Loyalists weapons

daithicarr · 04-09-2008 5:25pm #1

I cant help but notice that little or no mention is made of the various loyalist paramilitary's which still posses most of their arsenals intact. The DUP and others seem to concentrate their energy's on the IRA, who have disarmed and are for the most part , defunct , un-operational and unarmed.

However the Loyalist groups are still heavily armed and make no signs of handing over their weapons. Why isn't their as much focus on these illegally held weapons. Towards the end of the troubles the loyalists killed almost as many as the IRA, and a much higher percentage of innocent civilians , i.e , not members of opposing paramilitary's or armed forces etc.
Surely if they remain armed the potential for future violence is significantly greater.

OS119 · 04-09-2008 7:19pm

i think you'll find that (most) minds are less concentrated about loyalist armouries for four reasons:

(i) while loyalist terrorists are armed, their weapons are more 'one-to-one' than PIRA's, they are potentially effective against individuals rather than infrastructure or 'society at large'. PIRA was able to successfully use large bombs, and heavy, crew served weapons like 12.7mm DshKa and had, but never really used, Surface to Air Missiles. in effect, while Loyalists could kill people, PIRA was a potential threat against very large numbers of people.

(ii) Loyalist terrorists, certainly according to their own somewhat 'interesting' logic, were 'reactive' in the way they fought, if the rest of the conflicrt was quiet, they were liable to be quiet(ish). PIRA had a very different doctrine.

(iii) they are pretty rubbish. compared to the military capabilities of PIRA generally - and certain units in particular - Loyalist terrorists were little more than gangsters, unpleasent in the extreme if they were after you (or you happened to be the random Catholic they saw staggering home from the pub), but if not they could be ignored in relative safety.

(iv) they infight to such an extent that allowing them to keep their weapons encourages a Darwinian process of extinction - and none of them are very high up the evolutionary scale - the down side to this otherwise admirable process is that occasionally one tries to demonstrate his superiority by killing an innocent Catholic, rather than his 'comrades'.

very roughly.

Hagar · 04-09-2008 7:23pm

So you think they should be allowed stay armed?

I thought the general idea was that the Govt would run the place, the law would be upheld by it's legitimate police force and nobody else would bear arms, other than for lawfully approved sporting purposes of course.

Zambia · 04-09-2008 7:48pm

I would have to agree with the sentiment that they are in general a pack of eejits.

But the DUP's demands are un reachable , save I am given the names of every past member of the Army council chop of their heads and lay them at Carsons Statues feet. There is no way you can completly remove the army council or render them beyond use. They will always have the abilty to call each other and go for a pint. Peter Robinson is merely showboating for the sake of it, as every step to self administration is a step away from British administration.

However loyalists are ignored because they are by far more entrenched in their views and there is simply no talking to them. They hang on to their weapons merely because they need them to support their criminal activities. they also live in constant fear of the south gaining influence over "their wee country" .

They have other worries

1: They may be forced to show the small stockpile they had

2: I also do not see any real way they could suddenly attract the sums of cash needed to really re-arm. If they gave them up.

So the best idea is to ignore them and hope in time they just go away there is simply no point in having a battle of wits with the defenceless. A group who fight for the following
The right to stay in Britain and cost it more in DLA , Civil service wages and security than anywhere else.
The right to march the kings/queens high way yet set fire to it every year requiring yearly repairs.

I could go on but I am already dangerously, OT

In short they are incapable of handing over a toothpick even if they had it....

OS119 · 04-09-2008 7:49pm

Hagar wrote: »

So you think they should be allowed stay armed?

I thought the general idea was that the Govt would run the place, the law would be upheld by it's legitimate police force and nobody else would bear arms, other than for lawfully approved sporting purposes of course.

if i believed that it would have no adverse political effect - and i was able to reconcile it with my distaste for judicial homicide - i'd like to line them up at Cape Wrath and have them prove their patriotism by using them as target practice for the Typhoons going to Afghanistan....

so no, i don't think they should be allowed to retain their arms, however i accept that when looked at from a state point of view they are much less of a concern - and therefore priority - than PIRA.

Hagar · 04-09-2008 7:54pm

OS119 wrote: »

if i believed that it would have no adverse political effect - and i was able to reconcile it with my distaste for judicial homicide - i'd like to line them up at Cape Wrath and have them prove their patriotism by using them as target practice for the Typhoons going to Afghanistan....

Novel idea.

