Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Northern Ireland and the IRA

Options
245678

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Yurt2
    Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    They remain dirty, run by dirt, staffed by dirt. I wouldn't go so far as to say voted for by dirt, just the naive, maybe too young to understand the context.

    Charming. And on the age matter, every age demographic bar pensioners SF are the largest party. That's a lot of naive people, or perhaps your just dripping with patronising sentiment.

    Larbre34 wrote: »
    Its up to those of us in the centre, real patriots and true democrats, to see that a coalition of such parties in this State keep them out of government forever.


    I had a good snicker at this. Talk about self-regarding blather. Off the scale.


  • Options
    #33
    simongurnick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭simongurnick


    Sunny Disposition wrote: »
    I was at the Sands funeral, not because I supported the IRA but because support was needed to show that the situation couldn’t continue and the Catholics wouldn’t be trampled, he was an MP. IRA funerals are not a good measure of support for violence though, as I said in another thread Bill Clinton and Blair sympathised with the McGuinness family, but they didn’t agree with turning people into human bombs. I actually went to a good few smaller IRA funerals when I lived in Belfast, generally because I knew family members.
    Again, there’s no question British actions over centuries were the real problem, but I feel the response of the IRA made things worse for everyone, and it has palmist certainly delayed the date of reunification.

    How else do you think they should have responded? Remember when Bombay st was attacked they reckon the ira had f all weapons etc. You may know more than me, but serious question, what else could they have done ?


  • Options
    #34
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,913 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    To me it’s a cult thing.

    Nothing will stop it on any side.

    Those of us struggling with Covid couldn't give a shiny sh!te really. Off you lot go and fight forever more. It’s the only thing you know up there in the badlands.


  • Options
    #35
    Biafranlivemat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 386 ✭✭Biafranlivemat


    Sunny Disposition wrote: »
    Lot of threads about the North going on.
    Like most people here I well remember the Troubles, was in London for some, Belfast for a good bit less and the South for the majority.
    One thing I often wonder about is what else could have been done. The IRA campaign was appalling, simply awful.But undoubtedly conditions were unacceptable and intolerable for Catholics. What I often wonder is what else could have been done, would a massive campaign of civil disobedience have been effective? I think it would have and would have left the North in a better place with a UI far more likely.
    One of the ways towards Civil disobedience, encouraged by the likes of Austin Currie , was the non payments of "rates"
    But once Austin got a taste of power in the executive, he went after people who didn't pay their Rates.
    Do you see the problem.


  • Options
    #36
    coinop
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 315 ✭✭coinop


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Sunny Disposition
    Registered Users Posts: 2,728 ✭✭✭Sunny Disposition


    simongurnick wrote: »
    How else do you think they should have responded? Remember when Bombay st was attacked they reckon the ira had f all weapons etc. You may know more than me, but serious question, what else could they have done ?

    Many more people than supported the Provos would have been happy to support or get involved in civil disobedience, but it just petered out. There were great people involved in campaigns bwfore the violence really kicked off, but unfortunately the leadership wasn’t there to make it really catch fire.
    People talking up the Provos should know they weren’t a legitimate force, most people in the areas they said they were defending did not support what they were doing. There was fear of them too, that’s how it was.


  • Options
    #38
    Natterjack from Kerry
    Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Natterjack from Kerry


    Yurt! wrote: »
    Charming. And on the age matter, every age demographic bar pensioners SF are the largest party. That's a lot of naive people,

    Yes, it is a lot of naive people. Thats a weakness of universal suffrage, but as they say, its the least worst option we have.
    It works well enough when you have political parties who are broadly well intentioned, more or less honest, and are democratic of intent.
    This does not apply when you have the likes of SF on the scene though. Yet some people assume, incorrectly, SF is a party that is OK to vote for. Yet are naive to do so, and are unaware of the harm their vote risks causing.


  • Options
    #39
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    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.

    You need to talk to someone about that obsession you have coinop.

    Seriously.


  • Options
    #40
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭CrazyFather1


    ...Ghost... wrote: »
    I very much doubt there is an answer to that. Some supported publicly. Some sympathised and others kept their support to themselves.

    If you look around the web seems to be a few bits and pieces. The first part came from a website and mentions a study but no link to the study. The second part includes a study.

    In the majority based on these studies the people of Northern Ireland and Republic didn't support the PIRA. It didn't matter what background.

    The most shocking part is 71% of people killed where civilians.
    So the PIRA was never fighting for the people of Northern Ireland or the Republic which is the claim made on here all the time, the people in the majority never supported the PIRA.

    https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Irish-people-supported-the-IRA-during-the-violent-decades-known-as-The-Troubles-Could-you-say-it-was-a-civil-war-or-just-an-isolated-rebel-and-terrorist-group-acting-on-their-own-in-spite-of-the-population%E2%80%99s-will
    Since you asked for percentages, we can actually state that. I assume you are using the layman’s definition of support, and not the distinctions that are applied by experts.

