2 Dead several others shot outside Army base Antrim

I would love to see a protest march against this, with both catholic and protestant people walking together.

Local-womanizer wrote: »

I agree with you,but unfortunatly there are people who take an issue with it,as seen in the news over the last few days.

As far as I see it,the north is under British rule so its up to them what they do with it

Not really.
I'd say it's more up to the people who live there to decide what is to be done, and not some corrupt cross dressers in London or Dublin.
Stormont is still in its infancy, so it needs time for all elected officials there to come to an agreement which suits all.

I think whether you are of the belief that Ireland never stood as one or not, that we can all agree with the fact that the British were initially to blame ofr the situation there by removing people from their land and giving it to (mostly) Protestant Scottish farmers.

They now have roots (no pun intended) going back there hundreds of years.
I personally don't like it, but the now have a vaild claim to call themselves Irish and/or British.

Leave them be and lets them sort it outbetween themselves.
I can guarantee that without aid from both sides, they wouldn't be fighting for very long and the average person on the street would be giving them absolutely no support.

Never going to happen though. They would probably just end up killing the average person on the street.

Poccington wrote: »

We gave up our Constitutional claim to NI and the people of NI also took it away when the GFA was voted on. So they're not occupying our country at all.

The Special Reconnaissance Regiment has been in NI for the past few months because the threat level from Dissident Republicans had been raised since before Christmas. You should know this because there's a good chance you've been to the same briefs I have in the past few months. Usually we agree on most things but to claim that the Brits bringing back their best Intel organisations because of a raised threat level is provocative, is something I just see no sense in.

Is it wrong for someone to wish for a united Ireland?
Is it wrong that someone romanticises about that?
Should we villify every person who dreams that one day we can see this happen?

Is it fúck. Some people need to get off their high horses when it comes to this.
Wishing for a united Ireland does not put a gun in your hand and make you a murderer.

spiderpig101 wrote: »

the line between terrorists and freedom fighters is a very muddy one

Not really.
Fighting against an occupying force = Freedom fighter.
Fighting against an imaginary enemy = Terrorist.

Although it's hard to call it on this island.

mumhaabu wrote: »

Ireland is in a deep dark economic recession and now fighting begins in the North again, the majority of Irish people face higher taxes a miserable futures, extreme Nationalism is the obvious answer for the masses. While I have sympathy for the soldiers killed in this event, however they are in Northern Ireland as occupational forces and should expect to get killed or have someone try to kill you etc., you don't join the Military for the craic.

There will never be peace proper in Northern Ireland until a United Ireland is achieved, it is fine for people to condemn this now, but wait until the loyalists murder a few Catholic Nationalists, will these people still sympathise with the occupation of our Northern half. I am no hard liner and am a general pacifist but until a United Ireland is achieved, Peaceful means so far have only brought ten 12 years of feet dragging and the height of bigotry from the Unionist majority.

There is dark days ahead in Northern Ireland and when the Tories take Westminster soon with Unionist support it will be back to the 1970's again, like it or lump it, these people want to govern themselves and as the economic situation south of the border deteoriates furher, there will be an upsurge in sympathy for those under British rule in the North. Ireland now faces Civil conflict and an Economic Depression coupled to high outward Emigration. A war economy on Northern Ireland may be our best bet to stave off the situation and have Southern Forces directly engage the British Army in Northern Ireland and finish the 800 year conflict finally.

Some nice sentiments, but they will never work in reality, as much as some would like.

What you seem to forget is that there are still loyalists (even though news organisations around the world ignored that fact for many, many years and some will do anything to hold on to being British.

An Ri rua wrote: »

And you are?

Oh yes, "acting unilaterally", its obvious you are too. :rolleyes:

Have you applied for a Mod role?

An Ri rua wrote: »

"Personally, as a republican, I feel very sorry for those young men and their families. they shouldn't be in Northern Ireland. They shouldn't be in Afghanistan. They're too young to have known better. That's young men for you."

What's personal about this? have you an empathy deficit? You did quote it above? Or are just an 'in haste' kind of person? 8000+ posts, all extremely well thought out I hope? Oops, that's personal too, isn't it? :rolleyes:

An Ri rua wrote: »

Javaboy has deleted the word egalitarian from my quote. Why is that Javaboy? Is that something you can do as a mod (which I realise you are, I was being ironic)?

Why, when I wrote and egalitarian and a Republican above, did you omit the word egalitarian in your quote? If there is some mod guide to the word 'egalitarian' then let me know. If not, what exactly was your agenda?

