Brilliant Northern Ireland Army Documentary

hammy140

Lads,was torn between putting this in the Northern section or Military.

Absolute brilliant documentary from yesteryear showing the everyday conflict between IRA and the army.

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=1m8aJPQh0-Q

Pathfinder

hammy140 wrote: »

Lads,was torn between putting this in the Northern section or Military.

Absolute brilliant documentary from yesteryear showing the everyday conflict between IRA and the army.

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=1m8aJPQh0-Q

The simple reality is the PIRA killed around 750 Catholics, the loyalists around 1,100 and the British army around 340, which included PIRA members.

Good interview with social security scrounger Brendan Hughes from his Divis council flat, great views from the roof btw.:)


Its a myth the PIRA was a secret army, most members were carded and photographed, by all three agencies, army intelligence/the FRU/the Det, RUC Special branch as well as MI5.

The problem is evidence had to be obtained to convict them.

As for collusion, if you were a cop and there was a guy down the road intent on murdering you and possibly taking out members of your family in the process, but you knew by passing on an intelligence file to an org down the road who would take care of the chap who was planning your murder and it could not be traced back to you, what would you do ?

eroo

Pathfinder wrote: »

As for collusion, if you were a cop and there was a guy down the road intent on murdering you and possibly taking out members of your family in the process, but you knew by passing on an intelligence file to an org down the road who would take care of the chap who was planning your murder and it could not be traced back to you, what would you do ?

You disgust me mate,seriously.Your defending collusion??:mad:
Those officers weren't covering their ass,they were pro-UVF etc,just like some members of UDR were also active paramilitaries..
Pathfinder needs a reality check.

daithicarr

there is no excuse for the killing on either side, but for the state security forces to engage in it, ames them no better than the supposed terrorists.

i was just reading about it. i always got the impression of the TV and other sources that the IRA went around murdering and targeting Civilans. but as a conflict, the ration of military deaths (including Paramilitarys) to civilain is fairly low. I am sure they would be happy to have a similar ration in Iraq. but then the fact that artillery and airpower and armour wasnt used indescriminantly was probably a major factor

Deaths by status of victim [4]StatusNo.Civilian1855Members of security forces (and reserves)1123of whom:British Army (excluding Northern Ireland regiments)499Royal Ulster Constabulary301Ulster Defence Regiment197Northern Ireland Prison Service24Garda Síochána (Republic of Ireland police)9Royal Irish Regiment7Territorial Army7English police forces6Royal Air Force4Royal Navy2Irish Army1Members of Republican Paramilitary Groups394Members of Loyalist Paramilitary Groups151

Pathfinder

daithicarr wrote: »

there is no excuse for the killing on either side, but for the state security forces to engage in it, ames them no better than the supposed terrorists.

i was just reading about it. i always got the impression of the TV and other sources that the IRA went around murdering and targeting Civilans. but as a conflict, the ration of military deaths (including Paramilitarys) to civilain is fairly low. I am sure they would be happy to have a similar ration in Iraq. but then the fact that artillery and airpower and armour wasnt used indescriminantly was probably a major factor

Deaths by status of victim [4]StatusNo.Civilian1855Members of security forces (and reserves)1123of whom:British Army (excluding Northern Ireland regiments)499Royal Ulster Constabulary301Ulster Defence Regiment197Northern Ireland Prison Service24Garda Síochána (Republic of Ireland police)9Royal Irish Regiment7Territorial Army7English police forces6Royal Air Force4Royal Navy2Irish Army1Members of Republican Paramilitary Groups394Members of Loyalist Paramilitary Groups151

So you are saying a member of the security services passing intelligence about an org which is intent on murdering him/her and has murdered collegues to loyalists, is the same morally as making and planting a bomb in a pub, shopping centre etc.

.......Dont think so.


Infact it was the fact PIRA/Sinn Fein tactics were used against them, (by 1989 Sinn Fein/PIRA councillors could no longer sleep in their ownbeds, many moved across the border), that made them compromise.

Its moral dilemma, if an armed group is hellbent on overturning a democracy by war, is that democracy unofficially justifed in using undemoratic methods to defeat it.

By day Sinn Fein/PIRA members spoke of human rights and oppression, by night they wore balicalvas, shot, bombed and kneecapped people, they were very good at the propaganda war.

After Brighton they were seen as so dangerous, collusion both unofficial and semi official became the last means of defeating them. Counter gangs are often used in low intensity warfare.

It was 14 Int and MI5 who won the war in the north, albeit with compromise.

daithicarr

Thats rubbish most those guys who colluded had no direct threat to them personaly. no more so than any other member of the security services.

the only reason a compromise was made is both sides saw they could not win, the IRA could never hope to drive the British out and the British could never defeat the IRA.

The murders and killings of both side were equally wrong.

Dirty Dave

Pathfinder wrote: »

Its moral dilemma, if an armed group is hellbent on overturning a democracy by war, is that democracy unofficially justifed in using undemoratic methods to defeat it.

First off, I am by NO MEANS a republican and never supported violence to solve the problems up the north, but I just had to say something about this.

What gives you the impression that northern ireland was a democratic place before the troubles started?

You are aware that Catholics were openly discriminated against for jobs and that they never had any political power due to gerrymandering don't you?

Pathfinder

daithicarr wrote: »

Thats rubbish most those guys who colluded had no direct threat to them personaly. no more so than any other member of the security services.

the only reason a compromise was made is both sides saw they could not win, the IRA could never hope to drive the British out and the British could never defeat the IRA.

The murders and killings of both side were equally wrong.

So you are claiming UDA soldiers and RUC officers who unoffically passed files had no threat to them ?

As for MI5 their job is to defend the realm and security of the UK.


The reality is operation motormans objective was to create the conditions so democracy could prevail, its mandate was not to militarily crush the PIRA and thus create the same problem in 30 years time.

This was achieved by making it harder and harder for the PIRA to operate, by the late 90s PIRAs op were a fraction of what they had been in the mid 70s.

Pathfinder

Dirty Dave wrote: »

Pathfinder wrote: »

Its moral dilemma, if an armed group is hellbent on overturning a democracy by war, is that democracy unofficially justifed in using undemoratic methods to defeat it.

First off, I am by NO MEANS a republican and never supported violence to solve the problems up the north, but I just had to say something about this.

What gives you the impression that northern ireland was a democratic place before the troubles started?

You are aware that Catholics were openly discriminated against for jobs and that they never had any political power due to gerrymandering don't you?

The civil rights movement acheived its objectives by 1972.

The PIRA campaign had nothing to do with civil rights, it was about national unity and installing itself as a govt in a united Ireland, it was supported by the Soviet union.

The reality is after 72 Catholics had more civil rights in the north, the legal right to divorce, using contraception etc, then they did in the south.

Dirty Dave

Pathfinder wrote: »

Dirty Dave wrote: »

Pathfinder wrote: »

Its moral dilemma, if an armed group is hellbent on overturning a democracy by war, is that democracy unofficially justifed in using undemoratic methods to defeat it.



The civil rights movement acheived its objectives by 1972.

The PIRA campaign had nothing to do with civil rights, it was about national unity and installing itself as a govt in a united Ireland, it was supported by the Soviet union.

The reality is after 72 Catholics had more civil rights in the north, the legal right to divorce, using contraception etc, then they did in the south.

I'm not going to get into a debate on it here - this isnt the right forum, however, I think you are oversimplifying things just a tad. More then a tad actually.

OP, interesting doc, good find.

guinnessdrinker

Pathfinder wrote: »

So you are claiming UDA soldiers and RUC officers who unoffically passed files had no threat to them ?

If your going to call members of one proscribed organisation terrorists you might as well call all of them terrorists.

And when we are talking about collusion, what threat did someone like Pat Finucane pose to somebodies life? He was only a solicitor in all fairness.

eroo

Fact is the security forces are there to carry out there duties,evenunder threat.Gardai are threatened daily by criminals.Do they pass on info to other criminals to bump them off?I think not.

Pathfinder

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

If your going to call members of one proscribed organisation terrorists you might as well call all of them terrorists.

And when we are talking about collusion, what threat did someone like Pat Finucane pose to somebodies life? He was only a solicitor in all fairness.

That was a typo or possibly Fraudian slip, should have read UDR.

Finucane was also a high level PIRA member, also involved in laundering provo m
oney, his brothers, were convicted PIRA members.

If he was simply a human rights lawyer why did he do nothing for the human rights of young men who were kneecapped ?

Oilrig

Pathfinder,

I have had the honour of working with ex members of HM forces, in both civvy & military roles, in many countries globally.

I have to say that your comments do not tie up with those your alleged "colleagues" have imparted to me.

Any ex HM Forces I have worked with have been the model of professionalism. As an example, I watched the '01 Ireland vs England 6 nations match in a Brit Officers Mess, the barman was wearing a Celtic jersey...

In short, you're a Walt at best, a Troll at worst.

Pathfinder

Oilrig wrote: »

Pathfinder,

I have had the honour of working with ex members of HM forces, in both civvy & military roles, in many countries globally.

I have to say that your comments do not tie up with those your alleged "colleagues" have imparted to me.

Any ex HM Forces I have worked with have been the model of professionalism. As an example, I watched the '01 Ireland vs England 6 nations match in a Brit Officers Mess, the barman was wearing a Celtic jersey...



In short, you're a Walt at best, a Troll at worst.

If you had ever done a tour in NI you might have something to say,but as you never, you don't really have anything to say.

Someone in the mess had a Celtic top, wow I'm impressed.

V Bull

This seems to be a political thread rather than military and posters seem to be getting a bit passionate with their posts.

Should be closed and moved to a political section or specialist section.

twinytwo

Pathfinder wrote: »

If you had ever done a tour in NI you might have something to say,but as you never, you don't really have anything to say.

Someone in the mess had a Celtic top, wow I'm impressed.

i take it so that u did a tour so pathfinder??

Zambia

Pathfinder wrote: »

That was a typo or possibly Fraudian slip, should have read UDR.

Finucane was also a high level PIRA member, also involved in laundering provo m
oney, his brothers, were convicted PIRA members.

If he was simply a human rights lawyer why did he do nothing for the human rights of young men who were kneecapped ?

Pathfinder, you cant back this up , be quiet.

Please

Boston

Pathfinder wrote: »

As for collusion, if you were a cop and there was a guy down the road intent on murdering you and possibly taking out members of your family in the process, but you knew by passing on an intelligence file to an org down the road who would take care of the chap who was planning your murder and it could not be traced back to you, what would you do ?

Murder is murder. The thing is that most people have a logical reason for it. I sure the PIRA members felt they where doing what they had to in order to protect their family and community. The reasons don't make it right.

Pathfinder

Zambia232 wrote: »

Pathfinder, you cant back this up , be quiet.

Please

Sean O' Callaghan formerly the souths most senior PIRA commander states he attended high level PIRA finance meetings where PF was present.

Pathfinder

Boston wrote: »

Murder is murder. The thing is that most people have a logical reason for it. I sure the PIRA members felt they where doing what they had to in order to protect their family and community. The reasons don't make it right.

But the PIRA killed around 700 Catholics and maimed thousands through bombings, shootings and punishment beatings, are you aware of that ? Some defenders.

And when it came to the crunch their claim they could defend the Catholic community was proven false.

It was all totally unnecessary, they accepted the same terms offered in Suningdale in 1973.

The reality is if 14 Int, MI5 etc had stuck to the letter of the law, the PIRA would have won. The PIRA could not be defeated simply through the legal process.


After Brighton, they were seen as a threat to the defence of the realm, which is when the gloves came off, over the next 6 years the SAS and Det alone killed more then 50 members in ambushes and virtually wiped out East Tyrone brigade.

And that does not include those unlawfully killed by loyalists/colllusion, by the early 90s in NI the tables had turned only 1 in 5 PIRA ops was a success, the rest ended in failure/arrest etc.

Hence the peace process.

And my question in a previous post.

Boston

Murder is ok if you do less of it then someone else? If you just kill one person for a good reason, its ok, once you're not a serial killer?

The security forces where there to do a job, maybe if they spent more time doing that, rather then being judges, jurors and executioners it would have gone a lot better, and maybe people would have trusted in them more, thus saving life's. Do you realise the problems caused by collusion? Do you realise that the only reason the IRA where able to set themselves up as the de facto authority in many communities was because those communities didn't trust the IRA?

