BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 01:25 PM

The belief and the desire that peaceful means will suffice is surely what is infinitely precious.

Since you ask, I live near Nottingham supposedly gun crime capital of England. So if things do get desperate, I'm sure our local lads will sort you out some good gear.

Having said that, Nottingham's yearly statistics probably would fit comfortably into a quiet weekend in New York or Chicago. I bet Americans think we are a right gang of of wooftahs, always going on about Northern Ireland. I bet they've shot more people cleaning their gun barrels and practising quick draw than got killed in the entire years of conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:34 PM

Our victory speaks for its self. We disbanded volunteerily in July05. The same can't be said for the B Specials, U.D.R. and The R.U.C. Your British government disbanded them for their actions. We will be remembered by historians as hero's one and all.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:28 PM

Being brought to their knees and globally humiliated into surrendering their arms has left them in need of face saving. If it has to be done on an internet chat forum so be it. Less messy that way.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 10:39 AM

Which record is that, Div? The one that goes and I see your British troops in Iraq have been behaving in the usual manner, torturing and murdering civilians.

Or the one that goes almost a third were killed by British army/police? How can that be when JimmyC later states "Statistics show that republicans were responsible for 58.8 % of the deaths, Loyalists for 28.9% and the securuty forces fo 10.1 %."?

I am begining to dispair over the situation there. Can we not just accept that the IRA have de-commisioned. It seems at times like the republican faction here don't like the de-commisioning as much as the idiots on the loyalist side. What's the problem? Nothing left to fight about so you rake up old coals?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,madman
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 10:04 AM

Well the ' Div ' part is right.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:56 AM

Divis is right Bill, change the record.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:55 AM

Someone please change the record. Same oul crap over and over again, can you not think of something else ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:51 AM

Well said Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:37 AM

Pure emotion and myth JimmyC plain fact is if the PIRA hadn't started it's campaign of bombing and murder all those of whom you speak would still be alive. Very early on in the conflict when the British Army was protecting the Nationalist areas and disarming and disbanding the B Specials the Official IRA stated that they had no part to play in the conflict. Not good enough for some this caused a rift and PIRA was formed, they carried on the 'struggle' and 'protected' the people of Northern Ireland and murdered/maimed thousands in the process. Can you please answer why the murderers of Mr McCartney have not been brought to justice. Can you please tell me why the relatives of Mrs Jean McConville still have to gaze on the faces of her torturers and murderers every time they walk down the street - both people completely innocent of any crime - I dare say that there are countless other examples.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 11:27 PM

Teribus, This is all getting a bit thin, but rom y 0ne of your posts where you state the " No nationalist/republican, IRA appologist has ever been able to provide me with the name of one single IRA volunteer who ever gave his life to protect a single civilian - Examples of members of the RUC and British Forces who have done exactly that are well known.

The I.R.A. lost members while protecting whole communities like the New Lodge, Ardoyne, The Markets and other districts and towns throughout the 6 counties. Without the I.R.A. in places like the Ardoyne or the New Lodge more civilians would have been killed. I come from the New Lodge, where 396 people lost their lives many on account of army action.

So please do not tell me that the IRA terrorized these civilians, if these districts had not been terrorized initially by roaming bands of loyalists, supported by the R.U.C. and later by certain regiments of the army the IRA would not have been rejuvenated in the first place.

If the civilians in these areas had been able to rely on the army and the police to protect them there would have no need for the IRA. But they were not protected and in fact were terrorized by certain regiments that were sent there to protect them - Why was the IRA necessary, well I will give you three exmples that I know of personally:
1 - A loyalist murder squad was able to walk past an army patrol, then a police patrol, enter a cul-de-sac and shoot a cathoic at his own door and after the shooting were able to walk past the same two patrols without being questioned, this is a fact, the victim was a relative of mine.
Does the word collusion mean anything.

2 - One unarmed 16 year old was shot and killed in Trainfield Street (the same street that our late member Annroi came from) ,two soldiers were charged with murder, they were found guilty and 10 years later were still serving in the british army.
3 - In Tyrone the army stopped a car with 2 occupants, one occupant ( Hugh Heron) ran accross the parking lot and was shot repeatedly in the back. the other occupant (John Paddy Mullan) exited the card with his hands up and was riddled where he stood.

