Lurgan Bomb

philologos

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The North is a failed economic entity and would not be able to survive on its own.

And you think without all of the UK tax money that is put into there that things would be better up there, or indeed for us down here?

Wolfe Tone

Jakkass wrote: »

And you think without all of the UK tax money that is put into there that things would be better up there, or indeed for us down here?

The 6 would not be able to last on its own, independence will never happen(or if it does, last long) the 6 is too small to survive on its own.

philologos

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The 6 would not be able to last on its own, independence will never happen(or if it does, last long) the 6 is too small to survive on its own.

Independence isn't really one of the main options, which seem to be:
1) Stay with the UK (current situation)
2) Become united with the Republic (highly unlikely)

Unionists won't particularly support NI independence either.

shampon

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The 6 would not be able to last on its own, independence will never happen(or if it does, last long) the 6 is too small to survive on its own.

And reunification will never happen either might aswell save our energy and try and pull the Isles out of economic oblivion.

Wolfe Tone

Jakkass wrote: »

Independence isn't really one of the main options, which seem to be:
1) Stay with the UK (current situation)
2) Become united with the Republic (highly unlikely)

Unionists won't particularly support NI independence either.

I know, thats the point I was making.

I do not feel it is highly unlikely. It is in the short term, but in the long it is an inevitability I feel.

Notorious97

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The 6 would not be able to last on its own, independence will never happen(or if it does, last long) the 6 is too small to survive on its own.

Yea i agree with this, but we need down here sorted out also. I for one would pay higher tax rate to fund a united Ireland to get it off the ground. We bail out so many elite snobby ***** that i think higher taxes for a united country is more worth while in my opinion than keeping Anglo afloat for example.

philologos

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I know, thats the point I was making.

I do not feel it is highly unlikely. It is in the short term, but in the long it is an inevitability I feel.

I do. Not only do you have to convince the people in Northern Ireland of the possibility, you will also have to convince the majority of people in the Republic to do so.

That also said, it is very possible that over time, people on both sides in Northern Ireland may become more OK with the current situation. This process is arguably occurring already.

Notorious97 - The only issue is in convincing other people of such a tax increase.

aDeener

Terry wrote: »

I know a guy who is 34 and has pictures of himself in a balaclava, alongside members of the RIRA on his Facebook. He's a complete ****ing tool.
The funny thing is that his wife is Protestant.

whilst i agree with him being a tool, i dont get how thats the funny part. being a catholic is not a requirement to being a republican

Savage Tyrant

aDeener wrote: »

whilst i agree with him being a tool, i dont get how thats the funny part. being a catholic is not a requirement to being a republican

Exactly.... I pointed that out a couple of pages back.

Savage Tyrant

Terry wrote: »

It's funny because he's the type of person who wants to get rid of all Protestants from the North. He cannot see the irony in being married to a Protestant woman, while wanting to get rid of Protestants from 1/5 of the island.

I'm a Republican and also married to a Protestant. Now if he is actually saying anti-Protestant things as opposed to pro-Republican things, that would make him a bigot aswell as a moron. But you did not say that on your original post.

Wolfe Tone

aDeener wrote: »

whilst i agree with him being a tool, i dont get how thats the funny part. being a catholic is not a requirement to being a republican

Sure Wolfe Tone himself was a protestant.

steddyeddy

Unfortunatly being a catholic will exclude you from many loyalist organizations (not that id want to join them bigots)

Wolfe Tone

dlofnep wrote: »

Nobody once said it was OK. Please point me to the point where anyone in this thread stated that it was OK. The attack was wrong. You don't have to convince me, nor that other poster.

Now - This is where you link a post that stated that the bomb attack was OK. If you fail to do so, I can only conclude that you are putting words in people's mouths and have taken it upon yourself to be board's official thought police.

Hmmm, seems like it was the usual rubbish of spouting off bollocks and then running into the night.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Hmmm, seems like it was the usual rubbish of spouting off bollocks and then running into the night.

Now you are just trying to incite me.

I made my points, you disagree with them, big brother stood up for you.

Personally I find your fascination with the R/C/IRA quite distasteful. You obviously aren't old enough to have been around during the troubles, probably not too dissimilar to the scumbags that planted this bomb.

There was nothing big, clever or glorious about what happened up there but all the time people try and make out that there was, it only adds fuel to the fire.

This thread, like the troubles, is best left in the past.

Wolfe Tone

I will ignore your opinion about me, because I actually do not care. You are making unsubstantiated claims. Care to back them up?

Now - This is where you link a post that stated that the bomb attack was OK. If you fail to do so, I can only conclude that you are putting words in people's mouths and have taken it upon yourself to be board's official thought police.

Notorious97

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Now you are just trying to incite me.

I made my points, you disagree with them, big brother stood up for you.

Personally I find your fascination with the R/C/IRA quite distasteful. You obviously aren't old enough to have been around during the troubles, probably not too dissimilar to the scumbags that planted this bomb.

There was nothing big, clever or glorious about what happened up there but all the time people try and make out that there was, it only adds fuel to the fire.

This thread, like the troubles, is best left in the past.

To be honest Mussolini doesnt support either of those, he is a republican and is smart enough (like most of us republicans believe it or not :O ) to be able to look at a situation and determine the reason behind it, which is not condoning it either but understanding why it happened.

Just because we dont come out calling them all scumbags etc or using a tone you or other posters dont approve of does not mean we condone innocent people especially children being injured in such attacks.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I will ignore your opinion about me, because I actually do not care. You are making unsubstantiated claims. Care to back them up?

You are defending the indefenceable.

Giving them excuses. it is the same stuff we have heard time after time "Oh, the Omagh bomb wasn't meant to kill anybody, they just got the warning wrong", or "The Birmingham pub bombers did try and phone in a warning, but the phone box had been vandalised".

To say they weren't targeting children is splitting hairs that do not need to be split. Saying they were not targetting children is giving them some sort of credibility which thy do not deserve.

Who cares if they were targeting children of nor, the simple fact of the matter is that children were hurt, therefore their bombs targetted children, intentionally or not.

Fratton Fred

Notorious97 wrote: »

To be honest Mussolini doesnt support either of those, he is a republican and is smart enough (like most of us republicans believe it or not :O ) to be able to look at a situation and determine the reason behind it, which is not condoning it either but understanding why it happened.

Just because we dont come out calling them all scumbags etc or using a tone you or other posters dont approve of does not mean we condone innocent people especially children being injured in such attacks.

are we back to the old "I do not condone these attacks, but I will not condemn them" rhetoric of the 80s?

Wolfe Tone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You are defending the indefenceable.

I am not defending it at all. The first thing I said was that it was disgraceful. My opinion has not changed.

Giving them excuses.

I am not giving them excuses. Was the bomb aimed at the children or at the PSNI? It is quite clear that it was at the PSNI. What is wrong with me saying that?

To say they weren't targeting children is splitting hairs that do not need to be split. Saying they were not targetting children is giving them some sort of credibility which thy do not deserve.

Unless you believe it is legitimate to target the PSNI I fail to see how pointing out the context and aim of the attack is splitting hairs that do not need to be split, or giving them credibility. How is it defending them? Unless you regard the attacking of PSNI an adequate defense?

Who cares if they were targeting children of nor, the simple fact of the matter is that children were hurt, therefore their bombs targetted children, intentionally or not.

Plenty of people care. I do not see how they wouldn't.

You are talking absolute CRAP here. I am not defending it in any way at all. I have condemned it. I expect you to back up here and admit you are wrong, just like the flutt did.

Notorious97

Fratton Fred wrote: »

are we back to the old "I do not condone these attacks, but I will not condemn them" rhetoric of the 80s?

No, if you read any of my posts about dissidents i have never once condoned them, and i have stated many times i don’t support them and they arent wanted or being anyway helpful to the progress of peace on this island. They are republicans however, misguided ones at that, and i think they should be fully behind the GFA as it is what the people voted for and accepted.

Like i said though, just because we don’t call them names which you or others do seems to make us supporters of them in this forum. Typical anti nationalist / republican bashing from AH though.

Also i never once posted anything in support of bombings especially Omagh as nobody can defend that. I have said with the PIRA though i can see why they targeted certain places, such as canary wharf (financial district) and shopping centres (commercial revenue generating areas), but the loss of innocent life cannot be defended so i havent ever supported such actions.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I am not defending it at all. The first thing I said was that it was disgraceful. My opinion has not changed.

I am not giving them excuses. Was the bomb aimed at the children or at the PSNI? It is quite clear that it was at the PSNI. What is wrong with me saying that?



Unless you believe it is legitimate to target the PSNI I fail to see how pointing out the context and aim of the attack is splitting hairs that do not need to be split, or giving them credibility. How is it defending them? Unless you regard the attacking of PSNI an adequate defense?

Plenty of people care. I do not see how they wouldn't.

You are talking absolute CRAP here. I am not defending it in any way at all. I have condemned it. I expect you to back up here and admit you are wrong, just like the flutt did.

you can go round in circles all day if you want. i can't be arsed.

For the sake of seeing this godforesaken thread disappear, lets agree that you weren't defending them and that putting a bomb in an area (ie a school) is indirectly targeting children, through recklessness if nothing else.

Now, can we go back to talking about muslims and orgasms or whatever it is AH specialises in.

Wolfe Tone

In future stop trying to put words in peoples mouths.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

In future stop trying to put words in peoples mouths.

will you give it a rest?

Wolfe Tone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

will you give it a rest?

Sorry, its hard not to get a bit ticked off when someone accuses you of supporting or defending children being hurt.:rolleyes:

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

you can go round in circles all day if you want. i can't be arsed.

For the sake of seeing this godforesaken thread disappear, lets agree that you weren't defending them and that putting a bomb in an area (ie a school) is indirectly targeting children, through recklessness if nothing else.

Now, can we go back to talking about muslims and orgasms or whatever it is AH specialises in.

You should be a politician, he called them disgracful several times. Your trying to goad him into saying that he supports them.

Do you understand that republicans can often sympathise with the basic ideals of a united ireland but support different means to achieve that?

Fratton Fred

Notorious97 wrote: »

No, if you read any of my posts about dissidents i have never once condoned them, and i have stated many times i don’t support them and they arent wanted or being anyway helpful to the progress of peace on this island. They are republicans however, misguided ones at that, and i think they should be fully behind the GFA as it is what the people voted for and accepted.

but do you condemn them?

Notorious97 wrote: »

Like i said though, just because we don’t call them names which you or others do seems to make us supporters of them in this forum. Typical anti nationalist / republican bashing from AH though.

Also i never once posted anything in support of bombings especially Omagh as nobody can defend that. I have said with the PIRA though i can see why they targeted certain places, such as canary wharf (financial district) and shopping centres (commercial revenue generating areas), but the loss of innocent life cannot be defended so i havent ever supported such actions.

That's good of you.

You will have to forgive me if I think that the people who bombed the city I have worked in most of my life are complete scumbags. I don't see nationalism as being that important.

mickydoomsux

steddyeddy wrote: »

Do you understand that republicans can often sympathise with the basic ideals of a united ireland but support different means to achieve that?

What, like magic?

steddyeddy

mickydoomsux wrote: »

What, like magic?

To be honest man if you think magic or violence are the only two options we have in life were pretty fu*ked

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

You should be a politician, he called them disgracful several times. Your trying to goad him into saying that he supports them.

No. I'm trying to goad him defending them in any way shaope of form.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Do you understand that republicans can often sympathise with the basic ideals of a united ireland but support different means to achieve that?

What's that supposed to mean?

mickydoomsux

Right so, give me your solution.

GO!