Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[sid waddell]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

[Franko]

Again, Franko, I invite you to tell me whether you agree or not with Bono's "f**k the revolution" comment after Enniskillen

And give reasons for your answer

At the time I didn't, no.  Primarily because I was 2 years old.

Which is why I had a good laugh at the little straw man story you concocted around my feelings on the issue on that date.

On reflection, I still don't.

But I can understand why he said it and the depth of feeling at that time

And this cuts to the heart of the whole discussion here.

What happened that day was 100%, unequivocally, no questions asked, wrong.  Unlike you, I will not try to defend it or justify it.  Not at all.  Not because of the length of the conflict, not because of the debateable "chances of winning", not because of the questionable popular support of the people.

But to dismiss the entire 'revolution' based on that is too simplistic and also wrong IMO.

[Franko]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

It is 100% relevant.

As the record shows, this debate started because some shinner compared the PIRA bombing near Warrenpoint to the Old IRA ambush at Kilmichael.

You were outraged.

So your opinions on the Old IRA when involving yourself in this discussion are totally 100% relevant.

Why are you desperately flailing around trying to invent reasons not to answer a simple question?

[Angelo]

Blue Sid spinning like a windmill here.

[Snapchap]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

Again, it's nothing to do with whataboutery. Im providing you with an opportunity to demonstrate a consistency of logic.

Anyway, given that you have already (repeatedly) engaged within this discussion about both the Easter Rising and the Tan War, then your refusal to answer this question about the Old IRA on grounds of 'whataboutery' appears all the more nonsensical and your real reason for not answering it all the more transparent.

So I'm quite happy to keep asking. For the seventh time now:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

[RedHand88]

I have to say, seeing Sid get made an eejit out of over and over again is filling me with festive cheer 

[sid waddell]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

Again, it's nothing to do with whataboutery. Im providing you with an opportunity to demonstrate a consistency of logic.

Anyway, given that you have already (repeatedly) engaged within this discussion about both the Easter Rising and the Tan War, then your refusal to answer this question about the Old IRA on grounds of 'whataboutery' appears all the more nonsensical and your real reason for not answering it all the more transparent.

So I'm quite happy to keep asking. For the seventh time now:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

You can ask 100 times if you like

You've pretty much written the same inane post full of whataboutery and disso logic 100 times as it is, so I guess that would be 101

[sid waddell]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

It is 100% relevant.

As the record shows, this debate started because some shinner compared the PIRA bombing near Warrenpoint to the Old IRA ambush at Kilmichael.

You were outraged.

So your opinions on the Old IRA when involving yourself in this discussion are totally 100% relevant.

Why are you desperately flailing around trying to invent reasons not to answer a simple question?

Woah, look you said "desperately flailing" as if you think it's a point

It isn't

Yet more whataboutery

[Snapchap]

Attempt Five:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign", Sid?

Again reaching for the whataboutery because you can't defend your beloved PIRA

Pathetic

Is it any wonder Shinners are laughed at

Adopting the tactics of the US Republican party wholesale

Except it's nothing to do with whataboutery. It's an attempt to get you to demonstrate consistency in your application of logic. Something I'd have thought you'd be only to eager to do. But alas, I'm having to ask this for a sixth time:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

It's classic whataboutery

Whataboutery is used as a deflection technique to bring up something irrelevant when somebody can't or refuses to debate something honestly, as has been the case with you and other Shinners throughout this thread

It's the Boris Johnson "dead cat" technique

You can keep asking a totally irrelevant question about a different conflict as many times as you like

But it has as much relevance to this debate as the price of fish

What is the price of a piece of cod these days?

You should know - you've sold about a hundred of them on this thread

Again, it's nothing to do with whataboutery. Im providing you with an opportunity to demonstrate a consistency of logic.

Anyway, given that you have already (repeatedly) engaged within this discussion about both the Easter Rising and the Tan War, then your refusal to answer this question about the Old IRA on grounds of 'whataboutery' appears all the more nonsensical and your real reason for not answering it all the more transparent.

So I'm quite happy to keep asking. For the seventh time now:

Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

You can ask 100 times if you like

You've pretty much written the same inane post full of whataboutery and disso logic 100 times as it is, so I guess that would be 101

So again, just to clarify, you're happy to engage in discussion about the Old IRA when it suits on this thread, and its only "whataboutery" when it doesn't suit/you're asked a question you'd prefer not answer?

