Do you think the 1916 rebels where terrorists?

Wolfe Tone

This is a view that has been cropping up from certain posters all too frequently lately.

Here is an example from Denerick, who I hope won't mind me singling him a bit out here(can't be arsed looking for other examples, he is certainly not the only one who says this, so this thread is not a go at him I'm just using his post as an example).

"[the 1916 rebels] were fanatics and terrorists.

What part of this do you not get?

I think you'll find that this is a surprisingly common opinion, at least to anyone who has stopped to think and/or read about it for more than five minutes."

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047045&postcount=16
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047136&postcount=22


Now I think this is complete rubbish. The 1916 rebels were heroes in my book, who fought for Irish freedom. Not fanatical terrorists.

What do you guys think? I will put up a poll, could be interesting.

Paparazzo

No

Please, no more!

Kiera

Great! Another thread for you and Keith to bicker in! :rolleyes:

orourkeda

Why isn't that description accurate?

ben.schlomo

No

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

This is a view that has been cropping up from certain posters all too frequently lately.

Here is an example from Denerick, who I hope won't mind me singling him a bit out here(can't be arsed looking for other examples, he is certainly not the only one who says this, so this thread is not a go at him I'm just using his post as an example).



http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047045&postcount=16
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047136&postcount=22


Now I think this is complete rubbish. The 1916 rebels where heroes in my book, who fought for Irish freedom. Not fanatical terrorists.

What do you guys think? I will put up a poll, could be interesting.

its were,sorry for being pedantic.

Sykk

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter..

KeithM89_old

Kiera wrote: »

Great! Another thread for you and Keith to bicker in! :rolleyes:

And she doesnt mean the cool one... :cool:

Wolfe Tone

ben.schlomo wrote: »

its were,sorry for being pedantic.

Thanks for that, I can never remember which to use.

orourkeda

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

This is a view that has been cropping up from certain posters all too frequently lately.

Here is an example from Denerick, who I hope won't mind me singling him a bit out here(can't be arsed looking for other examples, he is certainly not the only one who says this, so this thread is not a go at him I'm just using his post as an example).



http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047045&postcount=16
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72047136&postcount=22


Now I think this is complete rubbish. The 1916 rebels where heroes in my book, who fought for Irish freedom. Not fanatical terrorists.

What do you guys think? I will put up a poll, could be interesting.

Isn't any "terrorist" someone else' "freedom fighter"

Daegerty

I think the person who suggests that they were terrorists, is in fact a terrorist.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

No

yes of course they were.

It wasn't me!

they were bloody-minded ideologically driven fools with no popular support, but they didn't attack a civilian population, though they did bring massive damage to their city with no aim but a blood sacrifice. They didn't have a useful plan with a reasonable expectation of success, so while I have no time for their actions, they weren't terrorists, just morons.

orourkeda

Who's going to close this thread?

dlofnep

No - They were soldiers, like any other. I don't do the word 'terrorist'. Like I've said before, it's a term coined by those with a sizeable media sway, to portray one side as 'baddies' and the other as 'goodies'.

The leaders of the Rising were brave men, with incredible conviction and courage.

Fr Tod Umptious

yes they were.
They had very little popular support remember.

What would you think of a group today if they took over various parts of a city and had a shoot out with the regular army and police

Kiera

orourkeda wrote: »

Who's going to close this thread?

My money is on Micky!

Fuhrer

What I really want to know is what KeithAFC thinks about this

orourkeda

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

yes they were.
They had very little popular support remember.

What would you think of a group today if they took over various parts of a city and had a shoot out with the regular army and police

Suicide bombers. Because the herald says so

Thatnastyboy

can we have a 3rd option on the poll?

I put forward,

This dead horse has been beaten enough, its merely a strange stain on the footpath

Joe10000

ter·ror·ist
[ter-er-ist]
- noun 1.*person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates violence or threats of violence, esp., in pursuit of politcal goals.

If you accept that definition then there is only one answer.

Either way they are responsible for the
creation of this state and should be recognised for same. Call them what you like.

Paparazzo

No

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The 1916 rebels were heroes in my book, who fought for Irish freedom. Not fanatical terrorists.

Thanks for clearing that up, I honestly didn't know that's what you believed.

ascanbe

Were the A-Team terrorists?

orourkeda

Kiera wrote: »

My money is on Micky!

11\10 the field

dlofnep

It wasn't me! wrote: »

They didn't have a useful plan with a reasonable expectation of success

No, they only brought Britain to the a real bargaining table for the first time, and gained popular support for independence - evident by the results of the general elections less than 2 years later.

No success my hole. The Easter Rising is the reason why we are no longer a part of the United Kingdom. It was never meant to succeed militarily - it was meant to succeed politically, and succeed it did.

Wolfe Tone

Kiera wrote: »

Great! Another thread for you and Keith to bicker in! :rolleyes:

Excellent contribution there kiera. If you dont like the thread and have no meaningful contribution there is not much point in you posting is there?

Besides I was shocked to discover that keith is on my http://www.boards.ie/love.php list so we are best pals really.

orourkeda

Thatnastyboy wrote: »

can we have a 3rd option on the poll?

I put forward,

This dead horse has been beaten enough, its merely a strange stain on the footpath

Why didn't they blow up other sh1t

Kiera

orourkeda wrote: »

11\10 the field

*wush*

Wut?

/note i have no idea about betting terms if that is one?

