21 1 min 6 yrs

I read this with disgust.

Sinn Fein MLA and Policing Board member Gerry Kelly has used the republican Easter uprising commemoration in Belfast to praise what he called the “bravery, leadership and commitment” of the Troubles-era IRA.

Speaking at the Milltown Cemetery gathering, the North Belfast MLA also evoked an infamous Gerry Adams quip from August 1995, saying: “Let us send out this political message. Not only have we not gone away but we are getting stronger by the day.”

Clear enough. Proud of the slaughter and mayhem, admitting that the scum concerned have gone nowhere but INTO the establishment.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

21 thoughts on “NO REGRETS – 2000 DEAD, THEY GOT WHAT WAS COMING?

  1. Why wouldn’t they be proud. a couple hundred paddies beat one of the most powerful armies that ever existed!

    Its kind of like expecting the North Vietnamese not to be proud

  2. Yes Mahons but atleast now they are allowed full participation, or not as they so choose

  3. Great. So thousands died and many more maimed so they could have what could have been obtained without it.

    How proud they must be.

  4. Mahons

    If nationalists had engaged is only peaceful means I think we would still have an Orange government in Stormont. Because that government certainly never confined themselves to peaceful means and our Civil Rights marches were beaten off the streets. In the USA a strong federal government with a commitment to civil rights forced change on the southern states. There was no such government in London. As best they didn’t want to know and at worst they were active allies of the Orange state.

    I’m happy to concede that violence was not the solution for us but it was necessary to prove that it wasn’t going to work for them either even when they were able to call on the tanks and guns of the British army to back them up.

    David

    gone nowhere but INTO the establishment.

    So what’s your objection to the agreement that made that happen if you believe that’s what happened. How is unionism decayed after such a victory?

  5. no SG if nationalists had engaged in only peaceful means the victory would have come and would have come with respect and honor.

    Instead the Irish are the shame of the western world. Violence is never acceptable as a means of internal political change.

  6. Violence is never acceptable as a means of internal political change.

    Maybe if George Washington had been content to petition the King then America would have nearly won it’s freedom by now too.

    Instead the Irish are the shame of the western world.

    I have to say I’m not feeling that. There is far more shame about the war in Iraq for example. The US/UK alliance are held in very low esteem because of that that Ireland has ever been for anything.

  7. It’s pointless discussing whether violence by nationalist was right or wrong. In the context of NI, it was inevitable.

    Unionism of course started the violence and the killings, and the NI state was set up through violence and coercion in the first place, and unless Catholic Irish had become a race of Mahatma Gandhis they were going to fight back when the state collapsed in the late 1960s.

    What was unfortunate was how their (Nationalist) violence appeared and was expressed in ethnic terms. It was them and us, planter versus native, and from that mindset it was a small step to carrying out attacks that were indifferent to Protestant casualties.
    It must also be said that for many years the IRA continued a relentless campaign of killings even when Loyalists and the Brits were relative quiet.

  8. I don’t think it is pointless. I think it is very important. I dont discount violence per se. It sometimes is a necessary and justified response. But the situations are fact specific and not easily analogized. I think the modern IRA clearly exceeded the point at which it could be justified both in intensity and scope. Someone who looks back fondly or with unmitigated pride strikes me as out of step with humanity.

  9. Mahons

    I think Gerry Kelly was very measured. He praised the bravery, leadership and commitment of his comrades in the struggle. You don’t have to believe the armed struggle was justified or necessary to agree that required bravery leadership and commitment.

    Coming to terms with the legacy of the struggle having opted for peace is a challenge for republicans. The worst thing they could do is walk away from it and leave the field free for dissident elements to claim ownership of a past that they are not entitled to.

  10. Emerald Pimp…. cept the truth is a couple of hundred paddies didn’t beat anybody.

    They were already on their uppers when our Labour politicians decided to surrender.

    It was another Blair betrayal.

    Had we have had the political will to accept enormous collateral damage we could have won the ‘tiffs’ in weeks. How could the PIRA have responded to say the Vulcan fleet and a little carpet bombing?

  11. Simon grimes – bad people who commit horrible acts are sometimes quite brave. I have no feelings of nostalgia for them.

  12. In the context of NI, it was inevitable.

    ” Northern Ireland ” and the British presence in Ireland, was established at the point of a gun.

    A fact that many here, including gun-worshipers from Pennsylvania, seem to be completely unaware of, and which they have never once mentioned on these pages in all the years that the site has been up.

  13. How could the PIRA have responded to say the Vulcan fleet and a little carpet bombing?

    Would it helped promote the view that violence isn’t a solution?

    Had we have had the political will to accept enormous collateral damage we could have won the ‘tiffs’ in weeks

    How, in your opinion, would the political settlement that would have been necessary in the aftermath of that differed from the one we have? And would the difference be worth all the extra deaths on both sides?

  14. If SF were honest they would say we tried the violent path and lost. That would deter dissidents who have fewer followers and lesser resources. But republicans place pride well before honesty.

  15. Dog

    What you suggest would only have hastened englands conversion to a pariah state, they were losing the moral high ground a little more every year but that would have put them in league with Idi Amin of Yuganda

  16. New Yorker

    If SF were honest they would say we tried the violent path and lost.

    So who won? The British who get to keep the north at a huge economic cost? The unionists who wanted an Orange state but now have to agree everything with Martin McGuinness. From my point of view we were all losers and the biggest mistake on all sides was the belief that there could be a military solution to the political problem.

    Martin McGuinness has said to the dissidents publicly and directly that the armed struggle didn’t work. The problem with them is they don’t care if it works. It has become an end in itself. Keeping them as small an isolated as possible is the best contribution to peace the republican community can make right now.

  17. The major issue was if NI would remain in the UK or join the Republic. The British won. They defended the right of a democratic majority to choose which jurisdiction to belong to. Of course, it was always an unwinnable ‘war’ because the British side had vastly more resources, both military and intelligence. The inter-community hostility is no better and possible worse that at the beginning. The government at Stormont seems not to work. The people of NI should hold the terrorists of both sides responsible for past and present suffering. John Hume was right – the people have to be reunited and then politics can follow. Sadly, at present the emphasis is still on politics and not uniting people and the horse needs to be put in front of the cart.

  18. New Yorker do you understand the irony of claiming that Northern Ireland has anything to do with democracy, whether in its forming or in its operation?

Comments are closed.