Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Was the Loughgall ambush a mistake by the British?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    DarkyHughes wrote: »
    Correct. And how would the SAS be able to
    see what the brothers were wearing, it was pitch black & they were inside a
    car.

    The ambush happened at about 7.30 pm in early May, unless there was a solar eclipse at the time it was not pitch black.
    The SAS set up a "kill zone" & nobody was to make it out of that zone
    alive so there would be only one version of events. The winners write
    history.

    Cliché riddled nonsense. The Brits set up a successful ambush and wiped out a full IRA ASU. If it had been the other way around would you be as outraged?

    Irish republicans and the British always interpret the same events completely differently.
    And just to be clear I'm not saying Loughgall was a mistake for the SAS, they were given a job to do - kill as many people as possible. My question was did it help prolong the conflict another 10 years because at around the time of Loughgall Sinn Fein were considering talking to the "enemy" which was made apparent by the 1986 Sinn Fein conference after witch Ruari O'Bradaigh predicted the IRA campaign would be run down & finally stopped.

    Given that the IRA declared a ceasefire 7 years later in 1994 I think it's safe to say that Loughgall did not prolong the conflict by ten years.

    It didn't really matter that IRA/Sinn Fein were considering offering talks, the British and Irish governments were not willing to talk to them.

    As Ruairi O'Bradaigh's was an unhinged loon who refused to accept either the democratic decision of his colleagues in Sinn Fein or the overwhelming support of people north and south of the border for the Good Friday Agreement you'll forgive me for not giving a flying fvck about his opinion on anything.


  • Options
    #63
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    Snickers Man wrote: »
    Go to an Australian or New Zealander and just say the word Gallipoli and then sit back and listen while they turn a humiliating defeat, which achieved nothing militarily after nearly nine months, into the most glorious narrative of courage, endurance and nation building. It will give you some idea of how the historical imagination can infer some very strange conclusions at great odds with the facts of the matter.

    And to be fair to the OP. He didn't say the IRA achieved a victory at Loughgall; the Pyrrhic victory to which he referred was that of the British.

    A Pyrrhic victory is when one side wins the day but finds out that in the long term their victory was detrimental to their side. Dates back to the battle of Asculum which the Romans lost to a chap called Pyrrhus but his own losses were so heavy that he commented that any more "victories" of similar expense would ruin him.

    I know what a phyrric victory is and I know that the OP was referring to the British when he spoke of a phyrric victory, I just think he's talking absolute nonsense.


  • Options
    #64
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    Funny the way Fred and Tac seem to think when the Brits get shot, it's always in
    "cold blood". How do the British shoot people? By accident? .... in hot blood? Is that any less of a murder?

    Whatever happened to the stiff upper lip anyway?

    You join the Brit army, wave machine guns at people, you tend to get shot at. Then some X-factor loosers sing you a song and you get jingoists begging people to fund your pension selling poppies outside McDonalds.

    Not our fault your Bravo two zero squaddies couldn't even dambust their way through................ ....South Armagh. Half of a county!

    Better luck next time.

    It was a dirty conflict. Move on. Provos decommissioned. Squaddies went home. Peace.


  • Options
    #65
    tac foley
    Registered Users Posts: 5,504 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Sigh. Northern Ireland was then, and still is, part of the UK. The vast majority of those who died and those left injured actually lived there - they were, and are, Irish.

    As for the rest of your comment, I think you'll find that last week a man in the RoI awaiting sentence for dissident activity shot dead a garda and then himself, and a couple of days ago a viable device was found in Belfast.

    And about 3000 people still carry legally a handgun for personal protection - a state of affairs that does not pertain in any other part of Europe.

    tac


  • Options
    #66
    tac foley
    Registered Users Posts: 5,504 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Sigh. Northern Ireland was then, and still is, part of the UK. The vast majority of those who died and those left injured actually lived there - they were, and are, Irish.

    tac


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    tac foley wrote: »
    Sigh. Northern Ireland was then, and still is, part of the UK. The vast majority of those who died and those left injured actually lived there - they were, and are, Irish.

    As for the rest of your comment, I think you'll find that last week a man in the RoI awaiting sentence for dissident activity shot dead a garda and then himself, and a couple of days ago a viable device was found in Belfast.

    And about 3000 people still carry legally a handgun for personal protection - a state of affairs that does not pertain in any other part of Europe.

    tac

    What does any of that have to do with what I said? ........

    Brit soldiers playing dumb again. Vast majority were Irish?

    1000 British soldiers dead. Your boys are lucky they didn't have to occupy 32 counties! Ha. :)


  • Options
    #68
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,244 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    An Claidheamh wrote: »
    Vast majority were Irish?
    Yes, less than one third were British security (less than half of that third wereBritish Army / RAF / RN), two-thirds were Irish (admittedly, some of the civilians were Spanish, Australian or British).

    From http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Status_Summary.html
    Status_Summary Count %
    British Security 1114 32%
    Civilian 1841 52%
    Irish Security 11 0%
    Loyalist Paramilitary 170 5%
    Republican Paramilitary 396 11%
    TOTAL 3532 100%
    An Claidheamh wrote: »
    1000 British soldiers dead.
    En, no: http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Status.html

    British Army (BA) 502
    British Army Territorial Army (TA) 7
    ex-British Army (xBA) 5
    Royal Air Force (RAF) 4
    Royal Irish Regiment (RIR) 7
    Royal Navy (RN) 2
    An Claidheamh wrote: »
    Your boys are lucky they didn't have to occupy 32 counties! Ha. :)
    (a) There is no interest in occupying 32 counties. The British government even said it had no selfish interest in occupying 6, which is what brought about the 1994 ceasefire.

