Pathetic interview with Russian politician

Ireland was almost wholly dependant on the crop. And it was not British-induced poverty that forced us to depend on the potato, it was the high-yield nature of the crop that enabled us to have larger families, leading to a population increase that was unsustainable without[/] the potato.

It was also a lack of effective crop rotation by Irish landowners, that also lead to the famine. The Famine was as much Irish people's fault as it was the British Empire's. Its just convenient to blame the British for it and avoid responsibility.

arcadegame2004 - I answered your questions in regards to Chechnya, could you answer my own question to you as to whether you believe Chechen rebels were committing serious human-rights abuses?

(Getting back on thread for a sec)

arcadegame2004

Deleted User wrote:

arcadegame2004 - I answered your questions in regards to Chechnya, could you answer my own question to you as to whether you believe Chechen rebels were committing serious human-rights abuses?

(Getting back on thread for a sec)

Yes in the case of Beslan. However, the human-rights groups all agree that the vasy majority of abuses in Chechnya are being conducted by the brutal Russian army. There have been some cases of abuses of civilians iin Chechnya aswell by the rebels (from one or other faction of them) but that is far less in scale than the Russian abuses. Russia's strategy seems to be to kill males of fighting age. Teenager boys are rounded up on their way to school and elsewhere and never seen again. To add insult to injury their families are then often forced to pay their life-savings to get the remains.

There have been some cases of abuses of civilians iin Chechnya aswell by the rebels (from one or other faction of them) but that is far less in scale than the Russian abuses.

I know abt the russian abuses. They've been repeated here on these boards multiple times. I was wondering though were you aware of the Chechen doing the same, which you seem to be. This is not the case of one being worse than the other. Both sides are behaving this way, and are responsible for the reprecussions.

sceptre

Has this turned into one of those "I support the Jets and they do bad things in urban bohemia but the Sharks are so much worse" things already?

Has this turned into one of those "I support the Jets and they do bad things in urban bohemia but the Sharks are so much worse" things already?

err, I didn't mean to lead it that way.... was curious were his sympathies totally one sided or not. <shrugs>

arcadegame2004

Quite frankly, how anyone can have the slightest sypathy for an army that has butchered 300,000 innocent people, and used torture, rape, extortion and mutilation, and kidnapping is beyong me.

I prefer to side with a small country that, like Ireland, was oppressed brutally by an evil regime.

I personally believe that the EU must demand that Russia allows the OSCE mission in Chechnya to resume (they refused to renew it in 2002) and unimpeded access for the Red Cross and other international aid-agencies. If they refuse then we must stop future loans to Russia until they change their minds.

Our weak-willed EU leaders and the US have been grossly negligent in addressing the Chechen issue. For 5 years they have sat back and said hardly anything and done even less while a nation is being exterminated. Our Government had an opportunity to bring this up during our Presidency of the EU and did NOTHING.

sceptre

Deleted User wrote:

err, I didn't mean to lead it that way.... was curious were his sympathies totally one sided or not. <shrugs>

Naw, I was doing the same thing as you but trying to do even less finger pointing. I'm being a bit simplistic here but if you're going to pick up a knife, someone else on the other side is going to pick up a gun. I'm far more interested in why the first guy picked up a knife. Because this agreement has a long history it's less important who picked up the knife and more important as to how we get both people to put the gun away. Yeah, I said "both". This "your side is worse then mine" thing has been done to death in every (relatively) petty conflict around the world and it gets a bit tiresome while people die - innocents on both sides (hence the West Side Story/R&J reference). Which is what you were saying...

arcadegame2004

I'm far more interested in why the first guy picked up a knife.

If you mean you want background then here it is:

Before 1991, Chechnya and the neighbouring republic of Ingushetia (also Muslim) were part of the one republic called the Chechen-Ingushetian Soviet Republic. Unlike Ukraine and the other "Union Republics" that were allowed to secede, this was a republic within Russia (Russia conquered Chechnya in the 19th century after a war lasting about 60 years where the Chechens were led by Imam Shamil).

In 1991, Chechnya declared independence from Russia. The Ingush part of the republic refused to break away from Russia and so Chechnya went ahead on its own, though Russia refused to recognise it. Gorbachev warned Yeltsin in 1994 (according to comments attributed to him on the BBC website) not to use force to bring Chechnya to heel because this would cause bloodshed but Yeltsin wouldn't listen. In 1994, Yeltsin ordered the invasion of Chechnya. Unlike the second Chechen war, the media were allowed in. After the deaths of at least 100,000 Chechens, the Russian general Alexander Lebed reached a peace deal givign Chechnya de-facto independence, with the final-status talks to be held later. Aslan Maskhadov was elected President of Chechnya in elections declared free-and-fair by International observers.

