Messages

A lot more waffle but he still hasn't condemned the actions of the old IRA I see...

We wait with baited breath

That's because he's the only poster on here who justifies the killings of civilians.

This is quite the laugh

Angelo, who knows no other method of debate other than lying, has now backed himself into admitting he would have rathered the 26 counties remained part of the UK in 1922 

Hilarious

A lot more waffle but he still hasn't condemned the actions of the old IRA I see...

We wait with baited breath

It's hilarious how Northern Catholics who are living with an irreconcilable sense of cognitive dissonance over the PIRA campaign always reach for the whataboutery

They can't debate on the PIRA campaign, they refuse to debate

The old IRA did plenty of horrible things, but they had an actual clear strategy to win, and win they did

That's a key part of the morality of waging a war

The PIRA had no strategy other than nihilism

They lost, they lost pretty much right away, but they still carried on for three decades

Say what you want about the old IRA but their war produced a society which at least had the chance to move forward within a short time

The PIRA, like UNITA in Angola, produced a society which was set back decades

[but to say this to most people from the Free State until only very recently they would laugh in your face.]

The total denial of the media and governments as to what was happening also fuelled the anger and sense of inequality. The dogs on the street knew British security forces were in collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries but to say this to most people from the Free State until only very recently they would laugh in your face. To say it to an English person they would have you committed. Media spin is a powerful thing.

Utter nonsense

People in the Republic long believed there was Loyalist/British collusion, especially as the single most devastating event of the entire Troubles took place in the Republic

Thomas Begley killed himself, one UDA member and eight civilians going about their business

So one of the 28 Loyalists killed by the IRA was killed by Begley

How would Begley be viewed among Sinn Fein supporters?

Would he be viewed as a hero for killing the UDA man?

Or would the killing of the eight civilians cancel that out and then drive him into the villain column?

Or would youse say the killing of the eight civilians was bad - but not enough to wipe out the "good deed" of the killing of the UDA man, leaving him in credit overall and thus worthy of celebration?

Maybe there might yet be a book about him in the bookshop in Parnell Square "Thomas Begley - The Good, The Bad And The Ugly"?

[the very people who were terrorising their communities]

Just answer the question Sid.

If someone who believes the PIRA campaign in general was justifiable, and that to you means they therefore must view the Enniskillen bomb attack as justifiable, then since you believe the Old IRA campaign on the whole was justifiable, surely we can assume that you regard the Dunmanway Massacre as justifiable?

I don't regard the Dunmanway massacre as justifiable in any way

I have a very dim view of war in general and I have no interest whatsoever in glorifying the War of Independence

Sinn Fein do glorify the 28 year PIRA campaign, they continue to glorify it, many posters here glorify it

You are deliberately trying to blur the lines between war and isolated actions within a war. You have all along implied that if you agreed with the PIRA campaign, that you must therefore believe all actions they carried out during that campaign were justifiable.

I'm merely trying to follow your own logic here. If you believe the Dunmanway Massacre was unjustifiable, by your own terms you must surely then regard the entire Old IRA campaign as unjustifiable? You can't have it both ways here.

Similarly, you say that the PIRA campaign was unjustifiable "because civilian slaughter was an integral part of that campaign", then, given that civilian slaughter was an even more prevelant aspect of the Old IRA campaign, can we assume, again, that you regard the Old IRA campaign as unjustifiable? Again, you can't have it both ways.

Again, you're totally deflecting - I'm not the person glorifying killing people, you and the likes of Angelo are

Youse are the people that have to answer the questions

The IRA killed 644 civilians

They killed 638 British Army or UDR

They killed a miserly 28 Loyalists - the very people who were terrorising their communities

So tell us again how they were "protecting their communities"?

They were in me hole protecting their communities, they were sucking them into a three decades long spiral of death and destruction

Pied pipers

You don't really know much about the north really.

Loyalists, aided and abetted by the UDR/RUC, terrorised the nationalist community.

I see you take the same view as Fianna Gael.

How is killing 644 civilians and 28 Loyalists "protecting your communities"?

The PIRA killed more PIRA people than they killed Loyalists

Sid's point about it becoming less justified after they couldn't win is redundant - neither the old IRA, nor PIRA nor the dissidents ever had any chance of winning in any conventional understanding of the word. .

But the old IRA did win

They achieved an independent Irish state

The PIRA lost

They did not achieve what they wanted

Whether the SDLP could have achieved civil rights we'll never know.

The SDLP did achieve civil rights

I remember when this debate was being had back in 2018, it came out that Dublin has less Games Promotion officers per capita than the rest of Leinster

And that Roscommon were receiving around three times more development funding per capita than Dublin

This doesn't suit the narrative

I see Varadkar throwing a whistleblower under the bus has been swept under the rug by the media again.

Nasty culture with FG when it comes to whistleblowers.

Maurice McCabe
The HSE guy
And now the prison guy

All hung out to dry by FG.

How were PIRA whistleblowers treated?

Stabbed 20 times in the face and backed over by a car to prevent an open coffin, that's how

[So why then is Sinn Fein's continued glorification of a campaign of which civilian slaughter was an integral part deemed off limits for discussion?]

When Boris Johnson became UK Prime Minister, his history of racist comments was rightly brought up

Sinn Feiners pointed to them as evidence that he was not fit to be UK PM

And that would be correct, he isn't fit to be PM

So why then is Sinn Fein's continued glorification of a campaign of which civilian slaughter was an integral part deemed off limits for discussion?

What's the rationale that says that Johnson's history of racism means he's be unfit to be PM, yet also says that anybody who believes Sinn Fein's continued glorification of a campaign in which civilian slaughter was an integral part makes them unfit for government in the Republic, should shut the f**k up?

