It is time for the IRA to disband.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

mneylon

Originally posted by daveirl
Actually the Nationalist community welcomed the British army into Northern Ireland as they were supposed to protect them.

Initially yes. But you seem to have a very selective memory/knowledge of the entire story.

20 Times 20 Times

the question is would the talk that has happened and are ahppening of happened if the 30 years of troubles didnt happen ... NO THEY WOULD NOT!!!!!!

the fact is that nationalist always had to fight to get there voices heard as lets be honest who could see any nationalist party sitting down for talk in the late 70`s without the 30 years of fighting sinn fein would never be sitting where they are now .... like it or not but repubilcians had to figfht to get there voices heard....

Johnny_the_fox

Originally posted by daveirl
Actually the Nationalist community welcomed the British army into Northern Ireland as they were supposed to protect them.

The british army was sent by British Government because the catholics where being burnt out off their houses....

Zombrex

Originally posted by blacknight
Wicknight: Are the IRA active?
No.
So what is your point?

Er, what?

The IRA are active. Even if they weren't active, the fact that they could become active when ever they wanted is just as bad.

Originally posted by blacknight
So democracy plus army = acceptable?

Representative and accountable army, yes.

The British army, at the hight of the troubles, committed war crimes against the people of Northern Ireland, such as the firing on unarmed civilians, killing roughly 190. They tried to hide this fact, because they knew that they are an army of a legitimate state, and as such have a standard to hold to, which they let down. And when pieces of evidence of how they acted comes out there is, rightly so, outrage both here and in Britian. A legtimate army cannot be allowed to act like that.

The IRA are accountable to no one, and they serve no one. They are not the army of any democractic state or organisation. They are a terrorist organisation, who by definition fight by using war crimes as a tactic. They target civilians on purpose to provoke an emotional response from their enemies. What standard should people demand the IRA hold to??

I think the British army acted in the most horrific way during the troubles and I hope the army is never allowed to again act like that (though looking at the Iraq war it doesn't look good). But is it mind boggling to me how anyone can agree with that statement but still think a terrorist organisation such as the IRA is an acceptable form of military presence (not saying you do, but I know plenty of people who do).

Originally posted by blacknight
Besides the IRA are pro GFA.

The IRA claim to be pro GFA but still continue to be active and to act as an illegal "police" force (for want of a better term). The two are not compatable.

Originally posted by Raskolnikov
Nationalists are left without anything to defend themselves with. Nationalists would become ripe for ethnic cleansing and I certainly don't trust the British army to defend my family and friends in the North.

The IRA does not "defend" nationalists any more than the loyalists "defend" Ulster by trying to blow up Dublin. They only carry out revenge attacks that kill innocent people.

You trust the IRA not to blow your friends up in the first place? That is very good of you. Do you know how many civilians have the IRA accidently blow to pieces since Short Strand? Would you like them protecting you?

Originally posted by blacknight
Of course nobody ever asks the unionists to handover the guns .......

Actually everyone asks the unionist to hand over guns, including the unionists.

But that is beside the point. The thread is about the IRA. This deflective argument is a bit tiresome. It is like when you get caught in school robbing money and you say "yeah but timmy was doing it as well". That may be true, but you were still doing something bold. The fact is not diminisied because others did it also.

mneylon

The fact is not diminisied because others did it also.

That is where our opinions diverge.

Zombrex

Well you either do something or you don't. The fact that other people do it should not effect the morality the action. Other people get drunk and beat the **** out of their wives, does that mean if I do it, it is less of a big deal? Other people kidnap and murder people, so if the IRA do it is less of a big deal?

Atreides

Originally posted by mike65
Democracy & Private Army - Not compatible
Private Army & Democracy - Not compatible

Hmmm. Which bit don't you understand?

Mike.

Democracy is majority rules, do you think that would be a good thing for Northern Ireland?

Originally posted by Skanger
Democracy is majority rules, do you think that would be a good thing for Northern Ireland?

Well as NI is legally and technically part of the UK ( at the moment ) it's subject to the Democratic majority Rule of the UK parliament, which isn't a bad thing really currently anyway, considering that parliament along with our own took account of the warped sense of values prevalent among many politicians on both sides in NI when negotiating the Good Friday agreement.

As regards the IRA being active still-yes they are , most definitely.
However there is a BUT to be taken with that.
They are active because large sections of the nationalist community there still wouldn't trust the PSNI as far as they could throw them.
Its going to take the 50:50 recruitment policy years to make any inroads on that view.
In the meantime there is an understandable vaccum there which, the illegal army still fills.

