Real IRA to 'resume attacks on UK

D_Tim McGnaw

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Posts
5,420
Media
0
Likes
110
Points
133
No I have not. To tell the truth I am not so interested about the IRA itself so I never read the book. Why not when I have time.

The substance of my point is somewhere else. It is that what ever one knows/thinks of the IRA or comparable organisations in other conflict situations (ETA etc. ) it is very easy to use these organisations to dismiss the sense of injustice that led to their creation and thriving.

Over many centuries Ireland went through traumatic events. Harsh foreign rule, plantations, repression etc. As a result of this History the Island is partitioned. Once has just to deal with this fact and be very careful.



That's a very interesting observation actually Freddie, one of the things I notice about the British view of Northern Ireland and the IRA etc is that it draws almost exclusively on information relating to events which have transpired since the beginning of the Troubles in the 1960's.

It's as though the the psychological and political space which this situation occupies for most British people extends no further than the RC civil rights movement and the British crack down which galvanized the reformation of the IRA (later known as the Provisional IRA) and the campaign it then waged on the British army and within the island of Britain itself.

Most British people are for instance completely unaware that as part of the process of having the Good Friday agreement endorsed by the people of Ireland on both sides of the border a referedum was held to change the Irish constitution to remove the section which directly claimed the six counties of Northern Ireland and viewed it as illegitimately occupied Irish territory and that essentially this change to the constitution amounted to a formal (though not necessarily final) end to the most significant political bone of contention between the governments of Ireland and the UK, a bone of contention which had existed at least since the adoption of the constitution but which in fact had existed ever since the signing of the treaty of the Irish Free State after the war of independence.

From an Irish perspective this extends the way the conflict in Northern Ireland is viewed to include the history of the war of independence and much of the history preceding it. Indeed for many people the conflict between the UK government and the IRA is in a very real sense only the most recent phase of a violent struggle which has defined much of this country's history for several centuries.

Naturally even with that perspective this does not mean that the actions of the IRA in Northern Ireland were viewed as the natural or morally justifiable or even inevitable outcome of those historical processes, and no one would claim that the Provisional IRA has ever enjoyed the kind of widespread or mainstream support which the Old IRA did during the war of independence. But it does mean that where the mainstream of Irish people have regarded the actions of the Provos with horror they have done so from an entirely different perspective.

When British people express their disgust at the actions of the hunger strikers, they often do so without any knowledge of Pádraig Pearse's potent justifications of the concept of "blood sacrifice" and how those justifications would have influenced the thinking of men like Bobby Sands. Whatever one may think about the hunger strikers they didn't exist in a historical or cultural vacuum, they viewed themselves as the latest in a long line of martyrs. Plenty of people simply saw them deranged murderers and criminals, but that doesn't make the opposite view or a more subtle view of them impossible or logically non-viable.

British people often also seem too ready to dismiss the conflict in the north as a sectarian one, and I'm not going to pretend that sectarianism wasn't a major, perhaps the most potent accelerant to that conflict. But the problem with writing off that conflict as a purely sectarian one is that it ignores a far more subtle set of information which adds non-sectarian, socio-economic and ethnic nationalist factors in to the mix. It has caused many British people, and indeed many poorly informed Irish people also, to view the entire Irish struggle for independence as a sectarian one, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Many of the greatest patriots of this country have been protestants, and many of the staunchest Unionists were Roman Catholics. The division along these lines only became more stark in the north because of a partition which concentrated a vehemently Unionist Protestant community in an almost closed cell in the six counties as though the distinction between the six counties and the rest of Ireland were a natural and ineluctable one.

Much as the partitioning of India gave the impression that areas of what had been northern India were almost exclusively Muslim zones when for centuries those areas had been as mixed as any other part of the subcontinent so the partitioning of Ireland gave the impression that Northern Ireland was an exclusively Unionist and Protestant zone of Ireland. In both cases the arbitrary imposition of borders warped public consciousness and engendered an entirely false kind of logic on the places they had divided.


I might add that MB's highly prescient comparisons above are extremely instructive and useful. I recommend anyone trying to understand this situation consider what she said carefully.
 
Last edited:

Victoria

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Posts
52
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
91
Location
english suburbia
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
They're not threatening to kill equally greedy wealthy Irish bankers strangely..

