Would the PIRA be talked about differently if they achieved a United Ireland?

In my humble opinion, all successful revolutionaries are romanticised, even here we romanticise several revolutions that all failed miserably. If they had succeeded, most of the questionable stuff would be glossed over with rose coloured paint, like what we seen happen with good old IRA.

What are your thoughts?

Samaris

History is written by the winners.

Also

"Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason." - John Harington

Atlantic Dawn

It was nostalgic to take out a few foreign soldiers occupying your country in 1916 but for some reason it wasn't acceptable in the 80's as the song goes to do the very same thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOV5WXISM24

LordSutch

Deleted User wrote: »

Would the PIRA be talked about differently if they achieved a United Ireland?

Would Hitler be takled about differently had the Nazi's won the war?

The_Valeyard

LordSutch wrote: »

Would Hitler be takled about differently had the Nazi's won the war?

Watch: Man in the High Castle

LordSutch

... in other words, if if if if.

But they didn't.

not yet

I believe when we have a united Ireland (and we will)... an Ireland that should never have been partitioned to begin with, all the struggles, of all brave Irishmen will be acknowledged..

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

If they had succeeded...

It remains to be seen in the longer term. As far as Republicans are concerned the Good Friday Agreement is little but a staging post on their aim of a United Ireland. Union/loyalists pretend the GFA is the end of the UI question but they know it isn't which is why they refuse to call SF's bluff on a border poll they'd comfortably win.

Why do union/loyalists refuse to win a border poll on a UI? Because they don't even want the idea of a UI to be alive in the public consciousness never mind having to debate it in favour of moaning about manhole covers, flegs, and not being allowed to march by the Ardoyne shops.

RayM

I suspect they'd be talked about slightly differently if Sinn Fein weren't currently posing an electoral threat to the establishment parties. The rhetoric from the political establishment nowadays reminds me of Unionists in the mid-90s.

uck51js9zml2yt

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Watch: Man in the High Castle

Excellent series !

Cathy.C

Deleted User wrote: »

Would the PIRA be talked about differently if they achieved a United Ireland?

With regards to how Irish people speak about them?

No, I don't think so, as nobody can ever justify putting a bomb in a crowded pub full of young people and blowing it, and them, to smithereens.

Cathy.C

Cathy.C wrote: »

With regards to how Irish people speak about them?

No, I don't think so, as nobody can ever justify putting a bomb in a crowded pub full of young people and blowing it, and them, to smithereens.

The "Old" IRA committed some despicable atrocities too, yet they're spoken of with great pride and honour.

fatknacker

No, they have no vision for a nation most of us want to be a part of. They're seen as a bunch of skangery thugs who are incapable of doing anything useful for a united Ireland, they resort to violence and fear at any chance. At best, they exist as a resistance as a result of the troubles in North but for the most part, have little interest in creating a peaceful and inclusive country that we could all stand behind.

LordSutch

Deleted User wrote: »

The "Old" IRA committed some despicable atrocities too, yet they're spoken of with great pride and honour.

Great pride & honour you say; Not by my wifes family, who escaped/fled Cork to escape their clutches, but only after their house was torched...

Sheep Lover

LordSutch wrote: »

Great pride & honour you say; Not by my wifes family, who escaped/fled Cork to escape their clutches, but only after their house was torched...

Is that story like the "my grandad was in the GPO in 1916" but for unionists?

LordSutch

Sheep Lover wrote: »

Is that story like the "my grandad was in the GPO in 1916" but for unionists?

No idea.

I'm old school.

I like the idea of Republicanism...but once you bomb women and children to leave their parents collect their entrails off nearby trees and streets, I'm out.

realdanbreen

RayM wrote: »

I suspect they'd be talked about slightly differently if Sinn Fein weren't currently posing an electoral threat to the establishment parties. The rhetoric from the political establishment nowadays reminds me of Unionists in the mid-90s.

The 'establishment ' parties as you call them realise now after the last election that SF have peaked. The fact that they hadn't the ability to make more gains in the climate of austerity means their policies are seen as being just populoust pie in the sky.

