Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Attacked by dissident Republicans? Oh surprise surpise. I know, why don't we just give this particular part of Britain to Ireland and Britons who live their can then create the BRA (British Protestant Army), they can let off bombs in Dublin and Limerick
in their cause and we can have 'collection tins' on the bars of London pubs so that we can all chip in so that the BRA can afford bombs and guns for killing the Irish population...........that's acceptable isn't it!? Maybe the Mexicans should plant bombs in New York demanding New Mexico? Or is it only acceptable to blow up British people for a 'cause'?
Indeed, and to think it was all about opposition to the Sunningdale Agreement, which was to give the Irish in NI some power sharing.
The nerve of the Irish to want to have a say in how they were governed, in the place they were born in.
`
^
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ullish Rab
See you are still posting the same rubbish. The Irish refused to take part and abstained...abstain then complain and cry discrimination !
Well Usterman, do you think what I posted is total rubbish, or is there some truth in it?
If so, approximately what percentage of truth vs. rubbish?
While I am not sure if you are even going to admit that 1% is truthful, let me help you out a little;
UVF claimed responsibility and said their reasoning was related to the SA
UDR (your so called defense force) members were involved in helping the UVF
The British government's own Northern Ireland Secretary (Mr. Rees) said he believed that forces within the British Intelligence community conspired with the aforementioned to help stop the Sunningdale Agreement.
The Irish refused to take part in government ..that's a fact. I see you have went off the original post and are attacking the UDR. There were Catholics in the UDR. I count them as brave men. Sean Russell was the first to be murdered by the IRA. This was in front of his wife and children.
The Irish refused to take part in government ..that's a fact. I see you have went off the original post and are attacking the UDR. There were Catholics in the UDR. I count them as brave men. Sean Russell was the first to be murdered by the IRA. This was in front of his wife and children.
I am not making this stuff up as I go along, and my memory of what we have discussed is pretty accurate.
The UDR might well have been mostly good, but there were some significant bad apples that dropped all pretenses of neutrality. Some were either members of Loyalist paramilitaries, or at least colluded/assisted them in their attacks.
If I recall correctly, the bombs planted in Dublin and a couple of other places were considered more sophisticated than what the UVF was capable of constructing themselves.
As to the "Irish" refusing to take part, you generalize all of them as if they were monolithic. Just like there is a differentiation between regular Unionists and hardcore Loyalists, the green tribe has similar variables. So while hardcore Republicans might have refused, it does not mean more moderate Irish were opposed.
That said, it misses the point.
If your own Northern Ireland Secretary (Mr. Rees) said what he did, how am I making things up?
I am not making this stuff up as I go along, and my memory of what we have discussed is pretty accurate.
The UDR might well have been mostly good, but there were some significant bad apples that dropped all pretenses of neutrality. Some were either members of Loyalist paramilitaries, or at least colluded/assisted them in their attacks.
If I recall correctly, the bombs planted in Dublin and a couple of other places were considered more sophisticated than what the UVF was capable of constructing themselves.
As to the "Irish" refusing to take part, you generalize all of them as if they were monolithic. Just like there is a differentiation between regular Unionists and hardcore Loyalists, the green tribe has similar variables. So while hardcore Republicans might have refused, it does not mean more moderate Irish were opposed.
That said, it misses the point.
If your own Northern Ireland Secretary (Mr. Rees) said what he did, how am I making things up?
`
I'm still waiting on you to tell me an area in which Catholics were driven out and Protestants moved in. You are the Artful Dodger there's no doubt about that.
You'll always get bad apples. How did the American army fare? Were they always perfect ?
The great and the good among Catholics abstained and urged others to do the same. There is no doubt about that. There were a few who were willing to play a part and did so but they were verbally attacked.
Rees was but one person who spoke about the situation in Ulster. There were hundreds of others who did not speak as Rees did. Just because one man says it doesn't make it the gospel truth.
I'm still waiting on you to tell me an area in which Catholics were driven out and Protestants moved in. You are the Artful Dodger there's no doubt about that.
You'll always get bad apples. How did the American army fare? Were they always perfect ?
The great and the good among Catholics abstained and urged others to do the same. There is no doubt about that. There were a few who were willing to play a part and did so but they were verbally attacked.
Rees was but one person who spoke about the situation in Ulster. There were hundreds of others who did not speak as Rees did. Just because one man says it doesn't make it the gospel truth.
One of the things I find both amusing and perplexing that far too many people do (not just yourself), is when someone they do not care for says something that comports with their way of thinking, they want to hold it up as the truth. But when those same people say something that is opposite, they are to be dismissed.
So lets say someone in the IRA (who they despise and wouldn't trust as far as they could throw them) says Gerry Adams was a member of the IRA, they want to say "see, we always said he was in the IRA, and now we have the proof".
Wait, I thought that person could not and should not be trusted
Conversely, when someone they would normally trust, say the British governments Northern Ireland Secretary, says something that does not comport with their beliefs, they diminish their view, by saying that was their opinion, thus it could be flawed.
Well of course it could, but if they back up what you believe 95% of the time, you do not claim it is only their opinion.
Instead you use it to reinforce your own view, and only speak against them when they don't say something you like.
As to the Catholics driven out of areas, I could almost bet the farm I gave you at least one or two examples, one debatably being the spark that started the Troubles in the late 1960's.
Or have you forgotten how Ian Paisley's started the UPV and was involved with the UFV, helping to coordinate attacks on Catholics?
They threw Molotov cocktail bombs into Catholic schools, homes, and businesses. One of the firebombs intend to burn out an Irish Catholic bar owner, instead killed an old Protestant woman.
Needless to say most of the intended Catholic victims of those firebombs moved away, which was exactly the intent of Paisley & Company.
Or is your recollection of those events different than mine?
One of the things I find both amusing and perplexing that far too many people do (not just yourself), is when someone they do not care for says something that comports with their way of thinking, they want to hold it up as the truth. But when those same people say something that is opposite, they are to be dismissed.
So lets say someone in the IRA (who they despise and wouldn't trust as far as they could throw them) says Gerry Adams was a member of the IRA, they want to say "see, we always said he was in the IRA, and now we have the proof".
Wait, I thought that person could not and should not be trusted
Conversely, when someone they would normally trust, say the British governments Northern Ireland Secretary, says something that does not comport with their beliefs, they diminish their view, by saying that was their opinion, thus it could be flawed.
Well of course it could, but if they back up what you believe 95% of the time, you do not claim it is only their opinion.
Instead you use it to reinforce your own view, and only speak against them when they don't say something you like.
As to the Catholics driven out of areas, I could almost bet the farm I gave you at least one or two examples, one debatably being the spark that started the Troubles in the late 1960's.
Or have you forgotten how Ian Paisley's started the UPV and was involved with the UFV, helping to coordinate attacks on Catholics?
They threw Molotov cocktail bombs into Catholic schools, homes, and businesses. One of the firebombs intend to burn out an Irish Catholic bar owner, instead killed an old Protestant woman.
Needless to say most of the intended Catholic victims of those firebombs moved away, which was exactly the intent of Paisley & Company.
Or is your recollection of those events different than mine?
Still waiting to here from you of Catholic areas which have been taken over by Protestants . The only thing I recognize is the Irish Catholic bar owner and the old Protestant woman.
Had a wee laugh at this piece you posted ''Instead you use it to reinforce your own view, and only speak against them when they don't say something you like. '' ....and of course you don't. From your very beginning you have shown where your support lies.
.
`
Still waiting to here from you of Catholic areas which have been taken over by Protestants . The only thing I recognize is the Irish Catholic bar owner and the old Protestant woman.
Had a wee laugh at this piece you posted ''Instead you use it to reinforce your own view, and only speak against them when they don't say something you like. '' ....and of course you don't. From your very beginning you have shown where your support lies.
.
Still waiting to here from you of Catholic areas which have been taken over by Protestants . The only thing I recognize is the Irish Catholic bar owner and the old Protestant woman.
Had a wee laugh at this piece you posted ''Instead you use it to reinforce your own view, and only speak against them when they don't say something you like. '' ....and of course you don't. From your very beginning you have shown where your support lies.
.
its slightly unfair UR to expect someone not from northern ireland to know about who moved in or out from particular areas , i wouldnt know myself let alone an american
it shouldnt preclude them from discussing other aspects of northern ireland history
you seem to think unless everyone knows which traditionally protestant areas became catholic or vice versa , you arent entitled to an opinion ?
its slightly unfair UR to expect someone not from northern ireland to know about who moved in or out from particular areas , i wouldnt know myself let alone an american
it shouldnt preclude them from discussing other aspects of northern ireland history
you seem to think unless everyone knows which traditionally protestant areas became catholic or vice versa , you arent entitled to an opinion ?
Of course I don't but I have to query some of the statements made. If I had not come onto this site there probably would have been an entirely different picture painted. Bad things happened on both sides.
Yes that's true about Americans not knowin, but then if that's the case they should be careful of what they say or allege . There is a lot of sympathy given to the Catholic Irish and it has always been that way. However, that sympathy in a lot of cases is misguided. I am only giving another side to the events which happened. Protestants were driven out of their homes as were Catholics but not on the same scale as Protestants were. That's why I asked to give Catholic areas where Protestants have driven Catholics out and then moved in. I don't know of any but maybe those who voice their opinions about happenings in Ulster can tell me.
Protestants have always been seen as the aggressors. I am only giving another side to what took place. I lived though it. Just to mention yesterday was the anniversary of the IRA bombing of the Shankill Rd when men women and children were killed. The two IRA men who did this are classed as heroes by their people.
Of course I don't but I have to query some of the statements made. If I had not come onto this site there probably would have been an entirely different picture painted. Bad things happened on both sides.
Yes that's true about Americans not knowin, but then if that's the case they should be careful of what they say or allege . There is a lot of sympathy given to the Catholic Irish and it has always been that way. However, that sympathy in a lot of cases is misguided. I am only giving another side to the events which happened. Protestants were driven out of their homes as were Catholics but not on the same scale as Protestants were. That's why I asked to give Catholic areas where Protestants have driven Catholics out and then moved in. I don't know of any but maybe those who voice their opinions about happenings in Ulster can tell me.
Protestants have always been seen as the aggressors. I am only giving another side to what took place. I lived though it. Just to mention yesterday was the anniversary of the IRA bombing of the Shankill Rd when men women and children were killed. The two IRA men who did this are classed as heroes by their people.
the majority of protestants identified with the state , as the catholic population viewed the state as being unfair towards them , they then by extension viewed the protestant population as being aligned with the state
while its obviously more nuanced than that , its how the general narrative evolved
ruth dudley edwards ( a friend of unionism and fiercely anti SF ) has repeatedly said that unionists are hopeless at PR , PR is what creates a narrative in the media age
thats not me saying you personally are wrong , its me saying thats how most people view the subject and if you think the narrative is simply down to the irish population whinging so much , well its up to unionists to up their PR game because they havent won that battle, thats for sure , not even in the British mainland
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
