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

Esel

timthumbni wrote: »

Interestingly as a NI unionist I don't differentiate the current republican threat from that of the Provos a wheen of years back. Similarly doomed to fail of course but whatever.

It's nice tO see that the Irish republican terrorists are now seen as a similar level of threat as the Muslim extremists.

Laughable, but not funny.

Are bowlers more comfortable than blinkers?

"The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on."

LordSutch

Esel wrote: »

Laughable, but not funny.

Are bowlers more comfortable than blinkers?

"The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on."

"Re the current threat" I think timthumbni has a point whatever the current IRA moniker.
Be it real IRA, continuity IRA, new IRA or any other variation.

Surely we've all had our fill of terrorism in these islands?

armaghlad

timthumbni wrote: »

Interestingly as a NI unionist I don't differentiate the current republican threat from that of the Provos a wheen of years back. Similarly doomed to fail of course but whatever.

It's nice tO see that the Irish republican terrorists are now seen as a similar level of threat as the Muslim extremists.

What's nice about it? Surely it'd be a worrying prospect? Or is this just you going in Willie Frazer mode?

timthumbni

armaghlad wrote: »

What's nice about it? Surely it'd be a worrying prospect? Or is this just you going in Willie Frazer mode?

Your sarcasm detector must be broken. And please tell me you aren't another of those morons who gives that idiot Frazer publicity. You should try ladfleg. They can barely post about any issue in Northern Ireland without one of the very clever (sarcasm just to let you know) comments mentioning Willie afterwards. It's almost comical but not in the way they think.

How one man, who has little to zero support from unionists (check out when he stood for election) has managed to get under the skin of so many republicans is amazing. I seem to remember having this discussion with another poster when he brought his name up. Willie is a troll, and nationalists not only feed him but lay on a luxurious 10 course dinner, followed up with a relaxing massage for him.

BalcombeSt4

timthumbni wrote: »

Interestingly as a NI unionist I don't differentiate the current republican threat from that of the Provos a wheen of years back. Similarly doomed to fail of course but whatever.

It's nice tO see that the Irish republican terrorists are now seen as a similar level of threat as the Muslim extremists.

You mean it's to nice dissident Republicans be at the level of threat they've aspired to be at for propaganda reasons?

Fair enough.

BalcombeSt4

tomwaterford wrote: »

The border campaign of the 50s is held in huge esteem for keeping the flame of Irish freedom alive


Support or not....once British are in Ireland there'll always be people willing to risk life and liberty for Irish freedom

(Personally wouldn't....but think it's wrong to critism those who do as what's different today vs 1916)

It might be now but it was seen as a disaster within the movement itself. Afterwards the organization moved to the far-left which basically destroyed the military aspect of the IRA. There was no way anybody could have predicted in 1962 the events that happened in the in the late 60's that led to the conditions for the creation of the Officials and Provos.

And I don't think 1916 shouldn't be looked at uncritically.

KingBrian2

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

It might be now but it was seen as a disaster within the movement itself. Afterwards the organization moved to the far-left which basically destroyed the military aspect of the IRA. There was no way anybody could have predicted in 1962 the events that happened in the in the late 60's that led to the conditions for the creation of the Officials and Provos.

And I don't think 1916 shouldn't be looked at uncritically.

I have to come in on this 1916 is constantly criticized. You never stop hearing academics, politicians & authors talking non stop about the brutal nature of the combat. The pro's and cons. It is spoken about ad nausea. Maybe if the IRA/UVF war was talked about as much we might get some of the venom out.

We in the Republic are proud of our rebel hero's but when Unionist politicians describe them in comparison to Islamic terrorists the likes of Connolly, Pearse & Clarke knowing all we know about them now, the good and the bad their statements are dangerous. They don't call General Washington who was a slaveholder a terrorist and they seem to ignore an entire period in history when the French went mad and killed all their leaders in the name of Jacobin principles.

Revisionism is one aspect so is selective history.

armaghlad

timthumbni wrote: »

Your sarcasm detector must be broken. And please tell me you aren't another of those morons who gives that idiot Frazer publicity. You should try ladfleg. They can barely post about any issue in Northern Ireland without one of the very clever (sarcasm just to let you know) comments mentioning Willie afterwards. It's almost comical but not in the way they think.

How one man, who has little to zero support from unionists (check out when he stood for election) has managed to get under the skin of so many republicans is amazing. I seem to remember having this discussion with another poster when he brought his name up. Willie is a troll, and nationalists not only feed him but lay on a luxurious 10 course dinner, followed up with a relaxing massage for him.

How would I "give him publicity"?

Do you think I host facebook or something?

Gave him numerous tv interviews?

