Is it time for the IRA to disband?

eugene

does that justify Al'Quaeda blowing up more buildings in the US?

I don't really understand why you ask this but my answer is simple.....NO! It does not justify that at all but I can fully understand why it may happen. How would you like to be living in a shack or a tent in the desert and watch American and British bombs kill hundreds if not thousands of people around you?

Question #2 - Do you support disarmament as the majority of people both North and South of the border voted for the GFA which has disarming of all sides as an integral part of the agreement.

Yes, I support disarmament provided that all side do it. You convienently forget that the IRA aren't killing anybody at this time. The present day killers are Loyalists and the totally inept paramilitary police force aren't doing too much about that!

Question #3 - You say that the IRA exist because of a corrupt police force in NI. How does this justify killing Guards like Gerry McCabe?

Who tried to justify that then? I certainly didn't! And I didn't say that was the reason why the IRA exist. The IRA have existed for quite some time. It just happens that during the thirty years of the troubles, the RUC were the armed force of the Northern Unionists. It was them who beat Catholic and Protestant Civil Rights Protestors into the ground in Derry on Oct 5th 1968 and that was what led on to Bloody Sunday and the then massive influx of young people into the PIRA. The unionists created the PIRA......"As ye sow, so shall ye reap".

Question #4 - You say that the PNSI consist of 'the same rotten people' as the RUC so Catholics should not have to accept the force. Does this not swing both ways, with the same rotten people who were in the IRA now being in government. Will you not accept the double standard of not accepting the PNSI but accepting IRA/Sinn Féin in government

I don't see any double standard here. The PSNI are a renamed RUC, nothing else. The IRA have changed considerably considering that they have done some decomissioning and persist in committing themselves to a political and peaceful settlement. The RUC/PSNI are dirty, they are liars, and they would just love the IRA to re-engage so that they can say, "We told you so". And by the way, there is no such thing as IRA/Sinn Fein. Just who are you, some closet Unionist?

Question #5 - Since you say "I have known too many people who have died for their Republican beliefs and principles and you have some cheek and arrogance to try and dirty their names and their sacrifices" I would like to ask do these rules of your apply to all situations? The suicide pilots on 9/11 died for their beliefs. I want to condemn them but am I dirtying their names and sacrifices. I could be wrong maybe you don't have a double standard and maybe you support Al'Quaeda?

Just what the hell are you on about? You condemn whoever you want to. That is your perogative but please, stop being so childish and bringing Al Quaeda into this. We are trying to discuss the Irish situation here. As it happens, I don't support Al Quaeda but I totally condemn the American administration because they are every bit as much terrorists as any other group. Might doesn't mean right! If you really want to get into the Middle East problems, then try to get America to bomb the crap out of Israel, that'll sort the problem out once and for all!

Question #6 - Since you've said that taking 'the war' to England was justified are you saying that it is OK to kill children who've probably never even heard of the IRA and Northern Ireland?

Why do you keep on misquoting me. I didn't say that it was justified taking the war to England. What I said was that if the IRA wanted to influence the British, then taking the war there would do that. The Brits didn't care how many Irish or squaddies were killed....that was what I said! You are no different from the Unionists pal, really! I was criticised earlier for "not knowing how the Irish felt about the North...because I don't live in the Republic". That was utter crap also. You and your Brit-loving cronies on this group just haven't a clue. Maybe if you experienced what it was like to live under Ulster Protestant/British and sectarian rule, you would feel different. Try living in Israel for a while, with a Palestinian family, then you might get a feel of what life was like here in the North, before the IRA forced change. The IRA now, not the SDLP as many believe, no the IRA!

I hope I have answered your questions to your satisfaction but somehow I doubt it. And by the way, you didn't ask them earlier. You brought up points and criticised my opinions but you didn't ask any questions. This was why I had to politely ask for them to be put as questions. Jeez, it's like talking to Lassie!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

eugene

Clearly it's a complete waste of time trying to have a discussion with you Dave. I'm sorry now that I didn't read Mercury Tilt's post to you before I replied. I answered every question you eventually put to me but that will never be enough as you simply ignore the answers and ask something else. You have a fixation about the IRA obviously and that's too bad. I wasn't trying to convert you in case you think that was my purpose. You must be a devotee of Conor Cruise O'Brien I think because you display no sense of Irish Nationalism. Many many people disagree with your logic so don't think that you are in some sort of "Moral Majority". How come Sinn Fein are growing continuously if so many think like you do (God help their wit also)? I strongly suspect that this is the end of this particular discussion and I leave it agreeing to disagree and I don't harbour any ill-feeling towards you. Maybe catch you on some other thread some other time.
slainte.

I've just noticed it's North V south above:D

It's my firm belief that many of the things complained about in this thread such as punishment beatings, Bank robbing, racketeering and obviously the bombings and shootings, etc are just symptoms of a society gone very wrong, and really, while none of it can be justified, the real blame for it all is the people that set up that society in the first place....
Lumping such a large disaffected minority, into a new state in the first place , and allowing the majority to discriminate against them, left right and centre.
Mind you what choice, did they have,maybe they should have taken the whole of Ulster into NI, which would have really questioned how democratic it is to be sectioning off opposing sides.

The English(note: not the British..) over the centuries, never really understanding the Irish , took the decisions that have lead to this problem.
I have it in my mind for instance, if the English hadn't hanged the ring leaders of the 1916 rising, Sinn Féin might not have won the 1918 election...they píshed off the electorate mightily there.
Indeed there might have been a 32 county Ireland within the UK, isle of man and channel islands style...
But thats with the benefit of hindsight, now they with the Irish Government are eventually relaxing the stiff upper lip and striving to solve the vext Irish question once and for all.

That requires carefull decisions this time, walking on glass, and in the case of IRA disbandment, a case of encouraging them further along the path to peace and further decommissioning, rather than expecting "surrender" coupled with demilitarisation on the government side.
Just my Gerry springer thoughts to hopefully close my contribution here.
mm

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

eugene

Oh, sorry buddy! You are such a patriotic Nationalist, you accept that Britain still lays claim to six counties of OUR land. You are so sad! I have relatives who still receive their IRA pension from the 20's so don't try yhat one to legitimise your Irishness. You as an Irishman have the gall to call me British! Show what you know, feckin' dick!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

CheateN

Yes, because there IS a loyalist majority living in Northern Ireland.

Before this thread is closed as I suspect it will be as it has now degenerated into personal slagging:eek:
Why can't people agree to disagree...eh? and be civil.

I've never heard of the concept of 26 county nationalism before,although, I know lots of people who would have DaveIrl's views on a 32 county Ireland.
when you live down here in the South, it is a whole universe away from the society up north that Breeds Eugene's views.
Both to my mind are irreconcilable but legitimate.

I do think though that a 32 county Republic will happen in my lifetime, though,the numbers are shaping that way.
I also think , Fianna Fáils considerable election machine, together with the starting block of their core 40 odd percent voting strenght would aid the passing of a necessary Referendum in the South.
Question is though will it be the start of a campaign by loyalists on an all island basis, that possibility is under the carpet for now it seems.
Funny how partition worked though and the irony that it has brought about...!
I know protestant people here where I live, who were born and reared in the Republic, have Éire passports and sit in Church on Sunday , praying for the Taoiseach and President .
At the same time , they have uncles,cousins and aunts, living in NI who at their service are praying for Queen and Country(UK)
Gas isn't it?? One lot are down here voting for , actually FF, the Republican party and the others for Geofrey Donaldson...!
Now , the generation before them were all praying for Queen and country on Sunday, yet those that were trapped down here in the Republic accepted the situation and got on with life.

But then, in the South , by and large after partition, if you were a protestant, you had a much better chance of progressing in business and career than a catholic in the North...
How ironic is that...?? And they didn't take up arms,as they were pragmatic, plus the fact that the catholic majority here would have made that futile.

Coming to my point now...Basically, It annoys me to think that the prospects of a peacefull united Ireland coming about was stopped for so long by the bitterness and venom of an armed conflict that went on for thirty years, hatrid festered, people further divided, the same people that get on well in the South.

I Lay a lot of the blame for this , yes at the IRA's doorstep, for not having the patience to recognise, that nationalism could eventually win a numbers game, and without, the hatrid induced in the other side by all the bombing and shooting.

