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

Republic and Northern Ireland will eventually be reunited, predicts Enda Kenny

Options
13567…15

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    So what makes the Ira more superior, just a better class of people? Higher average IQ? Yout probably won't like this but loyalists are every bit as capable as nationalists are at destruction, they held a mainly defensive role I.e check points to housing estates etc because even though the ira did not have the majority support, they went on a campaign of terror killing mostly civilian and economic targets. If the role changes then the loyalists will be planting bombs in busy high streets in Dublin and the loyalists will take up the mirror role of romanticizing their actions as honourable freedom fighters, Mabey if they kill enough someday someone will even think they are elite solders and their enemy are all bar stool falling idiots.

    You either have no idea what you're talking about or are just looking a row.
    Either way I shan't be engaging with you.
    For further information consult any of the following books:

    Lost Lives
    Provos: The IRA and Sinn Fein
    A Secret History of the IRA
    Bandit Country
    Loyalists
    Brits
    Ten Men Dead
    The Shankill Butchers
    Northern Protestants: An Unsettled People
    The IRA by Tim Pat Coogan
    Voices from Beyond the Grave


  • Options
    #63
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    You either have no idea what you're talking about or are just looking a row.
    Either way I shan't be engaging with you.
    For further information consult any of the following books:

    Lost Lives
    Provos: The IRA and Sinn Fein
    A Secret History of the IRA
    Bandit Country
    Loyalists
    Brits
    Ten Men Dead
    The Shankill Butchers
    Northern Protestants: An Unsettled People
    The IRA by Tim Pat Coogan
    Voices from Beyond the Grave
    No answer, ok, you go on and believe it would be a peacefull transition because the prods are to stupid and drunk to do what the ra did. another aspect is are the guards going to be able to fight a gurilla war? not just finantialy, the brits were experts at this i.e sas etc. I truley hope if its what the majority want then peace will prevale, I just dont think it likely and it would though the country into cival war with mass casualtys and economic hits. try to not be condesending, Its only my opinion.


  • Options
    #64
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    No answer, ok, you go on and believe it would be a peacefull transition because the prods are to stupid and drunk to do what the ra did. another aspect is are the guards going to be able to fight a gurilla war? not just finantialy, the brits were experts at this i.e sas etc. I truley hope if its what the majority want then peace will prevale, I just dont think it likely and it would though the country into cival war with mass casualtys and economic hits. try to not be condesending, Its only my opinion.

    I'm really, really trying.


  • Options
    #65
    MakeEmLaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,356 ✭✭✭MakeEmLaugh


    Yes, because the person whose response to a user’s mentioning of the UDF was to go, “Hmm, anyway….” is in a position to accuse others of being condescending.

    You suggested some books for gallag to consult. Perhaps you should consult them yourself, as it was from Loyalists by Peter Taylor that my “knowledge of obscure delusional loyalist groups” was gleaned.

    But hey, who needs books when we have priceless nuggets of information like “loyalists had the weight of the british state behind them”.

    Presumably this is the same British state that locked up Billy Hutchinson, David Ervine, Billy Wright, Lenny Murphy, Michael Stone, Johnny Adair and Billy McCaughey, among many others.


  • Options
    #66
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Yes, because the person whose response to a user’s mentioning of the UDF was to go, “Hmm, anyway….” is in a position to accuse others of being condescending.

    Please point out where I accused anyone of being condescending. Go back and reread it.
    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    You suggested some books for gallag to consult. Perhaps you should consult them yourself, as it was from Loyalists by Peter Taylor that my “knowledge of obscure delusional loyalist groups” was gleaned.

    Then you should know that that's exactly what they were.
    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    But hey, who needs books when we have priceless nuggets of information like “loyalists had the weight of the british state behind them”.
    Presumably this is the same British state that locked up Billy Hutchinson, David Ervine, Billy Wright, Lenny Murphy, Michael Stone, Johnny Adair and Billy McCaughey, among many others.