What's that rationale?

Can anybody explain that total double standard?

And hey presto.... we're back to where we started in this entire discussion.

If you are going to have this discussion for SF, it is equally valid to point your moral compass in the direction of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail.

This is the bit you and many of our 26 county folk struggle with.

You've waffled for days now but you've yet to address this core point.

And you can't - because it's impossible to do this and retain any shred of moral consistency.

You don't get it, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael do not act as cults, they tolerate different opinions

Only Sinn Fein requires their members to glorify a three decades long campaign of which mass civilian murder was an integral part

If you don't subscribe to such a cultish view, you can't be in Sinn Fein

If you really do believe what you and others here believe, that's a carte blanche for dissidents, who can claim the exact same justification as the PIRA claimed

That's total hypocrisy

Sinn Fein may say individual acts are "wrong" - a classic non-apology apology, but they never expressed an ounce of regret

Sinn Fein are outraged about the lack of British inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane - rightly so

Yet they could easily give up the Enniskillen bombers to justice, they know who they are

So much more hypocrisy, and it always comes back to one thing - protecting and glorifying murder

What's another glaring hypocrisy is the ultra-partitionist nature of who you think is eligible to talk about the Troubles

That rules out Rathgar's Mary Lou McDonald and Blackrock's Eoin O'Broin, so

Just answer the question Sid.

If someone who believes the PIRA campaign in general was justifiable, and that to you means they therefore must view the Enniskillen bomb attack as justifiable, then since you believe the Old IRA campaign on the whole was justifiable, surely we can assume that you regard the Dunmanway Massacre as justifiable?

I don't regard the Dunmanway massacre as justifiable in any way

I have a very dim view of war in general and I have no interest whatsoever in glorifying the War of Independence

Sinn Fein do glorify the 28 year PIRA campaign, they continue to glorify it, many posters here glorify it

You are deliberately trying to blur the lines between war and isolated actions within a war. You have all along implied that if you agreed with the PIRA campaign, that you must therefore believe all actions they carried out during that campaign were justifiable.

I'm merely trying to follow your own logic here. If you believe the Dunmanway Massacre was unjustifiable, by your own terms you must surely then regard the entire Old IRA campaign as unjustifiable? You can't have it both ways here.

Similarly, you say that the PIRA campaign was unjustifiable "because civilian slaughter was an integral part of that campaign", then, given that civilian slaughter was an even more prevelant aspect of the Old IRA campaign, can we assume, again, that you regard the Old IRA campaign as unjustifiable? Again, you can't have it both ways.

Again, you're totally deflecting - I'm not the person glorifying killing people, you and the likes of Angelo are

Youse are the people that have to answer the questions

The IRA killed 644 civilians

They killed 638 British Army or UDR

They killed a miserly 28 Loyalists - the very people who were terrorising their communities

So tell us again how they were "protecting their communities"?

They were in me hole protecting their communities, they were sucking them into a three decades long spiral of death and destruction

Pied pipers

@Angelo

But it's not!

You support David Cullinane shouting "Up The RA"

You glorify a campaign of which civilian slaughter was an integral part

I don't

You have all the questions to answer in a thread in which you haven't answered a single question put to you - I don't

Should Sinn Fein give up the Enniskillen bombers to justice?

They must know who they are

How can somebody continue to glorify a campaign of which mass civilian murder was an integral part and be fit for government?

Deflection about the 1920s is just that - deflection

Just answer the question Sid.

If someone who believes the PIRA campaign in general was justifiable, and that to you means they therefore must view the Enniskillen bomb attack as justifiable, then since you believe the Old IRA campaign on the whole was justifiable, surely we can assume that you regard the Dunmanway Massacre as justifiable?

I don't regard the Dunmanway massacre as justifiable in any way

I have a very dim view of war in general and I have no interest whatsoever in glorifying the War of Independence

Sinn Fein do glorify the 28 year PIRA campaign, they continue to glorify it, many posters here glorify it

And civilian slaughter was an integral part of that campaign

You can't shout "Up the RA" as David Cullinane did without glorifying the civilian slaughter

Or do you believe you can?

Have Sinn Fein ever called for bringing the perpetrators of the Enniskillen bomb to justice?

Just like the Loyalist murderers of Sean Brown, those bombers never faced justice, and Sinn Fein must know who they are

Did they ever think of giving up the murderers of Eamonn Collins? Likewise, they must know who they are

There are many graves that remain unquiet

In response to those unquiet graves, Sinn Fein sternly says "sssssssssshhhhhhhh"

[I have correctly apportioned the blame for his slaughter where it lies]

Sid Today:

Nothing I said about the murder of Sean Brown was incorrect. I have correctly apportioned the blame for his slaughter where it lies

Sid Yesterday:

If the IRA had not abandoned their ceasefire, Sean Brown would probably not have been murdered, he might even still be alive

You're a sick, twisted little p***k.

Ironically, calling somebody a sick, twisted little p***k because they're asking a hard question you don't want want to answer is the reaction of a sick, twisted little p***k

I've put several hard questions here regarding the ending of the second IRA ceasefire

Answer them

When Boris Johnson became UK Prime Minister, his history of racist comments was rightly brought up

Sinn Feiners pointed to them as evidence that he was not fit to be UK PM

And that would be correct, he isn't fit to be PM

So why then is Sinn Fein's continued glorification of a campaign of which civilian slaughter was an integral part deemed off limits for discussion?

What's the rationale that says that Johnson's history of racism means he's be unfit to be PM, yet also says that anybody who believes Sinn Fein's continued glorification of a campaign in which civilian slaughter was an integral part makes them unfit for government in the Republic, should shut the f**k up?

What's that rationale?

Can anybody explain that total double standard?