They're threatening to kill British bankers and wage a terrorist campaign on British land against British people..

Greedy Wealthy Irish bankers don't exist?
Or they only see fit to qualify their interest in meting out threats of terrorist campaigns against the bankers in question because they happen to be British ?..

Perhaps when they threaten to do the same in r.o.i. and you realize how ridiculous qualifying their actions by alluding to history as a means of justifying their actions , albeit in a non-comital manner which affords you just enough maneuver room to claim misinterpretation.

My point is history has to be history at some point and people that do awful things or threaten to do them have to be culpable as lone agents of their actions and not afforded sanctuary in it .
 
Last edited:

D_Tim McGnaw

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Posts
5,420
Media
0
Likes
110
Points
133
They're not threatening to kill equally greedy wealthy Irish bankers strangely..

They're threatening to kill British bankers and wage a terrorist campaign on British land against British people..

Greedy Wealthy Irish bankers don't exist?
Or they only see fit to qualify their interest in meting out threats of terrorist campaigns against the bankers in question because they happen to be British ?..

Perhaps when they threaten to do the same in r.o.i. and you realize how ridiculous qualifying their actions by alluding to history as a means of justifying their actions , albeit in a non-comital manner which affords you just enough maneuver room to claim misinterpretation.

My point is history has to be history at some point and people that do awful things or threaten to do them have to be culpable as lone agents of their actions and not afforded sanctuary in it at some point.


Attacking Irish bankers would be absurd, they quite obviously have no possible justification for doing so ( though admittedly their logic for attacking British bankers is tenuous at best) so why would they? The RIRA want the reunification of Ireland (or so they claim) they don't have a specific beef with bankers tout court, they do have a beef with the British establishment and have indicated they will target what they presume are sufficiently high profile and contentious members of it.

I have not justified anyone's actions, so please for the last time, stop pretending that I have. I will presume you are intent on causing deep personal offence or are extremely stupid (perhaps both) if you continue to make that claim and treat you accordingly.


I could not agree with your last sentiments more, I have nowhere said that historical context offers exculpation or indeed sanctuary from the consequences of committing serious crimes and murder.
 
Last edited:

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,639
Media
62
Likes
5,013
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
The only show in town is the Peace Process. Problems should be sorted out within the framework of the Peace Process.

There is no place whatsoever for terrorist murder. CIRA, RIRA and other IRA splinters present challenges to the Peace Process. If they are supported by a significant number of people (probably not such a very large number) they will derail the Peace Process. Alternatively if they are opposed by the mass of people they will be unable to function. The future of the people of the island of Ireland is very much in their hands. Do they work with the DUP-Sinn Fein power sharing government to run Northern Ireland in peace for the good of the people who live their? Or do they support terrorism? It is a form of democracy where the people choose. Peace or terror.
 
Last edited:

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,639
Media
62
Likes
5,013
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
The RIRA want reunification with Ireland (or so they claim).

What would be fascinating is a whole island of Ireland referendum on this issue. Given the choice would a majority of people in the whole island of Ireland vote for reunification? Presumably Northern Ireland would vote no. I suspect the people of the Republic of Ireland would be pragmatic on the security and cost implications of union with NI and recognise the ongoing problems that would be faced by Dublin governing the 6 northern counties - and therefore I think they would vote no - but maybe I'm completely wrong.

If unification came about would this satisfy RIRA? Or do they additionally want government by their political supporters (in effect by SF - not FF, FG, DUP, UUP, SDLP, Alliance or anyone else).
 

Freddie36

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Posts
202
Media
16
Likes
45
Points
113
Location
Netherlands, London, Paris
Sexuality
Unsure
From the Wikipedia article on the subject "United Ireland"
United Ireland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Public opinion

In Northern Ireland

Time series showing public opinion on long-term policy in Northern Ireland.
In 1973, the population of Northern Ireland was polled on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join with the Republic of Ireland to form a United Ireland. The poll was largely boycotted by Catholics, and so the result of 98.9% in favour of union with the rest of the UK represented the opinion of 57.45% of the electorate.
A possible referendum on a united Ireland was included as part of the terms of the Belfast Agreement. Currently about 42% of the Northern Ireland electorate vote for Irish nationalist parties that oppose the union with Great Britain and support a united Ireland as an alternative, although it is not the only issue at election time so it is difficult to take this figure as a direct indication of levels of support for a united Ireland. A survey taken in 2008 showed support for a united Ireland at 18% and support for Northern Ireland remaining in the United Kingdom at 70%. 8% support independence or other arrangements.

