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

The story of what led bobby sands to join the IRA

245678

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Zaph wrote: »
    The actual number of civilian deaths attributed to republican paramilitaries is 723. On top of that there were another 1,080 members of the security forces, so your figures are way off. And to describe 300 deaths as an astonishing number in the way you mean it is one of the most unbelievably crass things I've seen on this site in a long time.




    Yeah, real paragons of virtue they were. They were murdering scum, just like all the other organisations, from both sides, who killed people during the Troubles. To try and paint them as anything else is complete and utter bullsh*t.

    I was referring to the Provisional IRA the group Bobby Sands was in, I respect you're opinion but the way catholics were treated in Northern Ireland was disgusting they were treated like dogs the police force standing by as catholic houses are being burnt down the complete discrimination against catholics was horrible in my opinion the fight back was more than justified. Massacres like the springhill massacre, Ballymurphy massacre, bloody sunday were horrible it's easy to say they were murderers when you were far away from the mistreatment.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    "You're impressed that that they managed to kill only 300 civilians " , that's my point.

    Yes due to the nature of attacks it showed that they took extreme care to avoid civilian casualty.


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    jack923 wrote: »
    it's easy to say they were murderers when you were far away from the mistreatment.

    I'm going to guess jack that you were far away from it also, possibly not even alive?


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    jack923 wrote: »
    Yes due to the nature of attacks it showed that they took extreme care to avoid civilian casualty.

    Yep, placing bombs on busy shopping areas in random towns in England shows extreme care to avoid civilian casualties.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    NiallBoo wrote: »
    Can you provide a source of someone reputable claiming that all deaths during the troubles were caused by the IRA?

    If someone says that the IRA were at fault, it's not the same as saying they were the only ones at fault. Of course, one group also committing atrocities doesn't make atrocities committed by the other group does any less atrocious.

    As desperate of positions they might have found themselves in, you can't justify taking human life...and you certainly shouldn't try to celebrate and/or justify their mistakes in retrospect.

    After the dublin and monaghan bombings the Fine Gael TD went on to put the blame on the IRA! Absolutely sickening little did he know british forces orchestrated that attack for that very reason!


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Yep, placing bombs on busy shopping areas in random towns in England shows extreme care to avoid civilian casualties.

    Yeah you're kind of forgetting they gave warnings like a huge truck bomb in Manchester where nobody actually died.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,247 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    jack923 wrote: »
    I was referring to the Provisional IRA the group Bobby Sands was in

    Well in that case the total number of deaths that they were specifically responsible for was 1,696, including the majority of the aforementioned 723 civilian deaths caused by republicans.


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    jack923 wrote: »
    Yeah you're kind of forgetting they gave warnings like a huge truck bomb in Manchester where nobody actually died.

    Why would that matter?
    They killed hundreds of civilians, why does it matter that sometimes no one got killed?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Zaph wrote: »
    There's one in Tehran. Will that do?

    There's a burger joint named after him in Tehran too. Say what you like about the Iranians, but they do have a healthy sense of humour.

    http://www.vice.com/read/bobby-sands-burgers-tehran-545


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    jack923 wrote: »
    Yes due to the nature of attacks it showed that they took extreme care to avoid civilian casualty.

    Lord knows how many would be dead if they were careless.

    What's three hundred civilians lives worth to you Jack ?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Why would that matter?
    They killed hundreds of civilians, why does it matter that sometimes no one got killed?

    Actually the vast majority of the time civilians didn’t get killed, I hate when people say things like the Provisional IRA were indiscriminately killing people because it's simply not true even the british military acknowledged this, I can't remember the exact name of this attack but it was in a nightclub and a bomb blew up killing something like 10 soldiers and 6 civilians and initially the British public placed the blame on the Provos but a military chief came out saying it wasn't his reasoning being that they would have taken much greater measures to avoid civilian casualty so he blamed the INLA and he was right.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Lord knows how many would be dead if they were careless.

    What's three hundred civilians lives worth to you Jack ?

    They had the power to kill thousands of people in a week across Britain so you could only imagine what the count would actually be.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Phoebas wrote: »
    There's a burger joint named after him in Tehran too. Say what you like about the Iranians, but they do have a healthy sense of humour.

    http://www.vice.com/read/bobby-sands-burgers-tehran-545

    Fair play to Iran


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    jack923 wrote: »
    Bobby sands is an Irish hero and he's my hero too so I don't think I'm being disrespectful I think it's a great disrespect for there to not have been a street named after him.

    There is..............................in Iran


  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,247 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    jack923 wrote: »
    They had the power to kill thousands of people in a week across Britain so you could only imagine what the count would actually be.

