Real IRA claims that 'The War Is Back On'

Fratton Fred

Poblachtach wrote: »

Why would the IRA have carried out an attack on Scotland simply because unionists came from there?
I never planned to reply here, but I've noticed your bile has remained consistent, even a few months down the line, that the IRA targetted protestants and unionists.

sorry, when did I say that?

The IRA targetted civilians, I doubt very much they cared what religion they were.

Why didn't the IRA target Scotland at all, it is part of Britain and a grerat many British soldiers come from there.

duggie-89

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The IRA targetted civilians, I doubt very much they cared what religion they were.

Why didn't the IRA target Scotland at all, it is part of Britain and a grerat many British soldiers come from there.

ok now you will find that you are trying to revision history the ira did care what peoples religion was which to be honest is a total crime but there was that mentality that prostestants are unionist and catholics are nationalist so they targerted them cause of that precieved loyalty. look at kings mill where they stoped da bus and got the only catholic out and shot the rest.

but still the war was justfied in my opinion.

djpbarry

duggie-89 wrote: »

but still the war was justfied in my opinion.

You still haven't given any good reasons why?

Fratton Fred

duggie-89 wrote: »

ok now you will find that you are trying to revision history the ira did care what peoples religion was which to be honest is a total crime but there was that mentality that prostestants are unionist and catholics are nationalist so they targerted them cause of that precieved loyalty. look at kings mill where they stoped da bus and got the only catholic out and shot the rest.

but still the war was justfied in my opinion.

so the bombs they planted in shopping areas/Pubs etc that only targetted Protestants and unionsists did they? Wow, the IRA must have created some pretty clever bombs to do that.

Unless Warrington, Manchester and Birmingham are Unionist strongholds of course:rolleyes:

Sleepy

Maybe time for a shoot on sight law for the PNSI?

Mr.Micro

If the IRA cared what religion a person was then that suggested a conscience of sorts? No way, if they had a conscience they would not kill any person. The "war" as the IRA supporters call it was coined by them alone to give a sort of "struggle" tag to their activities, it sounded good for the fools in the US who gave donations as well. It was not a war, just murder, butchery and terror that we all hope will never be allowed to return to Ireland or the UK and all the innocent people who died at the hands of the IRA.

LordSutch

duggie-89 wrote: »

but still the war was justfied in my opinion.

Sorry, but you must be one very sad & warped individual to make a statement like that!

Over 3000 people died during the Troubles, the majority of which were ordinary everyday shoppers going about their daily business, hundreds of businness were destroyed, hundreds of people maimed for life & you say "the war was justified" ~ and for what?

How do you sleep?

Riddle101

First of all why did the Troubles start. you can't just blame the IRA for all the atrocities. look at what the Loyalists did to the catholics before the Troubles happened. The IRA came about because of that, and put them in there place, showed them you can't bully them just because they have a bigger majority in Northern Ireland. I'm not saying that the IRA are in the right but it's not like they didn't do any good things either

LordSutch

"IRA doing good things"? what, you mean like helping old ladies across the road :rolleyes: Give me a break.

And by the way, this Thread is about the IRA (Real IRA), hence all the attacks on that particular Terrorist Gang, and if this thread was about the INLA or the UVF then the response would be quite similar . . .
"No more Terrorism".

Zombrex

Riddle101 wrote: »

you can't just blame the IRA for all the atrocities.

You can blame the IRA for every and all atrocity they carried out.

The "well all the other boys were doing it too Miss" excuse didn't work in primary school, it doesn't work now.

Riddle101 wrote: »

look at what the Loyalists did to the catholics before the Troubles happened.

And?

Riddle101 wrote: »

The IRA came about because of that, and put them in there place, showed them you can't bully them just because they have a bigger majority in Northern Ireland.

Which made the Loyalists even worse.

The excuse that the IRA were protecting Catholics by sending a message to the Loyalists was nonsense, though it was the exact same idea the Loyalists themselves used, by claiming they were protecting Protestants from the IRA by sending a clear message to Catholics (by shooting them and blowing them up)

Neither groups had a fecking clue :rolleyes:

Riddle101 wrote: »

I'm not saying that the IRA are in the right but it's not like they didn't do any good things either

What has that got to do with anything?

Hitler built motorways and Mussolini got the trains running on time :rolleyes:

Tar.Aldarion

ArthurF wrote: »

Sorry, but you must be one very sad & warped individual to make a statement like that!

