Political Crossfire Forums

[Lucky Luke]

thundertaker wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: red dragon wrote: What bloody difference does it make they would all turn in on themselves and tear eachother apart if it wasn't for the police force and some resemblance of law and order. You should ask these apologists how they feel about the IRA kidnapping innocents wives and kids and making the father drive a suicide bomb into a police checkpoint. As what has happened before, they learnt that from their friends the PLO........

The IRA was the biggest freedom fighting movement in Europe for a long time, now Bliar arrest me!



:-D
:-D

Did you ever get deployed to NI when you were in the Army? Just curious.....

No, and yet not all Israeli soldiers believe in murdering Palestinians just like not every British soldier believes in killing Iraqi people.
I did not believe in killing any German civilian, I was lucky I did not have to kill any.
:-D
:-D

[Lucky Luke]

thundertaker wrote: red dragon wrote: SSSSSSSHHHHHHHH some questions should not be asked in presence os cedrtain people!! :h :h :h :h \/ \/

What, like former comrades who might be pissed off with his IRA-worship?

I do not worship the IRA but they were who they were and nobody can deny how strong they were. Thatcher recognised its might and dealt with it, why can't you?

:-D
:-D

[Lucky Luke]

mulberrymagnet wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: red dragon wrote: What bloody difference does it make they would all turn in on themselves and tear eachother apart if it wasn't for the police force and some resemblance of law and order. You should ask these apologists how they feel about the IRA kidnapping innocents wives and kids and making the father drive a suicide bomb into a police checkpoint. As what has happened before, they learnt that from their friends the PLO........

The IRA was the biggest freedom fighting movement in Europe for a long time, now Bliar arrest me!



:-D
:-D

Aside from killing innocent men, women and children, MP's etc and shooting soldiers from great distances, it wasn't too hot though was it? With all that manpower, I thought they could have done a little better than what they did. Perhaps they were just badly lead.

Does planting bombs in shops and pubs make you tough?

It made each of them a member of the strongest freedom fighting force in western Europe, they were very successful at terrorising people, this was the way they fought. I don't know any better way to keep on an armed struggle, do you Mulberrymagnet?

:-D
:-D

[mulberrymagnet]

Lucky Luke wrote: mulberrymagnet wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: red dragon wrote: What bloody difference does it make they would all turn in on themselves and tear eachother apart if it wasn't for the police force and some resemblance of law and order. You should ask these apologists how they feel about the IRA kidnapping innocents wives and kids and making the father drive a suicide bomb into a police checkpoint. As what has happened before, they learnt that from their friends the PLO........

The IRA was the biggest freedom fighting movement in Europe for a long time, now Bliar arrest me!



:-D
:-D

Aside from killing innocent men, women and children, MP's etc and shooting soldiers from great distances, it wasn't too hot though was it? With all that manpower, I thought they could have done a little better than what they did. Perhaps they were just badly lead.

Does planting bombs in shops and pubs make you tough?

It made each of them a member of the strongest freedom fighting force in western Europe, they were very successful at terrorising people, this was the way they fought. I don't know any better way to keep on an armed struggle, do you Mulberrymagnet?

:-D
:-D

Oh, so terrorising children is the benchmark of being an effective 'freedom fighting force' eh? And there are many ways of keeping it going, ways which the IRA used, outside of being 'effective' as you describe it. They stole, extorted, murdered.. anything to keep a grip on power and to finance the perpetuation of their sick angst.

This relates to the most 'effective' military organisation arguement. Effectiveness isn't all about brute strength, its not always all about being strong and bashing the crap out of your opponents. They failed to win their campaign, but in the proces of their glorious defeat, they killed thousands of innocent people. In my book, that doesn't make them effective, and killing children certainly doesn't make them a force for freedom. If you have to kill innocent men, women and children to fulfill your perception of 'freedom', then you can stick it.