    Well done them for their self-restraint. What's the appropriate response to that - a round of applause? Never has this guy been so appropriate. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    jack923 wrote: »
    They had the power to kill thousands of people in a week across Britain so you could only imagine what the count would actually be.

    You seem proud .


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    NiallBoo wrote: »
    you can't justify taking human life

    I've never before heard such claptrap. Pacifism is actually quite a sick ideology.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,247 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    jack923 wrote: »
    Actually the vast majority of the time civilians didn’t get killed, I hate when people say things like the Provisional IRA were indiscriminately killing people because it's simply not true even the british military acknowledged this, I can't remember the exact name of this attack but it was in a nightclub and a bomb blew up killing something like 10 soldiers and 6 civilians and initially the British public placed the blame on the Provos but a military chief came out saying it wasn't his reasoning being that they would have taken much greater measures to avoid civilian casualty so he blamed the INLA and he was right.

    You do realise to most normal, decent people it doesn't matter a damn whether it was the IRA or the INLA or whoever the hell else was at it that were responsible for any given act of violence. Murder is murder, everything else is just details.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Zaph wrote: »
    Well done them for their self-restraint. What's the appropriate response to that - a round of applause? Never has this guy been so appropriate. :rolleyes:

    It was a reply to someone who mentioned it.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    Zaph wrote: »
    Murder is murder.

    Sure it is. That great philosopher Baroness Thatcher expounded that one.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Zaph wrote: »
    You do realise to most normal, decent people it doesn't matter a damn whether it was the IRA or the INLA or whoever the hell else was at it that were responsible for any given act of violence. Murder is murder, everything else is just details.

    It certainly did matter at the time in the recent iraq war would it matter if the United States was slaughtering innocent civilians on purpose? Or would it not matter who it was.


  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,247 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    jack923 wrote: »
    It was a reply to someone who mentioned it.

    So? Whether it was a reply or not is irrelevant, it was still a stupid statement.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Jesus. wrote: »
    Sure it is. That great philosopher Baroness Thatcher expounded that one.

    The Queen of Britain certainly didn’t think that, otherwise she wouldn't have put medals around the necks of the murderes of bloody sunday.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Jesus. wrote: »
    I've never before heard such claptrap. Pacifism is actually quite a sick ideology.

    Agreed. That's a moronic statement.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    Zaph wrote: »
    So? Whether it was a reply or not is irrelevant, it was still a stupid statement.

    It was just stating a fact he said how many would be killed if they were careless and I replied.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,504 ✭✭✭NiallBoo


    Look OP, I feel a sorry for you here. It might seem tempting to look at people from the past who found themselves in desperate situations* and be impressed by how they took action and had the courage of their convictions.

    But step back and look at it. People resorted to murder to try and obtain their rights and others resorted to murder to protect what they feared others world take from them. How does this make any sense? How do you protect human rights by taking life itself?

    Acting with conviction doesn't make you right.

    Now look at the result of their actions? What would have have happened if there had been no armed violence? - probably about 15-20 years of things being crap for Catholics but with gradual change in the right direction and eventually parity without the animosity or polarisation.

    Instead violence lead to decades of death, polarised and divided communities and hatred, further shaping people into thinking that violence and hatred are the only options. This is still going on today and is still the dominant force in northern Ireland.

    OP, you have the benefit of being in a much less shìtty position than the people who made those mistakes¤. Please don't think of this as looking at two sides and picking the right one. They were both idiots. But it's everyone else - the people who didn't believe in violence but had it forced on them, the people who are caught in the world misshapen by others, and the people who haven't been born yet who are forced to pay the price for their mistakes.



    *And I agree that they were horrible times for Catholics. No doubt that many were treated with a lot less than their civil rights or Hunan dignity.
    ¤unless you're writing this from Syria, in which case you have my sympathy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,504 ✭✭✭NiallBoo


    Jesus. wrote: »
    I've never before heard such claptrap. Pacifism is actually quite a sick ideology.

    ...you came across somewhat differently in your book...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    NiallBoo wrote: »
    Look OP, I feel a sorry for you here. It might seem tempting to look at people from the past who found themselves in desperate situations* and be impressed by how they took action and had the courage of their convictions.

    But step back and look at it. People resorted to murder to try and obtain their rights and others resorted to murder to protect what they feared others world take from them. How does this make any sense? How do you protect human rights by taking life itself?

    Acting with conviction doesn't make you right.

