Anyone willing to admit that they supported the IRA at any point?

FTA69

I became attracted to politics when I was 13 and a month before my 15th birthday I ended up joining the Republican Movement. Obviously my politics weren't very developed at the time but you think you know everything at that age. I jacked in everything when I was 19 as I thought SF were moving to the electoral right and I couldn't stomach accepting and endorsing the PSNI.

So yeah, I did support the IRA and I think they were right. They also did some awful, terrible things that Republicans have to accept responsibility for as a collective. That having been said, violence didn't come about in Ireland because the Provisional IRA popped into existence in 1969; it happened because the British government decided to tolerate a violent, sectarian and discriminatory statelet because it suited their interests and they met the challenge to that status quo with harsh military measures. In many ways, the IRA was an inevitable response to that.

Long term though I think the organisation should probably have packed it in around 1990, militarily they failed in their objectives but managed to Republicans managed to establish themselves as one of the major political forces in Ireland so perhaps that's something.

If I had my time back I probably wouldn't have bothered too much with Republican politics but there you go.

Kermit.de.frog

Assetbacked wrote: »

I’m 30; too young to know (or particularly care) about them other than from history books.

Murdering psychopaths and criminal thugs. Same with UVF etc.


That's all you need to know.

FTA69

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Murdering psychopaths and criminal thugs. Same with UVF etc.


That's all you need to know.

Yeah they weren't though. This blanket characterisation of all IRA Volunteers as being xyz is just dopey propaganda to be honest. Like it or not, they had a support base in the north (and south to a lesser extent) and that couldn't have been maintained had they been a bunch of self-interested scumbags. In the main, the IRA were normal people who found themselves in an abnormal conflict situation and had they been in any other country they'd have never been involved in anything like that.

Obviously there were bad people within it, and also some criminally minded people as well but unfortunately that small element has existed in Republicanism going back to the 1800s.

Strazdas

FTA69 wrote: »

Yeah they weren't though. This blanket characterisation of all IRA Volunteers as being xyz is just dopey propaganda to be honest. Like it or not, they had a support base in the north (and south to a lesser extent) and that couldn't have been maintained had they been a bunch of self-interested scumbags. In the main, the IRA were normal people who found themselves in an abnormal conflict situation and had they been in any other country they'd have never been involved in anything like that.

Obviously there were bad people within it, and also some criminally minded people as well but unfortunately that small element has existed in Republicanism going back to the 1800s.

I think that's a bit simplistic. It takes a particular type of person who chooses to arm themselves with a weapon and open fire on people in the name of a political cause or to plant a bomb. They might have been normal on the surface but were still sufficiently different from the other ordinary people in NI who weren't participating in these activities.

FTA69

Strazdas wrote: »

I think that's a bit simplistic. It takes a particular type of person who chooses to arm themselves with a weapon and open fire on people in the name of a political cause or to plant a bomb. They might have been normal on the surface but were still sufficiently different from the other ordinary people in NI who weren't participating in these activities.

Yeah I get your point like, it does take a certain type of opinionated, ballsy type to join a volunteer army but that doesn't make one abnormal per se. In Vietnam the vast majority of the population didn't pick up a gun but millions of young people did - and they did so not because the Vietnamese were all headers but because of the political, economic and military conditions in which they existed.

The IRA in places like West Belfast or South Armagh were barmen, mechanics or farmers etc. They were sons and brothers and sisters of the local people, they played soccer and Gaelic football and drank in the same pubs, and in these areas they were generally supported by the civilian population. They were very much ordinary people, albeit people willing to take risks.

Beasty

I've supported my Individual Retirement Account ever since I started paying into it

Taytoland

steddyeddy wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

A well established lie from Republicans.

Well established but not a lie.

Unionists seem to forget that attempts had been made as early as 1973 to implement power sharing in the form of the Sunningdale agreement. Unionists seem to forget that they opposed the ballot via the bullet:

On 10 December, the day after the agreement was announced, loyalist paramilitaries formed the Ulster Army Council – a coalition of loyalist paramilitary groups, including the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force, which would oppose the agreement.