In the Republic of Ireland
Support for Irish unity is a feature of all major political parties in the Republic of Ireland. Some very small pressure groups do exist, such as the Reform Movement and lodges of the Orange Order in the Republic of Ireland, that are sympathetic to Northern Ireland remaining within the UK for the foreseeable future, but their impact on the broader political opinion is negligible. A Dublin riot in 2006 prevented a march organised by "Love Ulster", though the rioters did not have a wide support base. Some politically conservative Catholics from the Republic of Ireland, such as Mary Kenny and Desmond Fennell have also expressed misgivings about a United Ireland, fearing the incorporation of a large number of Protestants would threaten what they see as the Catholic nature of the Republic. A 2006 Sunday Business Post survey reported that almost 80% of voters in the Republic favour a united Ireland: 22% believe that "achieving a united Ireland should be the first priority of the government" while 55% say they "would like to see a united Ireland, but not as the first priority of government." Of the remainder 10% said no efforts should be made to bring about a united Ireland and 13% had no opinion. This poll was markedly up from one year earlier when a Sunday Independent article reported that 55% would support a united Ireland, while the remainder said such an ambition held no interest. Such poll results should be seen in the context that Irish reunification would entail a significant financial burden for the economy and taxpayers of the southern 26 counties of the present-day Republic.
 

asellar

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Posts
10
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
86
Location
LIVERPOOL ,UK.
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Even the BBC's pension fund has been raped by over £400 million pounds - is nothing sacred - you think you have a job for life there - then you're pension disappears.....no wonder the rest of society have a twitchy sphincter !!!!!!!!!!!
 

D_Tim McGnaw

Account Disabled
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Posts
5,420
Media
0
Likes
110
Points
133
Even the BBC's pension fund has been raped by over £400 million pounds - is nothing sacred - you think you have a job for life there - then you're pension disappears.....no wonder the rest of society have a twitchy sphincter !!!!!!!!!!!


Outrage that this is, what does it have to do with the topic of the thread? :confused:
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Omagh is what I associate with the RIRA, Dave, and as such they can rot.

Were the British really supposed not to have a secret service presence in the North? Was that really sensible, given actions such as Omagh?

I never understood why they targeted Omagh, can you enlighten me/us?



Knowing omagh quite well and having friends who were actually caught in the blast I have the same feelings towards the realers as your yourself. Also having grown up in the later stage of the troubles I have a great understanding of the actions of the ra.

However the best I can think of is there's a court house at the end of the road where the thing went off and people who were not local to the area got the site of detenation wrong.

It was an absoulte worst case scenaro, the army thought the bomb was for the courthouse and the warning was given for "main street" or "high street" and omagh had the other that was given instead of clearing the area the army just cleared away from the courthouse where they were actually sending people towards the bomb which is why so many people were killed. people were actually sat on the car that blew up behind a police tape when it went off.

But it's come out the british knew the thing was coming but just sat by and watched and it worked in thier favour I mean just look at the level of hatred towards anything IRA now.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Aaaaaaaand you lost me.

The IRA (p, c, r - take your pick) do indeed have a reputation for keeping the drug running, organised criminals in their place, or indeed without a place. They are very big at pushing that on a community level. There are two reasons they do this - one, so people (like you) will say 'well they have the interest of the community at heart' and two, so that the drugs they themselves bring onto the island and distribute to their network of suppliers have the lion's share of the market. It isn't about saving the community from the peril of drugs - it is about having a monopoly.

Don't forget they keep lower criminals in thier place too, the joyriders, armed robbers and burgulars too. But don't be fooled into thinking thats the only bother they have when it comes to protecting the community. The 6 counties STILL suffers from a bigotted police force and out and out blatent sectarianism. Some of which includes the Orange marches being forced through area's they are holding to ransom. 2 years ago the people of Armagh city were out defending thier area's with stones when the ruc/psni turned up with batton rounds and riot gear, the CIRA turned up with aks and the peelers were out in a heartbeat.

