If there was no IRA....

gossipgirl123

gossipgirl123 wrote: »

I have personally started to enjoy Irish politics, I honestly can't abide Sinn Fein I disagree with the policies and I don't think the sums add up. That aside I have been thinking what would life be like if the IRA never existed would we have peace today.

With no IRA have an apartheid state in NI.

Unless you mean the older IRA. We'd both just be British then, though I'd probably rather just not have been born in the first place.

maccored

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So what was the murder in 2007 of Paul Quinn about?

What about the murder of people in South of Ireland? Was that for freedom? What exactly was the killing of Martin Cahill?
How many people along the border got killed for no reason, catholic and other religions?

The raping of women? The abuse of children and then protector those abusers?

Was that all required to get the freedom of the North?

Stick your head in the sand all you want, don’t expect everyone else to as well

I wish people like you had had to grow up in the north between the late 60s and the mid 90s. Might knock you off that high horse you have.

Maewyn Succat

gossipgirl123 wrote: »

At what point do you decide I will pick up a gun and kill or become a bomb maker.

If you happen to live in the Dublin North west constituency and Dessie Ellis is your local TD maybe you email him and ask him.

TheCitizen

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The IRA/SF were politically irrelevant. Sunningdale might have taken the wind out of their sales.

Are you aware of the Ulster Workers' strike that was enforced by the UVF?

I think he might be but is choosing to ignore it cos he's an FFGer playing politics with the Northern Irish conflict '69 onwards to the GFA.

Sad to se MM from FF today disowning Republicanism. FF the original Republican Party in the Republic. Old FFers like Dev and Lemass and Haughey turning in their graves.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/taoiseach-rules-out-united-ireland-referendum-as-divisive-1.4298677

rapul

Lads the OP's account was made today and clearly has no interest in what went on, just stirring the pot, read up yourself gossipgirl you have no clue.

Shefwedfan

maccored wrote: »

I wish people like you had had to grow up in the north between the late 60s and the mid 90s. Might knock you off that high horse you have.

Are you one of those people?

James Brown

gossipgirl123 wrote: »

You are right I never experienced any of the atrocities thank God. I have only recently started to think about the North on the back of the media hype of Bobby Storeys funeral.

I dont like what I read about the man, I found nothing positive about him I dont know why he was so liked and why Sinn Fein didnt distance themselves from him. My reason for not liking Sinn Fein was not based on IRA activity I simply dont agree with their policies or attitudes.

Yeah I'm not buying this wide eyed act. You tried it on elsewhere.
Did you ever find out what a 'Vulture Fund' was?

James Brown

gossipgirl123 wrote: »

You are right I never experienced any of the atrocities thank God. I have only recently started to think about the North on the back of the media hype of Bobby Storeys funeral.

I dont like what I read about the man, I found nothing positive about him I dont know why he was so liked and why Sinn Fein didnt distance themselves from him. My reason for not liking Sinn Fein was not based on IRA activity I simply dont agree with their policies or attitudes.

I never experienced it either. Being treated like second class or worse. Being interned. People disappearing, the so called 'legitimate' police and armed forces engaging in criminality and murder.
What were the paras like? I hear they murdered unarmed protesters? That sounds bad. :rolleyes:

markodaly

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The IRA/SF were politically irrelevant. Sunningdale might have taken the wind out of their sales.

Are you aware of the Ulster Workers' strike that was enforced by the UVF?

You are arguing negatively against the outcome of Sunningdale and its collapse when the IRA/SF were also vehemently against it as well because they wanted a singular aim. A United Ireland and British withdrawal from the north, something that had no mandate.

Unfortunately, it took them 25 more years and Omagh to realise that violent Republicanism would have to stop for there to be any outcome worthy of calling peace.

Its 2020 and those aims are still not met.

Slow learners indeed.

markodaly

Bowie wrote: »

So do I. I guess Remembrance day can be seen as glorifying murder by honouring those who fought and died. Like all things, depends on your politics. I am sickened to see WW2 bombers that would have carpet bombed entire cities viewed almost as religious relics.

"Whatabout.."

We don't know where we'd be without people willing to kill or be killed on our behalf. I would suggest that the occupied portion of Ulster might be more akin to Israel and the Nationalists Palestinians, if not for the IRA, Sinn Fein and many others.