    With that in mind let’s look at some of the statistics. In 1973 a study of younger members of society found the following.

    29.6% had stated that PIRA was “doing what was necessary” in Northern Ireland.
    6% had declared that PIRA members were “National heroes”.
    18% had stated that PIRA was composed of “vicious gunmen”
    33% had declared that PIRA was “harming Ireland”.

    So if we include the 2 uppers as support we have around 35% in Ireland supported the IRA, and please remember its terrorist nature was obvious at the time.

    If you want the other years, that reduced to around 21% in 1978. Further numbers are not something I can remember or find at the moment.

    As to whether it was a civil war, not really. That was the dictate of the government at the time as the violence was not utterly insane for the most part. And the British Army clearly did not act as if it was a war.

    As to the population’s will, depends what you refer to as will. If it’s strictly support than I suppose so, although not by much in Southern Ireland. But whilst they may not have had the support of the majority, they had the tacit acceptance of the majority. What these statistics hide is that a large chunk of those who DIDN’T support the IRA were still sympathetic and unwilling to do much against them.

    This is evidenced by the fact that only 30% of those in Dublin in 1973 supported jailing based on IRA membership. Meaning the majority of Irish people did not support even the most basic actions against the IRA.And other studies bear this out.

    Also this document
    https://www.abdn.ac.uk/staffpages/uploads/soc207/polviolence.pdf

    Percentages of who was killed
    Police 6.0
    Police Reserve 3.0
    Army 13.5
    UDR=RIR 6.1
    Civilian 71.4

    Percentages of who did the killing
    Police=Police Reserve 1.4
    Army 8.2
    UDR=RIR 0.2
    Republicans 58.6
    Loyalists 29.2
    Other 2.4

    The question was phrased so as to permit respondents to indicate sympathy, while not at the same time explicitly supporting the use of force. Table 5 shows that significant minorities within both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland lend support to paramilitary groups. A total of 26 percent of respondents in Northern Ireland express some level of sympathy for republican paramilitaries, while the figure for those sympathizing with loyalists is almost identical, at 27 percent. An even stronger level of support is echoed in the Republic of Ireland. Here, whereas a total of 40 percent of respondents express some level of sympathy for republican paramilitaries, the figure for those sympathizing with loyalists is somewhat lower, at 32 percent.


  • Options
    #41
    J.O. Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,434 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    Percentages of who was killed
    Police 6.0
    Police Reserve 3.0
    Army 13.5
    UDR=RIR 6.1
    Civilian 71.4

    Percentages of who did the killing
    Police=Police Reserve 1.4
    Army 8.2
    UDR=RIR 0.2
    Republicans 58.6
    Loyalists 29.2
    Other 2.4

    Tables like this one are misleading as those who did the killing didn't all kill the group's killed in the same proportions. Taken seperately both are probably accurate enough but a more accurate table would break down who was killed by each group.

    Also the above lists give percentages of those killed but only lists defence forces/ police and civilians. Are paramilitaries excluded (so percentages killed are over inflated in relation to all deaths) or are they included as civilians (civilians are over inflated). Either way it's not an accurate picture.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,879 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Yurt! wrote: »
    Charming. And on the age matter, every age demographic bar pensioners SF are the largest party. That's a lot of naive people, or perhaps your just dripping with patronising sentiment.





    I had a good snicker at this. Talk about self-regarding blather. Off the scale.

    Thats a lot of foolish people so. It just means the rest of us will have to work harder to show SF up for what it is.

    I do have a high regard for myself, its probably almost as high as your typical shinner, but I have a yet higher regard for this Country and I intend to protect it at all costs from SFs brand of dark Marxism.


  • Options
    #43
    Yurt2
    Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    Thats a lot of foolish people so. It just means the rest of us will have to work harder to show SF up for what it is.

    I do have a high regard for myself, its probably almost as high as your typical shinner, but I have a yet higher regard for this Country and I intend to protect it at all costs from SFs brand of dark Marxism.


    Jesus H :D:D:D


    Is your mammy sewing you a Captain Ireland suit so you can battle the dark forces Marxism?

    What are your special powers? - Like, telekinesis or something or just unintentionally hilarious posts on boards? Mind not to trip over your cape when you rush to the Patriotmobile Larbre, your country is depending on you.


  • Options
    #44
    J.O. Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,434 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    Yurt! wrote: »
    Jesus H :D:D:D


    Is your mammy sewing you a Captain Ireland suit so you can battle the dark forces Marxism?