Keeping 'on' an armed struggle for the sake of it is pointless, it reduces them to villains and crooks, which, lets face it, is what they were/are. Would you say that the Krays were an effective fighting force? No, they just bullied and terrorised normal people. If you want to refer to the IRA as an effective fighting force, lets analyse their record against soldiers.. real people who fought back. Not so hot, is it?

[red dragon]

Lucky Luke wrote: thundertaker wrote: red dragon wrote: SSSSSSSHHHHHHHH some questions should not be asked in presence os cedrtain people!! :h :h :h :h \/ \/

What, like former comrades who might be pissed off with his IRA-worship?

I do not worship the IRA but they were who they were and nobody can deny how strong they were. Thatcher recognised its might and dealt with it, why can't you?

:-D
:-D

I was referring to some people who maybe ex armed forces and for security reasons should be careful, especially in lieu of the people that they are speaking to, it's not a pop at you.

[Lucky Luke]

mulberrymagnet wrote:

Oh, so terrorising children is the benchmark of being an effective 'freedom fighting force' eh? And there are many ways of keeping it going, ways which the IRA used, outside of being 'effective' as you describe it. They stole, extorted, murdered.. anything to keep a grip on power and to finance the perpetuation of their sick angst.

This relates to the most 'effective' military organisation arguement. Effectiveness isn't all about brute strength, its not always all about being strong and bashing the crap out of your opponents. They failed to win their campaign, but in the proces of their glorious defeat, they killed thousands of innocent people. In my book, that doesn't make them effective, and killing children certainly doesn't make them a force for freedom. If you have to kill innocent men, women and children to fulfill your perception of 'freedom', then you can stick it.

Keeping 'on' an armed struggle for the sake of it is pointless, it reduces them to villains and crooks, which, lets face it, is what they were/are. Would you say that the Krays were an effective fighting force? No, they just bullied and terrorised normal people. If you want to refer to the IRA as an effective fighting force, lets analyse their record against soldiers.. real people who fought back. Not so hot, is it?

Terrorists are here to terrorise and they need proper finance to keep going, this is the way it works all over Mulberrymagnet when people are fighting a mighty regular army.

Your claim that they want to stay in power is denied by what is happening today. They were brave enough to fight and brave enough to stop when they realised that they could not win, the other side Margaret Thatcher was too brave enough to talk to them.

Terrorists don't fight soldiers, they terrorise the populations. At the end of the day the IRA has been dictating the pace of the peace process, they are responsible people who are looking for a positive outcome to their cause. Don't be fooled by thinking that they wouldn't start the fight again if people like you can't understand what Margaret Thatcher understood.

:-D
:-D

[Lucky Luke]

red dragon wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: thundertaker wrote: red dragon wrote: SSSSSSSHHHHHHHH some questions should not be asked in presence os cedrtain people!! :h :h :h :h \/ \/

What, like former comrades who might be pissed off with his IRA-worship?

I do not worship the IRA but they were who they were and nobody can deny how strong they were. Thatcher recognised its might and dealt with it, why can't you?

:-D
:-D

I was referring to some people who maybe ex armed forces and for security reasons should be careful, especially in lieu of the people that they are speaking to, it's not a pop at you.

I was answering Thundertaker's post not yours Red Dragon.

:-D
:-D

[mulberrymagnet]

Lucky Luke wrote: mulberrymagnet wrote:

Oh, so terrorising children is the benchmark of being an effective 'freedom fighting force' eh? And there are many ways of keeping it going, ways which the IRA used, outside of being 'effective' as you describe it. They stole, extorted, murdered.. anything to keep a grip on power and to finance the perpetuation of their sick angst.

This relates to the most 'effective' military organisation arguement. Effectiveness isn't all about brute strength, its not always all about being strong and bashing the crap out of your opponents. They failed to win their campaign, but in the proces of their glorious defeat, they killed thousands of innocent people. In my book, that doesn't make them effective, and killing children certainly doesn't make them a force for freedom. If you have to kill innocent men, women and children to fulfill your perception of 'freedom', then you can stick it.