    Yes, yes it was.

    http://relativesforjustice.com/docs/sgraham.pdf
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/15/uk-arms-northern-ireland-loyalist-massacre
    http://relativesforjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/COLLUSION-REPORT-1990-1994.pdf
    http://relativesforjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/July-1972-Official-Brit-Gov-Doc-30-yr-rule.pdf
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6286097.stm
    http://www.omuirighsolicitors.com/our_cases_operation_stafford_padraig_omuirigh_solicitors.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_and_Monaghan_bombings#John_Weir_on_security_force_collusion_in_bombings
    http://www.dublinmonaghanbombings.org/index2.html

    Those are just the results of a quick search during my lunch.
    I think you'll also find it was the IRA who took care of Lenny Murphy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    whitelines
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 159 ✭✭whitelines


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    I absolutely believe there is no way in hell loyalists could launch a campaign like that carried out by the IRA.
    Even with the weight of the british state behind them they achieved little more than hobbling of their bar stools to go and murder a random catholic (killing dozens of protestants they believed to be catholics along the way.)
    Their bombs were notoriously crude and unreliable devices (with the exception of those built for them by the brits) and they displayed little to no tactical thinking ability.
    As has been stated already the current set up ensures that there wont be a move towards a united Ireland without the support of the majority so the notion that these jokers could even portray themselves as some sort of defenders or freedom fighters is laughable.
    True, they may continue to exist within their own areas but with the support of the british state removed I cant see them being anything other than drug dealers giving themselves rather grandiose titles like brigadier or commander.

    What makes you say that? From what I've read their strategic thinking was quite clear - namely to use violence against the broader Nationalist community in NI to influence the thinking of three distinct audiences:

    (i) NI Nationalists: to pressure said Nationalists into pressurising their neighbours, friends and family members in The Republican movement to call off, or reign in, their own violent campaign.

    (ii) UK State: to show The UK State and it's politicos that making concessions to Nationalists in NI would not buy peace.

    (iii) People of The ROI: to demonstrate to the people of The Republic and especially key decision makers that coercing Unionists into an independent, united Ireland would be costly in blood and treasure.

    This would appear to be a coherent strategy to me and one which was prosecuted with some venom from time to time.

    By the way, Loyalists never had "the weight of the british state behind them" - in fact, The UK State locked up over 10 000 of them in the same prisons where those you idolised rotted.


  • Options
    #68
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Why do people want to throw my peaceful country back into chaos, many of whome don't live here. Is peace not more important? Should my children be at risk because you feel a land mass you have mabey never set foot on should be reclaimed because of a seance of injustice you suffer from so long ago no one alive today witnessed it? Is what we have now not worth more? I remember the scary men in balaclavas checking my grandas car, the city with a ring of iron around it and security checking my mum's bag at the door of every shop incase it was another IRA incendiary device. I seen the bombs and I lost family. I seen the injustice to all community's and fought with Catholics because we hated each other, or at least we were told we did.

    Now my very best friends are the people I used to hate, my children are educated with Catholics and protestants together and my beautiful, peacefully city is full of tourists who marvel at how far we have came together.

    We want peace above all. I now look at the Irish like brothers and sisters, a relationship can be achieved witch would be above boarders and mean more than who the rueling government is.
    If you want the war then you move here, if my children get through into conflict and bombing then you bring your children here also.

    Remember the desire for a ui is lower than ever, over 100,000 lined the streets of Belfast to celebrate the signing of the covenant. To think there would be no war or resistance is nieav. I even suggested to some we finally put this to bed and have the vote along with Scotland but apparently democracy only suites when it would net the right result.


  • Options
    #69
    whitelines
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 159 ✭✭whitelines


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    Please point out where I accused anyone of being condescending. Go back and reread it.



    Then you should know that that's exactly what they were.



