Well, 15th July 1969 to be precise.
Francie McCloskey remembered 50yrs on.
The police said he was hit by a stone. The cover-ups were from the outset.
On this Day
Wolfie - sure we know for a fact they "negotiated with terrorists" pretty much from the get go. That was just a slogan.@Betsy Og
Once the British ending the policies of criminalisation, collusion, internment, shoot to kill, and opened the door to political negotiation, did the political impetus take the ascendency.
The policy of the British and Irish governments was to criminalise the Republican movement and to discredit it amongst nationalist communities in the North. Do you remember the mantra of "we will never negotiate with terrorists"?
How long did this policy add to the conflict?
This policy was an abject failure and in turn it was when the two governments conceded that they would negotiate that the conflict started coming to an end.
It is not a credible insight to think that the IRA could have stopped at 'anytime'.
Who was going to give the order to stop? Unconditionally? This is not credible, there are grave injustices inflicted on nationalist Community over the period. The idea that the IRA would stop unconditionally is simply a bullet in the head for anyone trying to push that to be replaced by more hardliners.
they didn't, it wasn't, the reasons for continuing were not justifiable,
Yes, unjustifiable which is why I'm declining the SF invitation to worship at their altar - now we're getting somewhere. It was within the gift of the Republican movement to stop - are we to believe the "securicrats" would forever goad them into further violence?, that's a handy excuse isn't it...... giz a break.I'm not saying it was justifiable.
I'm saying it is ludicrous to think they could have stopped 'anytime'.
Gunmen with no votes, and they wanted to be brought in the front door to issue their demands. The arrogance of the Provos was outstanding, and it hasn't gone away y'know.... They had talks in 72, they could've had talks any day of the week if they were serious.It is not a regular army. The only way to get the campaign to stop was to enter political negotiations (by the front door, not the back door).
You posed that they were terrorists - to legitimise every off duty RUC man killed. I'm saying that's OTT. Sure ye'll shoot guards in the South too, equal opportunity murderers. A SF minister for justice - make your blood run cold.As I'm highlighting above the RUC was a discredited police force in nationalist areas. I doubt even the Duke dare contradict that?
Hurrah they cried on the Falls. Are they an undefeated army or a raggle taggle of terrorists who had to be lied to to get them into the peace process?, quite hard to ride those two horses. This could have been wrapped up before Thatcher ever came to power - demands that could never be met were never met - isn't that a shocker.....The evidence is there to see. Interventions by Hume, an intervention by Clinton in the US. Intervention by Reynolds, even John Major moved from the Thatcher hardline. Once that happened, the political side of the Republican movement took the ascendency at leadership level and we are where we are now.
Well the PIRA were blowing up the town, a 32 county socialist republic was not being dished up to them. Of course they settled for less in 1998, just the 25 years of pointless killing. As keepers of the Second Dail I know this burden weighed heavy on them......How soon would the conflict had ended if at the Sunningdale Agreement, prisoners were to be released?
Impossible to say, but it surely would have given impetus to a possible early end of the conflict?
Any....day.....of....the.....week they could have negotiated - even Dev had to lock up the lunatics in the Curragh eventually, are you telling me we had 25 years of killing in case, what, 100?, hardliners wouldn't like it?? We still have dissident republicans now, we had the Real IRA & Omagh, there's no clean way of making the break, poor show from the undefeated army that this is the best they could offer the people.Instead, the political centre and the British government sought to exclude, isolate, criminalise, etc the paramilitaries. This is understandable, but in the end, it undoubtedly prolonged the conflict and ultimately they ended up negotiating with the paramilitaries 25yrs later, releasing prisoners.
But I am with Garret that despite the unforgivable lapses by rogue elements we are mightily grateful that they got the job done.
I have conceded their grave lapses, I sense you will never concede that on balance their intervention saved us from ourselves.
There is no doubt that the BA deployment was a benefit for all at the outset.
And while it was a relief for Catholics when BA arrived, how must it have felt when they turned their guns on those the set out to protect?
From one perspective, the BA allowed themselves to be played naively right into the hands of the IRA. No doubt influenced in no small part by directions and information from their friends in the RUC.
are we to believe the "securicrats" would forever goad them into further violence?
Come on, givuz a full hand
I personally think a unified country that enshrines religious and political identities for all the best way forward. I support all those who actively pursue this.
