ISIS vs The IRA ?

Iwasfrozen · 06-05-2015 07:41PM

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

The British were a big bunch of immoral psychopaths.
They couldn't stop the IRA. Good always triumphs over evil.
They shouldn't have been trying to stop us because they shouldn't have come here in the first place.
The Wolfe Tones are very accurate when they write songs. In their song 'Rock on Rockall' we hear phrases such as "The greedy eye of England" and "Britain's greedy hands". So true, so true.

The British caused the Potato Famine.

If I ever get my hands on a time machine, a big ass gun and a vast quantity of bullets, I know where I'm going.

lol internet tough guy. If you had a time machine and a gun you'd shít yourself.

To Elland Back · 06-05-2015 07:42PM

Contest wouldn't happen. Both sides are cowardly murderous scum who only prey on the innocent. Doubt they would have the stomach for a fight among equals

end of the road · 06-05-2015 07:45PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Winning sides don't agree to decommission unconditional to the terms of the agreement. The IRA were forced to come to the table as they realized long before their armed campaign wasn't going to work.

oh it worked. once the bombs went off in britain the british government knew there was no other option but to come to the table.

06-05-2015 07:45PM

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

The British were a big bunch of immoral psychopaths.
They couldn't stop the IRA. Good always triumphs over evil...

Whew. When they blew up kids on the streets if Warrington or queuing with their grandparents in Frizzells fish shop on a Friday afternoon I'm glad it was in the name of being good.

Just think, isn't it great they didn't do anything evil...

end of the road · 06-05-2015 07:47PM

To Elland Back wrote: »

Contest wouldn't happen. Both sides are cowardly murderous scum who only prey on the innocent. Doubt they would have the stomach for a fight among equals

only applies to isis. the IRA never deliberately killed civilians, it was an accident.

Fratton Fred · 06-05-2015 07:49PM

end of the road wrote: »

untrue. it was a win. they force the british to the table, and if the british didn't agree there would be more bombs.

Military objective of the PIRA as per the Green Book in 1977.

"By now it is clear that our task is not only to kill as many enemy personnel as possible but of equal importance to create support which will carry us not only through a war of liberation which could last another decade but which will support us past the 'Brits Out' stage to the ultimate aim of a Democratic Socialist Republic."

last time I was in Belfast, they were still using Sterling, the Post Boxes were red and the number plates yellow.

Fratton Fred · 06-05-2015 07:51PM

end of the road wrote: »

only applies to isis. the IRA never deliberately killed civilians, it was an accident.

Comedy gold.

Father Ted Crilly · 06-05-2015 07:53PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Whew. When they blew up kids on the streets if Warrington or queuing with their grandparents in Frizzells fish shop on a Friday afternoon I'm glad it was in the name of being good.

Just think, isn't it great they didn't do anything evil...

Oh I'm sorry if you've never heard of the Black and Tans.

The very same people who went around burning people's houses down and killing people (and because your ageist, children too) who had nothing to do with the IRA. And they did it every time a little bit of resistance was shown to British rule.

The Diabolical Monocle · 06-05-2015 07:54PM

LordSutch wrote: »

Thing is though, you can't really compare a professional sophisticated world class army, to an embedded terrorist movement who hide among the community like ticks!

you leave la resistance francaise out of this Fritz.

Iwasfrozen · 06-05-2015 07:56PM

end of the road wrote: »

oh it worked. once the bombs went off in britain the british government knew there was no other option but to come to the table.

The British imposed conditions to talks, the conditions being that the IRA must decommission once an agreement was made regardless of the terms of the agreement.

The important part here is the British imposed conditions to talks, defeated sides don't impose conditions and winning sides don't agree to decommission before a treaty is signed.

Fratton Fred · 06-05-2015 07:57PM

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry if you've never heard of the Black and Tans.

The very same people who went around burning people's houses down and killing people (and because your ageist, children too) who had nothing to do with the IRA. And they did it every time a little bit of resistance was shown to British rule.

I like this guy, he funny.

The Diabolical Monocle · 06-05-2015 07:58PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

last time I was in Belfast, they were still using Sterling, the Post Boxes were red and the number plates yellow.

only costs the GB taxpayer a 7 billion pound annual subvention.

epic win.

end of the road · 06-05-2015 08:13PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Military objective of the PIRA as per the Green Book in 1977.

last time I was in Belfast, they were still using Sterling, the Post Boxes were red and the number plates yellow.

thats temporary. a united ireland will happen as its meant to be. the IRA slaughtered many BA persons and the BA never could defeat them

end of the road · 06-05-2015 08:16PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The British imposed conditions to talks, the conditions being that the IRA must decommission once an agreement was made regardless of the terms of the agreement.

well, that meant nothing. if the agreement didn't go in the IRA'S favour, then bomb bomb.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The important part here is the British imposed conditions to talks, defeated sides don't impose conditions and winning sides don't agree to decommission before a treaty is signed.

and as the british didn't "win" they agreed to their part of the deal. as the agreement went in the IRA'S favour, they agreed to their part also.

end of the road · 06-05-2015 08:19PM

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

only costs the GB taxpayer a 7 billion pound annual subvention.

epic win.

