Posted on 04/04/2006 1:08:31 PM PDT by bd476
I see you are still defending Sinn Fein/IRA.
It's incredible that you use an unintentional famine 160 years ago to justify the intentional actions of a modern terrorist group.
I am so sick of this crap, sick of people who cannot see through the IRA!!
Despite what you may think, I believe that the IRA is a terrorist organization. They have been involved with the Middle East terrorists since the 60’s.
The problem is that reason will not prevail in the argument over who owns the land. “We were here first and the land is ours” and “We were here last and the land is ours” cannot be resolved in a debate. You make a reasoned argument that the tactics of the Palestinians and the IRA are the same. I agree with you. But this isn’t the issue I addressed.
Yes, the Americans have effectively subdued the Indian population. While I would gladly be governed by an Indian president if duly elected, I would not give rule back to the Indians. America also fought a very bloody Civil War to show that once joined, no state will leave the union. Is it hypocritical of me to want a nice tidy map of Ireland? Perhaps. The Brits took Ireland by force, and were thrown out of most of it by force. But my grandparents left before Irish independence. They lived under some very difficult circumstances. But I have no skin in the game.
The group that holds the land will always have a different view from those who want it. Would I send a penny to Sinn Fein to see a united Ireland? Never. I wouldn’t want the likes of a Jerry Adams in any government, and I am embarrassed that US presidents invited him to the White House. Would I support an armed action to make a nice tidy map? No. Life is too precious. Would I resist the Brits reinstituting the penal laws? Yes. Do I believe that many Irish in America have an unrealistic view of the IRA? Yes. I joined a group, the Ancient Order of Hibernians, thinking it had to do with Irish heritage and camaraderie. I resigned when they renamed the group the Bobby Sands division.
Why have I spent so much time on this thread? When I saw somebody write that the Irish have killed more in Ireland than the British, "and the British security forces have only killed a couple dozen!!" I felt obliged to voice a contrary opinion. My ancestors were subject to the penal laws.
I have enjoyed the discourse. I’d love to continue the discussion over a pint, or a nice 18-year-old Macallan. (I prefer Scotch over Irish whiskey!)
Remember that on no country on Earth does the traditional boundry perfectly match the modern political one - any country that does match, it has been brought about by force. Shifting demographics shift borders.
Also, this country was never united under one government while it was independent - Ireland was just a loose confederation of kingdoms before British rule, so ultra-nationalists here have no claim to Northern Ireland.
Australia comes to mind. And if England would give Northern Ireland back to the Irish, we’d have three! (Though the Scots might still complain)
Also, this country was never united under one government while it was independent - Ireland was just a loose confederation of kingdoms before British rule, so ultra-nationalists here have no claim to Northern Ireland.
Around 980, in North Ireland, Malachy the Second, the Ui Neill King of Tara. followed Brian Boru's lead when his forces defeated a Norse army to take control of Dublin. The two kings met in 998 and agreed to divide Ireland between them, with Boru receiving the South and Malachy the North. Boru had much support and Malachy eventually allowed Boru to peacefully take over his lands. This was the greatest moment in the history of native Ireland. Brian, by his title, “Ard Ri”, was claiming the monarchy of the whole Gaelic race. This made Boru one of the first - and last - kings to effectively unite Ireland under one monarch. Boru’s death prevented a strong unification, and then the English invasions led to an 800 year struggle for Irish independence.
"When I saw somebody write that the Irish have killed more in Ireland than the British, "and the British security forces have only killed a couple dozen!!" I felt obliged to voice a contrary opinion. My ancestors were subject to the penal laws."
Oh well, looks like we could have avoided the whole debate if whoever had said ""and the British security forces have only killed a couple dozen!!" " had just added the line "since the 1970s."!
I too have enjoyed the debate. I took the bait and it is always good to revist your beliefs - our conversation has just reaffirmed in my mind that modern Britain's approach to Northern Ireland (since the 1990s particualry) has been magnaminious to the point of almost going too far.
Like you, my ancestory left due to the troubles so I don't have direct 'skin in the game' but I do think of my ancestors memory. I am a third generation Brit, and we no longer have the constant subconcious worry on the mainland that a trip to the shops or the pub will end in maiming or death thanks to the IRA (just as that subconious fear went we get the damn Islamofascists to fill gap).
I don't even think it is unreasonable to take a view of history that draws attention to the 'ugly' side of the Colonial/Empire period of British history - if you don't learn from history you are doomed to repeat it. But I have always maintained that history is just to learn from not to live in. We live in the here and now and a Christian tennant of both Catholic and Protestant agreement is you don't blame the sons for the sins of the father.
Incidentally, whilst I would not argue against a reading of history that included 'the ugly side' of the Colonial/Empire years of Britain (a side that Americans took exception to and sorted out quickly enough!) - perhaps I am being overally romantic in saying that, overall, in that Period of British Great Power (which ended with us bankrupting ourselves in the fight with the Nazi's) we were, on balance, a net force for good in the shaping of the modern world.....
I am proud of far more than I am ashamed of in Britain's historic contribution to the world. And that doubles for Modern Britain. For all its quirks and faults and some odd political views chunks of the population here have - it still aint a bad old place!
All the best.
Ok, I should have been more clear, I should have said few countries...
Anyway, Australia is a relatively new state, and it's very much an exception to the rule.
The Ard Rí's power increased from Brian Boru's time onward, but I don't think this country was effectively united under one ruler. It was moving toward that, like other countries in Europe at the time, but it didn't quite get there.
I do agree that the British have done much good around the world. The heroism of the Brits during WWII in defeating Hitler (with a little help from across the pond) was astounding, and still gives me shivers when I think of what was achieved. That is also why I feel a United States led mostly by Western Europeans has made far greater contributions to civilization than the Native Indian population could ever have dreamed.
However, I still feel the single greatest ‘black eye’ on the British legacy was Henry the VIII leaving the Church to get a divorce (and the Church’s wealth), which lead to the disastrous 800 year occupation of Ireland and continues today in the North. I don’t think the English would have treated fellow Catholics in Ireland so miserably had religion not entered into the equation. The only good thing to come out of the occupation was the fact that so many Irish left, and increased their numbers throughout the world.
Because the English came in and occupied Ireland for 800 years!
Still, it didn't get united.
Was briefly. Will be some day.
Not a very good idea without Unionist consent - bloodshed would ensue.
Some years ago I (and three other adults) took 17 Boy Scouts to Scotland for an international jamborette. It was held at Blair Atlol in Scotland. And there is a long history here. This jamborette started after World War II. The Boy Scouts in Scotland invited Scouts from all over Europe to come and relax after the war. Hitler didn't waste many bombs on the sheep in Scotland, so Scotland was largely untouched by the war. Every two years, Scouts from all over the world come to Scotland. They spend 10 days in the camp, paired up with a troop from the UK. They then go to the home of their British hosts for four days. It's a great time. Our boys, all Catholic, were paired with a troop from Belfast. There were no problems whatsoever at the camp. I spoke with many of the lads. They don't understand the troubles. They all had a great time. But we refused to send our boys to Belfast. We traded with a troop from Denmark. There is still much hatred there.
I hope someday, Catholic parents won't be so concerned.
A united Ireland will have to be built through trust.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.