It's hard to see that democracy would have worked in Northern Ireland without the troubles since loyalist paramilitaries seemed so keen to prevent it ever happening.

You had Nationalists voting and electing politicians even before the ill-fated sunningdale agreement. And even after that agreement you had Nationalists voting in elections during the very darkest of times in Ulster. So what I said was just factually true. Nationalists did have a vote in that timeline and voted SDLP. 

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Taytoland wrote: »

A well established lie from Republicans.

Go to CAIN and check out the thousands of gun battles the Provos had with the British Army and their scumbag proxy unionist terroists. Here's a good example of one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_at_Springmartin

Now tell the people reading the thread that they're a bunch of morons if they don't believe you.

Go on.

Hilarious how you make a point which had absolutely nothing to do with my point which was pointing out a Republican myth about Nationalists not being allowed near the ballot in the mid 70s. You call Unionist terrorists scumbags almost as if the IRA weren't scumbags, they were just angels who didn't turn children into mince meat, who didn't murder Garda officers, women with children, working class people, you name it, they murdered it. They even killed a beloved horse, such was the psychotic mentality of them. But carry on trying to rewrite it.

Donald Trump

Taytoland wrote: »

They even killed a beloved horse,

As the proud Irishman Dr. Ian might have sang if he were to perform a rendition of The Wild Rover

Imaginary Dr. Ian wrote:

No! Neigh! Never! No neigh never no more

timthumbni

The only thing I liked about the IRA were their Funerals. Absolute and utter lowlifes from start to finish, and ditto with their loyalist opposites.

Attempting to bomb and shoot your way to intimidate unionists into a so called “United” Ireland was never going to work now was it... but republicans are generally as thick as champ anyway so no surprise when their murder terrorist campaign failed miserably.

Strazdas

FTA69 wrote: »

Yeah I get your point like, it does take a certain type of opinionated, ballsy type to join a volunteer army but that doesn't make one abnormal per se. In Vietnam the vast majority of the population didn't pick up a gun but millions of young people did - and they did so not because the Vietnamese were all headers but because of the political, economic and military conditions in which they existed.

The IRA in places like West Belfast or South Armagh were barmen, mechanics or farmers etc. They were sons and brothers and sisters of the local people, they played soccer and Gaelic football and drank in the same pubs, and in these areas they were generally supported by the civilian population. They were very much ordinary people, albeit people willing to take risks.

One reason I said what I said is that I've watched TV interviews with former volunteers over the years and they seemed surprisingly angry and bitter in general and also fairly unrepentant about their past activities. Which does make me wonder about the idea of them being ordinary, decent men who somehow got sucked into violence.

It's rare that you'll hear them say they are full of regrets about the Troubles. Frequently they will try and justify the armed struggle all the way in a "I did what I had to do" type of way.

Dravokivich

The high horse brigade wrote: »

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter

Seems to be rarely the case. So why do people keep spouting this crap?

Donald Trump

Dravokivich wrote: »

Seems to be rarely the case. So why do people keep spouting this crap?

He Dravokivich, on a separate topic, what have you got against prison wardens? :pac:

FTA69

Strazdas wrote: »

One reason I said what I said is that I've watched TV interviews with former volunteers over the years and they seemed surprisingly angry and bitter in general and also fairly unrepentant about their past activities. Which does make me wonder about the idea of them being ordinary, decent men who somehow got sucked into violence.

It's rare that you'll hear them say they are full of regrets about the Troubles. Frequently they will try and justify the armed struggle all the way in a "I did what I had to do" type of way.

Depends on who you ask I suppose. I was in Algeria last year and met a few members of the old FLN there who fought against the French, they didn't regret the FLN campaign as they saw it as one which they fought for their liberation. Ireland is no different. I know some incredibly bitter former members, but they're bitter about the idea that what they didn't wasn't worth the outcome. Other former members you'll speak to (ones still to do with SF primarily) like Gerry Kelly or Danny Morrison wouldn't be bitter and acrimonious. Huge amounts of former combatants also suffer from PTSD etc.