During Chechen independence there was a lot of kidnappings. However, it is widely suspected that the Russian secre-service was behinf much of this, especially since Yeltsin's aid, tycoon Boris Berezovsky, happened to turn up to get many released (presumably to pay the ransoms - unless the kidnappings were staged of course) - in order to portray Chechens as unable to govern themselves. (Of course Ireland went through a period of anarchy for about a year after we became independent and since then we have clearly shown we can govern ourselves, thank you very much.

In 1999, there were a number of apartment-block bombings in Moscow. Putin blamed it on the Chechens but President Maskhadov denied involvement. In our experience from NI, the terrorists usually admit responsibility, especially since, from their point of view, their political 'point' has not been made otherwise. An organisation of revolutionary-writers claimed responsibility for the blast by Russia ignored this. Amid rumours that Putin had ordered the bombings as a pretext to invade Chechnya and gain popularity (Putin was then PM and was unpopular before the war in Chechnya), Russia invaded the country. They later imposed an effective media-blackout on Chechnya ever since, amid widespread reports of massacres, rapes, kidnappings and extortion by the Russian military.

At the time of the invasion, Preisident Clinton accused the Russians of "violating the Geneva Convention" and condemned the invasion. EU leaders were about to consider imposing economic-sanctions when 911 happened. Since then, Western leaders have allowed themselves to be duped by Putin that his invasion of Chechnya is just part of the "US-led war on terror". Al-Qaida laterintervened to help the Chechens. A desperate people being exterminated cannot be choosy about whose help they accept, but it has allowed Russia to wrongly portray all Chechen rebels as part of "International Terrorism" when it is in fact a war of independence. The US demanded that the Chechen rebels end any links with Al-Qaida or else links with Washington would be cut. This seems not have happened, but as I said before, can you be choosy about whose help to accept when genocide is being committed against your people? I think not.

Russia has demanded the extradition of the representative of President Maskhadov (Akhmad Zakayev) (who has gained asylum in Britain) and the former foreign-minister Ilyas Akhmadov (a political refugee in the US). Russia lost a case in the British courts to extradite the former because the judge ruled he might be tortured and that what was happening in Chechnya was a war. not merely terrorism. (One of the charges made against Zakayev was that of "waging war", which is a bit much coming from Putin). I urge EU states and other Western states to refuse to extradite any Chechen rebels unless they had involvement in the terror attacks outside of Chechnya on Russia. I also call on the International Criminal Court to indict President Vladimir Putin on genocide charges.

sceptre

arcadegame2004 wrote:

If you mean you want background then here it is:

Thanks, don't need it and it goes back just an ickle bit before when Right Said Fred were heading the UK charts. That's the point I'm getting to, hope you don't miss it the second time.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=1917464

Quite frankly, how anyone can have the slightest sypathy for an army that has butchered 300,000 innocent people, and used torture, rape, extortion and mutilation, and kidnapping is beyong me.

Seems like double standards to me. You can sympathise with the small nations, but not any innocent soldiers, career soldiers, doctors etc. You're painting the entire Russian Army with the same brush, for something only those posted to that region are responsible for.
At the same time, you conveniently brush away the rebels own acts of Terrorism , since the Russians have done worse. If the Rebels had the same numbers as the Russians, would their acts be on par?

I prefer to side with a small country that, like Ireland, was oppressed brutally by an evil regime.

Evil regime? I'm assuming you're talkin abt the British Empire? It wasn't Evil. It was just powerful. No different in its actions than the French empire, The German (African Colonies), The Italiens, etc etc. It was an empire pure and simple.

Oppression? We were just conquered.

As for Russia, they're no more Evil than the US in Iraq. They're responding to a rebellion which is using Guerrila warfare that targets both civilian & military targets. Palestine has shown that such tactics cause the occupying government to apply barbaric measures. The rebels are as responsible for the situation.

I personally believe that the EU must demand that Russia allows the OSCE mission in Chechnya to resume (they refused to renew it in 2002) and unimpeded access for the Red Cross and other international aid-agencies. If they refuse then we must stop future loans to Russia until they change their minds.