12000000000

Iwasfrozen · 06-05-2015 08:24PM

end of the road wrote: »

well, that meant nothing. if the agreement didn't go in the IRA'S favour, then bomb bomb.

The IRA had already agreed to decomission before an agreement had been reached.

and as the british didn't "win" they agreed to their part of the deal. as the agreement went in the IRA'S favour, they agreed to their part also.

I disagree the agreement was in nationalist favor. But regardless we can agree the IRA didn't "win".

ghostfacekilla · 06-05-2015 08:27PM

Are either of them hiring interns does anyone know?

It's slightly easier to tell strange women that on the internet than dropping the 'job bridge' bomb.

06-05-2015 08:33PM

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry if you've never heard of the Black and Tans.

The very same people who went around burning people's houses down and killing people (and because your ageist, children too) who had nothing to do with the IRA. And they did it every time a little bit of resistance was shown to British rule.

Ah sure of course, I forgot, they blew up the kids in Warrington cos a de Black n Tans.

That was a fierce good point. And shows you understand the IRA campaign very well. I guess they rammed the La Mon with incendiary devices, not to burn people, but to have a go at the Auxies.

end of the road · 06-05-2015 08:34PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The IRA had already agreed to decomission before an agreement had been reached.

I disagree the agreement was in nationalist favor. But regardless we can agree the IRA didn't "win".

but they did win against the BA. they killed more BA fighters then BA killed IRA. they stopped the BA slaughtering by force. that to me is a win

06-05-2015 08:36PM

end of the road wrote: »

only applies to isis. the IRA never deliberately killed civilians, it was an accident.

You disgust me

smurgen · 06-05-2015 08:37PM

I'm not even sure the ira really exist anymore. its just a bunch of criminals turning profits from crime at this stage. Even at their biggest the ira. Were alot less equipped than ISIS. isis are like a fully kitted out legitimate army that use terrorism to expand control quickly.it wouldn't even be close on a battlefield.

Arsemageddon · 06-05-2015 08:40PM

BREAKING NEWS

ISIS launch first strike in war against Nordies....

smurgen · 06-05-2015 08:40PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ah sure of course, I forgot, they blew up the kids in Warrington cos a de Black n Tans.

That was a fierce good point. And shows you understand the IRA campaign very well. I guess they rammed the La Mon with incendiary devices, not to burn people, but to have a go at the Auxies.

collateral damage to hit a very important target.extemely regrettable and I myself find it horrific however I see it as being no different to U.S drones which have killed thousands to eliminate a few dozen targets.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147

Father Ted Crilly · 06-05-2015 08:42PM

We can all agree that England is messed up. They attack you then promise to leave you alone if you give them part of your country.

The British are evil. The IRA fought for a Republic, they got it. It doesn't make any sense. They weren't playing a game of chess. They were fighting over a country. The country belonged to the Irish and the English randomly came in. I find it ridiculous that when someone says "Northern Ireland" they're referring to a different country. UNITED IRELAND!

Iwasfrozen · 06-05-2015 08:44PM

end of the road wrote: »

but they did win against the BA. they killed more BA fighters then BA killed IRA. they stopped the BA slaughtering by force. that to me is a win

Victory isn't defined by who kills more of the enemy. Victory is defined by who imposes conditions on peace talks and in that sense the British won.

06-05-2015 08:46PM

smurgen wrote: »

collateral damage to hit a very important target.extemely regrettable and I myself find it horrific however I see it as being no different to U.S drones which have killed thousands to eliminate a few dozen targets.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147

The argument he made was that it was linked to the Black and Tans.

What was the very important target in those Warrington shops though?

Fratton Fred · 06-05-2015 08:47PM

smurgen wrote: »

collateral damage to hit a very important target.extemely regrettable and I myself find it horrific however I see it as being no different to U.S drones which have killed thousands to eliminate a few dozen targets.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147

What was important about the La Mon hotel?

Fratton Fred · 06-05-2015 08:50PM

end of the road wrote: »

but they did win against the BA. they killed more BA fighters then BA killed IRA. they stopped the BA slaughtering by force. that to me is a win

So the British objective was to restore peace to Northern Ireland, the PIRA's was to bring about a United socialist Republic.

But the PIRA won?

How Do you come to that conclusion? Last I saw, the Union Flag still flies over Londonderry.

Father Ted Crilly · 06-05-2015 08:52PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Victory isn't defined by who kills more of the enemy. Victory is defined by who imposes conditions on peace talks and in that sense the British won.

I am about to rage. I cannot see how the British won. They are at wrong here. They had no right to come to Ireland and take it for themselves.
The IRA fought for our republic, if they never did what they did we'd be surrounded by people with fruitcake accents and caaaas with yellow plates.

I have total respect for the IRA.

06-05-2015 08:56PM

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

...if they never did what they did we'd be surrounded by people with fruitcake accents and caaaas with yellow plates.

And da Black n Tans...

ISIS vs The IRA ?

Comments