Bloody sunday was unjustifiable and unjustified

i want to see justice for all the RUC officers murdered in their houses in front of their famillies who incidentely protected you as well

Whether you think the RUC protected you rather depends on who you are, doesn't it?

i want to see justice for all the civillians from both sides who died going about their business. (What did Lord Mountbatten do to deserve what he got)

Jesus Christ, you were casting about for a sob story to underline the suffering of civilians whose murderers were not brought to justice and the "civilian" you chose was Admiral of the Fleet The Right Honourable The Earl Mountbatten of Burma KG GCB OM GCSI GCIE GCVO DSO KJStJ PC FRS RSerafO? And whose assassin was convicted and served twenty years in prison?

Jesus Christ, you were casting about for a sob story to underline the suffering of civilians whose murderers were not brought to justice and the "civilian" you chose was Admiral of the Fleet The Right Honourable The Earl Mountbatten of Burma KG GCB OM GCSI GCIE GCVO DSO KJStJ PC FRS RSerafO? And whose assassin was convicted and served twenty years in prison?

pity those bloody Sunday paras weren't given a chance to 'detain' the murdering b**tard first.

isn't one of the conclusions of the report the fact that so many innocent civilians died precisely because these soldiers didn't follow their training.

Yes indeed it is. "serious and widespread loss of fire discipline". This needs stressing I think. A loss of restraint and discipline may be understandable under pressure, but Saville's conclusion is emphatically not that the soldiers did what they were trained to do or ordered to do.

pity those bloody Sunday paras weren't given a chance to 'detain' the murdering b**tard first.

Well, I know that his ineptitude led to more than 3,000 Canadians being killed at Dieppe, but I'm surprised to hear you describe Mountbatten as a murderer. Or were you referring to his support for dividing India along religious lines? (Hmm…wonder where he got that idea?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieppe_Raid

The importance of this inquiry reflects the importance of the events: all above have mentioned the subsequent IRA actions / atrocities. These were legitimised and in many cases prompted (in Noraid & republican minds) by the events of Bloody Sunday. The IRA recruited heavily following it, the Widgery Report was a whitewash and only served to help them.

thanks to those currently posting from behind their norn irn ghetto mentality for reminding why I left and would never go back to that god forsaken steaming pile of shite – lovely countryside, outwardly friendly people but ingrained, inbred, narrow minded phucktarded way of thinking

Anokdale i live in England i was just pointing out that u need to take off your camo tinted glasses

i think all the tinted glasses need to be taken off conaid

green, orange, cammo, whatever…

Sadly I think there is phuck all chance of there being a reasonable debate on this subject – too many entrenched opinions on both sides. How ironic..

isn't one of the conclusions of the report the fact that so many innocent civilians died precisely because these soldiers didn't follow their training.

Well that really depends which bit of their training you choose to focus on doesn't it?

They are dehumanised and desensitised as part of the process of becoming a para. There is no argument about that. They are then trained to follow orders. On the day in question there is little doubt that the initial fire was from the lieutenant in charge :-

This belief was initiated by the first shots fired by Lieutenant N ………."

So I would say that in fact they did in fact entirely follow their training, which is to act with extreme predjudice toward any threat and to follow the leader.

Seems to me much of the report is contradictory, i.e. McGuiness with Gun, Nail bomber, (but thats Ok coz they didn't throw or shoot them), and the above. Either there was no threat or there was. To say otherwise is a bit like saying you are partially pregnant surely?

Ultimately, deploying troops is a serious action, not to be taken lightly and will almost invariably lead to a non-cuddly outcome. They are not social workers, psychologists, policemen, or politicians. they are simply young men who are trained to kill without question when certain circumstances arise. The problem in terrorist situations, is that the enemy do not dress up with Kill me quick hats on, and it does get very confusing as a result.

Well, I know that his ineptitude led to more than 3,000 Canadians being killed at Dieppe, but I'm surprised to hear you describe Mountbatten as a murderer. Or were you referring to his support for dividing India along religious lines? (Hmm…wonder where he got that idea?)

Murdering PIRA scum was my intended 'prisoner', preferably SAS stlye.

Seems to me much of the report is contradictory, i.e. McGuiness with Gun, Nail bomber, (but thats Ok coz they didn't throw or shoot them), and the above. Either there was no threat or there was

The protestors were only under threat once the para’s starting shooting with the guns not because they possessed them at the start…same thing with the IRA weapons only a threat if used.

It was the softly softly approach were the Army played by the rules and PIRA murdered at will that caused the problems. Never a better time in the troubles than when the SAS were allowed to dish out some of their medicine

What a worrying thing to say most people probably think the best time was the end and the peace process rather than when we ignored the rule of law and acted liked terrorists ourselves.