The EU is an economic organisation. It has no right to interfere in politics. If you said the UN I might agree with you, though. As for stopping loans, the people who suffer would be the citizens of Russia, not the government. Enforced peacekeeping by Un advisors with the co-operation of Russian forces, would be acceptable though.

Our weak-willed EU leaders and the US have been grossly negligent in addressing the Chechen issue. For 5 years they have sat back and said hardly anything and done even less while a nation is being exterminated. Our Government had an opportunity to bring this up during our Presidency of the EU and did NOTHING.

What do you expect them to do. March through a nuclear power's borders and hope that a war across Europe wouldn't occur? besides, do you really expect the Rebels to stop killing while they're being occupied by other foreign forces? Will they lay down their arms? I seriously doubt it.

Personally I think the Chechen people have been negligent about the situation that they've placed themselves in. They've had opportunities for independence in the past and have failed to sieze those moments. Also the rebels indesciminate use of terror against Russian Civilians, shows their lack of responsibility.

I'd rather see the Russians & the Chechen people being willing to seek peaceful negotiations and being serious abt peace before any foreign involvement occurs.

Its one thing to condemn European leaders for not acting, when you don't consider the remifications of such a action. A strong Russia is to be desired, not a russia thats falling apart, incapable of defending itself without European aid.

Since then, Western leaders have allowed themselves to be duped by Putin that his invasion of Chechnya is just part of the "US-led war on terror". Al-Qaida laterintervened to help the Chechens. A desperate people being exterminated cannot be choosy about whose help they accept, but it has allowed Russia to wrongly portray all Chechen rebels as part of "International Terrorism" when it is in fact a war of independence.

You say that AQ have helped in Chechnya, and then say that Putin has duped the western leaders by claiming that he's partaking in the war against Terror. Which is it really? Chechen Rebels are acting like terrorists, with their targetting of civilians, so his excuse is actually accurate.

As for accepting AQ help, because they're being exterminated; They're not being exterminated. They're being subdued. And accepting help from AQ just tarnishes their desire for independence. It is the Chechen rebels themselves that have given Putin the ammo to portray them as being Terrorists.

This seems not have happened, but as I said before, can you be choosy about whose help to accept when genocide is being committed against your people? I think not.

I'd like to repeat this again there is no genocide in Chechnya. Many posters have said this.


arcadegame2004 -
I'm not denying that Russia is free from guilt, they're definetly not. But I can't see where this blind faith you have in Chechen Rebels stems from. Their acts have placed them in the same category as the Russian death squads. Their actions have turned many away from the Chechen desire for Independence.

You see I can't support the independence of a people who are willing to perform any act to become so. There's a limit and the Chechen Rebels are coming damn close to that limit.

arcadegame2004

Legal definition of genocide:

1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and

2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide."

Just tell me please klaz what the rape of men and women, torture, mass-executions and disappearances has to do with "subduing" a nation? What do these acts have to do with "fighting terror"? Mass-executions clearly fall into the "intent to destroy in ... part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group" category needed to be called genocide. The Geneva Convention forbids the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians. If genocide is not going on, then please explain to me why Russia has made it virtually impossible for Western reporters to get into Chechnya? What are they hiding? I recall Milosevic did this also when the war in Kosovo started. And we later discovered the mass-graves.

If anything, these actions by the Russians are only creating more Black-Widows willing to blow themselves up. It is like Israel's oppression of the Palestinians except MUCH WORSE, especially since the TV cameras aren't allowed into Chechnya without military minders, and then they are forbidden from talking to ordinary Chechens (no doubt Putin doesn't want them to talk about how the Russian troops have destroyed their lives and massacred their children, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters etc.). And Putin calls them terrorists! People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, Vlad!

AQ's involvement in this conflict is fairly recent and reflects the radicalisation of a generation of Chechens by the savage brutality of Moscow's iron fist in Chechnya. Bloody Sunday in NI radicalised a generation of Nationalists in NI and led to soarinf membership of the IRA. If you consider how that can happen when just 13 innocents are killed, imagine the effect of having 300,000 civilians slaughtered (1/3rd of the entire population of Chechnya!). It would be the equivalent of Britain exterminating 1.3 million people in Ireland (if they had killed that many which I know they didn't though Cromwell was supposed to have butchered 1/3rd of us).

I have already told you that Ireland had a similar period of anarchy as the years of Chechen independence. Do you think that Britain would have been acting in the right to invade Ireland to "restore Constitutional order?" (the phrase used by Russia to justify its invasion). No doubt we woulld have been "terrorists" if we had resisted it and then Blair could say "This is part of the US-led war on "terror"!.

