Do not Watch RTE One Now!!

Einhard

I have a question for those who say that civilians in the employ of the British Army or the RUC, be they cleaners, caterers, suppliers etc, were legitimate targets for extra-judicial execution during the Troubles. If such was the deserved fate of "collaborators" on the Unionist side, then surely it was the deserved fate of those who helped out the IRA and other Republican paramilitaries? In other words, is it not hypocritical to condemn the BA for targetting nationalists they believed to have been "collaborators" with the enemy, when excusing the IRA for so doing?

I'm not trying to stir the pot here. I condemn unreservedly any such actions on the part of the BA. I'm just interested in how such civilians can morally be considered a legitimate target for one side, yet not for the other.

Notorious97

Einhard wrote: »

I have a question for those who say that civilians in the employ of the British Army or the RUC, be they cleaners, caterers, suppliers etc, were legitimate targets for extra-judicial execution during the Troubles. If such was the deserved fate of "collaborators" on the Unionist side, then surely it was the deserved fate of those who helped out the IRA and other Republican paramilitaries? In other words, is it not hypocritical to condemn the BA for targetting nationalists they believed to have been "collaborators" with the enemy, when excusing the IRA for so doing?

I'm not trying to stir the pot here. I condemn unreservedly any such actions on the part of the BA. I'm just interested in how such civilians can morally be considered a legitimate target for one side, yet not for the other.

I get what you are saying about people helping the IRA, indeed they put themselves in harms way by doing so, and knew if they got caught they would be in for it.

Just remember, it wasnt just nationalists that helped the IRA who were caught up in it, internment meant anybody of a certain age, male and oh yes catholic was rounded up like animals in their own country and sent off to prison. Im sure some of them caught by this were helping the IRA, but also alot of genuinely innocent people who were born into that religion, area, were locked up for being basically irish.

In my opinion what Britain done to people up there greatly outweighs what any republicans done, but saying that i am not excusing behaviour from republicans which can be considered extreme. I never agreed with bombings and never will, but i think the IRA done the job they were required to do for the situation to be as it is today.

A former SAS man wrote before the IRA bombed their way to the negotiating table, they had clear aims and objectives. I think if the situation had not required violence to achieve these means it would have happened differently, but to be honest violence is the only language britain understands, and unfortunately it had to happen in my opinion.

aDeener

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

There was another way for them to fight for rights, the peaceful way.

oh yes i recall them attempting such a thing on the 30th of january 1972. worked a treat for them..... ffs :rolleyes:

Einhard

aDeener wrote: »

oh yes i recall them attempting such a thing on the 30th of january 1972. worked a treat for them..... ffs :rolleyes:

So that entitled them to murder civilians? ffs :rolleyes: as you say.

Wolfe Tone

Einhard wrote: »

So that entitled them to murder civilians? ffs :rolleyes: as you say.

Personally I wish it had have only been restricted to "legitimate targets"

Wolfe Tone

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Given some of your posts in this and other threads, I am amazed that you have written this.

Care to elaborate on that? Surly you are not suggesting that I want the height of the troubles to return?

P. Breathnach

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Care to elaborate on that?

You ask me in a post immediately following one where you speak of legitimate targets, in a thread where where you challenged junder to define "innocent" rather than acknowledge the possibility that innocent Protestants were killed, where you suggest that all civilian victims of IRA bombs were unintended victims because warnings were phoned in. I don't even have to visit any other thread to find your claim surprising.

Surly you are not suggesting that I want the height of the troubles to return?

Where did I suggest that?

aDeener

Einhard wrote: »

So that entitled them to murder civilians? ffs :rolleyes: as you say.

oh i must say that is some top notch strawmanning. excellent, did you get a first class honours in that?

Wolfe Tone

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You ask me in a post immediately following one where you speak of legitimate targets, in a thread where where you challenged junder to define "innocent" rather than acknowledge the possibility that innocent Protestants were killed, where you suggest that all civilian victims of IRA bombs were unintended victims because warnings were phoned in. I don't even have to visit any other thread to find your claim surprising.



Where did I suggest that?

I wanted his definition, he said he abhorred the death of innocents on both sides, without condemning the particular attack this thread is about. I was questioning whether that some sort of "political spin" a clever answer. Without knowing his definition of innocent it is hard to tell what he meant, follow? Ones definition of "innocent" is important and relevant to this debate, as "innocent" does not have the same definition for everyone and everyone does not attach that term to the same people as another person might.

That is not true, I never said that all victims of IRA bombs were unintended victims, I said that in many cases the intent was not to kill civilians for instance in the bombing of some town centers, or buildings. In many cases it obviously was. To say that the IRA in its various guises simply went out to bomb civilians is, for the most part, incorrect.

