Northern Ireland and the IRA

end of the road

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

So you think you know more than the people of Northern Ireland who loved in the "sectarian hell hole"? according to them they didn't want the PIRA.

If the people wanted the PIRA you could suggest they are fighting for the people of Northern Ireland, but they didn't want them.

there were some who didn't want the PIRA but there were others who did and they had wide spread support even if not publically.
people not voting for sf wouldn't prove in itself that there wasn't much support for the PIRA, after all voting for sf would be enough for the authorities there whether it be the BA/RUC/loyalist mobs to attack or even murder a person, as did happen.

CrazyFather1

end of the road wrote: »

there were some who didn't want the PIRA but there were others who did and they had wide spread support even if not publically.
people not voting for sf wouldn't prove in itself that there wasn't much support for the PIRA, after all voting for sf would be enough for the authorities there whether it be the BA/RUC/loyalist mobs to attack or even murder a person, as did happen.

If you read the thread I posted the information which was taken over the troubles. Which showed the PIRA never had the support of the majority.

Nothing to do with SF getting votes or not, which they didn't either

McMurphy

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

If you read the thread I posted the information which was taken over the troubles. Which showed the PIRA never had the support of the majority.

Nothing to do with SF getting votes or not, which they didn't either

Was there a survey on family fortunes or something?

How did you arrive at any percentage figure, which is what you originally asked.

McMurphy

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Maybe read the thread

I did read it. You asked what percentage of people supported the IRA.

Was there s survey circulated around asking this question, and if so what were the results?

James Brown

coinop wrote: »

The Troubles...what an utterly pointless and depressing conflict. Like two bald men fighting over a comb. None of it will matter in the end anyway. Africans will be the majority on the island of Ireland before the end of the century. Irish Times.

Traditionally people don't take to oppression too well. Nothing pointless about fighting for equality on your own land.

end of the road

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

If you read the thread I posted the information which was taken over the troubles. Which showed the PIRA never had the support of the majority.

Nothing to do with SF getting votes or not, which they didn't either

i read it, it ultimately is unreliable given many would not admit publically to supporting the PIRA for obvious reasons.
we cannot know for absolute sure how many did or didn't support them and never will do so, but what we do know is that support for them was high as they would not have been as able to carry out their activities if support was small.

CrazyFather1

end of the road wrote: »

i read it, it ultimately is unreliable given many would not admit publically to supporting the PIRA for obvious reasons.
we cannot know for absolute sure how many did or didn't support them and never will do so, but what we do know is that support for them was high as they would not have been as able to carry out their activities if support was small.

In other words you don't like the answer so want to ignore it.

How do you know support was high? Everything points to low support. Unless you have some other document/survey to say different?

CrazyFather1

James Brown wrote: »

Traditionally people don't take to oppression too well. Nothing pointless about fighting for equality on your own land.

Traditionally people don't like getting killed by the people who claim to be their protectors. Taking a woman from her home and shooting her in the back of the head. Who in the general public do you think supported that?

Thats before we go into the regular beatings of people for stepping out of line etc, also the people blown up by mistake etc

UDAWINNER

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Traditionally people don't like getting killed by the people who claim to be their protectors. Taking a woman from her home and shooting her in the back of the head. Who in the general public do you think supported that?

Thats before we go into the regular beatings of people for stepping out of line etc, also the people blown up by mistake etc

imagine then how aidan mcanespie felt then or does your point only go one way

CrazyFather1

UDAWINNER wrote: »

imagine then how aidan mcanespie felt then or does your point only go one way

Standard SF answer, "but what about them"

Yurt2

An awful lot of sanctimonious nonsense in this thread.

There was a dark ethnic conflict that was sparked by attempts at ethnic cleansing, rampant exclusion and discrimination, extrajudicial detentions and killings. Pick up a comic book if it's a goodies v baddies narrative you're after.

If you want choirboys, Northern Ireland and anyone who touched off the conflict is the wrong place to go looking (perhaps with the exception of Hume). I include elements of the Irish state and naturally the British security apparatus and Conservative Party in that. Ireland on the foundation of the state was run by gunmen and a hell of a lot of people with dirt under their fingernails. That's life when you're dealing with a difficult legacy conflict.

