Bloody Sunday (war, bomb, Ireland, military)

[Phil306]

BBC News - Bloody Sunday report will be published on 15 June

This will be a very interesting report, when it is released. My understanding is the Brits paid over 200 million pounds doing this investigation. That is close to 500 million dollars...

[Hengist]

And it's not the first one. Just keep holding enquiries until you get the result you want to hear.

I could have saved them £200 million; soldiers shot civilians and shouldn't have.

They probably want the correct result to keep the peace process going, so maybe not a complete waste of money.

[Phil306]

I disagree with your assessment. Many IRA members have now admitted, they were there, and they had firearms. Now, whether or not they fired first, is up for debate. However, the fact the IRA was present that day and the fact they were armed, is NOT under debate. The Para's fired, yes, and people died. Whether or not they were innocent? Only god knows...

[WIHS2006]

Originally Posted by Phil306

I disagree with your assessment. Many IRA members have now admitted, they were there, and they had firearms. Now, whether or not they fired first, is up for debate. However, the fact the IRA was present that day and the fact they were armed, is NOT under debate. The Para's fired, yes, and people died. Whether or not they were innocent? Only god knows...

Agreed, the IRA are a sneaky bunch and like all terrorists they know how to use the media as a weapon in their favor.

The Parachute Regiment (like the Guards regiments and the Royal Marines) are an elite bunch on par with, if not better then the best troops in our army (the US Army). If they opened fire on that crowd then they had a very damn good reason to do so (ie: armed persons shooting at them). These guys were not 18 year old conscripts who had no idea what they were doing or why they were there, they are crack top notch troops as seen by their performance in the Falklands, both wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.

[Hengist]

I'm no military expert, but if you are an elite soldier and you come under fire, then the last thing you should be doing is firing into a crowd of civilians. I'm not an apologist for the IRA, but wrong is wrong.

[WIHS2006]

Originally Posted by Hengist

I'm no military expert, but if you are an elite soldier and you come under fire, then the last thing you should be doing is firing into a crowd of civilians. I'm not an apologist for the IRA, but wrong is wrong.

That's exactly my point - meaning that at least some members of the crowd were indeed armed.

[Phil306]

"I'm no military expert"

And that, in and of itself, is all that needs to be said. However, having said that, look at it from a different point of view. YOU are the commander of a platoon of men. You orders are too hold a certain piece of ground/area. You and your men come under fire, from a crowd of people; some are armed, some are not. What do YOU do?

You open fire into the crowd. Plain and simple. Your job is to keep as many of your men/women alive as possible AND complete your mission. Everything else, including civilian casualties, are secondary. Civilian's dying, although unwanted, has happened in almost all major urban battles.

Its a great way to draw sympathy for your side and use the media in your favor. You mingle armed persons with civilians. When the civilians are killed, you scream bloody murder and you get positive press.

Look at modern history: Mogadishu, Somalia, 1993. Exactly what happened. Armed persons mixed themselves within the civlian population, believing the American's would not fire into the crowds. They were wrong and many civilian's were killed. Sad? Yes, however necessary.

Iraq War. The Iraqi's often put civilian's in military installations, to thwart bombing, etc of these targets. To a point, it worked.

War is hell. War sucks and will always suck. But, it is there. More has been accomplished through pure, raw, force, then any other way, combined. Right, wrong, or indifferent. I'd prefer to bargin from a position of superiority then not. Innocent civilian's die and that is bad; however, except for them, it is not the end of the world.

[Hengist]

Now that the report has been published I stand by my comments.

None of the 14 dead was carrying a gun

No warnings were given.

No soldiers were under threat.

The soldiers were the first to open fire.

Many were shot in the back or waving handkerchiefs while helping the dying.

Soldiers committed perjury at the enquiry.

You don't need to be a military expert to know right from wrong.

[jackmccullough]

There's a word for what the occupation forces did on Bloody Sunday: MURDER.

[Jezer]

Can anyone think of another country that would spend all that money on such a report?