If you mean do I watch and piss myself laughing at his incoherent sectarian ramblings that pop up on facebook, then yes, guilty your honour. That isnt getting under people's skin, that's enjoying his special brand of comedy. That's not to say he isn't a bigoted, sinister reptile however. He does propagate lies about sectarian murders carried out by his UDR/UVF heroes so if someone did let him get under their skin, would you not understand why?

As for LAD, I know all about it, it's good satire, taking the complete piss, the right wing British nationalists get the brunt of it but sure they bring it upon themselves

2011

These threads always turn out the same.....:mad:

BalcombeSt4

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I have to come in on this 1916 is constantly criticized. You never stop hearing academics, politicians & authors talking non stop about the brutal nature of the combat. The pro's and cons. It is spoken about ad nausea. Maybe if the IRA/UVF war was talked about as much we might get some of the venom out.

We in the Republic are proud of our rebel hero's but when Unionist politicians describe them in comparison to Islamic terrorists the likes of Connolly, Pearse & Clarke knowing all we know about them now, the good and the bad their statements are dangerous. They don't call General Washington who was a slaveholder a terrorist and they seem to ignore an entire period in history when the French went mad and killed all their leaders in the name of Jacobin principles.

Revisionism is one aspect so is selective history.

Yes, me to and I do think it's laughable to compare them to any terrorist threat coming out of the Middle East.
But even tho I look at it overall as a good thing I still think aspects of it can be criticized, For example General Tom Barry (the man who led this nation to it's two greatest victories at Kilmichael and Crossbarry) criticized the planning of the rising and also criticized Tones & Emmets planning of the 1798 & 1803 risings. But their were civilians killed by rebels during the 1916 rising and unarmed people shot in the back and there were massacres carried out by the United Irishmen against Protestant civilians, these are just facts. You can still be a Republican, be on the left and be proud of past generations while at the same time being critical of actions taken by military aspect of our movement. I'm sure and hope British people who support their armed forces would have no hesitation in condemning Bloody Sunday, the Ballymurphy and Springhill massacres, Dunloy, Coagh, Gibraltar etc....

marienbad

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Yes, me to and I do think it's laughable to compare them to any terrorist threat coming out of the Middle East.
But even tho I look at it overall as a good thing I still think aspects of it can be criticized, For example General Tom Barry (the man who led this nation to it's two greatest victories at Kilmichael and Crossbarry) criticized the planning of the rising and also criticized Tones & Emmets planning of the 1798 & 1803 risings. But their were civilians killed by rebels during the 1916 rising and unarmed people shot in the back and there were massacres carried out by the United Irishmen against Protestant civilians, these are just facts. You can still be a Republican, be on the left and be proud of past generations while at the same time being critical of actions taken by military aspect of our movement. I'm sure and hope British people who support their armed forces would have no hesitation in condemning Bloody Sunday, the Ballymurphy and Springhill massacres, Dunloy, Coagh, Gibraltar etc....

Great post , I would go as far as to say it is essential that we review our past and accept the rights and the wrongs of it . And every generation should do so .

BalcombeSt4

2011 wrote: »

These threads always turn out the same.....:mad:

With people voicing their opinions?

maryishere

timthumbni wrote: »

It's nice tO see that the Irish republican terrorists are now seen as a similar level of threat as the Muslim extremists.

+1. Even Cardinal T Dolan of New York last year compared the IRA to ISIS. Thats how most in the world views terrorists since 9/11, no great surprise there.
http://www.thejournal.ie/isis-ira-1976248-Mar2015/

Appointed by Pope Benedict XVI, Dolan serves as the tenth and current Archbishop of New York. Time Magazine named Dolan one of the "100 Most Influential People in the World" for 2012.

marienbad

2011 wrote: »

These threads always turn out the same.....:mad:

Actually this has been an outstanding thread imho

marienbad

maryishere wrote: »

+1. Even Cardinal T Dolan of New York last year compared the IRA to ISIS. Thats how most in the world views terrorists since 9/11, no great surprise there.
http://www.thejournal.ie/isis-ira-1976248-Mar2015/

I would in no way be a supporter of PIRA but this comparison is just wrong . All he is effectively saying is that any armed struggle against any government is the same as ISIS . In other words rubbish .

Would he say the same about opposition to Pinochet ,Galtieri or any of the other vicious governments that dotted the globe ? Or just the ones he (and you) don't like ?

maryishere

Cardinal Dolan, the Catholic Archbishop of New York, drew comparisons between the sustained PIRA bombing campaign and that of ISIS. Also what about the different scales of ethnic cleansing by comparing border areas in N. Ireland to parts of the middle East.
Most democrats in the world do not support terrorism, certainly post 9/11, so no great surprise the well respected Cardinal Dolan made the comparison.

marienbad wrote: »

Would he say the same about opposition to Pinochet ,Galtieri or any of the other vicious governments that dotted the globe ? Or just the ones he (and you) don't like ?

