Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B923 - United Ireland/Northern Ireland Abolition Bill 2016 Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Regardless it remains the appropriate language to call them paramilitaries, not terrorists or terrorist groups, and this isn't just in regard to the IRA
    I would appreciate it, therefore, if you could also get McGovern to actually recognise the difference between a combatant and a non-com properly rather than using the incorrect definitions of the IRA.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I wasn't going to go there, that's a whole other argument waiting to happen
    Yeah, I've gone through these arguments many times already, but here we go...
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone for a round of leprechaun jokes to lighten things up?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Anyone for a round of leprechaun jokes to lighten things up?
    I prefer the potato one
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I prefer the potato one
    Yes, but there aren't many of those are there?

    Spoiler:
    Show
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Yes, but there aren't many of those are there?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    touche
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Once again, just because some mentally disturbed terrorist thinks something is legal does not mean it is, just because some nitwit thinks something is defined differently to how it is does not make it so. If I were to murder your family would you let me off if I asserted that I have a definition of murder that makes it fine?
    I never said it would make it legal - I was saying that they were legitimate targets.
    The people who legislated for the 'terror' inflicted by 'security' forces all knew well that they all remained targets, and the people who actively assisted the 'security' forces knew well that they remained targets as collaborators with the 'forces of occupation'.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Taking the figures on the Wikipedia article we have the following:

    368 Republican terrorists killed
    162 Loyalist terrorists killed
    718 British Forces (exl UDR) combatants killed
    301 RUC murdered, which could be either combatants or non coms depending on legislation, but on the whole, police are not combatants
    6 Mainland police murdered
    25 prison officers murdered
    236 UDR killed, including some as non-coms
    1 member of the Irish Army killed
    9 Gardai murdered

    1935 civilians murdered

    We have therefore, that out of 3530 dead, we have at least 1975, or 56% were non coms murdered. If we are to assume the 301 RUC murdered as non coms we have a further 8.5% murdered, so before considering anybody that was a privileged combatants illegally killed we already have 64.5% murder rate, all we need is for 74 privileged combatants to have been murdered when protected for TWO THIRDS of the people who died in the troubles to have been murdered non-coms
    That's quite irrelevant as it refers to all casualties, not those committed by republican paramilitaries.
    How are RUC men non-combatants? They were part of the 'forces of occupation' and colluded with loyalist terror groups - this is why the RUC was replaced with the PSNI. They had a reputation for one-sided policing and discrimination, as well as collusion with loyalist paramilitaries. They were 93% Protestant, 100% Unionist, and knew well that they all remained targets.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Yes, but there aren't many of those are there?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Savage ! PRSOM
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    I never said it would make it legal - I was saying that they were legitimate targets.
    The people who legislated for the 'terror' inflicted by 'security' forces all knew well that they all remained targets, and the people who actively assisted the 'security' forces knew well that they remained targets as collaborators with the 'forces of occupation'.
    At this rate I will have read the entirety of the texts of the Geneva Conventions:

    "In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."

    I doubt any sane person considers bombing Britain a legitimate target, nor a great many other IRA targets.

    That's quite irrelevant as it refers to all casualties, not those committed by republican paramilitaries.
    How are RUC men non-combatants? They were part of the 'forces of occupation' and colluded with loyalist terror groups - this is why the RUC was replaced with the PSNI. They had a reputation for one-sided policing and discrimination, as well as collusion with loyalist paramilitaries. They were 93% Protestant, 100% Unionist, and knew well that they all remained targets.
    Almost every civie killed was by terrorists, about half and half loyalist-republican

    combatant/non-com status is very unclear on the part of policing
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    We have a delicate peace right now, why open this can of worms when most are content with the status quo? We don't want a return to the 1980s.

    Besides which, fragmentation of the Union would not be a good thing.

    Nay.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    At this rate I will have read the entirety of the texts of the Geneva Conventions:

    "In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."

    I doubt any sane person considers bombing Britain a legitimate target, nor a great many other IRA targets.
    Hitler considered it a legitimate target.
    The Provisional IRA did this: they targeted military checkpoints, barracks etc. for example, the Attack on Cloghoge checkpoint, Warrenpoint ambush etc.
    As per tactics of Shock and Awe, the use of overwhelming power and spectacular displays of force paralyses the enemy's perception of the battlefield and destroy its will to fight.

    Although the authors claim that the need to "[m]inimize civilian casualties, loss of life, and collateral damage" is a "political sensitivity [which needs] to be understood up front", their doctrine of rapid dominance requires the capability to disrupt "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure", and, in practice, "the appropriate balance of Shock and Awe must cause ... the threat and fear of action that may shut down all or part of the adversary's society or render his ability to fight useless short of complete physical destruction."

    The Provisional IRA's Long War dictated:
    1. A war of attrition against enemy personnel based on causing as many deaths as possible so as to create a demand from their people at home for their withdrawal (like in Vietnam).
    2. A bombing campaign aimed at making the enemy's financial interests in our country unprofitable while at the same time curbing long term investment in our country.
    3. By defending the war of liberation by punishing criminals, collaborators and informers.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    A united Ireland certainly seems the most sensible option but there are a few things to take into consideration. Firstly, there are going to be more people against such a move than for it, similar to the failure of Esperanto. You have to look at whether the positives outweigh the negatives. Unifying the two countries could cause economic problems, that might lead to the two splitting again. The IRA could return - this move could encourage them. I am originally from Ireland and my personal view is that such a move is simply not worth the downsides it would bring.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    I would point out that under the good friday agreement they are to be called paramilitary organisations, not terrorists or terrorist groups, and this is for all groups involved in the conflict in Northern Ireland, including pro-union paramilitaries.
    They are terrorists regardless of the Good Friday Agreement which frankly seems like a bad deal in hindsight.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    The IRA could return - this move could encourage them. I am originally from Ireland and my personal view is that such a move is simply not worth the downsides it would bring.
    Not sure how this would happen if a United Ireland (their ultimate goal) was established - loyalist terror groups maybe - the UDA's still around...
    • Community Assistant
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katty3)
    Have you heard of the Potato Famine? That killed a lot of the Irish. It was the fault of the English landowners who refused to allow the Irish people to keep their other crops.
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The Anglo-Irish (not English) landowners sold a lot of food and produce to England, a mistake that cost millions of lives, but it was not the British people's nor the British government's fault.

    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Pretty much anyone, especially Americans with an Irish granny can have citizenship, so it was clearly not what I was asking. Irish as in born and raised in Ireland.

    You are clearly not Irish or have any knowledge of Ireland if you don't know any wrongs committed by the British on the Irish.
    There is no point arguing with you.
    You are no more Irish than I am.

    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Ever heard of the Great Famine, during which the British rulers of Ireland made it export enough grain to feed the whole population? Or of the Irish language, which was banned in schools until 1871, contributing to its loss of majority language status? Or of transportation, the process by which Irish criminals were forcibly permanently expelled from their homeland and sent 12000 miles away for the pettiest of offences?
    This happened to British people too. Actually it happened all over Europe, especially in France which ruthlessly supressed Breton, Basque, Alsatian, Occitan and the Provençal languages. Ireland was not singled out for victimisation.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    The Anglo-Irish (not English) landowners sold a lot of food and produce to England, a mistake that cost millions of lives, but it was not the British people's nor the British government's fault.



    You are no more Irish than I am.



    This happened to British people too. Actually it happened all over Europe, especially in France which ruthlessly supressed Breton, Basque, Alsatian, Occitan and the Provençal languages. Ireland was not singled out for victimisation.
    If you're going to question my Irishness or the fact that British imperialism was the cause of 800 years of oppression which caused the deaths and forced immigration of millions of Irish people, you are clearly neither Irish nor worth arguing with.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    You are no more Irish than I am.
    Okay let's lighten it up a bit.
    What county are ye from?
    What's the best county in terms of who's going to win the football next year?
    • Community Assistant
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    If you're going to question my Irishness or the fact that British imperialism was the cause of 800 years of oppression which caused the deaths and forced immigration of millions of Irish people, you are clearly neither Irish nor worth arguing with.
    You can only be Irish if you accept that Ireland was victimised and oppressed by Britain? Funny, I don't remember that in the constitution.

    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Okay let's lighten it up a bit.
    What county are ye from?
    What's the best county in terms of who's going to win the football next year?
    Dad's family comes from Cork; mum's family comes from Armagh. I live in England, and I don't like football. You don't need to grow up in Ireland to be Irish.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    They are terrorists regardless of the Good Friday Agreement which frankly seems like a bad deal in hindsight.
    In the sense that the GFA didn't go far enough. Indeed.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    In the sense that the GFA didn't go far enough. Indeed.
    Far enough! We allowed terrorists amnesty and modern surveillance technology would have allowed us to crush them.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 18, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.