On our behalf? That is hilarious. Tell me, did the Provos and SF commission a poll or a focus group or something? When did they listen to the majority? Even in Northern Ireland, they only had a small minority of support among nationalists during their years of mayhem and murder.

This is the lie and myth advocates of violence and murder tell themselves all the time, that it was all for something at the end of the day, as they cannot fathom that in reality it was all for nought.
Again, I point to Scotland and the SNP didn't have an armed wing bombing or killing on their behalf.

CBear1993

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So what was the murder in 2007 of Paul Quinn about?

What about the murder of people in South of Ireland? Was that for freedom? What exactly was the killing of Martin Cahill?
How many people along the border got killed for no reason, catholic and other religions?

The raping of women? The abuse of children and then protector those abusers?

Was that all required to get the freedom of the North?

Stick your head in the sand all you want, don’t expect everyone else to as well

The irony of your hole picking is that you still look at it from your perspective. You don’t care about how the north would have been affected and it doesn’t matter to you. No point debating with you.

markodaly

CrankyHaus wrote: »

And who brought down Sunningdale?
The majority of Irish Nationalists, though not the Provos, were ready to accept something like the Good Friday Agreement in 1973, or even earlier.
The same certainly cannot be said for the Loyalists who brought it down.
Or the British Establishment that refused to grasp the nettle of angering the Unionists by treating both communities equally.

A genuine question so. Why were SF and the IRA against Sunningdale, when 25 years later they came to the table for the GFA?
If the shoe was on the other foot, they would have acted like the loyalists.

The early IRA campaign of the 1970's was ridiculous in its aims, overly ambitious and incompetent politically. Sean Mac Stiofain and his like will join the long line of idiot Republican leaders. They were like the Real IRA of today.

SafeSurfer

corks finest wrote: »

No difference, between my grandfather's time up to present, whether you like, acknowledge or disagree

From your grandfather’s time, I presume you mean War if Independence, to today, dissident republicans, real IRA, Continuity IRA, I Cant believe it’s not the IRA?

Of course there is a difference and has been a difference between the many iterations if organisations calling themselves the IRA. Why would there have been so many splits and reincarnations if they are basically the same?

SafeSurfer

CBear1993 wrote: »

The irony of your hole picking is that you still look at it from your perspective. You don’t care about how the north would have been affected and it doesn’t matter to you. No point debating with you.

Sometimes to gain perspective one has to look at things from without and not within. So many commentators trot out the tired old cliche that one can’t comment or have an informed opinion on the north or the troubles unless one was there and lived through it. Obviously it is much more difficult to have a rounded, objective view of the troubles and Northern Ireland when one has lived in the north during the troubles. This is true of any period of history.

Junkyard Tom

markodaly wrote: »

You are arguing negatively against the outcome of Sunningdale and its collapse

Huh? I'm laying the blame for its collapse at the foot of those who collapsed. I wish it would have worked and the conflict had ended before it destroyed any more lives.

when the IRA/SF were also vehemently against it as well because they wanted a singular aim. A United Ireland and British withdrawal from the north, something that had no mandate.

SF were politically irrelevant. If we removed the IRA from the equation we'd still have the same outcome, Paisleyite Unionism sabotaging compromise, they were still at it when the GFA was being put together and you could argue they're still at it now.

Unfortunately, it took them 25 more years and Omagh to realise that violent Republicanism would have to stop for there to be any outcome worthy of calling peace. Its 2020 and those aims are still not met. Slow learners indeed.

It is desperately unfortunate and had the British brought Unionists to heel over the Sunningdale Agreement (like they eventually did at Drumcree in 1998) then maybe the Troubles would have ended sooner. We can but only speculate on these counterfactual outcomes.

CBear1993

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Sometimes to gain perspective one has to look at things from without and not within. So many commentators trot out the tired old cliche that one can’t comment or have an informed opinion on the north or the troubles unless one was there and lived through it. Obviously it is much more difficult to have a rounded, objective view of the troubles and Northern Ireland when one has lived in the north during the troubles. This is true of any period of history.

Ok. Thanks for update safesurfer

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

"Whatabout.."



On our behalf? That is hilarious. Tell me, did the Provos and SF commission a poll or a focus group or something? When did they listen to the majority? Even in Northern Ireland, they only had a small minority of support among nationalists during their years of mayhem and murder.

