Spainish Terriost Attack

**S�C** · 15/03/2004, 5:09 PM

Originally posted by brendy_�ire
You're making the accusations, so justify how the IRA are terrorists. And contrary to the laws? So lemme ask ye, are the RUC/PSNI terrorists? Are the British army terrorists? What about MI5? Where the IRA terrorists during the War of Independence? Was it wrong for the IRA to defend Nationalists from the British army and the RUC?

The IRA had made mistakes. They have targetted civilians. That is wrong and they have apologised for it. Which is a lot more than the Brits have ever done.

You seem to be mixing up the IRA of Collins et al and the Provisional IRA.

The provos opperate contray to the laws of Ireland. The IRA are not an army. What are they?

What ever the PSNI/RUC/MI5 did doesnt change what the IRA are.

They are terrorists. They have bombed civilian targets. Gillford, Birmingham, Manachester, Canary Warf, Warrington, Brighton etc. They say sorry and now they are not terrorist while still beating the sh�te out of people in "punishment" beatings.

If they are not terrorist why dont we know who's on their 'Army Council', why havnt they signed the Geneva Convention, why do they hold arms illegally???

from dictionary.com;
terrorism
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

**liam88** · 15/03/2004, 6:10 PM

Originally posted by sadloserkid
Have you ever heard of a town called Omagh Liam?

Can I just check what that is meant to be impling?
Of course I remember the Omagh atrocities-and my full condolences to the victims family and friends. I even made a peace poster with the poem that young lad wrote before he died in Omagh.
I have never expressed any pro RIRA views so why did you ask this question?
I don't want to get involved with the IRA discussion so I'm sitting on the fence.
I came on this thread to express my condolences and state my digust at the Spanish bombings.

**brendy_�ire** · 15/03/2004, 6:58 PM

Originally posted by Conor74
Umm, not certain of my military defintions, but building bloody big barracks all over the place and sending thousands of troops onto the streets is not usually associated with classic terrorism...

No, you're right. I suppose Bloody Sunday was a legitimate military operation. As were the Dublin and Monaghan bombings (by MI5). And the murders of Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson. Need I go on?

Originally posted by S�C
You seem to be mixing up the IRA of Collins et al and the Provisional IRA.

What's the difference exactly?

Originally posted by S�C
The provos opperate contray to the laws of Ireland.

As did the IRA in the War of Independence.

Originally posted by S�C
If they are not terrorist why dont we know who's on their 'Army Council', why havnt they signed the Geneva Convention, why do they hold arms illegally???

Aye, there's an idea now. Walk up to UN, ask to sign the Geneva Convention. Publish the names of those on the Army Council. Put in applications for licences to hold weapons. Sure while they're at it they might as well run a TV advertising campaign and hold open days at their training areas.

Originally posted by S�C
from dictionary.com;
terrorism
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Aye, the Brits would never do anything like that.

If you insist on calling the IRA terrorists, then you must also call the British army and the RUC/PSNI terrorists. As well as the soliders of the War of Independence. How quick those in the Free State are to forget those who got them their independence (of sorts) in the first place.

**Condex** · 15/03/2004, 7:46 PM

�anna posted

Thats because you are an ignorant bigot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its great to be called a ignorant bigot by a self proclaimed
'Scabby student bast@rd'

Typical student think they know everything, think their going to change the world until they soon realise they don't make one bit of difference.

Give me your opionion in in 20 years time when you have lived a bit, by then you'll have got your 9-5 job and house and fallen into line like everyone else.

I've travelled all over the world and have friends who are Hindu, Sikh and Muslim. I don't think they would call me bigot in fact some are comming out to St Patricks night meal I'm organising, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

**brendy_�ire** · 15/03/2004, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by Conor74
can you name any army in history that carried out everything in a noble or honourable manner? By your own definition, it would seem that there is no such thing as an army, and it's all just a bunch of terrorists, just some bunches are bigger than others...

You're the one who started calling people terrorists. I find that word is used in a derogatory fashion against any non-state organisation that uses violence, while if a state organisation does exactly the same thing it's all grand. It's so hypocrital.

Anyway, getting back to the topic. Very good to see the Socialists win power. Hopefully it'll be the same story with Bush and Blair in their coming elections. Also welcome news that the new Spanish PM, Zapatero, is insisting on a UN mandate for Iraq or he'll pull Spanish troops out. He's firmly in the anti-war camp, which now leaves Blair more or less alone in Europe, and supports dealing with Al-Qaeda through use of "a new international alliance..based on the authority of the United Nations, not unilateral actions by the US and UK." That's the type of stuff that's needed.

**S�C** · 16/03/2004, 9:16 AM

[QUOTE]No, you're right. I suppose Bloody Sunday was a legitimate military operation. As were the Dublin and Monaghan bombings (by MI5). And the murders of Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson. Need I go on?

Yea I regard that as terrorism.

So are the IRA going to allow themselves to be investigated by Human Rights Commissions. Are they going to set up Judicial inquirys into attrocities they have committed?

What's the difference exactly?

Between the Collins and Co and the Provos who style themselves the IRA?My god read up on your history. Here's a few initial ideas;
-Marxism
-Irish Language
-Military Strategy
-Number of Volunteers
-Popular Support

As did the IRA in the War of Independence

How did they if there was no state of Ireland. They opperated contray to the laws of the very people they were fighting against. The PIRA are opperate contray to the laws of Ireland. They betray their fellow Irish men. Kill Garda�, smuggle, carry out vigo activities, smuggle. How much do they cost the very Ireland that they say they are fighting for every year?

Look up the concept of the time of the blood scarfice.

Aye, there's an idea now. Walk up to UN, ask to sign the Geneva Convention. Publish the names of those on the Army Council. Put in applications for licences to hold weapons. Sure while they're at it they might as well run a TV advertising campaign and hold open days at their training areas.

Well the people the PIRA are fighting their "glorious" war against are doing that, so if they are a legitimate army why dont they?

British soldier leaves the barricks wearing his uniform, gun in hand, clearly marked out as a soldier. PIRA man leaves his house with his gun in his pocket and nobody is any the wiser.

Why oh why do the 'provisional' republician movement just put their head in the sand and point to what the other side have done? I know that there have acts committed by both sides but Im not asking you to recap that. Im asking you about the IRA.

As for your last comment

.

If the provos had stopped their bombing years earlier and complied with the Agreement they signed up to we'd be well on the way to a United Ireland.

**Peadar** · 16/03/2004, 10:08 AM

Religion is the root of all evil!

**liamon** · 16/03/2004, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by brendy_�ire
You're the one who started calling people terrorists. I find that word is used in a derogatory fashion against any non-state organisation that uses violence,

It doesn't matter if people use it in a derogatory fashion or not. Just coz you don't like the tone, you decide to ignore the underlying logic and truth? Not liking the word won't change it. Bigoted people may not like the word, but they're still bigots.

Here's one of many similar definitions of the word terrorism:
n : the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments.
The IRA did use violence (bombings, beatings, shootings) as a means to coerce societies (punishment beatings, Protestants) and governments (UK government).

Here's another definition:
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

And before you start on about what is or is not unlawful - here's another definition. Unlawful - Not lawful; illegal.
For instance - blowing up other peoples property is unlawful.

And the key bit in that second definition- "for ideological or political reasons". Just because you believe in their goals, it doesn't change what they are. For heavens sake, every terrorist believes he's doing what's right. The Islamic terrorists believe in what they're doing. ETA thinks they're justified in their campaign of blowing up tourists. Yet, that is terrorism.

Maybe the UK government has been involved in terrorism. Maybe the US has. It doesn't matter. Coz none of that will change the fact that the IRA has also taken part in terrorist acts.

By any definition of the word, they are terrorists.

To summarise - They are terrorists.

**brendy_�ire** · 16/03/2004, 4:19 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S�C

So are the IRA going to allow themselves to be investigated by Human Rights Commissions. Are they going to set up Judicial inquirys into attrocities they have committed?