    Yes, yes it was.

    http://relativesforjustice.com/docs/sgraham.pdf
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/15/uk-arms-northern-ireland-loyalist-massacre
    http://relativesforjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/COLLUSION-REPORT-1990-1994.pdf
    http://relativesforjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/July-1972-Official-Brit-Gov-Doc-30-yr-rule.pdf
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6286097.stm
    http://www.omuirighsolicitors.com/our_cases_operation_stafford_padraig_omuirigh_solicitors.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_and_Monaghan_bombings#John_Weir_on_security_force_collusion_in_bombings
    http://www.dublinmonaghanbombings.org/index2.html

    Those are just the results of a quick search during my lunch.
    I think you'll also find it was the IRA who took care of Lenny Murphy.

    Most of those sites are pure Republican propaganda.


  • Options
    #70
    Eggy Baby!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Eggy Baby!


    gallag wrote: »
    So what makes the Ira more superior, just a better class of people? Higher average IQ? Yout probably won't like this but loyalists are every bit as capable as nationalists are at destruction, they held a mainly defensive role I.e check points to housing estates etc because even though the ira did not have the majority support, they went on a campaign of terror killing mostly civilian and economic targets. If the role changes then the loyalists will be planting bombs in busy high streets in Dublin and the loyalists will take up the mirror role of romanticizing their actions as honourable freedom fighters, Mabey if they kill enough someday someone will even think they are elite solders and their enemy are all bar stool falling idiots.

    Defensive role? Are you kidding me?

    Are the Monaghan/Dublin bombings familiar to you? Even setting up checkpoints is a belligerent action in itself. Back during the good old days of "defensive Loyalists" they set up roadblocks and used violence to intimidate people, for example during the Sunningdale Agreement's attempted implementation.

    With regards to your statement that the IRA did not have majority support, are you suggesting that the loyalists did? Loyalists are not indicative of the protestant/unionist mindset.


  • Options
    #71
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    I think full Independece for Northern Ireland is a far more likely and practical long term likelyhood


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Eggy Baby! wrote: »

    Defensive role? Are you kidding me?

    Are the Monaghan/Dublin bombings familiar to you? Even setting up checkpoints is a belligerent action in itself. Back during the good old days of "defensive Loyalists" they set up roadblocks and used violence to intimidate people, for example during the Sunningdale Agreement's attempted implementation.

    With regards to your statement that the IRA did not have majority support, are you suggesting that the loyalists did? Loyalists are not indicative of the protestant/unionist mindset.
    Let me make this clear, the loyalists were as bad as the IRA, what I ment was they played a more defensive role overall I.e Ulster defence association. I was making this argument to point out that if there role became attack then they could be as effective as the ira attacking economic and civilian targets.


  • Options
    #73
    Death and Taxes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,775 ✭✭✭Death and Taxes


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. 100 per cent of nationalists want a united Ireland. If someone is in favour of the union with Britain then they are not a nationalist.
    Yes but 100% of Catholics? non Unionists are not Nationalists.
    More likely the debate on Scottish Independence will ignite a debate on NI Independence. Most nationalists might not want to live in this poverty ridden corrupt hellhole, governed by Dublin with no real say in their own affairs.


  • Options
    #74
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    Yes but 100% of Catholics? non Unionists are not Nationalists.
    More likely the debate on Scottish Independence will ignite a debate on NI Independence. Most nationalists might not want to live in this poverty ridden corrupt hellhole, governed by Dublin with no real say in their own affairs.

    That's exactly the point I was making. The guy said most nationalist don't want a united Ireland. I was just pointing out that's wrong.
    There also seems to be this skewed idea that unity will just mean sticking six counties onto 26, I see it as a total overhaul of the whole country.


  • Options
    #75
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    whitelines wrote: »
    Most of those sites are pure Republican propaganda.

    BBC, The Guardian, Wikipedia and a solicitors? Pure republican propaganda? Jesus, they fairly changed their tune.
    You'll also notice that if you actually click on the links the ones that bring you to Relatives for Justice and Justice for the Forgotten are just further links to actual government reports or secret MOD files.
    But hey if you prefer to stick your head in the sand and shout "republican propaganda" every time somebody produces evidence that challenges your own view go right ahead.