As I said, the IRA were normal people who arose from their communities and did so because of a set of conditions that existed here. The fact they aren't saying today that they think the campaign etc was wrong isn't a sign they weren't 'normal'.

Dravokivich

Donald Trump wrote: »

He Dravokivich, on a separate topic, what have you got against prison wardens? :pac:

Sorry man, I may have missed the joke there?

Donald Trump

Dravokivich wrote: »

Sorry man, I may have missed the joke there?

A shit joke referencing your signature

FTA69

timthumbni wrote: »

but republicans are generally as thick as champ anyway so no surprise when their murder terrorist campaign failed miserably.

I know yeah, if only we had such erudite and astute intellects such as Willie McCrea, Sammy Wilson, Johnny Adair, the Free Presbyterians and Lenny Murphy we'd have been flying it altogether.

FrancieBrady

FTA69 wrote: »

Depends on who you ask I suppose. I was in Algeria last year and met a few members of the old FLN there who fought against the French, they didn't regret the FLN campaign as they saw it as one which they fought for their liberation. Ireland is no different. I know some incredibly bitter former members, but they're bitter about the idea that what they didn't wasn't worth the outcome. Other former members you'll speak to (ones still to do with SF primarily) like Gerry Kelly or Danny Morrison wouldn't be bitter and acrimonious. Huge amounts of former combatants also suffer from PTSD etc.

As I said, the IRA were normal people who arose from their communities and did so because of a set of conditions that existed here. The fact they aren't saying today that they think the campaign etc was wrong isn't a sign they weren't 'normal'.

Never ceases to amaze me how seemingly reasonably imteligent people can call them abnormal or psychopaths.

If they were they would not have been able to be stopped. In a very disciplined way, they did stop when then achieved something the SDLP could not achieve -a workable internationally binding agreement that once and for all removed the bigoted, religiously sectarian unionist state and forced them to share power.
That battle goes on today with the unionists now hellbent on destroying the union and their place in it. It took them less than a 100 years to wreck it all.

timthumbni

FTA69 wrote: »

timthumbni wrote: »

but republicans are generally as thick as champ anyway so no surprise when their murder terrorist campaign failed miserably.

I know yeah, if only we had such erudite and astute intellects such as Willie McCrea, Sammy Wilson, Johnny Adair, the Free Presbyterians and Lenny Murphy we'd have been flying it altogether.

Well I did say that the loyalists were just as bad as the provos though I don’t know why you brought the religious free p’s into it.

You mentioned ptsd. I’m sure there are plenty of ira “combatants” who have plenty of that. I hope for example the brave ira volunteers who blew up those 2 children outside a McDonald’s have bought a length of rope.

I also note you wouldn’t have supported the psni. Those “dissident” or ex ira Irish republicans who blew the legs off that catholic gaa playing officer didn’t support it either obviously....

Junkyard Tom

timthumbni wrote: »

Well I did say that the loyalists were just as bad as the provos.

Typical unionist self-delusion that so-called 'security forces' weren't up to their necks in the blood of innocent Catholics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB9XqkZD1yc

_Brian

timthumbni wrote: »

Well I did say that the loyalists were just as bad as the provos though I don’t know why you brought the religious free p’s into it.

You mentioned ptsd. I’m sure there are plenty of ira “combatants” who have plenty of that. I hope for example the brave ira volunteers who blew up those 2 children outside a McDonald’s have bought a length of rope.

I also note you wouldn’t have supported the psni. Those “dissident” or ex ira Irish republicans who blew the legs off that catholic gaa playing officer didn’t support it either obviously....

I knew two former members who killed themselves partially as a result of active duty.

