United Ireland Poll - please vote

blanch152

guy2231 wrote: »

The most militarized zone on the whole planet, a guerilla army known as one of the most sophisticated and best in the world seems to meet that criteria.

The Battle of Newry Road was a running gun battle between British Army helicopters and Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) armed trucks, fought along the lanes east of Crossmaglen, County Armagh, on 23 September 1993. The engagement began when an IRA motorized team from the South Armagh Brigade attempted to ambush three helicopters lifting off from the British Army base at Crossmaglen.

Doesn't sound like a mafioso or criminal attack to me when you have attacks like that, gun battles lasting hours between the IRA and army, country roads riddled with landmines like Afghanistan and army bases and police stations under constant attack, sounds like guerilla war to me.

It was no Lebanon, neither was it anything like Afghanistan.

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

It was no Lebanon, neither was it anything like Afghanistan.

Just makes it easier for you to other your fellow citizens.

Imagine a State murdering its own citizens in cold blood and in turn having to turn to guerilla warfare for a way out.

I'm sure you'd think Ballymurphy was a kerfuffle, no smoke without fire etc.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

It was no Lebanon, neither was it anything like Afghanistan.

Did I claim it was?

Whatcar212

blanch152 wrote: »

Thanks for that. It confirms that there was no civil war in Northern Ireland, as the terrorist campaign doesn't meet that definition. It was physically violent in the way that criminal thugs and mafioso are physically violent, but it fails the other criteria.

Impressive mental gymnastics there.

the IRA being terrorists or freedom fighters is a matter of your opinion on the subject. They were labelled terrorists by the british government and plenty of irish love to copy that labelling without much thought.

The IRA of the early to mid 1900s killed far more civilians and planted plenty of bombs yet no one seems to call them terrorists?

While I don't condone violence, the shear hypocriticalness of people who condemn the IRA of the 1970s but laud the other is laughable.

blanch152

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Just makes it easier for you to other your fellow citizens.

Imagine a State murdering its own citizens in cold blood and in turn having to turn to guerilla warfare for a way out.

I'm sure you'd think Ballymurphy was a kerfuffle, no smoke without fire etc.

The original claim was that it was a civil war, it wasn't. Neither was it a sustained guerilla war.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

The original claim was that it was a civil war, it wasn't. Neither was it a sustained guerilla war.

How was it not a sustained guerilla war?

In 72\73 Belfast was known as one of the most dangerous places on earth.

blanch152

guy2231 wrote: »

How was it not a sustained guerilla war?

In 72\73 Belfast was known as one of the most dangerous places on earth.

In 1972, the IRA killed around 100 soldiers, the average year in Detroit (half the population of Northern Ireland) sees around 300 gun-deaths.

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

In 1972, the IRA killed around 100 soldiers, the average year in Detroit (half the population of Northern Ireland) sees around 300 gun-deaths.

Major difference being gun battles between the IRA and Army would go on for hours and hours most of the time without any deaths only injuries it's very hard for either side to get kills also the IRA exploded 1300 bombs on economic targets in 1972 alone, that's about 4 or 5 bombs a day, most people stayed in doors in those days.

It was also the most militarised zone on the planet, when in Detroit it's someone pulls up in a car shoots someone out the window and then that's it.

You seem to believe there is a minimum number of deaths for something to be called a war.


Do things like this happen in Detroit?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1GHJNJG3Zho

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kK3Ff4ivkJA

guy2231

blanch152 wrote: »

In 1972, the IRA killed around 100 soldiers, the average year in Detroit (half the population of Northern Ireland) sees around 300 gun-deaths.

Do you consider the war of independence a war?

The old IRA only killed 250 soldiers during the whole war of independence over a 3 year period and that encompassed the whole of Ireland.

You seem to have no understanding of guerilla war.

Markcheese

guy2231 wrote: »

The most militarized zone on the whole planet, a guerilla army known as one of the most sophisticated and best in the world seems to meet that criteria.

The Battle of Newry Road was a running gun battle between British Army helicopters and Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) armed trucks, fought along the lanes east of Crossmaglen, County Armagh, on 23 September 1993. The engagement began when an IRA motorized team from the South Armagh Brigade attempted to ambush three helicopters lifting off from the British Army base at Crossmaglen.

Doesn't sound like a mafioso or criminal attack to me when you have attacks like that, gun battles lasting hours between the IRA and army, country roads riddled with landmines like Afghanistan and army bases and police stations under constant attack, sounds like guerilla war to me.

Sounds like mexico - sadly that's not even slightly funny ...

guy2231

Markcheese wrote: »

Sounds like mexico - sadly that's not even slightly funny ...

Sounds more like the Irish war of independence except more intense.

downcow

guy2231 wrote: »

The most militarized zone on the whole planet, a guerilla army known as one of the most sophisticated and best in the world seems to meet that criteria.

The Battle of Newry Road was a running gun battle between British Army helicopters and Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) armed trucks, fought along the lanes east of Crossmaglen, County Armagh, on 23 September 1993. The engagement began when an IRA motorized team from the South Armagh Brigade attempted to ambush three helicopters lifting off from the British Army base at Crossmaglen.

Doesn't sound like a mafioso or criminal attack to me when you have attacks like that, gun battles lasting hours between the IRA and army, country roads riddled with landmines like Afghanistan and army bases and police stations under constant attack, sounds like guerilla war to me.

Romantic fanciful nonsense

downcow

Whatcar212 wrote: »

While I don't condone violence, the shear hypocriticalness of people who condemn the IRA of the 1970s but laud the other is laughable.

….and the current ones who carried out omagh and murdered Lyra McKee

downcow

guy2231 wrote: »

How was it not a sustained guerilla war?

In 72\73 Belfast was known as one of the most dangerous places on earth.

You couldn’t make this up. What planet are you living on.
Most dangerous place on earth. You can’t be serious ?

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

You couldn’t make this up. What planet are you living on.
Most dangerous place on earth. You can’t be serious ?

Belfast suffered greatly during the violence that accompanied the partition of Ireland, and especially during the more recent conflict known as the Troubles: in the 1970s and 1980s it was one of the world's most dangerous cities, with a homicide rate around 31 per 100,000.

https://artsandculture.google.com/entity/belfast/m01l63?hl=en

guy2231

FrancieBrady wrote: »

https://artsandculture.google.com/entity/belfast/m01l63?hl=en

There's an error on that, 31 is the murder rate for the whole of Northern Ireland, the murder rate would be far higher for Belfast but I can't find it online, aside from all that 1972 had nearly 2,000 bombings and the a lot of the shootings in Belfast would be far different than places like the US where it's bang bang and done gun battles would go on for hours and hours with the IRA and army.

Just out of curiosity I counted the amount of killings (related to the conflict) in 1972 https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/sutton/chron/1972.html
and then calculated the murder rate, I counted 280 deaths in Belfast and then calculated the murder rate by the population at the time (around 350,000) which gave a murder rate of 80 per 100,000.

Whatcar212

downcow wrote: »

….and the current ones who carried out omagh and murdered Lyra McKee

What's you're question here? I don't condone any of the violence.

I'm pointing out that we have people on here who call the PIRA terrorists but praise the IRA of the war of independence.

I'm not praising one or the other (nor the new IRA for Lyra McKee), I'm just pointing out the obvious (oblivious?) hypocrisy of some posters.

Hamsterchops

Whatcar212 wrote: »

What's you're question here? I don't condone any of the violence.

I'm pointing out that we have people on here who call the PIRA terrorists but praise the IRA of the war of independence.

I'm not praising one or the other (nor the new IRA for Lyra McKee), I'm just pointing out the obvious (oblivious?) hypocrisy of some posters.

Well the Provos and the latest newest crop of terrorists are within living memory, so let's condemn them unreservedly, before delving back into 100 year old history & the violent & bloody birth of the state. The Provos in particular committed their crimes in the very recent past! Not sure if all the disappeared have been found yet?

Whatcar212

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well the Provos and the latest newest crop of terrorists are within living memory, so let's condemn them unreservedly, before delving back into 100 year old history & the violent & bloody birth of the state. The Provos in particular committed their crimes in the very recent past! Not sure if all the disappeared have been found yet?

While I understand what you are getting at, let me put it this way.

Should we now start to ignore what the Nazi's did too because that was 100 years ago? No we condemn them just as much if not more than modern day Nazis.

We know what the original IRA did too so this condemning the PIRA and praising the IRA is just having your cake and eating it. It's complete hypocrisy.

guy2231

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well the Provos and the latest newest crop of terrorists are within living memory, so let's condemn them unreservedly, before delving back into 100 year old history & the violent & bloody birth of the state. The Provos in particular committed their crimes in the very recent past! Not sure if all the disappeared have been found yet?

So how much longer do we have to wait to be able to praise the provos? Not long now surely?

Junkyard Tom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Well the Provos and the latest newest crop of terrorists are within living memory, so let's condemn them unreservedly, before delving back into 100 year old history & the violent & bloody birth of the state. The Provos in particular committed their crimes in the very recent past! Not sure if all the disappeared have been found yet?

British empire fetishist complains about violence.

Hamsterchops

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

British empire fetishist complains about violence.

Ten out of ten for your graphics & attachments (well done), they're always very good, as is your Avatar. On the negative side may I say that you overuse several words including Empire, Colonial and apologist. I do understand where you're coming from, but times have changed, the empire has long gone, and GB is not an imminent threat :eek:

No seriously, GB is not a threat even though you keep suggesting that it is, presumably in some kind of Empire conquest capacity?

Talking of fetishes, I guess the old Provos have ditched the dark glasses, black berets, Doc Martins etc ...

Junkyard Tom

Hamsterchops wrote: »

No seriously, GB is not a threat even though you keep suggesting that it is,

GB has for generations been the greatest threat to the Irish people and remains so in the 21st Century. Just last week the British platformed representatives of unionist paramilitaries with their dark threats.

Ireland will always have the threat of the British state but we can minimise it, the first step being all-Ireland sovereignty. In the future we could form alliances with our European partners that will offset the threat of the British.

We have a valuable strategic location in the north Atlantic that could be integrated into European defence structures.

jh79

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

GB has for generations been the greatest threat to the Irish people and remains so in the 21st Century. Just last week the British platformed representatives of unionist paramilitaries with their dark threats.

Ireland will always have the threat of the British state but we can minimise it, the first step being all-Ireland sovereignty. In the future we could form alliances with our European partners that will offset the threat of the British.

We have a valuable strategic location in the north Atlantic that could be integrated into European defence structures.

This is hilarious.

We have the same protection from the EU whether their is partition or not.

Granted, the British army is small in comparison to the US / China etc but big enough that the Irish Sea would hardly be a deterrent.

Good luck selling that "investment" for the dramatic tax increases a UI requires.

We'll probably be always stuck with "Good Republicans" in the Republic and "Good Republicans and Loyalists" in the North either way.

Junkyard Tom

I didn't mention the EU. I also don't think your 'we' is the same as mine and the one in the constitution.

I'm worried about my relatives in the north this Summer and worried about the future of our country in the long term

You're worried about possibly having to forgo a 10 day holiday for 7 day one.

I don't think we're operating at the same level here.

jh79

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I didn't mention the EU. I also don't think your 'we' is the same as mine and the one in the constitution.

I'm worried about my relatives in the north this Summer and worried about the future of our country in the long term

You're worried about possibly having to forgo a 10 day holiday for 7 day one.

I don't think we're operating at the same level here.

You said "European Partners", how does ending partition make any difference to our relationship with them?

Your not worried about the future of our country, sure you haven't been able to give a single valid reason as to why unification gives us a better future. It's all about reversing an historical wrong.

Junkyard Tom

jh79 wrote: »

You said "European Partners", how does ending partition make any difference to our relationship with them?

There is little point in Ireland securing its strategic future before a UI. We don't have all-Ireland sovereignty and Britain retains a foothold in the north of our country. That needs to end. As we're seeing with Brexit the British state remains a threat to our stability due to its jurisdiction.

Your not worried about the future of our country

I don't think my country and your country are the same thing. My country is Ireland, all of it, and I'd like to see out the vision for its unification like it says in the preamble of the constitution.

guy2231

jh79 wrote: »

You said "European Partners", how does ending partition make any difference to our relationship with them?

Your not worried about the future of our country, sure you haven't been able to give a single valid reason as to why unification gives us a better future. It's all about reversing an historical wrong.

How about the "ownership of Ireland for the people of Ireland"?

So we as the people of Ireland have 100% control over our future without any interference from the British Government like we have seen recently with the border and we will be seeing over and over again to a worse extent.

Have you no pride in your country? Is all you care about keeping your pockets filled to the brim?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

You said "European Partners", how does ending partition make any difference to our relationship with them?

Your not worried about the future of our country, sure you haven't been able to give a single valid reason as to why unification gives us a better future. It's all about reversing an historical wrong.

Of course it will make a difference - the integrity of the single market is secured for starters.

You have been given multiple benefits across society of a UI - you just want to ignore them and focus on what you think will secure partition - your wallet.

jh79

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

There is little point in Ireland securing its strategic future before a UI. We don't have all-Ireland sovereignty and Britain retains a foothold in the north of our country. That needs to end. As we're seeing with Brexit the British state remains a threat to our stability due to its jurisdiction.



I don't think my country and your country are the same thing. My country is Ireland, all of it, and I'd like to see out the vision for its unification like it says in the preamble of the constitution.

Partition or end it doesn't change any threat from the British. The Irish Sea isn't a deterrent.

In terms of the single market, fair enough about Brexit. There remains a chance of a hard border but making the NI protocol work is by far the easier option.

My issue isn't that you want a UI, its the BS advantages you claim.