Most effective IRA brigade

mattjack

thecommietommy wrote: »

Back on topic, interesting. Appearently the Brit helicopters had to start going in convoy's of 3 to fire back and try and avoid been shot down. According to Tim Pat Coogan's The IRA, the Provos biggest wish was to get Surface to Air Missile technology, appearently they used to refer to them as " the war winner ".

Is there any other urban guerilla organisation that was capable of taking down helicopters ? Cann't say I have ever heard of say, ETA or the PLO shooting down choppers.

Hard to draw comparisons with ETA , but would Somali militia be an example..two shot down and three or so damaged ?

fasttalkerchat

mattjack wrote: »

Hard to draw comparisons with ETA , but would Somali militia be an example..two shot down and three or so damaged ?

Not exactly the same. Malitia, particularly African malitias are often using national Army technology, guns and soldiers. Where this makes a difference is that the IRA have to somehow acquire the weapons from America, Lybia, Serbia, Eastern Europe etc. Then learn how to use them, then to successfully use them against a highly experienced force that has counter-... technology.

mattjack

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Not exactly the same. Malitia, particularly African malitias are often using national Army technology, guns and soldiers. Where this makes a difference is that the IRA have to somehow acquire the weapons from America, Lybia, Serbia, Eastern Europe etc. Then learn how to use them, then to successfully use them against a highly experienced force that has counter-... technology.

What ? two RPG's hit those Blackhawks

Crooked Jack

whitelines wrote: »

Crooked Jack said



Obviously the bit about Loyalist paramilitaries is manure. The rest was in accordance with civil law.



In relative terms it does.



I didn't say that -and they could have.



It wouldn't have.



Most of them would have kept their heads down out of fear of what might happen to them.



Facing a regular army with tanks and air support? They'd have been exterminated like cockroaches.

Y'know I was going to reply to your posts individually, but then i thought, what's the point? I could say anything and back it up with evidence but you're still going to hold onto this myth that the Brits were law abiding peace keepers. So i thought to myself, Who would you listen to? And then it struck me, surely you couldnt deny the words of the very army you deify.
So here's a little light reading for you...

http://relativesforjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/July-1972-Official-Brit-Gov-Doc-30-yr-rule.pdf

It's a 1972 document chronicling the minutes of a meeting between the british army GOC, the deputy chief constable of the RUC and a number of MPs.
In case you cant be bothered reading it here are a few of my favourite bits.

The secretary of state announcing "the government's intention to carry on the war with the IRA with the utmost vigour," (kinda shits on your gently, gently crap as well as your assertion that it wasn't a war)

The GOC telling the UDA that its "efforts as vigilantes" were "acceptable." True, he goes on to tell those rapsacallions not to be shooting anymore but I suppose on one hand he was hardly going to put down that he was using their group as a proxy gang. The other interesting point that raises is if the brit govt knew the UDA were shooting people in 1972 why werent they outlawed for another 20 years.

The GOC calls for "more troops and materials" and the urgent "containment of areas known to harbour bombers and gunmen," before going on to say that his troops should not be "inhibited by the threat of court proceedings and should be suitably indemnified." Now why on earth would a "law abiding civil force" as you put it, need such guarantees.

There's plenty more interesting stuff in there. I await with interest your (no doubt hilarious) response.

jonniebgood1

Back on topic folks please.

Crooked Jack

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Not exactly the same. Malitia, particularly African malitias are often using national Army technology, guns and soldiers. Where this makes a difference is that the IRA have to somehow acquire the weapons from America, Lybia, Serbia, Eastern Europe etc. Then learn how to use them, then to successfully use them against a highly experienced force that has counter-... technology.

I also think one of the more impressive things about the IRA's capabilities was their ability to take on a professional army with home made devices. Taking down a helicopter with a home made mortar requires a serious amount of skill. This ingenuity is one of the reasons I think south Armagh was one of the most effective brigades. Anything and everything was a weapon. I remember reading about an incident where they loaded a slurry tank up with petrol, drove it into crossmaglen on a tractor, backed up to the barracks, sprayed the whole thing with the contents of the tanker and just lit it.
Phwomp. Absolute panic in the barracks. The soldiers in the main sangar were almost killed and it had a huge psychological effect on the rest of the soldiers stationed there.
Another time they adapted a van so that it could run on train tracks, loaded it with explosives and set it off down the tracks. As it went past a barracks beside the tracks they detonated it and the barracks was so badly damaged the brits didnt even bother rebuilding it.

The south Armagh IRA proved the same point the West Cork IRA did.That money and weapons and technology are no match for the intimate knowledge of an area that can only come from living there.

jonniebgood1

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I also think one of the more impressive things about the IRA's capabilities was their ability to take on a professional army with home made devices.

Can you see how the above reads like admiration for extremism- It could be adjusted slightly to be an admiration of that guy in Oslo who bombed the city centre "with home made devices". You go on to make the comparison with west Cork from a different era again? As if the northern troubles not legitimate in their own right?

Crooked Jack

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Can you see how the above reads like admiration for extremism- It could be adjusted slightly to be an admiration of that guy in Oslo who bombed the city centre "with home made devices". You go on to make the comparison with west Cork from a different era again? As if the northern troubles not legitimate in their own right?

The thread is about the effectiveness of each IRA brigade. I was stating that one of the reasons the South Armagh IRA were so effective was because of their ingenuity and knowledge of the area. I gave examples to back this up.
That's what this thread is about. Mentioning Oslo out of the blue is a cheap attempt to make it emotive and make it about right and wrong when that's clearly not the subject of the tread.

My comparison with west Cork was once again due to the remarkable similarities between the two brigades. The OP asked for the most effective IRA brigade ever, so time difference should have nothing to do with it. Once again I think you just find it unpalatable to have the similarities between both brigades highlighted.

Crooked Jack

And might I add, one post ago you asked everyone to stay on topic.

jonniebgood1

Crooked Jack wrote: »

And might I add, one post ago you asked everyone to stay on topic.

You are correct. We are both miles from OP.

Thread locked on account of this.