Not by the HRC, naw. Aye, there probably will be a few judicial inquiries if the Unionists get there way.
Besides, the RUC/PSNI have the power to follow up IRA activity. Nationalists have no-one to follow up what the RUC and British have done.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S�C

Between the Collins and Co and the Provos who style themselves the IRA?My god read up on your history. Here's a few initial ideas;
-Marxism
-Irish Language
-Military Strategy
-Number of Volunteers
-Popular Support

Marxism? Ye mad?? Connelly, aye. But Collins? Collins wasn't a Marxist. Did he declare a revolution after independence of the south? Did he abolish private property? Did he take all means of production into state ownership?
The IRA support the Irish language where they can, I'm sure.
The IRA have a military strategy - of course they do. They plan what they're going to do and how to do it.
Obviously numbers are going to be smaller with a smaller population.
The reason the last IRA campaign started was because of the demands of the Nationalist community for protection from the RUC and loyalists.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S�C

Kill Garda�, smuggle, carry out vigo activities, smuggle.

I don't agree with killing garda� or smuggling. As for vigilantism, that's what happens when there's no police force.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by S�C

British soldier leaves the barricks wearing his uniform, gun in hand, clearly marked out as a soldier. PIRA man leaves his house with his gun in his pocket and nobody is any the wiser.

So you're suggesting that the IRA fight the British army in an open battle?

Originally posted by S�C
If the provos had stopped their bombing years earlier and complied with the Agreement they signed up to we'd be well on the way to a United Ireland.

Sunningdale?

**�anna** · 16/03/2004, 4:56 PM

Originally posted by Condex
Typical student think they know everything, think their going to change the world until they soon realise they don't make one bit of difference.

I'm well aware of what you're saying. I don't believe I can change the world, I'd want to be fairly thick to think that. I do believe however that whether I can change it or not, I have a duty to speak out when I see or hear things I regard as wrong. And I regard america as wrong. You still have not replied to the rest of my post.

I could equally have just accused you of being a typical middle-class right-wing capitalist etc etc for your "easy to blame the yanks" comment. But I didn't. Becuase I like to dig a little depper. Which I did. But I still thought you were an ignorant bigot, so I said it

**S�C** · 16/03/2004, 4:57 PM

Not by the HRC, naw. Aye, there probably will be a few judicial inquiries if the Unionists get there way.
Besides, the RUC/PSNI have the power to follow up IRA activity. Nationalists have no-one to follow up what the RUC and British have done.
***********************************
Police Ombudsman, HRC, ECHR, High Court Judicial Review are all options open to Nationalist. The SDULP have actually joined the policing borad in a bid to change the system for the inside.

************************************
Marxism? Ye mad?? Connelly, aye. But Collins? Collins wasn't a Marxist. Did he declare a revolution after independence of the south? Did he abolish private property? Did he take all means of production into state ownership?
The IRA support the Irish language where they can, I'm sure.
The IRA have a military strategy - of course they do. They plan what they're going to do and how to do it.
Obviously numbers are going to be smaller with a smaller population.
The reason the last IRA campaign started was because of the demands of the Nationalist community for protection from the RUC and loyalists.
*************************************
The Sinn-ers regard themselves as marxist (when it suits them).
The PIRA have a different stradegy to what the IRA had.
It started out for what I would consider a perfectly good reason, protecting the people. Explain how they got from there to Warrington?

*********************************************
I don't agree with killing garda� or smuggling. As for vigilantism, that's what happens when there's no police force.
**********************************************
So that makes it ok? What about vigo activity in the South. Do the PIRA respect the soverginty of the Republic at all?
***********************************************
So you're suggesting that the IRA fight the British army in an open battle?

**********************************************
No but that they dont fight at all. Say the war is over take their place in the assembly. Form government. Allow nature take its course and give it 40 years and there would be a United Ireland. Sunningdale never went far enough.

**�anna** · 16/03/2004, 4:57 PM

The IRA are terrorists, as are the British security forces. The fact that the opposing side in a conflict behaves in that way does not legitimise you doing it too. easy really.