Over 3000 people died during the Troubles, the majority of which were ordinary everyday shoppers going about their daily business, hundreds of businness were destroyed, hundreds of people maimed for life & you say "the war was justified" ~ and for what?

How do you sleep?

no the majority wasn't everyday shoppers,why would you make that up,you have no knowledge of it then why would you post claims like this.i assume you are making some reference to the people killed during the omagh bomb...which was a terrible accident and the truth behind it has not properly come out.are you in mi5 or rira?then how would you know,you know what the media feeds you,and show your lack of knowledge with that claim that the majority killed were ''civilian shoppers'.

ok i'll make it simple for you with this question...if a country invades another for no reason except to exploit it,does that nation not have a right to fight this invading force??

Tar.Aldarion

I didn't actually post that, somebody hijacked my account. I could never write so badly.

LordSutch

Stats for who killed who during the Troubles ~ click on link below to view, depressing stuff

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/troubles/deaths_by_year.html

FTA69

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why didn't the IRA target Scotland at all, it is part of Britain and a grerat many British soldiers come from there.

Solidarity with another Celtic nation, Scotland was also a support base for the IRA and Republicanism in general. The UK isn't a homogenous nation, it is a state consisting of four nations, with its ethos shaped and determined by England; a bit like the USSR being Russia with add-ons.

Over 3000 people died during the Troubles, the majority of which were ordinary everyday shoppers going about their daily business

Nah, you just made those statistics up in fairness.

purple'n'gold

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

no the majority wasn't everyday shoppers,why would you make that up,you have no knowledge of it then why would you post claims like this.i assume you are making some reference to the people killed during the omagh bomb...which was a terrible accident and the truth behind it has not properly come out.are you in mi5 or rira?then how would you know,you know what the media feeds you,and show your lack of knowledge with that claim that the majority killed were ''civilian shoppers'.

ok i'll make it simple for you with this question...if a country invades another for no reason except to exploit it,does that nation not have a right to fight this invading force??

You say the Omagh bomb was a terrible accident? What on earth are you talking about? A jumbo jet crashing because of metal fatigue is a terrible accident. A terrorist bomb exploding in the middle of Omagh killing 28 people and injuring hundreds of others is a murderous act of terrorism.

FTA69

They claim that the Brits knew of the bomb but let it go off in order to discredit the organisation and put an end to an effective Republican armed struggle (which the RIRA was building up to until Omagh destroyed it). That or else they just made the mother of all f*ck ups and are simply trying to blame the Brits. It was one or the other, but they certainly didn't intend to massacre all those people, as I said, it finished them as an organisation and they are only starting to recover now 10 years later.

Fratton Fred

FTA69 wrote: »

They claim that the Brits knew of the bomb but let it go off in order to discredit the organisation and put an end to an effective Republican armed struggle (which the RIRA was building up to until Omagh destroyed it). That or else they just made the mother of all f*ck ups and are simply trying to blame the Brits. It was one or the other, but they certainly didn't intend to massacre all those people, as I said, it finished them as an organisation and they are only starting to recover now 10 years later.

It's tragic that an organisation that prides itself on it's professional standards has mishaps like the one at Omagh, broken telephone boxes in Birmingham, Army radios setting off timers in Eniskillen. It's always someone elses fault:rolleyes:

LordSutch

To FTA69, you cant honestly believe that I "Made up those ststistics" regarding who killed who during the Troubles ~ see link on (Post #254).

Zombrex

FTA69 wrote: »

Nah, you just made those statistics up in fairness.

Approx 3,500 people were killed during the troubles, of which more than 1,800 were classified as civilians.

FTA69

I am aware of how many civilians died in the conflict. To say that Arthur F was making up the figures is wrong, he isn't, but he is definitely skewing them. First of all the IRA killed roughly 750 civilians, the rest were killed by the cops, British Army and their surrogates in the Loyalist paramilitaries; although ArthurF insinuates it was simply a case of the IRA blowing up innocent "shoppers" for the craic.

FF,

It's tragic that an organisation that prides itself on it's professional standards has mishaps like the one at Omagh, broken telephone boxes in Birmingham, Army radios setting off timers in Eniskillen. It's always someone elses fault

That's the thing, the IRA is a volunteer organisation of politically conscious ordinary people operating in clandestine conditions. They weren't a state funded and armed body.

