[Closed] Martin McGuinness

Good guy, in my book.

Bad guy, in mine. But a bad guy who did bad things for what he passionately believed in, and when circumstances changed changed with them to eventually do very good things.

His slate is not clean, but that's not so different to many from that period on both sides. But in the round I think both sides owe him (and Trimble, and Paisley, and Major, and Mowlam, and even Blair a bit) a debt of gratitude.

As I have posted before IMO 9-11 was fhe key event in ending the Northern Ireland Troubles

Jamba has this right. Once this happened and the money couldn't flow around they had to get around the table.

Editing to add it was not so much get around the table but the option to leave and return to arms wasn't properly viable any more. There are many issues involved but the various flows of money and the associated power kept things going.

Binners, Tebbit has more right to his opinion on this subject than most on here.

How you can say this about Tebbit and someone who agrees with him;

If you ever wanted to make sure nobody reads another word of whatever drivel you're about to spew out, then that's probably the best statement to start with. You clearly share the same level of willful ignorance and blind prejudice

In a thread where most people are talking about being forgiving towards [i]Martin McGuinness[/i] is making my brain ache a bit.

Andy_B - Member
As I have posted before IMO 9-11 was fhe key event in ending the Northern Ireland Troubles
Jamba has this right.

Aye, I too think 9-11 had a profound affect the decommissioning talks. 😕

Timeline[edit]
10 April 1998 (Good Friday): Belfast Agreement is signed, which agrees to have all paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland decommission by May 2000.
May 2000: Deadline to disarm passes. Independent International Commission on Decommissioning agrees on a new deadline, 30 June 2001.
30 June 2001: Deadline to disarm passes.
July 2001: Ulster Unionist leader David Trimble resigns as First Minister because the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) refuses to disarm.
7 August 2001: The IRA agrees on a method to decommission.

the war was over by the time 9-11 happened.

I can understand Tebbit, man lost his wife to the 'ra.

Doesn't make him correct of course.

EDIT no she didn't die 😳

Glad I didn't start this thread, thought about I but got the jitters.

I'm torn, split right down the middle on this one. I'm a man of peace and tranquility so any kind of aggression and reactionary aggression on either side makes me retreat into a role of self preservation.

I think we all know how the IRA started, and why so no need to dredge that back up. But it wasn't just the blowing up and killing stuff I get itchy about. It's the beatings and violence and knee capping they did, of which He was involved and gave many the order to inflict.
There are a great many families that still tread in fear today, but without Him walking up to the table of negotiation the overt violence would still be in place, as is we've had peace for a number of years now, in the main because He understood the importance of talking and negotiation. But the beatings continue, the organised crime continues and He knew about it, whether directly or indirectly.

So, I'm on the fence.

Erm she didn't die cynic-al!

Obviously as a big hitter you'd need to post on a thread like this though without knowing anything at all about what you're commenting on.

bikebouy - Member
I think we all know how the IRA started,

i'd doubt that claim.

Given that the IRA attempted, and very nearly succeeded, in murdering Norman Tebbit I can understand his antipathy towards McGuinness and others associated with the IRA.

Ultimately however, if we aren't to remain in the past then we must bring it upon ourselves to forgive the past.

Talks about talks had been going on for a long time in NI before 9/11, but there is an element of truth in the idea that the changing attitude of the American diaspora had an effect.

For example; the first WTC bombing happened in 1993, and changed many Americans attitudes to bombs going off now that they were seen as a local possibility.

The average knowledge of the average American about the troubles can probably be summed up by the fact that I know some UDR (Ulster Defence Regiment) guys who drank copiously for free in some Irish American bars after telling people who they worked for, and not correcting the people that thought they were some sort of republican splinter group 🙂

I was there in Warrington and family were in Manchester when they did the Arndale. Suffice to say I didn't celebrate St. Patricks day.

It's interesting to hear just how very close Mc Guiness was to spending the rest of his life behind bars before his U-Turn to join the peace process.

How you can say this about Tebbit and someone who agrees with him;

Tebbit relies on his knee-jerk, prejudicial gut-instinct at the best of times. He doesn't do nuance either. So if I was looking for an objective view on anything, he'd be my very last port of call.

But for an objective view on a senior member of an organisation that tried to kill him....?

Tom B
Info on Tebbits wife, from wikipedia;

Margaret Elizabeth Tebbit, Baroness Tebbit, née Daines, is a former nurse who was severely and permanently paralysed by the IRA's 12 October 1984 bombing of the Grand Hotel in Brighton

Congratulations on your humanity.

binners,
My point isn't that Tebbit is a nice bloke, just that your invective about Tebbit could be considered a bit extreme in a thread where people are largely being nice about Martin McGuinness.

bikebouy - Member

...

I think we all know how the IRA started

I would lay a significant bet that 99.9% of people don't. I bet you don't.

In giving Martin McGuiness a lot of credit one is also in danger of airbrushing the very significant peaceful efforts made by John Hume.

I'm not being nice about Martin McGuinness, or nasty about Norman Tebbit.