    What are your special powers? - Like, telekinesis or something or just unintentionally hilarious posts on boards? Mind not to trip over your cape when you rush to the Patriotmobile Larbre, your country is depending on you.

    Ah now remember as a wise man once said in a different context not all superheroes wear capes.


  • Options
    #45
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,000 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    the truth of the matter is the IRA was the only way, that is just a fact.
    nobody likes it but it's the reality, and northern ireland would still be a sectarian hell hole only for them.
    peaceful means were tried and were met with violence, continuing with peaceful means would have done nothing apart from leading to catholics being ethnically cleansed from the north.
    the most important thing here to remember is that britain allowed the creation of a sectarian statelet in one of the territories they claim to be theirs, one right on it's door step, and then acted surprised when ultimately it boiled over.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #46
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,000 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    Thats a lot of foolish people so. It just means the rest of us will have to work harder to show SF up for what it is.

    I do have a high regard for myself, its probably almost as high as your typical shinner, but I have a yet higher regard for this Country and I intend to protect it at all costs from SFs brand of dark Marxism.




    you have worked as hard as possible to show sf up for what they are, the party of modernisation and good governance, law and order and allowing all to reach their full potential.
    the election result says it all, those of us who vote for sf know their past but it's irrelevant as it's in the past and it's what they do now that matters.
    it's over, there is going to be an sf government, it's a case of when and not if.
    ffg have failed the people for 100 years, it's time for change, it's time for modernisation.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #47
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,879 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    end of the road wrote: »
    sf up for what they are, the party of modernisation and good governance, law and order and allowing all to reach their full potential..

    There aren't enough lols on planet Earth.


  • Options
    #48
    Natterjack from Kerry
    Registered Users Posts: 623 ✭✭✭Natterjack from Kerry


    end of the road wrote: »
    sf up for what they are, the party of modernisation and good governance, law and order and allowing all to reach their full potential.

    Jaysus. Does anyone really follow this horsesh ?

    SF is a party with a single raison d'être - a united Ireland. A goal of benefit to no one, and just a redundant obsession from the past. "Law and order" ?!?!? This is the party without equal in disregarding the law wholesale and choosing murder and terrorism whenever it takes their fancy.


  • Options
    #49
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭CrazyFather1


    J.O. Farmer wrote: »
    Percentages of who was killed
    Police 6.0
    Police Reserve 3.0
    Army 13.5
    UDR=RIR 6.1
    Civilian 71.4

    Percentages of who did the killing
    Police=Police Reserve 1.4
    Army 8.2
    UDR=RIR 0.2
    Republicans 58.6
    Loyalists 29.2
    Other 2.4

    Tables like this one are misleading as those who did the killing didn't all kill the group's killed in the same proportions. Taken seperately both are probably accurate enough but a more accurate table would break down who was killed by each group.

    Also the above lists give percentages of those killed but only lists defence forces/ police and civilians. Are paramilitaries excluded (so percentages killed are over inflated in relation to all deaths) or are they included as civilians (civilians are over inflated). Either way it's not an accurate picture.

    The biggest finding in that study was the people of Northern and Rep of Ireland didn't support the PIRA right from the start of the troubles.

    It seems no matter how many times the same numbers are produced some reason or other is used to explain them.


  • Options
    #50
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭CrazyFather1


    end of the road wrote: »
    the truth of the matter is the IRA was the only way, that is just a fact.
    nobody likes it but it's the reality, and northern ireland would still be a sectarian hell hole only for them.
    peaceful means were tried and were met with violence, continuing with peaceful means would have done nothing apart from leading to catholics being ethnically cleansed from the north.
    the most important thing here to remember is that britain allowed the creation of a sectarian statelet in one of the territories they claim to be theirs, one right on it's door step, and then acted surprised when ultimately it boiled over.

    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.


  • Options
    #51
    Rezident
    Registered Users Posts: 1,783 ✭✭✭Rezident


    Civil Disobedience? When a loyalist mob burns down all of the houses on your street (e.g. Bombay Street) and the authorities look on in support (why do you think the RCU had to change its name to PSNI?), I feel like you only have three choices:
    1. Roll over and die
    2. Move e.g. South, as many did and who could blame them?
    3. Stand up and fight back (i.e. join the IRA).
    Civil disobedience can be ignored, violence cannot. That's why every army and police force in the world uses it, because it works.




    'Power without force is impotent'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,000 ✭✭✭✭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.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #53
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #54
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #55
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #56
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #57
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,000 ✭✭✭✭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.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #58
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #59
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #60
    UDAWINNER
    Registered Users Posts: 860 ✭✭✭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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    CrazyFather1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 844 ✭✭✭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"


Advertisement