Only a few days from the trial that could not convict several members of the Parachute Regiment for killing an Iraqi civilian the British Government is granting amnesty to IRA killers. Listed below are some of these individuals :
Michael Rogan, chief suspect for the 1996 IRA bomb explosion at Army headquarters in Lisburn, killing a soldier and injuring 31 people.
· Charlie Caufield, wanted in connection with the Enniskillen bomb, which killed 11 people.
Robert 'Fats' Campbell wanted for questioning over the 1980 killing of SAS Captain Herbert Westmacott during a gun battle with the IRA in north Belfast.
So then serving soldiers in a theatre of war whose rules of engagment were and I quote verbatim "To seek out and destroy enemy forces" were put on trial and yet known killers will go free.
Lest anyone think i am just giving the English point of view I would point out that these thugs murdered far more innocent Northern Irish civilains (Including Women and children) than serving British soldiers.
This is just wrong by any standards.
Killers freed
Killers freed
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Killers freed
Oh this is going to be controversial thread alright. Firstly Bothwell I will say that I fully understand your distaste at this latest move, I think that many unpalatable ideas are having to be entertained in this latest phase of the peace process.
I am not a Republican or IRA supporter, though like the vast majority of Irish people I would consider myself a nationalist, and I can see why this is being done. The conflict in the North was such that no side involved was innocent or impartial, which is one thing I think many ordinary British people don't realize. As far as the Northern catholic nationalists were concenerned the Army and the RUC were at best highly partial in their actions and at worst enemies, therefore they don't accept that they were, or are, the only ones who should take responsibility for the violence and bloodshed that ensued. Of course Sinn Fein also make constitutional arguments regarding partition, its invalidity, and their "self-justified" right to wage a war against Britain. Of course this is all very civilized and a little abstract compared to blowing up innocent men women and children in N.I. and Britain. But again I have to remind you that the R.U.C and the Army also killed (or were behind the killing of) quite a lot of innocent people in N.I. and it is very unlikely that they will be ever criticised for their actions, let alone brought to account.
It might help to look at it in this way, that you don't make peace with your friends, but with your enemys, and that what is going on is now part of that process, its cold comfort I suppose for those people who have been affected by this, but is that not the nature of war? The North during the 70's and 80's was to all intensive purposes a war zone, however, Britain was not and this made it all the more shocking and inomprehensible when the violence spilled over into Britain, as British people were not (directly) involved in the North and could not understand why they were being targeted. I just hope that the circumstances have changed permanently and that the various factions in Northern Ireland work out a way to coexist peacefully, whether this actuallyhappens remains to be seen.
I am not a Republican or IRA supporter, though like the vast majority of Irish people I would consider myself a nationalist, and I can see why this is being done. The conflict in the North was such that no side involved was innocent or impartial, which is one thing I think many ordinary British people don't realize. As far as the Northern catholic nationalists were concenerned the Army and the RUC were at best highly partial in their actions and at worst enemies, therefore they don't accept that they were, or are, the only ones who should take responsibility for the violence and bloodshed that ensued. Of course Sinn Fein also make constitutional arguments regarding partition, its invalidity, and their "self-justified" right to wage a war against Britain. Of course this is all very civilized and a little abstract compared to blowing up innocent men women and children in N.I. and Britain. But again I have to remind you that the R.U.C and the Army also killed (or were behind the killing of) quite a lot of innocent people in N.I. and it is very unlikely that they will be ever criticised for their actions, let alone brought to account.
It might help to look at it in this way, that you don't make peace with your friends, but with your enemys, and that what is going on is now part of that process, its cold comfort I suppose for those people who have been affected by this, but is that not the nature of war? The North during the 70's and 80's was to all intensive purposes a war zone, however, Britain was not and this made it all the more shocking and inomprehensible when the violence spilled over into Britain, as British people were not (directly) involved in the North and could not understand why they were being targeted. I just hope that the circumstances have changed permanently and that the various factions in Northern Ireland work out a way to coexist peacefully, whether this actuallyhappens remains to be seen.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
Would there be more outrage if we say brokered a peace deal with Al Qaeeda and the pardoned Bin Laden I think so.
