Honourable way Britain dealt with Irish terrorism. Israel needs to do the same? This guy thinks so
on 01/03/2009 at 01:57 PM
Hi, this is just one other action by my country I am ashamed of, the way I see it the fine people of New York sorted out this problem and forced the IRA to peace, they were strongly assisted by Mr B Laden and his company Terror Inc.
When New York had a lesson in terror they found it unappealing and stopped funding their “boys back home”, also the IRA and raghead terror inc were getting married and this was seen as bad so the money and arms stopped , shortly followed by the IRA’s power and street cred, the IRA were then faced with mounting odds as the other side (they would be the ones who supported the majority vote to stay with England and not unite with southern Ireland).
The IRA’s religious leader (the Pope) could have stopped the murder any time he wanted to but as this is a turf war, and one his side had previously badly lost (sound familiar??) he wanted a correction. Tony"the slug” Blair sold out to the terrorists and the only reason there is not wholesale bloodshed is the IRA’s clear inability to tie, let alone win, I suppose that places them slightly above the muslems in the scheme of things.
Please send all unhappy replies to:-
10 Downing St
London
England
marked :- Letter Bomb-do not foldPosted by Chris Edwards
01/03/2009 at 06:02 PM
I can’t wait to see the British response when the IRA lobs 4000 missiles into London, or Manchester, or Liverpool, as Hamas has done to Israel since 2005. And Israel is a much smaller territory than the UK. How ‘disproportionate’ would the British response be?
Oh, wait, it would be ‘disproportionate’, as in disproportionately weak. I seem to recall Iran attacking and capturing a British vessel in international waters a while back. That is an act of war. What did the Brits do? Nothing. Indeed, the captured sailors cooperated fully, including video-taping nice things about their captors. WWMTD? (What would Maggie Thatcher do?)
Chris has summed it up pretty well really. The IRA and the UDA, UVA etc. used sectarian violence as a cover for basic thuggery. They still run extortion rackets, money laundering, bank robbery etc. etc. in Northern Ireland. For a long time they existed on American money and support from scoundrels like Ted Kennedy. 9/11 put paid to that.
In my view the British government had the IRA on the back foot by 1996 then Blair came along and sold out. They released murderers from life sentences back on the street in the name of “peace” It is a complex issue but if you look at Northern Ireland now the moderates have disappeared from politics and you have the radicals from both sides given power. Chris makes an interesting point but I think a more pertinant one would be what will be the British government response when muslim terrorists start firing missiles from Bradford, Oldham and Luton?
Call me a little prejudiced (and I am), but when I look at the philosophy and track record of the IRA (pretty vile and bloody, no kidding) and compare it to the philosophy and track record of Hamas and Hizb’Allah, I really don’t think they’re comparable except on the surface. If I’m right, that’s not prejudice.
Perhaps the most basic difference is that the IRA never swore to destroy Britain or the English people, Hamas and Hizb’Allah have. I always thought that the IRA’s claim was that they only wanted what was theirs, a relatively small portion of Britain. Hamas and Hizb’Allah want to destroy and take over all of Israel. Isn’t there a rather large difference between the two objectives? Even at the height of the IRA bomb throwing violence, they are put to shame by their Mid Eastern competition with their continuing suicide bombing assaults. I’m even willing to overlook the rockets, for now.
Tell me again how comparable the IRA, Hamas & Hizb’Allah are?
Taken as a whole, I really think they Israelis have followed a very moderate and measured response to the provocations from Gaza. Their primary targets have always been the war making capacity of Gaza. That Hamas chooses to put it’s factories and such in Mosques and civilian neighborhoods is not the fault of the Israelis. I might consider coating all of Gaza with napalm disproportionate, but that’s about it.
btw - Anyone have any guesses why we haven’t had a “representative” of the terrorist slime come here to debate us?
England HAS been in the same situation before.
But not with IRA bombings.... bad analogy.
With V2 missiles launched from Germany and occupied France.Did they give a ‘proportionate response’? HELL NO, they (and the US) bombed the hell out of the German cities and reduced many like Dresden into piles of smoking ash and rubble. They bombed the V2 and V1 launching sites into rubble. They bombed the V2 missile factories into rubble, driving their production underground until they could no long be used.
And they not only decimated the capability of Germany to manufacture and launch V2s, they stopped the production of the V4s which VonBraun had plans to multi-stage, making it possible to strike Washington and New York with the eventual intent to drop a German A-Bomb on American and English soil.
Guess what?? The Allies won and England survived to be free....
Go get ‘em, IDF.
Posted by TimO
01/03/2009 at 11:36 PM
This basically shows the flaw in liberal reasoning - they compare a gunshot wound to a paper cut and then wonder why so many people (i.e. conservatives, rational, sane and the educated) support such a ‘gross’ over-kill on the part of Israel.
The fact that there is even still one Palowhinnian to whine (as I heard one this weekend on the tv) - ‘that we’ve been suffering this horrid invasion and killing since 1948’ - indicates that indeed for 61 years - Isreal has conducted an honorable way of dealing with thug, murdering, hatefilled terrorists.
TimO - I agree
Go Get ‘em IDF
To add to what the above have stated, there is one key factor that played a role in Northern Ireland but does not in Gaza.
The simple fact was that the British could AFFORD their complacency during the Troubles (I’m not saying it was a good idea, but they could get away with it at a sickening cost) because, South of the border, the Irish Republic was mobilized and trying to gut the IRA at the same time the British were.
In other words, when the British were under attack by the IRA, they had help South of the border-granted, often troubled help- that could hit the IRA in their home base.
This is drastically different from the Israel-Gaza issue. Sure, various groups like the Jordanian military will retaliate against the PLO when it gets out of hand against them, but they are just as quick to resume the aid to the PLO after they have dealt with their little “issues.”
It still amazes me that the Israelis have been able to do as well as they have all things considered.
Posted by Turtler
01/06/2009 at 12:30 AM
