once the army was there, which everyone seems to agree was originally for the protection of catholic(and presumabely nationalist) civillians it was impossible for them to leave unless the security established by their deployment was assured.
In the beginning the IRA had nothing to do with it, but it was the Provisional IRA by its attacks on these troops and with certain attacks on unionists that left the army with no choice but to stay in its vain attempt to protect citizens who would have been quite glad to fight it out amongst themselves. though this would have been unnaceptable to both the republic and the rest of the UK.
The excistence of both armed groups, in northern ireland was to blame for the 30 year deadlock that came next.
The IRA could never hope to soundly defeat the British Army and force a withdrawl and the nature of the IRA meant they couldnt be beaten without a dramatic change in not only army policy but also British Government policy in the north.
if we say good riddance to the British army we must also acknowledge that their departure has come after the IRA quit fighting. therefore we should assume that is the IRA had quit fighting anytime before the army would have left earlier
indeed
I would pay tribute to the soldiers who helped save countless lives during the conflict in Northern Ireland.
The price of that was a high one to pay.
I hope that this signifies another chapter in easing the pain of suffering for the friends and family of those who lost their lives during the conflict.
The army was sent in initially at the request of Nationalist political leaders to halt the pogroms being carried out by Unionists. Often these rioting mobs were led by those forces of the establishment who should have been upholding law and order, namely the B-specials and the police.
Once the killing of Catholics and the burning of whole streets had been curtailed by the army, people expected that the past discriminations of Nationalists/Catholics would be addressed by Britain's political leaders. Sadly it soon became clear that the British army would be used to prop up Unionist hegemony and the old ways would carry on. Thus the people called out for action, there was a desire to rid themselves of the oppressive anti-Catholic sectarian artificial statelet once and for all.
Wasted opportunities and wasted lives!
I find it utterly laughable the comments made by the DUP's Maurice Morrow who says that "the decision to site Army bases far from the border is part of a policy of ethnic cleansing of unionists from republican strongholds". He also says that "there would soon be little to differentiate parts of Fermanagh, Tyrone and Armagh from the Republic".
Is it just me or is this man a bit loopy? Everyone knows that those three counties mentioned are part of Northern Ireland. What does he want? Banners, bunting, flags and the British Army greeting everyone who crosses the border with "WELCOME TO BRITISH ULSTER" This man clearly wants to live in the past.
As my name suggests I was brought up within the so called "protestant community", so therefore I can not really comment on British Army spying and barracks etc. in places like South Armagh, however I read the article and just felt saddened and angry at his ideas.
Bring on Saturday for Belfast Pride! I can't wait to see all the DUP's faces as they stand by city hall waving their bibles and shouting abuse!
http://www.breakingnews.ie/irela...d/mhcwkfgbausn/
Good riddance
Hear hear...
The British Army spent 38 years protecting me and mine from the IRA and protecting thousands of Catholics from mad "Loyalists". Now that we've got the beginnings of true democracy I'm glad they're able to go, but I'm glad they were able to come.
'I would pay tribute to the soldiers who helped save countless lives during the conflict in Northern Ireland.'
'And murdered my father'
Yeah, I too am glad there's no reason for them operating here anymore.
The IRA are dead, so what do we need them for?
Unionist hegemony is dead, perhaps that is why they are no longer needed.
I think there's a widespread misunderstanding here. They are not leaving NI per se - they are just confining themselves to barracks. 5,000 troops are going to remain in NI it's just they won't be involved in police-backup no more except in very extreme situations.
Indeed Tony...
'I would pay tribute to the soldiers who helped save countless lives during the conflict in Northern Ireland.'
Perhaps you can sing a song to the 'heroes' at the next n.i game.
Very cross community - 'my da murdered your da'
I can certainly agree that they won't be missed. I always thought it an ugly thing to have soldiers on the streets and roads of this country.
Last weekend, I visited my home city of Armagh for the first time in a very long time. Streets that I recalled sealed off with yellow concrete-filled barrels were now paved and pedestrianised, cars parked neatly on cobbled precincts and the historic buildings and cathedrals (yes, there are 2 of them!) all basking in a warm August Saturday. Such a far cry from the grey, drizzly, depressing streets of my childhhood - and yeah, part of the improvement was that there was not one policeman or soldier, not one Land Rover or Pig, to be seen anywhere.
Your post makes no sense. You say occupation of "your" country.First they never went to the rep of Ireland.They were in Northern Ireland which is part of U.K which is if i could think i'm wrong (which on many times i could be.)is part of that armys homeland.
That sounds nice, Jo.
William,
UI's country (and mine) is Ireland. Makes perfect sense.
TONY
The army was sent in initially at the request of Nationalist political leaders to halt the pogroms being carried out by Unionists.
Myth.
In fact, the Army was deployed at the request of the Unionist government because the police were completely exhausted after 2 nights of serious and widespread rioting - initially by nationalists attacking the Apprentice Boys parade in Londonderry.
Often these rioting mobs were led by those forces of the establishment who should have been upholding law and order, namely the B-specials and the police.
Untrue. First, the riots were begun by nationalists. Second, loyalists did indeed respond: as police drove back rioting nationalists, loyalists followed - which is not quite the same as you imply.
JO
What you describe is great. What a pity the terrorists hadn't ended their campaigns sooner and the Army could have been removed from the streets much sooner.
William
This country, be it a region or island, is yours, mine and UI's. But we are only tenants.
We can and should share this beautiful place with all people - even though I think it will be improved when David Vance and Willie Frazer follow their consciences and emigrate 
William,
You are mixing up "country" and "state" again.
D'oh!
reg and others i'm not mixing up state and country.I call Northern Ireland my country as do many others no matter what it is.
Willow
Although pedantic I have never had occassion to question your honesty. Your interpretation of who started/didn't start the riots ignores a crucial point. Namely we had the forces of law and order leading what turned into pogroms of Ctholic streets. Individuals, including billy reid were forced out to defend their street using old weapons to halt the chaos.
We can argue all day about who actually started riots and called for british troops, but crucial aspects cannot be ignored.
I'm not sure how anyone could defend the record of the British forces in the North. Even their own reports admit they often made matters worse.
JG:
Thank you. I felt like taking people by the hand, taking them around and saying"hey this is a nice place. This is my home. I'm proud to be from here." I didnt want to see a soldier crouching on every corner, any more than I wanted to see an IRA sniper. Those feelings of pride were not something I felt when I was growing up.
Tony
I will always recall, as should we all, that machine gun fire from the RUC blew the head off a pre teen boy in August 1969.
What chance did he have? He was lying in bed.
What people need to realise is that the police that thyey regard as *their mates* have killed many people - and, moreover, have nevr been brought to account.
Tony
Your interpretation of who started/didn't start the riots ignores a crucial point. Namely we had the forces of law and order leading what turned into pogroms of Ctholic streets. Individuals, including billy reid were forced out to defend their street using old weapons to halt the chaos.
Your "crucial point" isn't exactly an objective assessment. To say that "the forces of law and order [led] what turned into pogroms of Ctholic streets" is to imply something rather more than what really happened. The police confronted nationalist rioters who had attacked with petrol bombs and fired shots at Divis Street police station: they pushed the rioters back and were followed by loyalist rioters. There were no "pogroms" - that is an exaggeration - but houses were burned by loyalist mobs as chaos ensued.
We can argue all day about who actually started riots and called for british troops, but crucial aspects cannot be ignored.
Crucially, you stated that "The army was sent in initially at the request of Nationalist political leaders to halt the pogroms being carried out by Unionists". That statement was untrue and hence I corrected it. There is no dispute that the riots were started by nationalists, nor that the Unionist government called in the Army.
Are you saying that Nationalist political leaders did not request that the British send in forces to stop the attacks that WERE led on several occasions by the forces of law and order?
Riots started by Nationalists? Are we not talking about the follow on from the siege of the Bogside, when the people there appealed to fellow Nationalists to take some pressure of them?
I'll not get involved any further in the semantics of who started what. The important point is your attempt to veil the fact that the forces of law and order were at the front of the attacks on Nationalist streets. This is not a fact of history that can be re-interpreted Willow.
