Sinn Fein Wins Irish Election - Page 3

Giordano · 11th February 2020, 04:05 PM

I have to bring up that over hundreds of years the English (and often their proxies the Scots) have done awful things in Ireland. Intentional starvation, stripping of property, denial of education, outright violence, etc. Do I need to document this?

Do the English of today deserve to be dismissed as violent and untrustworthy because of this moral burden of the past in the same way many English view the IRA in its various manifestations? Why not? Many Irish feel this way. Perhaps both sides need to recognize this and find a way to work in practice around their emotions, even their justified emotions, to make their world and that of their children a better place.

theprestige · 11th February 2020, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

Here's the way I see it:

Rebelling against the government is not terrorism. Using force to resist government intrusion, and fighting for independence from the government, is not terrorism. A person who does this is probably going to be labeled a terrorist by the government they're opposing, but that is a propaganda definition. It serves the government's purposes, not the purpose of clear communication.

Terrorism is when you want to oppose the government, but you don't want to rebel openly. You don't have a military goal that reasonably justifies the killing you embark on. You make no distinction between military targets and civilian targets. Or if you do, you target civilians because they're softer and easier that soldiers. Your objectives are not military success and thence the freedom you're fighting for. Rather, your objectives are political messaging through violence and death. "Freedom" isn't even a part of it. That's terrorism.

One man's terrorist is not another man's freedom fighter. It may suit the government to portray rebels as terrorists. It does not suit us to do the same.

Brainster · 11th February 2020, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by ahhell

It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998.

Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently.

Giordano · 11th February 2020, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently.

Yet they (and their colleagues) did give up most of the violence.

rockinkt · 11th February 2020, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Exactly. If there is to be no one who has a past that involved the supporting of terrorism, either actively planting bombs or enabling those who did, then many from both sides should not be in politics.

Sinn Fein supporters and politicians do not see themselves as the ones in the wrong. They can point to plenty of violence by the UK army and RUC during the Troubles.

Because two wrongs always makes a right.

I can't believe that someone is arguing the childish "They did it too!" as a justification for terrorism against innocent men, women, and children.

rockinkt · 11th February 2020, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Here's the way I see it:

Rebelling against the government is not terrorism. Using force to resist government intrusion, and fighting for independence from the government, is not terrorism. A person who does this is probably going to be labeled a terrorist by the government they're opposing, but that is a propaganda definition. It serves the government's purposes, not the purpose of clear communication.

Terrorism is when you want to oppose the government, but you don't want to rebel openly. You don't have a military goal that reasonably justifies the killing you embark on. You make no distinction between military targets and civilian targets. Or if you do, you target civilians because they're softer and easier that soldiers. Your objectives are not military success and thence the freedom you're fighting for. Rather, your objectives are political messaging through violence and death. "Freedom" isn't even a part of it. That's terrorism.

One man's terrorist is not another man's freedom fighter. It may suit the government to portray rebels as terrorists. It does not suit us to do the same.

^This^

People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists.

angrysoba · 11th February 2020, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Giordano

IMO the "Irish Question" has generated among the most long lasting hatreds/never forget emotions of any political conflict. Events of hundreds of years ago are still periodically paraded out (sometimes literally) to revisit and to re-enliven these hatreds. At one level I understand. I've already indicated in another thread how I could never forgive if a loved one of mine was killed as "collateral damage" in a military strike. Worse still in a terrorist action.

But I still maintain that things change in ways that are important to recognize, if only for practical reasons. Terrorists die and are replaced with people who have not performed violent acts. Choosing to identify with and join Sinn Fenn may not laudable, but in effect these new recruits are changing Sinn Fenn from within, replacing violent thugs with people seeking achieving goals though politic action. Trust them or not, but one can still recognize the changes that have occurred. Fail to do so and one dooms both sides to an dystopian future that just extends the evils of the past hundreds of years.

Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein?

angrysoba · 11th February 2020, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by ahhell

Do you have the same attitude toward Fine Gael and Fianna Fail? They both had their origins in the IRA which even in 1922 was a terrorist organization, especially Fianna fail, they lost the Civil War but quickly took political power for something like 70 years.

It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998. How long do you need to believe they have changed.

Let’s see. To give an example, if someone like Eoin O’Duffy was still a member of Fine Gael, then they would be beyond the pale (pun not intended). And if he is still reverted by the current Fine Gael, then **** them too! Someone whose organization fought for the fascists in the Spanish Civil War, and was himself an anti-Semite and fascist is someone that any reputable organization has to explicitly condemn and distance themselves from.

angrysoba · 11th February 2020, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Giordano

I have to bring up that over hundreds of years the English (and often their proxies the Scots) have done awful things in Ireland. Intentional starvation, stripping of property, denial of education, outright violence, etc. Do I need to document this?

Do the English of today deserve to be dismissed as violent and untrustworthy because of this moral burden of the past in the same way many English view the IRA in its various manifestations? Why not? Many Irish feel this way. Perhaps both sides need to recognize this and find a way to work in practice around their emotions, even their justified emotions, to make their world and that of their children a better place.

Nobody doubts this but there is clearly a difference between “English” which is a nationality, and an actual political organization that serves as front for violent terrorists.

Nessie · 12th February 2020, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

Because two wrongs always makes a right.

I can't believe that someone is arguing the childish "They did it too!" as a justification for terrorism against innocent men, women, and children.

That is not what I have argued.

My actual argument is that there was wrong and violence on both sides. Should we condemn the British politicians who, whilst others carried out acts of violence such as soldiers, the police and Unionist terrorists (with allegations of collusion and enablement), tried to and got a peace? The obvious answer is no. Those who sought peace should be praised. The same should apply to Nationalist side.

No throwing stones in glass houses and pot/kettle/black come to mind when I hear people trying to condemn the other side as they completely ignore what another side has also done.

That Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley made peace and worked together, is a superb example of how those who had been literally at each others throats and who had been involved in violent conflict, should be enabled to move on.

What they did atoned for their role in the Troubles and to try and destabilise that success is wrong. Sinn Fein is now a legitimate, elected, democratic party full of people who had absolutely nothing to do with the Troubles.

Nessie · 12th February 2020, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

^This^

People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists.

I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles.

By the late 1960s, sectarian repression of the Catholic minority by the Protestant majority, in jobs, housing, schooling and many other areas of life, had marginalised the Catholics. Attacks on Catholics had become so bad, the UK had to send in the Army to allegedly help the RUC, but since the RUC had been part of the sectarian repression, that just made the situation for the Catholic population even worse.

Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back.

rockinkt · 12th February 2020, 05:15 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

That is not what I have argued.

Yes it is because you actually still stick with that horrendous argument later on in your post.

Quote:

No throwing stones in glass houses and pot/kettle/black come to mind when I hear people trying to condemn the other side as they completely ignore what another side has also done.

So once we are back to "They did it too!"

Quote:

That Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley made peace and worked together, is a superb example of how those who had been literally at each others throats and who had been involved in violent conflict, should be enabled to move on.

What they did atoned for their role in the Troubles and to try and destabilise that success is wrong. Sinn Fein is now a legitimate, elected, democratic party full of people who had absolutely nothing to do with the Troubles.

What those two subhumans did can never be atoned for. They were responsible for deaths of innocents because of their horrid and twisted beliefs.
They should have both rotted in prison for their actions. They did nothing but put a pause to the hatred they caused and propagated and gained wealth and prestige from. That is exactly like two aged drug dealers making peace and receiving applause and gratitude for their stopping being subhuman criminals who caused death and suffering while they retire to luxury all the while laughing at the people they victimized.

Originally Posted by Nessie

I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles.

The difference between you and me is that I stopped the childish idea that two wrongs make a right a long time ago.
Furthermore, I do condemn any individuals who used excessive force while trying to enforce the laws of the land. I will not condemn entire governments or government organizations like police forces or military because a few rotten people crossed a very important line. I am absolutely certain that the government organizations whose members crossed the line do not revere and publicly celebrate the criminal actions of their villainous members and leaders like the terrorist Sinn Féin members do of their subhuman scum.

Quote:

Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back.

Oh look! Once again we are back to "They did it first!"

Sooo...the people that were killed in terrorist attacks were all personally responsible for the trouble the Catholics were having?

People who mix their politics with their most firmly held and fundamental hatreds and prejudices wind up being terrorists - or apologists for terrorists. In doing so - they lose their humanity. It is as simple as that.

Nessie · 12th February 2020, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

Yes it is because you actually still stick with that horrendous argument later on in your post.

So once we are back to "They did it too!"

What those two subhumans did can never be atoned for. They were responsible for deaths of innocents because of their horrid and twisted beliefs.
They should have both rotted in prison for their actions. They did nothing but put a pause to the hatred they caused and propagated and gained wealth and prestige from. That is exactly like two aged drug dealers making peace and receiving applause and gratitude for their stopping being subhuman criminals who caused death and suffering while they retire to luxury all the while laughing at the people they victimized.

The difference between you and me is that I stopped the childish idea that two wrongs make a right a long time ago.

Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it.

All of those involved in the violence, whether directly or by enabling, were in the wrong.

Quote:

Furthermore, I do condemn any individuals who used excessive force while trying to enforce the laws of the land. I will not condemn entire governments or government organizations like police forces or military because a few rotten people crossed a very important line. I am absolutely certain that the government organizations whose members crossed the line do not revere and publicly celebrate the criminal actions of their villainous members and leaders like the terrorist Sinn Féin members do of their subhuman scum.

The UK government has protected plenty of soldiers and police whose actions "crossed the line". Senior officers who ignored criminal acts were promoted and honoured. Politicians who quietly supported terrorist actions now sit in the Lords.

Quote:

Oh look! Once again we are back to "They did it first!"

Sooo...the people that were killed in terrorist attacks were all personally responsible for the trouble the Catholics were having?

Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it.

All I have done is point out both sides were capable of being as bad as each other when it came to the use or enabling the use of violence and neither side has the moral high ground.

But now, on both sides, there are those who had nothing to do with the Troubles and who are working for a political, democratic, non violent future and they should be supported.

Quote:

People who mix their politics with their most firmly held and fundamental hatreds and prejudices wind up being terrorists - or apologists for terrorists. In doing so - they lose their humanity. It is as simple as that.

Clearly you do not forgive, forget or allow those who did wrong to make it right. Thankfully, others do, otherwise the Troubles would still be ongoing as they were.

Arcade22 · 12th February 2020, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

In the meantime, do the majority of people in Ireland want the six counties and the baggage that goes with it? Sound like a major law enforcement headache.

Don't forget the crappy economy: UK subsidies to North Ireland are equivalent to 1/3 of their GDP, or about 10 billion GBP.

catsmate · 12th February 2020, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein?

Labour is burdened by Howlin, the Greens are seen as ineffectual and the SDs have yet to prove themselves.

dudalb · 12th February 2020, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Nessie

I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles.

By the late 1960s, sectarian repression of the Catholic minority by the Protestant majority, in jobs, housing, schooling and many other areas of life, had marginalised the Catholics. Attacks on Catholics had become so bad, the UK had to send in the Army to allegedly help the RUC, but since the RUC had been part of the sectarian repression, that just made the situation for the Catholic population even worse.

Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back.

Yeah, bombings targeting civilians in London is justified because the RUC were a bunch of jerks.
ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South.

angrysoba · 12th February 2020, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Y
ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South.

And too many in the South don't want the north.

dudalb · 12th February 2020, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by ahhell

Do you have the same attitude toward Fine Gael and Fianna Fail? They both had their origins in the IRA which even in 1922 was a terrorist organization, especially Fianna fail, they lost the Civil War but quickly took political power for something like 70 years.

It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998. How long do you need to believe they have changed.

Don't forget the civil war.

Even if true, the problem is Sinn Fine still has a 'We want the North to join the South, even if a majority of people in the North don't want to" attitude which is not going to be constructive.
That has always been the crux of the problem. The Majority of the North..whether for good or bad reasons really does not matter...does not want to become part of the Republic. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
And a lot of people in the South don't want the mess a problems of trying to forcing the North to Join.

dudalb · 12th February 2020, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

And too many in the South don't want the north.

Like I said, yeah, they sing rebel songs, and yell about a 32 County Republic and Four Green Fields but they really don't want to deal with the mess that would happen if the North was forced to join the South by some political deal with the UK.

Giordano · 12th February 2020, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Even if true, the problem is Sinn Fine still has a 'We want the North to join the South, even if a majority of people in the North don't want to" attitude which is not going to be constructive.
That has always been the crux of the problem. The Majority of the North..whether for good or bad reasons really does not matter...does not want to become part of the Republic. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
And a lot of people in the South don't want the mess a problems of trying to forcing the North to Join.