Now maybe (for the shake of argument) they only gave the names of IRA members to the loyalist gangs. Those groups didn't limit themselves to 'legitimate' targets. Its not a simple matter of giving a few names, these groups where protected and aloud to operate as a result.

Pathfinder

Boston wrote: »

Murder is ok if you do less of it then someone else? If you just kill one person for a good reason, its ok, once you're not a serial killer?

The security forces where there to do a job, maybe if they spent more time doing that, rather then being judges, jurors and executioners it would have gone a lot better, and maybe people would have trusted in them more, thus saving life's. Do you realise the problems caused by collusion? Do you realise that the only reason the IRA where able to set themselves up as the de facto authority in many communities was because those communities didn't trust the IRA?

Now maybe (for the shake of argument) they only gave the names of IRA members to the loyalist gangs. Those groups didn't limit themselves to 'legitimate' targets. Its not a simple matter of giving a few names, these groups where protected and aloud to operate as a result.

As stated the PIRA could not be defeated by law and order and democratic means.

Ex members of the FRU and Det state intelligence was given to loyalists in an attempt to stop them targeting ordinary Catholics.

But the reality is a central plank of the PIRAs existence was as self proclaimed defenders of the Catholic community and the community elected PIRA-Sinn Fein representitives, which in other words gave support to the PIRAs methods.

Therefore loyalists targeted Catholic areas to show them the PIRA could not defend them as well as demoralise them in terms of supporting armed conflict. From the loyalist position the message was if the community supported the conflict by voting Sinn Fein-PIRA, then they were part of the conflict.

Just as the PIRA targeted Protestant minority communities in border areas to drive them out and bombed Protestant bars, towns and businesses.

It was a nasty conflict, in which loyalist counter gangs played a pivotal role.

It also showed the PIRAs tactics could be compromised by counter gangs using similar methods against them and their community.

Boston

And you agree with the methods?

Hagar

I've had enough.

Pathfinder never darken these doors again.

Zambia

Pathfinder wrote: »

Sean O' Callaghan formerly the souths most senior PIRA commander states he attended high level PIRA finance meetings where PF was present.

Hear say at best its not even close to proof.

eroo

Thank you Hagar!Pathfinder just amazes me..defending collusion and loyalist gangs??They were in fact just as bad as PIRA!
Btw,aren't security forces there to provide security to a State and ALL of it's citizens..regardless of sex,creed,race,politics etc?

Hagar

If anyone's looking for me I'll probably be in Feedback.

guinnessdrinker

Hagar wrote: »

If anyone's looking for me I'll probably be in Feedback.

lol poor Hager, who'd want to be a mod?

Oilrig

Hagar wrote: »

I've had enough.

Pathfinder never darken these doors again.

Promise?

Hagar

Promise.

the_syco

eroo wrote: »

Btw,aren't security forces there to provide security to a State and ALL of it's citizens..regardless of sex,creed,race,politics etc?

Christ, are you that naive? Remember: the black and tans were security forces!

=-=

Also, the PIRA were [sarc] nice kind peace loving people [/sarc] as there isn't any proof of otherwise.

Boston wrote: »

And you agree with the methods?

Why does stating a fact = agreeing with said fact?

If I said Hitler got thousands of people gassed, are you going to assume that I agree with it?:eek:

twinytwo

Pathfinder wrote: »

As stated the PIRA could not be defeated by law and order and democratic means.

Ex members of the FRU and Det state intelligence was given to loyalists in an attempt to stop them targeting ordinary Catholics.

cough cough counter gangs my arse.... the brits will never admit it but the IRA ran rings around them for years. .. eh mate forget bout the loyalists.. how bout the british soldiers??

uptherebels

the_syco wrote: »

Christ, are you that naive? Remember: the black and tans were security forces!

I think that he was trying to point out that british "security forces" arent actually ecurity forces.

Boston

the_syco wrote: »

Why does stating a fact = agreeing with said fact?

If I said Hitler got thousands of people gassed, are you going to assume that I agree with it?:eek:

If you stated "what would you do if an inferior species was dragging down your master rage" I would conclude you supported Hitlers actions. In the same way, statement where made initially by pathfinder which appeared to support collusion.

Finally, you'll notice the question mark at the end of what you quoted. I was trying to get pathfinder to declare definitively his views. It was a question not a statement.