The way I see it Galbally is that the peace process in NI is long overdue and no one is more pleased than I to see it, however how can it be right to pardon killers, BTW I have the same attitude to the likes of Adair and Stone, I should also declare here that I was in the British Army for 12 years in I would have to say was not the most popular regiment in NI and that I had several tours to NI. (If anyone is curious I was too young for Bloody Sunday thank God)
Maybe suprisingly given the above I have always been an advocate of a peaceful and united Ireland but this amnesty seems to go against what may be seen to be justice. The argument which is being given I suppose is that this amnesty is required for the greater process in which case it may be a price worth paying but I will never subscribe to that point of view.
On your first comment I doubt it will get much response, NI politics and history are so riddled with quicksand that any discussion tends to get people scared to dip their toe in the water.
The way I see it Galbally is that the peace process in NI is long overdue and no one is more pleased than I to see it, however how can it be right to pardon killers, BTW I have the same attitude to the likes of Adair and Stone, I should also declare here that I was in the British Army for 12 years in I would have to say was not the most popular regiment in NI and that I had several tours to NI. (If anyone is curious I was too young for Bloody Sunday thank God)
Maybe suprisingly given the above I have always been an advocate of a peaceful and united Ireland but this amnesty seems to go against what may be seen to be justice. The argument which is being given I suppose is that this amnesty is required for the greater process in which case it may be a price worth paying but I will never subscribe to that point of view.
On your first comment I doubt it will get much response, NI politics and history are so riddled with quicksand that any discussion tends to get people scared to dip their toe in the water.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Killers freed
Is it being said that without the anmesty being granted that more bombings will go on? I too question extending the Olive Branch to those who have killed so many....ok, extend it to the 'group' with a philosophy that is ready to mend the rifts, but those that actually did the bombings, they should be paying the price. I can't imagine being a family member and sitting back watching this happen.
Killers freed
The way I see it Galbally is that the peace process in NI is long overdue and no one is more pleased than I to see it, however how can it be right to pardon killers, BTW I have the same attitude to the likes of Adair and Stone, I should also declare here that I was in the British Army for 12 years in I would have to say was not the most popular regiment in NI and that I had several tours to NI. (If anyone is curious I was too young for Bloody Sunday thank God)
Maybe suprisingly given the above I have always been an advocate of a peaceful and united Ireland but this amnesty seems to go against what may be seen to be justice. The argument which is being given I suppose is that this amnesty is required for the greater process in which case it may be a price worth paying but I will never subscribe to that point of view.
I think like yourself most people would advocate a peaceful unitied Ireland, well except the Unionist people of course, but achieving that aim is certainly an extremely difficult issue, particularly as 1,000,000 people on the Island have an cultural, political and emotional identity that is British. I think if there is to be an united Ireland we, the majority of Irish people, have to create an Ireland in which unionists can feel comfortable and secure living in. I think that the IRA campaign proved that in this case political violence was ultimatley an unworkable solution as well as being a morally repugnant option. I accept your point of view about justice, I just think that in this case true justice for indivduals on all sides will not be achieved as the politics involved in the conflict make that impossible, so its what level of "injustice" that we are all prepared to accept that should be decided upon.
This is of course difficult in the extreme, as some of the actions committed by the IRA were utterly barbaric, and like you mentioned "bloody sunday" remains a black day for the British army, likewise Unionist and loyalist forces committed atrocities that beggar belief, in one famous case were so bad that the perpertrators ended up being shot by their own side out of embarresment.
However, its heartening to see that someone like yourself who was directly involved hasn't become embittered by their experiences, thats a good indicator for the future that people will be able to, if not forget, what has happened at least not remain trapped in a viscious circle of conflict and enmity.
I think the last point you made is very true, but I think we do all need to talk about it, no matter how difficult it is, as unless we express our feelings about the conflict it will remain a source of bitterness and rancour that we can all do without.
Maybe suprisingly given the above I have always been an advocate of a peaceful and united Ireland but this amnesty seems to go against what may be seen to be justice. The argument which is being given I suppose is that this amnesty is required for the greater process in which case it may be a price worth paying but I will never subscribe to that point of view.