That said, unlike most united Irelanders I know I would be prepared to rejoin the commonwealth in exchange for end to partition and an All Ireland parliament.
It's not that it was all their fault, but that fairly quickly anything they had to bring was achieved; i.e. most of the Civil Rights aims were achieved, unionist domination was over (powersharing), there was no longer a threat of being burned out by your neighbours. The point is that zero extra was achieved in the following 25 years, that demands to be handed a 32 county socialist republic were never going to happen, and so it proved.I just don't buy into the "it was all the PIRA's fault, they could have stopped anytime" mantra. This is just lazy analysis that has been propagated to the point of absurdity at this stage.
Simultaneously nothing, they are separate arguments, you don't have to hold one to hold the other. I'd prefer we look to the future as a European nation, leave the events of 100 years ago to history books, I'd even leave events pre 1998 to the history books but it looks like thats not an option either....While simultaneously those that proffer this view cannot see the hypocrisy of the President of the 'Republic' still fawning over the deeds of someone like Thomas Clarke whose organisation planted bombs indiscriminately in public places killing a child in the process.
This would be a reasonable argument if I was making out Grisly was the devil incarnate, it was all his fault - you might say "ah but what about the hawks". I'm saying the RA and they alone are responsible for their actions (cos it weren't the bleedin' tea ladies were planting the bombs was it??), they collectively could have stopped....guess what, they eventually did....hows about that then. If they'd come to J*sus 25 years earlier that would have been fantastic.If they could have stopped "anytime", what was it that happened that did actually make them end the armed campaign? Just a random notion? Gerry woke one morning made a few phones calls to the Army Council and said "that's it, we're finished now". To which the others on the AC replied "yeah! We were just thinking the same thing! What a coincidence!!"
Use your loaf, no-one is saying that would cease for nothing, God knows they tore the absolute out of it in the end. All they needed to do was get over themselves with the 32 county demand, everything else was on the table. Their arrogance gave us an extra 25, that's the main mark against them. No-one is saying it would have been easy, but killing more was not going to bring back the dead of Derry, Ballymurphy and everwhere else. When we did the deal in '98, prisoners streamed out and the relatives of the dead just had to suck it up, maybe the RA could have sucked it up in the mid 70s and spared us all this, but no, everything must be on their terms, their dead, their heroes. Is it any wonder that so little has been achieved nearly 25 years on from a peace deal. #toxicshowerAnd having randomly declared a ceasefire why did the British government feel the need to release paramilitaries from prison?
Why did they disband the RUC and introduce policing reforms?
Why did they agree a power-sharing arrangement for government? The IRA had stopped, why not just revert to the Unionist led government?
Nah!, I happen to think its a little more complicated than what is being proffered here.
The cycle of violence is hard to break, it is not something that occurs out of random notions that may occur at "anytime".
that fairly quickly anything they had to bring was achieved; i.e. most of the Civil Rights aims were achieved, unionist domination was over (powersharing), there was no longer a threat of being burned out by your neighbours. The point is that zero extra was achieved in the following 25 years, that demands to be handed a 32 county socialist republic were never going to happen, and so it proved.
I'd prefer we look to the future as a European nation, leave the events of 100 years ago to history books,
they collectively could have stopped....guess what, they eventually did....hows about that then
All they needed to do was get over themselves with the 32 county demand,
no-one is saying that would cease for nothing,
Their arrogance gave us an extra 25,
Yes, so negotiate then. It had gone from a one party state to power sharing even without the IRA on board, imagine what else could have been achieved. The Brits were talking in terms of timeframe for withdrawal, you're telling me Flags & Emblems would have been the rock on which a peace settlement perished??- police reform?
- ending of internment?
- criminalisation? Are you saying that in return for ending the violence those caught up in prison (prisoners of war) were being offered release, or were they to serve out the rest of their time as ordinary decent criminals?
- Flags and emblems Act, 1954. In case you hadn't noticed, that thing tends to provoke people up there.
This is an absurdity. The genie was out of the bottle, the sectarian statelet was exposed and, unsurprisingly some were determined to tear it down. Without political negotiation then violence would perpetuate. It wasn't one-sided.
How convenient for you that you insist it was all equivalent - did the GOIRA wage a 25 year campaign for absolutely nothing?, No, they didn't, I've already covered this. I'm sure Michaeldy is burnt from all the letters you're writing to him berating him.......How convenient for you. I'd prefer that too but every Easter my President keeps digging up the past acts of terrorism and tries to glorify it to me as some heroic noble deed.