    (b) Gloating about deaths is a Very Bad Thing™.


  • Options
    #69
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    "(b) Gloating about deaths is a Very Bad Thing™

    Unless their the deaths of deluded provos though Victor, glorifying British thuggery, because that seems to be allowed.

    When it's the other way around, you get banned from boards, as happened earlier in this thread.

    Regards.


  • Options
    #70
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    Victor wrote: »
    Yes, less than one third were British security (less than half of that third wereBritish Army / RAF / RN), two-thirds were Irish (admittedly, some of the civilians were Spanish, Australian or British).

    From http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Status_Summary.html
    Status_Summary Count %
    British Security 1114 32%
    Civilian 1841 52%
    Irish Security 11 0%
    Loyalist Paramilitary 170 5%
    Republican Paramilitary 396 11%
    TOTAL 3532 100%

    En, no: http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/tables/Status.html

    British Army (BA) 502
    British Army Territorial Army (TA) 7
    ex-British Army (xBA) 5
    Royal Air Force (RAF) 4
    Royal Irish Regiment (RIR) 7
    Royal Navy (RN) 2

    Eh yes.

    https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1482975/Troop-deaths-in-Ulster-higher-than-thought.html&ved=0CCgQFjADahUKEwjh-6C188nIAhXIuhQKHZ3DDcE&usg=AFQjCNHPEXmDIQ3oPmHjJRI87PW0lbzdRQ


  • Options
    #71
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,244 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    So you are gloating about people committing suicide?

    Actually, if you want to take into account British Army suicides and accidents, surely you should do so for the other players also? Will you be taking responsibility for the disproportionate spike in road traffic deaths in the 1970s also?

    365833.png


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    I wouldn't consider how Loughgall was handled by the British a mistake on their part. The IRA Volunteers were fairly heavily armed, arrest was never going to be an option. I don't believe the war would have come to a conclusion any sooner had it been handled any differently. I can't imagine the IRA would have seen much of an increase in levels of new recruits, not on the levels after Bloody Sunday or the Hunger strikes.


  • Options
    #73
    An Claidheamh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭An Claidheamh


    Victor wrote: »
    So you are gloating about people committing suicide?

    Actually, if you want to take into account British Army suicides and accidents, surely you should do so for the other players also? Will you be taking responsibility for the disproportionate spike in road traffic deaths in the 1970s also

    Well apparently the Daily Telegraph credit those suicides to the PIRA.

    They seem to want them remembered as the fallen. Not me. And gloating? Give me a break.


  • Options
    #74
    tac foley
    Registered Users Posts: 5,504 ✭✭✭tac foley


    An Claidheamh wrote: »
    "(b) Gloating about deaths is a Very Bad Thing™

    Unless their the deaths of deluded provos though Victor, glorifying British thuggery, because that seems to be allowed.

    When it's the other way around, you get banned from boards, as happened earlier in this thread.

    Regards.

    Obviously I have my own personal viewpoint on this, and make no apologies for having it. I survived Northern Ireland and the element of the civilian population there trying to kill me because I was in uniform and therefore instantly identifiable. They, on the other hand, were indistinguishable from the rest of the population, and used that to their advantage.

    Add to that that we always had the ROEs that stopped us from returning fire until we had identified the firer, and did not hide behind women and children the way that the opposition did.

    I can see no point in me having any further input in this thread - those who support terrorism under the guise of nationalism will always have an argument to bolster their view. It's as well to remember that THIS website is based in the Republic of Ireland, where membership of the PIRA/IRA/NIRA or whatever they call themselves this week is punishable by a long prison sentence.

    THAT's how much the Republic 'loves' the IRA.

    tac


  • Options
    #75
    rockatansky
    Registered Users Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭rockatansky


    tac foley wrote: »
    Obviously I have my own personal viewpoint on this, and make no apologies for having it. I survived Northern Ireland and the element of the civilian population there trying to kill me because I was in uniform and therefore instantly identifiable. They, on the other hand, were indistinguishable from the rest of the population, and used that to their advantage.

    Such is the type of warfare. Similar to that used by those who fought during the war of Independence.
    tac foley wrote: »
    It's as well to remember that THIS website is based in the Republic of Ireland, where membership of the PIRA/IRA/NIRA or whatever they call themselves this week is punishable by a long prison sentence.

    THAT's how much the Republic 'loves' the IRA.

    The Republic never had love for any Irish person in the 6 counties, never mind the IRA.
    tac foley wrote: »
    I can see no point in me having any further input in this thread - those who support terrorism under the guise of nationalism will always have an argument to bolster their view.

    Republicanism, not nationalism. There is a difference. 'Nationalist' is just a term that was given to any Irish Catholics in the 6 counties. Nationalism, always has and always will be, far more dangerous than Republicanism.


  • Options
    #76
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    tac foley wrote: »
    I survived Northern Ireland and the element of the civilian population there trying to kill me because I was in uniform and therefore instantly identifiable.
    Don't be such a crybaby. You chose to don the British Army Uniform so stop whinging because you were shot at.

    All I ever see from your posts is whining!


  • Options
    #77
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Thread locked. To much nonsense, not enough history or facts with a few exceptions.
    Moderator


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement