Easter Rising vs modern day terrorism

Mr. Presentable

Well, now, there's a question OP. I object to the killing of people for whatever end, but if you want to get through to the enemy occupying your townlands, the pleas of the victims spouses/families will call loudest.

I am proud we threw the English out of most of our country. I am sad people had to die. I wish they'd get out of the rest, but can accept it won't happen.

I can see the viewpoint of people in occupied territories like Iraq etc - recall Iraq was occupied and split up by the English before, Kuwait being a province of Iraq. And without any other leverage, guns and bombs is your resort. I don't approve, but I understand.

djpbarry

Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »

...are you aware Micheal Collins shot a police man dead while he was sleeping? Yet he is regarded as a hero...

...by some.

jank

NOOOOOOOOOO! Not this issue again!
History needs to be viewed from the politics, morals and issues of the time.

TBH this should be moved to History. Maybe a MOD can to the business?

FTA69

djpbarry wrote: »

...by some.

By most to be honest.

jank

djpbarry wrote: »

...by some.

Some think Hitler and Stalin were great guys too..:pac:

***Opens a can of worms and runs away***

Nodin

One day the technology will exist whereby we can collect the cans of worms at the door...One day....

K-9

Nodin wrote: »

One day the technology will exist whereby we can collect the cans of worms at the door...One day....

Godwin might invent it!

Erin Go Brath

wylo wrote: »

Hi I am just wondering what peoples views on the differences between the likes of the Easter Rising and modern day work of the IRA.


Are there many out there that are proud of the likes of the Easter Rising but are strongly against the IRAs terrorist campaign?

Removing British rule from Ireland was the goal then and its still the goal. Nothing has changed in that respect. If one views an attack on British occupied Ireland justified in 1916 then an attack on British occupied Ireland is equally justified in 2009.

The only difference now is a different political climate in which the Provisional Republican movement have allowed themselves to be painted into a corner by the GFA. The GFA is signed up to by all the major players, and gains its legitimacy by virtue of this.

Britain has succesfully fostered division between Republicans and Unionists some time back, now it looks like they've succesfully fostered an intra-republican division. Part of their tried and tested divide and conquer strategy used to great effect by them in many countries around the world has been successfully deployed.

One mans peace process is another mans sellout. That is the crux of the issue. The only thing assured is that more conflict down the line is inevitable.

Only a full and complete removal of British rule from Ireland can guarantee an end to conflict. The British are the problem, not the Unionists, not the Republicans but the British who have continually fostered division and hatred here through the years. While at the same time succesfully painting it as an 'internal dispute' to the worlds media where they are neutral arbitrators. The shocking history of collusion, state sponsored murder, and anti-catholic apartheid in the orange state has proved what a bogus claim that was.

K-9

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Only a full and complete removal of British rule from Ireland can guarantee an end to conflict.

I'd broadly agree with your post excpet that part. It will not end conflict.
Their will be a new bunch of freedom fighters.

RedPlanet

K-9 wrote: »

I'd broadly agree with your post excpet that part. It will not end conflict.
Their will be a new bunch of freedom fighters.

But they don't have much a history of fighting wars of attrition.
And they seem rather dependent on state support.
Cut of their oxygen and those Loyalists won't last long.

K-9

RedPlanet wrote: »

But they don't have much a history of fighting wars of attrition.
And they seem rather dependent on state support.
Cut of their oxygen and those Loyalists won't last long.

Sure the IRA or indeed the RIRA could/can can do enough damage without state support.

On the history, they can learn!

jimmmy

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Only a full and complete removal of British rule from Ireland can guarantee an end to conflict.

If N. Ireland was not part of the UK, and Britain stopped pumping billions there each year, there would still be conflict....only probably worse. Even if the 1 million or so unionists were "silenced", part of the republican movement would still be dedicated to a socialist cause...and you can bet your last dollar there would still be bickering over Rockall, the Isle of Man or something else. Hell would freeze over before the million people ( who wish to remain part of the UK ) would risk becoming part of a "united" Ireland. Hard to blame them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

LordSutch

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Removing British rule from Ireland was the goal then and its still the goal. Nothing has changed in that respect. If one views an attack on British occupied Ireland justified in 1916 then an attack on British occupied Ireland is equally justified in 2009.

Only a full and complete removal of British rule from Ireland can guarantee an end to conflict. The British are the problem, not the Unionists, not the Republicans but the British who have continually fostered division and hatred here through the years. While at the same time succesfully painting it as an 'internal dispute' to the worlds media where they are neutral arbitrators. The shocking history of collusion, state sponsored murder, and anti-catholic apartheid in the orange state has proved what a bogus claim that was.