Obviously innocents were killed, everyone knows and sees that.
So you find it surprising that I am glad the troubles are behind us?

Noreen1

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

There was another way for them to fight for rights, the peaceful way.

I do not, and never will, condone the killing of innocents - no matter what their political allegiance.

However, in fairness, it has to be said that attempts to gain Civil rights, by peaceful means, resulted in Bloody Sunday.

IMO, it's fair to say that Nationalists in N. Ireland were unhappy with the lack of civil rights prior to Bloody Sunday, hence the march.
Bloody Sunday, however, acted as a massive recruitment agent for the IRA.
The rest, as they say, is history.

Personally, I hope it remains just that - History.
There has been far too much bloodshed already.

Noreen

Notorious97

Noreen1 wrote: »

IMO, it's fair to say that Nationalists in N. Ireland were unhappy with the lack of civil rights prior to Bloody Sunday, hence the march.

Noreen

It is not just your opinion that they were unhappy, its a basic fact Britain treated them like ****e and secnd class citizens, to be honest how they (British Gov) can act disgusted by an armed campaign is beyond me, they created the conditons for the war, abuse people long enough and they will react.

P. Breathnach

Notorious97 wrote: »

It is not just your opinion that they were unhappy, its a basic fact Britain treated them like ****e and secnd class citizens, to be honest how they (British Gov) can act disgusted by an armed campaign is beyond me, they created the conditons for the war, abuse people long enough and they will react.

Funny. I thought it was the unionist-dominated government in Stormont, abetted often by unionist-dominated local authorities, who treated nationalist communities badly. The main failing of the British government fell on a scale that ranged from ignorance through neglect to tolerance of injustice.

Throughout the first 50 years or so of the existence of NI as a political entity, the bad guys were, for the most part, unionist politicians.

Notorious97

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Funny. I thought it was the unionist-dominated government in Stormont, abetted often by unionist-dominated local authorities, who treated nationalist communities badly. The main failing of the British government fell on a scale that ranged from ignorance through neglect to tolerance of injustice.

Throughout the first 50 years or so of the existence of NI as a political entity, the bad guys were, for the most part, unionist politicians.

No your correct, It was a protestant state for a protestant people, propped up by Britain, i apologise for my generalisation. One community should never have had so much influence and power in that region, hopefully its never let go that way again.

KeithAFC

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Personally when I look at what the IRA have done I go through many thoughts. They range from understanding and respect to anger at the circumstances which made these acts necessary.

But then when I look at other events I shake my head in disgust and horror and question whether anything is worth doing something like that, mostly the answer is no.
I see that some of the IRAs actions were necessary to change the intolerable status quo. Others were not. I condone some of their actions and condemn others.
No one wants people to die, but in wars they do.


The IRA were a product of horrible circumstances and conditions that should never have existed.

Mate, you said in this thread that the IRAs aim when bombing buildings on a saturday afternoon was not murder, says all i need to know about you to be honest.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

Mate, you said in this thread that the IRAs aim when bombing buildings on a saturday afternoon was not murder, says all i need to know about you to be honest.

I do not believe it was murder in the cases which killing civilians was not the objective. The aim was to destroy buildings and damage the economy not kill people. If it was why would they have given warnings etc?
I never said the IRA were wise or right to do it, I do not think they were. But I don't think it was murder. And, if I am totally honest I do not really care what you think. If you want to hold the view that the IRA were a bunch of insane "murdering scum" then thats up to you.

KeithAFC

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Funny. I thought it was the unionist-dominated government in Stormont, abetted often by unionist-dominated local authorities, who treated nationalist communities badly. The main failing of the British government fell on a scale that ranged from ignorance through neglect to tolerance of injustice.

Throughout the first 50 years or so of the existence of NI as a political entity, the bad guys were, for the most part, unionist politicians.

That does not give anyone the right to bomb, knife or shoot people.

What a lot of people forget about the Troubles was the people at the height of the troubles who wanted peace, who didn't care for either side and went about their daily bussiness earning a living.

People who got caught up in some of the most disgraceful acts of violence and got ripped apart, Be it the shankill butchers, Bloody Friday and so on. People got ripped apart for no reason. The IRA killed a lot of catholics. This is how silly it was.

The IRA planted a bomb and most likely killed some one during the troubles who actually supported the IRA cause..