Unpalletable as it may seem to those in the Republic, removed for such a long time , with the exception of some incidents from the Norths troubles ( and it's associated sectarianism ) that is the facual situation up there, and textbook cures don't work for that.
Time might.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Skanger
Democracy is majority rules, do you think that would be a good thing for Northern Ireland?

Would you think minority rules would be better?

bonkey

Originally posted by Wicknight
The IRA are active. Even if they weren't active, the fact that they could become active when ever they wanted is just as bad.

And therein lies the entire crux of the matter.

When the IRA announced their ceasefire, there was a lot of noise being made - which forutnately came to nothing - about how this wasn't going to change anything because of the emergence of "splinter IRA" groups (e.g. the Real IRA).

Time passes, and stumbling block after stumbling block gets reached because of an insistence that the IRA must disarm now.

Now thats changed, and we have a new stumbling block - the IRA must disband.

But what does any of that achieve? A disarmed IRA can re-arm itself should it decide to return to its terroristic ways. A disbanded IRA can reform should it decide to return to its terroristic ways.

In fact, there is absolutely nothing which the IRA can do which can prove they have forsaken violence. Even were they to line up and ritually commit suicide with their own weapons, leaving a pile of bodies and weapons for the authorities to pick up after them, someone simply has to say "but how do we know thats all of them" for it all to start over again. We could impose an X-year limit within which they would have t remain peaceful in order to who their good intentions....and someone can just say "but that doesn't mean they won't return to violence a day later."

Its impossible, and to be quite honest, those who use it as a stopping-point in their negotiations know that its impossible. They know that there is simply no way the IRA will ever disappear as a stopping-block they can put in the way of anything.

Just look at the disarming farce - the IRA started to comply within the rules which were agreed, and the first thing that happened is that people who signed up to the agreement suddenly were not willing to accept the terms they had themselves negotiated and agreed to. Why not?

I challenge anyone who insists on the disbanding of the IRA being a necessary step to outline how it can be done in a manner which will actually prove the IRA has disbanded, and which will ensure the IRA never re-bands. I'm pretty sure that no-one can do it.....but look how many of you are insisting that its necessary.

Ad far as I can see, the situation in the North is rapidly devolving back to a cycle of violence. Some will say that this was proof that the IRA were never serious about putting their violent ways behind them. Others will say that it is proof the unionists were never really serious about negotiating in the first place.

The sad thing is both views are probably right.

From an external point of view, obviously the IRA should disband. Then again, from an external point of view, so should every other paramilitary organisation in the North. Negotiations should be carried out openly and honestly by all sides with a willingness to find common ground lest failure to do so commit the country to another cycle of violence.

Thats all nice and clear and obvious. Unfortunately, its also completely removed from reality.

jc

Mighty_Mouse

"It was time the IRA disbanded a long long time ago. If they had... we'd already have a United Ireland. They are whats stopping that, not the unionists.

DeV.

"

Thats just ridiculous!!!

IMO there would be no movement on civil rights for nationalists/catholics in NI without the IRA.

The general point made by most people against the IRA is :

"the IRA has no place in a democracy!"

This is correct and thats why there has been a cease-fire for 10yrs. There has been substantial movement on decommissioning, apologies, "war is over" statements etc etc. At the moment the will of republicans has been tested again and again and yet the committment to a political struggle has remained and is growing stronger.

The IRA did not come in to existance for the sake of it. People did not take up murdering as a happy pasttime!! The IRA grew in numbers during the struggle when northern nationalists were so desperate for change in their society they turned to arms.

To misrepresent the reason/need for the IRA in the first place means misunderstanding why, as an organisation , it still exists.

In essence the IRA is "winding down" - you cant just ask or expect an immediate disbandment of the IRA given its history, members, struggle and the conntext for its existence.

Mighty_Mouse

what bonkey said!

For those who argue anti-sinn fein/ and IRA....

Ask youselves this question...................

What would convice you the IRA is serious about the political struggle?


Do you need a "war is over" - got it
Disbandment - got it
apology - got it

etc
etc


You now want a " the ira has disbanded! " - if you get this will you be happy to switch your focus onto the working of politics.

and what will this statement mean! How will it be different to the "war is over",

Its a complete smoke and mirrors argument created by anti-cooperative uniionists and the media!

bonkey

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
To misrepresent the reason/need for the IRA in the first place means misunderstanding why, as an organisation , it still exists.

In essence the IRA is "winding down" - you cant just ask or expect an immediate disbandment of the IRA given its history, members, struggle and the conntext for its existence.

Well, now, I'm not entirely sure I agree with this.

Firstly, there was never a need for the IRA. There were reasons why it came into being, yes, but there was no need for it. So lets not confuse those two words or imply that they are in any way interchangeable.