Keeping 'on' an armed struggle for the sake of it is pointless, it reduces them to villains and crooks, which, lets face it, is what they were/are. Would you say that the Krays were an effective fighting force? No, they just bullied and terrorised normal people. If you want to refer to the IRA as an effective fighting force, lets analyse their record against soldiers.. real people who fought back. Not so hot, is it?

Terrorists are here to terrorise and they need proper finance to keep going, this is the way it works all over Mulberrymagnet when people are fighting a mighty regular army.

Your claim that they want to stay in power is denied by what is happening today. They were brave enough to fight and brave enough to stop when they realised that they could not win, the other side Margaret Thatcher was too brave enough to talk to them.

Terrorists don't fight soldiers, they terrorise the populations. At the end of the day the IRA has been dictating the pace of the peace process, they are responsible people who are looking for a positive outcome to their cause. Don't be fooled by thinking that they wouldn't start the fight again if people like you can't understand what Margaret Thatcher understood.

:-D
:-D

So, lets get this right. Are you condoning what they did, or are you simply an apologist? You contradict yourself, so many times in fact in one post, its almost amusing. Are they 'fighting a mighty regular army' or aren't they? I say that, because you mention that in the first para and then go on to say that '..terrorists don't fight soldiers, they terrorise the populations'. Make your mind up! :roll:

Moving on.. 'Bravery', now there's a word.

How much bravery does it take to plant a bomb under hundreds of people's cars, people with children who had no part of their 'struggle'? How much bravery does it take to walk into a crowded bar and place a shopping bag full of explosives under a table? Is that the sort of bravery that you condone?

I'm fully aware that the IRA is not to be trusted one iota, thankfully neither are the security forces. As time goes by, more intelligence is being gathered and the terrorist becomes more stagnant. Thankfully too, as time goes by, even more and more Irish people in Eire and British people in Northern Ireland will come to realise that peace is by far and away the better option. Northern Ireland is starting to flourish, something that must really smart for those murdering bastards. The Brits in Northen Ireland had no say in those warped scum bombing them, but they certainly had their say in the polls didn't they? That must really smart the murderers, to know that for all those years, they killed innocent people and it got them nowhere, and all along, the people didn't want any part of it either.

Still, in your book, I bet terrorism pays no attention to what the people really want does it.. it assumes they don't know what's best for them eh?

[red dragon]

Lucky Luke, your ex army and you act like you haven't a clue about the security and tactics of the IRA, surely you were briefed in the army?

[Lucky Luke]

mulberrymagnet wrote: Lucky Luke wrote:

Terrorists are here to terrorise and they need proper finance to keep going, this is the way it works all over Mulberrymagnet when people are fighting a mighty regular army.

Your claim that they want to stay in power is denied by what is happening today. They were brave enough to fight and brave enough to stop when they realised that they could not win, the other side Margaret Thatcher was too brave enough to talk to them.

Terrorists don't fight soldiers, they terrorise the populations. At the end of the day the IRA has been dictating the pace of the peace process, they are responsible people who are looking for a positive outcome to their cause. Don't be fooled by thinking that they wouldn't start the fight again if people like you can't understand what Margaret Thatcher understood.

:-D
:-D

So, lets get this right. Are you condoning what they did, or are you simply an apologist? You contradict yourself, so many times in fact in one post, its almost amusing. Are they 'fighting a mighty regular army' or aren't they? I say that, because you mention that in the first para and then go on to say that '..terrorists don't fight soldiers, they terrorise the populations'. Make your mind up! :roll:

Moving on.. 'Bravery', now there's a word.

How much bravery does it take to plant a bomb under hundreds of people's cars, people with children who had no part of their 'struggle'? How much bravery does it take to walk into a crowded bar and place a shopping bag full of explosives under a table? Is that the sort of bravery that you condone?

