How long before Irish reunification? (Part 2) Threadbans in OP

gormdubhgorm

Bambi wrote: »

yeah, its hard to believe a mans views might soften over the course of almost forty years.

Where is the confusion would you not call the two positions diametrically opposed. Would Gerry 82 say Gerry 14 is/was wrong or vice versa?

Personally I believe Gerry's 82 views are still his real views, deep down. Plus what Gerry 14 said is merely a dressing up of 82. A con job. Let be honest most Republicans (particularly in NI) want Unionism obliterated piece by piece if necessary.

downcow

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Interesting how Gerry Adams more recently gave more conciliatory soundbites to Unionists about a UI (when he was a TD for Louth) compared to his 1982 panorama interview.

Belligerent, intolerant 1982 Gerry:

When said there was no Unionist Culture it was a political culture.

Mellow Louth TD 2014 Gerry doing his best preacher spiel:

@0:34


"There is no way we can put the shoe on the other foot. There is no way we want to be part of doing unto our Unionist brothers and sisters, what was done unto us we might have to be innovative"


@1:37

"There is no point in creating a new state, or a new system of governance on this island And have a large alienated minority of people who would be against what's going on. It has to be governance by the people for the people."


'Unionist brothers and sisters' - cracked me up

I didn't think I would ever be surprised by the hypocracy of Gerry Adams, but this takes it to another level.
I actually can't believe what I've listened to. It is so ridiculous I don't even start. I suppose if there is anything positive in it it is that he has spoken out against a united Ireland - he says there is no point in a united Ireland with a disaffected minority - well Gerry, that's it then.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I met many a squaddie going through checkpoints here, invariably decent young men but to a man, they were nervous, suspicious and hadn't a clue who to trust or what they were dropped into. With everyone of them you got the distinct impression they would rather be anywhere else on the planet than were they were.

Any former members of the IRA I have met do not share the above traits and gullible would not be a word I would associate with them. They all knew very definitely what they were involved in and where they were.
I would imagine the same could be said of loyalist recruits.

That was your experience Francie and I don't deny it - I can understand why they would be nervous.
I had a very different experience at checkpoints. We invariably had a chat, a bit of crack about football teams, and I always thanked them for their sacrifice to protect us. Always kept a few sweets in the car to share with them.
Any time they done a checkpoint at my gate. My kids would always take them sweets or sandwiches.
You have it in your head Francie that they felt unwanted, because you would like them to have felt unwanted. I can assure you that the vast majority of the unionist community left them in no doubt how much we appreciated what they were doing. I reckon a fair few nationalists would have probably done the same when they were in the privacy of their car.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The PIRA were assassinating RUC/BA and blowing up British business districts well into the 1990's, somehow the informers couldn't get that info to their handlers.

[in the 1990's] it was revealed, reportedly by Sir John Wilsey, the Army’s General Officer Commanding in Northern Ireland that “the PIRA is better equipped, better resourced, better led, bolder and more secure against our penetration than at any time before

Journal
International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence
Volume 23, 2010 - Issue 1

........ but in the main they concentrated on sectarian murder

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Like I say...claim and counter claim.


An organisation 'riddled' with informers doesn't tally with an organisation that was able to negotiate while still fully armed or one that was able to mount attacks in the heart of Britain to nudge them towards a deal.

It will be many years before we know the truth. It will be immaterial then as it is now, and that is a good thing.

Be careful you don't let your inside knowledge slip Francie. Most people on here think the IRA have gone. But clearly you and me know differently.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Yes, I support self-determination for the people in the six counties/NI.

What for exactly?

DC, what would you be looking for people in the north to self-determine?

downcow

Edgware wrote: »

Have another read through and you will see "80s". By the time the 90s came Gerry and the Peacemakers knew it was stalemate and decided to get on the Stormont payroll officially

Class LOL
you just about summed it up.
And as for negotiating a settlement, could anybody tell me anything that the IRA got out of it except the prisoners let out.

