nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Nelson Mandela terrorist?

Fuinseog

I have often wondered why people here would support someone like Nelson Mandela and vilify someone like Gerry Adams?
Mandela was imprisoned for terrorist activities. he was the head of a militant group that killed civilians so why is he such a hero?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

eth0

Because in the end he actually won? Nearly 100 years on and we're still living with partition in Ireland. The IRA made a balls of it

Sonics2k

I think we all know the true answer to this.

Gerry Adams has a funny voice.

[Deleted User]

Terrorist = Freedom Fighter, depending on which side of the fence you're sitting on.

eth0

Sonics2k wrote: »

I think we all know the true answer to this.

Gerry Adams has a funny voice.

Sityeashun

Mr Benevolent

No rational person cares about partition in Ireland anymore.

SEPT 23 1989

because he had a long jog to freedom

JohnMarston

People with beards appear less trustworthy

Higher

Fuinseog wrote: »

I have often wondered why people here would support someone like Nelson Mandela and vilify someone like Gerry Adams?
Mandela was imprisoned for terrorist activities. he was the head of a militant group that killed civilians so why is he such a hero?

The reason Mandela is so well regarded is not because of how he came to power but his leadership when he came to power. At a time when the entire nation was baying for retrubution against the white population, he risked everything to protect the very people who he suffered so terribly under.

He led by example and in doing so showed one of the greatest modern day examples of forgiveness and tolerance.

That is why he is considered such a hero.

Gurgle

Fuinseog wrote: »

I have often wondered why people here would support someone like Nelson Mandela and vilify someone like Gerry Adams?
Mandela was imprisoned for terrorist activities. he was the head of a militant group that killed civilians so why is he such a hero?

You have to take into account the scale of the injustice each was fighting.

NI was (still is in some areas?) a pretty bloody oppressive place to be born to a catholic / irish / nationalist family, but never came close to the injustice of apartheid in SA.

Fuinseog

Higher wrote: »

The reason Mandela is so well regarded is not because of how he came to power but his leadership when he came to power. At a time when the entire nation was baying for retrubution against the white population, he risked everything to protect the very people who he suffered so terribly under.

He led by example and in doing so showed one of the greatest modern day examples of forgiveness and tolerance.

That is why he is considered such a hero.

could he same not be said about Gerry Adams and Martin McG? they risked a lot to enter the peace process and made enemies for themselves among more extreme republicans.

gerry adams sat down and tried to talk peace with people who had tried to kill him and his family.

LordSutch

eth0 wrote: »

The IRA made a balls of it

How do you mean?

Chips Lovell

Nothing exemplifies how vain and delusional the Provos are than when they compare themselves to people like Mandela.

bluecode

While Adams and McGuinness are to be congratualated on coming over from the dark side. It took them far too long. They persisted with a violent campaign for many years after the point when it became obvious that it was pointless and had descended from idealism to pure bloody minded terrorism.

What was proved by the peace process was that terrorism was never neccessary. What we have now is not much different from what was proposed by the Sunningdale agreement as far back as 1973. If Adams and the rest wanted peace they had the ability to stop the campaign at any time. But they stood over the murder of thousands of people over many years of pointless violence.

Plus there is absolutely no comparison between South Africa and Northern Ireland in terms or Mandela's imprisonment. Adams is definitely no Mandela.

cowzerp

History will see them in the same light, Mandela was seen as a terrorist and now as freedom fighter, Ireland been partitioned is ridiculous no matter what way you look at it-Just because the people who consider themselves Irish are not persecuted anymore does not change this.

There is still people who view Mandela as a terrorist, it all depends what view your coming from-When they are all long gone History will write them as Men who stood for a cause, This i have no doubt about.

The 1916 rising soldiers where thought as Terrorists, There considered Heroes by most now.

fishy fishy

Higher wrote: »

The reason Mandela is so well regarded is not because of how he came to power but his leadership when he came to power. At a time when the entire nation was baying for retrubution against the white population, he risked everything to protect the very people who he suffered so terribly under.

He led by example and in doing so showed one of the greatest modern day examples of forgiveness and tolerance.

That is why he is considered such a hero.

Do you know the history of Nelson Mandela BEFORE he was imprisoned? It makes me laugh that people can call Nelson Mandela a hero (which he is by the way) out of one side of their mouth, and yet slate similar likeminded people/leaders out of the other side of their mouth. It shows a lack of understanding.