Thatnastyboy

orourkeda wrote: »

Why didn't they blow up other sh1t

:eek: as in?

KeithAFC

No

I would say yes. That is what i have voted for. I don't see how they weren't

orourkeda

Thatnastyboy wrote: »

:eek: as in?

The asgard :eek:

dlofnep

In fairness to Kiera, the amount of political threads on AH is mind-blowing. I come on here to talk about porn, the westboro baptist church and to watch Terry get naked in public.

I can see why people see a trend in topics.

orourkeda

KeithAFC wrote: »

I would say yes. That is what i have voted for. I don't see how they weren't

Al QAEDA

ejmaztec

It's about time Predator showed up to inject some humour into the proceedings.

dlofnep

KeithAFC wrote: »

I would say yes. That is what i have voted for. I don't see how they weren't

Go away you big liar, you were e-mailing me last night telling me how great the leaders of the Easter Rising were.

ascanbe

The men of 1916 were terrorisn'ts.

Thatnastyboy

orourkeda wrote: »

The asgard :eek:

I have no idea what that is, as long as it aint me; I'm happy in my er... em..




nappy

landsleaving

If I provide a serious answer, can we then close this thread and all the other threads like it and return to blasting various things with piss, including one's ma?

Kiera

dlofnep wrote: »

In fairness to Kiera, the amount of political threads on AH is mind-blowing. I come on here to talk about porn, the westboro baptist church and to watch Terry get naked in public.

I can see why people see a trend in topics.

This is exactly it! Where are all the YP/RT threads? We need to bring the fun back to AH, dlofnep

/and lock Wolfe and Keith in a room so they can make their own vid for those sites

mozil

well by today standands they would be.
I personally think that it is a farce that we commerate these brave men every easter with the might of the defence force and our "President" laying a pretty little wreath outside the GPO when they treated the men who stood for the same values during the so called "troubles" as terrorists. Lets not forget that civillians died during the rising so the argument that the IRA murdered innocent people during the 70s... dosent really wash with me.
Dont get me wrong im not being insensitive to those people who were killed. But I fail to see how we can commemorate and glorify 1916 yet criminalise the voulenteers during the "troubles".

dlofnep

Kiera wrote: »

This is exactly it! Where are all the YP/RT threads? We need to bring the fun back to AH, dlofnep

/and lock Wolfe and Keith in a room so they can make their own vid for those sites

Yeah Kiera, tits out for the lads!

laughter189

The 1916 rebels were Irish Republicans and fighting for Ireland .

How lucky are we today - We have it so good

My name is URL

I don't, but ultimately it doesn't matter what I think.. shit happened almost 100 years ago. Anyone basing their views of the future on stuff that happened that far back can safely assume that change has passed them by.

NTMK

dlofnep wrote: »

No, they only brought Britain to the a real bargaining table for the first time, and gained popular support for independence - evident by the results of the general elections less than 2 years later.

No success my hole. The Easter Rising is the reason why we are no longer a part of the United Kingdom. It was never meant to succeed militarily - it was meant to succeed politically, and succeed it did.

Home Rule was already granted before 1916 WWI delayed it being implemented we were getting independence the rising just advanced the process quicker. Their importance in history is exaggerated

ascanbe

landsleaving wrote: »

If I provide a serious answer, can we then close this thread and all the other threads like it and return to blasting various things with piss, including one's ma?

Only if that answer is one that everyone can agree upon.

orourkeda

dlofnep wrote: »

In fairness to Kiera, the amount of political threads on AH is mind-blowing. I come on here to talk about porn, the westboro baptist church and to watch Terry get naked in public.

I can see why people see a trend in topics.

God hates spires

Wolfe Tone

dlofnep wrote: »

In fairness to Kiera, the amount of political threads on AH is mind-blowing. I come on here to talk about porn, the westboro baptist church and to watch Terry get naked in public.

I can see why people see a trend in topics.

You cant have polls in the politics forum unfortunately, and I wanted a wider cross section of society to have a say too.

jive

Well what were the Brits when they came over here in the first place?

This is such a stupid argument. If I went and invaded wales tomorrow I'd be a dickhead. If they decided to try to get me out does that make them terrorists? Nah. It is their land. The Brits at the time were dickheads and now you fart heads are talking about something that happened 100 years ago like it actually matters. If you want to talk about something relevant talk about the actual terrorists that are around today instead of pussy footing around with definitions and half arsed opinions.

My opinion is that it is ours. They came and took it off us. Yet some people think the Irish who wanted that land back are terrorists. Right. You can argue that 'those were different times' but we were still human and we still are human. If some headcases want to go around up north causing a bit of havoc then good luck to them but in this day and age that kind of behaviour isn't tolerated because 'we are more civilised'. I've more important things to be doing with my time like murdering stray animals

ejmaztec

ascanbe wrote: »

Were the A-Team terrorists?

The old A Team, or the new A Team?

Thatnastyboy

<snip>

Pauleta

No

Misguided fools in my book. Anybody that gives their lives for a flag is an idiot and suffers from a lack of direction or belonging in life. They wanted to achieve Irish Independence from Britain. If they hadnt of bothered we definitely would of had a 32 county Ireland by now. Im also sceptical about people like James Connolly. He was a socialist and would of led Ireland down the evil path of communism. We would of been a major target in WW2 from the Germans and most likely have entered into the war.

Micky Dolenz

If you want to talk about history and debate it's merits, go to the History Forum.


We should vote on having any more Irish history threads.