I think like yourself most people would advocate a peaceful unitied Ireland, well except the Unionist people of course, but achieving that aim is certainly an extremely difficult issue, particularly as 1,000,000 people on the Island have an cultural, political and emotional identity that is British. I think if there is to be an united Ireland we, the majority of Irish people, have to create an Ireland in which unionists can feel comfortable and secure living in. I think that the IRA campaign proved that in this case political violence was ultimatley an unworkable solution as well as being a morally repugnant option. I accept your point of view about justice, I just think that in this case true justice for indivduals on all sides will not be achieved as the politics involved in the conflict make that impossible, so its what level of "injustice" that we are all prepared to accept that should be decided upon.
This is of course difficult in the extreme, as some of the actions committed by the IRA were utterly barbaric, and like you mentioned "bloody sunday" remains a black day for the British army, likewise Unionist and loyalist forces committed atrocities that beggar belief, in one famous case were so bad that the perpertrators ended up being shot by their own side out of embarresment.
However, its heartening to see that someone like yourself who was directly involved hasn't become embittered by their experiences, thats a good indicator for the future that people will be able to, if not forget, what has happened at least not remain trapped in a viscious circle of conflict and enmity.
I think the last point you made is very true, but I think we do all need to talk about it, no matter how difficult it is, as unless we express our feelings about the conflict it will remain a source of bitterness and rancour that we can all do without.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
ubetta wrote: Is it being said that without the anmesty being granted that more bombings will go on? I too question extending the Olive Branch to those who have killed so many....ok, extend it to the 'group' with a philosophy that is ready to mend the rifts, but those that actually did the bombings, they should be paying the price. I can't imagine being a family member and sitting back watching this happen.
I think you make very valid points, again like I said to Bothwell, its a case of how much "injustice" one is willing to accept in order to achieve a peaceful resolution of such a conflict, which was in this case both a civil and ethnic war, as well as being a policial "war". One thing that an "amnesty", which is what this is in reality, does achieve is that it draws a line in the sand. As in much the same way as the IRA's statement that its conflict was at an end and that no more violence would be contemplated. If the loyalist paramilitaries follow suit then all of the groups directly involved in the conflict remove any justification for further violence, making it easier to isolate those who still (and there are a few) who think that violence is an option. Its a very slow process, and its by no means guarenteed that it will suceed, buts its far more acceptable than the alternatives.
As to the point about there being more bombings if the amnesty is not granted, I don't think thats really the position. I think the only thing that would make violence reerrupt is the resumption of a general ethnic conflict between catholics and protestants in the north, like what happened between 68 and 71, but I honestly think that despite the continuing bitterness up there, no one really wants those days back again. Unfortunatly this could be me just being naive.
I think you make very valid points, again like I said to Bothwell, its a case of how much "injustice" one is willing to accept in order to achieve a peaceful resolution of such a conflict, which was in this case both a civil and ethnic war, as well as being a policial "war". One thing that an "amnesty", which is what this is in reality, does achieve is that it draws a line in the sand. As in much the same way as the IRA's statement that its conflict was at an end and that no more violence would be contemplated. If the loyalist paramilitaries follow suit then all of the groups directly involved in the conflict remove any justification for further violence, making it easier to isolate those who still (and there are a few) who think that violence is an option. Its a very slow process, and its by no means guarenteed that it will suceed, buts its far more acceptable than the alternatives.
As to the point about there being more bombings if the amnesty is not granted, I don't think thats really the position. I think the only thing that would make violence reerrupt is the resumption of a general ethnic conflict between catholics and protestants in the north, like what happened between 68 and 71, but I honestly think that despite the continuing bitterness up there, no one really wants those days back again. Unfortunatly this could be me just being naive.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
remains a black day for the British army, I would say for the Paras Galbally, there is no getting around it.
Even Though my experiences were not the best I am not bitter about the situation, from what I saw with my own eyes the vast majority of the people from both sides of the divide were either programmed into behaving one way or another or were terrified into doing it. Without detailing it I would say that I had acts of kindness given to me by catholics that would almost certainly resulted in dire consequences for them if they had become public.
I agree with the united Ireland premise and I think that an welcoming united Ireland can be achieved, the main problem I see at the moment is the good Reverend and his Ilk. It always struck me even when I was there (and I was a lot younger are certainly more stupid) that the Unionists were far more fanatical than anyone else.
I am always amazed that n one has ever tried to arrest him on the grounds of preaching hatred, seriously if it was attempted i am absolutely sure he could be done, except he would then be the "Martyr Reverend".