Aslan Maskhadov said in 1999 that he had nothing to do with the apartment block bombings in Moscow. No Chechens even admitted to doing it. We know from experience in NI that terror-groups tend to admit responsibility when they plant a bomb. Copies of a book by a former Russian secret-agent claiming that Putin had a hand in those apartment-block bombings to create a pretext to invade Chechnya were seized by Russian security-forces on the way into Russia from Latvia, with the security-forces citing that it was "anti-government propaganda". Hold on - isn't Russia supposed to be a democracy, with freedom to criticise the Government? Actually hold on a minute of course it isn't... :rolleyes:

Seems like double standards to me. You can sympathise with the small nations, but not any innocent soldiers, career soldiers, doctors etc. You're painting the entire Russian Army with the same brush, for something only those posted to that region are responsible for.
At the same time, you conveniently brush away the rebels own acts of Terrorism , since the Russians have done worse. If the Rebels had the same numbers as the Russians, would their acts be on par?

Yes let's sympathise with Nazi Germany's armies, the innocent soldiers, career soldiers, doctors etc. Let's not tar the Nazi army all with the same brush, for something only those posted to the region wereresponsible for!

I have already told you that I condemn unreservedly any war-crimes committed by the rebels. However the rebels are not a monolith but a series of groups and for me to condemn them en-masse would be like condemning the Irish army for something the Real IRA had done. I consider the rebels to be the armed-forces of the Republic of Chechnya, defending that state from the invasion of imperial Russia, which afterwards will likely invade Georgia (when it happens I won't say I told you so).

As for Russia, they're no more Evil than the US in Iraq. They're responding to a rebellion which is using Guerrila warfare that targets both civilian & military targets. Palestine has shown that such tactics cause the occupying government to apply barbaric measures. The rebels are as responsible for the situation.

The US isn't rounding up 1.3rd of the population for execution! Abu Ghraib was just one prison and the numbers killed therein are certianly not in the hundreds, let alone the hundreds of thousands slaughtered in Russia's genocidal campaign. The Interior Minister of the neighbouring Russian republic of Ingushetia, said (roughly) 'we want a Chechnya without the Chechens, but if we can't do without them then we want one without Chechen men' .
This fits in with the reports by human-rights groups of young men being rounded up at random and shot. This was also a tactic during the Bosnian wars and in Kosovo. The aim being to kill those of fighting-age. It should be noted, in that context, that a number of those involved in such tactics in these wars have been found guilty of genocide, even where they themselves did not directly kill thousands. This further undermines your claim that genocide under the legal-definition is not being committed.

Oppression? We were just conquered.

I see. So being barred from voting, being forced to subdivide your land in terms of inheritance, being denied property-rights, the right to go to university, and being forced to pay taxes to a religion that is not yours, together with being pitch-capped (before the 1798 Rebellion British soldiers attached tar to people's heads and set it alight - leading to the Wexford rebellion), massacred (Cromwell), sold into slavery (many of the Irish dispossed during the plantations faced this fate) and deliberately starved to death, is not oppression? Interesting point of view. :rolleyes:

The EU is an economic organisation. It has no right to interfere in politics. If you said the UN I might agree with you, though. As for stopping loans, the people who suffer would be the citizens of Russia, not the government. Enforced peacekeeping by Un advisors with the co-operation of Russian forces, would be acceptable though.

Economic sanctions by the EU against Serbia played a major role in ending the war in Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Aparteid regime in South Africa. Russia is desperate for the money and we are entitled to ask that in return, they kindly stop murdering the Chechen people, raping the Chechen people, torturing the Chechen people, and bombing the Chechen people.

What do you expect them to do. March through a nuclear power's borders and hope that a war across Europe wouldn't occur? besides, do you really expect the Rebels to stop killing while they're being occupied by other foreign forces? Will they lay down their arms? I seriously doubt it.

They could at least open their mouths and say something! :rolleyes:

Personally I think the Chechen people have been negligent about the situation that they've placed themselves in. They've had opportunities for independence in the past and have failed to sieze those moments. Also the rebels indesciminate use of terror against Russian Civilians, shows their lack of responsibility.

The "Chechen people"? It was 600 or so Chechens led by renegade Shamil Basayev who invaded Dagestan not "the Chechen people". You might as well say that the Civil War in 1922-23 was "negligence" on our part and that the British should have come back and "sorted us out" for that or for the killing of the Sir Henry Wilson in Northern Ireland (the NI Govt's security advisor whom the British believed the anti-IRA had killed but we now know it was Michael Collins and good on him!).