Not one round was fired and the contos patrolled the area and kept it safe for the remainder of the 12th onwards till the riots died down.

They knew the threat of violence was enough to protect it's people.

THAT is one of many reasons they have my respect.

I lived in a well dodgy area of Dublin for part of my student years and the local provos made a big show of chasing out several heroin dealers (beating one of them to death as an 'example' to the others - nice, huh?). But funnily enough the heroin dealing did not stop completely in the area, there were still two guys left the Ra didn't go after. Hummity-hum - I wonder why... :rolleyes:

beating a drug dealer to death? oh what a shame. as for leaving others alone, don't be so niave to think that guns just walk in off the street they have to be smuggled in don't they? How do you think that happens?

Don't be fooled. They are fucking criminals and terrorists and they don't give a flying fuck about your community.

Is the opinion of a man who's never known the troubles from the inside looking out.

I'm not slagging you for it, there's just a lot you haven't been exposed too.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
That's a reasonable point, Freddie. It's odd in some ways. It depends on the context, doesn't it - I wonder how many of us think of the ANC as a former terrorist group. They certainly used terror tactics, but the vast majority of us here will have opposed Apartheid in South Africa and therefore identify with their cause. I don't think of the IRA that emerged after 1916 as terrorists, I think of them as freedom fighters. I identify with their cause and the need for armed struggle at the time. My feelings about the IRA of the 30s, 40s and 50s are different and my feelings about the various groups of the 60s through to the Good Friday Agreement different again.

Don't be under the impression that Collins IRA wouldn't of killed you and your family if it suited thier cause.

They the same as the the stickies onwards were a guerrilla army who struck the british when and where they wanted and anyone in thier way got it too.

But whats the difference? well the IRA then had several incidents such as croke park when the british army drove into a gealic football game and opened fire into the crowd with heavy machine guns killing a dozen or so people.

The provo's had several such incidents such as bloody sunday.

The only difference is the IRA of the time had a clear cut victory over the british in the 26 however collins then ordered his army to fire weapons given to him by the british against his own countrymen.

You can argue the logistics of it but thats what the man did.

The contos/realers family tree of IRA can be traced from splits right back to collins and Connollys IRB/IRA.


As for the ANC I agree with you.
I suppose a good way to illustrate to non-Irish people how much of Ireland feels about the Provisional IRA (of the 70s, 80, 90s) is to postulate a situation where a splinter group of the ANC had continued terrorist actions against white South Africans after the abolition of Apartheid. Or perhaps it be more accurate to suggest a scenario in which South Africa had split to White SA and Black SA and, while the blacks in White SA were not officially
still in an Apartheid system, oppression continued nonetheless. How do people think they would feel about a 'Provisional ANC' committing acts of terror against the white civilians of White SA in the name of a united Black South Africa?
It is not, forgive the awful pun, a black and white situation.

Thats really good point, as with the end of aparthied there was still the bitter and twisted attitudes towards Irish people in the 6 counties, the police force under a new name are still the same bigotted sectarian bunch they always were and other than there being no border and no army killing civillians anymore not a great deal has changed.

BTW: My post after Big_dave's was not a dismissal of anything other than the fact that certain Republican terrorist groups put themselves forward as the 'good guys' in the war on drugs, and they aren't.


Certain republican groups AREN'T. I agree. But some however are.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
They're not threatening to kill equally greedy wealthy Irish bankers strangely..

They're threatening to kill British bankers and wage a terrorist campaign on British land against British people..

Greedy Wealthy Irish bankers don't exist?
Or they only see fit to qualify their interest in meting out threats of terrorist campaigns against the bankers in question because they happen to be British ?..

Perhaps when they threaten to do the same in r.o.i. and you realize how ridiculous qualifying their actions by alluding to history as a means of justifying their actions , albeit in a non-comital manner which affords you just enough maneuver room to claim misinterpretation.

My point is history has to be history at some point and people that do awful things or threaten to do them have to be culpable as lone agents of their actions and not afforded sanctuary in it .


Are you so soft in the head that you can't see why they're going after british bankers on mainland britian?

The british goverment back down everytime they're hit in the pocket. Soldiers and civillians can be replaced in a second, money can't. You think there's not millions of other bigotted fools like you to buy the daily mail should you be killed by an IRA bomb?