Cathy.C

Deleted User wrote: »

The "Old" IRA committed some despicable atrocities too, yet they're spoken of with great pride and honour.

Innocent people died at the hands of the 'old IRA' but they don't compae to the likes of the PIRA. They may have had common goals but that is pretty much were the similarities began and ended. The PIRA indiscriminately targeted civilians with the likes of the Birmingham bombings (1974), the Enniskillen bombing (1987), the Warrington Bomb Attacks (1993) and the Omagh bombing (1998).

The 'old IRA' NEVER purposefully targeted civilians to anywhere near the same objectionable degree that the PIRA did. Again, yes, innocent life was lost at times, on both sides, but killing and maiming innocent people was never a goal of the old IRA as it quite clearly was for the PIRA, and of course at times, the British Government.

tomwaterford

Cathy.C wrote: »

Innocent people died at the hands of the 'old IRA' but they don't compae to the likes of the PIRA. They may have had common goals but that is pretty much were the similarities began and ended. The PIRA indiscriminately targeted civilians with the likes of the Birmingham bombings (1974), the Enniskillen bombing (1987), the Warrington Bomb Attacks (1993) and the Omagh bombing (1998).

The 'old IRA' NEVER purposefully targeted civilians to anywhere near the same objectionable degree that the PIRA did. Again, yes, innocent life was lost at times, on both sides, but killing and maiming innocent people was never a goal of the old IRA as it quite clearly was for the PIRA, and of course at times, the British Government.

Quite why you include the omagh bombing in a thread about the PIRA suggests you don't know what your talking about

Filmer Paradise

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm old school.

I like the idea of Republicanism...but once you bomb women and children to leave their parents collect their entrails off nearby trees and streets, I'm out.

I'd be of the same opinion. Also I'd add that most of the puppet-masters of the operation were evil scum.

Cathy.C

tomwaterford wrote: »

Quite why you include the omagh bombing in a thread about the PIRA suggests you don't know what your talking about

Oh give me a break. I see the point scoring has started early. It was quite obvious what my point was, and is. Yes, the RIRA carried out Omagh, but they were after all dissident members of the PIRA, were they not, and so lets not pretend there is all that much of difference between the two.

The whole point of the thread is to ask has the IRA of old being romanticized in comparison to the so called equivalent republican groups of recent times and if their goals had been archived, would they be seen in the same light as they are now. My response is 'No, they wouldn't' based on the fact that these newer bastardized versions of the old IRA, be that the PIRA or the RIRA, are not feet to wipe their boots considering how they showed total and utter disregard for not just innocent life, but innocent life quite often on a large scale.

Atlantic Dawn

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm old school.

I like the idea of Republicanism...but once you bomb women and children to leave their parents collect their entrails off nearby trees and streets, I'm out.

But what if the occupying force bomb women and children to leave their parents collect their entrails off nearby trees and streets initially? Probably with carpet bombing or cruise missiles but same idea?

tomwaterford

Cathy.C wrote: »

Oh give me a break. I see the point scoring has started early. It was quite obvious what my point was, and is. Yes, the RIRA carried out Omagh, but they were after all dissident members of the PIRA, were they not, and so lets not pretend there is all that much of difference between the two.

The whole point of the thread is to ask has the IRA of old being romanticized in comparison to the so called equivalent today and if their goals had been archived, would they be seen in the same light. My response is no based on the fact that these newer bastardized versions of the old IRA, be that the PIRA or the RIRA, are not feet to wipe their boots considering how they showed total and utter disregard for not just innocent life, but innocent life quite often on a large scale.

And let's not forget....more innocents died in the 2 year war of indeoendane vs a 30 odd year troubles?



If anything the killing and violence was on a different scale and intensity during the war of independance and was getting so bitter towards the end that it was on the brink of a simultaneous civil war....

mzungu

Even if they had, would it stop Gerry from spouting tripe on Twitter?

Phoebas

mzungu wrote: »

Even if they had, would it stop Gerry from spouting tripe on Twitter?