I'm fully aware that the IRA is not to be trusted one iota, thankfully neither are the security forces. As time goes by, more intelligence is being gathered and the terrorist becomes more stagnant. Thankfully too, as time goes by, even more and more Irish people in Eire and British people in Northern Ireland will come to realise that peace is by far and away the better option. Northern Ireland is starting to flourish, something that must really smart for those murdering bastards. The Brits in Northen Ireland had no say in those warped scum bombing them, but they certainly had their say in the polls didn't they? That must really smart the murderers, to know that for all those years, they killed innocent people and it got them nowhere, and all along, the people didn't want any part of it either.

Still, in your book, I bet terrorism pays no attention to what the people really want does it.. it assumes they don't know what's best for them eh?

If you listen to the IRA statements you would know that the IRA has nothing to apologise for.

Any armed conflict results in a lot of civilians killed, in fact terrorism doesn't mean that a lot of civilians get killed compared to other forms of armed conflict, intense bombing from the air is usually the main cause of civilian deaths.

No freedom fighter would face a regular army with no hope of wining, terrorism is the only way to fight a regular army. You are right the best way to defeat a mighty army is not to fight it but to terrorise their families at home.

Bravery has no place in any modern armed conflict Mulberrymagnet, surviving and be able to fight another day is the way to go about it. Regular armies are certainly the less brave of all, bombing civilian population from the air has nothing to do with bravery, you must understand wars to understand how people fight.

The killing got the IRA to where it is today, at the centre of the discussions about the future of Northern Ireland.
I don't remember Bliar and Bush paying any attention to what people wanted. The IRA always had the support of its community.

Northern Ireland is not British and never has been, it is Irish.

:-D
:-D

[Lucky Luke]

red dragon wrote: Lucky Luke, your ex army and you act like you haven't a clue about the security and tactics of the IRA, surely you were briefed in the army?

The IRA has never been a big problem in Germany.

:-D
:-D

[red dragon]

Lucky Luke wrote: red dragon wrote: Lucky Luke, your ex army and you act like you haven't a clue about the security and tactics of the IRA, surely you were briefed in the army?

The IRA has never been a big problem in Germany.

:-D
:-D

Of course they were, when were you in Germany?? They shot and killed Australian civilians, RAF and Army personel, including a pregnant women, the wife of an RAF corporal, now that is bravery.......she died by the way, so did the child. When exactly were you in Germany??

[mulberrymagnet]

Red,

I happened to be passing through Bruggen in October 1989, just down the road from Wildenrath when that RAF Cpl was getting his car refueled opposite the Brattie place. Luke's brave boys walked up to the rear of the car and put as many rounds through the rear window as they could before legging it. Not only did the serviceman die, but their baby did too. His name was Maheshkumar Islania and he was just 34. The baby seat in the back holding Nivruti must have been visible to them. I saw the SOCO fots.. I would have despatched the cowardly swine myself, quite happily. Nivruti would have been 17 now, what part did she play in Luke's random nightmarish view of a 'united Iteland' I wonder?

That people of the likes of Luke can defend vile filth like that, just strengthens people's resolve to defeat them. How he can say that the IRA don't have to defend murdering that baby is beyond most normal and civilised people's comprehension. He's out of touch with what Brits in NI want, and that just makes the likes of him more wrankled through marginalisation. They and he, are in the minority, and no matter how many innocents they kill, they will always be in the minority.

I'm sure Luke will be thrilled at the idea of the serviceman being killed, but in a reflective moment, I hope he remembers Nivruit tonight, and her mum Smita, who watched her husband and baby murdered infront of her.

Luke,

I was an infanteer for over 20 years. I'm aware how wars are fought AND I'm aware how the IRA murder people. Please, whatever else happens to be going in your head, don't fool yourself into mixing up those two.