KeithAFC

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I do not believe it was murder in the cases which killing civilians was not the objective. The aim was to destroy buildings and damage the economy not kill people. If it was why would they have given warnings etc?
I never said the IRA were wise or right to do it, I do not think they were. But I don't think it was murder. And, if I am totally honest I do not really care what you think. If you want to hold the view that the IRA were a bunch of insane "murdering scum" then thats up to you.

The IRA didn't give warnings. And even when they did, people still got killed. Mate, you seem like you like them. The IRA killed people, matter what religion they came from.

There was so much senseless murder during the troubles. End of.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

The IRA didn't give warnings. And even when they did, people still got killed. Mate, you seem like you like them. The IRA killed people, matter what religion they came from.

There was so much senseless murder during the troubles. End of.

They didn't give warnings...... In many cases they did, they even had code words so the authorities knew it was legit.

Yes there was much senseless killing on all sides, so much of it was unnecessary.

You just commented on a post in which I outlined my feelings on the IRA... that not good enough?

KeithAFC

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

They didn't give warnings...... In many cases they did, they even had code words so the authorities knew it was legit.

Yes there was much senseless killing on all sides, so much of it was unnecessary.

You just commented on a post in which I outlined my feelings on the IRA... that not good enough?

I don't feel it is because its just excuses.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

I don't feel it is because its just excuses.

Well I don't have to explain myself to you, or anyone else for that matter. I already have.


Excuses for what?

Why don't you tell me what you really think?

P. Breathnach

KeithAFC wrote: »

That does not give anyone the right to bomb, knife or shoot people.

I agree without reservation.

It interests me to note that you do not contest my characterisation of unionists in the first 50 years of NI as "bad guys".

Einhard

aDeener wrote: »

oh i must say that is some top notch strawmanning. excellent, did you get a first class honours in that?

No, I didn't. And from the fact that you don't seem to understand the concept of a strawman, I assume you didn't get a first class honours degree in English?

KeithAFC

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I agree without reservation.

It interests me to note that you do not contest my characterisation of unionists in the first 50 years of NI as "bad guys".

I think both sides for many many years did bad things. I think for over a 100 years, you had both sides doing bad things. Its now 2010, the war is over.

P. Breathnach

KeithAFC wrote: »

I think both sides for many many years did bad things. I think for over a 100 years, you had both sides doing bad things. Its now 2010, the war is over.

Well over 100 years. Since the 16th century, if not even earlier.

The war might be largely over, but it will be at least several decades before community relations in NI are good.

KeithAFC

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Well over 100 years. Since the 16th century, if not even earlier.

The war might be largely over, but it will be at least several decades before community relations in NI are good.

You can't blame the people of today who came over from Scotland etc and were planted in Ireland.

Einhard

KeithAFC wrote: »

You can't blame the people of today who came over from Scotland etc and were planted in Ireland.

Aye, true that. They have roots in the community. And they've branched out all over the place. Plus their bark is worse than their bite. Would be silly to ask them to leaf now.













I'm sorry. It's a compulsion.

Mahatma coat

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

LordSutch

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

If you want to hold the view that the IRA were a bunch of insane "murdering scum" then thats up to you.

Well they were, and lets make no bones about it, the PIRA were a prescribed Terrorist organisation as recognised by the international community, to say otherwise would be to re-write history. They Bombed, Knee capped, tarred & feathered, murdered, maimed, extorted, they robbed banks, post offices, put bombs in busses, pub's, cars, shopping centres, police stations, and they did everything you would expect from a Terrorist outfit, so if that other poster calles them "murdering scum" then I for one wouldn't argue with their view.

FlutterinBantam

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

Good man yourself, living proof that attitudes of crass intransigence and caveman mentality are still alive and well.

Notorious97

Camelot wrote: »

Well they were, and lets make no bones about it, the PIRA were a prescribed Terrorist organisation as recognised by the international community, to say otherwise would be to re-write history. They Bombed, Knee capped, tarred & feathered, murdered, maimed, extorted, they robbed banks, post offices, put bombs in busses, pub's, cars, shopping centres, police stations, and they did everything you would expect from a Terrorist outfit, so if that other poster calles them "murdering scum" then I for wouldn't argue with their view.

You seem to think they just got out of bed one day and decided to go on a killing spree. The IRA wouldnt exist and would not have been needed had Britain and a unionist 'government' up north treated Irish people in the 6 counties as 1st class citizens, it is their country and to be treated like dogs is disgusting. the situation they created led to the IRA coming into existence, and the events of Jan 30th 1972 ensured they could not be trusted and drove countless numbers into the ranks of the IRA.