  • Options
    #76
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    WileyCoyote wrote: »
    I think full Independece for Northern Ireland is a far more likely and practical long term likelyhood

    I personally think this is the least likely thing to ever happen and if it did the state would collapse in on itself in about 20 minutes.


  • Options
    #77
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    whitelines wrote: »
    What makes you say that? From what I've read their strategic thinking was quite clear - namely to use violence against the broader Nationalist community in NI to influence the thinking of three distinct audiences:

    (i) NI Nationalists: to pressure said Nationalists into pressurising their neighbours, friends and family members in The Republican movement to call off, or reign in, their own violent campaign.

    (ii) UK State: to show The UK State and it's politicos that making concessions to Nationalists in NI would not buy peace.

    (iii) People of The ROI: to demonstrate to the people of The Republic and especially key decision makers that coercing Unionists into an independent, united Ireland would be costly in blood and treasure.

    This would appear to be a coherent strategy to me and one which was prosecuted with some venom from time to time.

    That's a rather grandiose way of saying they killed random taigs. As a far as military strategy goes it's also idiotic.
    What makes me say that they had no tactical ability is years of studying the troubles and the actions of those involved in it.
    There was never any tactical thinking to loyalist actions, just pure, hot-blooded hatred.
    Hell, the UVF started killing people in 1966 at a time when the IRA was just an old story and there was no real drive for reunification.
    whitelines wrote: »
    By the way, Loyalists never had "the weight of the british state behind them" - in fact, The UK State locked up over 10 000 of them in the same prisons where those you idolised rotted.

    Firstly, where are you getting that number from?
    Secondly, the evidence of collusion is damning and with each passing year more and more of it is coming out. The brits do themselves no favours either with their terrified refusal to engage with a truth and reconciliation programme.
    As for loyalist prisoners, yes they certainly learned from the days of internment that if you lock only nationalists up it looks bad but strangely they never seemed to damage these groups, even with their "10,000" prisoners.
    I suppose it's a bit pointless having agents in a group if you're going to put them in a cell.
    Who, by the way, is it that i idolise?


  • Options
    #78
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    Why do people want to throw my peaceful country back into chaos, many of whome don't live here. Is peace not more important? Should my children be at risk because you feel a land mass you have mabey never set foot on should be reclaimed because of a seance of injustice you suffer from so long ago no one alive today witnessed it? Is what we have now not worth more? I remember the scary men in balaclavas checking my grandas car, the city with a ring of iron around it and security checking my mum's bag at the door of every shop incase it was another IRA incendiary device. I seen the bombs and I lost family. I seen the injustice to all community's and fought with Catholics because we hated each other, or at least we were told we did.

    Now my very best friends are the people I used to hate, my children are educated with Catholics and protestants together and my beautiful, peacefully city is full of tourists who marvel at how far we have came together.

    We want peace above all. I now look at the Irish like brothers and sisters, a relationship can be achieved witch would be above boarders and mean more than who the rueling government is.
    If you want the war then you move here, if my children get through into conflict and bombing then you bring your children here also.

    Remember the desire for a ui is lower than ever, over 100,000 lined the streets of Belfast to celebrate the signing of the covenant. To think there would be no war or resistance is nieav. I even suggested to some we finally put this to bed and have the vote along with Scotland but apparently democracy only suites when it would net the right result.

    You're about 70,000 out there. I can barely make out what the rest of your post is attempting to say.


  • Options
    #79
    whitelines
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 159 ✭✭whitelines


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    BBC, The Guardian, Wikipedia and a solicitors? Pure republican propaganda? Jesus, they fairly changed their tune.
    You'll also notice that if you actually click on the links the ones that bring you to Relatives for Justice and Justice for the Forgotten are just further links to actual government reports or secret MOD files.
    But hey if you prefer to stick your head in the sand and shout "republican propaganda" every time somebody produces evidence that challenges your own view go right ahead.