If Gerry ever gets into power:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C_Lo4fOJqU

KingBrian2

The PIRA unlike the old IRB are a criminal outfit. Yes we do romanticize about the deeds of those Republicans that does not mean with condone those acts. The IRB of that era were defending the rights of Irish people to self rule and self defense. Today's lot are a sectarian drug cartel that invoke the Easter Rebellion for their own ends. It is not about Irish claims to become an independent republic rather it is a warning sign to gvt, other dissidents and the community at large to stay clear from our territory.

Filmer Paradise

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The PIRA unlike the old IRB are a criminal outfit. Yes we do romanticize about the deeds of those Republicans that does not mean with condone those acts. The IRB of that era were defending the rights of Irish people to self rule and self defense. Today's lot are a sectarian drug cartel that invoke the Easter Rebellion for their own ends. It is not about Irish claims to become an independent republic rather it is a warning sign to gvt, other dissidents and the community at large to stay clear from our territory.

I agree. The leadership of PIRA had a ready made population of uneducated, disaffected & gullible young people to manipulate.

And boy, did they make a bad situation worse! They did it with relish. And for what? Eh?

PURE EVIL SCUM.

Fleawuss

Reddit. Reddit.

Atlantic Dawn

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The PIRA unlike the old IRB are a criminal outfit. Yes we do romanticize about the deeds of those Republicans that does not mean with condone those acts. The IRB of that era were defending the rights of Irish people to self rule and self defense. Today's lot are a sectarian drug cartel that invoke the Easter Rebellion for their own ends. It is not about Irish claims to become an independent republic rather it is a warning sign to gvt, other dissidents and the community at large to stay clear from our territory.

How would an organised people oppose an occupying superpower on a officially approved finanancial fair play ground, would they have to apply for a Lottery grant to purchase their weaponry to make it fair and ok?

IrishTrajan

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm old school.

I like the idea of Republicanism...but once you bomb women and children to leave their parents collect their entrails off nearby trees and streets, I'm out.

You'd have preferred if they'd killed the parents too?

IrishTrajan

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The PIRA unlike the old IRB are a criminal outfit. Yes we do romanticize about the deeds of those Republicans that does not mean with condone those acts. The IRB of that era were defending the rights of Irish people to self rule and self defense. Today's lot are a sectarian drug cartel that invoke the Easter Rebellion for their own ends. It is not about Irish claims to become an independent republic rather it is a warning sign to gvt, other dissidents and the community at large to stay clear from our territory.

You know the IRA came out to "defend" the rights of Irish people to self-rule and self-defence during the opening stages of the Troubles? Because those Irish living in the North are still Irish, you can't say the IRB was faultless and selfless, and turn and say the PIRA was nothing like them.

ThinkProgress

Old IRA - New IRA... Who cares!!

United Ireland is a pipe dream that will never happen. PIRA just existed so that bad people could do horrible things in the name of something!

Those bad people would have found another "cause" either way.

We blew our chance for a united Ireland a long time ago. Modern republicanism was a waste of time and lives. It's finished now... Unionists will never accept a UI - they would tear the place apart up there if it ever looked like a possibility.

It's more important that NI is a place where people can live, work and not be in constant fear. One day both sides will let go of the tribalism and just live their lives...

Lurkio

LordSutch wrote: »

... in other words, if if if if.

But they didn't.

Hai Sutch.

"If" indeed. Great movie, btw.

JustTheOne

Kneecapping people.
Diesel laundering.
kidnapping horses.
Blowing up kids.
stabbing someone in a packed pub and cleaning the evidence and threatening any witnesses who goes forward.
Robbing post offices then killing members of AGS.
Burying a mother of 11 in a field.

To name a few. How can anyone tell me this is noble behaviour that we should all be proud of in pursuing our dream of a united Ireland?

JustTheOne

JustTheOne wrote: »

Kneecapping people.
Diesel laundering.
kidnapping horses.
Blowing up kids.
stabbing someone in a packed pub and cleaning the evidence and threatening any witnesses who goes forward.
Robbing post offices then killing members of AGS.
Burying a mother of 11 in a field.

To name a few. How can anyone tell me this is noble behaviour that we should all be proud of in pursuing our dream of a united Ireland?

