skooterblue2 wrote: » https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/retired-ruc-officers-to-be-offered-a-new-role-in-iraq-9bjdnwqmts9http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/3659595.stm I have it from an ex-RUC officer that they were out there. Now I never asked what they were doing out there nor was it volunteered but "They had need of experienced interviews". I doubt he was writing parking tickets out there.
corner of hells wrote: » One of the first tasks completed after the first Gulf War was the complete disbanding of all police and military in Iraq , so as you could imagine , a vacuum was created necessitating some form of police/military , it's no mystery .Ex security were recruited from all over the world. Any tell us more about the passports.
Hamlet. wrote: » The IRA never came close to the evils that the British committed this country too. Simply research the topic and you'll understand this.
the_syco wrote: » Checks what evils the British committed in the Republic of Ireland compared to the evils committed in the Republic of Ireland whilst not at war with the Republic of Ireland... It seems the IRA saw RoI as a cash cow that they could rob from and kill anyone who got in their way.
Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: » Of course there were many very, very sad and regrettable deaths in the north WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF THE POLITICAL SITUATION HAD BEEN DIFFERENT. If the IRA hadn't taken the war to the British, do you really think the situation would have changed? Discrimination had been a reality in the northern state for hundreds of thousands of people for over 50 years before the IRA re-organised in the late 60s. It took another 25+ years for the political situation to evolve to the stage when it became no longer necessary to used armed force. Using an example of one sad incident out of the thousands that occurred is a poor reflection of your understanding as to why many Irish people had no other possible alternative to joining or supporting the IRA, if the shameful way they were treated was ever to change.
Zebra3 wrote: » Could you imagine a Polish MP claiming the German or Soviet occupation of their nation was a “shared experience”?
Hamlet. wrote: » ROI? That is a something that was created by the British. Ireland is Ireland. included in Ireland is the current statelet that is the north of Ireland. Please educate people on what the British did up north for all of us please.
Creol1 wrote: » The IRA never claimed its campaign was about civil rights; it was supposedly about a "united Ireland". The IRA opposed efforts at power-sharing between the communities, such as the Sunningdale Agreement.
feargale wrote: » What is the definition of a statelet, please?
maccored wrote: » all sides had issues with sunningdale. The IRA protected many people in nationalist areas. If you have grown up in such an area, you'd be aware of that
May Contain Small Parts wrote: » maccored wrote: » all sides had issues with sunningdale. The IRA protected many people in nationalist areas. If you have grown up in such an area, you'd be aware of that People like Maíria Cahill?
feargale wrote: » You are confusing a largely natural disaster with one caused entirely by human tyranny. The famine was certainly a shared British-Irish experience in that it severely affected the Scottish Highlands and Islands. It is true that the response of the British government was grossly inadequate and individual British administrators exhibited a shameful attitude and behaved disgracefully. The attitude of the British administration has been compared to our attitude and that of the western world to Third World famine today, one of benign indifference. It is also true that many of those who profited were Irish, (many Catholics if you want to employ that narrow definition of Irish.) And it is true that many heroic deeds were done by English people and other representatives of the administration, such as the Protestant Ulsterman Captain Kennedy in County Clare, also by Quakers and Anglicans who in the latter case were often defamed by RC priests as proselytisers. But a complex narrative never suits particular agendas on either side.
Taytoland wrote: » Wouldn't be the first time Gerry Adams tried to cover up rape.
Aegir wrote: » it never ceases to amaze me just how efficient the SFOS are at locating and responding to these threads.
DONTMATTER wrote: » I don't know what that is but what amazes me is the amount of British army terrorist supporters that we have in Ireland. I don't think they're all northern unionists either.
Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: » A united Ireland was the aim because it would guarantee civil rights. The IRA were fighting for unity and civil rights. Many IRA members were involved in NICRA in the early days too. Power sharing agreements such as Sunningdale were totally unrealistic at this time, as they would only have upheld the status quo, while at the same time giving the impression to the world that the UK government and the Unionist politicians were actually interested in civil rights for Catholics.
Benildus wrote: » Fascinating, please tell me more
corner of hells wrote: » Should ya'll not be out waving your " no to foreign sports flag" at Harry and Meghan on their visit ?
DONTMATTER wrote: » Opposing the British army murder machine is not opposing everything British. Are you going to bring a 'kill more Irish people' flag to the visit?
corner of hells wrote: » Surely you couldn't get someone more worthy of your ire , a Royal and a former British army officer with completed active service .
DONTMATTER wrote: » I'm sure there's British army officers here all the time. Do you not have any ire for all the murders committed by the British security forces here? All the innocents killed? The children slaughtered?
corner of hells wrote: » Oh absolutely , in fact I've a friend who's an officer in the British army. Back to Harry , himself and Meghan are to visit the famine memorial on the quays , ironic if you think about it considering , well ya know the cause of the famine.
Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: » Creol1 wrote: » The IRA never claimed its campaign was about civil rights; it was supposedly about a "united Ireland". The IRA opposed efforts at power-sharing between the communities, such as the Sunningdale Agreement. A united Ireland was the aim because it would guarantee civil rights. The IRA were fighting for unity and civil rights. Many IRA members were involved in NICRA in the early days too. Power sharing agreements such as Sunningdale were totally unrealistic at this time, as they would only have upheld the status quo, while at the same time giving the impression to the world that the UK government and the Unionist politicians were actually interested in civil rights for Catholics.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/284f2526e18ff7e4c08066f9ed850ed0.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23cbe5e5e50cebb31e4a86160a77c62d.svg)
