First of all I do not condone terrorism nor do I have particularly strong feelings of dislike towards Britain or the military. I happen to believe I am of a new generation who can think for myself and won't have my opinion plagued by the infectious sectarianism that is rife in this part of Ireland.
However, looking at some stats I stumbled across today, I had to ask why the IRA are called terrorists but not the British army.
Terrorism - 'The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.'
In NI between 1969-1998 the British army (UDR included) killed 151 civilians, that is higher than the combined number of republican and loyalist paramilitaries who died at the hands of the army.
So why do the evade the terrorist brush? People will say things like 'because the army didn't plant bombs in town centres'. However this isn't about, who is worse than who. No one will get anywhere if we want to provide each other with examples of one side doing something worse than the other. We have a special place for people who passionately engage in that kind of nonsense and it is called Stormont.
I am not asking why the IRA are called terrorists. I am asking why the British army are not.
Surely killing 151 civilians would be seen as violence and intimidation? Personally, looking at the stats, they seem no better than the IRA. What is the justification for allowing the army, or at the very least the UDR (with their 3:1 civilian:republican kill ratio) to escape the term terrorist?
The British Army is a force for good, any civilian casualties that result from their actions are unintentional and are to be prevented at all costs.
The same cannot be said for the IRA or other terrorist groups out there.
Because of the international laws such as
Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907
Charter of the International Military Tribunal 1945.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1998.
Geneva Protocol I & II 1977
Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict 1954
Zagreb Resolution 1974
United Nations Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children 1974
United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques 1977.
every army that's ever existed is a terrorist organisation according to the OP's logic.
Terrorism is just a word governments use to describe organisations dedicated to violence which are not part of any government, or are part of a hostile government which everyone else considers hostile, such as a pariah state. If the IRA was a branch of the Irish army and they started bombing things, that wouldn't be terrorism. That would be a declaration of war by another army.
It's all just definitions really. Regardless of who you support, it's just a load of idiots with weapons on both sides risking their lives for leaders who couldn't care less if they live or die.