OS119 wrote: »

so no, i don't think they should be allowed to retain their arms, however i accept that when looked at from a state point of view they are much less of a concern - and therefore priority - than PIRA.

Surely since the PIRA are verifiably no longer armed they are off the priority list and Loyalist arms are now top priority?

Zambia · 04-09-2008 7:54pm

Hagar wrote: »

So you think they should be allowed stay armed?

I thought the general idea was that the Govt would run the place, the law would be upheld by it's legitimate police force and nobody else would bear arms, other than for lawfully approved sporting purposes of course.

Yes that was the general idea.

Govt would run the place The goverment are mostly dangerously under qualified and dont even meet they have not sat since July and are threatening not to on the 18th Sept :mad:

the law would be upheld by it's legitimate police force they are very polite but really do very little , they tend not to arrive except unless they are sure its safe, for them not you. :mad:

nobody else would bear arms Cant even manage that down South :mad:

Hagar · 04-09-2008 7:56pm

Except for the police being polite that could be either North or South.

stovelid · 04-09-2008 9:50pm

Not the worse thing OP.

Now that the IRA have disarmed, illegal weaponry cannot be passed off as a necessary and reactive evil to the IRA. This (hopefully) means that the full weight of law can be brought to apply to what is basically, criminal activity.

LordSutch · 05-09-2008 10:58am

Zambia232 wrote: »

Peter Robinson is merely showboating for the sake of it, as every step to self administration is a step away from British administration.

Not sure if moving admin from London to Belfast is a step away from British administration 'as you put it' seeing as the DUP are staunchly British to the core, but taking steps away from London certainly has to
be done with the assurance that the Union is watertight - Robinson is no fool.

Regarding the Loyalist thugs, they will hopefully wither away & drink themselves into oblivion & beyond,
but they are not a threat, their foe is extinct, so their whole 'raison d'etre' has evaporated in a haze of pot smoke? Community service is probably the way to go for these 'glue heads' maybe get them to remove the graffiti off some of the walls in Belfast along with the chewing gum off the pavements.

daithicarr · 05-09-2008 12:39pm

It doesnt matter if the loyalists were far less capable than the PIRA, the fact that they retain weapons still makes them a danger. if sectarian rioting were to flare again or other intercommunity violence they still have weapons at easy reach and if they chose to use those weapons, even if on a small scale it might prompt the other side to rearm. surely its best if both are completely disarmed.

if those weapons are used against the other community and causes them to look for their own means of defence, it could be a very hard job to get them to give them over a second time.

serfboard · 05-09-2008 12:53pm

Zambia232 wrote: »

They may be forced to show the small stockpile they had

As events in The Netherlands have shown, I'd say there are drug gangs in Dublin who have bigger weapons stockpiles than the loyalists.

Hagar · 05-09-2008 12:57pm

I think if the Loyalist weapons are not pursued by the Authorities it will give creedance to the claims by Nationalists that there was always one law for Loyalists and a different one for Nationalists.

CSC · 05-09-2008 2:02pm

It has been proven beyond doubt the links between the British security forces and loyalist death squads with the case of Pat Finuance being the prime example I can think of right now.

There is no future for the people of protestant working class areas while these gangs still operate. I fear that if the anti-GFA republican groupings are "successful" in killing a member of the PSNI that the loyalists will respond in their usual manner by shooting dead innocent nationalists.

Zambia · 05-09-2008 6:42pm

Camelot wrote: »

Not sure if moving admin from London to Belfast is a step away from British administration 'as you put it' seeing as the DUP are staunchly British to the core, but taking steps away from London certainly has to
be done with the assurance that the Union is watertight - Robinson is no fool.

You have heard of his Missus haven't you?

Zambia · 05-09-2008 6:43pm

CSC wrote: »

There is no future for the people of protestant working class areas while these gangs still operate. I fear that if the anti-GFA republican groupings are "successful" in killing a member of the PSNI that the loyalists will respond in their usual manner by shooting dead innocent nationalists.