Secondly, the question of whether or not the IRA is "winding down" is still an open one. It could just be biding its time. There is no proof that it is winding down - such proof would be akin in nature to proof that it had permanently disbanded - and I've already argued that such proof simply cannot exist in the latter case...which you agreed with.

jc

Zombrex

Originally posted by bonkey
I challenge anyone who insists on the disbanding of the IRA being a necessary step to outline how it can be done in a manner which will actually prove the IRA has disbanded, and which will ensure the IRA never re-bands. I'm pretty sure that no-one can do it.....but look how many of you are insisting that its necessary

The arm dumps are destroyed with independent verification, and (most importantly) Sinn Fein come out and say that the IRA had disbanded, that they no longer exist. The IRA that Sinn Fein represent needs to go, and Sinn Fein can tell us if they have. Sinn Fein wouldn't lie about something like that, it would be too disasterous for them if they were found out.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
"It was time the IRA disbanded a long long time ago. If they had... we'd already have a United Ireland. They are whats stopping that, not the unionists.

DeV.

"

Thats just ridiculous!!!

IMO there would be no movement on civil rights for nationalists/catholics in NI without the IRA.

That is stupid ... the IRA held back civil rights for decades, because they gave the British government an excuse to ignore the legitimate civil rights violations of Catholics while claiming they don't give in to terrorist demands. The IRA highjacked the civil rights movement and set it back decades.

bonkey

Originally posted by Wicknight
The arm dumps are destroyed with independent verification,

Which ones? Which arms dumps exactly

Are you trying to tell me that anyone except the IRA knows exactly what weapons, and how many of each the IRA has? If not, then how could you possibly verify that they had completely disarmed.

Not only that, but how would decomissioning prevent the acquisition of new weapons? Or would complete disclosure of funds also be a requirement? And again - how could you ever know its complete??

Just look at the existing fiasco surrounding an independantly verified, negotiated-and-agreed-by-the-unionists decomissioning process to see how easy a step this is.

The process goes like this : negotiate, agree, have the IRA eventually act on it, disregard and discount it all as meaningless because you can never be sure of everything.

and (most importantly) Sinn Fein come out and say that the IRA had disbanded, that they no longer exist.

Sinn Fein denied for years that they had any formal connection with the IRA. This was widely discounted.

Now you're telling me that if they came out and said "the IRA has permamently disbanded" everyone would just believe them?

If so, then why didn't they believe them when Sinn Fein came out and said "the IRA has permanently put violence behind them", and why hasn't this been disastrous for them given that many people are alleging that its clearly not true?????

Sinn Fein wouldn't lie about something like that, it would be too disasterous for them if they were found out.

See above comments.

None of the lies Sinn Fein has told in the past, or indeed statements which were discounted without ever been shown to be false have been disastrous for them. You seem to forget that they became a significant political party while maintaining their connection to the IRA. Why would people willing to vote for a party linked to terrorism care if that party lied about putting terrorism behind it? Not only that, but why would it matter, because the only time it would be proveable that Sinn Fein lied would be if the IRA abandoned its peaceful stance and returned to politically-motivated terrorism again? In such a case, the GFA would be dead and buried anyway, and it wouldn't matter how disastrous it would be for Sinn Fein.

jc

Mighty_Mouse

Still we have no answer. Proposals that wont work or cant be verified and so the whole thing is smoke and mirrors. The cease fire and peace process is important not all this other crap which is a compltely impossible mess and series of new dead ends which cant be resolved.

I mean to say that the british were "just about" to give nationalists some civil rights in NI is only laughable!!! Its not like they had enough time to do ti before the last 30 yrs.

I havent fully defined my thoughts in the whole terrorism issue. But dont tell that eniskillen, the army scared ****less, canary warf......didnt make the british government adress the situation. Whatever you think of these tragic events ...........thats the way it was.

They brits just didnt care how many paddys died and thats just it. Same process as Nelson Mandela/ANC took in South Africa. A peaceful protest is all very good when the right of the opressed people to do so is respected!!. What can you do when peace protests are crushed with an iron fist?

Again for a person to pick up a gun and blow an 18 yr old army officers head officer shows a desperate need for change! If I had lived through, family deaths, poverty, unemployment, biased police force, no political representation ................who knows what would of happened.

The IRA developed in a NI nationalists society that needed it at the time. The need no longer exists and in effect neither does the IRA.
(I think your the one becoming confused between the resons for/need for etc ) Anyone who joined the IRA felt they needed to.........when a large number of people support the organisation the the society needs.......etc

I believe that the IRA will never again take up arms. I would argue differently if I didnt.

Its been 10 yrs through serious testing and they've held

Sparks

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I believe that the IRA will never again take up arms. I would argue differently if I didnt.
Its been 10 yrs through serious testing and they've held

No, it's been a decade and no-one has been blown up or shot.