Oh by the way, anyone see "reeling in the years 1971 last night" it showed the "ethnic cleansing" up North. Very interesting.

ejmaztec

It all depends on how long ago these people stopped being terrorists. Memories get a bit more vague after a few decades.

lugha

Fuinseog wrote: »

I have often wondered why people here would support someone like Nelson Mandela and vilify someone like Gerry Adams?
Mandela was imprisoned for terrorist activities. he was the head of a militant group that killed civilians so why is he such a hero?

The “terrorist” label is irrelevant. The PIRA took it upon themselves to use force on behalf of the Irish people when it was demonstrably obvious that the vast majority of the people did not support this means, even if a majority did support the same ends.

Can make an argument that Nelson Mandela similarly did not have the support of the people he represented?

guinnessdrinker

lugha wrote: »

The “terrorist” label is irrelevant. The PIRA took it upon themselves to use force on behalf of the Irish people when it was demonstrably obvious that the vast majority of the people did not support this means, even if a majority did support the same ends.

Can make an argument that Nelson Mandela similarly did not have the support of the people he represented?

So do you think whether a person should be labeled a terrorist or freedom fighter depends on the amount of support that particular person has?

--Kaiser--

Yes

lugha

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

So do you think whether a person should be labeled a terrorist or freedom fighter depends on the amount of support that particular person has?

I steer clear of the label “terrorist” altogether. The question to ask of those that use violence is whether or not their actions are justified.

It is not an easy question to answer, but I would think an obviously necessary (but not sufficient of course) condition is that a majority of the people you claim to represent support you.

granturismo

guinnessdrinker

lugha wrote: »

I steer clear of the label “terrorist” altogether. The question to ask of those that use violence is whether or not their actions are justified.

It is not an easy question to answer, but I would think an obviously necessary (but not sufficient of course) condition is that a majority of the people you claim to represent support you.

I get where you are coming from but for example would you say the majority of British people supported the war in Iraq and the violence that it entailed? And do the majority of those British citizens support the ongoing involvement in Afghanistan?

lugha

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

I get where you are coming from but for example would you say the majority of British people supported the war in Iraq and the violence that it entailed? And do the majority of those British citizens support the ongoing involvement in Afghanistan?

Well the British army, like any other army in a democracy, is under the control of the government. So, you should really ask if the government rather than the army have the support of the people. And of course, they do.

You plainly cannot expect that the people will approve of every decision their government will take, though there is certainly an argument that if you are going to do something big like involve your country in a war, you should get explicit permission from the people.

LordSutch

What ever happened to Mandela's wife Winnie? I seem to remember her waiting for him when he came out of prison, but you dont see much of her anymore!

fishy fishy

lugha wrote: »

The “terrorist” label is irrelevant. The PIRA took it upon themselves to use force on behalf of the Irish people when it was demonstrably obvious that the vast majority of the people did not support this means, even if a majority did support the same ends.

Can make an argument that Nelson Mandela similarly did not have the support of the people he represented?

oh, that oul line again. Covers a multitude.

Oink

LordSutch wrote: »

What ever happened to Mandela's wife Winnie? I seem to remember her waiting for him when he came out of prison, but you dont see much of her anymore!

That's because she's a wagon.

guinnessdrinker

lugha wrote: »

Well the British army, like any other army in a democracy, is under the control of the government. So, you should really ask if the government rather than the army have the support of the people. And of course, they do.

You plainly cannot expect that the people will approve of every decision their government will take, though there is certainly an argument that if you are going to do something big like involve your country in a war, you should get explicit permission from the people.

Good points about governments and true of course but I'm talking about popular support.

For example I don't think the supporters of the ANC or even Mandela himself would have supported all of that organisation's actions over the years. A lot of the actions of the ANC could have been described by some as terrorist attacks etc, so would that make Mandela a terrorist too?

Chuck Stone

Confab wrote: »

No rational person cares about partition in Ireland anymore.

What a terribly self-defeating, irrational statement to make.

By making the statement it shows that you actually care - because if you didn't care you wouldn't have made it. Hilarious!

There are lots of things I don't care about and you know what? I don't comment on them because, well, I don't care.

You funny.

fishy fishy

LordSutch wrote: »

What ever happened to Mandela's wife Winnie? I seem to remember her waiting for him when he came out of prison, but you dont see much of her anymore!

didn't winnie get herself into a bit of bother after nelson mandela was released - he had to distance himself from her and her "new friends'

Fratton Fred

LordSutch wrote: »

What ever happened to Mandela's wife Winnie? I seem to remember her waiting for him when he came out of prison, but you dont see much of her anymore!

She was a nasty piece of work.