Free Staters and their hypocrisy on their violent, bloody past

[smelmoth]

One of the big differences between the Old IRA and the PIRA was the level of popular support. the Old IRA had over 80% of the population onside
The PIRA didn't even have 40%.
That is a massive difference in a revolutionary war.

Interesting numbers. Both them. Source?

SF had a landslide in the 1918 election.  Catholics in S. Ireland were at least 80% and strongly nationalist
In NI in the late 60s the catholic population was max 40% and taking half as supporting the armed struggle would be generous. 


There's a parallel with the SNP in Scotland now. They don't have enough of a majority to definitely win an independence vote. They would need to be at 70% or more for that,
In NI the population now  is split 50/50.

No harm to you but your numbers are plucked assumptions. What is the evidence that these people supported the related armed struggle?

[smelmoth]

Seafoid changing the goalposts for a second time today
out of a sheer desperation to convince himself he isn't a complete hypocrite and pulling stats out of thin air to help him out.

The Easter Rising was deeply unpopular when it happened. Were Clarke, Connolly et al a bunch of terrorist psychopaths?

Good you to admit how unpopular the Easter Rising actually was.

[smelmoth]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

[Snapchap]

It's quite delicious to see all our resident Provos suddenly coming across as the bastard love children of Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. 

Their self hatred must be off the charts.

They hate the IRA of the war of independence era because they were led and manned by Southerners

And the key point

They Won

They drove the Brits out of their areas

Something they couldn't achieve in the north

Your comments are probably the most inflammatory on this board. That is saying something.

It's not inflammatory. It's just attention seeking. Very easily dealt with

[Armagh18]

It's quite delicious to see all our resident Provos suddenly coming across as the bastard love children of Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. 

Their self hatred must be off the charts.

They hate the IRA of the war of independence era because they were led and manned by Southerners

And the key point

They Won

They drove the Brits out of their areas

Something they couldn't achieve in the north

Who hates the old IRA on here? They were heroes. Surprised yous boys dont hate them though.

[dublin7]

It's quite delicious to see all our resident Provos suddenly coming across as the bastard love children of Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. 

Their self hatred must be off the charts.

They hate the IRA of the war of independence era because they were led and manned by Southerners

And the key point

They Won

They drove the Brits out of their areas

Something they couldn't achieve in the north

While I wouldn't word it quite like that, that is a key difference when PIRA defenders on here start whataboutering about what happened 100 years ago.

There were some horrible things done back then by the lies of Michael Collins, but their actions led to the Irish Free state and what is now the ROI.

The French resistance carried out some horrible acts in WWII as part of the campaign to force the Nazi army out of France.

The PIRA have nothing to show for their 25 year campaign, which at one stage deliberately targeted non-military (what they call economic) targets in England as their campaign was getting nowhere in NI.

The DUP with their self harm and Brexit have done more to bring a united Ireland closer in the last few months than anything the PIRA did. That must leave the PIRA defenders on here very conflicted.

[Angelo]

It's quite delicious to see all our resident Provos suddenly coming across as the bastard love children of Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. 

Their self hatred must be off the charts.

They hate the IRA of the war of independence era because they were led and manned by Southerners

And the key point

They Won

They drove the Brits out of their areas

Something they couldn't achieve in the north

While I wouldn't word it quite like that, that is a key difference when PIRA defenders on here start whataboutering about what happened 100 years ago.

There were some horrible things done back then by the lies of Michael Collins, but their actions led to the Irish Free state and what is now the ROI.

The French resistance carried out some horrible acts in WWII as part of the campaign to force the Nazi army out of France.

The PIRA have nothing to show for their 25 year campaign, which at one stage deliberately targeted non-military (what they call economic) targets in England as their campaign was getting nowhere in NI.

The DUP with their self harm and Brexit have done more to bring a united Ireland closer in the last few months than anything the PIRA did. That must leave the PIRA defenders on here very conflicted.

Their actions led to the partition of the island and threw natioanlists into decades of institutional discrimination and violence.

So if anything that makes it even worse for the Old IRA.

[Snapchap]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

So because you think an armed campaign was legitimate, that means you have to be happy about it and enjoy it? By that logic, people can only join armed groups because they like war and death, and not because they believe they are left with no alternative but to take up arms?

Francis Hughes, who died in Hunger Strike 40 years ago yesterday, talking about his involvement in attacks on British forces said "They're just kids. For God's sake, I don't want to be shooting them. I want them to bloody go home in the morning." He was perhaps the most active IRA Volunteer there was and he certaintly wasn't happy with there being a conflict.

I think it's sad that anyone had to lose a life as a result of violence here either in 1921 or 1969. The reality remains though that in each case, Irish republicans becoming involved in conflict was both inevitable and legitimate.

[Itchy]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

Pretty sad that the cold blooded murder of felloe Irish men and women, often shot in the back etc, can be described as wholly legitimate.

The RUC was a disgraced organisation (I am sure you recall it was done away with) and so were the B Specials. Colluded with loyalists and british army to murder civilians. Its was a dirty business but in the conflict in the North they were as legitimate a target as anyone was - I assume you feel that it was legitimate for British Army to shoot IRA men? If anything the shooting of RIC men would have been much more controversial back in the day given the make up of that force had a much higher proportion of nationalists.

[Snapchap]

It's quite delicious to see all our resident Provos suddenly coming across as the bastard love children of Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards. 

Their self hatred must be off the charts.

They hate the IRA of the war of independence era because they were led and manned by Southerners

And the key point

They Won

They drove the Brits out of their areas

Something they couldn't achieve in the north

While I wouldn't word it quite like that, that is a key difference when PIRA defenders on here start whataboutering about what happened 100 years ago.

There were some horrible things done back then by the lies of Michael Collins, but their actions led to the Irish Free state and what is now the ROI.

The French resistance carried out some horrible acts in WWII as part of the campaign to force the Nazi army out of France.

The PIRA have nothing to show for their 25 year campaign, which at one stage deliberately targeted non-military (what they call economic) targets in England as their campaign was getting nowhere in NI.

The DUP with their self harm and Brexit have done more to bring a united Ireland closer in the last few months than anything the PIRA did. That must leave the PIRA defenders on here very conflicted.

So what you are saying is, if the PIRA campaign had been successful in reunifiying Ireland, the fact that 35% of their victims were civilians would then have been OK then? Given that at least 35% of Old IRA victims were civilians (and some estimates put it higher), I assume you would today regard them as just a bunch of ruthless terrorists had they not got the brits out of 26 of the counties?

You only decide if an armed campaign was "terrorist" when it's over and you can see whether it suceeded or not?

[michaelg]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

Pretty sad that the cold blooded murder of felloe Irish men and women, often shot in the back etc, can be described as wholly legitimate.

The RUC was a disgraced organisation (I am sure you recall it was done away with) and so were the B Specials. Colluded with loyalists and british army to murder civilians. Its was a dirty business but in the conflict in the North they were as legitimate a target as anyone was - I assume you feel that it was legitimate for British Army to shoot IRA men? If anything the shooting of RIC men would have been much more controversial back in the day given the make up of that force had a much higher proportion of nationalists.

So it's more acceptable to shoot protestants / unionists?

[brokencrossbar1]

https://www.facebook.com/247386520194/posts/10165565489095195/

Who wrote it?

[smelmoth]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

You cannot separate the campaign which you describe as "legitimate" and the consequential deaths with which you are not "happy" with.

Should the PIRA have planted the bomb and hoped it didn't go off? Fire the bullet and hope it be blown off course? Kidnap the guy and hope he was Houdini?

So because you think an armed campaign was legitimate, that means you have to be happy about it and enjoy it? By that logic, people can only join armed groups because they like war and death, and not because they believe they are left with no alternative but to take up arms?

Francis Hughes, who died in Hunger Strike 40 years ago yesterday, talking about his involvement in attacks on British forces said "They're just kids. For God's sake, I don't want to be shooting them. I want them to bloody go home in the morning." He was perhaps the most active IRA Volunteer there was and he certaintly wasn't happy with there being a conflict.

I think it's sad that anyone had to lose a life as a result of violence here either in 1921 or 1969. The reality remains though that in each case, Irish republicans becoming involved in conflict was both inevitable and legitimate.

The armed campaign was a campaign of killing. You cannot say you approve of the campaign but not the killing. There is no logical basis to what you say.

If Francis Hughes didn't want someone to be killed he would have been well advised (if he hadn't the wit to work it out himself) not to shoot them.

Sorry to be logical about the whole thing

[Itchy]

What was the legitimate case for the Provos bearing arms in the 26?
And then using them to murder Gardai, Pte.Kelly, Prison Officer Stack, a Protestant Senator, Tom Oliver, bank robbing, kidnapping etc etc.
What ever happened to Army Order 8?

Didn't the Old IRA also rob banks and Post Offices, and do so on a routine basis?

Was it OK back then?

Your refusal to acknowledge any wrong doing by the IRA is remarkable and admirable in a strange way. Despite everything you're sticking to whataboutery from a century ago as if that somehow makes everything ok

I've never once denied wrongdoing by the IRA. If you can find a quote where I did, please post it up.

I have repeatedly said both the Old IRA and PIRA carried out unjustifiable actions. I have merely pointed out that the Old IRA  killed at least the same, and in all liklihood a higher, proportion of civilians than the PIRA did. How is it "whataboutery" to examine the actions of the Old IRA in a thread specifically about them?

Which PIRA actions were you happy enough about?  The 300+ RUC personnel murdered okay?

I'm not "happy" about any deaths but I regard the PIRA campaign as having been legitimate and the utterly discredited and sectarian RUC were willing protagonists in that conflict and as such were wholly legitimate targets.

Pretty sad that the cold blooded murder of felloe Irish men and women, often shot in the back etc, can be described as wholly legitimate.

The RUC was a disgraced organisation (I am sure you recall it was done away with) and so were the B Specials. Colluded with loyalists and british army to murder civilians. Its was a dirty business but in the conflict in the North they were as legitimate a target as anyone was - I assume you feel that it was legitimate for British Army to shoot IRA men? If anything the shooting of RIC men would have been much more controversial back in the day given the make up of that force had a much higher proportion of nationalists.

So it's more acceptable to shoot protestants / unionists?

I never mentioned protestants. It is a rare thing if I do, I dont see conflict in this country as based on religion and I have nothing but complete contempt for Catholic and Protestant churches and all the rest too.

Back to the jist of you're comment. I never said it was ok to shoot a unionist as in any unionist. The truth is blowing up Canary Wharf was a much more useful act for the IRA than shooting people in the 6 counties as when big business in the UK complains the politicians listen.

[brokencrossbar1]

Who was searched regularly as a teenager, spreadeagled against a wall purely because of your name and birthplace?
Who had their school buses stopped by soldiers on a regular basis, school bags searched, called stupid paddy bastards?
Who had helicopters land in their back yard, throwing stones up smashing windows?
Who had their 'fort' that they built with their mates in their back yard turned into an army surveillance point?
Who had to play football as a kid whilst guns were pointing directly at you from a look out post that wouldn't look amiss in an Eastern Bloc country under Communist rule at the time?
Who walked down the street and watched as a soldier traced their steps with his assault rifle aimed directly at them?
Who had people they grew up with shot dead or seriously injured?
Who had their car searched 18 times in the one day, 1 single day, because they lived in a ring of steel and couldn't travel 2 miles without being stopped at a permanent check point?

We may question the reason for starting the war but there is absolutely no doubt that the actions of the governing bodies and the army exacerbated the situation. I have given small examples of what my life growing up was like and I was pretty lucky as there was no sectarianism where I was.  My family and I had a few sliding doors moments whereby it could have gone either way.  I was born at the height of the Glennane Gangs killings and my father very nearly got caught up in one of the incidents. My uncle was there, my great uncle was there, people who I later in life became very friendly with lost their family members in it, yet members of the Irish establishment, MSM, government etc want us basically to do what I posted in the Waterford Whispers article, 'get over yourselves'. I was born the same day, in the same hospital, in the same ward as someone whose father was shot dead 2 days later by a loyalist gang, colluding with the security forces, whilst out wetting their head. She never saw her father. How does she get over herself?