Just as the Pope condemned the PIRA when he was in Co. Louth in 1979 and appealed for them to stop, I suspect Cardinal Dolan would not condone the methods used by the PIRA/ INLA against any government.

marienbad

maryishere wrote: »

Cardinal Dolan, the Catholic Archbishop of New York, drew comparisons between the sustained PIRA bombing campaign and that of ISIS. Also what about the different scales of ethnic cleansing by comparing border areas in N. Ireland to parts of the middle East.
Most democrats in the world do not support terrorism, certainly post 9/11, so no great surprise the well respected Cardinal Dolan made the comparison.

It is not a question of supporting or not supporting 'terrorism' , if he wishes to make analogies at least he could take the trouble to get it right . He doesn't have very far to look https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Crusade

maryishere

lol. He was talking about 20th and 21st century world, not going back to 1147 ffs !

Junkyard Tom

maryishere wrote: »

Most democrats in the world do not support terrorism

Most terrorists like puppies.

marienbad

maryishere wrote: »

lol. He was talking about 20th and 21st century world, not going back to 1147 ffs !

So what ? The RCC is not the organisation to lecture others on ethic or religious persecution . But I forgot you don't do irony Mary .

K-9

There are certain things the IRA and indeed the UVF should be ashamed of, but no, the IRA didn't target football stadiums or shoot up concerts etc. Some things were on a smaller scale though, that I think would be difficult to argue against.

Lurkio

maryishere wrote: »

+1. Even Cardinal T Dolan of New York last year compared the IRA to ISIS. Thats how most in the world views terrorists since 9/11, no great surprise there.
http://www.thejournal.ie/isis-ira-1976248-Mar2015/

Appointed by Pope Benedict XVI, Dolan serves as the tenth and current Archbishop of New York. Time Magazine named Dolan one of the "100 Most Influential People in the World" for 2012.

What do you think?

BalcombeSt4

marienbad wrote: »

I would in no way be a supporter of PIRA but this comparison is just wrong . All he is effectively saying is that any armed struggle against any government is the same as ISIS . In other words rubbish .

Would he say the same about opposition to Pinochet ,Galtieri or any of the other vicious governments that dotted the globe ? Or just the ones he (and you) don't like ?

And Franco. He wa loved by the Catholic hierarchy.

BalcombeSt4

K-9 wrote: »

There are certain things the IRA and indeed the UVF should be ashamed of, but no, the IRA didn't target football stadiums or shoot up concerts etc. Some things were on a smaller scale though, that I think would be difficult to argue against.

They shot up plenty of pubs tho just because they were owned by Catholics..

timthumbni

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

They shot up plenty of pubs tho just because they were owned by Catholics..

It's lucky the IRA (of one of whose murder gangs you call yourself after) never bothered much with pubs themselves. Ho hum. It's almost bizarre the sort of craic you hear on here. Carry on...

K-9

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

They shot up plenty of pubs tho just because they were owned by Catholics..

They did indeed.

Are we going down the who did what road? That has never been done before!

Esel

K-9 wrote: »

They did indeed.

Are we going down the who did what road? That has never been done before!

Hang on there! What about ...

BalcombeSt4

K-9 wrote: »

They did indeed.

Are we going down the who did what road? That has never been done before!

It's been done on Republicans plenty of times yes, not so much on the UDA or UVF. I would put money on it that atleast half the population doesn't know that Dublin airport was bombed by the UDA in 1975 or any of the other places targted by the UDA & UVF in the South during the 70's, 80's & 90's.

marienbad

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

It's been done on Republicans plenty of times yes, not so much on the UDA or UVF. I would put money on it that atleast half the population doesn't know that Dublin airport was bombed by the UDA in 1975 or any of the other places targted by the UDA & UVF in the South during the 70's, 80's & 90's.

That is because down south people never saw the UDA/UVF as anything more than vicious thugs . That might be simplistic but there it is .

Some would see PIRA as little better but they (at least in the early years) had a raison d'etre that was coherent , even if one disagreed with it .

timthumbni

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

It's been done on Republicans plenty of times yes, not so much on the UDA or UVF. I would put money on it that atleast half the population doesn't know that Dublin airport was bombed by the UDA in 1975 or any of the other places targted by the UDA & UVF in the South during the 70's, 80's & 90's.

Well this thread is about the IRA terrorist side apparently, and regarding the loyalist terrorists no one seems to be shouting their corner or justifying them on here anywhere.

The IRA on the other hand has loads of wee fanboys on here and some even make their username after an IRA murder gang. Go figure....