New Skaaneland wrote:And I was asking for the whole song.
here's a lyric video by 1916 their version is my favorite but Scythian has a more traditional one.
Advertisement
by The Alexanderians » Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:38 pm
New Skaaneland wrote:And I was asking for the whole song.
Galloism wrote:Or we can go with feminism doesn't exist. We all imagined it. Collectively.
by Glasgia » Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:45 pm
by Dumb Ideologies » Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:46 pm
by Glasgia » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:07 pm
by New Yuktobanian Republics » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:10 pm
by The Alexanderians » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:15 pm
Galloism wrote:Or we can go with feminism doesn't exist. We all imagined it. Collectively.
by Esheaun Stroakuss » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:18 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:19 pm
Esheaun Stroakuss wrote:Depends entirely on who you ask.
To the more fervent Republican, the IRA are heroes. To protestants, the IRA are villains. To me, the IRA have some valid grievances, but their methods of solving these grievances are not commendable.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Novus America » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:21 pm
Glasgia wrote:I feel like I need to repeat my point and differentiate.
The original IRA fought from 1917 to 1922 and were successful in securing the independence of the south of Ireland from British rule.
In 1922 the IRA split between those who opposed the Anglo-Irish treaty and the partition of Ireland, the "irregulars", and pro-treaty National Army. Those who didn't defect to the Irish Free State were defeated in the Irish Civil War by the British-backed National Army.
Following the civil war, the remaining IRA moved towards social activism in Ireland - often protecting the rights of small farmers against landowners - and protecting the Catholic population in the north of Ireland against sectarian violence.
After being banned by de Valera's government, the IRA began to lose it's core political support and became more militant. Between 1935 and 1969, the IRA conducted multiple "sabotage" (feel free to interpret this either as terrorism or freedom fighting) campaigns against the British state as well as opposition to them in the Irish government.
In 1969, a split in the IRA formed between the "official" - a Marxist group who believed violence worked against the working class on both sides of the divide and wanted to form a parliamentary group- and the "provisional". It was the PIRA who continued the fight against the British and Protestant presence in the north of Ireland until 1997 and the Good Friday Agreement.
Since the ceasefire with the provisional, many splinter groups such as the RIRA have attempted to continue the IRA's legacy - mostly without success.
I believe that the IRA were in the right during the Irish War of Independence and the Irish Civil War - Although whether some individual members can be seen as heroes is certainly questionable. Following that, I support much of their work until the split of much of the organisation's left wing in the 30s and the descent in backwards-looking conservative nationalism and ultimately terrorism.
by Esheaun Stroakuss » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:22 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:Esheaun Stroakuss wrote:Depends entirely on who you ask.
To the more fervent Republican, the IRA are heroes. To protestants, the IRA are villains. To me, the IRA have some valid grievances, but their methods of solving these grievances are not commendable.
While I do think they should have limited their attacks only to the British Army and the Unionist paramilitaries, there was really no recourse except for violent action; Bloody Sunday proved that.
by Esheaun Stroakuss » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:24 pm
Novus America wrote:Glasgia wrote:I feel like I need to repeat my point and differentiate.
The original IRA fought from 1917 to 1922 and were successful in securing the independence of the south of Ireland from British rule.
In 1922 the IRA split between those who opposed the Anglo-Irish treaty and the partition of Ireland, the "irregulars", and pro-treaty National Army. Those who didn't defect to the Irish Free State were defeated in the Irish Civil War by the British-backed National Army.
Following the civil war, the remaining IRA moved towards social activism in Ireland - often protecting the rights of small farmers against landowners - and protecting the Catholic population in the north of Ireland against sectarian violence.
After being banned by de Valera's government, the IRA began to lose it's core political support and became more militant. Between 1935 and 1969, the IRA conducted multiple "sabotage" (feel free to interpret this either as terrorism or freedom fighting) campaigns against the British state as well as opposition to them in the Irish government.
In 1969, a split in the IRA formed between the "official" - a Marxist group who believed violence worked against the working class on both sides of the divide and wanted to form a parliamentary group- and the "provisional". It was the PIRA who continued the fight against the British and Protestant presence in the north of Ireland until 1997 and the Good Friday Agreement.
Since the ceasefire with the provisional, many splinter groups such as the RIRA have attempted to continue the IRA's legacy - mostly without success.
I believe that the IRA were in the right during the Irish War of Independence and the Irish Civil War - Although whether some individual members can be seen as heroes is certainly questionable. Following that, I support much of their work until the split of much of the organisation's left wing in the 30s and the descent in backwards-looking conservative nationalism and ultimately terrorism.