People are fully aware of the road SF traveled to get where they are today, and increasingly, the population are perfectly comfortable with voting for them. And indeed, they deserve a hell of a lot more credit than the pearl-clutchers are willing to give them for their role in bringing the conflict to a resolution.

There's always people like Simon Harris who has his teeth brushed, is in his jammies before 10 o'clock and has never said an unkind word to his mammy if that's who you want to vote for. Such is the wonder and choice of democracy.

Whatisthisnow

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Standard SF answer, "but what about them"

No what was said DOES your point only go one way? It was a question

CrazyFather1

Whatisthisnow wrote: »

No what was said DOES your point only go one way? It was a question

I never said it went one way did I?
The discussion was about the support for the PIRA. I would expect the support for the British Army was at the same low level with catholics as the PIRA was

Do you think?

maccored

when I was growing up there - born in the late 60s and there til the late 80s - people in my community felt the RUC and government did not represent them, that the unionist majority hated us (I cant count the amount of times I was nearly beat to death during the summer months in the build up to the 12th July by loyalist gangs) and we had no-one to represent us. SF were the only people who gave a damn and who would be who you went to to sort out issues the RUC couldnt care about. The IRA were a necessary evil as the RUC, loyalists and the UDA were a much worse threat and the IRA were the only people keeping them in check. That was just the way it was. I doubt ANYONE liked the idea of violence but when people are put in a corner, thats generally the result (the world over). I dont think anyone of my generation could have forseen the peace process actually happening and I really dont think many people on this side of the border have a balls notion of what it was like. Its easy to pontificate and point fingers when you aren't being affected by it.

Yurt2

maccored wrote: »

when I was growing up there - born in the late 60s and there til the late 80s - people in my community felt the RUC and government did not represent them, that the unionist majority hated us (I cant count the amount of times I was nearly beat to death during the summer months in the build up to the 12th July by loyalist gangs) and we had no-one to represent us. SF were the only people who gave a damn and who would be who you went to to sort out issues the RUC couldnt care about. The IRA were a necessary evil as the RUC, loyalists and the UDA were a much worse threat and the IRA were the only people keeping them in check. That was just the way it was. I doubt ANYONE liked the idea of violence but when people are put in a corner, thats generally the result (the world over). I dont think anyone of my generation could have forseen the peace process actually happening and I really dont think many people on this side of the border have a balls notion of what it was like. Its easy to pontificate and point fingers when you aren't being affected by it.

Thanks for your contribution. My only real experience of NI is via work trips (always in peace time) and getting to know some Nordies down south.

People down here ought to listen-up when people from the North (from both communities) are speaking about the conflict, instead of lecturing them from on-high that their experiences and life-informed opinions are wrong. Most people here experienced the conflict via their television sets and had their collective thumbs up their ars*s. It may as well have been a conflict in the middle of an island in the Pacific for all they cared (excepting border counties to an extent).

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

when I was growing up there - born in the late 60s and there til the late 80s - people in my community felt the RUC and government did not represent them, that the unionist majority hated us (I cant count the amount of times I was nearly beat to death during the summer months in the build up to the 12th July by loyalist gangs) and we had no-one to represent us. SF were the only people who gave a damn and who would be who you went to to sort out issues the RUC couldnt care about. The IRA were a necessary evil as the RUC, loyalists and the UDA were a much worse threat and the IRA were the only people keeping them in check. That was just the way it was. I doubt ANYONE liked the idea of violence but when people are put in a corner, thats generally the result (the world over). I dont think anyone of my generation could have forseen the peace process actually happening and I really dont think many people on this side of the border have a balls notion of what it was like. Its easy to pontificate and point fingers when you aren't being affected by it.

According to the information I seen this was not the view held by the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Nobody should have an terrorist army or political party forced on them by the minority. Do you not think?

maccored

Yurt! wrote: »

Thanks for your contribution. My only real experience of NI is via work trips (always in peace time) and getting to know some Nordies down south.