Even Though my experiences were not the best I am not bitter about the situation, from what I saw with my own eyes the vast majority of the people from both sides of the divide were either programmed into behaving one way or another or were terrified into doing it. Without detailing it I would say that I had acts of kindness given to me by catholics that would almost certainly resulted in dire consequences for them if they had become public.
I agree with the united Ireland premise and I think that an welcoming united Ireland can be achieved, the main problem I see at the moment is the good Reverend and his Ilk. It always struck me even when I was there (and I was a lot younger are certainly more stupid) that the Unionists were far more fanatical than anyone else.
I am always amazed that n one has ever tried to arrest him on the grounds of preaching hatred, seriously if it was attempted i am absolutely sure he could be done, except he would then be the "Martyr Reverend".
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Killers freed
Bothwell] I would say for the Paras Galbally, there is no getting around it.
I accept that Bothwell, and being Irish I hope you understand that I will say for the people of Derry. Ultimately my attitude to bloody sunday is that what happened, happened; it was part of a wider conflict and should be consigned to history along with all the rest. Let historians argue about it in 100 years time, we do not have that luxury right now.
Even Though my experiences were not the best I am not bitter about the situation, from what I saw with my own eyes the vast majority of the people from both sides of the divide were either programmed into behaving one way or another or were terrified into doing it. Without detailing it I would say that I had acts of kindness given to me by catholics that would almost certainly resulted in dire consequences for them if they had become public.
You obviously have experience and are wise enough to draw mature conclusions from it, I would suppose that conflict is a fairly universal experience and that people react instinctivly in such extreme circumstances. Some will be kind, while others cruel, and that is not a monoply any side has on the other.
I agree with the united Ireland premise and I think that an welcoming united Ireland can be achieved, the main problem I see at the moment is the good Reverend and his Ilk. It always struck me even when I was there (and I was a lot younger are certainly more stupid) that the Unionists were far more fanatical than anyone else.
I am always amazed that n one has ever tried to arrest him on the grounds of preaching hatred, seriously if it was attempted i am absolutely sure he could be done, except he would then be the "Martyr Reverend.
And yes, it is very hard for me also to listen to Dr. Paisley without getting very annoyed, but again one has to make peace with ones enemies. It probably just as hard for unionists and British people litening to Sinn fein. If we are ever going to get out of this conflict people like me will have to (if not agree with) at least tolerate and accomodate the Unionist point of view, because if we don't, we will simply be laying the foundation for generations of future conflict.
I accept that Bothwell, and being Irish I hope you understand that I will say for the people of Derry. Ultimately my attitude to bloody sunday is that what happened, happened; it was part of a wider conflict and should be consigned to history along with all the rest. Let historians argue about it in 100 years time, we do not have that luxury right now.
Even Though my experiences were not the best I am not bitter about the situation, from what I saw with my own eyes the vast majority of the people from both sides of the divide were either programmed into behaving one way or another or were terrified into doing it. Without detailing it I would say that I had acts of kindness given to me by catholics that would almost certainly resulted in dire consequences for them if they had become public.
You obviously have experience and are wise enough to draw mature conclusions from it, I would suppose that conflict is a fairly universal experience and that people react instinctivly in such extreme circumstances. Some will be kind, while others cruel, and that is not a monoply any side has on the other.
I agree with the united Ireland premise and I think that an welcoming united Ireland can be achieved, the main problem I see at the moment is the good Reverend and his Ilk. It always struck me even when I was there (and I was a lot younger are certainly more stupid) that the Unionists were far more fanatical than anyone else.
I am always amazed that n one has ever tried to arrest him on the grounds of preaching hatred, seriously if it was attempted i am absolutely sure he could be done, except he would then be the "Martyr Reverend.
And yes, it is very hard for me also to listen to Dr. Paisley without getting very annoyed, but again one has to make peace with ones enemies. It probably just as hard for unionists and British people litening to Sinn fein. If we are ever going to get out of this conflict people like me will have to (if not agree with) at least tolerate and accomodate the Unionist point of view, because if we don't, we will simply be laying the foundation for generations of future conflict.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
I think Iraq is a totally different case. My point on that one is that British soliders should never have been put into the position of being there in the first place. I do not dislike Tony Blair, but I really can't see what he was thinking in getting Britain involved in that particular war in the first place. Britain has gained very little apart from the goodwill of the American people, which is nice, but its a very high price to pay being involved in a war that very few people, including many Americans, think has been much of a success in combating or even limiting the current terrorist threat.
The real question on Iraq is what happens next? How long will U.S. and British troops be required to police the place?. Its fairly obvious that once the forces are withdrawn the country will undergo a nasty civil war, involving the Iranians, and bring further instability to the region upon which we are dependent for our economic well being. The other option is to maintain the current troop levels indefinetly and suffer the causualties and political problems that this entails, including a military standoff with Iran and more conflict. Not very good options at all. To my mind any government proposing such actions should know exactly what they want to achieve, how this is to be achieved, whether these aims will actually be in their own long term interests, a fair degree of certainty of success, and a decent exit strategy should be prepared if things go wrong. None of these seem evident in the current conflict.
The real question on Iraq is what happens next? How long will U.S. and British troops be required to police the place?. Its fairly obvious that once the forces are withdrawn the country will undergo a nasty civil war, involving the Iranians, and bring further instability to the region upon which we are dependent for our economic well being. The other option is to maintain the current troop levels indefinetly and suffer the causualties and political problems that this entails, including a military standoff with Iran and more conflict. Not very good options at all. To my mind any government proposing such actions should know exactly what they want to achieve, how this is to be achieved, whether these aims will actually be in their own long term interests, a fair degree of certainty of success, and a decent exit strategy should be prepared if things go wrong. None of these seem evident in the current conflict.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
I think Bothwells point was , that they are prepared to send enlisted soldiers to jail on the say so of the enemy but release proven terrorists and murderers, Loyalist and IRA alike( I make no distinction ). As I said in my previous post I think the release is a bitter pill to swallow but one we must swallow none the less. Our government do not do themselves any favours by , at the same time, condemning our brave lads to a court marshall using dubious evidence from dubious people. Perhaps we should return to the days of the first world war when the sole purpose of the Military Police was to stand behind our boys and shoot deserters. The callous disregard of our own troops at times of war amounts to the same thing[/QUOTE]
I know what you are getting at, and it is very unfortunate. I think that it just goes to proove what a dirty, rotten business war is and why it should only be contemplated when it is absolutley (as Blair would say) "the only and the right thing to do". I have many relatives who have been soliders and fought for both the Irish and British armies and they have given me some insight on what it means to do that job. I think one of the worst things is men who are trained to act and think in one way and then put into situations where the rules of engagement are completely different to what they have been trained to deal with. I don't think things will ever change and whether wars are won or lost the soliders always ultimately lose out, though it always amazes me how brave and sanguine most people are when put into these situations.
I know what you are getting at, and it is very unfortunate. I think that it just goes to proove what a dirty, rotten business war is and why it should only be contemplated when it is absolutley (as Blair would say) "the only and the right thing to do". I have many relatives who have been soliders and fought for both the Irish and British armies and they have given me some insight on what it means to do that job. I think one of the worst things is men who are trained to act and think in one way and then put into situations where the rules of engagement are completely different to what they have been trained to deal with. I don't think things will ever change and whether wars are won or lost the soliders always ultimately lose out, though it always amazes me how brave and sanguine most people are when put into these situations.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Killers freed
*yellow card*, God that takes me back!!.
Just a a point of reference when the paras who were charged recently were in Iraq they had been informed that there were 13 enemy organisations whose members they should "Seek and Destroy" only two of which wore identifiable uniforms. This makes Arnold's point even more valid, as he says a lot of first tours in Ni involved young, niaive and a lot of times (certainly for me) scared guys, we only had to deal with one enemy really, how difficult it is for the guys in Iraq I cannot begin to imagine.
Just a a point of reference when the paras who were charged recently were in Iraq they had been informed that there were 13 enemy organisations whose members they should "Seek and Destroy" only two of which wore identifiable uniforms. This makes Arnold's point even more valid, as he says a lot of first tours in Ni involved young, niaive and a lot of times (certainly for me) scared guys, we only had to deal with one enemy really, how difficult it is for the guys in Iraq I cannot begin to imagine.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"