I honestly don’t think the peace in the north would have been reached without the IRA activity. There would have been no reason for the brutality against republicans to stop otherwise.

the_syco

Pedro K wrote: »

I think, at times, the IRA were a necessary evil. Sometimes, you can't get the ballot without the bullet.

Especially when you kill those who you claim to protect.

timthumbni

_Brian wrote: »

timthumbni wrote: »

Well I did say that the loyalists were just as bad as the provos though I don’t know why you brought the religious free p’s into it.

You mentioned ptsd. I’m sure there are plenty of ira “combatants” who have plenty of that. I hope for example the brave ira volunteers who blew up those 2 children outside a McDonald’s have bought a length of rope.

I also note you wouldn’t have supported the psni. Those “dissident” or ex ira Irish republicans who blew the legs off that catholic gaa playing officer didn’t support it either obviously....

I knew two former members who killed themselves partially as a result of active duty.

I honestly don’t think the peace in the north would have been reached without the IRA activity. There would have been no reason for the brutality against republicans to stop otherwise.

The Ira murdered many more humans than anyone else involved in the modern troubles. They were the problem. Whenever they stopped blowing up kids the loyalist thugs stopped as well. So you can stop the poor downtrodden republican manta. It’s old, it’s tired and it’s a pile of mad dog ****e tbh.

AllForIt

I wouldn't every endorse the bombing of innocent civilians, ever.

However I totally understand how the IRA came about. Bearing in mind though that the vast majority of them were nothing more than common thugs and if they weren't in the IRA they would be common criminals. I think criminality is their line of work these days. They are hardly resuming their careers in medicine now that they have disbanded.

When I say I understand how they came to be I mean it in respect of this - your average English person thought that the IRA were from the Republic, ppl in the south who had no other concern than the reunification of Ireland. Gerry Adams was banned from speaking on British media - so the English were extremely ignorant of what was the real reason for the conflict. They didn't know anything about the DUP and their politics, they didn't even know there was Catholics committees in the north. They though the north of full of Brits and all the trouble was coming from the south.

I still hear today from some British commentators, more recently when Martin McGuinness died, that there was no need for any conflict at all and all that was required was peaceful protests. This point of view is laughable. The idea that peaceful protests would be tolerated in any way whatsoever back then is to completely deny the state of affairs and attitudes to the Catholic community back then.

The IRA came about because of the complete and utter subjugation of the Catholic Irish in NI by the ruling parties in the north and the British govermnent and if they didn't take that position there wouldn't have been any IRA at all.

FrancieBrady

timthumbni wrote: »

The Ira murdered many more humans than anyone else involved in the modern troubles. They were the problem. Whenever they stopped blowing up kids the loyalist thugs stopped as well. So you can stop the poor downtrodden republican manta. It’s old, it’s tired and it’s a pile of mad dog ****e tbh.

And we are still seeing again and again and again, that the state was an ardent and underhand player with lots of blood on it's hands.

But themuns 'were the problem'.

Those who had the capacity in 1968 (The British Gov) to do what they eventually did in 1998 after almost 3000 people died carry the ultimate responsibility.
There is no reason why the unionist controlled statlet could not have been dismantled in 68 - only the kind of arrogant imperialistic behaviour we are once again seeing in relation to Brexit.
That is why the IRA thrived, the British would only listen to force. And they did eventually listen and they did eventually act.

Filmer Paradise

Never supported them. I was in my teens in the '80s, so remember their brand of scumery very well.

Somehow as a kid I just knew that Haughey & all that he stood for was wrong. His followers were all utter Dopes. All of them.

IRA supporters in the South were cut from the same cloth. Dopes to a man & usually the dregs of society.

Zebra3

Utter scum the Rah.

If only they’d had the moral compass of the Brits.

Invading lands all over the world. Getting into the old genocide and ethnic cleansing. Castrating Africans, herding Africans into concentration camps. Bit of the old napalm dropping on Asian civilians.