We all know that for half a century the British government would not stand in the way of Northern Ireland leaving the United Kingdom.
We have the shinners administrating British rule in Northern Ireland. They are publicly supporting the British forces - Michelle even had to draw her horns in after she expressed some disquiet about the British forces assisting with hospitals here.
The GFA gives Republicans nothing.
The reason for this is quite clear. When you go into a negotiation already defeated, you have nothing to negotiate with

downcow

Bambi wrote: »

Here's an interesting thing, if there had ever been a survey of the men who served in the ASUs in the 20s, the civil war, prison etc., it would probably find a lot of them didnt make it to their 50s, it all took a toll on their health. I'd say with a lot of provos it was the same.

WRT to intelligence war, there was book recently published looking at this, it concluded the IRA was not significanly compromised by British intelligence. How true that is I don't know.

The writer obviously had not seen the files that were stolen out of Castlereagh. LOL

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

That was your experience Francie and I don't deny it - I can understand why they would be nervous.
I had a very different experience at checkpoints. We invariably had a chat, a bit of crack about football teams, and I always thanked them for their sacrifice to protect us. Always kept a few sweets in the car to share with them.
Any time they done a checkpoint at my gate. My kids would always take them sweets or sandwiches.
You have it in your head Francie that they felt unwanted, because you would like them to have felt unwanted. I can assure you that the vast majority of the unionist community left them in no doubt how much we appreciated what they were doing. I reckon a fair few nationalists would have probably done the same when they were in the privacy of their car.

Just take it from the other side, Downcow. The experience you had going through the checkpoints was VERY different to that of the average Nationalist.

I don't blame the young cubs stuck on the border posts, but you have to realise the treatment you received was completely incomparable to that which we did.

The vast majority of Nationalists absolutely felt that they weren't wanted.....because the treatment they received at border crossings was atrocious.

No amount of sandwiches can normalise shoving rifles in children's faces.

gormdubhgorm

downcow wrote: »

I didn't think I would ever be surprised by the of Gerry Adams, but this takes it to another level.
I actually can't believe that I'd listened to. It is so ridiculous I don't even start. I suppose if there is anything positive in it it is that he has spoken out against a united Ireland - he says there is no point in a united Ireland with a disaffected minority - well Gerry, that's it then.

Which is why I think the status quo would be better than any alternative ,given the nature of both sides of the political divide.

FrancieBrady

SDLP looking in on the UI act now too.
I give it 2 years to the announcement of the first Border Poll.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Just take it from the other side, Downcow. The experience you had going through the checkpoints was VERY different to that of the average Nationalist.

I don't blame the young cubs stuck on the border posts, but you have to realise the treatment you received was completely incomparable to that which we did.

The vast majority of Nationalists absolutely felt that they weren't wanted.....because the treatment they received at border crossings was atrocious.

No amount of sandwiches can normalise shoving rifles in children's faces.

I don't disagree with you Fionn. It is a chicken and egg situation. I have many nationalist/republican friends who tell me of their experiences at checkpoints. Rifles cocked, etc. but when we chat it is very difficult to sort out who started. They arrived at the checkpoint cheeky and aggressive, or in fairness to them, even just nervous. I arrived at the checkpoint, appreciative and wanting them to feel welcome. It's not difficult to understand why we had very different experiences

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

SDLP looking in on the UI act now too.
I give it 2 years to the announcement of the first Border Poll.

...... and then once it fails, according to Gerry in that video, there will be another one 'within seven years'. Ha ha, not possible Gerry, unfortunately the GFA states that is not possible

James Brown

downcow wrote: »

Be careful you don't let your inside knowledge slip Francie. Most people on here think the IRA have gone. But clearly you and me know differently.

Some people seem to think that once peace was signed up to these people that made up the IRA evaporated and if they are ever heard of again the IRA are still around and active. It's silly.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I don't disagree with you Fionn. It is a chicken and egg situation. I have many nationalist/republican friends who tell me of their experiences at checkpoints. Rifles cocked, etc. but when we chat it is very difficult to sort out who started. They arrived at the checkpoint cheeky and aggressive, or in fairness to them, even just nervous. I arrived at the checkpoint, appreciative and wanting them to feel welcome. It's not difficult to understand why we had very different experiences

I wouldn't doubt that nerves and attitude were a factor, Downcow. Granted, I'd be of the opinion that the vast majority of the nerves an attitude came from the teenage and early 20s year old boys stationed in a strange land with no idea what they were doing there.

