Was the Republican campaign justifiable?

Nodin wrote: »

He refers to them on page 15. I've no idea where theres an itemised list
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/special/2003/stevens/stevens.pdf

Stevens 1 was set up on 25th August 1989 following the leaking of security force intelligence by loyalists anxious to prove that they were targeting active republicans rather than innocent Catholics such as Laughlin Maginn, whose murder led indirectly to the investigation. In May 1990 a summary of Stevens’ report was published, which confirmed that collusion had occurred but concluded that it was not widespread or institutionalised. Although many of the documents leaked to the loyalists originated from police files, not a single police officer was charged. As a result of this investigation, 94 people were arrested, of whom 59 people were charged or reported to the DPP, resulting in 47 prosecutions and 183 convictions for separate offences. 32 UDA members were charged with 153 offences, 146 of which resulted in convictions. 11 UDR soldiers were charged with 15 offences, all of which led to convictions. In addition to these 43 people, three others were charged with involvement in Loughlin Maginn’s murder. British military intelligence agent Brian Nelson was also convicted of five counts of conspiracy to murder – but not the murder of Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane – and other charges relating to terrorism.

Nodin wrote: »

Do please elaborate.


As the 'dirty work' was done by loyalists thats hardly suprising.

Was just talking to the folks there about the UDR seeing as it's all the rage in this thread at the moment.

There was an attempt by the British/NI authorities to recruit Catholics into the force but it didn't go well from the start.

My Mother, who lived in a mixed religion country area in County Derry, was telling me that some of the Unionists who she knew who joined the UDR were barely able to write their own names and were staunch anti-Catholics - ignorance and hate are a dangerous mix.

My Father who comes from the Bogside of Derry was saying that the push to recruit Catholics was viewed with suspicion by many and was seen as an attempt to divide the Catholic community.

I have little doubt there were plenty of well-intentioned members of the unionist community in the UDR but it was doomed to become yet another Unionist militia because of some of the feeble minded anti-Catholic degenerates that were allowed to enroll.

Such lost opportunity.

Dotsey wrote: »

??? you keep saying that to yourself and trying to convince yourself of it but that's severely wrong. For someone who has posted practically 24/7 in this thread your lack of understanding of the Troubles and of this period of Irish history is beyond belief, your complete tunnel vision and pro-British agenda you're pursuing is staggering. If it were left to people with your mindset there would never have been any type of peace in Ireland but thankfully there was people on both sides of the divide who could see the bigger picture and a way forward.

Nodin wrote: »

....evidently the did, going by the reports above.

You still haven't explained

realies wrote: »

From arming loyalist paramilitaries to directly encouraging UDA/UVF gunmen to target republican sympathisers to turning a blind eye to the sadistic torture and random murder of Catholics, collusion between the security forces and loyalists in Northern Ireland runs deep. Loyalist paramilitaries were effectively allies of British Army intelligence and the RUC, who viewed them as useful attack dogs in the war on Irish republicans and in terrorising and morally deflating Catholic/republican areas. At the same time, there were tensions between the British security forces and loyalists. The British pretty much held loyalists in contempt, and would rather not have worked with them at all. And of course, the authorities would arrest and imprison loyalist paramilitaries for periods of time, which helped to bolster the idea that Britain was a neutral arbiter in a ‘tit-for-tat’ conflict between two sets of mad Irishmen – loyalists on one side, and republicans on the other. In fact, as the evidence of collusion shows, the conflict was between the forces of the British state and their loyalist allies on one side, and republicans on the other.The way you and other posters go on here keith its as if you don't believe that it happened or that it was just small scale and yet you should know deep down that the Crown forces were on the unionist/loyalist side in this conflict.But you know all this anyway and it gets a bit pointless going on and on and on about it.

From arming loyalist paramilitaries

to directly encouraging UDA/UVF gunmen to target republican sympathisers

to turning a blind eye to the sadistic torture and random murder of Catholics

collusion between the security forces and loyalists in Northern Ireland runs deep.

Loyalist paramilitaries were effectively allies of British Army intelligence and the RUC, who viewed them as useful attack dogs in the war on Irish republicans and in terrorising and morally deflating Catholic/republican areas.

At the same time, there were tensions between the British security forces and loyalists.

The British pretty much held loyalists in contempt, and would rather not have worked with them at all.

And of course, the authorities would arrest and imprison loyalist paramilitaries for periods of time, which helped to bolster the idea that Britain was a neutral arbiter in a ‘tit-for-tat’ conflict between two sets of mad Irishmen – loyalists on one side, and republicans on the other.

In fact, as the evidence of collusion shows, the conflict was between the forces of the British state and their loyalist allies on one side, and republicans on the other.

The way you and other posters go on here keith its as if you don't believe that it happened or that it was just small scale and yet you should know deep down that the Crown forces were on the unionist/loyalist side in this conflict.