Punishment beatings, however, have continued unabated, and while it takes a few minutes more to beat a man to death with a sledgehammer than it does to shoot him, he's just as dead or crippled in the end.

And on Friday, three IRA men wandered into Kellys (a pub in the middle of the city), beat a man unconcious with iron bars, dragged him outside and threw him into a van and drove off. If the PSNI hadn't stopped the van and caught them, do you think they'd have wound up sitting round a table drinking coffee and resolving their differences through dialogue?

Not active my arse.

DeVore

That is the most ridiculous statement I've seen in a long time. The IRA are hardly the root of the problem. There a are other republican groups that have, admittedly, caused problems since the introduction of the GFA. However, the real stumbling block has been and remains the unionists' unwillingness to share power.

I'm a catholic by birth. That birth was in Lagan Valley Hospital near the Lagan river in Antrim. My family were burned out of our house by loyalists. Just to put a few things straight.


Do you seriously think that Mr Paisleys worst nightmare isnt democracy? Imagine if the IRA disbanded completely tomorrow. Gave them everything they wanted and unconditionally committed themselves to the democratic process. Do you think if they said that this was because, in light of 9/11 and what have you, they had seen Mr Bush's "light" and decided to totally and fully commit themselves to the democractic process... .do you think they wouldnt control the north in a matter of years, maybe even months.

You realise that the voting in the north is on a knife edge yes? That while the catholics used to be the minority, that that will be true for bugger all time at the rate catholics multiply (and I'm not even joking with that comment).

Why is you think they are so opposed to any move where they govern themselves.... its because in a democractic system it is merely a matter of time before the catholics literally out-fnck them.

And dont give me the "IRA were for civil rights" line. John Hume and the SDLP did more for anyones rights up there then the IRA. My father and mother lived in the front lines on the road between Shankill and the Falls.... the way they tell it, the IRA were only marginally better then the loyalists to them and if you werent willing to be sectarian, if you helped people unconditionally, then you might as well be protestant in their eyes.

In this day and age, Sky News and the power of the media are far far more powerful weapons then anything the IRA has in its arsenal. Maggie Thatcher understood this.
The English would be embarrased into a democratic system in the north and then its off with the rubbers boys and the loyalist's worst nightmare comes to pass, they'd get ****ed out of the country.

My family history is litered with men who died for this country. Both my grandfathers were high up in the civil war, one was Collins' Aide De Comp. I'm quite nationalistic but there is no cause I would kill for.

DeV.

Mighty_Mouse

A a lovely man he was too. An upstanding member of our society!!!

Two things:
1. dont be too quick to judge this incident
2. hence the need for a police force republicans trust

DeVore

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
A a lovely man he was too. An upstanding member of our society!!!

Two things:
1. dont be too quick to judge this incident

Why not, they did!

2. hence the need for a police force republicans trust

Kinda hard to complain about a protestant dominated force when they have a tendancy to shoot catholics who join it....

DeV.

Sparks

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
A a lovely man he was too. An upstanding member of our society!!!

WHO THE **** CARES?
I don't care if he was Edie ****ing Amin, you do not support thugs beating the ****e out of people in the middle of a ****ing pub in the city centre.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sparks
Not active my arse.

Has it been proven it was the IRA that Sinn Fein still has connections to and not some splinter group which has broken off from Sinn Fein and is completely unrelated to them?

jc

Sparks

Originally posted by bonkey
Has it been proven it was the IRA that Sinn Fein still has connections to and not some splinter group which has broken off from Sinn Fein and is completely unrelated to them?

This specific incident on friday? No. Punishment beatings over the last decade? Yes, several times. There have been convictions in a few cases.

The odd news of the day is that the four arrested on friday are not being charged with membership of a proscribed organisation.

Johnny_the_fox

i have to agree - dont be quick to judge the incident...

When Stormont was raided by the PSNI - over claims that there was an IRA spy ring at its centre.. Stormont collapsed and the GFA was delayed again.. <the media present didnt help the matter>

The charges were withdrawn...

My point is the media and the british have hyped the matter ... give it time...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Cork

Let arms be decommissioned.
Let Punishment beatings stop
Put "P O' Neill" out to pasture

Why should we tolerate bunches of thugs running around beating up people?

Do you think abductions are part of normal politics?

Sand

Whilst the IRA are a despicable organisation of thugs, at least they are an organisation if a shakey one.

As bad as the situation is and as unacceptable as the IRA is, its better for it to dwindle away by no further recrutiment and its curent membership getting older and hopefully deader than to be suddenly disbanded and all the gangs of crinimals with their stockpiles of weapons suddenly be let off to do their own thing with no Army Council or "superiours" keeping them under some sort of control.