BTW. Try and explaining to the people who survived Bombay street what your definition of a pogrom is.
Jo
I'm sure in some eyes it is normal to discharge weapons in a built up area. However if these people should be state employee's, this does not mean that they should not face the full force of that state's laws. Sadly for the apologists for the mis-deeds of the state, it puts into context their holier than thou words when speaking of so called terrorists.
Willow,
How could nationalists have called in the army? The answer is in the term "Unionist government."
The point is that nationalist leaders and the nationalist community generally warmly welcomed the British Army. What changed that? I wonder....
JG
How could nationalists have called in the army?
I guess by asking the Government. But take it up with Tony.
The point is that nationalist leaders and the nationalist community generally warmly welcomed the British Army. What changed that? I wonder....
That's not the point. The point is that the Army was deployed as a result of a Unionist request, and not "at the request nationalists of nationalist leaders to halt the pogroms [sic]", as dishonestly claimed by Tony.
No-one has disputed that the Army was welcomed by the nationalist community. What changed things? Gauche tactics in response to the PIRA.
"Last weekend, I visited my home city of Armagh for the first time in a very long time. Streets that I recalled sealed off with yellow concrete-filled barrels were now paved and pedestrianised, cars parked neatly on cobbled precincts and the historic buildings and cathedrals (yes, there are 2 of them!) all basking in a warm August Saturday. Such a far cry from the grey, drizzly, depressing streets of my childhhood - and yeah, part of the improvement was that there was not one policeman or soldier, not one Land Rover or Pig, to be seen anywhere."
LOL.
And there we have the romanticism of Irish nationalism summed up in one short passage.
Aye, it's the Brits fault that it rains!!
"What changed things? Gauche tactics in response to the PIRA."
Hmmm.
"And there we have the romanticism of Irish nationalism summed up in one short passage."
Jamie, Jo is from the unionist community.
"Aye, it's the Brits fault that it rains!!"
Don't be silly - its a Sinn Fein/IRA-Vatican conspiracy (implemented by the GAA) to get marching Orangemen wet.
It is neither a Unionist nor a Nationalist perspective to regard the armed military might of government, the unsubtle and often brutal fist, that exists behind any diplomatic suave civil servant, to be on the streets of my country or any civilised country. I don't so far as "good riddance" but I'm not sorry not to seee them any more. Now...I've started to climb those inviting south Armagh hills and mountains.
Actually, I visited Cross for the first time, on Saturday. Was no one about to entertain 2 reasonably sociable girls. Where is everyone on a Sat. afternoon?
Slan abhaile!
"I'm sure in some eyes it is normal to discharge weapons in a built up area. However if these people should be state employee's, this does not mean that they should not face the full force of that state's laws."
I couldnt agree more. It is to the shame of many *Unionists* that the murder (wrongful killing) of hundreds of people, including children, has not been brought to account.
I recall the horror I felt when I read that RUC men (apparently) watched Robert Hamill (a friend of my family) literally being stamped to deathj in the masin street of Portadown.
Years ago.
Now, while the IRA equally stopped killing years ago, they were not ever a legal group. If a state (legal) group participated or stood by in the case of a killing, there shoud be a case to answer.
Therefore, in my view, demands that Gerry and Martin *own up* to what they did - or authorised - misses the point. Hence my detestation of *unionists* whop are silent on the dead of Bloody Sunday and yet vociferously represent the dead of Enniskillen, etc.
Jo @08.25.07 - 5:51 pm
Hypocrisy is the word you are searching for Jo. Sad to say but Taigs are still not seen as co-equal, thus not worthy the same level of horror attributable to the death of Prods.
BTW over the Robert Hamill death there was no apparently or allegedly about it. Local women were pleading with them to come out of their vehicle to stop it. Catholics had been attacked there previously that night and reported it, thus the RUC presence.
For all the good it did!
There is plenty of info available on British/Irish human rights watch. Unbelievably detectives from the same nick investigated the failing to act as those under investigation.
Whitewash! No wonder the Brits don't want the truth to come out about their legal and illegal militia's.
oh god shut up
Commenting by HaloScan