Maybe not:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...poll-1.4015170

Giordano · 12th February 2020, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Yeah, bombings targeting civilians in London is justified because the RUC were a bunch of jerks.
ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South.

A lot worse than a bunch of jerks. In fact, as I understand it, not all that easily distinguishable from the types of terrorists you, and I, despise.

I am not justifying bombings targeting civilians. Just noting again that to establish peace and a future both sides have to negotiate with elements guilty of dreadful things in the past.

rockinkt · 12th February 2020, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it.

Nonsense. You have no argument other than "They did it too!"

Quote:

All of those involved in the violence, whether directly or by enabling, were in the wrong.

I have not claimed different.

Quote:

The UK government has protected plenty of soldiers and police whose actions "crossed the line". Senior officers who ignored criminal acts were promoted and honoured. Politicians who quietly supported terrorist actions now sit in the Lords.

The difference is that the government is acknowledging the fact that their people "crossed the line" and are not only stating that such actions were wrong - but investigating and prosecuting when there is evidence to charge.
Again - the government and the police and military organisations are not marching in the streets and celebrating the vicious murderers and rapists and their terrorist acts.

Quote:

Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it.

Again - it is not a strawman to point out your actual argument is a basic "They did it too!"

Quote:

All I have done is point out both sides were capable of being as bad as each other when it came to the use or enabling the use of violence and neither side has the moral high ground.

The IRA was beyond the pale when it came to the number of ruthless acts of violence on innocent people. Their terroristic acts far, far, outnumbered the number of equivalent acts carried out by the authorities. Any argument to the contrary is nonsense.
Besides - the OP and my points are about the subhuman terrorists and their horrid supporters that make up the Sinn Fein Party. If you want to discuss the villainous acts of others - like Rob Roy MacGregor

- you may want to start another thread.

Quote:

But now, on both sides, there are those who had nothing to do with the Troubles and who are working for a political, democratic, non violent future and they should be supported.

The very fact that they belong to and venerate the abhorrent Sinn Fein and all the vile things that they have perpetrated and currently still stand for is reason enough to not support them.
The obvious solution would be to start another political party that absolutely and completely calls out the atrocities that Sinn Fein committed and spits on their symbolism and bans their songs. You want to do good? Start by making no doubt of your abhorrence of terrorism and violence. Easy!

Quote:

Clearly you do not forgive, forget or allow those who did wrong to make it right. Thankfully, others do, otherwise the Troubles would still be ongoing as they were.

Nothing has been made right. There is a lull in the terrorism and the threat of it still lingers and is very real. People in the various terrorist factions still hold murder in their hearts and minds or they would not venerate murdering terrorists and belong to their political entities.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

You realise that if the Unionists wanted to join Ireland they would have done if 60 years ago?

That's the Problem. The majority of Northern Ireland don't want to be a part of the Republic of Ireland, they want to remain a part of the UK. Most of them see themselves as either British (or its component countries) or as Northern Irish as opposed to being Irish. Their ties are to the UK, not Ireland.

They don't just oppose it they violently oppose it. People do not realise the strength of feeling in this.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 07:51 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

If it would have been "A Nation Once Again", "Rising Of the Moon" or even "Foggy Dew" it would not have been so bad, but the one chose is a particularly nasty one.

Don't forget Skibereen and Sean South.

Problem with these 'rebel songs' is they are very catchy with a fiddle and a tin flute backing up.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Robin

Would you say that about the people who crashed planes into the World Trade Center towers?

The long history of Irish conflict merits its own thread.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

The bank robbery connection proves that they have only pulled back - not changed their ways. What do you think the money will be used for - paying money to all the families of the people they raped, tortured and murdered - or for a war chest?

Hilarious! Picture this: "Your Honor - my client stopped murdering people a while back. He deserves to be thanked for making the community a safer place for people because the murder rate has dropped now that he has stopped murdering people.

The horrid and twisted mindset of people that are willing to rejoice in the past terrorist activities of such an organization and want to become a part of it should make any person with an ounce of common decency want to vomit.

Having to hold one's nose when dealing with horrible people and horrid regimes is nothing new on the national and international stage.

True - but that does not make them free from the fact that they are a terrorist organization that venerates their horrible former members and acts of terrorism. They should never be allowed to forget that.

I understand what you are saying. However, it is not just a case of a bunch of murderous thugs setting off bombs and killing and maiming innocent victims.

Once you know the history it takes on a different complexion. People are willing to die for their country and they will employ any means to do so rather than being taken over by another country.

You see it as an act of wanton criminality, they see it as an act of war.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently.

I bought Gerry Adams' hardback biography at the time it came out but could never bring myself to read it, knowing what I know about him. He really gives one the creeps.

Vixen · 13th February 2020, 08:09 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

^This^

People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists.

All decent minded people agree with you.

However, imagine if your country was invaded and you became subjected to the laws of this new power. Can you honestly put your hand on your heart and say you wouldn't be moved to try to overthrow them and regain your country back?

ahhell · 13th February 2020, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

^This^

People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists.

Including Chruchhill and FDR?

Nessie · 13th February 2020, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

Nonsense. You have no argument other than "They did it too!"

I have not claimed different.

The difference is that the government is acknowledging the fact that their people "crossed the line" and are not only stating that such actions were wrong - but investigating and prosecuting when there is evidence to charge.
Again - the government and the police and military organisations are not marching in the streets and celebrating the vicious murderers and rapists and their terrorist acts.

Again - it is not a strawman to point out your actual argument is a basic "They did it too!"

The IRA was beyond the pale when it came to the number of ruthless acts of violence on innocent people. Their terroristic acts far, far, outnumbered the number of equivalent acts carried out by the authorities. Any argument to the contrary is nonsense.
Besides - the OP and my points are about the subhuman terrorists and their horrid supporters that make up the Sinn Fein Party. If you want to discuss the villainous acts of others - like Rob Roy MacGregor

- you may want to start another thread.

The very fact that they belong to and venerate the abhorrent Sinn Fein and all the vile things that they have perpetrated and currently still stand for is reason enough to not support them.
The obvious solution would be to start another political party that absolutely and completely calls out the atrocities that Sinn Fein committed and spits on their symbolism and bans their songs. You want to do good? Start by making no doubt of your abhorrence of terrorism and violence. Easy!

