stOx, mate, I respect your views, but don't you think you're living in the past a bit? I've got mates who've served in Northern Ireland in various regiments and they don't feel as strongly as you.
If you do the research Stox.. You'll know that it was the British who killed innocent Children, women and raped women.. That is why it is called Opression. Whereever there is opression there is Resistence.
You never answered my question, how do we stop England from slaughtering innocents or claiming ownership of land with violence?
The IRA actually milled 700 British Army members.. And around 300 Protestants.. So we never killed any civilizens.. On the other hand you killed 365 Innocent people.
You know as well as i do that that is a complete lie. Bombs were placed specifically to target and kill civilians, That's what makes them cowards. Put on a uniform, Give us something to stick some bullets in. korr your question is irrelevant and a red herring.
Great to see you lack intelligence that you need to result to insults in a discussion. Again its collateral damage but I understand now that you lack intelligence so I wont bang on about it. You really are starting to show how much intelligence you lack. Read up on the relationship Ireland had with Germany during the World War but before making a complete twat of yourself (yeah I know, too late) trying reading some facts about history. Do you have an official IRA source for that or are you just assuming that from your own hatred?
Stox, I've avoided this thread, up to now. Can I ask why you find it necessary to rub salt in such a vile wound? Something like 1,000,000 people died from the famine, something like anywhere from a quarter to a half million tossed from their homes in the midst of that famine - and you think this is funny? I enjoy many exchanges, but with respect to this - what are you doing?
I thought id point out the irony of a nation who wants independence yet cant even manage on thier own without potatoes.
Stox, a few things. Firstly, trying to make your point by referral to arguably the most painful thing in Irish history is not something I'm cool with, personally. Secondly, the notion that somehow this was entirely due to some kind of idiosyncratic and absolute need for potaties ignores the landholder divisions of power in place at the time, and the actions of the Whig Government of Britain, in severely spreading the impact and length of the famine. Finally, given the economic ferocity, the robustness of the Republic of Ireland across nearly every indicator, are you sure you want to continue with this line of reasoning?
The psychology of imperialism typically requires an implicit belief that the one society, or race, is inherently superior to the other. This superiority-complex attempts to justify abuse while condemning any retaliation. Lives are not valued at an equal one-to-one ratio. In America, I really only see this in reactionary nationalists. They tend to be evangelical about their religions, but I guess evangelical atheism could fit the profile, too. [See, pan-islamic nationalists, Pakistani expansionists, Chinese nationalists (I suppose their attacks on indigenous religion are another good example of atheist evangelism), American fundamentalists/terror hawks]
I'm sorry, Stox, but I'm not with you on this logic at all with your "swings and roundabouts" line. Because of IRA action in the last third of the 20th century (ignoring loyalist paramilitary action during the same time period), you choose to deliberately invoke pain, referring to an event caused, in part, by Britain itself, resulting ultimately in 1,000,000+ people killed, half as many expropriated at the same time, a century and a half ago? Doesn't make sense. If you want to really go back, you might return to 1608, with the expropriation of Irish land by Scottish and English protestants. I generally like Brits, and I generally like the Irish. I find both of your countries extremely beautiful, rich with history and culture, and I count many friends from among both nations. What I see on display with your posts here is something, it seems to me, that belongs in a mournful past.
Actually, Ireland has one of the booming econmy's.. The Brits messed it up.. What about the recession?
Nice post and extremely accurate. He IS a bit one-dimensional, and as I said in an earlier post his isn't a majority English view, certainly not from the persepctive of 2008. (Although maybe I'd better round my figure down to 95% of English people don't care who 'owns' Northern Ireland). And anyway, everybody KNOWS that the IRA was controlled by British intelligence and the bombs targetted against British civilians were simply to deflect attention away from government incompetence, the British economic crises of the 1970s, to keep draconain laws on the statute books and to create and maintain 'jobs for the boys' ... But that's another story!
The IRA were not in any way controlled by the British government. The IRA used bombs to slow the development and growth of the British economy.
I dont think SeagullSid is saying what you think he is saying. British intelligence knew more than they let on and had sometimes played dumb for their own gain. The Omagh bombing was one event that raised such an idea and was questioned by a lot of people. An Phoblacht has an interesting write up. True but it was only partial on why they took their campaign to England. Other reasons were in retaliation over the murder of 14 civilians in Derry by the British Army but also to make international headlines so people would sit up and see what was actually going on including the population of Britain. The IRA thought that if they bombed England enough then the British public would want withdrawal from Ireland. Civil rights campaigns had failed the civillians and made very little, if any, impact internationally. Its well believed that if the IRA hadn't taken their campaign to England our civil rights could have been well stuck right back in the 70's but that's just a matter of opinion and as you know things here were not as clear cut.
No, it was a tongue-in cheek comment in the same way as you can find Americans who believe 9/11 was an inside job. As with all these conspiracy theories you can find a grain of evidence and then extrapolate an entire fantasy built on that. And as Cormac said British Intelligence DID know a lot more than they let on at the time, and more and more comes out every year (as with Omagh). Also I don't think IRA bombs had any harmful effect on the British economy as the collateral damage was miniscule - indeed you could take the cynical view that they were quite useful in providing work for glaziers and builders. (I know people who worked on the reconstruction of the Grand Hotel; as well as providing jobs in a time of recession the rebuilt version was MUCH better than the original!) The Arndale centre in Manchester is also much better, and without wishing to sound like Stox it was a shame the improvement had to cost the life of a young boy. As I mentioned in my first post if the IRA 'mainland' bombing campaign was intended to bring about a united Ireland by force of arms then it failed utterly - you could have continued at the same level for another 1000 years and it wouldn't have made any difference simply because there was the view that we couldn't give in to terrorism. Now we're in 'Europe' together, there's no more bombs and Martin McGuiness (the well-known British spy!) is a respected politician - it can happen tomorrow.