I'm saying McGuinness's position is complicated, nuanced, and changed completely over time. He was a pragmatist, and his actions have to be viewed in that context. And I'm saying that Tebbits opinion is about as far removed from objective as its possible to get. Which I also understand.

I doubt I'd be prepared to consider the more positive aspects of someone's charterer, who had tried to kill me.

And, just to show some of the empathy with all sides that's needed in these situations, I think Tebbit's hard-line stance can be understood, given the IRA tried to take his life and in doing so condemned his wife to a life in a wheelchair.

Fill your afternoon up, for those unable to find Wikipedia...

[url= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army ]IRA history.[/url]

seosamh

I did edit, probably while you were writing, to say that it was 9/11 that closed the door rather than paved the way. I certainly didn't have the feeling until 9/11 happened that IRA decom was worth their declarations until after the cash was stopped. Also, if it hadn't happened there would likely have been more incidents from 2001 to present day. Remember that Omagh was in August 1998 (after Good Friday) and it seemed clear to me that there was no consensus for arms decommissioning on either side but the results of 9/11 ensured that what was said actually happened.

If 9/11 had an affect it was in speeding up decommissioning, and that's about it. The appetite for war was long gone(the population on all sides was sick of it), and politics was the only way forward from the mid90s onwards, despite some set backs.

The republican movement had been on a course to politics from a long time, ever since the 80s it was well understood that the aims couldn't be achieve by gun alone(the obvious conclusion to that is a completely political solution.)

And, just to show some of the empathy with all sides that's needed in these situations, I think Tebbit's hard-line stance can be understood, given the IRA tried to take his life and in doing so condemned his wife to a life in a wheelchair.

That cuts both ways. The British government, of which Tebbit was a part, spent a great deal of time denying Catholics jobs, imprisoning people without trial, and murdering unarmed protestors.

Calls for remembrance of McGuiness' past activities are reasonable enough, but seem to be highly selective.

Wasn't PIRA a splinter of the original IRA at some point who wished to continue with arms? Genuine question. That's what i believed and I could see a possibility of history repeating. I agree that the majority were looking to a political solution but a motivated and financed minority could disrupt it.

If 9/11 had and affect it was in speeding up decommissioning, and that's about it.

binners,
I fully agree with that.

For me though, however nuanced and however much things changed in the end, I can't help considering how people would feel if they Mr McGuinness shooting some crying kid through the back of the knees.

(There was a sliding scale of kneecapping by the way. Shooting back to front was considered the worst as it removed the kneecap permanently.)

The best thing you can say about him was that he stopped in the end.

The best thing you can say about him was that he stopped in the end.

He did more than stop. He pretty much did a 180. He just didn't come clean about his past.

I do not like him one bit but what he did was quite remarkable imo.

Andy_B - Member
Wasn't PIRA a splinter of the original IRA at some point who wished to continue with arms? Genuine question. That's what i believed and I could see a possibility of history repeating. I agree that the majority were looking to a political solution but a motivated and financed minority could disrupt it.

Aye the PIRA took over from the less proactive older "Offical" IRA in 69/70.

What do you mean history repeating itself? these days?

eat_the_pudding

t.

For me though, however nuanced and however much things changed in the end, I can't help considering how people would feel if they Mr McGuinness shooting some crying kid through the back of the knees.

You should probably temper your views on McGuinnes with the realisation that he was a product of of British interference, exploitation and genocidal murder of millions of people in Ireland for nearly 1000 years.

bikebouy - Member

I'm torn, split right down the middle on this one

Seems completely appropriate tbh.

The best thing you can say about him was that he stopped in the end

I'm no fan of him either. He has plenty of blood on his hands. But the way I look at it is that not only did he renounce violence himself, and embrace diplomacy and compromise, but along with Adams, he managed to convince a terrorist organisation as formidable as the IRA to disarm and do the same.

Would you fancy taking on that task? I can't imagine how daunting a prospect that was! Or the work, not to mention risk to your life, that involved!

Whatever you think of him - nobody is saying you have to like him - you surely have to admire, or at least acknowledge the commitment from him, and personal sacrifice, that has allowed a lasting peace to emerge after decades of bloody conflict? No?

I'd like to hope that his commitment to that was to atone for his previous violent actions. But I guess we'll never know.

Peace?? Really...The fact that soldiers no longer police the streets is really the only difference.

It's moved on a whole lot since you last patrolled in a Landrover.

It's rather pleasant not to have to check under the borrowed car (from a family member) when we stop in Coleraine. I no longer have to avoid Swatragh or Dungiven. My loyalist nephew works in Toomebridge and has done for a few years now.

It's whole new place and the longer it goes like this the harder any return will be.

What do you mean history repeating itself? these days?

From 98-01, I didn't see that anybody had full control of the arms that still existed. I saw a possibility of another splintering of the IRA like the PIRA before. I think 9/11 + decommissioning + the beginnings of politics + the passage of time has made that quite unlikely today. I hope it has. I think it needs another generation minimum - one that hasn't had their families murdered by the other side. At least the politics discussed at Stormont is more about economics, health, education and prosperity than it used to be. it's not something I thought I'd see in the timescale that it has happened in and I absolutely believe that's for financial reasons as much as the other reasons.

Cheers for the Wikipedia link eat the pudding....as I said then, his wife didn't die, not blaming Tebitt for having McGuiness....I would too. I was merely correct cynic-al (whom has now edited his post)

Congratulations on your own humanity too Chap....and on your useful contribution to the thread.

Andy_B - Member
What do you mean history repeating itself? these days?
From 98-01, I didn't see that anybody had full control of the arms that still existed. I saw a possibility of another splintering of the IRA like the PIRA before. I think 9/11 + decommissioning + the beginnings of politics + the passage of time has made that quite unlikely today. I hope it has. I think it needs another generation minimum - one that hasn't had their families murdered by the other side. At least the politics discussed at Stormont is more about economics, health, education and prosperity than it used to be. it's not something I thought I'd see in the timescale that it has happened in and I absolutely believe that's for financial reasons as much as the other reasons.

I think it would have took an awful lot to go back tbh, I think there was an aire of inevitability about it looking back, but still..

I think we can all agree the situation today is better that it was an that's a good thing and testament to all involved, from all sides.

i still think a proper truth and reconcillation should have happened, along with immunity from further prosecution for all(a line should have been drawn, imo.)

TomB
Sorry if I got you wrong, but it seemed that just saying "she didn't die" to correct someone was a bit harsh in view of the life changing injuries she suffered.

[I]You should probably temper your views on McGuinnes with the realisation that he was a product of of British interference, exploitation and genocidal murder of millions of people in Ireland for nearly 1000 years. [/I]

There is that, yeah.

No there isn't, 1000 years ago the ruling classes murdered and exploited the poor regardless of their nationality. Recent history's slightly different. But anyone anywhere could use medieval oppression as a justification for vigilante violence but they don't, cos it's wrong.

Re McGuiness, id guess he's typical of that generation on both sides. It'd have been better if he'd offered up what he knew about murder victims before he died but he'd have probably implicated more of Sinn Feins assembly/local government if he had to the detriment of the peace process so I see why he didn't even if I disagree

It's whole new place and the longer it goes like this the harder any return will be.

This sums it up for me. His work as Education Secretary has laid much of the foundation for the profound and lasting changes.

Two things I learned today, the British military considered him just the sort of material they'd want for top command, and that he was an England cricket fan.

Anyone prepared to speculate on how well a negotiated peace settlement, based on pragmatism and compromise, would have progressed with Norman Tebbit as one of the main protagonists?

No there isn't, 1000 years ago the ruling classes murdered and exploited the poor regardless of their nationality. Recent history's slightly different. But anyone anywhere could use medieval oppression as a justification for vigilante violence but they don't, cos it's wrong.

Fair enough, I was being slightly glib.

He was, however, a product of 60 years of the partition of Ireland, and the pretty appalling civil rights situation in the North. As I've said before, it was basically apartheid.

Anyone prepared to speculate on how well a negotiated peace settlement, based on pragmatism and compromise, would have progressed with Norman Tebbit as one of the main protagonists?

Well it is unlikely to have happened, which shows how courageous John Major was in starting the process.

Always going to bring out diametrically opposed views.
Interesting word terrorist, as my ancestors thought the black & tans were when shooting my grand uncles in their beds. They were 6 year old twins.

the pretty appalling civil rights situation in the North. As I've said before, it was basically apartheid.

Gets messy blaming that on the British government though, as a devolved government (prior to '72) it might be better to regard it as a uniquely Irish set of bastards from one community behind the poor treatment of the other community (and not giving much of a toss about many of their own either)

My dad worked with him when he was the Minister for Education and had nothing but good things to say about the job he was doing. I also think that as Deputy First Minister he did try and do his best for the population as a whole, despite his past....and his political views. I personally don't think there should be any parallels to Mandela and was shocked to think anyone would even entertain that notion. Let's not get carried away with ourselves.

To the comment that nothing has changed. Are you basing this on first hand experience or just making a sweeping generalization? As someone who lives in Northern Ireland and works in Belfast I think you are talking balls. Yes there are still issues, but let's face it.....we are not alone in having obstacles that we need to overcome.

thestabiliser

No there isn't, 1000 years ago the ruling classes murdered and exploited the poor regardless of their nationality. Recent history's slightly different. But anyone anywhere could use medieval oppression as a justification for vigilante violence but they don't, cos it's wrong.

You misunderstand or don't care to understand what I said. I didn't say tht McGuinness' actions were justified by events 1000 years ago. What I said was that he was a product of 1000 years of exploitation and genocide. If you study Irish history you'll see that as far back as there was involvement between Britain and Ireland there has been suffering in Ireland and almost every generation, certainly every other generation suffered a genocidal slaughter at British hands.

ninfan

Gets messy blaming that on the British government though, as a devolved government (prior to '72) it might be better to regard it as a uniquely Irish set of bastards from one community behind the poor treatment of the other community (and not giving much of a toss about many of their own either)

So Ulster Unionists loyal to Britain are "Irish bastards"?