    I said most. Plenty of solicitors sympathised with PIRA - some were even members. Wiki's not a credible site for anything contentious.


  • Options
    #80
    An Coilean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,285 ✭✭✭An Coilean


    gallag wrote: »
    Why do people want to throw my peaceful country back into chaos, many of whome don't live here. Is peace not more important? Should my children be at risk because you feel a land mass you have mabey never set foot on should be reclaimed because of a seance of injustice you suffer from so long ago no one alive today witnessed it?


    Sorry, but this is tripe of the highest order.

    If there is a referendum in NI and the result is a Majority in favor of a United Ireland, then there will be a United Ireland. Wanting this to happen is perfectaly legitimate, working twords this is perfectly legitimate.

    Should a Majority vote in favor of a UI, and some people from a loyalist background try to start a war to oppose the legitimate will of the majority, the resulting deaths will be their fault and theirs alone. Trying to suggest that it is the fault of the people who worked to achieve their political aspirations by peaceful means is rubbish, and dangerous rubbish at that.

    I truely hope you realise that what you are suggesting is that one community should have the right to dictate the future of NI regardless of what the Majority wants on the threat of violence if they dont get their own way. Personally I think thats disgracefull.


  • Options
    #81
    gallag
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Crooked Jack wrote: »

    You're about 70,000 out there. I can barely make out what the rest of your post is attempting to say.
    What parts are troubling you? I think it was 30000 marchers and there were more spectators, probably a good many of them unwilling to forget and move on as you are. What's your story, why do you feel so strong about my country? Do you live here? Can you ever imagine moving forward or would that only happen if we nordies accept the financial and cultural suicide of uniting with Ireland.

    We can be more than our county, we can move forward in a unity of friendship. Why does it matter if it'd the corrupt Irish government or the dirty British government that sets our policy. Just try to get over it and move on brother.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    An Coilean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,285 ✭✭✭An Coilean


    gallag wrote: »
    What parts are troubling you? I think it was 30000 marchers and there were more spectators, probably a good many of them unwilling to forget and move on as you are. What's your story, why do you feel so strong about my country? Do you live here? Can you ever imagine moving forward or would that only happen if we nordies accept the financial and cultural suicide of uniting with Ireland.

    We can be more than our county, we can move forward in a unity of friendship. Why does it matter if it'd the corrupt Irish government or the dirty British government that sets our policy. Just try to get over it and move on brother.


    Could I not say the very same to you in the event of a UI? Why are you opposing it? Move on brother.


  • Options
    #83
    whitelines
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 159 ✭✭whitelines


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    That's a rather grandiose way of saying they killed random taigs. As a far as military strategy goes it's also idiotic.
    What makes me say that they had no tactical ability is years of studying the troubles and the actions of those involved in it.
    There was never any tactical thinking to loyalist actions, just pure, hot-blooded hatred.
    Hell, the UVF started killing people in 1966 at a time when the IRA was just an old story and there was no real drive for reunification.



    Firstly, where are you getting that number from?
    Secondly, the evidence of collusion is damning and with each passing year more and more of it is coming out. The brits do themselves no favours either with their terrified refusal to engage with a truth and reconciliation programme.
    As for loyalist prisoners, yes they certainly learned from the days of internment that if you lock only nationalists up it looks bad but strangely they never seemed to damage these groups, even with their "10,000" prisoners.
    I suppose it's a bit pointless having agents in a group if you're going to put them in a cell.
    Who, by the way, is it that i idolise?

    So you don't think Loyalist paramilitaries had a good strategy? Oh well, it's irrelevant now isn't it? Particularly given that line still strung across the map of The Island of Ireland. Didn't move one inch did it?

    Only a few years prior to The '66 UVF killings The IRA had killed more people in their border campaign. Hardly old news at that time.

