Why do we react differently to different terrorist organasiations? IS vs IRA

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: nonspecific

Living in the United States, we really don't hear that much about the IRA but ISIS is on the MSM every single day.

I also find it doubtful that the IRA would be beheading people, including children, left and right in the name of god.

No they wouldn't be so brazen, they planted bombs indiscriminately and killed and maimed anybody who was in the vicinity.

The last real terrorist act was the Omagh bombing 1998.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

No but they are making bombs, did you read the article I posted regarding the bomb and the children?

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

a reply to: nonspecific
Not sure "fairly well documented" equals qualification of your statement
Is this incorrect ?

originally posted by: crostkev
a reply to: nonspecific
Not sure "fairly well documented" equals qualification of your statement
Is this incorrect ?

Okay, why not search for yourself, there are countless websites with information on this, particularly referring to the Boston fundraisers.

Remember the Boston bombing and the outcry relating to this? Whilst I had sympathy for the victims, Boston got to experience what their money paid for in Northern Ireland and mainland U.K.

I am from Irish heritage and whilst I can appreciate the angst in Northern Ireland, particularly for the Catholic population, freedom fighters, they certainly weren't.

a reply to: nonspecific

Honestly, the OP is very disingenuous. A person who knows nothing of human conflict or even human nature cant distinguish between different people, cultures, and history. They see all "cool" rebels as "freedom fighters".

To be simple, we treat them differently because they are different. The IRA was happy to put down arms once a respectable situation was achieved and would have anyways once Ireland was whole in the most extreme cases.

ISIS wants to establish an Islamic empire so as to conquer the world. Its their freaking mission statement.

Thats a HUGE difference. There are countless others. The IRA didnt go around raping, maiming and torturing citizens of the UK to name another...

Every group is different. Just like people. Why on earth would we treat them as the same? Is a hooligan the same as a serial rapist?

The IRA of today is just a terrorist organization. Every bit of validity went out the window once they got what they wanted and especially when they killed non combatants for no damned reason.

a reply to: nonspecific

A terroist group is a terrorist group.

No matter their name.

This is a political and media-generated war with ISIS.

Afghanistan kills more US soldiers than ISIS does, and we're making nice and pulling out of that country.

The media wanted a bad guy.

ISIS took the part.

I would have to answer that question this way.

When the IRA committed bombings, it was reported on national tv. It was horrific and many of us could not understand why they would target children on their way to school and what not. The, I believe, British police and military did try to hunt them down.

As to why I think the US did not (at least openly) is because the attacks were few and far between. Unlike a terrorist organization of today which seems to have daily acts of barbarism. And now the ISIS group if more formed up and advancing, leaving them a bit mor exposed than when they can hide amongst the civilian population.

a reply to: tadaman

Because the IRA didn't rape women or behead journalists it is more acceptable?

Sorry the IRA, killed indiscriminately never actually knowing who their victims would be. They were a terrorist organisation that were supported by many U.S citizens, because of the propaganda used in the U.S by them.

They were cowards who would plant a bomb and run away. Phone through a warning and on many occasions give false information in order to confuse the situation.

They were also Gangsters that profited from their actions and woe betide anybody who stood in their way, even the people they were so say fighting for.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: nonspecific

Honestly, the OP is very disingenuous. A person who knows nothing of human conflict or even human nature cant distinguish between different people, cultures, and history. They see all "cool" rebels as "freedom fighters".

To be simple, we treat them differently because they are different. The IRA was happy to put down arms once a respectable situation was achieved and would have anyways once Ireland was whole in the most extreme cases.

ISIS wants to establish an Islamic empire so as to conquer the world. Its their freaking mission statement.

Thats a HUGE difference. There are countless others. The IRA didnt go around raping, maiming and torturing citizens of the UK to name another...

Every group is different. Just like people. Why on earth would we treat them as the same? Is a hooligan the same as a serial rapist?

The IRA of today is just a terrorist organization. Every bit of validity went out the window once they got what they wanted and especially when they killed non combatants for no damned reason.

I have read your posts and until now how always given you creedence and even a couple of stars here and there but what was that?

Please for the sake of argument could you re read your post and then we can maybe try again.

I refer mainly to your statement that "The IRA of today is just a terrorist organization"

I do not understand the difference between acceptable terrorism and unacceptable terrorism.

I look forward to future coments.

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: nonspecific

Honestly, the OP is very disingenuous. A person who knows nothing of human conflict or even human nature cant distinguish between different people, cultures, and history. They see all "cool" rebels as "freedom fighters".

To be simple, we treat them differently because they are different. The IRA was happy to put down arms once a respectable situation was achieved and would have anyways once Ireland was whole in the most extreme cases.

ISIS wants to establish an Islamic empire so as to conquer the world. Its their freaking mission statement.

Thats a HUGE difference. There are countless others. The IRA didnt go around raping, maiming and torturing citizens of the UK to name another...

Every group is different. Just like people. Why on earth would we treat them as the same? Is a hooligan the same as a serial rapist?

The IRA of today is just a terrorist organization. Every bit of validity went out the window once they got what they wanted and especially when they killed non combatants for no damned reason.

I have read your posts and until now how always given you creedence and even a couple of stars here and there but what was that?

Please for the sake of argument could you re read your post and then we can maybe try again.

I refer mainly to your statement that "The IRA of today is just a terrorist organization"

I do not understand the difference between acceptable terrorism and unacceptable terrorism.

I look forward to future coments.

There isn't any difference, it's all about ideology and what side of the fence you sit on.

Terrorists are terrorists. They use terror as a means to get what they want. In the end, we will have to sit down with ISIL to discuss a peace plan whether we like it or no.

They will not go away, they are what they are and the U.S and their allies know it.

a reply to: nonspecific

I am sorry.

Well, I was referring to the historical IRA that was born of natural resistance to bad government by the UK. I do not support them but honestly the heavy hand of past governments under the monarchs was what birthed them.

Please dont think I hold some to be more noble than others. They killed innocents in every age, but IMO when they first came about it was a natural to response to violence with violence. The Irish were utterly crapped on in the past.

Again, They were not justified, I just think it was understandable for them to get tired of what they used to endure. Their response was wrong, but the root of the problem WAS their abject slavery.

I may be wrong, but thats how I see it.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

I agree that terrorists are terrorists.

I disagree that peace can even be talked about with ISIS. The IRA had specific goals that WERE withing reach. What ISIS wants is absurd.

Most movements lose momentum when the population doesnt support it and especially when all support is out of fear and self preservation like it is with ISIS.

a reply to: nonspecific

I sure did!

You asked why we react differently to terrorist organizations and I answered with my opinion. Never did I state that the IRA was a stand up group of individuals, they are a terrorist organization. I simply stated that they didn't get much coverage in the US and that beheading children gets far more press.

a reply to: tadaman

They have been afforded the title ISIL by The West. They want an Islamic state in the Levant, let them have it I say. Let them have their backward state, based on the Saudi model and just apply sanctions, so no oil or gas flows. Starve them like we did to Iraq and Iran.

We know they were funded by the Saudis yet we did nothing to stop them, until now. And even now we are not doing enough to effectively have an impact.

It's bigger than the IRA could ever dream of being, warfare will not beat them, we will have to negotiate at some stage, Mark my words.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: nonspecific

I am sorry.

Well, I was referring to the historical IRA that was born of natural resistance to bad government by the UK. I do not support them but honestly the heavy hand of past governments under the monarchs was what birthed them.

Please dont think I hold some to be more noble than others. They killed innocents in every age, but IMO when they first came about it was a natural to response to violence with violence. The Irish were utterly crapped on in the past.

Again, They were not justified, I just think it was understandable for them to get tired of what they used to endure. Their response was wrong, but the root of the problem WAS their abject slavery.

I may be wrong, but thats how I see it.

Although I can not profess to to know enough all about it are not ISIS no different? They wish to live in a world that they belive to be right and good for there people.

Yes the Ira of old is different to the one that exists now but they still have to resort to violence to make there voice heard.

The point I wished to make is that we are not bombing Ireland because there are " terrorists" in the country.

a reply to: nonspecific

The IRA isn't active like ISIS is, right? Another member on this thread pointed out the last IRA attack was in 1998...

The point I wished to make is that we are not bombing Ireland because there are " terrorists" in the country.

a reply to: nonspecific

I can agree with that with no issue taken.

My problem with ISIS is that they arent exactly looking for non interference. They want to take the very spirit of freedom from people to give to them what most dont want. Its not like forming an empire to conquer the world is something most or even very many people in the ME want.

If ISIS simply wanted non interference they would first exhaust every other means of diplomacy and dialogue. Its not like there are unreasonable men on our side. They simply want to form an army of conquest to go BEYOND their historical territories and infringe on other sovereign peoples their extremist ideologies. I dont want to continue down the line of the IRA since I know its a sensitive subject for the people of the UK, and honestly as an American I am talking out of my ass.

BUT

There were plenty of Irish that didnt support the IRA and were simply left alone. ISIS is a "with me or against me" sort of organization.

Either way my apologies. I didnt want to come off as offensive or insensitive to the acts of violence that innocent people of the UK endured.

Have a good one.

[url=http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/pipe-bombs-gun-and-ammunition-in-fermanagh-arms-haul-30657229.html]link[/u rl]

a reply to: nonspecific

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

I agree. They acted like scum and criminals.

The IRA arent exactly ISIS though. This thread is asking why we make any distinctions between terrorist organizations. ISIS is in a league of its own compared to the IRA.

I would like to see both as things of the past. One is more concerning than the other in the here and now though.