People down here ought to listen-up when people from the North (from both communities) are speaking about the conflict, instead of lecturing them from on-high that their experiences and life-informed opinions are wrong. Most people here experienced the conflict via their television sets and had their collective thumbs up their ars*s. It may as well have been a conflict in the middle of an island in the Pacific for all they cared (excepting border counties to an extent).

there was a time on this board many years ago before the great 'loss of passwords' when I had a different username, that I tried to explain what it was like to live in the north. I was basically laughed out of the politics forum and told I was making it all up.

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

According to the information I seen this was not the view held by the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Nobody should have an terrorist army or political party forced on them by the minority. Do you not think?

i dont really care what info you've seen. I still have plenty of friends living there who will tell you the same thing as I did. by the way agree - the loyalists shouldnt have had access to a well armed and funded army like the british army, but they did

Yurt2

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

According to the information I seen this was not the view held by the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Nobody should have an terrorist army or political party forced on them by the minority. Do you not think?

Go on, explain to him further about the community, context and conflict he grew up in. He really needs your uncolored presumptions and narrative you've completely not concocted because of deeply held political prejudices.

I'm sure he'll learn loads.

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

i dont really care what info you've seen. I still have plenty of friends living there who will tell you the same thing as I did.

Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance. What should of happened was everyone listened to the majority. Not decide what was best for people and then force it on them.

What happened was the catholic's of Northern Ireland in the majority suddenly got the PIRA forced on them, which they didn't want. Then got SF forced on them which they didn't want either.

The few thought they knew better than the many, which always ends up in a disaster.

Ian Paisley's role can never be forgotten. He was a massive instigator and agitator.

Yurt2

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance. What should of happened was everyone listened to the majority. Not decide what was best for people and then force it on them.

What happened was the catholic's of Northern Ireland in the majority suddenly got the PIRA forced on them, which they didn't want. Then got SF forced on them which they didn't want either.

The few thought they knew better than the many, which always ends up in a disaster.

What you're really after is a time machine so you can go back and patronise the Catholic community of the 60s and 70s as they're getting burnerd out of their homes.

My good mate Marty McFly is letting go of his DeLorean if you're interested. It's a bit dinged up from a trip back to the Wild-West (have you seen Back to the Future 3 by any chance?) but it should get you to the Bogside in Derry in the early 70s no bother.

Meanwhile, if you're interested in 2021, it's not so bad, there's peace on the island and we can all vote for whoever the hell we want. If only we could argue in good faith though? Probably too much to ask for...

CrazyFather1

Yurt! wrote: »

What you're really after is a time machine so you can go back and patronise the Catholic community of the 60s and 70s as they're getting burnerd out of their homes.

My good mate Marty McFly is letting go of his DeLorean if you're interested. It's a bit dinged up from a trip back to the Wild-West (have you seen Back to the Future 3 by any chance?) but it should get you to the Bogside in Derry in the early 70s no bother.

Meanwhile, if you're interested in 2021, it's not so bad, there's peace on the island and we can all vote for whoever the hell we want. If only we could argue in good faith though? Probably too much to ask for...

I asked at the very start of this thread what percentage of the Northern Ireland population support the PIRA. So far I am the only one to give actual evidence they didn't support them.

Now if you want to jump in your mates car and go back off you go, I suggest you come back with some evidence that suggest the majority supported the PIRA because based on everything available they didn't.

You can of course choose to ignore that, that is your decision but don't expect everyone else to. No matter how much finger pointing people do at anyone and everyone the simple fact is at the very start of the troubles and throughout the troubles, the majority in the catholic community never wanted the PIRA and never wanted SF.

blanch152

Yurt! wrote: »

An awful lot of sanctimonious nonsense in this thread.

There was a dark ethnic conflict that was sparked by attempts at ethnic cleansing, rampant exclusion and discrimination, extrajudicial detentions and killings. Pick up a comic book if it's a goodies v baddies narrative you're after.

If you want choirboys, Northern Ireland and anyone who touched off the conflict is the wrong place to go looking (perhaps with the exception of Hume). I include elements of the Irish state and naturally the British security apparatus and Conservative Party in that. Ireland on the foundation of the state was run by gunmen and a hell of a lot of people with dirt under their fingernails. That's life when you're dealing with a difficult legacy conflict.

