Northern Ireland and the IRA

jimmycrackcorm

dd973 wrote:

The PIRA could and should have protected the Nationalist community more, I'd rather have seen scum like the Belfast UDA wiped out than most of the attacks on part time UDR men whom were mostly from rural communities in quieter less disputatious areas.

Chicken and egg. The UDA attacks were a response to the IRAs campaign. Once the IRA stopped then the UDA did as they didn't have a reason otherwise.

I think the IRA were fortunate to have gotten out of the business of war when they did. I certainly don't think that in recent decades, and in particular following the 9/11 attacks, and subsequent islamic terrorism, that they would be tolerated or be as effective.

Cilldara_2000

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Chicken and egg. The UDA attacks were a response to the IRAs campaign. Once the IRA stopped then the UDA did as they didn't have a reason otherwise.

I think the IRA were fortunate to have gotten out of the business of war when they did. I certainly don't think that in recent decades, and in particular following the 9/11 attacks, and subsequent islamic terrorism, that they would be tolerated or be as effective.

The UVF restarted in 1966. There was much provocation and violence against nationalists before the IRA restarted in 1969.

The timeline of what happened and understanding the motivations of various actors is rather important in any historical study.

end of the road

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Chicken and egg. The UDA attacks were a response to the IRAs campaign. Once the IRA stopped then the UDA did as they didn't have a reason otherwise.

I think the IRA were fortunate to have gotten out of the business of war when they did. I certainly don't think that in recent decades, and in particular following the 9/11 attacks, and subsequent islamic terrorism, that they would be tolerated or be as effective.

the UDA attacks were a response to there being irish nationalists in the "protestant state for a protestant people"
the reason they stopped is the british government stopped arming them, if that hadn't have happened they would have had plenty of reason to continue and would have done so.
realistically post 911 britain would have had a problem if the conflict was still ongoing, in that they would not have been able to maintain 3 conflicts between iraq, afghanistan and northern ireland.

maccored

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Chicken and egg. The UDA attacks were a response to the IRAs campaign. Once the IRA stopped then the UDA did as they didn't have a reason otherwise.

I think the IRA were fortunate to have gotten out of the business of war when they did. I certainly don't think that in recent decades, and in particular following the 9/11 attacks, and subsequent islamic terrorism, that they would be tolerated or be as effective.

the RUC and unionist attacks on civil rights marchers werent chicken and egg

maccored

dd973 wrote: »

The PIRA could and should have protected the Nationalist community more, I'd rather have seen scum like the Belfast UDA wiped out than most of the attacks on part time UDR men whom were mostly from rural communities in quieter less disputatious areas.

the rural areas were where the majority of paramilitaries were based, and where the likes of the UDR were at their worst. Look up the East Tyrone brigade of the PIRA - they werent based in a city. Cities had the most flash points, but a lot of the organisation, training etc was done rurally. Most of the place is rural.

Fionn1952

Hamsterchops wrote: »

All I'm saying is that it was shocking to witness this on the TV as I was growing up in South Dublin. It was always in the background, another bombing, civilians blown to bits in a pub, as well as security personnel.

Jaysus that must've been awful tough for you to watch on the news in South Dublin. No wonder you're such an expert on the matter with such insightful lived experience.