Nothing has been made right. There is a lull in the terrorism and the threat of it still lingers and is very real. People in the various terrorist factions still hold murder in their hearts and minds or they would not venerate murdering terrorists and belong to their political entities.

We agree the IRA were terrorists and their actions were despicable and unjustified.

You then refuse to acknowledge why they did what they did and how others actions influenced their actions. Just because I do and I acknowledge the role of the UK government and Unionists in NI, in helping to cause the violence does not mean I support it.

It is unreasonable, unrealistic and rather ignorant of you, to expect people to just cow down to being repressed and not fight back when subject to violence.

Scotland has had little to no violence when it comes to Nationalist campaigns for independence. That is because no group in Scotland has suffered like Catholics did in 1960s NI.

If Catholics in 1960s NI had equal access to jobs, housing, schooling and were well represented in the RUC and a say in local government, the Troubles would not have happened.

theprestige · 13th February 2020, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by ahhell

Including Chruchhill and FDR?

The way I see it, there are three principles governing the morality of causing civilian deaths (collateral damage) in warfare.

Military distinction: It is incumbent on belligerents to distinguish their combatants from their noncombatants. This is accomplished with measures like uniforms, visible symbols, segregated facilities, etc. Soldiers that hide among civilians (e.g., terrorists) are committing a war crime. Militaries that base their operations among civilians likewise. Civilian deaths that arise from fighting such people are their fault, not the fault of the people fighting them.

That said, there are two other principles to consider.

Military necessity: There must be some concrete, achievable military goal, for the attack. You're capturing a bridge, establishing a beachhead, decapitating their high command, destroying their supply depots, etc. Something that diminishes their capacity to wage war.

Proportionality: The violence of the attack must be proportional to the military value if it succeeds. Getting rid of a squad of commandos holed up in an apartment block is a military goal. Nuking the entire city to do so is out of proportion to the military value of getting rid of those commandos. Bringing down the apartment block on their heads may not be, though.

There are nuances, and while the above principles are sound guidelines, they must be applied on a case by case basis.

Your question, "Including Chruchhill and FDR?" is too vague. We'd have to examine specific cases in context.

Some of the violence perpetrated by rebels in Northern Ireland was military. Some of it was terrorism.

ponderingturtle · 13th February 2020, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Giordano

A lot worse than a bunch of jerks. In fact, as I understand it, not all that easily distinguishable from the types of terrorists you, and I, despise.
.

See there is a moral difference, killing local minorities and running a terror campaign to keep them in their place is totally different than bombing civilians in far away cities. You can bomb the local minorities all you want and it is not at all the terrorism of the same kind. It is the bombing of distant majorities that is more morally repugnant.

ponderingturtle · 13th February 2020, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by ahhell

Including Chruchhill and FDR?

Ah now it is the time for the half hearted equivocation about total war or some such changing morals and making the targeting of civilians to disrupt industry acceptable because of some vague reason.

Yet for some reason a minor power can never be involved in a total war for its existence with a major power, that is only something major powers can be in with each other for moral reasons.

Giz · 13th February 2020, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein?

Indeed

dudalb · 13th February 2020, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Nessie

We agree the IRA were terrorists and their actions were despicable and unjustified.

You then refuse to acknowledge why they did what they did and how others actions influenced their actions. Just because I do and I acknowledge the role of the UK government and Unionists in NI, in helping to cause the violence does not mean I support it.

It is unreasonable, unrealistic and rather ignorant of you, to expect people to just cow down to being repressed and not fight back when subject to violence.

Scotland has had little to no violence when it comes to Nationalist campaigns for independence. That is because no group in Scotland has suffered like Catholics did in 1960s NI.

If Catholics in 1960s NI had equal access to jobs, housing, schooling and were well represented in the RUC and a say in local government, the Troubles would not have happened.

A lot of truth in that, but you are still dodging the issue;A majority of the people in Ulster almost certainly do not want to be part of the Republic.
I don't like the whole Orange mentality very much, but I also don't want to coerce them into being part of the Republic if they don't want to.
A black and white, good guys mentality is what got Ireland into this mess to begin with.

dudalb · 13th February 2020, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Giordano

Maybe not:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...poll-1.4015170

That is one poll, and a lsight majority would not be enough to make it work.It would have to be a large majority.

dudalb · 13th February 2020, 12:16 PM

AMused that the left is always accusing the right of seeing things in black and white and wanting simple solutions...which is true...but they are often guilty of the same things.
BTW if Sinn Finn is sincere about giving up violence, why don't they just disband The IRA or have a total break with the IRA?
It's life a Mafia family saying they are going 100 percent legit,but still keeping a small army of hitmen. you can't blame people for being skeptical.
I also wonder if the bretheren of the Left are just as forgiving and understanding of the Orange Paramilities.

Darat · 13th February 2020, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

AMused that the left is always accusing the right of seeing things in black and white and wanting simple solutions...which is true...but they are often guilty of the same things.
BTW if Sinn Finn is sincere about giving up violence, why don't they just disband The IRA or have a total break with the IRA?
It's life a Mafia family saying they are going 100 percent legit,but still keeping a small army of hitmen. you can't blame people for being skeptical.
I also wonder if the bretheren of the Left are just as forgiving and understanding of the Orange Paramilities.

They have done.

PhantomWolf · 13th February 2020, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by catsmate

Yes, but...

There's a new left/right divide in Irish politics but it's very fragmented and based on reaction to domestic issues. The 'old left' of Labour (and I'll include the SDs there) isn't doing well and the vote share is going to the Greens and Sinn Féin who, frankly, aren't fit to govern. Plus lots of independents and fringe idiots (remember Wallace

).

Plus let's look at the numbers:
38 Fianna Fáil
37 Sinn Féin (plus Tóibín)
35 Fine Gael
12 SD/Labour
12 Greens
6 Solidarity/PBP/I4C
18 Independents

Try and get a stable block of eighty out of that....

An xmas election I suspect.

Also I'd like to know the five thousand who voted for Barrett, Reynolds and their fellow fascists.

Don't know the parties well enough to know if it would work, but a look over their Wiki entries suggests that the best result would be a Semi-Conservative Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael/SDLP coalition. I am guessing though that this would mean putting some egos in check to manage it.

Tolls · 14th February 2020, 01:35 AM

The Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael split was explained to me elsewhere.
They are essentially the same party, policy-wise, but split based on who their grandfathers aligned with a century ago.
If they went into coalition it would beg the question of why they stay separrate. Consequently a coalition between them is unlikely.

11th February 2020, 04:32 PM	#83
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 17,470	Originally Posted by ahhell It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998. Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

11th February 2020, 04:55 PM	#85
rockinkt Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,474	Originally Posted by Nessie Exactly. If there is to be no one who has a past that involved the supporting of terrorism, either actively planting bombs or enabling those who did, then many from both sides should not be in politics. Sinn Fein supporters and politicians do not see themselves as the ones in the wrong. They can point to plenty of violence by the UK army and RUC during the Troubles. Because two wrongs always makes a right. I can't believe that someone is arguing the childish "They did it too!" as a justification for terrorism against innocent men, women, and children.
	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

11th February 2020, 04:58 PM	#86
rockinkt Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,474	Originally Posted by theprestige Here's the way I see it: Rebelling against the government is not terrorism. Using force to resist government intrusion, and fighting for independence from the government, is not terrorism. A person who does this is probably going to be labeled a terrorist by the government they're opposing, but that is a propaganda definition. It serves the government's purposes, not the purpose of clear communication. Terrorism is when you want to oppose the government, but you don't want to rebel openly. You don't have a military goal that reasonably justifies the killing you embark on. You make no distinction between military targets and civilian targets. Or if you do, you target civilians because they're softer and easier that soldiers. Your objectives are not military success and thence the freedom you're fighting for. Rather, your objectives are political messaging through violence and death. "Freedom" isn't even a part of it. That's terrorism. One man's terrorist is not another man's freedom fighter. It may suit the government to portray rebels as terrorists. It does not suit us to do the same. ^This^ People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists.
	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

11th February 2020, 05:41 PM	#87
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 26,543	Originally Posted by Giordano IMO the "Irish Question" has generated among the most long lasting hatreds/never forget emotions of any political conflict. Events of hundreds of years ago are still periodically paraded out (sometimes literally) to revisit and to re-enliven these hatreds. At one level I understand. I've already indicated in another thread how I could never forgive if a loved one of mine was killed as "collateral damage" in a military strike. Worse still in a terrorist action. But I still maintain that things change in ways that are important to recognize, if only for practical reasons. Terrorists die and are replaced with people who have not performed violent acts. Choosing to identify with and join Sinn Fenn may not laudable, but in effect these new recruits are changing Sinn Fenn from within, replacing violent thugs with people seeking achieving goals though politic action. Trust them or not, but one can still recognize the changes that have occurred. Fail to do so and one dooms both sides to an dystopian future that just extends the evils of the past hundreds of years. Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein?
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

11th February 2020, 05:54 PM	#88
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 26,543	Originally Posted by ahhell Do you have the same attitude toward Fine Gael and Fianna Fail? They both had their origins in the IRA which even in 1922 was a terrorist organization, especially Fianna fail, they lost the Civil War but quickly took political power for something like 70 years. It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998. How long do you need to believe they have changed. Let’s see. To give an example, if someone like Eoin O’Duffy was still a member of Fine Gael, then they would be beyond the pale (pun not intended). And if he is still reverted by the current Fine Gael, then **** them too! Someone whose organization fought for the fascists in the Spanish Civil War, and was himself an anti-Semite and fascist is someone that any reputable organization has to explicitly condemn and distance themselves from.
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

11th February 2020, 04:05 PM	#81
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 16,331	I have to bring up that over hundreds of years the English (and often their proxies the Scots) have done awful things in Ireland. Intentional starvation, stripping of property, denial of education, outright violence, etc. Do I need to document this? Do the English of today deserve to be dismissed as violent and untrustworthy because of this moral burden of the past in the same way many English view the IRA in its various manifestations? Why not? Many Irish feel this way. Perhaps both sides need to recognize this and find a way to work in practice around their emotions, even their justified emotions, to make their world and that of their children a better place.

11th February 2020, 04:11 PM	#82
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 42,026	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. Here's the way I see it: Rebelling against the government is not terrorism. Using force to resist government intrusion, and fighting for independence from the government, is not terrorism. A person who does this is probably going to be labeled a terrorist by the government they're opposing, but that is a propaganda definition. It serves the government's purposes, not the purpose of clear communication. Terrorism is when you want to oppose the government, but you don't want to rebel openly. You don't have a military goal that reasonably justifies the killing you embark on. You make no distinction between military targets and civilian targets. Or if you do, you target civilians because they're softer and easier that soldiers. Your objectives are not military success and thence the freedom you're fighting for. Rather, your objectives are political messaging through violence and death. "Freedom" isn't even a part of it. That's terrorism. One man's terrorist is not another man's freedom fighter. It may suit the government to portray rebels as terrorists. It does not suit us to do the same.

11th February 2020, 04:54 PM	#84
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 16,331	Originally Posted by Brainster Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently. Yet they (and their colleagues) did give up most of the violence.

11th February 2020, 05:55 PM	#89
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 26,543	Originally Posted by Giordano I have to bring up that over hundreds of years the English (and often their proxies the Scots) have done awful things in Ireland. Intentional starvation, stripping of property, denial of education, outright violence, etc. Do I need to document this? Do the English of today deserve to be dismissed as violent and untrustworthy because of this moral burden of the past in the same way many English view the IRA in its various manifestations? Why not? Many Irish feel this way. Perhaps both sides need to recognize this and find a way to work in practice around their emotions, even their justified emotions, to make their world and that of their children a better place. Nobody doubts this but there is clearly a difference between “English” which is a nationality, and an actual political organization that serves as front for violent terrorists.
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

12th February 2020, 02:25 AM	#90
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,518	Originally Posted by rockinkt Because two wrongs always makes a right. I can't believe that someone is arguing the childish "They did it too!" as a justification for terrorism against innocent men, women, and children. That is not what I have argued. My actual argument is that there was wrong and violence on both sides. Should we condemn the British politicians who, whilst others carried out acts of violence such as soldiers, the police and Unionist terrorists (with allegations of collusion and enablement), tried to and got a peace? The obvious answer is no. Those who sought peace should be praised. The same should apply to Nationalist side. No throwing stones in glass houses and pot/kettle/black come to mind when I hear people trying to condemn the other side as they completely ignore what another side has also done. That Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley made peace and worked together, is a superb example of how those who had been literally at each others throats and who had been involved in violent conflict, should be enabled to move on. What they did atoned for their role in the Troubles and to try and destabilise that success is wrong. Sinn Fein is now a legitimate, elected, democratic party full of people who had absolutely nothing to do with the Troubles.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