I still dont see a future though

OS119 · 05-09-2008 7:20pm

CSC wrote: »

There is no future for the people of protestant working class areas while these gangs still operate. I fear that if the anti-GFA republican groupings are "successful" in killing a member of the PSNI that the loyalists will respond in their usual manner by shooting dead innocent nationalists.

in my view that is actually the greatest danger - the anti-GFA republicans who remain commited to armed struggle (which isn't all of them, but most) have a very 'pure' republican doctrine, they genuinely do not see themselves as having a role as the 'Catholic Defence Force' in the way that revisionists within PIRA/PSF are begining to describe their campaign in order to justify acceptance of the GFA - their decision as to whether/when to ramp up armed struggle is in no way hinged on the effects, etither directly or indirectly, on your average 'Catholic in the street'.

the recent attacks have shown a much greater willingness/ability to attack security force targets - and even though RIRA has been in existance since 1998 and CIRA since 1986 (to some degree or other) and so far niether has killed a member of the security forces - that its only a matter of time before they do. i genuinely believe that when they 'achieve' that kill that much of the vaunted peace process will fall apart - republicans within the PIRA/PSF umbrella who are dissatisfied but who see the other groups (CIRA/RIRA/INLA) as incompetent, tout-ridden clowns will, if not flock to their colours, then be very much harsher with PSF, and armed loyalism is likely to respond in the manner you describe until it decends into yet another round of internecine blood-letting.

the problem, unlike the deal that PSF/PIRA was able to do, is that no one wants to have these monkeys in any kind of power-sharing arrangement - PSF, if perhaps a pain in the arse to deal with, have a social and economic agenda that others can work with. loyalists know this, so for them there is little for them to swap their weapons for - no one is going to invite them to sit in cabinet, so all they have is crime - and as has been pointed out further up the thread - in Ireland, serious crime means having a serious arsenal.

guinnessdrinker · 05-09-2008 10:14pm

The lack of pressure put on loyalists to decommission is puzzling. Both the Irish and British governments always seem to be strangely quiet on the issue for some reason as well as all the parties in Stormont. When Jackie McDonald of the UDA stated last year that they would not be decommisioning and that the UDA held weapons were "the peoples weapons" nobody even batted an eyelid.

LordSutch · 06-09-2008 1:03am

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

The lack of pressure put on loyalists to decommission is puzzling. Both the Irish and British governments always seem to be strangely quiet on the issue for some reason as well as all the parties in Stormont. When Jackie McDonald of the UDA stated last year that they would not be decommisioning and that the UDA held weapons were "the peoples weapons" nobody even batted an eyelid.

Are you seriously 'puzzled' why nobody even batted an eyelid?

Just in case you are really 'puzzled' its because the Loyalist thugs are NOT represented in Government - whereas their counterparts on the Republican side are/were!! Hence it being an imperative that Republicans 'gave up' their arms if they wished to be represented in Storemont by Sinn Fein, while on the other hand, the Loyalist Mobs are not present or represented in Storemont (they are outcasts) so there are no complications re Government and no urgency or pressure for Loyalists to disarm, because Government can function perfectly well without them & they dont seem to be a major threat to security.

Hopefully, given time their mindset & structures will fade away (just like the PIRA Army Council) ............

CSC · 06-09-2008 1:11am

I doubt the loyalist death squads will "fade away" as you put it; they have built criminal empires in working class areas of Belfast, Portadown etc. and are making serious money.
Loyalist leaders like the one previous mentioned are widely known yet there doesn't seem to be the motivation or political will to go after these people.

LordSutch · 06-09-2008 1:24am

Currently, there doesnt seem to be any serious threat to security by Loyalist paramilitaries, so I get the impression that the powers that be (on the Hill) just 'hope' they will fade away in time with a little monetary incentive & better education . . .

Thats my impression

Erin Go Brath · 06-09-2008 2:09am

Its completely unacceptable that loyalist paramilitaries have weapons stashs (that are known about by the PSNI btw) but yet the stashs remain. If it was republican weapons stashs we can be sure that the weapons would be confiscated and put beyond use straight away.

It casts a serious doubt over the credibility of the PSNI! If the 'good guy' (or pro union terrorists have weapons its ok).

Surely 'terrorists' are 'terrorists' regardless of who they declare their allegiance to. This, will unfortunately only feed into Nationalists distrust of the system.

Zambia · 06-09-2008 10:55am

I disagree Loyalists leaders have been imprisoned the Shoukris being a good example.

THE UVF/UDA/RED HAND etc are all living in the past they will never accept any form of disarmament as the back lash in their home areas would not allow it. It no use playing the defenders of the union if you have nothing to defend it with.

Loyalists march every weekend in July they march in full band uniform up and down wee roads no one every hears of, and drink in wee pubs no-one else will ever frequent except them. They see themselves as holding these areas from some threat .

If they give up these weapons or say they have then they revert to plain simple poor folk as there is no higher purpose that they can cling to. Its like a great big safety blanket giving them a sense of importance.