    Now look at the result of their actions? What would have have happened if there had been no armed violence? - probably about 15-20 years of things being crap for Catholics but with gradual change in the right direction and eventually parity without the animosity or polarisation.

    Instead violence lead to decades of death, polarised and divided communities and hatred, further shaping people into thinking that violence and hatred are the only options. This is still going on today and is still the dominant force in northern Ireland.

    OP, you have the benefit of being in a much less shìtty position than the people who made those mistakes¤. Please don't think of this as looking at two sides and picking the right one. They were both idiots. But it's everyone else - the people who didn't believe in violence but had it forced on them, the people who are caught in the world misshapen by others, and the people who haven't been born yet who are forced to pay the price for their mistakes.



    *And I agree that they were horrible times for Catholics. No doubt that many were treated with a lot less than their civil rights or Hunan dignity.
    ¤unless you're writing this from Syria, in which case you have my sympathy.

    I do agree with you to an extent but the people couldn't see into the future at that time, the people at that time thought that the only way to make things better in the long run was to resort to violence to achieve appropriate protection to their communities and for a better future for their children and to fight back and achieve a United Ireland in which their communities would be protected by the likes of the gardai and the Irish army if necessary and then to work on peace from there.

    The people at that time thought their children were going to have no future, they thought the only future their children would have was discrimination and hatred and that fighting back was the only way to achieve a good future for their children.

    I don't consider these people monsters like some people do I consider them people who fought for what they believed was not only right but necessary and many of them gave their lives to try and achieve it, I consider them heroes to be completely honest.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    NiallBoo wrote: »
    Look OP, I feel a sorry for you here. It might seem tempting to look at people from the past who found themselves in desperate situations* and be impressed by how they took action and had the courage of their convictions.

    But step back and look at it. People resorted to murder to try and obtain their rights and others resorted to murder to protect what they feared others world take from them. How does this make any sense? How do you protect human rights by taking life itself?

    Acting with conviction doesn't make you right.

    Now look at the result of their actions? What would have have happened if there had been no armed violence? - probably about 15-20 years of things being crap for Catholics but with gradual change in the right direction and eventually parity without the animosity or polarisation.

    Instead violence lead to decades of death, polarised and divided communities and hatred, further shaping people into thinking that violence and hatred are the only options. This is still going on today and is still the dominant force in northern Ireland.

    OP, you have the benefit of being in a much less shìtty position than the people who made those mistakes¤. Please don't think of this as looking at two sides and picking the right one. They were both idiots. But it's everyone else - the people who didn't believe in violence but had it forced on them, the people who are caught in the world misshapen by others, and the people who haven't been born yet who are forced to pay the price for their mistakes.



    *And I agree that they were horrible times for Catholics. No doubt that many were treated with a lot less than their civil rights or Hunan dignity.
    ¤unless you're writing this from Syria, in which case you have my sympathy.

    As I said it's quite easy to look at history and say this is what should have happened but the people at that time don't know that and don't forget 1916 was very recent history there is no doubt they were inspired by that.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 418 ✭✭jack923


    NiallBoo wrote: »
    Look OP, I feel a sorry for you here. It might seem tempting to look at people from the past who found themselves in desperate situations* and be impressed by how they took action and had the courage of their convictions.

    But step back and look at it. People resorted to murder to try and obtain their rights and others resorted to murder to protect what they feared others world take from them. How does this make any sense? How do you protect human rights by taking life itself?

    Acting with conviction doesn't make you right.

    Now look at the result of their actions? What would have have happened if there had been no armed violence? - probably about 15-20 years of things being crap for Catholics but with gradual change in the right direction and eventually parity without the animosity or polarisation.

    Instead violence lead to decades of death, polarised and divided communities and hatred, further shaping people into thinking that violence and hatred are the only options. This is still going on today and is still the dominant force in northern Ireland.

    OP, you have the benefit of being in a much less shìtty position than the people who made those mistakes¤. Please don't think of this as looking at two sides and picking the right one. They were both idiots. But it's everyone else - the people who didn't believe in violence but had it forced on them, the people who are caught in the world misshapen by others, and the people who haven't been born yet who are forced to pay the price for their mistakes.



    *And I agree that they were horrible times for Catholics. No doubt that many were treated with a lot less than their civil rights or Hunan dignity.
    ¤unless you're writing this from Syria, in which case you have my sympathy.

    And also please don't forget that peaceful means were attempted first, civil rights marches and such were attempted but we're beaten off the streets by police and loyalists. The IRA decided that peaceful means would be best but when that didn't work they brought back their military campaign but was strictly defensive I believe they started their offensive campaign in 1972.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement