It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Northern Ireland

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I've always thought that the Northern Ireland problem was all the more terrible as I do think that it could have been resolved much earlier. The Irish like most nations within the "Empire" suffered greatly during the turn of the last century and this will only ever really create tension on a massive level, much the same as Iraq.
However the IRA were the ugliest aspect of the whole stuggle, they, like most initial freedom fighters turned to terrorism and then onto basic large scale crime such as theft. One thing I would like to say, that despite alll this they had a cause, a genuine reason to harbour greif.....but.....this was all made truly stupid by the religious differences in NI. To have a war between two fundamentally different religions is preposterous enough, but to have a war between two factions of catholicism is just, well, mind numbing.

The US, never sponsored the IRA directly, but it was basic common knowledge that funding was going to the IRA via the states, just the same as the IRA provided terrorist advice to various arab organisations.

Ultimately the author cannot blame a "Nation" for supporting the IRA, as this is not true, just the same as ALL of Pakistan is not blowing up trains in London.

I like all English and Irish people are just really happy that now we have resolution in Northern Ireland regarding the tensions created by having what is seen as an invading force (Technically not, but it must feel like it). Also I never thought I would say this, but I'm now seeing the value of Gerry Adams, I despised his two facery as I was growing up, but it does appear that he has helped move the whole process along.

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Monkfish]

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Monkfish]




posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by tommyc
The IRA have murdered thousands of completely innocent civilians for decades.


- Actually they didn't.
According to the respected Cain/Sutton source they were responsible for 1706.

Organisation Responsible - Count
British Army (BA) 297
British Police (BP) 1
Catholic Reaction Force (CRF) 3
Direct Action Against Drugs (DAAD) 5
Garda Siochana (GS) 4
Irish Army (IA) 1
Irish National Liberation Army (INLA) 113
Irish People's Liberation Organisation (IPLO) 22
Irish People's Liberation Organisation Belfast Brigade (IPLOBB) 2
Irish Republican Army (IRA) 1706
Loyalist Retaliation and Defence Group (LRDG) 2
Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) 18
non-specific Loyalist group (LOY) 252
non-specific Republican group (REP) 89
not known (nk) 80
Official Irish Republican Army (OIRA) 52
People's Liberation Army (PLA) 3
People's Republican Army (PRA) 4
Protestant Action Force (PAF) 37
Protestant Action Group (PAG) 5
real Irish Republican Army (rIRA) 29
Red Hand Commando (RHC) 13
Red Hand Defenders (RHD) 8
Republican Action Force (RepAF) 24
Royal Air Force (RAF) 1
Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) 55
Saor Eire (SE) 3
Ulster Defence Association (UDA) 112
Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR) 8
Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) 147
Ulster Special Constabulary (USC) 1
Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) 426
TOTAL 3523

cain.ulst.ac.uk...


The justification being what?


- That the island of Ireland should not have been partitioned in the first place and that the north should not have been allowed to separate and thus provoke decades of mayhem and disaster?

I'm no IRA supporter and I certainly do not support or justify that revolting list of death and destruction but the reasoning for a movement of unity and 'national liberation' is hardly that difficult to work out, never mind the more mundane 'community protection' that gave rise to an armed and active IRA in the late 1960's and early 1970's, huh?

[edit on 29-7-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyc
Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and remains so by way of the democratic process. Northern Ireland has been a part of the United Kingdom since 1801.

Unfortunately, the USA public largely contributed towards funding the IRA, which could well be classed as "interfering". The funding wasn't at a US gov't level, it was at the US public level.

It wasn't until 9/11 that the USA public woke up and realised that funding the IRA wasn't such a romantic idea. 9/11 was a wake up call for the US public, whereas us in the UK, we had suffered for years because of US public ignorance.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by tommyc]

Not exactly. All of Ireland was part of Britain until 1922. Then it got its indepence, except the northern part of the island whose people wanted to stay a part of Britain.

There was no United Kingdom until 1922 when what is now the Irish Republic cos its independence.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 04:05 AM
link   

The US PUBLIC, Huh???? Prove it!!! Do you mean through tax-dollars? or what? How in the hell did I (I am part of the public) fund the IRA?

It's a well-known fact that many Americans, especially Irish Americans, funded the IRA, mainly those who live in places like Boston and New York. It's a bit ironic that many New Yorkers funded IRA terrorists for years, but then their city was a victim of Al Qaeda in 2001.




denying the IRA did all that stuff you mentioned.....It sucks that they did. But don't blame ME for funding them and don't go off on how the US should have been there.....look at the ones that truly SHOULD have been there...the UK perhaps. Im all about helping others, don't get we wrong.

sporty


UK soldiers have been in NI for years.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Is it necessary to flare up a # storm? Seems to me Ireland's come along way. Seems to me enough death has fallen in your Lives and in your Hearts?

Dallas



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

Originally posted by tommyc


The justification being what?


- That the island of Ireland should not have been partitioned in the first place and that the north should not have been allowed to separate and thus provoke decades of mayhem and disaster?


Or perhaps none of Ireland should have been given independance?

If you compare with Wales which fully became part of England, Wales does very well out of it and does not want independance from England.

As it is, the people in Northern Ireland didn't want to be part of Ireland, and so only the south was given independance. That's democary at work and the IRA wouldn't except it.

[edit on 30-7-2005 by tommyc]



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyc
Or perhaps none of Ireland should have been given independance?


- Well that's a point of view I suppose, an unsustainable one but nevertheless a viewpoint you are entitled to (and you did say earlier you're Irish!?).

'Home Rule' was the last chance for a close formal relationship with the UK and Ireland and they blew it with partition.
Thankfully with the EU and this Labour gov we are getting the chance to repair the damage and develop new bonds.
(helped massively by the Irish links many 'British/English' families now have - probably more so than such links with N.I. now - due to Irish people living in Britain.)


If you compare with Wales which fully became part of England, Wales does very well out of it and does not want independance from England.


- I wouldn't call Wales an ideal and there are, despite all the efforts over the centuries, plenty of Welsh people itching for greater and greater autonomy.
Whether that eventually leads to a new more independant relationship with England and the rest remains to be seen.
It is, despite appearances, a fluid situation over the long term IMO.


As it is, the people in Northern Ireland didn't want to be part of Ireland, and so only the south was given independance. That's democary at work and the IRA wouldn't except it.


- I wouldn't be so free with the term 'democracy' when describing a gerry-mandered state-let like Northern Ireland and it's formation.
Especially considering the whole thing was so rooted in base and crass sectarianism.

As recent events/decades show we can see only too clearly N.I was not ever viable, particularly when it's functioning depends so heavily on a reluctant British exchequer.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

Originally posted by tommyc
Or perhaps none of Ireland should have been given independance?


- Well that's a point of view I suppose, an unsustainable one but nevertheless a viewpoint you are entitled to (and you did say earlier you're Irish!?).

'Home Rule' was the last chance for a close formal relationship with the UK and Ireland and they blew it with partition.
Thankfully with the EU and this Labour gov we are getting the chance to repair the damage and develop new bonds.
(helped massively by the Irish links many 'British/English' families now have - probably more so than such links with N.I. now - due to Irish people living in Britain.)


If you compare with Wales which fully became part of England, Wales does very well out of it and does not want independance from England.


- I wouldn't call Wales an ideal and there are, despite all the efforts over the centuries, plenty of Welsh people itching for greater and greater autonomy.
Whether that eventually leads to a new more independant relationship with England and the rest remains to be seen.
It is, despite appearances, a fluid situation over the long term IMO.


As it is, the people in Northern Ireland didn't want to be part of Ireland, and so only the south was given independance. That's democary at work and the IRA wouldn't except it.


- I wouldn't be so free with the term 'democracy' when describing a gerry-mandered state-let like Northern Ireland and it's formation.
Especially considering the whole thing was so rooted in base and crass sectarianism.

As recent events/decades show we can see only too clearly N.I was not ever viable, particularly when it's functioning depends so heavily on a reluctant British exchequer.



The vast majority of Welsh people don't want independence from England.

The majority of the people in Northern Ireland don't want to become part of Ireland.

The majority of Gibraltar does not want to become part of Spain.

The vast majority of the Falkland Islands don't want to become part of Argentina.

It's all part of the same argument. Why should GB hand over these places against the wishes of the majority of people living there?

Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc. were granted independence to rule their own country, because that is what those people wanted.

The difference in Northern Ireland is down to terrorism, with the IRA using terrorism as a way to try take Northern Ireland against the wishes of the majority of people living there. If it wasn't for the IRA then Northern Ireland could have been enjoying peaceful life as they do in Wales etc.

A democratic country such as GB should NEVER give in to terrorism.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by tommyc
The vast majority of Welsh people don't want independence from England.


- At the moment that is so but you cannot deny that there is a significant section of Welsh society that wants greater devolved powers sent back to Wales. Who knows how this will develop?
(hmmmm, isn't it an irony that the British anti-EU element are so pro 'repatriating' powers to the UK but so reluctant to loosen the strings with the 'home nations').


The majority of the people in Northern Ireland don't want to become part of Ireland.


- Really? So some people would love everyone to believe but I'd love to see a 'border poll' held to see what the present position actually is, my bet is that actually it is very close and if there is a gap it is closing fast in the favour of those likely to want a republic.

It's been a long time since the one and only previous one (which was boycotted) in 1973.
(.......and btw there was not actually a formal border poll held at any other time and certainly not at the time of partition)


The majority of Gibraltar does not want to become part of Spain.

The vast majority of the Falkland Islands don't want to become part of Argentina.

It's all part of the same argument. Why should GB hand over these places against the wishes of the majority of people living there?


- I don't agree, this isn't the same issue at all.
Each is unique.

.....I take it you think that solely because China has imported a stack of Chinese people into Tibet their votes have the right to fundamentally change Tibet in ways the Tibetan people don't want too, hmmm?.


The difference in Northern Ireland is down to terrorism, with the IRA using terrorism as a way to try take Northern Ireland against the wishes of the majority of people living there. If it wasn't for the IRA then Northern Ireland could have been enjoying peaceful life as they do in Wales etc.


- No. The difference in N.I. was the sectarian N.I. state. That is why there was an IRA rebirth in 1968-9 in the first place.

N.I. was recognised by the British gov as early as 1936 in a Civil Service report as operating a quasi-fascist gov.

It most definitely was not a land of milk and honey before 1969 and the just ended 'campaign'.

For God's sake there were even 'Loyalist' poaramilitaries pretending to be the IRA, they were bombing and attacking places to spark it all off back then.......and then there was the vermin like Paisley only too happy to fan whatever sparks arose from the mayhem and egg on those unlucky to respond to his evil message of being under siege and a coming all-out war.


A democratic country such as GB should NEVER give in to terrorism.


- A democratic country like the UK should never have turned a blind eye, as they did, to the conditions under the old devolved 'Protestant state for a protestant people' sectarian unionist state.

Thank God it has gone and is never coming back (no matter what Paisley might bluster.) Even all but the rump of the British tory party have distanced themselves from the religio-political DUP.
Anyone who knows or has any dealings with anyone at Westminster knows they are held in derisory contempt at the heart of the UK Parliament.

It was the dreadful wrong of the (let's face it downright stupid) sectarian state which helped foster and cultivate the disaster of the last 35yrs, which we have all had to endure, almost as much as anything.

........and everyone bar the determined closed eyed, fingers in ears, fundamentalist right-wing element knows it.

[edit on 30-7-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Whales wouldnt bother with independance because it is one of the first imperial settlements of the Engle people. there are little differences between them and the Anglo_Saxon government of the UK...... The Irish on the otherhand are in a long struggle..... they are primarily a norse based race, after the occurance of the Viking founding of the city of Dublin. Vikings and Saxons have always fought.... although the difference between them are slim, it gives the situation enough edge, with a little spice of religion, you bake a cake of discontent...... Another crusade would do the trick ..... and we could find peace in the bloodshed of some other races



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   
*You have voted sminkeypinkey for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.*

Living in Ireland all I can say is I am glad it is over,the IRA gets very little support for its actions here in the Republic even from people who think Ireland should be re-united.We all have to live on the same ilsand so we need to get along and thats the bottem line.Its time for peace.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join