Martin Mc Guinness Passes Away at 66

[haranguerer]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

[JohnDenver]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

so you believe that Unionists would have started to share power with their catholic neighbours out of good will. lol

Well my view is that the British were brought to the peace table as a result of the war and particularly the attacks that were being specifically targeted in England, which were becoming more regular towards the latter end of the troubles.

Power sharing didn't come until armed struggle ended. 30 years after it started! None of us can be 100% certain but I think it would have taken less than 30 years without violence.

Equality in terms of housing and jobs (public sector at least) came in the first half of the conflict but by then it was too late. And that equality was thanks in a large part to the first generation of educated Catholics and not the ra.

You've changed your tune from the "proven" theory earlier.

[Man Marker]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

so you believe that Unionists would have started to share power with their catholic neighbours out of good will. lol

Well my view is that the British were brought to the peace table as a result of the war and particularly the attacks that were being specifically targeted in England, which were becoming more regular towards the latter end of the troubles.

Power sharing didn't come until armed struggle ended. 30 years after it started! None of us can be 100% certain but I think it would have taken less than 30 years without violence.

Equality in terms of housing and jobs (public sector at least) came in the first half of the conflict but by then it was too late. And that equality was thanks in a large part to the first generation of educated Catholics and not the ra.

So you do believe that Unionists would have started to share power with their catholic neighbours out of the goodness of their hearts. lol

[haranguerer]

Power sharing didn't come until armed struggle ended. 30 years after it started! None of us can be 100% certain but I think it would have taken less than 30 years without violence.

Equality in terms of housing and jobs (public sector at least) came in the first half of the conflict but by then it was too late. And that equality was thanks in a large part to the first generation of educated Catholics and not the ra.

It would never have come voluntarily.

It was too late by 50 years ffs, not because the conflict was underway at that stage, as you seem to suggest.

What did being peaceable and doing what they were told do for nationalists pre troubles?

[OakleafCounty]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

so you believe that Unionists would have started to share power with their catholic neighbours out of good will. lol

Well my view is that the British were brought to the peace table as a result of the war and particularly the attacks that were being specifically targeted in England, which were becoming more regular towards the latter end of the troubles.

Power sharing didn't come until armed struggle ended. 30 years after it started! None of us can be 100% certain but I think it would have taken less than 30 years without violence.

Equality in terms of housing and jobs (public sector at least) came in the first half of the conflict but by then it was too late. And that equality was thanks in a large part to the first generation of educated Catholics and not the ra.

So you do believe that Unionists would have started to share power with their catholic neighbours out of the goodness of their hearts. lol

Do you think they started sharing power out of fear? lol

[Fuzzman]

Arlene got a big round of applause when she took her seat
http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-northern-ireland-39365921

[haranguerer]

Sweet mother of f**k, she did not?!

[vallankumous]

Power sharing didn't come until armed struggle ended. 30 years after it started! None of us can be 100% certain but I think it would have taken less than 30 years without violence.

Equality in terms of housing and jobs (public sector at least) came in the first half of the conflict but by then it was too late. And that equality was thanks in a large part to the first generation of educated Catholics and not the ra.

Inequality was present for longer than the armed conflict. The Civil rights campaign was not the beginning of the inequality, it was in response to it. It is taken as a starting point to fuzz the reality. The impact of generations of inequality can not be switched off in a single decade.

Every decade is preceded by many decades that impact on it. Now we are still seeing an impact of events in the 70s and 80s. In the 70s and 80s it was an impact from events in the 40s. In the 50s it was the impact of events in the 20s and so on.
Go back as far you need, you'll see longer periods of inequality than violence.
We are partly a product of the experience of our parents and grandparent as the next generation will be.

[OakleafCounty]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

They took hidings from the police and of course Bloody Sunday but they were seriously effective as a propaganda tool!! More effective than any bomb ever planted! If the IRA hadn't taken over and Civil Rights movement continued I've no doubt that it would have taken much less than 30 years.

[vallankumous]

Sweet mother of f**k, she did not?!

I think that's nice. In context though, it seems many attendees got that warm welcome to the bogside. It was nice not to single her out by not affording her a warm welcome.

[haranguerer]

I saw the context which doesn't make it as bad. I still can't stand the **** however, and resent her posturing over all this. Despicable

[haranguerer]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

They took hidings from the police and of course Bloody Sunday but they were seriously effective as a propaganda tool!! More effective than any bomb ever planted! If the IRA hadn't taken over and Civil Rights movement continued I've no doubt that it would have taken much less than 30 years.

You're an idiot, and a naive one at that

[OakleafCounty]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

They took hidings from the police and of course Bloody Sunday but they were seriously effective as a propaganda tool!! More effective than any bomb ever planted! If the IRA hadn't taken over and Civil Rights movement continued I've no doubt that it would have taken much less than 30 years.

You're an idiot, and a naive one at that

Are you willing to say that to my face?

[trileacman]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

They took hidings from the police and of course Bloody Sunday but they were seriously effective as a propaganda tool!! More effective than any bomb ever planted! If the IRA hadn't taken over and Civil Rights movement continued I've no doubt that it would have taken much less than 30 years.

You're an idiot, and a naive one at that

No he's not it's yourself who's deluded.

[haranguerer]

Although violence was inevitable I think it's been proven that it was never really necessary.

Necessary for what?

And violence by whom?

It wasn't necessary in achieving equality for Catholics and I don't think it was effective in protecting communities either on both sides and didn't stop innocent civilians getting killed in crossfire. It just turned into tit for tat killings some of which were extremely sinister. Obviously it didn't achieve a United Ireland either.

It was good for keeping drugs off the streets and policing very deprived communities but that's about it for me.

I think you missed the point. What happened the civil rights marches?

They took hidings from the police and of course Bloody Sunday but they were seriously effective as a propaganda tool!! More effective than any bomb ever planted! If the IRA hadn't taken over and Civil Rights movement continued I've no doubt that it would have taken much less than 30 years.

You're an idiot, and a naive one at that

Are you willing to say that to my face?

The irony.

Right, you're not an idiot, on reflection it sounds like going out and getting battered and shot for propaganda uses is indeed an excellent tactic.