I can assure you that my father was as respectful a man as they came. If anything, my father carried less sectarianism in him than I ever did, growing up in a 'mixed marriage'. I certainly didn't have any nerves or attitude at 5-10 years old when I had rifles pointed in to the back of the car at me.

I can understand why the young lads acted the way they did, but I absolutely won't buy your, 'well you probably deserved it' analysis.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I wouldn't doubt that nerves and attitude were a factor, Downcow. Granted, I'd be of the opinion that the vast majority of the nerves an attitude came from the teenage and early 20s year old boys stationed in a strange land with no idea what they were doing there.

I can assure you that my father was as respectful a man as they came. If anything, my father carried less sectarianism in him than I ever did, growing up in a 'mixed marriage'. I certainly didn't have any nerves or attitude at 5-10 years old when I had rifles pointed in to the back of the car at me.

I can understand why the young lads acted the way they did, but I absolutely won't buy your, 'well you probably deserved it' analysis.

The British army is no different from any army on an individual level...some decent people and some thugs. They all followed orders though and at times of tension they knew the community's to come down hard on.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British army is no different from any army on an individual level...some decent people and some thugs. They all followed orders though and at times of tension they knew the community's to come down hard on.

Don’t disagree with any of that.
I might word it differently as they knew which community they were safe in

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Don’t disagree with any of that.
I might word it differently as they knew which community they were safe in

You'll recall they were initially warmly welcomed on the Falls, Downcow. Sandwiches and all.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Not my place to make a judgement on any man or woman, Downcow (that includes you and all), I will say I've never spotted a claim of IRA membership from Francie though.

My point was 100% that it is ridiculous to suggest anyone living in Monaghan would have no experience with the British Army during that period. A point which I presume you would 100% agree and back me on, right?

I can't fathom the reason why Edgeware arrives onto various threads to claim things like that. It only shows that he/she has nothing else to say, so they try to undermine on a personal basis.
In this instance and having been on the wrong side of 50 for quite a while and having lived in 100 yards from a checkpoint for a goodly portion of those 50 years with a brief stint abroad and a longer one in Donegal, I can assure him/her that he/she couldn't be further from the truth sadly.

The_Fitz

Stoops have set up a forum on a UI. Hopefully some Unionists will engage in conversation on how they would like their island to look on this potential outcome.

BonnieSituation

Edgware wrote: »

I think we should all realise by now that Francie is a bluffer and the nearest he has come to the British army/ ira is watching t.v.

Is he?

And what about your sprawling knowledge of the subject at hand that doesn't include your usual glib "Sinn Féin R BAD OK!" shtick?

It's laughable that anyone on this thread would even countenance a continuation of the nonsense of Francie's BA knowledge. Why these character attacks are even allowed is beyond me. What's it to any of ye?

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Not my place to make a judgement on any man or woman, Downcow (that includes you and all), I will say I've never spotted a claim of IRA membership from Francie though.

My point was 100% that it is ridiculous to suggest anyone living in Monaghan would have no experience with the British Army during that period. A point which I presume you would 100% agree and back me on, right?

If he travelled abroad he would run the risk of encountering them, no doubt

downcow

The_Fitz wrote: »

Stoops have set up a forum on a UI. Hopefully some Unionists will engage in conversation on how they would like their island to look on this potential outcome.

Now where would this thread be. I almost detest their position more. The shinners pretend that they think there are not sectarian but they know fine well that they are sectarian. The stoops genuinely think they are not sectarian

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

If he travelled abroad he would run the risk of encountering them, no doubt

Completely unnecessary and pointless, Downcow. Not too many places you can go, 'abroad', back and 'abroad' again from one end of your field to the next.

Care to actually answer the question without throwing in the nonsense?

Do you find it likely that someone could live on the Monaghan border during the troubles and have NO experience with the British Army?

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

Now where would this thread be. I almost detest their position more. The shinners pretend that they think there are not sectarian but they know fine well that they are sectarian. The stoops genuinely think they are not sectarian

Are you suggesting there might be a residual sectarian aspect to politics in that little former Protestant ethno-statelet?