And the rest of the blame is on the very people(some unionists) who in (if I was to be a cynic) an almost calculated way bred the support for the IRA campaign by their widespread discrimination and harassment.
mm

eugene

Just as a hopefully closing comment (which I tried to do yesterday), I attempted to end with agreeing to disagree with Dave and I wished him well. He started the degeneration today, maybe he's hungover or something but I certainly pushed a sensitive button and he reacted by totally proving that what I said was correct! Who ever heard of a Nationalist who tried to legitimise the validity of British ownership of the six counties? It's a new one for me! Who ever heard of a Nationalist calling northern Catholics "British"? Feckin' West Brit is what he is.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Originally posted by daveirl
Two things. 1) I don't think the numbers thing will really change things. In the Independent last week there was an article on how the Catholic birth rate was falling and leveling out with the Protestant Birth rate. Also it brought up the fact that there would be many SDLP supporters who would trade being part of Britain for the better public services they recieve. Like however bad the NHS is made out to be it's far better than what we have.

2) I've said before that it isn't in Fianna Fáils best interests to persue an United Ireland and as we all know thats what politicans do things for - their best interests. If there was to be an United Ireland, FF's natural position as the dominant party would be no more.

I'll have to disagree with you there Dave on both counts, but accept your position as yours.
Firstly, the very nature of Northern Ireland means statistics do not pick up an accurate picture of the religious divide.
The only trends to watch with absolute, certainty are at the ballot box and even they cannot be intrepated the same way as in a normal democracy.
Take Martin McGuinnes's constituency as an example.
When it was first created, it elected a unionist, because of the divided majority.But it was clear which green candidate could win next time, and the SDLP vote fell off-tactical voting.
Even opinion polls cannot be relied upon in NI as in a normal democracy,so notions based on them should be taken with salt.

On the other point, I don't believe that any FF leader or party as a whole, present or future wouldn't work for a united Ireland.
Economic/health service issues wouldn't even come into it as a first priority there, they'd have a plan whatever it might be, but their unity beliefs wouldn't be comprimised.
To be honest,that would be confirmed for you if you attended an Ógra FF meeting and had this topic discussed there, thats the feeling I get anyhow.
mm

eugene

Okay Dave, I also apologise. I tried to close this yesterday as there is no common ground "in this area" between us. I don't want to fall out with anyone on this forum, especially anyone Irish. Take care.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Originally posted by daveirl
I agree fully that NI doesn't operate like a normal democracy, but is it not valid to say that if the numbers remain the same then surely things wouldn't change substantially from today's position?

This is FF we're talking about. They are the most self serving party in the country. They form almost all the governments we've ever had. Do you think they'll actively campaign to give up that position.

On an idealistic level many people support a United Ireland but when the facts get laid out in front of people a lot of them change their opinions. As I said earlier I can't see many people South of the border wanting to have an increase of €3000 per annum in taxation nor can I see many people North of the border wanting the lower levels of social benefits.

Dave I was questioning the accuracy of , numbers counted in NI, other than those in the ballot box, and the reasons for that are fairly unique to NI.
Where else would you have so may different ways of (when having a conversation with someone for the first time) determining someones religion, it's only so because it matters to people there more so than here in the South.

In answer to your question on FF giving up their dominant position, thats hard to make a judgement on as you would have to be able to predict what way politics would go in a united Ireland situation.

Take Sinn Féins policies for instance, other than those that relate specifically to republicanism.
I wouldn't have any of them and I suspect neither would most that wouldn't want a Socialist/borderline communist republic.
I'd suspect that when the dust of conflict settled , a lot of people voting for them would examine this in more detail as the urgency of finding the most electable green mp would be gone.

Regarding the problem of paying €3,000 extra in taxes,I don't believe you would, politicians are clever'er than to put that kind of proposal to the people, as I've said elsewhere, you should be dealing with a less costly entity than the existing NI.
mm

aine

It was themselves they were defending but NATO was on outside force taking sides and that can be dangerous if you pick the wrong side.. Wether NATO were right or wrong I dont know but I presume generally people think they were right.

appologies for being so anal and picking up on such an old post but you're not sure whether or not NATO were right to defend the Kosovars? you're not sure as to whether or not ethnic cleansing should be stopped?

Typedef

OT:

aine, NATO I think was an inappropiate entity to intercede in Kosovo, when the UN, should have been the entity to do so. Now, before I get flamed, I'm not arguing that the UN is a body that is ameniable to such intercession, but the point I'm trying to make is.