Zombrex

FTA69 wrote: »

I am aware of how many civilians died in the conflict. To say that Arthur F was making up the figures is wrong, he isn't, but he is definitely skewing them. First of all the IRA killed roughly 750 civilians, the rest were killed by the cops, British Army and their surrogates in the Loyalist paramilitaries; although ArthurF insinuates it was simply a case of the IRA blowing up innocent "shoppers" for the craic.

FF,

The IRA did blow up innocent shoppers for the "craic", as you put it.

For example, in 1993 the Provisional IRA placed two bombs in litter bins outside a Boots and an Argos in Warrington, Cheshire (the purpose of placing bombs in this manner is to produce shrapnel that will injure indiscriminately), that killed 2 children and injured 54. The first bomb was placed to drive shoppers into the blast of the second bomb.

Now perhaps you want to explain to me what the military significance of Argos is that excuses the murder of 2 children?

FTA69 wrote: »

That's the thing, the IRA is a volunteer organisation of politically conscious ordinary people operating in clandestine conditions. They weren't a state funded and armed body.

Funny, I thought they were a group of thugs and murderers.

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote: »

They claim that the Brits knew of the bomb but let it go off in order to discredit the organisation and put an end to an effective Republican armed struggle (which the RIRA was building up to until Omagh destroyed it). That or else they just made the mother of all f*ck ups and are simply trying to blame the Brits. It was one or the other, but they certainly didn't intend to massacre all those people, as I said, it finished them as an organisation and they are only starting to recover now 10 years later.

If you plant a bomb in a place where, should it detonate, it will kill civilians, then you are guilty of mass murder whether or not you intend to detonate it.

If they didn't intend to massacre all those people, they shouldn't have placed the bomb.

Leaving aside the fact that I don't believe for a second that they didn't intend to kill people, any attempt to dilute the guilt of those involves sickens me.

Dinter

I can't see why this is such an issue. The RIRA has never been an effective group. This is just an attempt at bluster and posturing. The "war is back on!" RIRA is probably about 12 Walter Mittys sitting around wishing. They're recognised as having neither the means nor the capabilities.

I would consider myself a nationalist in that, one day I'd like a united Ireland but I do not see these lunatics, running around murdering civilians, achieving that or representing me.

I had written a long reply refuting the claims of some of the people as regards the political makeup of Ireland back in the 1100's. Whether or not we were a nation or a State or a collection of statelets.

However I deleted it because in all fairness it's off topic. There is no way that events of centuries ago could ever justify the taking of innocent lives.

One note that I feel should be mentioned though, is that just because a bomb is launched from a Tornado or a cruise missile and not dumped in a bin, if it overwhelmingly kills civilians, there is no real difference in intent imo.

The IRA justified their bombing campaigns on the off chance of killing soldiers. There are many army's around the world doing exactly the same whilst knowing the likelihood of "collateral damage".

Rant over!

djpbarry

Dinter wrote: »

The IRA justified their bombing campaigns on the off chance of killing soldiers. There are many army's around the world doing exactly the same whilst knowing the likelihood of "collateral damage".

The conduct of the IRA cannot be excused on the grounds of moral equivalence.

Dinter

djpbarry wrote: »

The conduct of the IRA cannot be excused on the grounds of moral equivalence.

No their conduct cannot be excused by any means and I don't know where you arrived at the assumption that I intended to do so.

However there is a very definite case for moral equivalence.

djpbarry

Dinter wrote: »

No their conduct cannot be excused by any means and I don't know where you arrived at the assumption that I intended to do so.

I was not implying that you were excusing their conduct - it was a general statement.

Dinter wrote: »

However there is a very definite case for moral equivalence.

Maybe, but that is a matter for another thread.

LordSutch

Dinter wrote: »

I would consider myself a nationalist in that, one day I'd like a united Ireland but I do not see these lunatics, running around murdering civilians, achieving that or representing me.

Fair enough Dinter, but as a unionist I never want to see a 'United Ireland' not because I dont like the South or its people, but because I am a Unionist & 'British/Irish' ~ as opposed to being Irish in the 'Tricolour' tradition (not that theres anything wrong with that either), but its just that I + the majority in the North wish to remain British, we wish to maintain the Union with Britain (Scotland, England & Wales) we wish to mark the Queens Birthday, we wish to fly the Union Flag over our own Parliament & elsewhere in the North, while you fly your own flag down south, we are also quite happy to get on really well with our good neighbours across the border, & the more cooperation between out two countries the better for all .... its just that we do not want to leave the UK ~ it is our home, it is our Anglo/ Scots culture, and we do not wish to leave our Union because Irish Nationalists wish us to leave (our Union) in order to join (your Union). Why give-up the UK for a UI?