12th February 2020, 02:33 AM	#91
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,518	Originally Posted by rockinkt ^This^ People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists. I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles. By the late 1960s, sectarian repression of the Catholic minority by the Protestant majority, in jobs, housing, schooling and many other areas of life, had marginalised the Catholics. Attacks on Catholics had become so bad, the UK had to send in the Army to allegedly help the RUC, but since the RUC had been part of the sectarian repression, that just made the situation for the Catholic population even worse. Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

12th February 2020, 05:15 AM	#92
rockinkt Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,474	Originally Posted by Nessie That is not what I have argued. Yes it is because you actually still stick with that horrendous argument later on in your post. Quote: No throwing stones in glass houses and pot/kettle/black come to mind when I hear people trying to condemn the other side as they completely ignore what another side has also done. So once we are back to "They did it too!" Quote: That Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley made peace and worked together, is a superb example of how those who had been literally at each others throats and who had been involved in violent conflict, should be enabled to move on. What they did atoned for their role in the Troubles and to try and destabilise that success is wrong. Sinn Fein is now a legitimate, elected, democratic party full of people who had absolutely nothing to do with the Troubles. What those two subhumans did can never be atoned for. They were responsible for deaths of innocents because of their horrid and twisted beliefs. They should have both rotted in prison for their actions. They did nothing but put a pause to the hatred they caused and propagated and gained wealth and prestige from. That is exactly like two aged drug dealers making peace and receiving applause and gratitude for their stopping being subhuman criminals who caused death and suffering while they retire to luxury all the while laughing at the people they victimized. Originally Posted by Nessie I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles. The difference between you and me is that I stopped the childish idea that two wrongs make a right a long time ago. Furthermore, I do condemn any individuals who used excessive force while trying to enforce the laws of the land. I will not condemn entire governments or government organizations like police forces or military because a few rotten people crossed a very important line. I am absolutely certain that the government organizations whose members crossed the line do not revere and publicly celebrate the criminal actions of their villainous members and leaders like the terrorist Sinn Féin members do of their subhuman scum. Quote: Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back. Oh look! Once again we are back to "They did it first!" Sooo...the people that were killed in terrorist attacks were all personally responsible for the trouble the Catholics were having? People who mix their politics with their most firmly held and fundamental hatreds and prejudices wind up being terrorists - or apologists for terrorists. In doing so - they lose their humanity. It is as simple as that.
	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

12th February 2020, 05:37 AM	#93
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,518	Originally Posted by rockinkt Yes it is because you actually still stick with that horrendous argument later on in your post. So once we are back to "They did it too!" What those two subhumans did can never be atoned for. They were responsible for deaths of innocents because of their horrid and twisted beliefs. They should have both rotted in prison for their actions. They did nothing but put a pause to the hatred they caused and propagated and gained wealth and prestige from. That is exactly like two aged drug dealers making peace and receiving applause and gratitude for their stopping being subhuman criminals who caused death and suffering while they retire to luxury all the while laughing at the people they victimized. The difference between you and me is that I stopped the childish idea that two wrongs make a right a long time ago. Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it. All of those involved in the violence, whether directly or by enabling, were in the wrong. Quote: Furthermore, I do condemn any individuals who used excessive force while trying to enforce the laws of the land. I will not condemn entire governments or government organizations like police forces or military because a few rotten people crossed a very important line. I am absolutely certain that the government organizations whose members crossed the line do not revere and publicly celebrate the criminal actions of their villainous members and leaders like the terrorist Sinn Féin members do of their subhuman scum. The UK government has protected plenty of soldiers and police whose actions "crossed the line". Senior officers who ignored criminal acts were promoted and honoured. Politicians who quietly supported terrorist actions now sit in the Lords. Quote: Oh look! Once again we are back to "They did it first!" Sooo...the people that were killed in terrorist attacks were all personally responsible for the trouble the Catholics were having? Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it. All I have done is point out both sides were capable of being as bad as each other when it came to the use or enabling the use of violence and neither side has the moral high ground. But now, on both sides, there are those who had nothing to do with the Troubles and who are working for a political, democratic, non violent future and they should be supported. Quote: People who mix their politics with their most firmly held and fundamental hatreds and prejudices wind up being terrorists - or apologists for terrorists. In doing so - they lose their humanity. It is as simple as that. Clearly you do not forgive, forget or allow those who did wrong to make it right. Thankfully, others do, otherwise the Troubles would still be ongoing as they were.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

12th February 2020, 05:52 AM	#94
Arcade22 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 6,021	Originally Posted by angrysoba In the meantime, do the majority of people in Ireland want the six counties and the baggage that goes with it? Sound like a major law enforcement headache. Don't forget the crappy economy: UK subsidies to North Ireland are equivalent to 1/3 of their GDP, or about 10 billion GBP.
	__________________ We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

12th February 2020, 07:07 AM	#95
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 21,626	Originally Posted by angrysoba Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein? Labour is burdened by Howlin, the Greens are seen as ineffectual and the SDs have yet to prove themselves.
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

12th February 2020, 05:52 PM	#96
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 47,120	Originally Posted by Nessie I think that the difference between you and me is that I acknowledge there were members of the UK armed forces, UK political parties and police in NI who also bloodied their hands in the Troubles. By the late 1960s, sectarian repression of the Catholic minority by the Protestant majority, in jobs, housing, schooling and many other areas of life, had marginalised the Catholics. Attacks on Catholics had become so bad, the UK had to send in the Army to allegedly help the RUC, but since the RUC had been part of the sectarian repression, that just made the situation for the Catholic population even worse. Then you criticise them for fighting back! I think that when a minority is persecuted, it is hard to condemn them for fighting back. Yeah, bombings targeting civilians in London is justified because the RUC were a bunch of jerks. ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein. Last edited by dudalb; 12th February 2020 at 05:54 PM.

12th February 2020, 05:59 PM	#97
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 26,543	Originally Posted by dudalb Y ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South. And too many in the South don't want the north.
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

12th February 2020, 06:03 PM	#98
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 47,120	Originally Posted by ahhell Do you have the same attitude toward Fine Gael and Fianna Fail? They both had their origins in the IRA which even in 1922 was a terrorist organization, especially Fianna fail, they lost the Civil War but quickly took political power for something like 70 years. It really does appear as though they legitimately gave up violence in 1998. How long do you need to believe they have changed. Don't forget the civil war. Even if true, the problem is Sinn Fine still has a 'We want the North to join the South, even if a majority of people in the North don't want to" attitude which is not going to be constructive. That has always been the crux of the problem. The Majority of the North..whether for good or bad reasons really does not matter...does not want to become part of the Republic. I don't see that changing anytime soon. And a lot of people in the South don't want the mess a problems of trying to forcing the North to Join.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

12th February 2020, 06:06 PM	#99
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 47,120	Originally Posted by angrysoba And too many in the South don't want the north. Like I said, yeah, they sing rebel songs, and yell about a 32 County Republic and Four Green Fields but they really don't want to deal with the mess that would happen if the North was forced to join the South by some political deal with the UK.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

12th February 2020, 07:03 PM	#100
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 16,331	Originally Posted by dudalb Even if true, the problem is Sinn Fine still has a 'We want the North to join the South, even if a majority of people in the North don't want to" attitude which is not going to be constructive. That has always been the crux of the problem. The Majority of the North..whether for good or bad reasons really does not matter...does not want to become part of the Republic. I don't see that changing anytime soon. And a lot of people in the South don't want the mess a problems of trying to forcing the North to Join. Maybe not: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...poll-1.4015170

12th February 2020, 07:06 PM	#101
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 16,331	Originally Posted by dudalb Yeah, bombings targeting civilians in London is justified because the RUC were a bunch of jerks. ANyway, I doubt a united Ireland is going to happen anytime soon. Too many people in the North don';t want to join the South. A lot worse than a bunch of jerks. In fact, as I understand it, not all that easily distinguishable from the types of terrorists you, and I, despise. I am not justifying bombings targeting civilians. Just noting again that to establish peace and a future both sides have to negotiate with elements guilty of dreadful things in the past.
	Last edited by Giordano; 12th February 2020 at 07:09 PM.

12th February 2020, 07:55 PM	#102
rockinkt Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,474	Originally Posted by Nessie Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it. Nonsense. You have no argument other than "They did it too!" Quote: All of those involved in the violence, whether directly or by enabling, were in the wrong. I have not claimed different. Quote: The UK government has protected plenty of soldiers and police whose actions "crossed the line". Senior officers who ignored criminal acts were promoted and honoured. Politicians who quietly supported terrorist actions now sit in the Lords. The difference is that the government is acknowledging the fact that their people "crossed the line" and are not only stating that such actions were wrong - but investigating and prosecuting when there is evidence to charge. Again - the government and the police and military organisations are not marching in the streets and celebrating the vicious murderers and rapists and their terrorist acts. Quote: Strawman. You cannot cope with my actual argument, so you invent one and claim I have made it. Again - it is not a strawman to point out your actual argument is a basic "They did it too!" Quote: All I have done is point out both sides were capable of being as bad as each other when it came to the use or enabling the use of violence and neither side has the moral high ground. The IRA was beyond the pale when it came to the number of ruthless acts of violence on innocent people. Their terroristic acts far, far, outnumbered the number of equivalent acts carried out by the authorities. Any argument to the contrary is nonsense. Besides - the OP and my points are about the subhuman terrorists and their horrid supporters that make up the Sinn Fein Party. If you want to discuss the villainous acts of others - like Rob Roy MacGregor - you may want to start another thread. Quote: But now, on both sides, there are those who had nothing to do with the Troubles and who are working for a political, democratic, non violent future and they should be supported. The very fact that they belong to and venerate the abhorrent Sinn Fein and all the vile things that they have perpetrated and currently still stand for is reason enough to not support them. The obvious solution would be to start another political party that absolutely and completely calls out the atrocities that Sinn Fein committed and spits on their symbolism and bans their songs. You want to do good? Start by making no doubt of your abhorrence of terrorism and violence. Easy! Quote: Clearly you do not forgive, forget or allow those who did wrong to make it right. Thankfully, others do, otherwise the Troubles would still be ongoing as they were. Nothing has been made right. There is a lull in the terrorism and the threat of it still lingers and is very real. People in the various terrorist factions still hold murder in their hearts and minds or they would not venerate murdering terrorists and belong to their political entities.
	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt* Last edited by rockinkt; 12th February 2020 at 08:10 PM. Reason: change wording for clarification

13th February 2020, 07:49 AM	#103
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf You realise that if the Unionists wanted to join Ireland they would have done if 60 years ago? That's the Problem. The majority of Northern Ireland don't want to be a part of the Republic of Ireland, they want to remain a part of the UK. Most of them see themselves as either British (or its component countries) or as Northern Irish as opposed to being Irish. Their ties are to the UK, not Ireland. They don't just oppose it they violently oppose it. People do not realise the strength of feeling in this.

13th February 2020, 07:51 AM	#104
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by dudalb If it would have been "A Nation Once Again", "Rising Of the Moon" or even "Foggy Dew" it would not have been so bad, but the one chose is a particularly nasty one. Don't forget Skibereen and Sean South. Problem with these 'rebel songs' is they are very catchy with a fiddle and a tin flute backing up.

13th February 2020, 07:57 AM	#105
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by Robin Would you say that about the people who crashed planes into the World Trade Center towers? The long history of Irish conflict merits its own thread.

13th February 2020, 08:03 AM	#106
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by rockinkt The bank robbery connection proves that they have only pulled back - not changed their ways. What do you think the money will be used for - paying money to all the families of the people they raped, tortured and murdered - or for a war chest? Hilarious! Picture this: "Your Honor - my client stopped murdering people a while back. He deserves to be thanked for making the community a safer place for people because the murder rate has dropped now that he has stopped murdering people. The horrid and twisted mindset of people that are willing to rejoice in the past terrorist activities of such an organization and want to become a part of it should make any person with an ounce of common decency want to vomit. Having to hold one's nose when dealing with horrible people and horrid regimes is nothing new on the national and international stage. True - but that does not make them free from the fact that they are a terrorist organization that venerates their horrible former members and acts of terrorism. They should never be allowed to forget that. I understand what you are saying. However, it is not just a case of a bunch of murderous thugs setting off bombs and killing and maiming innocent victims. Once you know the history it takes on a different complexion. People are willing to die for their country and they will employ any means to do so rather than being taken over by another country. You see it as an act of wanton criminality, they see it as an act of war.