I presume by 'the British' you mean the British Government? (please clarify), anyway, leaving that aside 4 now, surely nothing changes unless the people of NI vote to leave the Union, and as has been said many times before, the GFA is the only show in town these days (2009) & the Unionists/British are still in the majority who want NI to remain part of the UK, (as do a sizeable percentage of Nationalists) > so why must some people keep banging on about what they demand, whilst holding everybody else to ransome!

ie; "We demand our version of a United Ireland" > we also demand that NI leaves the UK > because "we say so" and in the meantime we will just keep 'bumping off' the odd policeman or sapper here or there ........ :rolleyes:

Allah Hu Akbar

Camelot wrote: »

I presume by 'the British' you mean the British Government? (please clarify), anyway, leaving that aside 4 now, surely nothing changes unless the people of NI vote to leave the Union, and as has been said many times before, the GFA is the only show in town these days (2009) & the Unionists/British are still in the majority who want NI to remain part of the UK, (as do a sizeable percentage of Nationalists) > so why must some people keep banging on about what they demand, whilst holding everybody else to ransome!

ie; "We demand our version of a United Ireland" > we also demand that NI leaves the UK > because "we say so" and in the meantime we will just keep 'bumping off' the odd policeman or sapper here or there ........ :rolleyes:

So why don't they have a vote on it every 5/10 years?

I am pie

Do you know anything about the GFA and the Principle of Consent ?

Doesn't sound like it.

If SF have an electoral mandate of 51% in NI, not inconceivable in the next decade or two what do you think that would mean for the future of NI based on the principle of consent of the democratic majority of NI ?

Still...yeah, you keep on getting teenagers to shoot pizza delivery men in the back while the big men behind the scenes desparately try to cling to the brave and honourable legacy of 1916.

Erin Go Brath

K-9 wrote: »

I'd broadly agree with your post excpet that part. It will not end conflict.
Their will be a new bunch of freedom fighters.

It will put the issue of disputed sovereignty of the 6 counties to bed for good, and remove the reason for conflict in the long term.

Any minor kerfuffles that arise after unity will be put down and the people incarcerated. Even if there is a bit of ongoing conflict as a result of unity, people will soon realise that Ireland is a United 32 county republic for evermore so they'll get the idea that conflict is futile. Live in the new republic or emigrate will be the options.

Republicans will never acqueise to live in anything other than a United Ireland, and there will always be some militants prepared to overthrow Brit rule, just as well as there is some that will work within the system to achieve the same ends. The current Stormont Govt is just something Republicans are part of as an interim deal until the conditions for unity are more favourable. It is a temporary arrangement.

Allah Hu Akbar

I am pie wrote: »

Do you know anything about the GFA and the Principle of Consent ?

Doesn't sound like it.

If SF have an electoral mandate of 51% in NI, not inconceivable in the next decade or two what do you think that would mean for the future of NI based on the principle of consent of the democratic majority of NI ?

Wouldn't mean anything to be honest!

You believe if 51% of the people in northern voted for Sinn Fein there would be a united Ireland? Don't make me laugh.

Erin Go Brath

jimmmy wrote: »

If N. Ireland was not part of the UK, and Britain stopped pumping billions there each year, there would still be conflict....only probably worse. Even if the 1 million or so unionists were "silenced", part of the republican movement would still be dedicated to a socialist cause...and you can bet your last dollar there would still be bickering over Rockall, the Isle of Man or something else. Hell would freeze over before the million people ( who wish to remain part of the UK ) would risk becoming part of a "united" Ireland. Hard to blame them.

Nonsense. Firstly there is much less than 1 million unionists in the occupied territory. They will in fact become a minority even within the gerrymandered part of Ireland in about a decade or so as well. The challenge for the Irish Govt is to find what is the best way to organise Government. A unitary or federal state will be the two options with a devolved regional parliament for the north as part of the federal state solution.

If a localised 6 county majority vote for unity then unity is what we'll have. Theres nothing a few disgruntled loyalists can do about it then i'm afraid.

LordSutch

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Republicans will never acqueise to live in anything other than a United Ireland, and there will always be some militants prepared to overthrow Brit rule, just as well as there is some that will work within the system to achieve the same ends. The current Stormont Govt is just something Republicans are part of as an interim deal until the conditions for unity are more favourable. It is a temporary arrangement.

And so, the 'Troubles' will go on for ever ........ :cool:

Why cant you just accept things the way they are, that NI is currently within the United Kingdom & that the GFA is the only way to go forward (without the bomb & the bullit)!