Drive down the falls and you will see most of the paramilitary murals are replaced by more peacefull rememberance ones. Drive down the Shankill/Newtownards roads you will still see the same masked gunman crap that always was. These murals mean nothing if the whole province knows they have not got a cap gun to their name.

Mural Example
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2206/2087665974_6ebb6e40be.jpg

CSC · 06-09-2008 11:03am

The Shoukaris were sent to prison to prevent another loyalist blood bath on the streets of Belfast. As far as I'm aware they were only jailed after falling out with the UDA leadership.

LordSutch · 06-09-2008 11:11am

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Its completely unacceptable that loyalist paramilitaries have weapons stashs (that are known about by the PSNI btw) but yet the stashs remain. If it was republican weapons stashs we can be sure that the weapons would be confiscated and put beyond use straight away.

Surely Post#19 answers this?

guinnessdrinker · 06-09-2008 11:37am

Camelot wrote: »

Are you seriously 'puzzled' why nobody even batted an eyelid?

Just in case you are really 'puzzled' its because the Loyalist thugs are NOT represented in Government - whereas their counterparts on the Republican side are/were!! Hence it being an imperative that Republicans 'gave up' their arms if they wished to be represented in Storemont by Sinn Fein, while on the other hand, the Loyalist Mobs are not present or represented in Storemont (they are outcasts) so there are no complications re Government and no urgency or pressure for Loyalists to disarm, because Government can function perfectly well without them & they dont seem to be a major threat to security.

The fact that loyalist paramilitaries are not represented in government certainly does not make it ok for them not to have their weapons decommissioned. Holding onto illegal stockpiles of weapons with immunity is a threat to normal society.

You say that loyalists don't seem to be a major threat to security. Tell that to the people that live in the areas controlled by these thugs or to members of the nationalist communities living in close proximity to them.

Camelot wrote: »

Hopefully, given time their mindset & structures will fade away (just like the PIRA Army Council) ............

Wishfull thinking, unfortunatly they won't fade away while they believe they don't have to disarm for anyone.

Zambia · 06-09-2008 11:48am

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

Wishfull thinking, unfortunatly they won't fade away while they believe they don't have to disarm for anyone.

You mean like the Dublin criminal fraternity, I think the point being made is the IRA had a leadership you could talk to that had a Vested interest in the peace process. The UDA does not need this as NI is still part of the UK and there are already the DUP and UUP in place to further their cause.

However they will fade away and simply become ordinary armed criminals.

CSC · 06-09-2008 3:43pm

Becoming ordinary armed criminals isn't fading away though. If criminal gangs from Dublin or Limerick had as much power and immunity from the forces of law and order there would be public outcry(and rightly so). If the PSNI tackled these organisations it would increase confidence in them in nationalist areas.

TOMASJ · 06-09-2008 5:11pm

Zambia232 wrote: »

You mean like the Dublin criminal fraternity,

I think you may find out quite soon that the Loyalist UDA/UVF UDR, ect, are part of the Dublin criminal drug gangs, Only this time they will not have the protection of there friends in the RUC/PSNI/Special branch protecting them from the courts, 'and each other'

Erin Go Brath · 06-09-2008 7:50pm

Camelot wrote: »

Surely Post#19 answers this?

Camelot wrote: »

Are you seriously 'puzzled' why nobody even batted an eyelid?

Just in case you are really 'puzzled' its because the Loyalist thugs are NOT represented in Government - whereas their counterparts on the Republican side are/were!! Hence it being an imperative that Republicans 'gave up' their arms if they wished to be represented in Storemont by Sinn Fein, while on the other hand, the Loyalist Mobs are not present or represented in Storemont (they are outcasts) so there are no complications re Government and no urgency or pressure for Loyalists to disarm, because Government can function perfectly well without them & they dont seem to be a major threat to security.

Hopefully, given time their mindset & structures will fade away (just like the PIRA Army Council) ............

So you're saying its ok for paramiliatries to hold on to weapons stashs if they are not linked to governmental parties.

If this is what you're saying its ludicrous. The PSNI need to get off their ass and do their job!

LordSutch · 07-09-2008 12:55am

No No No, I'm not saying its 'OK' for the Loyalist Paramilitaries to hold onto their weapons, but what I am saying is that there isnt the willpower in Stormont to deal with them because they are not a 'SERIOUS' threat to security, ie they do not tend to plant Bomb's in Pubs or Shopping Centres of recent years . . .
& no threats of such like either! - they are all bark & no bite.

Loyalists weapons

Comments