Why don't you just stop making a show of yourself with your refusal to answer. In a discussion about physical force Irish republicanism - which began with a discussion around parallels that had been drawn between a PIRA ambush and an Old IRA ambush, you're suddenly deciding that talking about the Old IRA is "whataboutery" (despite having done so happily right up until now) but are happy to engage in lengthy side-arguments about Trump and US politics. It doesn't quite stack up, does it?

I'll ask again for just the 8th time:
Would you term the Old IRA campaign as a "civilian/sectarian murder campaign"?

[Milltown Row2]

This thread has turned into the American politics thread.

Really disgusting to see how 'we' can get so thick with each other.

Reading through this it's clear that views on a UI are not so clear!

What happened in the north can't be undone, it was the result of so many factors that once it started it was going to be very difficult to pull back.

It's impossible of any southerner to comprehend or realise the actual extent of the conditions people went through.

The starting point for this lies firmly with the negotiations and acceptance of partition. Being cast off will never be forgotten by many.

The atrocities during the troubles can never be justified, and anyone that stands over them is wrong, same as the atrocities of the Irish civil war.

That being said, the conditions of the Irish nationalist/republican living in the north was grim, civil rights was the way to go, but unfortunately events like Bloody Sunday, the  Ballymurphy massacre steered us down a ugly road.

Enniskillen Omagh kingsmill and others should not be forgotten, all of these could have been avoided had Ireland stayed united from the start.

[sid waddell]

This thread has turned into the American politics thread.

Really disgusting to see how 'we' can get so thick with each other.

Reading through this it's clear that views on a UI are not so clear!

What happened in the north can't be undone, it was the result of so many factors that once it started it was going to be very difficult to pull back.

It's impossible of any southerner to comprehend or realise the actual extent of the conditions people went through.

The starting point for this lies firmly with the negotiations and acceptance of partition. Being cast off will never be forgotten by many.

The atrocities during the troubles can never be justified, and anyone that stands over them is wrong, same as the atrocities of the Irish civil war.

That being said, the conditions of the Irish nationalist/republican living in the north was grim, civil rights was the way to go, but unfortunately events like Bloody Sunday, the  Ballymurphy massacre steered us down a ugly road.

Enniskillen Omagh kingsmill and others should not be forgotten, all of these could have been avoided had Ireland stayed united from the start.

Unfortunately Irish politics is destined to go the road of American politics because Sinn Fein have decided so

They use the methods of Trump - culture war ideology is mainly used on the far right but it is not limited to the far right

Sinn Fein understand that if people can be persuaded to become culture warriors, they are likely to stick with a party which is waging a culture war, because waging a culture war requires full buy in to the idea of tribe - and then you get paranoia, eternal victimhood and mindlessness

So that's the road they've gone down and the behaviour of their supporters on this thread is an example of that mindset

Labour and the Green Party suffered at elections after they were in Government because, whatever you think of them, they were essentially good faith operators who believe in an agreed, objective set of facts - they said, "here's our record, we made mistakes, we did not get all we want, but we tried to bring a progressive attitude and policies to government as best we could"

Sinn Fein don't do that, they attack, attack, attack, are willing to lie through their teeth about pretty much anything, and create a siege mentality

Their ideology is to create a Putinist landscape in which everything is true yet nothing is true and confusion and cynicism reigns

Sinn Fein's central goal, along with a united Ireland, is to rehabilitate the PIRA

You can't be in the party unless you accept the rehabilitation of the PIRA

But the PIRA was hated by most people down here, now their rehabilitation for political means, from a safe distance, is well underway - like Putin is rehabilitating Stalin

Whatever situation occurred in the six counties was always likely to be a shitshow and a united Ireland would not have changed that

Enniskillen, Warrington and Omagh might and would probably not have happened were it not for British and Unionist intransigence, that is true - but it's likely that neither would the murder of Sean Browne have happened were it not for the resumed PIRA campaign of 1996 starting with Canary Wharf

If you want to point to the "failure" of partition, point to the failure of the Boundary Commission

But a united Ireland in 1922 was completely unachievable and indeed had the Boundary Commission done its job properly, the hope of a united Ireland would be a total pipe dream, because the Unionist majority would never have been lost - and Catholics who looked towards the south in places like Belfast and north Antrim would still have been "abandoned", as you put it

In the hypothetical event of a united Ireland in 1922, there would have been slaughter - and indeed the threat of slaughter still exists as we move nearer to one - which is why it cannot be forced prematurely, it should only happen when it is ready to happen

But there is no inherent state of nature in which the island of Ireland is one political unit - it's a political matter

In fact the dispersed nature of the CNR community vis a vis the PUL community in the North is reminiscent of Bosnia - where the Serbs believed they had an inherent right to be ruled by a Greater Serbia while the Muslims believed they had a right to self rule

Both wanted the same land and the inhabitants of that land were an inconvenience to the other

In that way, the territorial dispute over NI is no different to any other territorial dispute in Europe - but for some reason people in the North think it is

[Rossfan]

Enniskillen Omagh kingsmill and others should not be forgotten, all of these could have been avoided had Ireland stayed united from the start.

The only way Ireland was staying United back "at the start"was
1 - as a nice assimilated British part of the UK with no Home Rule....same as Scotland and Wales but with all those "nasty Nationalists" getting the same treatment as in 1798.
2 - as an Independent All Ireland Republic with the North Eastern Unionists being subdued like  the Palestinians.
The Brits had already decided on 2 Home Rule areas - "Northern Ireland" and "Southern Ireland".
The War and Treaty resulted in the Southern Ireland being still born and becoming a Dominion called the Irish Free State.

But what happened happened, we are where we are so leave history to the historians and concentrate on the future.

[Milltown Row2]

Enniskillen Omagh kingsmill and others should not be forgotten, all of these could have been avoided had Ireland stayed united from the start.

The only way Ireland was staying United back "at the start"was
1 - as a nice assimilated British part of the UK with no Home Rule....same as Scotland and Wales but with all those "nasty Nationalists" getting the same treatment as in 1798.
2 - as an Independent All Ireland Republic with the North Eastern Unionists being subdued like  the Palestinians.
The Brits had already decided on 2 Home Rule areas - "Northern Ireland" and "Southern Ireland".
The War and Treaty resulted in the Southern Ireland being still born and becoming a Dominion called the Irish Free State.

But what happened happened, we are where we are so leave history to the historians and concentrate on the future.

History being dragged up here left right and centre. To suit each other's argument!

People calling themselves Irishmen embarrassing themselves. Political parties will do what they need to do to get into power. There's not been a party in power that's covered themselves in glory, ever.

Mudslingers are aplenty. The Greens/labours/liberal parties won't get the votes because traditionally and unfortunately they don't enough people to believe in them to give them a chance. Tribal politics is the same here as it's in any country.

As for looking back at 1922, yes there may have be a slaughter but it would have been done and dusted.

The northerners were left behind, that's fact, no actual plan to rectify that came about, the South got on with their lives and blotted the north out of their plans.

Northern catholic's were discriminated against from day one. Nearly 50 years of it before it exploded on the streets of Belfast and Derry. I'm not justifying it, but you can only poke a bear so much

[weareros]

Northern Catholics were treated deplorably. And abandoned.
But the South was an awful place for many too. Children sent into Industrial homes, unmarried mothers sent away to laundries. Children sold abroad. Women in abusive marriages denied divorce until the 1990s. Even Sinn Fein did not support divorce in 1986 and Gerry Adams told Catholics to vote with their conscience. There was all kinds of sex abuse going on with clergy and child abuse within families. Books were banned. Writers like McGahern lost his job for writing about this in The Dark. Women were second class citizens. Had to give up jobs for men.
Ireland was not ready for a United Ireland in the 20th century. It would have broken up.
The best chance of a United Ireland is the economic and social progress we have made, and in creating the type of country the next generations want to live in. Many of our nationalist patriots were religious nuts and their visions should be consigned to history. We recently came number 2 on the World Quality of Life Index. This will piss off all the radicals who like to portray Ireland as hell on earth. It's not and time is coming when it now needs to be one economic, sovereign nation. And it will be that progress in quality of life that will bring it about.

[Rossfan]

Point of order wearers-
McGahern was sacked because he married a woman in a foreign Registry Office instead of having  a  Catholic Marriage.