These things happened on a daily basis all over the 6 counties, especially in the rural areas away from the T.V reporters and newscasters. And people wonder why the IRA exists.

Statistics show that republicans were responsible for 58.8 % of the deaths, Loyalists for 28.9% and the securuty forces fo 10.1 %.

I accept that although the I.R.A. was the greatest taker of lives there were also many other deaths for which the R.U.C. and in particular the army were responsible, many of which generated sizeable and continuing conrtroversy, such as the 1972 Bloody Sunday shootings and the R.U.C' 1982 " Shoot-to-kill" incidents, in the long run the IRA offered the the only protectiona to nationalist areas and although responsible for many lives they may have actually prevented many more that would surely have been lost if the Loyalists, R.U.C. and the army had a free rein to do whatever they wanted without the threat of facing the IRA.

Also you state that from the mid 1700's no country has done more to eradicate slavery than the U.K. - well they certainly did nothing to eradicate it in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Guest, Big Tim
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 06:12 AM

"I wish they'd done it years ago. It should have been ended a long time ago. It's a great pity the conflict ever began".

Bishop Edward Daly, 27 September 05.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 04:17 AM

Interesting to note that on RTE Radio 1 news at 8am this morning they reported the results of a poll [ presumably in Eire ] the majority of people didn't believe that the IRA had decomissioned ALL their weapons and an even larger majority believed that the IRA were still running organised crime.

My own opinion is the we should accept the IRA word on de-comissioning, trust has got to start somewhere.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:23 PM

GUEST, Oh I got you on a nerve, nice term that, Army Personnel, always like that term, memories come flowing back, all good ones may I add.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 06:22 PM

GUEST - 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

Iraq? Hells teeth laddie early days yet we're going to be there for years yet - and counter to what some other tosser said I've always realised that. But if you do want to assess how well we are doing down in Basra visit BBC 'have your say' - most non-Iraqi contributers trot out the same old leftist line so favoured by the Beeb, Iraqi contributers, especially those in Basra seem rather attached to us and want us to stay for a while - no accountiong for taste Eh??

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 05:56 PM

It wasn't a pub exclusively serving Army personnel. And just like every other pub, where the preferred method of bombing was to throw the device through an open door, it would have killed more than 'just' Army personnel. So the arsehole blew himself up? Good.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 02:53 PM

I am aware you are not questioning his bravery, I only gave this example in answer to the post which stated the British army and RUC where out there saving lives on a daily basis, which we on the ground in West Belfast know otherwise.Individuals within both of these forces were found to be at fault on more than one ocassion.If I was to become involved in the supply of examples I would imagine this would roll on in a tit for tat post for acts of bravery. I cannot and do not expect you to agree with me, but the person I felt to be at fault was the owner of the primises, his own staff had asked him to consider their well being more than once. I do not ask for your understanding as to why British soldiers should not be served in public houses in the North of Ireland, I feel this should speak for it's self.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 02:23 PM

Not questioning his bravery Sweeney, but all he did was to try to save the people that he and his bomb endangered in the first place.
Do you have a better example?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 08:14 AM

The owner of the public house was serving British soldiers and had received four verbal warnings for his activty. This should have been enough. When the device became unstable, the volunteer remained with it in an attempt to remove the blaster cap after the warning had been ignored by several customers. Another volunteer cleared the area. He did not leave the device and walk away and leave those within the building to it. If the owner of the building had acted in a responsible manner and accepted the verbal warnings this would not have had to take place.Regarding the 1994 ceasefire it was not PIRA that negotiated this ceasefire it was two of John Majors men that came to them. You will never know just how close the British government was to breaking in 1994, many felt at the time there should have been a greater push by PIRA. Well that was then, its a long time ago.Take the events since then as positive.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

The British Government underestimated the long haul Iraq is turning out to be, and I see your British troops in Iraq have been behaving in the usual manner, torturing and murdering civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: greg stephens
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

I don't fully follow this volunteer/device/own petard story either. Why was he staying with thhis oozing device while other people cleared the area? How did this action help to save civilians, which is what you say was the motivation for his actions?
    And, on the more general question of motivation, surely if your aim in life is not to hurt civilians, why wander round the streets clutching "devices"?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:27 AM

GUEST Divis Sweeney,

I think on a previous thread where this came up I did discount IRA bombers who managed to blow themselves up while making their bombs or transporting them. Had your 'volunteer' and the organisation he represented really wanted to protect civilians they wouldn't have been building the bomb in the first place.