[Lucky Luke]

red dragon wrote:

Of course they were, when were you in Germany?? They shot and killed Australian civilians, RAF and Army personel, including a pregnant women, the wife of an RAF corporal, now that is bravery.......she died by the way, so did the child. When exactly were you in Germany??

Enough of this Red Dragon, this thread is not about my life.

The killings happened in Wildenrath and Dortmund in the late 80's and early 90's, experts of the conflict wrote that the IRA intended to spread the terror away from Northern Ireland to maximise the coverage in the media abroad. This has been repeated by all terrorists movements since.

The IRA justified their killings just like we justified ours, there isn't such a thing than a clean war when you are outnumbered and outfought.
:-D
:-D

[mulberrymagnet]

Lucky Luke wrote: red dragon wrote:

Of course they were, when were you in Germany?? They shot and killed Australian civilians, RAF and Army personel, including a pregnant women, the wife of an RAF corporal, now that is bravery.......she died by the way, so did the child. When exactly were you in Germany??

Enough of this Red Dragon, this thread is not about my life.

The killing happened in Dortmund in the 90's, experts of the conflict wrote that the IRA intended to spread the terror away from Northern Ireland to maximise the coverage in the media abroad. This has been repeated by all terrorists movements since.

The IRA justified their killings just like we justified ours, there isn't such a thing than a clean war when you are outnumbered and outfought.
:-D
:-D

See my previous post (above) to you.

You're talking complete and utter rubbish. '.. maximise the coverage in the media abroad'? :lol: The German and Dutch g'ments all but put a news embargo on IRA activity on their land. You're confusing the IRA 'bullet and the ballot box' phase with a mix of 'one more push' and 'green base' (the murdering dullards never could agree on strategy). When they murdered Ian Shinner and his mates in Roermond, it went almost unmentioned.

At least if you're going to come here and talk crap, don't try and assume people know less than you, which lets face it, appears to be pretty minimal.

[thundertaker]

Isn't the IRA the reason why british service members were banned from wearing uniform off duty and off base? As opposed to the days back in WWII or national Service when service members went to the pub without changing into civilian clothes?

[Lucky Luke]

mulberrymagnet wrote: Red,

I happened to be passing through Bruggen in October 1989, just down the road from Wildenrath when that RAF Cpl was getting his car refueled opposite the Brattie place. Luke's brave boys walked up to the rear of the car and put as many rounds through the rear window as they could before legging it. Not only did the serviceman die, but their baby did too. His name was Maheshkumar Islania and he was just 34. The baby seat in the back holding Nivruti must have been visible to them. I saw the SOCO fots.. I would have despatched the cowardly swine myself, quite happily. Nivruti would have been 17 now, what part did she play in Luke's random nightmarish view of a 'united Iteland' I wonder?

That people of the likes of Luke can defend vile filth like that, just strengthens people's resolve to defeat them. How he can say that the IRA don't have to defend murdering that baby is beyond most normal and civilised people's comprehension. He's out of touch with what Brits in NI want, and that just makes the likes of him more wrankled through marginalisation. They and he, are in the minority, and no matter how many innocents they kill, they will always be in the minority.

I'm sure Luke will be thrilled at the idea of the serviceman being killed, but in a reflective moment, I hope he remembers Nivruit tonight, and her mum Smita, who watched her husband and baby murdered infront of her.

Luke,

I was an infanteer for over 20 years. I'm aware how wars are fought AND I'm aware how the IRA murder people. Please, whatever else happens to be going in your head, don't fool yourself into mixing up those two.

In any wars children will die Mulberrymagnet, if you cannot accept this then I can't see what made you choose to serve your country.

The IRA was very aware of this and yet they put out a statement at the time:

Quote: I.R.A. Says It Regrets Killing
Print Save SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: October 28, 1989
LEAD: The Irish Republican Army said today that its gunmen killed a Royal Air Force corporal and his 6-month-old daughter in West Germany, and it expressed ''profound regret'' for killing the child. Cpl. Maheshkumar Islania, 34 years old, died when two gunmen opened fire at his car in a snack-bar parking lot outside the British air base at Wildenrath.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEFDA1238F93BA15753C1A96F948260

Nobody wants to kill children but we all have to understand that children will die.