Banned.

Poccington wrote: »

I'd love for you to show me anywhere in my post that I even tried to imply such a thing.

It was towards your overall disagreement with Mairt's post.
The fact that he wished to one day see a united Ireland and you seemed to take umbridge at that.

Wreaking Bar wrote: »

This is a sad day for the north. The last thing on your mind while thinking of the beautiful taste of a Dominos pizza meal is getting killed
I pray for those killed, injured and their families. If this is all going to kick off again it would be best for the British to increase their numbers to combat any situation spiralling out of control.

The problem is that if they do send in more troops, it will only serve to anger more nationalists.
It's a vicious circle.

@ Terry.

I understand about Stormant being young and that.But the problem is that NI dosent have its own army,which I was trying to get at.Unfortunatly some sort of military force is needed there as I could see the nationalist and loyalist would be forever at each other throats.But unfortunatly,having soliders pisses off one side.As you said its a vicious circle and it is hard to strike a balance.

In the end its like these extremist groups are completely detached from reality and what the normal everyday people feel....

Poccington wrote: »

My disagreement was with the fact he said that to have any kind of SF in country was provocative, I said it was needed. He also referred to the Brits as an occupying force which is something I also disagreed with.

Personally I'd love to see a United Ireland but it's not going to happen and I can accept that. Anyway, this is going off topic so we'll leave it alone.

Fair enough. My mistake.

Mikel wrote: »

So were the IRA terrorists or 'freedom fighters'?

Half and half.
When you're dealing with the ones who specifically targetted military personnel and installations, then you're looking at freedom fighters.
The rest were scumy terrorists.

Now you can say that they were all the same and that they were doing it under the one banner, but the thing about organisations like these is that it's hard to say no to a person who will probably kill you if you disagree.

The IRA operated in cells, so at certain points along the line you would have complete lunatics giving orders.
William from Armagh joins up wanting to let off a bomb close to a barracks.
Instead he's told to go over to London and take out Canary Wharf (just examples here folks). He knows that if he doesn't do it that he (and possibly his family) will be shot. He doesn't want to actually kill anyone. He's just caught up in the buzz and the hype. Then he finds himself in too deep.

Then you have Frank from Tyrone. He shows local leaders a willingness to kill anyone he sees.
They make him a cell leader and he just runs amok and orders people to blow up people mourning at a graveyard. Frank feels no guilt or shame at his actons. He doesn't care about anyone.

I could go on all night about reasons for doing that crap.

Biggins wrote: »

@ Terry:

While it's clear you have different view points with others here as we discuss the current situation, you are to be commended and I am heartened to read your last words, they being...


...and that sums up a good difference.
We could be all at the furthest reaches of political points of view from each other but we see the sense in not returning to the ways of yesteryear.

If I am honest, I too would like some day to see Ireland as one peaceful country. Given the chance, I'd find no harm though in working towards it by a peaceful route.
Will it happen in my lifetime, probably not, but I too will be damned if I'm going to get a gun and shoot innocent people.

We as a nation and individual people have gone too far down the road to return to the ineffective ways of the past. That road leads to gaining little against a lot more to lose.

More has been gained in the last few years of talking than 30+ years of murderous fighting (by any side) alone.
Long may the talking continue...

Don't mistake me for an IRA supporter or apologist.

I was a supporter when I was younger, but then I grew up.
My father's experience patrolling the border in the late 60's taught me a lot. He never told me the stories when I was a child, but we sat down one day and he told me everything.
Believe me, what he told me that day really opened my eyes. Put it this way, he was lucky to see the 70's.

The problem still remains amongst disaffects youths and they are the ones who need to be fully educated about the past from both sides of the line.

Mikel wrote: »

So were the IRA terrorists or 'freedom fighters'?

Arent the IRA officially designated terrorists now?

Back in the days I'd would have called them freedom fighters.

RoundTower wrote: »

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Some soldiers in the British army may be from the Republic, but they're still loyalists. Here's the oath they swear on joining. Members of the PSNI do not take an oath like this.

Correct, newly attested PSNI constables swear an oath in front of a magistrate that essentially obliges the officer to fullfil his duties under the law. Indirectly this would imply that when the law changes for example when Ireland would be united in a constitutional manner a PSNI officer having pledged loyalty to the law and his/her duties under the law they would have two choices :
- carry on as usual being a police officer to the best of their ability
- if they can't digest such constitutional change : resign