I've news for you, there is.

However big business will not be investing in a country building new sky scrapers and sending their tops boys over only to have them flattened by a car bomb the second they arrive.

Catch yourself on.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The only show in town is the Peace Process. Problems should be sorted out within the framework of the Peace Process.


Really? and how well is that working? you haven't a clue so please don't try and answer it by what you've read in the british media.

You really wanna know? buy yourself a celtic shirt and walk through portadown wearing it on a saturday morning.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
From the Wikipedia article on the subject "United Ireland"
United Ireland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Public opinion

In Northern Ireland

Time series showing public opinion on long-term policy in Northern Ireland.
In 1973, the population of Northern Ireland was polled on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join with the Republic of Ireland to form a United Ireland. The poll was largely boycotted by Catholics, and so the result of 98.9% in favour of union with the rest of the UK represented the opinion of 57.45% of the electorate.
A possible referendum on a united Ireland was included as part of the terms of the Belfast Agreement. Currently about 42% of the Northern Ireland electorate vote for Irish nationalist parties that oppose the union with Great Britain and support a united Ireland as an alternative, although it is not the only issue at election time so it is difficult to take this figure as a direct indication of levels of support for a united Ireland. A survey taken in 2008 showed support for a united Ireland at 18% and support for Northern Ireland remaining in the United Kingdom at 70%. 8% support independence or other arrangements.

In the Republic of Ireland
Support for Irish unity is a feature of all major political parties in the Republic of Ireland. Some very small pressure groups do exist, such as the Reform Movement and lodges of the Orange Order in the Republic of Ireland, that are sympathetic to Northern Ireland remaining within the UK for the foreseeable future, but their impact on the broader political opinion is negligible. A Dublin riot in 2006 prevented a march organised by "Love Ulster", though the rioters did not have a wide support base. Some politically conservative Catholics from the Republic of Ireland, such as Mary Kenny and Desmond Fennell have also expressed misgivings about a United Ireland, fearing the incorporation of a large number of Protestants would threaten what they see as the Catholic nature of the Republic. A 2006 Sunday Business Post survey reported that almost 80% of voters in the Republic favour a united Ireland: 22% believe that "achieving a united Ireland should be the first priority of the government" while 55% say they "would like to see a united Ireland, but not as the first priority of government." Of the remainder 10% said no efforts should be made to bring about a united Ireland and 13% had no opinion. This poll was markedly up from one year earlier when a Sunday Independent article reported that 55% would support a united Ireland, while the remainder said such an ambition held no interest. Such poll results should be seen in the context that Irish reunification would entail a significant financial burden for the economy and taxpayers of the southern 26 counties of the present-day Republic.


The poll in 73 WASN'T boycotted by catholics. They were stopped from voting if you wan't more information about it please read this post
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,639
Media
62
Likes
5,013
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
You really wanna know? buy yourself a celtic shirt and walk through portadown wearing it on a saturday morning.

Wear the wrong football shirt through the wrong estate in England and you are in for trouble. Have an English accent (as I have) and walk through the Bogside in the early evening and I can assure you it is terrifying.

My walk in the Bogside also taught me something about human responses by showing me my response. I have previously made an effort to name Derry/Londonderry in a way that does not upset people (and no doubt I will do so again). But after the experience of a walk in the Bogside I felt it should be called LONDONderry with orange tassles hanging from every letter and a big union jack flying above. Sectarianism breeds sectarianism, hurt causes hurt. I felt it.

The Peace Process is a real effort to press the reset button. It isn't perfect, just better than the alternatives. Wear a Celtic shirt through Portadown on a Saturday morning and I can readily believe there would be unpleasantness. Walk up the Falls Road in a Rangers shirt and the same result. Clearly we need more Peace Process, and more integration. And we need people to make a deliberate effort to step back from sectarianism. I need to get used to calling the city Derry and be content with this name. Republicans there need to get used to hearing it called Londonderry and accept this as part of the two traditions so richly exemplified by their city.
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Wear the wrong football shirt through the wrong estate in England and you are in for trouble. Have an English accent (as I have) and walk through the Bogside in the early evening and I can assure you it is terrifying.

Missed the point completely.