Can’t understand why with gerrymandering, that nationalists didn’t sort everything out at the ballot box.

end of the road

archer22 wrote: »

You are forgetting that the Unionists and British could have wiped the IRA off the face of the earth in a few days if they wanted.
They knew every single one of them and had arrested them over and over...however they never upgraded the conflict to war status instead just keeping it to a policing matter.
They never once used their heavy weapons or air power.

The IRA were fortunate in who they were at 'war' with.
The Americans, Russians and most others would really have given them something to be singing about!!

actually, the british only knew the people at the top of the ira who they had been secretly negotiating with the whole time. after that, they had little idea of who were the ground troops. absolutely britain would have wiped them out in a face to face battle, however given the tactics the IRA used britain would not have been able to compete and would have failed to eradicate them. that is why britain likely didn't upgrade it to a full scale war.

Gadgetman496

Are we not getting the 6 counties back after Brexit?

northknife

Filmer Paradise wrote:

Never supported them. I was in my teens in the '80s, so remember their brand of scumery very well.

What an absolute tosspot you are.. how f'n dear you call the actions of people who fought back against the total discrimination and bigotry of the British government and the unionist elite who colluded to murder many innocent people and treat them as third class citizens who were not even able to vote, as scum. I would never have taken up arms from my privileged position here in the Republic but if I was living in an occupied country against that regime then I can be pretty certain that I would have done anything to help myself and my fellow citizens to rid ourselves of this evil tyranny.

Filmer Paradise

northknife wrote: »

What an absolute tosspot you are.. how f'n dear you call the actions of people who fought back against the total discrimination and bigotry of the British government and the unionist elite who colluded to murder many innocent people and treat them as third class citizens who were not even able to vote, as scum. I would never have taken up arms from my privileged position here in the Republic but if I was living in an occupied country against that regime then I can be pretty certain that I would have done anything to help myself and my fellow citizens to rid ourselves of this evil tyranny.

Never spoke of anybody in the North & Be careful of who you call a 'Tosspot' .

Maybe If I lived in the North in those times, I could have been the first on the streets myself. Who Knows?

I just answered a question on an internet discussion forum & outlined my positon on it.

So crane your neck in there now.

robindch

flookdgates wrote: »

Anyone willing to admit that they supported the IRA at any point?

Nope, since I didn't support them at any point during their campaign of terror, murder and crime all over Ireland, the UK and further afield. The IRA, their fellow-travellers and the various opposing sides they fought against, were not patriots when they were murdering people, and thankfully, few people paint them as patriots now. By their actions, they demeaned and discredited the idea of Irishness and associated it on the international stage with bombs, bulllets, criminality and death. They also planted a bomb in my home town well south of the border and - trivially, in the light of the rest of their broad contempt for civilization - one of their boyos, collecting money outside a church one Sunday morning, once made physical threats against my mum. Probably worth noting that they fought as terrorists too and not face-to-face as real soldiers would.

I am happy that the Irish and UK governments co-operated for long-enough and well-enough to bring an end to the campaigns of all the terrorists. And I'd like to see the current elected representatives in the north playing to the gallery less, and running the place more.

FTA69

timthumbni wrote: »

Well I did say that the loyalists were just as bad as the provos though I don’t know why you brought the religious free p’s into it.

I wasn't just referring to illegal paramilitary Loyalism or their mates in the DUP, but also the other armed strands of Unionism such as the sectarian organisations like the B Specials, the RUC and the UDR - all of which were actively aiding and colluding with Loyalist paramiliataries and doing so under state direction.

As I've said to you on other threads tim, you've this mad habit of taking a thumbs-behind-the-braces preaching moralism about IRA political violence while also supporting state bodies up to their neck in collusion, torture and the killing of innocent people. There is no moral superiority by the UDR et al over the IRA whatsoever.

It's funny that some people are on this thread going on about anger and bitterness etc but the only person I see blankety portraying Republicans as thicks and lowlifes while defending the RUC of all people, is you.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

The Backwards Man

The hoops people will put themselves through to justify their support for the cold blooded murderers of children are staggering. You can talk about themmuns all you want, but it just doesn't change what you are endorsing.

