Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

gingerjon

They fought and died for our freedom

188 posts in this topic

That's why I said "since the 70s".

The loyalists stopped using bombs then.

Not because they were nice people but they just didn't have the know-how.

Yer they started riding motorbikes into Catholic areas and cutting the throats of the first person they saw; man, woman or child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it was a war, we may not have attacked the mainland (unproven because there are all kinds of rumours of SAS activity) but that just makes it a contained war.

I agree that Northern Ireland was not a war, neither the IRA nor the loyalists made any effort to follow the Geneva Convention.

the falklands campaign was a limited operation to recover the Falkand islands. All militaery activity was conducted with that aim.

This pl;aced clear and strict operational limitations upon the UK military.

The UK was not 'at war' with Argentina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly PIRA didn't give adequate warnings; the casualty lists are a testament to this. News agencies are not part of the security apparatus - they are there for gathering and disseminating news, not assisting paramilitaries in their operations. If the process put in place by those paramilitaries did not always work then it was no ones fault but the bombers.

The warning systems were not there out of any consideration for the potential victims but out of a concern that 'bad publicity' would cost them support from their communities

Of course it was there as a warning system, if PIRA didn't target the military it then designed it's attack to disrupt the business sector of the province.

I've proved that the loyalists killed more innocent people with bombs than PIRA and it's associates.

News agencies where a part of the system if you like it or not (Best read your books from the Uni of Ulster) and the chosen method of PIRA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it was there as a warning system, if PIRA didn't target the military it then designed it's attack to disrupt the business sector of the province.

I've proved that the loyalists killed more innocent people with bombs than PIRA and it's associates.

News agencies where a part of the system if you like it or not (Best read your books from the Uni of Ulster) and the chosen method of PIRA

No, you proved that they killed more civilians (undefined) by various means.

But nobody seems to care much.

It doesn't say anything about the IRA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you proved that they killed more civilians (undefined) by various means.

But nobody seems to care much.

It doesn't say anything about the IRA.

So why are you arguing that the Catholics where worse that the Protestants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why are you arguing that the Catholics where worse that the Protestants.

I'm not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it was there as a warning system, if PIRA didn't target the military it then designed it's attack to disrupt the business sector of the province.

I've proved that the loyalists killed more innocent people with bombs than PIRA and it's associates.

News agencies where a part of the system if you like it or not (Best read your books from the Uni of Ulster) and the chosen method of PIRA

It was a warning system but it often wasn't good enough - witness all the innocent civilians killed (and the innocent members of the security services as well, including those who were off-duty and not on operations). And passing on a warning didn't absolve the PIRA of the consequences of their actions. If others screwed up the responsibility for the deaths still remained with them.

You haven't proved that loyalists killed more innocent people by bombing than PIRA. As NS had said, the loyalists largely abandoned bombing - as the techniques for dealing with terrorist bombs improved, loyalist groups just didn't have the expertise to construct and deploy sophisticated devices; PIRA did and could also get their hands on the equipment and resources needed.

On a quick tally of killings by bombing, I've calculated that PIRA killed 95 civilians and 144 security personnel (totals do not include bombings by the likes of INLA). Loyalist groups killed 62.

I'm not aware that I've read any books from the University of Ulster, but don't knock it. Reading, critically of course, is an excellent way of finding out what is going on. That way you don't fall for romantic tales about cold-blooded killers and their motives.

PIRA may have had as its objectives the withdrawal of the British state from Northern Ireland, the overthrow of what they referred to as the "Free State", and the creation of a 32 county socialist republic, but that does not mean that the organisation, and its operatives, didn't resort to naked sectarianism at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why are you arguing that the Catholics where worse that the Protestants.

No one has been arguing that; you brought loyalist terrorists into the thread. PIRA were brought into the discussion as a result of the Gerry Adams writing in the Guardian being put forward as a case of freedom of speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't disagree with that.

As I am sure you are aware, there were differences between the English and Scots settlers in Ulster and the Protestant ascendancy was really an Anglican ascendancy. This being the reason why Adams can praise Presbyterianism and Methodism since they represent working class Protestantism but not the Church of Ireland.

Mainstream unionism is rooted in the Anglican, English tradition and is closely connected to the mainland Conservative party. Hardline unionism is rooted in the same working class Ulster Scots communities that the various loyalist groups comes from. Hence there is a degree of overlap even if they wouldn't care to be called "loyalist".

Yes, and in fact the Presbyterians played a leading role in the United Irishmen and the rebellion of 1798. Interestingly, that relates to what we discussing. Even today, the Ulster Protestant folk memory recalls that, although the 1798 was about a cross-community, cross-denomination campaign to secure Ireland's independence from the UK (on the same lines as the American and French revolutions), the aftermath of its failure saw sectarian attacks on isolated Protestant communities.

And that is the point I've tried to make to Marauder in a previous post. The unfortunate history of Ireland, its settlement patterns and the competition for land and resources between the different communities, means that there are always simmering, engrained tensions bubbling away. A violent organisation representing one side or the other may have a certain goal, or an ambition to achieve unity, but the ensuing violence becomes, for some, a chance to settle historical scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh?

In my opinion This thread is comparable to the Radio 4 programme “Mornington Crescent” where no rules exist – just inane banter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion This thread is comparable to the Radio 4 programme “Mornington Crescent” where no rules exist – just inane banter

That's what I thought, and that is why I posted Wopuld Ltd", the fictitious manufacturer of the fictitious "Morning Crescent" board game in the novel The Steep Approach to Garbadale (by Ian Banks).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.