I do not believe that the UK armed forces ever deliberately underestimate any opponent. Your point is what exactly? Fought to a standstill in a situation where at no time there never was ever going to be a military solution or 'victory', the PIRA negotiated a cease-fire in 1994, this briefly broken and resotored, 1998 saw the GFA, 2005 saw the P O'Neill statement renouncing the armed struggle and decommissioning of PIRA weapons. As previously stated the UK and Irish Governments coulld easily have continued to maintain the stalemate - The PIRA could not, especially after 9/11.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:27 AM

Sweeney, not being knowledgeable on these things, how did staying with the device help?
Could he not have helped clear the area instead?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 06:28 AM

Again wrong, wrong, wrong. I knew a volunteer who in November 1971 remained with his device until the area was cleared as it became unstable and the coop mix began to ooze from the bag it was in. He was killed, no other person was injured in the operation.Regarding the RUC and Brit army. It is also well recorded the number of them that killed civilans, both on and off duty. As for stating an arguement should be based on fact instead of emotion, spend a little more time obtaining factual information before you post. Regarding our victories, was it not your General of land forces Veron Erskine Crum in 1974 branded the PIRA one of the most successful guerilla armies in the world and only a fool would under estimate them. Did he know you ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 04:58 AM

JimmyC,

Being a bit selective re-Churchill. Yes an underground movement would have fought on it would have targeted the occupying forces, as happened with the SOE backed resistence movements in occupied Europe. It would not have deliberately targeted and terrorised the civilian population as the PIRA did. As I have said before if any organisation killed and maimed the number of civilians that the PIRA did and at the same time ruined any chance of economic improvement along with it's accompanying prosperity, then had the gall to tell it was protecting me, I'd have no hesitation in telling them to bugger off and protect someone else. No doubt those with the 'glorious vision' firmly fixed in their mind's eye would view the innocent civilian deaths as just so many eggs required to make the omelette. No nationalist/republican, IRA appologist has ever been able to provide me with the name of one single IRA volunteer who ever gave his life to protect a single civilian - Examples of members of the RUC and British Forces who have done exactly that are well known.

If you bothered to base your arguement on fact instead of emotion you would quickly have seen that from the middle of the 1700's no country has done more to erradicate slavery in this world than the United Kingdom - Fact.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 11:52 PM

Teribus,
You are correct in stating that Pearse (not Pearce) and his comrades knew they had no chance of winning. They also knew that they did not have the full support of the irish people.

However they knew that to preserve the dream of a future all Ireland republic they had to change that situation, except they did not change it. It was England that changed it, when the rebels were taken out and shot, not even all at one time, but staggered throughout the weeks following the surrender. One (James Connolly) wounded in the fight and unable to walk was tied to a chair and shot. If the English had " slapped their wrist" maybe things would have been different, but Pearse, Connolly, Clark, McDermott, Ceannt, De Valera and the rest knew by instinct what a cruel, despotic group they were dealing with, they knew they would be executued and they knew that the mood of the Irish people would change from apathy to disgust, resulting in an increaded hatred for England and a genuine passion for a republic. England in her stupidy played the game the way Pearse and the others knew it would. When mighty England executed the teacher. the poet, the shopkeeper etc, that was when the tide turned against them, and it is still turning and will sweep them from our shores one day, and we do not need handouts from Europe or anywhere else to accomplish this. We just leave it to England and their vengeful attitude will guarantee it. What a bunch of hypocrites, at a time when they were at war with Germany for running roughshod over little Belgium and other small nations the mighty English had no hesitation in threatening to do the same by running roughshod over little Ireland. What an arrogant bunch they have proven to be year after year after year.

Before you spout any more dispersions on the I.R.A. I think you had better read some of the writings of Churchill (the greatest brit of all) as he has been referred to, especially when he declared that if foreign soldiers (germans) ever occupied his country he would form an underground army, working in small groups he would kill them when the occasion arose, he would bomb their residences, he would bome their clubs, he would disrupt the railroads, he would blackmail any store that even served them etc, etc, etc. In fact he would do exactly what the i.R.A. has done. The difference is that you would see him as a freedom fighter, but if anybody else would do the same, especially against England they would be thugs, murderers and terrotists. What a nation of bloody hypocrites, hypocrites, hypocrites.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves,br> Of course it's ok if everybody else is a slave. ???>

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 08:16 PM

Beachcomber,

In response to some of the points made:

Ireland was "of no use to Britain since day one" and I don't really believe that they did go to any great extremes to hold onto it - they did what they had to do to prevent it being used as a base from which attacks could be launched at Wales, England or Scotland.

As to the exploitation of the islands natural resources by the British Government (i.e. post 1707 or 1801). Ireland's natural resources were fairly minimal in extent, simply not worth transporting them to fuel the Industrial Revolution taking place on the mainlands of the British Isles. The cities and industrial centres that sprang up in England, Scotland and Wales were located close to the natural resources required to drive them - little requirement for imports.

Ireland's agricultural produce was regulated purely for the benefit of the British market, no more so than that of England, Scotland and Wales, not surprising as at the time Ireland was part of the UK. Overall Ireland actually profitted from it.

Who provided the investment for the textile industry which was, if memory serves me correct, mainly located in the North and initially relied on water for power (As in the borders of Scotland). It was of very fine quality (Belfast Linnen), but due to technological improvements the mills of Lanarkshire in Scotland and of Lancashire in England caught up and could produce the same quality of cloth cheaper - result decline in the Ulster textile industry - commercial competition, not Government design.

Totally understandable for the Irish to rebel during time of war, the ensuing reaction is equally understandable, but for some reason the Irish believe that the Government should have reacted differently. Personally I believe that the guys in the GPO should have been given a slap on the wrist, told not be such naughty boys and then sent home. Why? because Pearce and co had absolutely no support amongst the population. He led the Easter Week Rising knowing damn well it was going to fail. Had the Government had the courage to treat them like errant children they would have been made a laughingstock the length and breadth of Ireland.

The principal reason that the greater part of the island was backward was because of the stance taken on education by the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. The educational institutions set up by the British in Ireland are amongst the best in Europe - that was not all done post-1921. The standard of education in Northern Ireland is rated as being the best in the UK.

Why was the small North East of the island "industrial and highly competitive" because businessmen from Scotland and the North of England invested in it - not the British Government.

Obviously you still begrudge us the helping hand that we received through EU membership - not in the least - just don't dress up the reasons for Eire's current prosperity and growth on being anything other than situation and circumstance fuelled by EU hand-outs.

It was very true that by 1994 both sides had fought to a stand-still, the only difference was that the British Government could afford to maintain that stand-still - the PIRA could not, they were going nowhere and the population were starting to catch on.

It was true that 9/11 in the US brought about a seachange in thinking among many strands of violence all over the world, not everywhere (RIRA, CIRA, Loyalist Groups), but definitely with regard to the PIRA.

Why not give credit to those who finally came to a change in thinking and strategies? I do.

Under the current circumstances prevailing world wide the PIRA would find it extremely difficult to resume the armed struggle. I suppose they could appeal to FARC but that would only piss the US Authorities off even more.

Would you bet that protection would be provided by the PSNI if armed thugs attack nationalist homes, yes I would, ask the McCartney sisters. Can Nationalists be blamed for feeling a little worried, in certain areas, just now? Not at all, you have members of the PIRA wandering around believing that they are wholely above the law in those Nationalist areas, they can kill and maim whoever at will. Until the population start to back the PSNI that is what they are doomed to.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 07:35 PM

GUEST, Did you say the funding from the states has dried up, no more goodwill ! If only you knew !

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 07:30 PM

Teribus
I am grateful for your line, calling our units hero's which of course they were. There are so many lines of that tripe you wrote full of errors.    Those brave heros of the IRA succeed in needlessly murdering about 3000 of their supposedly fellow countrymen.    The figures you refer to are the total death toll over the 35 year period. Regarding the number you state anyone knows almost a third were killed by British army/police.Not to forget the protestant backed groupings. Before you rant son check your figures, I really don't like to see someone become a laughing stock.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 05:45 PM

Good man Teribus.
But , explain to me how it came about that, if Ireland was "of no use to Britain since day one" as you say, they were prepared to go to such extremes to hold on to it ?
You admit to the strategic value of the island ? Just as a base , do I presume you mean? and nothing else ? But what about the inhabitants?
How do you explain how the British Government exploited the natural resources of the island, our woodlands initially and later our mineral deposits, miniscule though they may have been Did they buy them?
Our agricultural produce was regulated purely for the benefit of the British market, so was our textile manufacturing. Our exports, pathetic though they were , were also ordered by Westminister.
Yes it was rather a mean trick to rebel during time of war, it would have been much more like cricket to have waited until another 50 or 60 thousand troops were available to Mr Churchill to send over in 1919.
Britain made most of the rules of war, not the Irish you know.
The principal reason that the greater part of the island was backward was because the British Government made damn sure that it was.
Agricultural yes, why not,for who can fight a freedom campaign with turnips or spuds? Surprise, surprise the Irish did.
Why was the small North East of the island "industrial and highly competitive" ?
Because the British Government wanted it so.
They would not leave the system that guaranteed them , the loyalist people, and only them , power and privilege. They were largely deluded of course but what they had did seem better than what the nationalists had
"Croppys" lie down and be thankful that you have anything at all. When the "Covananters" asserted their preparedness to fight it was nationalists that they had in their sights, not the Government in Westminister who feared a political backlash and allowed them to frolic with German arms agents.
Obviously you still begrudge us the helping hand that we received through EU membership. You would prefer that we were left, as Britain held us for so long, in poverty and without infra-structure through the south of the country. For instance the only decent harbours we had were those used by the British Navy and a few used to export people and food and import soldiers and British Manufactured Goods only.
Yes we got subsidies from Europe, they were a more far seeing and
fairer partner than had ever been, up to recent times. Without them we could not , from so low a base, come quickly up to standard in economy and socially.
Now , at last, we can hold our heads up in Europe, and in Britain , as equals , not subjugated people, and can begin to pay back those who befriended us in our need.
I will not argue with you as to the amount of killings unless you specify the period to which 3,000 dead refers.
The British Army/Police force amounted to over 40,000 armed men in this country at one time but , it too was "fought to a standstill" but by a force that could never arm more than a thousand or so at any one time.
Yes, it is most likely true that 9/11 in the US brought about a seachange in thinking among many strands of violence all over the world but, not everywhere. Why not give credit to those who finally came to a change in thinking and strategies? I'm fairly sure that the PIRA could have found other sources of finance considering the many "terrorist" organisations that there are worldwide. But you musn't assume that the US war on "terrorism" is merely what it seems . It is now expedient where before it simply didn't matter to them , who bombed what, there were no pipelines in the way.
I wish and hope that you are correct about "no return to the 'armed struggle'. That is now a matter for Northern Loyalists. I wonder , do you have as much information on their "armed struggle" as you think you have about the Nationalist one?
Would you bet that protection would be provided by the PSNI if armed thugs attack nationalist homes, can Nationalists be blamed for feeling a little worried, in certain areas, just now?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: ard mhacha
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 05:08 PM

The main aim of the Loyalist bombing campaign in the late 1960s was to bring down the Government of Terence O`Neill, the Loyalists knew that even if they hadn`t achieved their aim, the Unionists with their built-in majority were always going to be in power
The Loyalists were determined not to yield an inch, one man one vote would have meant the end of their control in Derry and other Nationalists towns.
As for your belated congratulations of a corrupt RUC they hadn`t much detective work to do as the UVF scored an own goal with a premature bomb blast and the Gardai in Donegal handed over the evidence.

The IRA campaign wasn`t in vain, what more proof do you need than the whinging from the Loyalist of the IRA being rewarded for the successful outcome of their victory.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:13 AM

Ard M and Divs Sweeney,
Re the loyalist bombing which they hoped would be blamed on IRA.

If Loyalists had the insight to see that a bombing campaign by the IRA would prevent their legitimate aspirations, why did the IRA not realise that their real bombing campaign would have that effect?

(And belated well done to RUC for charging the Loyalist responsible)

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 09:48 AM

Across in the US a terrorist organisation crashes two planes into a well known New York landmark. Up to now America has never known real terrorism, post-9/11 they do - the administration declares a war on terrorism - their steadfast ally is the United Kingdom - quite natural, we've been living with this shit, sponsored by plastic paddy's in the US for decades. But now that the US has been hit it's serious and worthy of note.

And the withdrawal of US goodwill left them with no credible support. An analysis that I tend to agree with, strange to think that the US Govt ended up unwittingly playing such a masterstroke by refusing to meet the reps,favoring the McCartney sisters.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 10:28 PM

Actually old sons, if you look at politics in British Isles the Parliament in Westminster have been trying to give away Ireland since the early 1870's. Only the Irish have been too thick to realise it. Ireland has been of no use to the British since day one.

Now let's repraise some stuff

Early days England, France and Spain - one independent, the other at odds with Holy Roman Empire concept of things, the latter holding fast to that ideal. England straddles the trading route for one and is seen as being capable of manipulation by the other. If France wants to provide England with a distraction it invokes the 'Auld Alliance' and drags Scotland into the fray with promises of French support (Never actually turned up - but then the French never intended that it should). Similarly if the Spanish (Single Super Power of the day) wanted to do the same they stirred things up in Ireland - you know that great Irish patriot Chief O'Neill - hell he fled to Spain (Flight of Earls and all that bullshit) - he had no great vision of an independent Ireland the vision he had was of a Spanish controlled and governed Ireland with him as numero uno - no more no less - a typical, complete, opportunistic aristocrat. Now why did Britain bother with it? The answer to that is simple - naval power was important, therefore whoever held Ireland held the weather guage on the British Isles - To the British, Ireland didn't matter as long as no-one else controlled it - the same thing guaranteed Belgium's existence after it was created after the Napoleonic War.

Now onto latter days (Post WW 1), the Irish want independence (They got slightly miffed at the UK's reaction to them rebelling during time of war - which was totally unreasonable of them considering the circumstances and alternatives of the time). The vast majority of the country is agricultural and backward. One small part of the island is industrial and highly competitive, but it is only so in the wake of the first world war if they remain within the 'British' frame of things, so they tell the 'Irish Nationalists' that they will not leave the system that will guarantee them prosperity (perfectly understandable) - they also add that they are prepared to fight. End result partition, Eire bimbles along as a fairly impoverished nation until the UK decides that it wants to join the Common Market. Eire decides that this is a good idea - stumbling block is that the Common Market says that Irish entry (Eire) is dependent on UK entry. Fortunately for Eire, the UK does get accepted for membership, as does Eire, win-win situation for Eire and the Common Market. Eire gets subsidies thrown at it right-left-and-centre (continues to be the case - Celtic Tiger economy my arse) UK becomes traditionally second/third largest contributer to the EU's coffers.

Those brave heros of the IRA succeed in needlessly murdering about 3000 of their supposedly fellow countrymen - they do later apologise for this (OK if you happenned to have successfully lived through the period in which these tossers were 'protecting' you - you can then afford to argue semantics) They finally get fought to a standstill ( Well documented version of Martin McGuniness's appraisal of the situation, not my own) and join the political process. Across in the US a terrorist organisation crashes two planes into a well known New York landmark. Up to now America has never known real terrorism, post-9/11 they do - the administration declares a war on terrorism - their steadfast ally is the United Kingdom - quite natural, we've been living with this shit, sponsored by plastic paddy's in the US for decades. But now that the US has been hit it's serious and worthy of note.

Word to the wise for any 'Nationalist' or 'Republican' there will be no return to the 'armed struggle' as the combined weights of the US, UK and Eire Governments will come crashing down about your ears - and they will roast you. Now the hard-liners in Ulster and in Eire may shrug this off, but the pastey-faced armchair rebels in the US, who for years have provided the wherewithal might be in for one hell of a shock. It's them catching a cold that will give the 'bhoyos' in Ireland one hell of a surprise if they try to return to the good old days of protecting people.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:48 PM

Sorry Beachcomber of course it was Carson not Carter; sorry.
As far as the rebellion by army officers was concerned, of course it was treason, in the same way as the creation of the Sick counties was a negation of democracy, which was apparently a movable feast as far as the British government was concerned.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:16 PM

Not quite "Giok"
Collins had determined to carry on secretely supporting the IRA in the North of Ireland after the Treaty was ratified, seeing it as merely "a stepping stone to freedom".
People like Carson (not Carter) and his loyalist volunteers had declared their armed opposition to a law passed by the British Parliament and the Army Officers in the Curragh declared to be willing to disobey the orders of the same body. Why was this not treasonable if Democracy ruled in Britain back then ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 03:24 PM

Well let's see, William the Conqueror sent Norman knights and their armies to conquer Ireland in the 12th Century and it's been going downhill ever since; is that right? [Hence the Fitz's!]
As far as the partition of the north is concerned it was only allowed to happen because of a threat of armed insurrection by Paisley's hero Carter, backed up by a refusal of army officers based at the Curragh to enforce the referendum in which the majority of the Irish people voted for secession.
Now we have a return of the status quo, protestants [see Carter] threatening force of arms to destabilise the ongoing peace process in the Sick Counties.
Excuse me mate but can you move your legs so that I can get out, this is where I came in!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Grab
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 01:33 PM

The protestant minister has already been dubbed a traitor by Paisley in an interview yesterday.

I guess I was wrong then - Paisley can so sink lower than I thought he'd go...

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Ringer
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 01:22 PM

"How could someone of this standing... make such a mistake? He would have had to be voted into this position and be highly respected and I would imagine educated."

But I wonder if you'd use the same arguments for George W Bush?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 12:13 PM

Keith A of Hertford
How could someone of this standing, he is County Grand Master, make such a mistake ? are you sure ? He would have had to be voted into this position and be highly respected and I would imagine educated. Also he was an ex member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. It would not be an easy mistake to make considering he said it several time throughout the interview. Is this an example of senior Orange Order ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 06:07 AM

Guest 0543 27th

He was not condoning the violence.
He meant to say "condemn" but got his wordsmixed up.
He did correct himself finally but made a fool of himself.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 04:52 AM

Only time will tell, but the reported act of completion of arms decommissioning on the part of the IRA should be welcomed and accepted at face value in order that things can move on.

That includes proactive co-operation with the Police Authorities by all sections of the population. Otherwise innocent people living in Nationalist/Republican areas and Unionist/Loyalist areas will continue to live under the threat of 'justice' as meeted out to the McCartneys and Commanders of this world - people deserve better than that.

In the post-9/11 world there will be no return to the 'armed struggle' everybody knows that.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 05 - 12:57 PM

I extremely rarely wish for the death of a person, but Ian Paisley is one of the rare exceptions in that respect. The Unionist leadership is no match to the Nationalist leadership since many years. A Unionist leader with determination, creativity, vision, and the ability to try new paths and convince his followers that at least some of the old 'truths' may be in need of correction is still not in sight. Now the Unionists have to move.

British Victory At Culloden (for a dissident republican view)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:43 PM

I said in my initial post that the attacks on nationalists would increase, we have already experienced that


1 - a little 7 year old boy was hit with a brick because the car he was in was flying the Tyrone flag, after they won the all Ireland football final ????.

and secondly this piece from the B.B.C.


A crude explosive device has been discovered near Magherafelt in County Londonderry.
Army technical experts dealt with the object on the Castledawson Road on Monday night.

A gaelic football club was evacuated during the alert. The device also contained fireworks.

Police have appealed for information and asked people to be vigilant and report any suspicious activity to detectives in Magherafelt.

----------------------------------------------------------

I Believe the loyalists will not rest until they do enough damage and create enough fear to get the I.R.A. to re-arm and come out and defend catholic areas again. This is what the unionists want, they have no interest in peace. I fear that if this happens all the soldiers, police and governments in the world will not get the I.R.A. to decommission ever again. You all have to know how these people think (I am not talking about ordinary decent protestants), but I am talking about anti-catholic, anti-irish bigots who have never seen the inside of any church, let alone a protestant one, but they run around calling themselves protestants, all with one thing in mind, to see the last catholic in the 6 counties dead or moved to Dublin.

Sorry it just ain't gonna happen. Enough is enough, there is no going back to the old unionist controlled system. Never again. And if to prevent that means the re-arming of the I.R.A. sometime in the future, then so be it.
They now have a chance for lasting peace, they have a chance to sit down with their neighbours and plan out the future of the 6 counties, if they refuse to meet with duly elected representatives of Sinn-fein and screw it up then they will pay the price, both on the streets and at the ballot box, because I am certain that many protestant cringe to hear these thugs call themselves protestants. Just as many catholics do with some of the specimens that claim to be catholic,
Sinn-Fein members were elected and the unionist party and Mr. Paisley and his ilk have no moral or legal grounds to deny them their place in government. Those days are gone - never to return.

Thanks be to God.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:33 PM

I am so tired of these apologist bastards. Perhaps you would be satisfied if all the IRA soldiers stood up against a wall and allowed themselves to be killed to prove that the violence is over??????? Listen ...... they decommissioned their arms, they allow their children to be harassed, they have done everything possible to bring peace. The Unionist/Loyalists continue to try and sabotage the process, harass children, burn houses, shoot police officers, and brand as traitor anyone who dares try and end this.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE???????? And when some father goes crazy at the thought of a family member being hurt or killed and reacts, you apologizist assholes will sit smugly and say, "See!"

The Nationalists continue to be the ones trying to change this to a political process. They are showing restraint and bravery. Just look at the response from the other side. And over what??? The thought that Catholics might have some say in where they live,how they live and how they are governed? One man, one vote, and no gerrymandering. Now there is a concept.

Those that equivocate on the issue are idiots. It is time for peace and politics. I find it laughable and hypocritical that the self same folks that decried the bombings and violence committed in the name of Irish freedom, now seek to alibi those that would destroy the chance at equality and peace. My Grandmother, born and raised in Athlone, would say that what you are speaks louder than what you say you are.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:08 PM

Nigel. The infantory was based on records of shipments delivered since 1982. These came from four countries. Prior to that the amount of AR180's/M1's/M50's was counted in the low hundreds.Colonel Gadaffi sumitted his records of supply to the British early last year. Allowing for training purposes and use, all of the Semtex H was accounted for.I imagine in time the information will become public knowledge.As to the estimates Nigel these were very close, dam close. There were allowances for dumps which could not be located due to the quartermaster death or such like.Regarding the amounts allowed here, this too proved to come in under the governments expections.So have peace of mind that tonight in a disused quarry there is a very heavy brick of setting concrete.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:47 PM

weelittledrummer
Don't like the sound of the area you live in !

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Den
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:36 PM

It'll never be enough will it Nigel? You're starting to sound like Paisley. How are we doing with Loyalists weapons by the way? Did you read Jimmy's post? Does it sound like we are going to be making any inroads into loyalist decommissioning any time soon? Forgive me for pointing this out but I remember very clearly the last time Nationalists were largely unarmed and Loyalists were armed to the teeth.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,Guest, Big Tim
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:31 PM

The war is definitely over. There's no going back.               

Now it's about point scoring. "When two tribes go to war, a point is all that you can score".

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:15 PM

Maybe I'm just cynical, but..
De Chastelain said that he personally handled and inspected every weapon, every piece of ordnance that was decommissioned. Granted he can't know that this was everything, but it was apparently in line with estimates of what they had.
I heard this described on the news as well. There it was stated that the estimates were those of the security services & others.

Presumably if the IRA had decomissioned noticeably less than the estimate, people would have a good reason to feel unsafe still.
However, they didn't decommission noticeably more than the estimate either.

"OK, we've been told what arms they think we've got, if we get rid of that amount, what are we left with?...."


I can understand De Chastelain not being confident that he has had the whole story.

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 01:56 PM

well looking on the bright side...

it might work and you might get peace

and if you don't. well it will be a chance to re-stock with this years models.

since the advent of crack cocaine, there are a lot more guns about. it won't take long to get a new lot.