Are you trying to tell me that a rotten little enclave carved out to accommodate Protestant supremacy where the current largest Unionist political outfit was named the 'Protestant Unionist Party' might have an issue with sectarianism?

Are you telling me that a place where the largest political party is dominated by a fundamentalist Protestant sect, where most of the sitting MP's are members of a weird 18th Century Protestant fraternity set up to maintain Protestant supremacy might have an issue with sectarianism?

Do you realise the galactic levels hypocrisy you parade around this thread? As I've said before, you are beyond redemption, there is no point in trying to reason with you and you display perfectly, well into the 21st Century, to any neutral readers of the thread, what the nationalist people of the north were up against in the late 1960's.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Completely unnecessary and pointless, Downcow. Not too many places you can go, 'abroad', back and 'abroad' again from one end of your field to the next.

Care to actually answer the question without throwing in the nonsense?

Do you find it likely that someone could live on the Monaghan border during the troubles and have NO experience with the British Army?

I thought I was very clear. If he travels abroad it’s very likely. If he stays in his own country it would be very unlikely. RA road checks would be likely in both countries in that area.

downcow

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Are you suggesting there might be a residual sectarian aspect to politics in that little former Protestant ethno-statelet?

Are you trying to tell me that a rotten little enclave carved out to accommodate Protestant supremacy where the current largest Unionist political outfit was named the 'Protestant Unionist Party' might have an issue with sectarianism?

Are you telling me that a place where the largest political party is dominated by a fundamentalist Protestant sect, where most of the sitting MP's are members of a weird 18th Century Protestant fraternity set up to maintain Protestant supremacy might have an issue with sectarianism?

Do you realise the galactic levels hypocrisy you parade around this thread? As I've said before, you are beyond redemption, there is no point in trying to reason with you and you display perfectly, well into the 21st Century, to any neutral readers of the thread, what the nationalist people of the north were up against in the late 1960's.

Junkyard. I have agreed many times that there was a period catholics up here didn’t have a fair crack of the whip, and likewise for prods down south.

Which bit of my post you responded to upset you? Was it the stoops or the RA being sectarian?
You see your difficulty is that I recognise the sectarianism in my community and have declared many times here that dealing with my own sectarianism is a work in progress.
Your sad problem is that you cannot admit that you are sectarian. And we have to guess whether you have even recognised it. - the rest of us have lol
You have not even reached square one yet and I am about 25 years down the road.

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

I thought I was very clear. If he travels abroad it’s very likely. If he stays in his own country it would be very unlikely. RA road checks would be likely in both countries in that area.

I never went through a RA checkpoint myself. I do know a few folk in Cavan who could've had a chat with the British Army from their own property.

Even if we want to go along with your nonsense, a simple drive from Clones to Cavan would take one across the border multiple times. So even without wishing to spend any time, 'abroad' the ridiculous nature of the border would make never encountering a member of the British Army incredibly unlikely.

I don't get why you can't just acknowledge the simple fact that living along the border would make it quite unlikely for a person to never have any experience with the British Army - apart from the sort of territorialism I'd usually expect from dogs with lampposts, what does your comment about, 'travel abroad' actually add?

Junkyard Tom

downcow wrote: »

Junkyard. I have agreed many times that there was a period catholics up here didn’t have a fair crack of the whip

Sectarianism is a legacy of British/Unionist misrule, you consider yourself British/Unionist, stop crying about it and own your mess.

downcow

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I never went through a RA checkpoint myself. I do know a few folk in Cavan who could've had a chat with the British Army from their own property.

Even if we want to go along with your nonsense, a simple drive from Clones to Cavan would take one across the border multiple times. So even without wishing to spend any time, 'abroad' the ridiculous nature of the border would make never encountering a member of the British Army incredibly unlikely.

I don't get why you can't just acknowledge the simple fact that living along the border would make it quite unlikely for a person to never have any experience with the British Army - apart from the sort of territorialism I'd usually expect from dogs with lampposts, what does your comment about, 'travel abroad' actually add?

I think you are directing you anger at the wrong person. I have acknowledged throughout that (if he lived in Monaghan) Francie was really close to the UK and therefore if he entered the UK he would no doubt encounter UK army. Same the world over