None of us on here has condoned bombing civilian targets, we have said we can probably see their logic to damage infrastructure and damage an economy, but we have never once agreed with killing anybody innocent people(ie anybody who was not a memeber of the British Security services / Loyalist groups - one of the same to be honest if you ask me!)

the IRA gets alot of abuse on here from Irish people which is fine that their opinion, but if you want to class them as 'terrorists' then the British Army, SAS (sly murdering bastards), RUC and loyalist groups are all equally worthy of the name Terrorist if not more worthy!

Both sides done alot of terrible things, as i said before i think what the British state and Unionist statelet done is alot worse, but that in no way excuses republicans from killing innocent people. Nobody was giving nationalists / catholics their basic human rights in the 6 counties through peaceful talks, we seen what happened on bloody sunday when they asked for them, so the armed struggle had to happen as britain left people with no choice and violence is the only language they speak! Its time to move on as the armed campaign is well and truly over, and make the most of the opportunity all sides in NI have.

P. Breathnach

KeithAFC wrote: »

You can't blame the people of today who came over from Scotland etc and were planted in Ireland.

I don't.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

But it's clear that some do.

eamo12

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I don't appreciate the way you referred to me as a "scumbag republican" there.

No I didn't. And crying to the moderators is a typical shinner reaction - they can give it out, but you can't take it you poor 'victim'. There is no getting away from the fact that the armchair shinners by their support for the IRA are complicit in the atrocities committed by them in their name. If you support an organisation that deliberately targets innocent men, women and children then don't expect an easy time here.

junder

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

So you want us gone then, so how do you propose to go about it then ?

Personnly I believe that when you strip away the veener, hyperbole and spin, what mahatmycoat wrote lies at the heart of many Irish republicans beliefs, espically those that justify what the ira did for 30 odd years.
All to often I read what can only be described as thinly veiled hatred of all things Protestant/unionist/loyalist

maccored

eamo12 wrote: »

No I didn't. And crying to the moderators is a typical shinner reaction - they can give it out, but you can't take it you poor 'victim'. There is no getting away from the fact that the armchair shinners by their support for the IRA are complicit in the atrocities committed by them in their name. If you support an organisation that deliberately targets innocent men, women and children then don't expect an easy time here.

thats the funniest thing Ive read in ages. Mainly because it makes absolutely no sense and shows a real lack of any kind of indepth understanding of what has gone on in the north. then again, its easy to talk the talk (though inaccurately) on the interwebs.

A typical shinner reaction is crying to the moderators ... aye. I suppose you can back that up with a bit of research or stats? no - didnt think so.

Notorious97

junder wrote: »

So you want us gone then, so how do you propose to go about it then ?

Personnly I believe that when you strip away the veener, hyperbole and spin, what mahatmycoat wrote lies at the heart of many Irish republicans beliefs, espically those that justify what the ira did for 30 odd years.
All to often I read what can only be described as thinly veiled hatred of all things Protestant/unionist/loyalist

Im Republican and i dont believe Unionists should be 'gone', i have never once said that, i have wanted a united ireland, with all communiities in Ireland represented, if you want to get to the heart of a republicans belief, go read Wolfe Tone, after all he is who most of us look up to, and you will see he wanted to 'unite all Protestants, Catholics and Dissenters under a common name of Irishmen' - I had this in my sig until it got to big and removed lol

As for eamo, where did we cry victim? You did refer to him as a republican scumbag in an earlier post as i got that impression from it myself when reading it before Mussolini commented on it, we don’t call you a filthy west brit so we would appreciate not being referred to as republican scumbags, and if supporting Republicanism makes us guilty of the bad done during the troubles, what does it make you for not speaking out against the terrorism inflicted on this country by British Armed Forces?

maccored

i wouldnt mind being called a republican scumbag in such circumstances as its obvious the person calling the names doesnt really know what they're on about in the first place.

deise go deo

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

I would personally consider myself to be a republican. However I Am ashamed to be in any way associated with the above post, unfortunatly there are others who share these disturbing ideas. How people like this can ever imagine there will ever be a United Ireland when they go around spouting this Bulls##t is byond me. If there is to be a 32 Countie Republic one day, and I hope there will be, it can only be based on concences and co-operation between comunities.

It is people like this that is the problem in the North:mad:

Bottle_of_Smoke

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

Cop the f*ck on practically everyone in Ireland has some planter blood in them. Even if they didn't it is utterly ridiculous to blame people of today for what their ancestors 400 years ago did

FTA69

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

This fella is clearly having a spoof and comments espousing such bullsh*t shouldn't have any place on this forum.

Ash.J.Williams

Big Mouth wrote: »

Yet the Brits couldnt defeat the IRA for forty years!! Back on topic your thoughts on the shooting dead of 3 catholic musicians?