MadsL

Russia has demanded the extradition of the representative of President Maskhadov (Akhmad Zakayev) (who has gained asylum in Britain)

Presumably because he failed to cross any EU borders on his way there. Let me ask you this AG - if his application for asylum had failed in Britain - do you think he should have come to Ireland, or should Britain have had the right to send him back to Chechnya?

Also, will you be writing to the Minister to press for asylum rights for Chechens?

And would you also support asylum applications from Sierra Leone and Cote D'Ivoire as there are massacres taking place there.

Just tell me please klaz what the rape of men and women, torture, mass-executions and disappearances has to do with "subduing" a nation? What do these acts have to do with "fighting terror"? Mass-executions clearly fall into the "intent to destroy in ... part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group" category needed to be called genocide. The Geneva Convention forbids the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians. If genocide is not going on, then please explain to me why Russia has made it virtually impossible for Western reporters to get into Chechnya? What are they hiding? I recall Milosevic did this also when the war in Kosovo started. And we later discovered the mass-graves

You seem to think that I'm excusing Russian actions. I'm not. <Shrugs>

What exactly is a mass-execution? 100, 1000, 100,000 killed in one fell swoop? I agree that Russian forces in the region are murdering civilians and Rebels alike. But I don't believe that Russia is intentionally acting on a plan to wipe the population of chechnya off the face of the planet.

If anything, these actions by the Russians are only creating more Black-Widows willing to blow themselves up.

Agreed. Just as Rebel forces killing Russian Civilians removes any inhibitions to treating chechen people in an inhumane way. Tit-for-Tat.

It is like Israel's oppression of the Palestinians except MUCH WORSE, especially since the TV cameras aren't allowed into Chechnya without military minders, and then they are forbidden from talking to ordinary Chechens (no doubt Putin doesn't want them to talk about how the Russian troops have destroyed their lives and massacred their children, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters etc.).

Its a military controlled area. In most wars the media was blocked for freedom of movement, and this is happening since Russia views Chechnya as a warzone. Regardless, russia has always had a policy against foreign media being present in any of their theatre's of military operations. This is not a special case.

the second part in brackets is supposition. You're guessing.

And I'm not going to start abt Israel & Palestine. Its a different matetr completely.

AQ's involvement in this conflict is fairly recent and reflects the radicalisation of a generation of Chechens by the savage brutality of Moscow's iron fist in Chechnya

Regardless it doesn't excuse that involvement. You're missing the point. Most people have few problems with "freedom fighters". Its when they become Terrorists that I have a problem. And they have become Terrorists.

You don't become free of the enemy by adopting the same tactics.

I have already told you that Ireland had a similar period of anarchy as the years of Chechen independence. Do you think that Britain would have been acting in the right to invade Ireland to "restore Constitutional order?" (the phrase used by Russia to justify its invasion). No doubt we woulld have been "terrorists" if we had resisted it and then Blair could say "This is part of the US-led war on "terror"!.

restore Constitutional order? Sure. They could have. I assume you're talkin abt during our Civil War? The reason why we got freedom, was because Britain could no longer afford the war. Different situation entirely to the present day.

If you mean present day, then no not a chance. Ireland has gained political power, and no nation inside of Europe wants to start a war. They're too costly by far. Besides the last 50 years have shown that such occupations are too dangerous to keep going. Palestine has show-pieced this.

Hold on - isn't Russia supposed to be a democracy, with freedom to criticise the Government? Actually hold on a minute of course it isn't... :rolleyes:

I don't particulary like the Russian Government. Regardless, the same could be said of the US at the moment. Personal freedoms are being reduced there gradually, and any major criticism is seen as anti-american.

As a side point, I've never seen Russia as being a democracy. They're either rules by the old die-hard communist government types, or Mafia types.

Yes let's sympathise with Nazi Germany's armies, the innocent soldiers, career soldiers, doctors etc. Let's not tar the Nazi army all with the same brush, for something only those posted to the region wereresponsible for!

Sure lets. You're generalising with the best of them. Its proven that the wehrmacht was guilty only through association with the Nazi Death-camps, and Nazi Death squads.

And you're supporting a rebel faction thats willing to kill children on TV to get their point across. Yes lets sympathise with murderers.