This is the lie and myth advocates of violence and murder tell themselves all the time, that it was all for something at the end of the day, as they cannot fathom that in reality it was all for nought.
Again, I point to Scotland and the SNP didn't have an armed wing bombing or killing on their behalf.

You don't know what whatabout is, which is funny consider how often you engage.

That was the point.
If they had the opportunity to engage they wouldn't have needed the IRA. Where we asked if we wanted the unionist **** show?
No myth. You don't like it. That's cool.
The 1916 rising wasn't widely popular either.

The IRA were an organisation you don't like or support. You seemingly don't understand how freedom fighters/terrorists whatever label you like come into being or why. You should read up.

cameramonkey

blanch152 wrote: »

By the early 1970s, there was a realisation that things needed to change in Northern Ireland. Dialogue between the Dublin and London governments made that clear.

Once Sunningdale was negotiated, a formula for peace into the medium and long-term was in place. Little changed between Sunningdale and the GFA, with Seamus Mallon calling it Sunningdale for slow learners. If we had had no PIRA, we would have had peace and prosperity in the North over 40 years ago. All-Ireland co-operation would be further advanced, and the two economies would be much better off.

Not only did thousands suffer and die at the hands of the PIRA, but millions would be living better lives if they had never existed.

Sunningdale was brought down by the loyalist with the British standing back and giving them a free hand. Seamus Mallon was pretty bitter all right about what happened but you can not blame the provos for the demise of Sunnigdale.


If we had had no Loyalist paramilitaries who were backed up by the UK security forces , we would have had peace and prosperity in the North over 40 years ago. All-Ireland co-operation would be further advanced, and the two economies would be much better off.

Not only did thousands suffer and die at the hands of the the Loyalist and British, but millions would be living better lives if they had never existed.

Shefwedfan

So far the shinnerbots are constantly harping on about IRA 1916, which is not the SF IRA. SF like to align themselves all the time to this section of history. They have nothing to do with it at all and FG and FF have the real links here.

The SF IRA is really the PIRA and all the different version since the 1960 which they are actually aligned with.

The PIRA is a lot murkier as these are the women rapers, child abusers, killed catholics, let Irish sit in jail for years, the list goes on. This variant is still the one killing people today and still in bed with SF. The “we fought for Ireland freedom” cost lost in what became a bunch of criminals

markodaly

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

SF were politically irrelevant. If we removed the IRA from the equation we'd still have the same outcome, Paisleyite Unionism sabotaging compromise, they were still at it when the GFA was being put together and you could argue they're still at it now.

I don't believe that at all. Many people believe that the IRA and their singular aim of violence exasperated an already fraught situation.
If the IRA were not bombing and murdering all around them, then Unionists would have moderated their stance towards Sunningdale which would have increased the chance of its success.

Some people cannot fathom that the IRA actually did more harm than 'good'.

markodaly

Bowie wrote: »

You don't know what whatabout is, which is funny consider how often you engage.

That was the point.
If they had the opportunity to engage they wouldn't have needed the IRA. Where we asked if we wanted the unionist **** show?
No myth. You don't like it. That's cool.
The 1916 rising wasn't widely popular either.

The IRA were an organisation you don't like or support. You seemingly don't understand how freedom fighters/terrorists whatever label you like come into being or why. You should read up.

Is this post supposed to make sense?
Is it a rebuttal or a monologue?

James Brown

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So far the shinnerbots are constantly harping on about IRA 1916, which is not the SF IRA. SF like to align themselves all the time to this section of history. They have nothing to do with it at all and FG and FF have the real links here.

The SF IRA is really the PIRA and all the different version since the 1960 which they are actually aligned with.

The PIRA is a lot murkier as these are the women rapers, child abusers, killed catholics, let Irish sit in jail for years, the list goes on. This variant is still the one killing people today and still in bed with SF. The “we fought for Ireland freedom” cost lost in what became a bunch of criminals

In your opinion.
A few things:
The IRA of the 1990's were the exact same as the people fought in the rising for Irish independence depending on who you ask.
Accepting that not everyone thinks like you is important.
There are no absolutes in conflict. It's by it's very nature differing views and sides.
You cannot judge other people in another situation at another period based on your environment today.
The IRA stood down for peace.
You can disagree but still understand the views of others.
SF don't own the idea of a united Ireland.