    The 'Brits' (as you call them) couldn't care less about The Troubles anymore (just look at how Cameron flipped an apology for Bloody Sunday then moved on immediately to the price of bread, or whatever). You see Jack, The Troubles are long over now. Anything that comes out regarding collusion will have absolutely no effect on The UK State as it's history now. They just don't care anymore. They have got exactly what they want - Northern Ireland rock solid within The UK and the good citizens of NI working away happily together in Stormont arranging for bin deliveries (or whatever). Turned out nice again. ;)


  • Options
    #84
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    whitelines wrote: »
    I said most. Plenty of solicitors sympathised with PIRA - some were even members. Wiki's not a credible site for anything contentious.

    Yes, you did say most, you're still wrong though.
    Care to name some of these gun-toting solicitors?
    I'd usually agree but the specific part of the page I linked to deals almost exclusively with quotes from those in the know. It also has sources showing where the quotes came from.


  • Options
    #85
    dulpit
    Registered Users Posts: 10,354 ✭✭✭✭dulpit


    Just wondering, who will have to a vote on a united Ireland down the line? Just the North? Just the UK as a whole? Ireland and the North? All of UK and Ireland?


  • Options
    #86
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    gallag wrote: »
    What parts are troubling you? I think it was 30000 marchers and there were more spectators, probably a good many of them unwilling to forget and move on as you are. What's your story, why do you feel so strong about my country? Do you live here? Can you ever imagine moving forward or would that only happen if we nordies accept the financial and cultural suicide of uniting with Ireland.

    We can be more than our county, we can move forward in a unity of friendship. Why does it matter if it'd the corrupt Irish government or the dirty British government that sets our policy. Just try to get over it and move on brother.

    Im 26 and from Armagh, I don't have anything to "get over."
    "Financial and cultural suicide"?? What are you on about? I really cant decide which is more confusing, your nonsensical ranting or your flimsy grasp of the English language.


  • Options
    #87
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    whitelines wrote: »
    So you don't think Loyalist paramilitaries had a good strategy? Oh well, it's irrelevant now isn't it? Particularly given that line still strung across the map of The Island of Ireland. Didn't move one inch did it?

    Only a few years prior to The '66 UVF killings The IRA had killed more people in their border campaign. Hardly old news at that time.

    The 'Brits' (as you call them) couldn't care less about The Troubles anymore (just look at how Cameron flipped an apology for Bloody Sunday then moved on immediately to the price of bread, or whatever). You see Jack, The Troubles are long over now. Anything that comes out regarding collusion will have absolutely no effect on The UK State as it's history now. They just don't care anymore. They have got exactly what they want - Northern Ireland rock solid within The UK and the good citizens of NI working away happily together in Stormont arranging for bin deliveries (or whatever). Turned out nice again. ;)

    What has any of that got to do with what we were talking about? You said loyalists didn't have the state behind them, now you're saying revelations about collusion don't matter. Which is it? They didn't happen or they don't matter? Seems to me like you ran out of points to argue so you thought you'd engage in some good old fashioned triumphalism.

    Oh, and the border campaign ended in 62, with the last killing in south Armagh 1961. The IRA inflicted a total of six fatalities on the RUC over more than five years, so barely more than one death a year. Yes, in 1966 Belfast I would consider the IRA old news. Certainly not worth murdering two young men and an elderly protestant lady over.


  • Options
    #88
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    dulpit wrote: »
    Just wondering, who will have to a vote on a united Ireland down the line? Just the North? Just the UK as a whole? Ireland and the North? All of UK and Ireland?

    I assume it would be the north and south but separately, much like the GFA referendum.


  • Options
    #89
    whitelines
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 159 ✭✭whitelines


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    What has any of that got to do with what we were talking about? You said loyalists didn't have the state behind them, now you're saying revelations about collusion don't matter. Which is it? They didn't happen or they don't matter? Seems to me like you ran out of points to argue so you thought you'd engage in some good old fashioned triumphalism.