But the "Old IRA" were just as ruthless, no?

end of the road

fatknacker wrote: »

No, they have no vision for a nation most of us want to be a part of. They're seen as a bunch of skangery thugs who are incapable of doing anything useful for a united Ireland, they resort to violence and fear at any chance. At best, they exist as a resistance as a result of the troubles in North but for the most part, have little interest in creating a peaceful and inclusive country that we could all stand behind.

you must be getting mixed up with another group. 1 step on the ladder of creating a nation we want to be part of and which we can get behind has been achieved. that is a peaceful northern ireland. the next step is to unite both north and south as the 32 county sovern legitimate republic free from british rule. it will happen but it will take time and the people will be free and happy in the home nation. we will be a nation once again one day, of that i have no doubt.

Cathy.C wrote: »

Innocent people died at the hands of the 'old IRA' but they don't compae to the likes of the PIRA. They may have had common goals but that is pretty much were the similarities began and ended. The PIRA indiscriminately targeted civilians with the likes of the Birmingham bombings (1974), the Enniskillen bombing (1987), the Warrington Bomb Attacks (1993) and the Omagh bombing (1998).

The 'old IRA' NEVER purposefully targeted civilians to anywhere near the same objectionable degree that the PIRA did. Again, yes, innocent life was lost at times, on both sides, but killing and maiming innocent people was never a goal of the old IRA as it quite clearly was for the PIRA, and of course at times, the British Government.

slaughtering innocent civilians wasn't the goal of the PIRA. it was absolutely the goal of the british army to kill civilians. the Omagh bombing was not carried out by the PIRA. there are huge differences between the provos and any other groups calling themselves the IRA.

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Old IRA - New IRA... Who cares!!

United Ireland is a pipe dream that will never happen. PIRA just existed so that bad people could do horrible things in the name of something!

Those bad people would have found another "cause" either way.

We blew our chance for a united Ireland a long time ago. Modern republicanism was a waste of time and lives. It's finished now... Unionists will never accept a UI - they would tear the place apart up there if it ever looked like a possibility.

It's more important that NI is a place where people can live, work and not be in constant fear. One day both sides will let go of the tribalism and just live their lives...

a united ireland is a reality that will happen in time. the provos existed to protect the catholic population from the NI government and BA. the vast majority of the members of the PIRA would not have found another cause. we have not blown our chance for a united ireland dispite all the things those who are against the 32 county republic have done. achieveing the goal of a united ireland is not, never will be, and never was a waste of time, and it isn't and never will be finished until the goal is realised, which it will. unionists won't accept anythin but the reality is that they wouldn't be able to tare up the place as they have no support now unlike before. the british government and military won't be providing support.

ohnonotgmail

[QUOTE=end of the road;99595011



slaughtering innocent civilians wasn't the goal of the PIRA. it was absolutely the goal of the british army to kill civilians. the Omagh bombing was not carried out by the PIRA. there are huge differences between the provos and any other groups calling themselves the IRA.


[/QUOTE]

So they were just unlucky when they set off bombs in public places that slaughtered innocent civilians? and they were just unlucky when they shot people in the back of the head and buried them in the middle of nowhere and didnt tell their families where? A great bunch o' lads the IRA, just fierce unlucky.

Carlos Orange

LordSutch wrote: »

Would Hitler be takled about differently had the Nazi's won the war?

Would a better comparison not be will Hitler be talked about differently if the EU becomes a single country?

BMMachine

I'd be talked about differently if I managed to climb Everest and voyage down the Marianas Trench at the same time. But unfortunately that is impossible so I won't be talked about differently, much like the PIRA won't be as its impossible for them to unite Ireland. I'm currently talked about as a man who is handsome, tough strong, funny and an amazing dancer with an fascinating past and an amazing future and the PIRA are talked about as gangsters who hold back progress. Reality is a bitch

BMMachine

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Watch: Man in the High Castle

Read: Man in the High Castle

Carlos Orange

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

So they were just unlucky when they set off bombs in public places that slaughtered innocent civilians? and they were just unlucky when they shot people in the back of the head and buried them in the middle of nowhere and didnt tell their families where? A great bunch o' lads the IRA, just fierce unlucky.