P.S. I do wholeheartedly agree with you about the lunatics running around murdering civilians ~ and thank God they have given it up (for good)?

Dinter

What bothers me is that even today when I speak to some people from abroad i.e. America and suprisingly even Britain they still seem to think the North is synonymous with internicine violence. These would be considered to be well educated but still hold these outdated beliefs.

That's my main reason for detesting the sort of media attention these scum can generate with their wild claims about returning to war. They'll be believed by more people than you'd think.

ArthurF I'm never going to lend support to a campaign to unite Ireland. I would consider myself to be a Nationalist in a vague unsubstantial way. I'm like a lapsed Catholic.

dav32cs

FruitLover wrote: »

Justify the Omagh bombing for me.

Oglaigh na hEireann had a minimal part to play in this event. Thier codeword was used yes but this is widely accepted on the ground this is as far as their involvment went. Other grouping had the responsibility of planting the bomb but have not come out and said this in public as everyone has seen themselves the stigma that has been attached to being involved in this bomb.
The facts in Omagh are pretty clear and have all come out in the recent Sean Hoey trial but the media do not publicise these....

The FBI and MI5 were told a month in advance of the exact date of the bomb yet no extra secuirty measures were taken.
These same security services had agents inside who could have easily identified the car, location etc in the build up but it was let go ahead.
Despite being told the location of the bomb, people were pushed towards it and not even one RUC officer remained with them to keep a cordon???
When these people were being seen moving towards the bomb another phone call was made to say they were being moved towards instead of away from it.
If the RUC thought the bomb was indeed at the courthouse, why wasn't standard procedure followed and the area evacuated??The peelers were swarming the area where they were told the bomb 'apperently' was before it was going to go off.....?

Sean Hoey was used as bait in a hope to convict someone over it to portray a false picture over who was exactly involved but this backfired with alot of the true story coming out along with RUC officers lieing and changing their statements.

On the statements of the IRA killing innocent people on purpose
Yes in some unfortunate cases this happened
On purpose and by accident...
All of them shouldn't have happened but things do go wrong due to mistakes,collusion etc there are many reasons but they are all regrettable.
In a perfect world none of them would have occured.
I think its ironic that when you look at the figures compiled by CAIN they break down something like:

Civilians killed as a percentage of all casualties per grouping

Loyalist Groups 80%
RUC/Brit Army 50%
Republican Groups 15%

Or something crazy like that. And the republican groupings are largely portrayed as the bad guys??Because of the control governments have over the media and the need to paint the British in good lights to the larger worldwide community...this is why it was portrayed and provoked as a secterian war by them to ensure that it would erode the national question it the conflict as long as everyone thought it was because someone hated the other person because of their religion...
Bombs like Omagh were financial target bombs but was a poorly selected target in reference to the support in the general area etc

It annoys me as a republican(and I don't support Sinn Fein or Stormont) to see that the continous stream of degradement poured upon republicans...while loyalist and their british handlers mainly went around for 30years shooitng innocent people because of their religion to stoke the flames for a religious conflict??A point which has been pushed so vigourusly that many people now believe it. You cant have one way traffic to push your point.

On points being made about a mandate or the support of the general populous....where were these in 1916???Don't forget the men of 1916 were spat on in the street at first.

There are still basically the same amount of troops in NI that is in IRAQ!!!!
5000 is 5000 too much...what about the apperent normalisation that has occured??If the Brits are really 'going' why for the large scale offensive operation that occured this month which involved Brit Special force troops landing by boat to a media blackout???They are targetting republican/nationalist areas from Derry across to Newry showing the same tactics they are fighting only one side not 'two' as they claim....

Armed struggle is only a tactic(meaning it does not have to be deployed) not a main part of the fight for freedom and as a result the main focus has to be on the political element to unite all people regardless of creed,race etc in peace. That is the vision that we all have,yet as said before, the world isn't perfect and never will be.....

dav32cs

oscarBravo wrote: »

Leaving aside the fact that I don't believe for a second that they didn't intend to kill people, any attempt to dilute the guilt of those involves sickens me.

Think about it for a second.....

How does it further anything by deliberatly killing civilians???It just alientes any suport that could have been recieved...
You have seen the fallout it has resulted in so if you have a brain you will realise that this was not the deliberate intent of the bomb......