NATO was set up as an opposing bloc to the Warsaw pact and it was no accident that NATO was performing operations in Russia's back yard, by bombing the Yugoslavs.

Let's be honest, the NATO action in Yugoslavia was sabre ratteling and was little to do with doing the right thing. Yes I know that is a cynical view, but look at the facts.

NATO as an entity allowed ethnic cleansing (read genocide) to take place between the Tutsi and Hutus in Rwanda. It allowed Pol Pot to exterminate hundreds of thousads (if not millions) of people, without so much as a bullet (or daisy cutter) dropped by NATO.

Oh but wait, all of a sudden NATO, has had an epiphany, has found god and realised intercession is desireable?
No. NATO was proving that it has the military muscle and guile to preform operations in a former Soviet State, basically.

Since when has a partisan military organisation (NATO) been an adequate supplicant for the United Nations? Ah, since the Americans have decided the UN is irrelevant (read not an American puppet).

Victor

Originally posted by eugene
I have relatives who still receive their IRA pension from the 20's so don't try yhat one to legitimise your Irishness.

Really? You have several relatives who are 100 years old or more? I think statistics are against you there. Sounds vaguely like vote early, vote often.

Well technically Victor, it is possible that their younger wives are receiving the pension.
It's the swear at the end, I didn't like,but two posters just got stuck in, today,I would suggest though that the posters or mods edit out that bad language , it's not great to have it here on a civilised discussion forum.
mm

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

gandalf

OK guys after receiving complaints about this thread.

Please remember to keep it civil and if you degenerate to personal abuse you have lost the arguement, plus I may ban you as well.

I don't expect to hear any more complaints about this thread or there will be problems.

Gandalf.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

bonkey

Originally posted by Mercury_Tilt
At what point did I make such a statement?

Coming from the person who claimed that questions weren't questions, I'd have to ask you to clarify what exactly you mean by the word "statement".

The simple fact is that either you are simply acting out a personal vendetta against daveirl, or you appear to have an issue with his condemnation of IRA actions (such as punishment shootings, kneecappings, etc).

Rather than address this, you have simply decided to try and infer that the IRA's actions are somehow comparable to the actions of the US or UN forces on international issues, and that therefore Dave is taking alternate stances on two issues which are identical - despite the laughability of your comparison.

One can draw some conclusions from this, but in general, it seems fair to say that you are at least unwilling to condemn the criminal actions of the IRA - indeed for someone who has claimed dave wont address points, I had to laugh at your assertion of having gone to the bother of writing a word doc to answer all the issues raised, but couldnt be bothered posting it.

Then again - to borrow your "compare to US actions" strategy... I keep insisting that the US actually produce their proof, and that claiming to have it is worthless. So...I'll take the same stance here. Produce the word document which answers all the issues you claim it does, or your assertions are worthless.

Mercury - its simple. If you are not willing to discuss your opinions here, then get off the forum. To date, on this topic, all you have done is consistently tell us that you couldnt be bothered actually refuting the points raised, and instead have tried to simply undermine the validity of the points by attacking the questioner. All this while telling us that although you couldnt be bothered refuting the points, you actually have gone to the trouble of doing so in some mythical documentm but its one which we are not worthy of, for some inexplicable reason.

You may be technically correct in claiming that you have never stated that you support these actions. What you have done is shown your opposition to the validity of these actions being questioned or condemned. I think its a reasonable conclsuion to draw.

You confuse me sometimes with your ickle confusions Dave.

And you apparently confuse this board with somewhere you can act the clown repeatedly. I'd suggest you clear that misconception up right away, before I have to do it for you.

Any chance of an apology for you sullying my good name by saying that I supported "smuggling and punishment shootings " ehhh when I didn’t?

Maybe its because you have singularly refused to actually address any issue, but rather have decided to question how we can condemn actions from one group (the IRA) and not from another group (most typically US military).

The only conclusion that one can draw from this is you, at least to some degree, condone or accept the validity of these actions.

While you continue to refuse to enter the discussion, and instead think it somehow clever to go off on tangential issues rather than discuss the issue at hand, then I think its perfectly reasonable for people to make inferences and assumptions about your stance - god knows you arent willing to actually state anything because then you wouldnt be able to take your handy "oh but I never said that" excuse.

So I somehow doubt an apology is needed...unless its from you for the insults you've been throwing at dave every chance you get.

jc

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.