Do you believe that Margaret Thatcher was mistaken to negotiate with the IRA Mulberrymagnet?

:-D
:-D

[mulberrymagnet]

Lucky Luke wrote: mulberrymagnet wrote: Red,

I happened to be passing through Bruggen in October 1989, just down the road from Wildenrath when that RAF Cpl was getting his car refueled opposite the Brattie place. Luke's brave boys walked up to the rear of the car and put as many rounds through the rear window as they could before legging it. Not only did the serviceman die, but their baby did too. His name was Maheshkumar Islania and he was just 34. The baby seat in the back holding Nivruti must have been visible to them. I saw the SOCO fots.. I would have despatched the cowardly swine myself, quite happily. Nivruti would have been 17 now, what part did she play in Luke's random nightmarish view of a 'united Iteland' I wonder?

That people of the likes of Luke can defend vile filth like that, just strengthens people's resolve to defeat them. How he can say that the IRA don't have to defend murdering that baby is beyond most normal and civilised people's comprehension. He's out of touch with what Brits in NI want, and that just makes the likes of him more wrankled through marginalisation. They and he, are in the minority, and no matter how many innocents they kill, they will always be in the minority.

I'm sure Luke will be thrilled at the idea of the serviceman being killed, but in a reflective moment, I hope he remembers Nivruit tonight, and her mum Smita, who watched her husband and baby murdered infront of her.

Luke,

I was an infanteer for over 20 years. I'm aware how wars are fought AND I'm aware how the IRA murder people. Please, whatever else happens to be going in your head, don't fool yourself into mixing up those two.

In any wars children will die Mulberrymagnet, if you cannot accept this then I can't see what made you choose to serve your country.
The IRA was very aware of this and yet they put out a statement at the time:

Quote: I.R.A. Says It Regrets Killing
Print Save SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: October 28, 1989
LEAD: The Irish Republican Army said today that its gunmen killed a Royal Air Force corporal and his 6-month-old daughter in West Germany, and it expressed ''profound regret'' for killing the child. Cpl. Maheshkumar Islania, 34 years old, died when two gunmen opened fire at his car in a snack-bar parking lot outside the British air base at Wildenrath.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEFDA1238F93BA15753C1A96F948260

Nobody wants to kill children but we all have to understand that children will die.

Do you believe that Margaret Thatcher was mistaken to negotiate with the IRA Mulberrymagnet?

:-D
:-D

".. we all have to understand that children will die". You sicko, of course children die, but they aren't always targeted. Does expressing regret make it better for you to sleep at night? I decided to serve my country for many reasons, having the chance to defeat sick scum like you was just a bonus.

[thundertaker]

Quote: In any wars children will die Mulberrymagnet, if you cannot accept this then I can't see what made you choose to serve your country.

What the hell made you choose to serve yours?!?

[Lucky Luke]

mulberrymagnet wrote:

See my previous post (above) to you.

You're talking complete and utter rubbish. '.. maximise the coverage in the media abroad'? :lol: The German and Dutch g'ments all but put a news embargo on IRA activity on their land. You're confusing the IRA 'bullet and the ballot box' phase with a mix of 'one more push' and 'green base' (the murdering dullards never could agree on strategy). When they murdered Ian Shinner and his mates in Roermond, it went almost unmentioned.

At least if you're going to come here and talk crap, don't try and assume people know less than you, which lets face it, appears to be pretty minimal.

I agree with the following statement:

Quote: It has been argued that this bombing campaign helped convince the British government (who had hoped to contain the conflict to Northern Ireland with its Ulsterisation policy) to negotiate with Sinn Fein after the IRA ceasefires of August 1994 and July 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army

:-D
:-D