People are fully aware of the road SF traveled to get where they are today, and increasingly, the population are perfectly comfortable with voting for them. And indeed, they deserve a hell of a lot more credit than the pearl-clutchers are willing to give them for their role in bringing the conflict to a resolution.

There's always people like Simon Harris who has his teeth brushed, is in his jammies before 10 o'clock and has never said an unkind word to his mammy if that's who you want to vote for. Such is the wonder and choice of democracy.

You are correct here, Sinn Fein are no choirboys, but there is a wider point that you are missing. Given that they weren't choirboys, the time is right for them, like all gunslingers, to retire from the stage when the fight is over and disappear. Take their poisonous background with them and disappear from Irish life.

Natterjack from Kerry

blanch152 wrote: »

You are correct here, Sinn Fein are no choirboys, but there is a wider point that you are missing. Given that they weren't choirboys, the time is right for them, like all gunslingers, to retire from the stage when the fight is over and disappear. Take their poisonous background with them and disappear from Irish life.

Yes. But politicians do become self serving - no great insight I know, but in most cases they do start out with some political goal, which then fades. SF/IRA is a case where for the greater good of Ireland, which they do claim to have at heart. the logical conclusion of laying down arms, is to disband SF completely, both north and south. But they are caught on the treadmill, and institutionalised, depending on it for their own sense of self, purpose, status, and livelihood.
It would be a great day for the Island.

The Labour Party - and those who no longer vote for it - bears a great responsibility for the SF week gaining ground in the south. The republicans of the north for continuing to vote for SF when the time came to consign them to history.

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance. What should of happened was everyone listened to the majority. Not decide what was best for people and then force it on them.

What happened was the catholic's of Northern Ireland in the majority suddenly got the PIRA forced on them, which they didn't want. Then got SF forced on them which they didn't want either.

The few thought they knew better than the many, which always ends up in a disaster.

yes - I personally dont care. the thread is about the north and the IRA. I gave my personal experience as my opinion. You on the other hand tell me thats wrong because you read something somewhere on the internet. Thats the bit I dont care about.

Yurt2

blanch152 wrote: »

You are correct here, Sinn Fein are no choirboys, but there is a wider point that you are missing. Given that they weren't choirboys, the time is right for them, like all gunslingers, to retire from the stage when the fight is over and disappear. Take their poisonous background with them and disappear from Irish life.

SF are a very real and potent long-term political reality and the IRA are gone blanch. You won't be able to get odds on SF being in the next government and you're not going to bully, cajole, or mock anyone out of voting for them. It's time to wake up.

You're like someone who is in denial that their wife has left them.

Speedline

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance. What should of happened was everyone listened to the majority. Not decide what was best for people and then force it on them.

What happened was the catholic's of Northern Ireland in the majority suddenly got the PIRA forced on them, which they didn't want. Then got SF forced on them which they didn't want either.

The few thought they knew better than the many, which always ends up in a disaster.

They didn't want to be beaten, shot, and burnt out of their homes either.

How would you like to be burnt out of your home tonight, with Gardai watching on. And no comeback whatsoever for the people doing it. You'd be ****ing glad to see your friends and neighbours arming themselves to make sure it didn't happen again.

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

yes - I personally dont care. the thread is about the north and the IRA. I gave my personal experience as my opinion. You on the other hand tell me thats wrong because you read something somewhere on the internet. Thats the bit I dont care about.

This is what I posted in response to your post

According to the information I seen this was not the view held by the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Nobody should have an terrorist army or political party forced on them by the minority. Do you not think?

I never said you are wrong, did I now? I asked if you agreed that the majority should not have a army or political party forced on them, Which you replied saying you didn't care.

Natterjack from Kerry

Speedline wrote: »

They didn't want to be beaten, shot, and burnt out of their homes either.

They weren't though.

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

This is what I posted in response to your post

According to the information I seen this was not the view held by the majority of people in Northern Ireland. Nobody should have an terrorist army or political party forced on them by the minority. Do you not think?