My own view is the paras lost the plot and shot people. This was the greatest recruitment drive the IRA could have ever had. The shooting of innocent people is wrong whether by terrorists [ loyalist and republican] or by the state – if anything it is worse when a state ignores the rule of law. Justice needs to be done. I though Dave was unequivocal in his apology on behalf of the state.
EDIT:

Murdering PIRA scum was my intended 'prisoner', preferably SAS stlye

Murdering RUC scum was my intended 'prisoner', preferably IRA stlye

see the problem with your attitude? You are no better than a terrorist and share their disregard for the rule of law

Everything straightforward in your world, eh Konabunny?

"Lord Mountbatten said he wished me to know that he and many of his friends have been deeply impressed by the positive Dublin reaction to the Heath initiative. They hope that this can be developed into a 'major advance towards the final solution'. Reunification is the only eventual solution. If there is anything he can do to help he will be most happy to cooperate."

The protestors were only under threat once the para’s starting shooting with the guns not because they possessed them at the start…same thing with the IRA weapons only a threat if used.

Good God. <Shakes head in disbelief at the sheer idocy of that, and subsequent statements, and goes off muttering to self in direction of bike and countryside>

A reasoned argument would have better but whatever floats your boat

Good God. <Shakes head in disbelief at the sheer idocy of that, and subsequent statements, and goes off muttering to self in direction of bike and countryside>

Cheerio then…given that your only other contribution was

Well said anokdale

I think we'll manage without you. 🙄

same thing with the IRA weapons only a threat if used

<Shakes head in disbelief>

I was thinking that, too. My dad served as (a parachute-badged -7RHA, so not a Para per se) Army Doctor in Co. Amargh during the seventies, and saw more than his share of ugliness. Now cuddly McGuinness may or may not have been carrying a weapon at any given time and place, but the blast injuries my dad treated were definitely real. People seem to forget why the British Army was originally deployed in Northern Ireland. A lot of soldiers died for the sake of political tribalism.

All sides should **** well move on.

noteeth – Member
Everything straightforward in your world, eh Konabunny?

I don't get it – how does the fact that he contemplated a united Ireland contradict what I said? What does that have to do with the price of fish?

People seem to forget why the British Army was originally deployed in Northern Ireland.

Including, after a while, the paras themselves.

how does the fact that he contemplated a united Ireland contradict what I said?

This:

Or were you referring to his support for dividing India along religious lines? (Hmm…wonder where he got that idea?)

I think we'll manage without you.

I'm sure you will DD. Given some of the utter bollox spouted on this thread (with a few notable exceptions) I'll be glad to leave you to carry on with your 'worthwhile' contributions.

Cheerio then. We'll struggle on 🙂

People seem to forget why the British Army was originally deployed in Northern Ireland. A lot of soldiers died for the sake of political tribalism

Yes to protect the Catholics from the protestants. Was shooting them helpful in achieveing this goal? Did it aid the peace process? Help two communities live side by side?

The fact the IRA [and the protestant ones UVF etc] committed many many attrocities in no way justifies the army killing innocent people from that broad community. Too object to the behaviour of the para's is not to defend the behaviour of the IRA.
WOOODY you missed another chance to put forward a coherent argument

Including, after a while, the paras themselves.

It became, as they say, a shooting war. Sadly.

Still, seeing that large crowd cheer the words of a British Prime Minister makes me think we are – finally – in a better place. But "Justice" must mean Justice for all. Certain comfortably ensconced Irish politicians would do well to remember that.

Was shooting them helpful in achieveing this goal?

I never said it was. The IRA could not have asked for a better recruitment drive.

Noteeth: that would be a very valid point if his contemplation of a united Ireland had been public, and twenty five years earlier, and he hadn't in fact endorsed Jinnah and a religiously-divided India, and partition along religious lines wasn't the British colonial policy used in Ireland, Israel ("little loyal Jewish Ulster") and India alike. Also, I simply didn't say or suggest that Mountbatten was a religious bigot – just suggested British post-colonial policy in India bore resemblance to Ireland.

So yes, if history happened in reverse, and the events were different, and if I had said something I didn't, then you'd have a really good argument.

Certain comfortably ensconced Irish politicians would do well to remember that as well as those comfortably enscomced murdering paras
Finished it for you

or so you just want justice for one side?

So many people can only see what the other side did and think that justifies their sides attrocities/murders as somehow defensive and OK.

EDIT: Some nice humorous put downs on here Konabunny 😆

just suggested British post-colonial policy in India bore resemblance to Ireland.

In short: British post-colonial policy in India was pretty much a disaster. It still doesn't justify bombing a yacht. Extrapolating from one side of the globe to the other for the sake of a simplistic, easily-digestible model of, like, "British oppression" is facile bollox, and you know it.

The actions of the Paras on that day did nothing to aid Peace – nor, as it happens, did the actions of any number of oh-so-macho, racketeering hard men (on either side of the Irish political divide). A plague on both their houses.

It still doesn't justify bombing a yacht. Extrapolating from one side of the globe to the other for the sake of a simplistic, easily-digestible model of, like, "British oppression" is facile bollox, and you know it.

Yeah, err – that's why I didn't say anything about "British oppression", and didn't suggest the assassination was justified. And, err, it's not much of an "extrapolation" to compare partition in Ireland and India when they were both done along the same principle and the subject of our discussion implemented one and then got involved in the other!

Are there any other things that I didn't say that you'd like to correct me on? Perhaps you'd like to tell me that I'm wrong because it's not all Thatch's fault? That Hitler didn't have some good ideas? That 9/11 wasn't an inside job?

Like most things there is not one simple answer nor one mistake that we can point to.

The politicians made serious mistakes that lead to the angry but peaceful march. the Paras were simply the wrong people to police the march. The lieutenant panicked and opened fire and the squaddies followed them.

I wish the soldiers had been honest with their answers but after all this time it must be very hard to recollect what was true and they will have heard that there were gunmen in the protest march and by now they may really think they fired in self defence.

I don't think any prosecutions of individual soldiers is warranted now nor is it likely to end in a conviction. Reconciliation along the lines of the south African truth and justice commission is needed along with an admission of wrongdoing from the army.

We have moved on and hopefully the inquiry has cleared the air.

WOOODY you missed another chance to put forward a coherent argument

No point. This thread has already repeated itself several times and I made my viewpoint clear in agreeing with the post made by anokdale.

YOUTUBE

that's why I didn't say anything about.. etc etc

No, I didn't say you did. But Mountbatten's wish for a united Ireland should be given credence [however late], even if it doesn't suit the mythologised "struggle" of the IRA. If only senior diplomats and military leaders could be more like yourself: dispensing perfect, far-sighted strategy, even as you emerge from the womb!

Edit: "compare partition in Ireland and India when they were both done along the same principle" – perhaps I should clarify why I think this is bollox. My Grandfather served (sometimes under Mountbatten) as a career soldier in India, Burma and Palestine – and saw at firsthand every example of British success/****-up you could ever wish for. He was there – and I'm guessing he'd find the comparison reductive in the extreme. But I dunno: maybe the slaughter along the Radcliffe Line was just like late 60s Belfast?

Yes indeed it is. "serious and widespread loss of fire discipline". This needs stressing I think. A loss of restraint and discipline may be understandable under pressure,

Indeed, 108 rounds fired and only 27 targets fell – **** shocking lack of marksmanship, would have expected better from the maroon machine.

The only winners in this one are the lawyers 8 million paid to two lawyers, good gig if you can get it.

Er, I think you'll find the overall legal fees were more like £100m.

My oprevious employers made c£13m for doing the witness statements, but that involved 30+ lawyers working on it for 6 years, so actually only £2m a year, which represents less than 0.5% per cent of the firm's annual turnover.

The individuals earning £4m each are QCs. £4m over this time period is a drop in the ocean with what they would be earning normally – the top earning silks make that much in a year or two, not the 12 that this Inquiry has run.

Are people *really* that surprised this cost £200m?

Murdering RUC scum was my intended 'prisoner', preferably IRA stlye

see the problem with your attitude? You are no better than a terrorist and share their disregard for the rule of law

Its ok the PIRA got their way into government and now run 'the north' – murdering does pay. Pity the Brits didnt do more of it ot indeed the Loyalists didnt organise a better murdering/bombing spree south of the border. Yeah maybe I am not better than the terroists but who cares? Nobody here in Ulster over the last 40 years seems to give a damn about the terrorist government.

perhaps a sign that they were panicking but you no more about killing things with guns that I do as I am a virgin in this area. Surely you can think of a better put down with that feeder line that just calling me Junky?

I made my viewpoint clear in agreeing with the post made by anokdale

But you carried on posting about how you had nothing more to add and that you were going

sv
You hate the IRA for being murdering scum but think your side should have done more murdering and you don’t mind being the same as murdering scum ..honestly you are fine with this? You are clearly part of the problem and not the solution . I am not really sure which govt you are referring too as a terrorist one ours or Eire.

Thanks for pointing that out

I'm definitely off out now that I've changed my bars, so I'll keep on theme and leave you with the only thing that springs to mind………..

………………Póg mo thóin 😉

I will if it stops you talking out of it

Junkyard – I was using the fact that murdering in Ulster gets you voted into power in the government. Who cares you were running around with a sub-machine gun on Bloody Sunday forget all of your murdering background here have the Deputy First Minister post and oh your fellow terrorists can run (badly) Education, DARD, Junior Minister post etc.

Well thats the way it seems to me in my warped narrow mind 😉

"terrorist government"

In every civil war or similar conflict resolution can only happen once the two sides talk. One persons terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.

Nelson Mandela
Moshye Dayan
Jomo Kenyatta

Moshye Dayan is a particularly interesting one – imprisoned by the Brits before WW2 ( probably responsible for killing brit soldiers), fought on the allied side with distinction in WW2. Became a statesman in Israel