[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

I have to get involved here because I've read up on the SAS's tactics when they were brought in to battle against the IRA and they ambushed and shot down many IRA members that weren't even armed at the time. I mean, every single person involved in the Troubles has blood on their hands, and don't get me started on Bloody Sunday.

Yes it really was bad to send in those nasty sassmen, butchers they are, to take on those awfully nice decent terrorist people, after all whats wrong with planting a few bombs that kill and maim innocent people? They were only expressing their ideology werent they?

The SAS were formally deployed to the Province in 1974 by Harold Wilson in response to bombing campaigns on the UK mainland including the bomb that took out a gardener a Roman Catholic Priest and 5 women working in the kitchens at the home of 3 Para(by the Official IRA in response to Bloody Sunday - 1972) and the car bomb campaign led by the Price sisters(PIRA - 1973).

Some would say, if you play with fire you get burnt.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Yes it really was bad to send in those nasty sassmen, butchers they are, to take on those awfully nice decent terrorist people, after all whats wrong with planting a few bombs that kill and maim innocent people? They were only expressing their ideology werent they?

The SAS were formally deployed to the Province in 1974 by Harold Wilson in response to bombing campaigns on the UK mainland including the bomb that took out a gardener a Roman Catholic Priest and 5 women working in the kitchens at the home of 3 Para(by the Official IRA in response to Bloody Sunday - 1972) and the car bomb campaign led by the Price sisters(PIRA - 1973).

Some would say, if you play with fire you get burnt.

Some would also say that how the British dealt with every situation that occurred within Northern Ireland, which displayed a total bias and led to many civilians as well as prisoners' deaths (Bobby Sands etc), only furthered the Nationalists sense of isolation and frustation and fanned the flames of their hatred for the State that controlled them.

You think it's ok to ambush a target and then open fire on them at point blank range? Funny how one side views things differently to another when both have killed. You think the British didn't bomb civilians or commit heinous acts while on foreign soil? Give me a break.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Some would also say that how the British dealt with every situation that occurred within Northern Ireland, which displayed a total bias and led to many civilians as well as prisoners' deaths (Bobby Sands etc), only furthered the Nationalists sense of isolation and frustation and fanned the flames of their hatred for the State that controlled them.

You think it's ok to ambush a target and then open fire on them at point blank range? Funny how one side views things differently to another when both have killed. You think the British didn't bomb civilians or commit heinous acts while on foreign soil? Give me a break.

Yeah some would say the british showed a certain bias, siding with the general population of the Province and trying to stop acts of terror being commited by both sides. Yes we know all about the claims of siding and collaberating with the loyalists etc... But what were the aims of the loyalists, what were the aims of the IRA?

Bobby Sands and co. starved themselves, whether or not that was on orders from the High Command of the IRA is open to debate. Thats for people to decide themselves.

Its a legitimate military tactic, its actually called an ambush. Funny old thing that. But its not as if the PIRA didnt use it themselves now is it? In fact in this instance werent they the ones started shooting at the troops, as opposed to the troops shooting at them? Werent they the ones planting bombs?

Or another good tactic was to take control of a house, holding the occupants at gunpoint, snipe at the passing military patrol then out the backdoor, dropping off the weapon to someone else, then attempt to escape.

Point being if you call yourself an army then attempt to engage a larger and better force at playing soldiers with real bullets, you will be amazed to find yourself taking casualties? Thats what happens when people play with guns.

You see regardless of the rights and wrongs created by history, Northern Ireland is part of the UK, the majority of the population want it to stay that way. Almost the entire population were against violence being used by either side. At times during the wee shinnanigans various people in the south also wanted it to stay that way too.

[Claymores]

Much as I like your orderly posts, I can't see that any "High Command" could order a political prisoner to starve themself to death. Think that was your British Army background talking there

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Claymores

Much as I like your orderly posts, I can't see that any "High Command" could order a political prisoner to starve themself to death. Think that was your British Army background talking there

Read up on PIRA, they organised themselves into commands and Brigades, had an army council and a high command. Members of PIRA classed themselves as soldiers and volunteers. Also if you can get it read Richard O'Rawe - Blanketman , if you can find it, puts one persons persepective of life in the Lazy K.(Long kesh - the internment/concentration camp they were interned in)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle416033.ece

The British Army of which I was never a part hasnt had a High Command.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Yeah some would say the british showed a certain bias, siding with the general population of the Province and trying to stop acts of terror being commited by both sides. Yes we know all about the claims of siding and collaberating with the loyalists etc... But what were the aims of the loyalists, what were the aims of the IRA?

Bobby Sands and co. starved themselves, whether or not that was on orders from the High Command of the IRA is open to debate. Thats for people to decide themselves.

Its a legitimate military tactic, its actually called an ambush. Funny old thing that. But its not as if the PIRA didnt use it themselves now is it? In fact in this instance werent they the ones started shooting at the troops, as opposed to the troops shooting at them? Werent they the ones planting bombs?

Or another good tactic was to take control of a house, holding the occupants at gunpoint, snipe at the passing military patrol then out the backdoor, dropping off the weapon to someone else, then attempt to escape.

Point being if you call yourself an army then attempt to engage a larger and better force at playing soldiers with real bullets, you will be amazed to find yourself taking casualties? Thats what happens when people play with guns.

You see regardless of the rights and wrongs created by history, Northern Ireland is part of the UK, the majority of the population want it to stay that way. Almost the entire population were against violence being used by either side. At times during the wee shinnanigans various people in the south also wanted it to stay that way too.

Wee shinnanigans kinda highlights exactly where you're coming from in this whole thing. Very dismissive tone for a people who were initially trampled on and not protected when they had the audacity to make a peaceful protest... how dare they want some say in a land that they've lived in for generations. The IRA was a necessary evil at a time when the loyalists had already armed themselves and Nationalists were getting no support from the State.

The SAS executed many of the IRA. Just took them out in ambushes. Would they do the same to loyalists? Would it have reached that stage had they been more inclined to listen to the problems of the people of Northern Ireland? And again, you never answered about the atrocities committed by British troops in Iraq.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Wee shinnanigans kinda highlights exactly where you're coming from in this whole thing. Very dismissive tone for a people who were initially trampled on and not protected when they had the audacity to make a peaceful protest... how dare they want some say in a land that they've lived in for generations. The IRA was a necessary evil at a time when the loyalists had already armed themselves and Nationalists were getting no support from the State.

The SAS executed many of the IRA. Just took them out in ambushes. Would they do the same to loyalists? Would it have reached that stage had they been more inclined to listen to the problems of the people of Northern Ireland? And again, you never answered about the atrocities committed by British troops in Iraq.

Correct me if I am wrong here, but the troops were deployed to the Six counties to protect the Catholic Communities. They were sent to aid the civil powers, now a minor little problem was both sides of the divide had decided to arm themselves. The Catholic enclaves receiving money from amongst other places the government in Eire. The right to bear arms is actually a right enshrined in the US constitution its not allowed in the UK or the republic of Ireland.

So when the troops asked for the weapons and ammunition, didnt the people with the weapons decide to send the ammunition first, through the barrels of the weapons?

Wasn't it only in the mid 80's that PIRA dropped its assertion about the illegalities of the Government of the Irish Republic and Sinn Fein dropped its abstentionist policy towards the Dáil

Incidentally in 1955 in case you didnt know internment was re-introduced in Northern Ireland and it was used on both Loyalist and Nationalist groups.

Change was taking place at the time but unfortunately not fast enough for some.

Executed the IRA? Behave PIRA and the INLA wanted to be treat as soldiers, to be the heroes of the Armed Struggle. If you are engaged in a struggle with insurgents, then you remove the insurgents. Which particular ambush are you talking about?

Loyalists were ambushed using the same tactics. Most of these ambushes were against either men already armed, in the stages of arming themselves planting bombs or moving the explosives to the point of detonation. Sorry but thats a legal and legitimate tactic. Or maybe you think they should have not opened fire at all and just let get on with it?

What atrocities in Iraq? Real or alleged, then investigated and disciplined when necessary?

[setanta]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Correct me if I am wrong here, but the troops were deployed to the Six counties to protect the Catholic Communities. They were sent to aid the civil powers, now a minor little problem was both sides of the divide had decided to arm themselves. The Catholic enclaves receiving money from amongst other places the government in Eire. The right to bear arms is actually a right enshrined in the US constitution its not allowed in the UK or the republic of Ireland.

So when the troops asked for the weapons and ammunition, didnt the people with the weapons decide to send the ammunition first, through the barrels of the weapons?

Wasn't it only in the mid 80's that PIRA dropped its assertion about the illegalities of the Government of the Irish Republic and Sinn Fein dropped its abstentionist policy towards the Dáil

Incidentally in 1955 in case you didnt know internment was re-introduced in Northern Ireland and it was used on both Loyalist and Nationalist groups.

Change was taking place at the time but unfortunately not fast enough for some.

Executed the IRA? Behave PIRA and the INLA wanted to be treat as soldiers, to be the heroes of the Armed Struggle. If you are engaged in a struggle with insurgents, then you remove the insurgents. Which particular ambush are you talking about?

Loyalists were ambushed using the same tactics. Most of these ambushes were against either men already armed, in the stages of arming themselves planting bombs or moving the explosives to the point of detonation. Sorry but thats a legal and legitimate tactic. Or maybe you think they should have not opened fire at all and just let get on with it?

What atrocities in Iraq? Real or alleged, then investigated and disciplined when necessary?

Yes, they were sent arms from Eire as well as abroad because they were being beaten by the State and looted and vandalised by Loyalists groups, who incidentally were the first to arm themselves and kill someone in the struggle.

You have to remember the scenario within Northern Ireland at the time: a sectarian regime that oppressed the Roman Catholics in many areas of their lives. And what happened when they decided to make a peaceful protest to highlight these injustices?

And don't talk to me about the British reaction to events within Northen Ireland, which always showed a complete bias in favour of the Loyalists. And yet again, you're chosing to highlight the IRA's campaign here rather than accept that every group were responsible for some terrible acts. That's what war is.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by setanta

Yes, they were sent arms from Eire as well as abroad because they were being beaten by the State and looted and vandalised by Loyalists groups, who incidentally were the first to arm themselves and kill someone in the struggle.

You have to remember the scenario within Northern Ireland at the time: a sectarian regime that oppressed the Roman Catholics in many areas of their lives. And what happened when they decided to make a peaceful protest to highlight these injustices?

And don't talk to me about the British reaction to events within Northen Ireland, which always showed a complete bias in favour of the Loyalists. And yet again, you're chosing to highlight the IRA's campaign here rather than accept that every group were responsible for some terrible acts. That's what war is.

I am not saying anyone is to blame, nor am i saying everyone is to blame. I am simply providing facts to counterpoint your rather open statements.

Yes the Catholics were initially the wronged party, thats why the troops went in. Because of the way the government at Stormont and all local councils were highly biaised in favour of the Protestant/loyalist community, Home rule from stormont was suspended. In the 70's it looked it could have been brought back through the Sunningdale agreement, however the Ulster Unionists dug their heels in and it remained suspended. I dont dispute any of that.

Nor have I disputed what happened on Bloody Sunday. I simply stated the reasoning that the people who made the decisions that led to those mistakes actually made them. Thats not to excuse them, I have in fact stated on these forums not only should the troops involved be held accountable but also the leaders and civil servants who took the decisions that were made leading up to the incident should also be held accountable.

I dont dispute the RUC and UDR colluded with loyalist forces, that was bound to happen given both the RUC and the UDR were mainly manned by protestants. Not only that I can give instances were UDR and RUC memners were also found to be members of loyalist paramilitary groups.

I do though dispute broad brush inflammatory statements like the SAS executed IRA members. They were engaged in counter insurgency operations where their enemy would not hesitate to take not only their lives but completely disregarded any collateral damage inflicted upon civilians. In fact by the very nature of some of their operations PIRA/RIRA/CIRA/INLA/IPLO intended to kill and maim civilians to inflict terror in order to acheieve their aims.

Consequently at times especially where explosives were involved it was necessary to ensure that those explosive could not be detonated at the time of the attempted arrest. If people moved when challenged then they got shot, simply to prevent this.

You should also remember that what you class as political prisoners from the republican side were released as part of the Good Friday Agreement. Where are the prisoners of the IRA? Some of those republican prisoners were arrested by the SAS during operations, hardly the actions of state sponsored assassins.

One of the hunger strikers, in fact the second to die was Francis Hughes he was at the time of his arrest the most wanted man in Ulster, he was arrested after a shootout with an SAS patrol, during the shootout one member of the sabre team was killed and another seriously wounded. If they were in the habit of shooting IRA members on sight, wouldnt they have just slotted him? No one would have known.

A little known fact an attempt was made on the life of a Republican MP called Bernadette (Devlin) McAliskey by loyalist paramilitaries in 1981. Although both she and her husband were shot, her life was saved by a British Army patrol, which had been tasked to the area by an SAS observation team on seeing the assassination team move into the area. The OP team couldnt stop the attempt because it would have compromised them, nor did they have the firepower. However they also tasked helicopter casualty evacuation for her. They also directed another patrol that succeeded in arresting the UFF paramilitaries who had carried out the attack.

There was no shoot to kill policy within any sector of the British Armed Forces in Northern Ireland. I cant speak for certain self contained RUC units, but nor was there one within mainstream RUC.