Thing is while the IRA were prancin about blowing things up, "the Brits" moved back into the south and engaged in a takeover that nobody noticed....they took over the republic using business acumen and now own us again! Instead of wasting your time with the IRA you shouldwent to business school and really helped the country!

aDeener

Einhard wrote: »

No, I didn't. And from the fact that you don't seem to understand the concept of a strawman, I assume you didn't get a first class honours degree in English?

err, you shot down something i did not say.

please point out where i said it was ok to murder civilians?

Nodin

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Dosent matter how long ago Their families stole our families farms, WE still want them GONE, and Peace or not there will still always be an element that believes a Free and United Ireland cannot Happen with the Loyalists still drawing breath

You aren't representative of the Republican movement.

Wolfe Tone

eamo12 wrote: »

No I didn't. And crying to the moderators is a typical shinner reaction - they can give it out, but you can't take it you poor 'victim'. There is no getting away from the fact that the armchair shinners by their support for the IRA are complicit in the atrocities committed by them in their name. If you support an organisation that deliberately targets innocent men, women and children then don't expect an easy time here.

Yeah, ok, whatever.:rolleyes:

rovert

Are the Republican in this thread still playing evasive word games here?

junder

Notorious97 wrote: »

Im Republican and i dont believe Unionists should be 'gone', i have never once said that, i have wanted a united ireland, with all communiities in Ireland represented, if you want to get to the heart of a republicans belief, go read Wolfe Tone, after all he is who most of us look up to, and you will see he wanted to 'unite all Protestants, Catholics and Dissenters under a common name of Irishmen' - I had this in my sig until it got to big and removed lol

As for eamo, where did we cry victim? You did refer to him as a republican scumbag in an earlier post as i got that impression from it myself when reading it before Mussolini commented on it, we don’t call you a filthy west brit so we would appreciate not being referred to as republican scumbags, and if supporting Republicanism makes us guilty of the bad done during the troubles, what does it make you for not speaking out against the terrorism inflicted on this country by British Armed Forces?

You comments on the orange order days different. The loyal orders are at the heart of the Protestant/unionist/loyalist culture, if try are not welcome they neither are we

maccored

rovert wrote: »

Are the Republican in this thread still playing evasive word games here?

As far as I can see, no, though of you point out some of the 'evasive word games' you are referring to then maybe someone might be able to give you a more definitive answer.

Notorious97

junder wrote: »

You comments on the orange order days different. The loyal orders are at the heart of the Protestant/unionist/loyalist culture, if try are not welcome they neither are we

I have always said i dont agree with the OO, because i dont. In my opinion they do not represent the average protestant in NI, maybe im wrong on that but i dont think all protestants are bigots and sectarian. I know before you point out there are catholic bigots too, im not saying there isnt, i just dont think the OO represents the average protestant person.

If they want to march then by all means march in their areas, or anywhere else people welcome them, if they arent welcome on some streets then dont march there. Ive sai dbefore also if a united ireland happened, i wouldnt care if a person from the unionist community was in a high position in a 32 county united ireland, i think everybody should work for the good of the country and whoever can benefit it postively should be in high positions to do so.

junder

Notorious97 wrote: »

I have always said i dont agree with the OO, because i dont. In my opinion they do not represent the average protestant in NI, maybe im wrong on that but i dont think all protestants are bigots and sectarian. I know before you point out there are catholic bigots too, im not saying there isnt, i just dont think the OO represents the average protestant person.

If they want to march then by all means march in their areas, or anywhere else people welcome them, if they arent welcome on some streets then dont march there. Ive sai dbefore also if a united ireland happened, i wouldnt care if a person from the unionist community was in a high position in a 32 county united ireland, i think everybody should work for the good of the country and whoever can benefit it postively should be in high positions to do so.

Then you don't know the average Protestant/unionist/loyalist. You are correct that not all Protestants are bigots and by extension not all orange men are bigots.

OhNoYouDidn't

junder wrote: »

You comments on the orange order days different. The loyal orders are at the heart of the Protestant/unionist/loyalist culture, if try are not welcome they neither are we

How many members of the OO are there in the 6 counties?

Notorious97

junder wrote: »

Then you don't know the average Protestant/unionist/loyalist. You are correct that not all Protestants are bigots and by extension not all orange men bigots.

Im sure not every member of the OO is a hate filled bigot, but in my opinion the OO as an organisation is a sectarian organisation. You could argue guilty by association i guess as a previous poster pointed out before, you wouldnt be in the KKK unless you hated black people.