armaghlad wrote: » What horrific things was he personally involved in? List his convictions there for us, you know, for balance.
opinionated3 wrote: » They weren't British policemen. ...they were British soldiers.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » steddyeddy wrote: » The ANC, Nelson Mandela's terror group did exactly the same Audrey. They even had connections with the IRA. I know that and equally I can appreciate what Mandela did in later years - he should praised for it as McGuinness should be for his efforts to make peace and, as I see, maybe atone for the wrongs he did. But again, like Mandela, ANC etc, we cannot and should not pretend that in his early years McGuinness was a member of terrorist organisation who committed some heinous horrible crimes.
steddyeddy wrote: » The ANC, Nelson Mandela's terror group did exactly the same Audrey. They even had connections with the IRA.
selwyn froggitt wrote: » If you have so much distain for them, why don't do yourself a favour and **** off back to Ireland then. Everyones a winner.[/QUOTE Last time I looked this was boards.ie maybe do yourself a favour and **** off to an English site with that tone.
Deleted User wrote: » A few posters seem to be hijacking his death to vent anti British sentiment. Lord Tebbit is not a spokesperson for "the Establishment". And as McGuinness was part of an organisation that tried to blow him up, and put his wife in wheelchair, it's laughable that people expect him to be nice about it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Who is pretending though? It was a conflict/war the IRA wasn't even involved in when the most recent one broke out. If those who cherrypick the actions of one side in the conflict on this island, did the same with, for instance, the actions of the British in winning WW2 and called them reprehensible or even, 'atrocities', they'd be laughed out of here. The British fought back in WW2 Audrey with some of the most heinous, reprehensible violence known to man and woman kind. Would you similarly compartmentalise and condemn that?
lawred2 wrote: » Who is asking you to?
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I know that and equally I can appreciate what Mandela did in later years - he should praised for it as McGuinness should be for his efforts to make peace and, as I see, maybe atone for the wrongs he did. But again, like Mandela, ANC etc, we cannot and should not pretend that in his early years McGuinness was a member of terrorist organisation who committed some heinous horrible crimes.
FTA69 wrote: » Tebbit was a senior Tory figure and very much part of what people term the British Establishment. He suffered a lot at the hand of the IRA no doubt, but as others have pointed out so did many others and they're not engaging in the sort of silly gravedancing that a small minority are engaging in. By all means debate McGuinness' actions and legacy but at least do so in an honest manner is all I would say. Anyone coming out with some cartoon cops and robbers type rubbish where McGuinness was some evil psycho and the Brits were some sort of noble crusaders against evil should be called out on it IMO.[/QUOTE] Right on there boy.
FTA69 wrote: » Tebbit was a senior Tory figure and very much part of what people term the British Establishment. He suffered a lot at the hand of the IRA no doubt, but as others have pointed out so did many others and they're not engaging in the sort of silly gravedancing that a small minority are engaging in. By all means debate McGuinness' actions and legacy but at least do so in an honest manner is all I would say. Anyone coming out with some cartoon cops and robbers type rubbish where McGuinness was some evil psycho and the Brits were some sort of noble crusaders against evil should be called out on it IMO.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » None of that in any way justifies planting bombs under innocent people, dragging British policemen out a car and beating them to death in front the media just because they drove the wrong through a funeral, kidnapping innocent young men, and one mother of ten, killing and burying them in unknown graves not be found for decades or the many other horrific things the IRA did and still do. There's no point pretending atrocities didn't take place on BOTH sides of the Troubles, it does no-one any favors.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » Of course I would. Look I know you're just going out of your way to make it seem like I don't what I'm talking about and I'm not going to take that bait. McGuinness was not the heroic freedom fighter people are trying to make him out be. Yes he did a lot of work for peace in his later life and achieved great things - but this shouldn't blind us to the fact that he was once part of one of the violent organisations on the island, an organisation who were only to happy to maim and kill innocent people in pursuit of their aims.
Autonomous Cowherd wrote: » And how should we phrase that, Audrey? A big, bold comma in the middle of the ''on the one hand, but on the other hand'' sentence? Just wondering what would satisfy you, as most of the commentators I have seen in this post have openly acknowledged the dichotomy and contradictions of the man's history. In spite of that history, there are a lot of people alive today in Northern Ireland that might not be if he had not worked very hard to make the Peace Process a reality. Would be tough to be a Heavenly judge in such a case...
smelly sock wrote: » War itself is an atrocity.
Feisar wrote: » Rest In Peace. Rightly or wrongly my first thoughts when I heard the news on the radio this morning was that a freedom fighter had died. Easy for me to have romantic notions having grown up in the Republic though.
The Assistinator wrote: » RIP to a man who done more for the Irish people than Bertie Enda or the rest of that crowd in Dublin. A man that helped more than most to give peace in the north and get equal rights to Irish people living there
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I think you'll find on this thread that people are saying the opposite - that McGuinness is a heroic freedom fighter and the British army are evil murders.Which is also completely incorrect of course.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The violent organisation he fought against is STILL engaged in violent pursuit of it's aims around the world. If you don't wish to be challenged, please stop with the cherrypicking and patronising nonsense. McGuinness never turned his back on his past, therefore his life should be viewed as a whole. He did what most soldiers/generals did, he fought for what he believed in, and when he and others achieved what they could live peacefully with they put away the guns and built a peace based on the equality and parity of esteem they achieved.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » Snooty tone of your question aside, all I would like is an acknowledgement that there were two sides to the man, the terrorist in his youth, the peacemaker later on. I just think people are trying to ignore the early McGuinness, maybe because they find it too hard to look back on those difficult times.
The Assistinator wrote: » RIP to a man who done more for the Irish people than Bertie........... A man that helped more than most to give peace in the north and get equal rights to Irish people living there
FrancieBrady wrote: » No there wasn't 'two sides' to him. You want there to be though because that is a lazy way out. It was that 'laziness' and ignoring of what was actually going on in the north that allowed it to explode.
murpho999 wrote: » Nothing against Martin McGuinness but this is populist rubbish. What did he do for the Republic of Ireland? (Not a criticism). Bertie, as much as I dislike him, was vital to the peace process and deserves credit for it as much as MMG. Enda Kenny, you're probably just judging him on Irish Water.