I never said you are wrong, did I now? I asked if you agreed that the majority should not have a army or political party forced on them, Which you replied saying you didn't care.

you were telling me "Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance".

I grew up in Omagh and I have never met anyone in the nationalist community there say there were ever forced to have SF or the IRA forced upon them. We had the RUC, the army, loyalists, the UDA and the UDR forced on us though - so yes, I agree such things shouldnt be forced on people.

Maybe some felt like you outline but I honestly cant say the majority of people I grew up with felt like that. Then again you read it on the internet so it has to be true.

maccored

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

They weren't though.

people werent beaten, shot or burnt out of their homes? I wont even argue with you there - history already proves you wrong on that one.

Natterjack from Kerry

maccored wrote: »

people werent beaten, shot or burnt out of their homes? I wont even argue with you there - history already proves you wrong on that one.

What proportion of NI catholics were beaten, shot, or burnt out of their homes, then on your figures ?

maccored

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

What proportion of NI catholics were beaten, shot, or burnt out of their homes, then on your figures ?

quite a lot were beaten - I know that for a fact as I was on numerous occasions myself - by loyalists. I was chased out of a nightclub by three squaddies because of my religion - I was lucky to get away from them.. Catholics were shot (unless you wish to deny that) and burnt out of their homes (google is your friend - bombay st in belfast, plus derry, armagh, newry etc)

Derail the thread all you want - I'd suggest you use google though.

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

you were telling me "Thats the problem, Some people don't care. They think their opinion has more importance".

I grew up in Omagh and I have never met anyone in the nationalist community there say there were ever forced to have SF or the IRA forced upon them. We had the RUC, the army, loyalists, the UDA and the UDR forced on us though - so yes, I agree such things shouldnt be forced on people.

Maybe some felt like you outline but I honestly cant say the majority of people I grew up with felt like that. Then again you read it on the internet so it has to be true.

I suggest you read the posts in the timelines please.

So did the Catholics in Northern Ireland vote to have the PIRA and SF? or was the decision made by a few and then everyone else just had to accept it?

You will also see the other side of the community by the way in the majority didn't want the UDA etc. I expect they didn't get to vote either

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

I suggest you read the posts in the timelines please.

So did the Catholics in Northern Ireland vote to have the PIRA and SF? or was the decision made by a few and then everyone else just had to accept it?

why? because you are asking questions on how many catholics supported the IRA. Was there ever a poll done? I dont remember it. All I can tell you is what I know for myself.

Yurt2

So this thread took a serious turn towards the idiotic.

For those joining us late, here's a summary:

- We saw the advent of a new vigilante superhero, Captain Ireland - who is a true patriot and will protect us all from 'the dark forces of Marxism'

- Blanch drops by to tell us Sinn Fein will disappear any second now, his FG cumann decided on their latest Zoom meeting

- We have someone who wants to go back to the 1970s to tell Catholics who were being ethnically cleansed to chill out, and it will all just work out fine if they just ask Loyalists and RUC onlookers nicely not to pogrom them.

- A master statistician with access to Google who knows better than someone who grew up in the thick of the Troubles

- And lastly, someone who thinks the entire thing was a mirage and nobody was burned out of their homes at all.

Lockdown has really gotten to some people.

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

why? because you are asking questions on how many catholics supported the IRA. Was there ever a poll done? I dont remember it. All I can tell you is what I know for myself.

Im not asking for a poll. I am asking did the catholics get a chance to vote to say they did/didn't want the PIRA?
If not then you will find the PIRA was forced on people.

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

Im not asking for a poll. I am asking did the catholics get a chance to vote to say they did/didn't want the PIRA?
If not then you will find the PIRA was forced on people.

I think your logic is skewed. The reason for the IRA was forced upon them by the loyalist/Army/UDR/UDA elements. I dont know of anyone personally who I grew up with who felt the IRA and SF had forced themselves upon the community. In fact it was SF acting as a community reporting centre and the ira as a police force than many ended up relying on as the government funded police couldnt and didnt care. I really dont think you are getting that into your head.

