Political Crossfire Forums

Andrew_Belfast · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 4

i honestly dont know what this call for a disarm is going to achieve, and why it is only focused on the IRA! i can, without a doubt say that there is no way it will happen just because the US special envoy says so, the weapons are a tool for political negotiation, and a powerful one at that! the IRA, or anyother paramilitary group active in the northern ireland situation would see it foolish to give up this huge advantage[/quote]

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

That is exactly what is wrong with Northern Ireland. Organisations such as the IRA, UVF, INLA, and UDA all use weapons to frighten and intimidate voters and frighten people who want to move Northern Ireland Forward and away from religous bigotry.

Andrew_Belfast · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 4

i am of the firm opinion that the situation here will never change, no matter what. even though 72% of the people voted for the agreement there is always going to be the minority of people, on both sides, who are prepared to do anything to keep the status quo.

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

Your probably right but that group are the ones who will lose not only their influence but money as well.

Andrew_Belfast · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 4

i suppose thats true, with the recent violent defection of grass roots supporters it cant help but harm the stronghold of the paramilitaries

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

The splintering of paramilitary groups can be very very dangerous as the tendency is for internal arguments to be settled on the streets and lanes of the groups areas of influence. With the losers being the innocents caught in the crossfire.

Andrew_Belfast · Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Posts: 4

splintering is a problem which is often never addressed within legitimate political spheres, everyone is more concerned with the present. much to everyones surprise the real IRA came to the forefront with a bang, excuse the pun. and in recent surveys it has been shown that hey are the fastest growing paramilitary group in the north, a scary prospect

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

With the push toward reconciliation maybe it's about time some Real leaders can from both communities to try and bridge the divide Paisley and Adams are to tied up with the past. Splinter groups are normally Hard liners who cannot stand the thought of compromise

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

For any following this story on Thursday 11th of March Westminster (British Parliament) suspended all payments to the 4 Sinn Fein MPs. Check out any British News site for full story.

Scribbler1 · Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:33 am Post subject:

I'm wondering why the Bush administration would even mention Ireland. What will we do, invade them if they don't stop fighting? Bush has no U.N. resolution to back him up and the Irish haven't attacked the U.S. so taking that stance is beyond pointless.
Usually such statements are designed to clarify or reinforce a policy by the country making the statement. Did anyone think we SUPPORTED the IRA until now? Do we feel the need to tell the world we don't like a terrorist organization? And since the IRA hasn't been motivated by a parade of British PMs calling for the end to hostilities what is the point of the United States saying anything at all?

Windy · Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 3451 Location: Wolverhampton

Scribbler1 wrote: I'm wondering why the Bush administration would even mention Ireland. What will we do, invade them if they don't stop fighting? Bush has no U.N. resolution to back him up and the Irish haven't attacked the U.S. so taking that stance is beyond pointless.
Usually such statements are designed to clarify or reinforce a policy by the country making the statement. Did anyone think we SUPPORTED the IRA until now? Do we feel the need to tell the world we don't like a terrorist organization? And since the IRA hasn't been motivated by a parade of British PMs calling for the end to hostilities what is the point of the United States saying anything at all?

You did support then, Presidents have invited Gerry Adams to the White House, the IRA has been given millions by Americans to kill English people with.

Scribbler1 · Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 12:58 pm Post subject:

Windy wrote: Scribbler1 wrote: I'm wondering why the Bush administration would even mention Ireland. What will we do, invade them if they don't stop fighting? Bush has no U.N. resolution to back him up and the Irish haven't attacked the U.S. so taking that stance is beyond pointless.
Usually such statements are designed to clarify or reinforce a policy by the country making the statement. Did anyone think we SUPPORTED the IRA until now? Do we feel the need to tell the world we don't like a terrorist organization? And since the IRA hasn't been motivated by a parade of British PMs calling for the end to hostilities what is the point of the United States saying anything at all?

You did support then, Presidents have invited Gerry Adams to the White House, the IRA has been given millions by Americans to kill English people with.
I had forgotten about Adams, but if memory serves we were talking with him with the assumption he was politically powerful enough to help end the terrorism (possibly not a proper term to use here) where we had no actual pull with the IRA. In other words it may have been better to deal with him than no one at all.
As far as Americans sending money to the IRA or any other group over there, that was without government approval. Just another example of how Americans do stupid s**t all the time. Just look at the various religious cults a lot of Americans support, even to the point of suicide. After that, giving money to the IRA seems almose sensible.

Windy · Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 3451 Location: Wolverhampton

Without government approval but the government didn't try and stop people either, which it easily could do.

Scribbler1 · Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:38 pm Post subject:

Windy wrote: Without government approval but the government didn't try and stop people either, which it easily could do. Not OUR government, Windy. Unless we are actually at war with them we can give money to anyone we like, and I'm not positive we can't THEN either, but I don't think so.
We may not have them for much longer, but I believe Americans have more personal rights than many other democracies.

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

Windy dear boy British soldiers not English even a rabid nationalist like me Knows that English, Scots and Welsh not to mention Irish men and women have died in the Northern Irish Troubles. So please at least acknowledge that England is not the Whole UK.

thundertaker · Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 4:44 pm Post subject:

The IRA never planted bombs in Scotland and Wales to the best of my knowledge..........

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

No but Scots and Welsh soldiers were Killed in Northern Ireland. As part of the British Army.

Windy · Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 3451 Location: Wolverhampton

They didn't target Welsh and Scottish civilians did they?

thundertaker · Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:19 am Post subject:

http://politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22980

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

In reply to Windy no but then you Don't attack areas were you have support. The shame of Scotland is the fact that large numbers of Scots are s*cked into the Irish Question because of Family Links and Football. (Celtic & Rangers)