    Oh, and the border campaign ended in 62, with the last killing in south Armagh 1961. The IRA inflicted a total of six fatalities on the RUC over more than five years, so barely more than one death a year. Yes, in 1966 Belfast I would consider the IRA old news. Certainly not worth murdering two young men and an elderly protestant lady over.

    Loyalists didn't have The UK State behind them. That isn't to say collusion didn't occur on occasion. If it did happen (on occasion) it wouldn't matter to The UK State - certainly not now.

    Like yourself Jack, I have a passing interest in the history of The Troubles, but I'm not naive enough to think that what happened then will shape events unrolling now.

    You see Jack, many NI Catholics can now take a balanced view of The Troubles. They can recognise that Nationalists were murdered as a result of The Republican murder campaign - yes indiscriminately on occasion. They accept that PIRA wore no uniforms and didn't openly display weapons or abide by many other rules of war, opening their community up to classic counter terror by Loyalist paramilitaries. They accept that unarmed RUC/UDR men and women were killed by Republicans, sometimes in front of their families and that these human beings had neighbours, friends and family members, some of whom were (in your words) literally driven mad with hatred against all Nationalists and some of whom sought naked revenge within a Loyalist paramilitary framework. Such Catholics understand all this in the cold light of day and with the benefit of hind sight, because they understand that that is what ethno/religious conflicts involve. They, like their Protestant neighbours are just glad it's all over and they won't be in any hurry to resurrect the horrors of the past - hence their support for the political status quo.


  • Options
    #90
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    whitelines wrote: »

    Loyalists didn't have The UK State behind them. That isn't to say collusion didn't occur on occasion. If it did happen (on occasion) it wouldn't matter to The UK State - certainly not now.

    Like yourself Jack, I have a passing interest in the history of The Troubles, but I'm not naive enough to think that what happened then will shape events unrolling now.

    You see Jack, many NI Catholics can now take a balanced view of The Troubles. They can recognise that Nationalists were murdered as a result of The Republican murder campaign - yes indiscriminately on occasion. They accept that PIRA wore no uniforms and didn't openly display weapons or abide by many other rules of war, opening their community up to classic counter terror by Loyalist paramilitaries. They accept that unarmed RUC/UDR men and women were killed by Republicans, sometimes in front of their families and that these human beings had neighbours, friends and family members, some of whom were (in your words) literally driven mad with hatred against all Nationalists and some of whom sought naked revenge within a Loyalist paramilitary framework. Such Catholics understand all this in the cold light of day and with the benefit of hind sight, because they understand that that is what ethno/religious conflicts involve. They, like their Protestant neighbours are just glad it's all over and they won't be in any hurry to resurrect the horrors of the past - hence their support for the political status quo.

    Justify the state backed loyalist murder campaign to yourself however you like. the facts show your words up for what they are, an attempt to bestow some form of honour or legitimacy on a nakedly sectarian killing spree.
    Id also point out that a "balanced" view of the conflict, where people say stupid things like "one side was as bad as the other" in an effort to avoid offending anyone, is not the same as an accurate view.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    Crooked Jack wrote: »

    Justify the state backed loyalist murder campaign to yourself however you like. the facts show your words up for what they are, an attempt to bestow some form of honour or legitimacy on a nakedly sectarian killing spree.
    Id also point out that a "balanced" view of the conflict, where people say stupid things like "one side was as bad as the other" in an effort to avoid offending anyone, is not the same as an accurate view.

    So lets get this straight, the loyalists paramiltarys had the full force of the British state behind it, a state that at one time had the largest empire ever to exist, fought in two world wars sailed half way round the world to reclaim a set of islands claimed by Argentina and is the second biggest arms manufacture in the world and yet they where only able to help loyslists kill random Catholics and build rubbish bombs, if collusion was bad was as wide spread as is alleged then you would expect better results


Advertisement