Also - Im not going to be bothered tit for tat posting about it either. If you dont understand my position on it, fair enough. Im not going to be bothered trying to convince you.

McMurphy

Yurt! wrote: »

So this thread took a serious turn towards the idiotic.

For those joining us late, here's a summary:

- We saw the advent of a new vigilante superhero, Captain Ireland - who is a true patriot and will protect us all from 'the dark forces of Marxism'

- Blanch drops by to tell us Sinn Fein will disappear any second now, his FG cumann decided on their latest Zoom meeting

- We have someone who wants to go back to the 1970s to tell Catholics who were being ethnically cleansed to chill out, and it will all just work out fine if they just ask Loyalists and RUC onlookers nicely not to pogrom them.

- A master statistician with access to Google who knows better than someone who grew up in the thick of the Troubles

- And lastly, someone who thinks the entire thing was a mirage and nobody was burned out of their homes at all.

Lockdown has really gotten to some people.

Epic.


Fcukin epic.

CrazyFather1

maccored wrote: »

I think your logic is skewed. The reason for the IRA was forced upon them by the loyalist/Army/UDR/UDA elements. I dont know of anyone personally who I grew up with who felt the IRA and SF had forced themselves upon the community. In fact it was SF acting as a community reporting centre and the ira as a police force than many ended up relying on as the government funded police couldnt and didnt care. I really dont think you are getting that into your head.

Also - Im not going to be bothered tit for tat posting about it either. If you dont understand my position on it, fair enough. Im not going to be bothered trying to convince you.

its called a discussion, the whole point of boards. You don't have to "win". You do realise that?
Seems a few people forget that all the time on here.

maccored

CrazyFather1 wrote: »

its called a discussion, the whole point of boards. You don't have to "win". You do realise that?
Seems a few people forget that all the time on here.

who mentioned winning? You keep trying to tell me that catholics didnt need or want the IRA. As I said already, NOONE would have chosen violence, but it was forced upon a section of the community. You push people and try to control them, give one community a better standard of living and better chances than the other and you WILL GET violence. Thats what happened. Your idea that no-one supported the IRA is pure and utter bollocks because if people did not support the IRA (support again that people felt they had to give as the treatment they were receiving was **** from the government and loyalists) then they simply would have all been handed over to the authorities. Instead people hid them - not because they were forced to (the IRA were recruited from the same pool of people) but because people did not want to hand them over to what they classed as a government who didnt care.

You arent getting that, so Im not going to bother my arse 'debating' with you on it.

Speedline

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

They weren't though.

Tell that to my sister in laws mother. Her and her family landed in Dublin with nothing but the clothes on their backs after being burnt out of their Belfast home.

Junkyard Tom

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

What proportion of NI catholics were beaten, shot, or burnt out of their homes, then on your figures ?

Many fewer than might have had Republicans not got hold of weapons.

Natterjack from Kerry

maccored wrote: »

As I said already, NOONE would have chosen violence, but it was forced upon a section of the community.

Ah, yes, the 'but she made me beat her your honour'.

UDAWINNER

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Ah, yes, the 'but she made me beat her your honour'.

What would you have had Nationalists do that were getting burnt out of their houses, beaten and murdered by loyalists and stateforces, sit there quietly ffs

UDAWINNER

Speedline wrote: »

Tell that to my sister in laws mother. Her and her family landed in Dublin with nothing but the clothes on their backs after being burnt out of their Belfast home.

and many more that I know in cork since the 1970s. But this ok according to some on this thread, they were only catholics

blanch152

Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »

Ah, yes, the 'but she made me beat her your honour'.

Yes, and when they stop beating their wife, they want praise, just like SF/IRA after the ceasefire.

Natterjack from Kerry

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, and when they stop beating their wife, they want praise, just like SF/IRA after the ceasefire.

True that. I dont think they even see the irony when they go around extolling Adams and McGuinness and SF/IRA in general for their roles in stopping terrorism. They were the terrorism you gits !

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, and when they stop beating their wife, they want praise, just like SF/IRA after the ceasefire.

It was a war and SF were heroes for the most part.