To be fair, who could have foreseen civilian casualties when bombing busy city center pubs.

JustTheOne

Laughable to say tho British army killed civilians on purpose but the other side didn't.

What about the 12 protestants killed on the bus or the proxy bombs?

And I'm sure if the British army were targeting civilians on purpose they would have noticed up 100's of thousands of casualties during the 30 years.

Both sides targeted civilians but not constantly everyday.

KlausFlouride

Deleted User wrote: »

But the "Old IRA" were just as ruthless, no?

The "Old IRA" were as ruthless; guerrilla wars by their nature devolve into atrocity and counter atrocity. Civilian "informers" were executed. They're (naturally) just not remembered/ talked about as much as the British atrocities.

armaghlad

LordSutch wrote: »

Would Hitler be takled about differently had the Nazi's won the war?

Didn't take long...

empacher

Ita narrow minded to criticise ira, pira, rira or whatever dissident break off you can name on civillian deaths. Just because its more recent in our history.

When the brittish caused the deaths of millions directly and indirectly on this island alone.

Too much bloodshed on a small island. To blame one side or another is idiotic. When both sides caused suffering.

We should always look forward learn from mistakes and possibly unite the island if it can result in the creation of a better country.

ohnonotgmail

empacher wrote: »

Ita narrow minded to criticise ira, pira, rira or whatever dissident break off you can name on civillian deaths. Just because its more recent in our history.

When the brittish caused the deaths of millions directly and indirectly on this island alone.

Too much bloodshed on a small island. To blame one side or another is idiotic. When both sides caused suffering.

We should always look forward learn from mistakes and possibly unite the island if it can result in the creation of a better country.

is that what you call setting off a bomb in a city center pub?

armaghlad

The PIRA carried out some reprehensible acts.

Did they target civilians? Probably, yes, they didn't claim the likes of Kingsmill massacre but it's likely they did do it, or elements within their ranks were at least involved, with suspected British intelligence directing it.

Was targeting civilians part of the IRA's raison d'etre? Absolutely not. They'd have wiped out whole towns with no warning bombs if they wanted to kill as many civilians as possible.

Was targeting civilians part of the British Army's raison d'etre. On the face of it, no, however they were involved in directing Loyalist terrorism who's very raison d'etre was to kill civilians, Catholic civilians to be precise. This how they "brought the fight to the IRA"; while also providing an opportunity to act on their sectarian hatred.

So I find it rather amusing, when people display this sense of faux hysterics over IRA actions, all the while blissfully unaware that Loyalists were killing civilians under the protection and direction of British state agencies.

I know which one is the lesser of two evils.

ThinkProgress

end of the road wrote: »

a united ireland is a reality that will happen in time.

No, it's not and it won't.

It's a lost cause... and most in the south don't seem to give a sh*t about it either. Many in the north don't care anymore either. That's what years of violence and terrorism does to people!

But go on and explain the master plan for republicanism to bring about a UI. Because I don't see anything that resembles any kind of coherent plan to accomplish it... just empty rhetoric from hollow yesterday-men like Adams and Mcguinness.

armaghlad

ThinkProgress wrote: »

No, it's not and it won't.

It's a lost cause... and most in the south don't seem to give a sh*t about it either. Many in the north don't care anymore either. That's what years of violence and terrorism does to people!

But go on and explain the master plan for republicanism to bring about a UI. Because I don't see anything that resembles any kind of coherent plan to accomplish it... just empty rhetoric from hollow yesterday-men like Adams and Mcguinness.

Hardly a lost cause when there's a mechanism enshrined in law to facilitate it...

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

In my humble opinion, all successful revolutionaries are romanticised, even here we romanticise several revolutions that all failed miserably. If they had succeeded, most of the questionable stuff would be glossed over with rose coloured paint, like what we seen happen with good old IRA.

What are your thoughts?

Probably.

Though if some sectarian crap went on in the NE of Ireland there'd be lots of questions asked.

As time goes on most people can look back in history objectively.