Printable View
And what has that got to do with the large degree of criminality inherent within the IRA's activties during their last campaign (1969-c. 1998) ?Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
And what has that got to do with the fact that some of the Huinger Strikers were in prison for criminal activities (e.g. theft, murder) rather than the more traditional definitions of 'active service' ?
Partition is no excuse for racketeering, drug smuggling, personal violence etc etc.
i would love to know your opnion about the riotous behavious of that 1916 mob, *******s, totally recked DublinQuote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
:rolleyes:
please explain to me the differecne between SF and the IRA in the 1900's to 1960's? has the fight for a united and free ireland changed so much!? am i living in cloud cukoo land, has ireland suddenyl got its 6 counties back!:rolleyes:
what hunger stirkers, were in priosn for criminality, please xplain?
also a few of them were elected representatives
and for your homework, let me suggest watchin teh great movie."the wind that shakes the barley"
and then come back to me!
It shouldn't take me to explain the difference between uniformed insurgents standing and fighting against a uniformed enemy, and IRA members knee-capping people they fell out with or dealing drugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
And the 1916 insurgents didn't wreck Dublin - the British did in seking to crush them quickly and with minimum loss of life to themselves.
You seem completely unable or unwilling to either recognise the criminality that the IRA engaged in, or to separate it from the organisation's broader motives.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
The struggle for Irish freedom did not need to include drug dealing, knee-capping people you've falling out with, and robbing banks for personal gain. Yet under the last IRA campaign it did. I wasn't aware that James Connolly knee-capped people his brother fell out with, Pearse ran protection rackets, or that DeValera dealt skank and pills....
I thought you said you'd been reading everything on here...? Read my very first post on this thread for the info.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Two were at the time they died, but not at the time they were imprisoned. So having an MP or TD amongst their number makes actions like burning a young female shop assistant to death in a Ballymena clothes store somehow more acceptable, does it...? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
For your homework, may I suggest taking your head out of your arse and copping yourself on to what the Troubles were actually like. And the way to do that is to look to history books, not Hollywood.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
You strike me as the worst type of Armchair Republican - one doubtless brought up miles from the north, in an area little or no impacted by the Troubles, with a degree of understanding of what was actually going on that is no better than your average misty-eyed Irish-American. Your inability to even acknowedge the naked criminality welded to the IRA's activities for decades leaves me with no other conclusion.
Have you even done more than a few fleeting visits to the north in your life ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
m collins, and guerilla warfare?:rolleyes:
how many ira guys were shot by the british army? no exactly a good career choice by a criminal!:rolleyes: easier ways to make money, but oh yeah its not politics!
can you tell me please how the nationalists were expected to defend themselves in the 60's and 70's?
why are you so ashamed of your history?
**********************
Mod Edit: Thread closed as pointless debate starting to go for personal attacks.