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Is this post supposed to make sense?
Is it a rebuttal or a monologue?

Be more genuine if you ignored it rather than pretending you cant comprehend. Less embarrassing too.

markodaly

Bowie wrote: »

In your opinion.
A few things:
The IRA of the 1990's were the exact same as the people fought in the rising for Irish independence depending on who you ask.

Let us play this out.

"The Real IRA who shot and murdered Lyra McKee are the exact same as the IRA of the 1920', 'depending' on who you ask"

Who you ask indeed!

You can also deny climate change, deny the holocaust, or engage in loopy conspiracy theories 'depending' who you ask.
Not really a good benchmark to go after, to be honest. :pac:

CBear1993

Shefwedfan wrote: »

So far the shinnerbots are constantly harping on about IRA 1916, which is not the SF IRA. SF like to align themselves all the time to this section of history. They have nothing to do with it at all and FG and FF have the real links here.

The SF IRA is really the PIRA and all the different version since the 1960 which they are actually aligned with.

The PIRA is a lot murkier as these are the women rapers, child abusers, killed catholics, let Irish sit in jail for years, the list goes on. This variant is still the one killing people today and still in bed with SF. The “we fought for Ireland freedom” cost lost in what became a bunch of criminals

I see you’ve lost your way on this thread, babbling utter tripe now.

A rugby head, Sheffield Wednesday fan on the surface, who defends Cowen at present, to top it all off he defend Simon Coveney’s expenses.
I think this is the wrong thread for you. It’s like Jeremy clarkson on an episode of love island in the pool, go spout your ideas on twitter. Leo has gave you a great platform on there to become well established spin doctors

James Brown

markodaly wrote: »

Let us play this out.

"The Real IRA who shot and murdered Lyra McKee are the exact same as the IRA of the 1920', 'depending' on who you ask"

Who you ask indeed!

You can also deny climate change, deny the holocaust, or engage in loopy conspiracy theories 'depending' who you ask.
Not really a good benchmark to go after, to be honest. :pac:

Yes. To its members.
I could start a 'I can't believe it's not the IRA' and pledge aligence to the queen.
No you cant deny provable facts that's nonsense and completely bizarre for you to jump to that.
You seem to get a little off balance when you run out of road.

jm08

markodaly wrote: »

Ah so its a hypothetical body count battle now. I love this line of argument.

A few thousand dead and murdered in the name of Irish freedom is grand so, as we stayed out of WWII. It makes it all grand so.

The Irish involvement or non-involvement in WWII is a big much wider discussion.

In terms of how many would have died, well not many seeing as we were defended by Britain in any case as they did most of the heavy lifting. :P

About 50,000 were slaughtered in WWI. You seem to have forgotten about how well armed the Ulster Volunteers were and they opposed Home Rule. The Curragh Mutiny meant that the British Government didn't have the capability to enforce it either. Redmond failed (he actually didn't even try) to get unionist support. The threat of conscription in 1918 put an end to Home Rule and full independence was sought.

CBear1993

The mans obsessed Bowie. He literally is on a merry-go-round of threads for weeks now where there’s any ounce of Irish politics where he can get his two cents in to bash “SF”. Don’t think anyone really cares to be honest. Sad really.

Kind of reminds me of those fembots in Austin powers, they’ll not give up and will keep reiterating their point until they either spontaneously combust themselves or fry their own brains trying to believe their nonsense.

Sometimes I really wonder in this country, will it be the unionists most hurt when the island is united again or buffoons like markodaly, starting to really believe it’s the latter.

Shefwedfan

Bowie wrote: »

In your opinion.
A few things:
The IRA of the 1990's were the exact same as the people fought in the rising for Irish independence depending on who you ask.

Nobody thinks they are the same.

jm08

markodaly wrote: »

A genuine question so. Why were SF and the IRA against Sunningdale, when 25 years later they came to the table for the GFA?
If the shoe was on the other foot, they would have acted like the loyalists.

The early IRA campaign of the 1970's was ridiculous in its aims, overly ambitious and incompetent politically. Sean Mac Stiofain and his like will join the long line of idiot Republican leaders. They were like the Real IRA of today.

Sinn Fein or the IRA were not at the table for the Sunningdale Agreement. They were all interned at the time. The failure of Sunningdale is entirely due to Unionists.