Silent Running

The Backwards Man wrote: »

The hoops people will put themselves through to justify their support for the cold blooded murderers of children are staggering. You can talk about themmuns all you want, but it just doesn't change what you are endorsing.

That can be said for both of themmuns.

The Backwards Man

Silent Running wrote: »

That can be said for both of themmuns.

My point exactly, you just don't see it, or you just don't want to see it. It's not a competition, you support the slaughter of innocents, or you don't.

Silent Running

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Cowardly murderous bastards.

So, it's fair to say that this statement applies to the Unionist thugs as well as Nationalist thugs.

As long as we both understand this. Your post could have been seen as aimed at the IRA only.

weldoninhio

Strazdas wrote: »

I think that's a bit simplistic. It takes a particular type of person who chooses to arm themselves with a weapon and open fire on people in the name of a political cause or to plant a bomb. They might have been normal on the surface but were still sufficiently different from the other ordinary people in NI who weren't participating in these activities.

How would you categorize Nelson Mandela??

Berserker

weldoninhio wrote: »

How would you categorize Nelson Mandela??

A class A1 terrorist.

FTA69 wrote: »

I wasn't just referring to illegal paramilitary Loyalism or their mates in the DUP

The DUP weren't mates with any illegal paramilitary groups. That was one of the issues with Unionism and Loyalism. On the nationalist/republican side, SF and the IRA were joined at the hip as we all know.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Silent Running

Berserker wrote: »

A class A1 terrorist.



The DUP weren't mates with any illegal paramilitary groups. That was one of the issues with Unionism and Loyalism. On the nationalist/republican side, SF and the IRA were joined at the hip as we all know.

Incorrect! The DUP have links to the UVF and UDA, through their Ulster Resistance movement. Remember the red berets?

FrancieBrady

The Backwards Man wrote: »

My point exactly, you just don't see it, or you just don't want to see it. It's not a competition, you support the slaughter of innocents, or you don't.

You can have a view of our history which understands what and why it happened.

The politics of condemnation is a patent waste of time and energy
You have to advocate doing the right thing and the right thing was done in forcing the government's to accept that it was they who has to ensure proper equality.
The most responsible government paid lip service to equality for the first 50 or 60 years of an irresponsible partition and then when it went inevitably up in flames tried to support the bigoted unionist authority.
The 'right' thing to do and the only option open was to force them to do the right thing.

Like all wars and conflicts; too many died and it was hard to get it stopped.
The GFA was a triumph and has to be allowed to survive.

Zebra3

Berserker wrote: »

The DUP weren't mates with any illegal paramilitary groups. That was one of the issues with Unionism and Loyalism. On the nationalist/republican side, SF and the IRA were joined at the hip as we all know.

The DUP were besties with a lot of criminal organisations and sure didn’t Robbo show his true colours with the attack over the border?

realdanbreen

I always felt, and it's as true today as it was then, that the unemployed/working class/ poor-take your pick, Catholic/Nationalist guy had more in common with an unemployed/working class/poor Protestant/Unionist guy than he had with well heeled Catholics/Nationalists and vice versa.

sbsquarepants

The high horse brigade wrote: »

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter

This exactly.

The IRA was a necessary evil. Like practically every other paramilitary organisation the world over it was an uneasy mix of high minded political idealists and murderous thugs, and like practically every other paramilitary organisation it descended into pure criminality once it's purpose was served.

The "republican" and "loyalist" organisations on the go now are basically nothing but organised crime gangs.

6541

100 percent a supporter and proud. I know / knew bomb-makers, shooters, logistic men and agitators. The IRA beat the British Government and by extension Unionist into an uneasy truce. The one thing that people need to realize is, the majority if Unionist's hate you I mean really hate you. I recommend you go North and hang out a while, you will soon get the vibe.

Odhinn

Berserker wrote: »

A class A1 terrorist.