"Would Northern Ireland be a much better place if it were part of the Republic of Ireland"? would it be more peaceful than it is now? and would its departure from the UK spell the end of the Troubles?

junder

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Nonsense. Firstly there is much less than 1 million unionists in the occupied territory. They will in fact become a minority even within the gerrymandered part of Ireland in about a decade or so as well. The challenge for the Irish Govt is to find what is the best way to organise Government. A unitary or federal state will be the two options with a devolved regional parliament for the north as part of the federal state solution.

If a localised 6 county majority vote for unity then unity is what we'll have. Theres nothing a few disgruntled loyalists can do about it then i'm afraid.

except bring the entire island to its knees

K-9

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

It will put the issue of disputed sovereignty of the 6 counties to bed for good, and remove the reason for conflict in the long term.

Yes to the first part, No to the second. It just creates another band of revolutionaries/terrorists!

Erin Go Brath wrote:

Any minor kerfuffles that arise after unity will be put down and the people incarcerated. Even if there is a bit of ongoing conflict as a result of unity, people will soon realise that Ireland is a United 32 county republic for evermore so they'll get the idea that conflict is futile. Live in the new republic or emigrate will be the options.

Not a very democratic Republic to me.

Erin Go Brath

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You are entitled to hold such a viewpoint. Pearse, Connolly and co are however national heroes for their efforts so your position is very much a minority one.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

True. It is an internationally binding agreement which both sides need to hold their end of the bargain. Britain must recognise the majority of northerners decision to unify with Ireland should they vote is such a manner, as the Irish Govt must respect northerners right to remain in the UK. The problem is a mistrust of Britain however. The British Government refused to recognise the Irish peoples wish to Govern itself in 1919. Any subsequent agreement with Britain is tainted to a degree and treated with caution by Republicans.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Republicans support it because they see it as a way to unity. Unionists support it because they see it as keeping the north within the union. Somebodys been duped, time will tell who. Things are guaranteed to flare up in the future, in fact they've flared up recently.

As i've said before Britains removal from Ireland and that alone can only put this to bed for good.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Unfortunately people can easily defect from PIRA to another group such as RIRA which aren't included under the GFA, likewise on the loyalist side. It sounds great the IRA on ceasefire. Leaders can clap themselves on the back and have specials on Sky News or whatever, but if their operatives defect it kind of defeats the purpose.

The GFA is a band aid trying to cover a cancer. Its a good job on cosmetics but it will fall asunder sooner or later.

I am pie

Sorry now, what is it you think would happen in a nationalist controlled parliament ? All sides signed up to the P.o.C. Democracy and not the last desperate actions of a few bad men will be the deciding factor.

PS...if you think you'll get a United Ireland via a few grubby murders, universally condemned at home and abroad, you need to wise up.

Erin Go Brath

junder wrote: »

except bring the entire island to its knees

ROFLMAO A few disgruntled loyalists will easily be taken care of. You won't have your British Army masters and state forces fighting your battles for you this time. Lets see how far you can get.

futurehope

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

ROFLMAO A few disgruntled loyalists will easily be taken care of. You won't have your British Army masters and state forces fighting your battles for you this time. Lets see how far you can get.

Al Haig met The Argentine Junta just prior to UK Forces engaging the enemy in a last gasp effort for peace and was subjected to a diatribe of vain glorious rhetoric by the Argentine generals for his pains. His reply was:

"it's not the same when you see the body bags".

You put me in mind of those Argentine officers.

Manic Moran

FWIW, we've been hashing this out on a thread or two over on soc... military...politics of war if anyone wants more reading.

NTM

junder

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

ROFLMAO A few disgruntled loyalists will easily be taken care of. You won't have your British Army masters and state forces fighting your battles for you this time. Lets see how far you can get.

think you will find its the majorty of the 800,000 or so unionists that will be disgruntled and while the british army would not be invloved you are forgetting that quite a few of us are serving or ex service men in the British army and with combat experince, you won't find us the push over that you would like.

Nodin

Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »

So why don't they have a vote on it every 5/10 years?

With every nut hopping out the woodwork...it'd be worse than a yearly abortion referendum for jaysus sake...

meathstevie

futurehope wrote: »

The Irish are too emotional for their own good. As you say, the 1916 rebels were abused and spat on by The Irish populace, but when The UK executed them, The Irish saw them as heroes. What were The British meant to do with them?

If they would have been smart : condemn the leaders to life behind bars. Let it all cool down a good bit. Release them after about 15 to 20 years and nobody would have given a fiddlers...It doesn't matter whether you're a Brit or a Paddy; there's no hero like a dead hero.