My walk in the Bogside also taught me something about human responses by showing me my response. I have previously made an effort to name Derry/Londonderry in a way that does not upset people (and no doubt I will do so again). But after the experience of a walk in the Bogside I felt it should be called LONDONderry with orange tassles hanging from every letter and a big union jack flying above. Sectarianism breeds sectarianism, hurt causes hurt. I felt it.[/QUOTE]

oh poor you, you got picked on by mean catholics cuz of your accent. boo fucking hoo. Kevin McDaid was kicked to death infront of his wife and sons for being a catholic as were many others.

If you actually had a wee clue you'd realise the only sectarian killings still carried out today are against catholics.

I'm running out of ways to tell you to wise up.


The Peace Process is a real effort to press the reset button. It isn't perfect, just better than the alternatives. Wear a Celtic shirt through Portadown on a Saturday morning and I can readily believe there would be unpleasantness. Walk up the Falls Road in a Rangers shirt and the same result. Clearly we need more Peace Process, and more integration. And we need people to make a deliberate effort to step back from sectarianism. I need to get used to calling the city Derry and be content with this name. Republicans there need to get used to hearing it called Londonderry and accept this as part of the two traditions so richly exemplified by their city.


The Peace process is nothing more than an effort by the british goverment to protect it's investments in the uk.

As for the name of derry I'm glad you have an opinion on it. But for someone who's been adament that the people should decide you should realise that derry (as with all counties in the 6 with the exception of antrim) has a nationalist majority and has petitioned again and again to have the name changed.

But unionists in power seem to keep finding a way to have the date for the vote put back again and again.


Funny that.


Make no mistake, all the wrongs the british have done in Ireland are slowly but surely being undone.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
325
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
British people often also seem too ready to dismiss the conflict in the north as a sectarian one, and I'm not going to pretend that sectarianism wasn't a major, perhaps the most potent accelerant to that conflict. But the problem with writing off that conflict as a purely sectarian one is that it ignores a far more subtle set of information which adds non-sectarian, socio-economic and ethnic nationalist factors in to the mix. It has caused many British people, and indeed many poorly informed Irish people also, to view the entire Irish struggle for independence as a sectarian one, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Many of the greatest patriots of this country have been protestants, and many of the staunchest Unionists were Roman Catholics. The division along these lines only became more stark in the north because of a partition which concentrated a vehemently Unionist Protestant community in an almost closed cell in the six counties as though the distinction between the six counties and the rest of Ireland were a natural and ineluctable one.

Much as the partitioning of India gave the impression that areas of what had been northern India were almost exclusively Muslim zones when for centuries those areas had been as mixed as any other part of the subcontinent so the partitioning of Ireland gave the impression that Northern Ireland was an exclusively Unionist and Protestant zone of Ireland. In both cases the arbitrary imposition of borders warped public consciousness and engendered an entirely false kind of logic on the places they had divided.


I might add that MB's highly prescient comparisons above are extremely instructive and useful. I recommend anyone trying to understand this situation consider what she said carefully.

The narrative of generational animosity between the Irish and Brits has been coined in sectarian verbiage as long as I can remember: Catholics against Protestants. It was only once I'd reached my 20s that I understood that other issues must most certainly be involved. The degree to which it continues to be framed as a religious, rather than a political struggle seems nothing less than facile streamlining of what is obviously a highly complicated story with many villains and precious few heroes.

MB's posts are (almost) always brilliance regardless of the topic. She's one of my top-10 most trusted posters here; she almost never gets it wrong :07:
 

BIG_DAVE

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Posts
147
Media
9
Likes
122
Points
263
Location
Irish but living near London.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Utter bollocks.

You're showing your arse here - you're totally partisan and therefore there is very little point in debating with you.

And BTW way I'm woman, not a man.

ok so a womans opinion. If you have no actual knowledge of how the IRA operate in the north then how do you know they're just criminals? It seems your going to say your bit and anyone who's thoughts differ from you must be militant in their opinions.

if your not going to debate then why reply?



Now, I'm not saying there's no sectarian bother from nationalists but the people who have been killed in sectarian attacks have been catholic.

As for being pro-IRA begrudingly yes I am, until something better comes along. Cuz at the min the shinners are full of shite and have done nothing to protect the nationalist community since 98.
 
Last edited: