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

Bobby Sands R.I.P. 5th May 1981

Options
  • 05-05-2013 12:31am
    #1
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users Posts: 7,202 ✭✭✭


    Loved by many, scorned by a few but remembered by all.

    How this country could do with someone like Bobby now.

    "They have nothing in their whole imperial arsenal that can break the spirit of one Irishman who doesn’t want to be broken."


«134567…21

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    EireGreg
    Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭EireGreg


    R.I.P A true Irish warrior
    Gone but not forgotten

    32


  • Options
    #3
    wingsof daun
    Registered Users Posts: 270 ✭✭wingsof daun


    A lot of countries could do with Bobby now. There's too much corruption, too many have sold out their country for money and high positions. Many paid to stay silent. Imperialism has more recently targeted Africa. Nations and countries worldwide remain in a constant battle against it.


  • Options
    #4
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    bobbysands81 wrote: »

    "They have nothing in their whole imperial arsenal that can break the spirit of one Irishman who doesn’t want to be broken."
    And then he went and starved himself to death. Sounds like a broken man to me.


  • Options
    #5
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,671 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    Phoebas wrote: »
    And then he went and starved himself to death. Sounds like a broken man to me.

    great reasoning there :rolleyes:

    RIP


  • Options
    #6
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    "They have nothing in their whole imperial arsenal that can break the spirit of one Irishman who doesn’t want to be broken."
    They had torture but they choose not to use it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    belcampprisoner
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 698 ✭✭✭belcampprisoner


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/04/guantanamo-hunger-strike



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Sands


  • Options
    #8
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Phoebas wrote: »
    And then he went and starved himself to death. Sounds like a broken man to me.
    Starvation is a pretty horrible way to go, and it takes enormous effort to force yourself through it; so, whatever personal/political criticisms people may have of Bobby Sands, it has to be admired, the sheer determination, integrity of personal principles, and incredible willpower that it takes, to tortuously starve yourself to death over two months, in protest.

    There aren't a whole lot of people who have both 1: the level of self-determination and willpower needed to be capable of that, or 2: the strength of belief in principals, and personal dedication to them, required in order to actually voluntarily choose that fate.


  • Options
    #9
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    They had torture but they choose not to use it.

    If they'd have started torturing Republican prisoners routinely (they already used torture in some cases) the backlash would have been even worse than what happened after the hunger strikers.

    There was a large Irish diaspora to be worried about in the UK and considerable support for Republicans that would have been even more energized had they dared.

    They knew better than to kick that hornets nest.


  • Options
    #10
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    If they'd have started torturing Republican prisoners routinely (they already used torture in some cases) the backlash would have been even worse than what happened after the hunger strikers.

    There was a large Irish diaspora to be worried about in the UK and considerable support for Republicans that would have been even more energized had they dared.

    They knew better than to kick that hornets nest.
    I'm not saying they would have done it, I'm pointing out the quote was wrong.


  • Options
    #11
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    I'm pointing out the quote was wrong.

    You can't say it was wrong, you see, because the only way of proving if the quote was wrong would be to set up a replicable experiment where Bobby Sands could have lived over-and-over again and 50% of the time he was tortured (to what ends?) and 50% of the time he was let be. After this incredible experiment if Bobby sands had 'broke' more times than not we might be able to draw the conclusion on whether the quote was wrong or not.

    Now I know you have a penchant for alternate realities but let's just work with the reality we have instead of those you'd like to conjure to underpin your dogma.

    In short, you don't even understand what you are saying.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Norwesterner
    Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭Norwesterner


    Bobby and his comrades died for political status, only for it to be later to be used and sold as a bargaining chip in the GFA negotiations.
    At the stroke of a pen, Republican prisoners in the North lost their political status in 1998.
    Now, it's not just Tories who criminalise Republican prisoners, it's " New SF" Ministers as well.

    A travesty how it all turned out, and one has to wonder if they died in vain.
    Certainly seems like it in my opinion.
    Incidentally, the family of Bobby Sands have been fighting for years to try and stop SF from profiteering on Bobbys writings and merchandise etc.


  • Options
    #13
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    You can't say it was wrong, you see, because the only way of proving if the quote was wrong would be to set up a replicable experiment where Bobby Sands could have lived over-and-over again and 50% of the time he was tortured (to what ends?) and 50% of the time he was let be. After this incredible experiment if Bobby sands had 'broke' more times than not we might be able to draw the conclusion on whether the quote was wrong or not.

    Now I know you have a penchant for alternate realities but let's just work with the reality we have instead of those you'd like to conjure to underpin your dogma.

    In short, you don't even understand what you are saying.
    You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. Everyone breaks under sustained torture. Everyone. Stop talking crap about alternate realities this is a serious subject.


  • Options
    #14
    Colash
    Registered Users Posts: 1,377 ✭✭✭Colash


    32


  • Options
    #15
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Everyone breaks under sustained torture. Everyone.

    Even people who are willing to sacrifice their lives for their cause? So they can be tortured into not not sacrificing their lives? More rubbish.
    Stop talking crap about alternate realities

    I'll make it simple for you. When you say 'should have' and 'would have' you make an assertion about your beliefs of what might have happened in some alternative universe. Why should anyone give a shit about your beliefs? The fact that you present your beliefs as some sort of rational argument is only evidence of your own poor reasoning.
    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Violence would have broken out over the national issue anyway.

    Belief.
    Do you agree with my statement that anything that was achieved in Northern Ireland up this day could have been achieved peacefully?

    Belief.


  • Options
    #16
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Starvation is a pretty horrible way to go, and it takes enormous effort to force yourself through it; so, whatever personal/political criticisms people may have of Bobby Sands, it has to be admired, the sheer determination, integrity of personal principles, and incredible willpower that it takes, to tortuously starve yourself to death over two months, in protest.

    There aren't a whole lot of people who have both 1: the level of self-determination and willpower needed to be capable of that, or 2: the strength of belief in principals, and personal dedication to them, required in order to actually voluntarily choose that fate.
    There's no doubting his level of determination, but it doesn't have to be admired at all.


  • Options
    #17
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Going to break this republican circlejerk by reminding people the man was a terrorist and doesn't deserve his martyr status.


  • Options
    #18
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    They will not criminalise us, rob us of our true identity, steal our individualism, depoliticise us, churn us out as systemised, institutionalised, decent law-abiding robots. We refuse to lie here in dishonor! We are not criminals, but Irishmen! This is the crime of which we stand accused. Never will they label our liberation struggle as criminal!


    R.I.P Bobby.

    codladh go maith mo chara.


  • Options
    #19
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    fgoig to break this republican circlejerk by reminding people the man was a terrorist and doesn't deserve his martyr status.

    The man wasn't a terrorist. The British themselves conceded to this fact when they ultimately granted political status to the prisoners.

    Based on this alone, Your post couldn't be further from the truth.


  • Options
    #20
    R P McMurphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭R P McMurphy


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    Going to break this republican circlejerk by reminding people the man was a terrorist and doesn't deserve his martyr status.

    Just out of interest, if you were forced to live as a second class citizen, not afforded any protection by the state and watched your family come under attack and be burned out of your house would you continue to bend over


  • Options
    #21
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    SamHall wrote: »
    The man wasn't a terrorist. The British themselves conceded to this fact when they ultimately granted political status to the prisoners.

    Based on this alone, Your post couldn't be further from the truth.

    He was a Provo, a member of a terrorist organization. In my eyes he's a terrorist and nothing more.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Fr Tod Umptious
    Registered Users Posts: 15,100 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    common criminal who committed suicide, don't see what the big deal is.


  • Options
    #23
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭droidman123


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    He was a Provo, a member of a terrorist organization. In my eyes he's a terrorist and nothing more.

    The biggest terrorists this country has ever seen were the british. How do you define "terrorist" ?


  • Options
    #24
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    droidman123 wrote: »
    The biggest terrorists this country has ever seen were the british. How do you define "terrorist" ?

    A member of an illegal organization that conducts a campaign of terror.


  • Options
    #25
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭droidman123


    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    common criminal who committed suicide, don't see what the big deal is.

    The fact that you admit that you can't see what the big deal is confirms your ignorance of the topic.


  • Options
    #26
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭droidman123


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    A member of an illegal organization that conducts a campaign of terror.

    Fine,so are you saying the British never conducted a campaign if terror in this country?


  • Options
    #27
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    droidman123 wrote: »
    Fine,so are you saying the British never conducted a campaign if terror in this country?

    Well no they didnt. Their operations in NI did not include the objective of a campaign of terror.


  • Options
    #28
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭droidman123


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    Well no they didnt. Their operations in NI did not include the objective of a campaign of terror.

    Well you are very blinded then.


  • Options
    #29
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    droidman123 wrote: »
    Well you are very blinded then.

    I could level the same accusation at you.


  • Options
    #30
    droidman123
    Registered Users Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭droidman123


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    I could level the same accusation at you.

    Are you seriously saying the British never terrorised catholic communities in the north?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    Well no they didnt. Their operations in NI did not include the objective of a campaign of terror.

    You've heard about bloody Sunday, right? (For starters)


Advertisement