the security services murdered civilians and were never made accountable for it, the police service colluded with loyalist terrorists and bullied and harassed the nationalist population. Innocent people were thrown in prison without ever receiving a trial, families were torn apart.

Trying to liberate a people through armed force is nothing new, and will continue for times to come.

The IRA campaign against loyalists paramilitaries, the RUC and the British security services was absolutely justified. I just don't see how anyone could support the role that Britain played post-partition in the north of this country, and couldn't empathise with those who felt that they had no other choice but to take up arms in the pursuit of freedom.

Here here, well said.

Historically I would find further justification for the campaign in the fact that the British completely ignored the democratic will of the Irish people when they called for a united independent Ireland in 1918. Also it should always be remembered that it was the Unionist community who re-introduced the gun to Irish political life, not Republicans. This action, and its unreserved support from the British Tories totally legitimised future Republican armed action.

Was the Republican campaign justifiable?

Comments