I have already told you that I condemn unreservedly any war-crimes committed by the rebels. However

Yup. And its the however that is always added on that I'm concerned about. You say you condemn them, and then seem to support them by offering excuses.

I have already told you that I condemn unreservedly any war-crimes committed by the rebels. However the rebels are not a monolith but a series of groups and for me to condemn them en-masse would be like condemning the Irish army for something the Real IRA had done. I consider the rebels to be the armed-forces of the Republic of Chechnya, defending that state from the invasion of imperial Russia, which afterwards will likely invade Georgia

Actually its a crap comparison. The Army of teh Republic of Ireland has no associations with the IRA from the north. The Rebels do have associations with each other, otherwise they wouldn't be this army you see so clearly. Perhaps try saying it a different way?

The US isn't rounding up 1.3rd of the population for execution!

No. I agree. They're not. They're just assigning the casualties as collateral damage.

Abu Ghraib was just one prison and the numbers killed therein are certianly not in the hundreds, let alone the hundreds of thousands slaughtered in Russia's genocidal campaign.

You've said that roughly 300k have been killed in Chechnya. Is this not an overall figure? Over what epriod of time? Years? Its not an excuse for those killed. I'm just wondering over what period of time has this happened?

This fits in with the reports by human-rights groups of young men being rounded up at random and shot. This was also a tactic during the Bosnian wars and in Kosovo, the aim being to kill those who potentially might fight the Russians in the future. It should be noted, in that context, that a number of those involved in such tactics in these wars have been found guilty of genocide, even where they themselves did not directly kill thousands. This further undermines your claim that genocide under the legal-definition is not being committed.

Nope. I, personally, view Genocide as the intentional destruction of a race, ethic, religious, society through an active campaign of extermination. Kosovo being a prime example. There is no active campaign to exterminate the people of Chechnya.

I see. So being barred from voting, being forced to subdivide your land in terms of inheritance, being denied property-rights, the right to go to university, and being forced to pay taxes to a religion that is not yours, together with being pitch-capped (before the 1798 Rebellion British soldiers attached tar to people's heads and set it alight - leading to the Wexford rebellion), massacred (Cromwell), sold into slavery (many of the Irish dispossed during the plantations faced this fate) and deliberately starved to death, is not oppression? Interesting point of view. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes

Land: factor of the time across Europe. Not specific to just Ireland, and British colonies. Also, you seem to be talking abt the complete occupation of Ireland from the plantations right to the 20th century.
right to University: At what time? early-Mid occupation, definetly. How many Irish people could afford the same fees that British citizens paid for University? How many british citizens attended University on average, camparing the income of the average Irish person, to the average income of British subjects.
taxes to Religion: fair enough. catholicism, not being the official religion of the Ruling country. Strange you don't mention paying taxes to support the occupying army within Ireland...
pitch-capped: I know nothing abt it yet. Will research abt it.
Sold into slavery: Aye. For debts owing to land-lords. Being indebted caused the same results in most european counties. Sign of the times.
Starved to Death: irish mistakes in focusing on one type of crop forced Irish people into that situation. A decided lack of interest by landlords also was a factor. Soup-kitchens, and work schemes were in place to help during the 1st famine.

You're looking back with the opinions of someone with a modern outlook. The times that Ireland was under British control were vastly different to today. And you also seem to forget that many nations treated their citizens in the same way across Europe.

Economic sanctions by the EU against Serbia played a major role in ending the war in Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Aparteid regime in South Africa. Russia is desperate for the money and we are entitled to ask that in return, they kindly stop murdering the Chechen people, raping the Chechen people, torturing the Chechen people, and bombing the Chechen people.

Fair enough. I'm not telling you to stop asking. personally I'm asking that the rebels stop targetting civilians. They haven't been listening to me though.

MadsL

So being barred from voting, being forced to subdivide your land in terms of inheritance, being denied property-rights, the right to go to university, and being forced to pay taxes to a religion that is not yours, together with being pitch-capped (before the 1798 Rebellion British soldiers attached tar to people's heads and set it alight - leading to the Wexford rebellion), massacred (Cromwell), sold into slavery (many of the Irish dispossed during the plantations faced this fate) and deliberately starved to death, is not oppression? Interesting point of view.

All of which 'excuses' IRA, CIRA, and RealIRA atrocities in the name of 'freedom fighting' in the 20th century I suppose. :rolleyes:

And lets airbrush out of history the Catholic massacre of Protestants in Portadown in 1641.