The DUP weren't mates with any illegal paramilitary groups. That was one of the issues with Unionism and Loyalism. On the nationalist/republican side, SF and the IRA were joined at the hip as we all know.

No, no, not at all, at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMpV5jnZhq8

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=53lIQqHz&id=3085B5DA1BDD14430B4BB3F784C00763B6A044F3&thid=OIP.53lIQqHzMqB-slvqNN8-5AHaF4&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fl7.alamy.com%2fzooms%2fe4d1fbd548d54263a8825dd3f002e2be%2f1972-rev-ian-paisley-watches-his-private-army-of-third-force-marching-f66r1t.jpg&exph=509&expw=640&q=ian+paisley+third+force&simid=607987515477198945&selectedIndex=2&ajaxhist=0


https://www.google.ie/search?q=willie+mccrea+billy+wright&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwin79rpnIDcAhUrLcAKHT0NAR4Q_AUICigB&biw=1536&bih=841#imgrc=5f0LU00YgawjGM:

Bring back Cú Chulainn and Na Fianna

mariaalice

6541 wrote: »

100 percent a supporter and proud. I know / knew bomb-makers, shooters, logistic men and agitators. The IRA beat the British Government and by extension Unionist into an uneasy truce. The one thing that people need to realize is, the majority if Unionist's hate you I mean really hate you. I recommend you go North and hang out a while, you will soon get the vibe.

No, they don't, a lot though not all have a belligerent/ siege mentality it more evident in working-class areas, but at least that is honest instead of hiding it in a mask of politeness in a more middle-class area.

It was and is more of a class war thing via religion.

brainfreeze

archer22 wrote: »

however they never upgraded the conflict to war

In name only. Even Tony Blair admitted it was a war. They behaved it was like a war, deploying soldiers, shoot to kill policies, interment. Not calling it a war was in name only, for propaganda purposes but also so they could justify themselves avoiding the Geneva Convention. The IRA didn't exactly follow the Geneva Convention either though so the British can use multiple reasons of why they didn't follow it.

archer22 wrote: »

instead just keeping it to a policing matter.

With Soldiers??

archer22 wrote: »

They never once used their heavy weapons or air power.

Yes because destroying your self-proclaimed own cities your trying to convince people you are protecting would make perfect sense. It worked out so well for them internationally when they did it in Dublin and Cork. They didn't shell London either in the mid 2000s with the rise if Islamist attacks, yet they still proclaimed it a war on terror. Shelling Belfast would be also shelling their own people. People loyal to the crown. That would be an awful tactic, how many unionists would be left after you carpet bomb them? They considered this a war on British soil, not some foreign land were they don't care if they make in uninhabitable.

I get what you are trying to say but your logic is all wrong. Even British Intelligence state they would never be able to defeat the IRA through military means, so you are basically claiming you know something they don't. All analysis pointed to a stalemate, they would never outright win.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6276416.stm

The document, obtained by the Pat Finucane Centre, points to a number of mistakes, including internment and highlights what lessons have been learnt.

It describes the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters".

It concedes for the first time that it did not win the battle against the IRA - but claims to have "shown the IRA that it could not achieve its ends through violence".

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/british-army-paper-illustrates-respect-for-ira-1.948685

Later, towards the end of the 98-page review, the three British army officers who were specially seconded to write the document, appeared to conform to the general modern analysis that one of the key reasons the "war" ended was that neither the British army/RUC nor the IRA could defeat each other.

And here is a single quote from ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair that debunks both your points, that 1) it wasn't a war. And 2) that they could have defeated them easily with the military if they wanted to.

https://youtu.be/XhPMb0W9kJE?t=3180

• "No one won the war. The British and the Unionists were never going to be bombed out of the United Kingdom, and we were never going to be able by military force, to destroy the republicans. So no one won." - Tony Blair.

This notion that the British could have destroyed the IRA if they just increased their game is just that, notions. They don't even think that.