13th February 2020, 08:06 AM	#107
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by Brainster Gerry Adams has never admitted he was involved in the Provos, and Martin McGuinness claimed he left in 1974. They gave up the violence they claimed they weren't involved in apparently. I bought Gerry Adams' hardback biography at the time it came out but could never bring myself to read it, knowing what I know about him. He really gives one the creeps.

13th February 2020, 08:09 AM	#108
Vixen Suspended Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 18,321	Originally Posted by rockinkt ^This^ People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists. All decent minded people agree with you. However, imagine if your country was invaded and you became subjected to the laws of this new power. Can you honestly put your hand on your heart and say you wouldn't be moved to try to overthrow them and regain your country back?

13th February 2020, 08:40 AM	#109
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,097	Originally Posted by rockinkt ^This^ People that purposely kill innocent men, women, and children for the sake of a political goal are sub-human scum terrorists. Including Chruchhill and FDR?
ahhell Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 3,097

13th February 2020, 08:57 AM	#110
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,518	Originally Posted by rockinkt Nonsense. You have no argument other than "They did it too!" I have not claimed different. The difference is that the government is acknowledging the fact that their people "crossed the line" and are not only stating that such actions were wrong - but investigating and prosecuting when there is evidence to charge. Again - the government and the police and military organisations are not marching in the streets and celebrating the vicious murderers and rapists and their terrorist acts. Again - it is not a strawman to point out your actual argument is a basic "They did it too!" The IRA was beyond the pale when it came to the number of ruthless acts of violence on innocent people. Their terroristic acts far, far, outnumbered the number of equivalent acts carried out by the authorities. Any argument to the contrary is nonsense. Besides - the OP and my points are about the subhuman terrorists and their horrid supporters that make up the Sinn Fein Party. If you want to discuss the villainous acts of others - like Rob Roy MacGregor - you may want to start another thread. The very fact that they belong to and venerate the abhorrent Sinn Fein and all the vile things that they have perpetrated and currently still stand for is reason enough to not support them. The obvious solution would be to start another political party that absolutely and completely calls out the atrocities that Sinn Fein committed and spits on their symbolism and bans their songs. You want to do good? Start by making no doubt of your abhorrence of terrorism and violence. Easy! Nothing has been made right. There is a lull in the terrorism and the threat of it still lingers and is very real. People in the various terrorist factions still hold murder in their hearts and minds or they would not venerate murdering terrorists and belong to their political entities. We agree the IRA were terrorists and their actions were despicable and unjustified. You then refuse to acknowledge why they did what they did and how others actions influenced their actions. Just because I do and I acknowledge the role of the UK government and Unionists in NI, in helping to cause the violence does not mean I support it. It is unreasonable, unrealistic and rather ignorant of you, to expect people to just cow down to being repressed and not fight back when subject to violence. Scotland has had little to no violence when it comes to Nationalist campaigns for independence. That is because no group in Scotland has suffered like Catholics did in 1960s NI. If Catholics in 1960s NI had equal access to jobs, housing, schooling and were well represented in the RUC and a say in local government, the Troubles would not have happened.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

13th February 2020, 09:33 AM	#111
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 42,026	Originally Posted by ahhell Including Chruchhill and FDR? The way I see it, there are three principles governing the morality of causing civilian deaths (collateral damage) in warfare. Military distinction: It is incumbent on belligerents to distinguish their combatants from their noncombatants. This is accomplished with measures like uniforms, visible symbols, segregated facilities, etc. Soldiers that hide among civilians (e.g., terrorists) are committing a war crime. Militaries that base their operations among civilians likewise. Civilian deaths that arise from fighting such people are their fault, not the fault of the people fighting them. That said, there are two other principles to consider. Military necessity: There must be some concrete, achievable military goal, for the attack. You're capturing a bridge, establishing a beachhead, decapitating their high command, destroying their supply depots, etc. Something that diminishes their capacity to wage war. Proportionality: The violence of the attack must be proportional to the military value if it succeeds. Getting rid of a squad of commandos holed up in an apartment block is a military goal. Nuking the entire city to do so is out of proportion to the military value of getting rid of those commandos. Bringing down the apartment block on their heads may not be, though. There are nuances, and while the above principles are sound guidelines, they must be applied on a case by case basis. Your question, "Including Chruchhill and FDR?" is too vague. We'd have to examine specific cases in context. Some of the violence perpetrated by rebels in Northern Ireland was military. Some of it was terrorism.

13th February 2020, 10:02 AM	#112
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 48,575	Originally Posted by Giordano A lot worse than a bunch of jerks. In fact, as I understand it, not all that easily distinguishable from the types of terrorists you, and I, despise. . See there is a moral difference, killing local minorities and running a terror campaign to keep them in their place is totally different than bombing civilians in far away cities. You can bomb the local minorities all you want and it is not at all the terrorism of the same kind. It is the bombing of distant majorities that is more morally repugnant.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

13th February 2020, 10:06 AM	#113
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 48,575	Originally Posted by ahhell Including Chruchhill and FDR? Ah now it is the time for the half hearted equivocation about total war or some such changing morals and making the targeting of civilians to disrupt industry acceptable because of some vague reason. Yet for some reason a minor power can never be involved in a total war for its existence with a major power, that is only something major powers can be in with each other for moral reasons.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

13th February 2020, 11:58 AM	#114
Giz Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 8,654	Originally Posted by angrysoba Sure. But why can’t these youngsters start a nice left-wing party? Why does it have to be Sinn Fein? Indeed
Giz Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 8,654

13th February 2020, 12:08 PM	#115
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 47,120	Originally Posted by Nessie We agree the IRA were terrorists and their actions were despicable and unjustified. You then refuse to acknowledge why they did what they did and how others actions influenced their actions. Just because I do and I acknowledge the role of the UK government and Unionists in NI, in helping to cause the violence does not mean I support it. It is unreasonable, unrealistic and rather ignorant of you, to expect people to just cow down to being repressed and not fight back when subject to violence. Scotland has had little to no violence when it comes to Nationalist campaigns for independence. That is because no group in Scotland has suffered like Catholics did in 1960s NI. If Catholics in 1960s NI had equal access to jobs, housing, schooling and were well represented in the RUC and a say in local government, the Troubles would not have happened. A lot of truth in that, but you are still dodging the issue;A majority of the people in Ulster almost certainly do not want to be part of the Republic. I don't like the whole Orange mentality very much, but I also don't want to coerce them into being part of the Republic if they don't want to. A black and white, good guys mentality is what got Ireland into this mess to begin with.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.