The UVF had already armed, 'Ulster' was not going into a Free State. You'll have to go back the the 1500s if you want to tie Ireland into a nice neat bow. After that you either accept that there's a people to be worked with or you go for ethnic cleansing - which is why, on their own doorstep, the UK government was never going to hand them to the IRA (the legitimate government of Ireland you understand.......). Brits Out is all well and good if it means you want a colonial army to go home, but what about all those who want to remain British who are left behind, upwards of a million of them at one time.Unfortunately, the events of 100yrs ago tie in very much to the events of 50yrs ago. Without partition, civil rights movement may not have been a thing.
Or maybe it was that the RA was riddled with informers and any pretence of possible victory was gone. Maybe Gerry fancied chilling out in the Donegal villa. Are you seriously telling me that if the RA had negotiated a settlement that all the dark state activity above would have continued?Yes, and I'm asking why? How was it that it happened in August 1994 and not 1984, or 1974 as you seem to think it could have done?
I'm thinking the absence of any real political negotiation, policies of internment, criminalisation, censorship, torture, framing innocent people, shoot to kill, collusion with paramilitaries were still all the rage.
Perhaps that had something to do with it? Take your pick.
Well lucky enough there's this thing called democracy, been around a long time, if only we'd embraced it a bit more.......so we'll either vote for it or we wont.Yeh, maybe we all need to get over that? Unfortunately it appears from recent polling that a 32 county demand is still the preferred option by overwhelmingly majority on this island.
If they had rowed in with Sunningdale they could have gotten powersharing that would have stuck - yes Paisley and Loyalists were against it but maybe the RA had something to do with that, what with blowing up the town. But not having any votes meant they weren't calling the ..errr.. shots in a democratic process, the RA don't respect democracy, they are they government, do what you're told....old habits die hard and even SF reps get the auld 'do what you're told', ah sure they're gas..... Shinners eh???Rubbish. Name a point in time in the period from 1972 (the collapse of first ceasefire) to 1994 where they could have just stopped?
Agreed, probably not as hard as for those yet the die, or get maimed, or those belonging to them.As I mentioned before, the cycle of violence is hard to stop once the genie was out of the bottle.
Ah, I see, the poor RA felt 'no-one likes us so we'll go bombing'. We're back to rhyming couplets again, "the same people said A & B". I supported Hume at the time. How was there every going to be peace without talks. At a government level you can't officially sit at a table with someone still bombing you, but of course there are always back channels - are you telling me that the RA were pacifists in waiting except no-one would talk to them? Even though they had talked to them before and did do again? Any....day.....of.....the......week.Political intervention was needed, sadly, it was not to be forthcoming until the Hume/Adams initiative. An initiative that was pilloried by many.
The same people who bemoan that the IRA could have stopped sooner were berating Hume for an initiative aimed at stopping the violence!
Of course not, its just symbolic of the divided mindsets that sought to promote Ulster as entirely British in the face of a significant minority that see themselves as entirely Irish.you're telling me Flags & Emblems would have been the rock on which a peace settlement perished??
did the GOIRA wage a 25 year campaign for absolutely nothing
The UVF had already armed, 'Ulster' was not going into a Free State.
You'll have to go back the the 1500s if you want to tie Ireland into a nice neat bow.
Are you seriously telling me that if the RA had negotiated a settlement that all the dark state activity above would have continued?
If they had rowed in with Sunningdale
How was there every going to be peace without talks.
They were talking in 1972, Sunningdale was done in 1973. It wasn't that there was no-one to talk to it was what there was to talk about. There never was, before or after, the delivery of a 32 county republic. Until the RA could get their heads around that, there could never be a deal. I think anything else was on the table. It wasn't that the RA had amassed such military strength by 1998 that it hammered out a deal that could only be done then.Exactly. So you point to me the period where meaningful talks were initiated and I will point to you the end of the conflict.
They were talking in 1972,
Sunningdale
think anything else was on the table.
Never thought of it like that. Kingsmills was just human nature. Who hasn't at some stage in their lives wanted to go out and riddle all round them? All this hypocrisy about Kingsmills. Michael D - put a loaf of bread on your head.But human nature being human nature, revenge was also in the air, and there followed the Kingsmill massacre.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?