How were they right in the Civil War? The Anglo-Irish Treaty was the best deal possible for Ireland. Any reasonable person was surprised Ireland got so much. The British were not leaving the North, and the Irish had no way to take the North. It simply was not going to happen.
Ireland had suffered so much harm, it needed peace. The last thing it needed was Irish killing Irish. An "IRA" victory in the Civil War would have resulted in a return of Brtish occupation. it would have been a disaster and likely the end of Irish independence. It would have NEVER won one inch of Northern Ireland.
I mean again, Americans did not murder George Washintgton because he failed to get Canada.
by Novus America » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:25 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:Esheaun Stroakuss wrote:Depends entirely on who you ask.
To the more fervent Republican, the IRA are heroes. To protestants, the IRA are villains. To me, the IRA have some valid grievances, but their methods of solving these grievances are not commendable.
While I do think they should have limited their attacks only to the British Army and the Unionist paramilitaries, there was really no recourse except for violent action; Bloody Sunday proved that.
by United Marxist Nations » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:31 pm
Novus America wrote:United Marxist Nations wrote:While I do think they should have limited their attacks only to the British Army and the Unionist paramilitaries, there was really no recourse except for violent action; Bloody Sunday proved that.
Again the tactics used are what makes a "terrorist". Causes are often complex and debatable. Deliberately murdering civilians especially your own for political purposes is the very definition of terrorism.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Novus America » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:35 pm
Esheaun Stroakuss wrote:Novus America wrote:
How were they right in the Civil War? The Anglo-Irish Treaty was the best deal possible for Ireland. Any reasonable person was surprised Ireland got so much. The British were not leaving the North, and the Irish had no way to take the North. It simply was not going to happen.
Ireland had suffered so much harm, it needed peace. The last thing it needed was Irish killing Irish. An "IRA" victory in the Civil War would have resulted in a return of Brtish occupation. it would have been a disaster and likely the end of Irish independence. It would have NEVER won one inch of Northern Ireland.
I mean again, Americans did not murder George Washintgton because he failed to get Canada.
I agree. I think that whilst the Anglo-Irish Treaty was flawed and did not grant Ireland total independence, I think that- for the time- it was the best deal possible, for both the North and the South. Even Michael Collins viewed the Treaty as a temporary measure, hoping to revise it over time to eventual sovereignty. It was de Valera with his rather scheming ways that ultimately ended any hope of peace.
by Esheaun Stroakuss » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:38 pm
Novus America wrote:Esheaun Stroakuss wrote:
I agree. I think that whilst the Anglo-Irish Treaty was flawed and did not grant Ireland total independence, I think that- for the time- it was the best deal possible, for both the North and the South. Even Michael Collins viewed the Treaty as a temporary measure, hoping to revise it over time to eventual sovereignty. It was de Valera with his rather scheming ways that ultimately ended any hope of peace.
"[The treaty is] not the ultimate freedom that all nations aspire and develop, but the freedom to achieve freedom."
Michael Collins
Britain still had overwhelming military superiority, so some sort of negotiated truce was the only hope for peace. Had the treaty not been signed the war would have continued, and Ireland would have only lost more lives with nothing gained.
by Glasgia » Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:45 pm
Novus America wrote:Glasgia wrote:I feel like I need to repeat my point and differentiate.
The original IRA fought from 1917 to 1922 and were successful in securing the independence of the south of Ireland from British rule.
In 1922 the IRA split between those who opposed the Anglo-Irish treaty and the partition of Ireland, the "irregulars", and pro-treaty National Army. Those who didn't defect to the Irish Free State were defeated in the Irish Civil War by the British-backed National Army.
Following the civil war, the remaining IRA moved towards social activism in Ireland - often protecting the rights of small farmers against landowners - and protecting the Catholic population in the north of Ireland against sectarian violence.
After being banned by de Valera's government, the IRA began to lose it's core political support and became more militant. Between 1935 and 1969, the IRA conducted multiple "sabotage" (feel free to interpret this either as terrorism or freedom fighting) campaigns against the British state as well as opposition to them in the Irish government.
In 1969, a split in the IRA formed between the "official" - a Marxist group who believed violence worked against the working class on both sides of the divide and wanted to form a parliamentary group- and the "provisional". It was the PIRA who continued the fight against the British and Protestant presence in the north of Ireland until 1997 and the Good Friday Agreement.
Since the ceasefire with the provisional, many splinter groups such as the RIRA have attempted to continue the IRA's legacy - mostly without success.
I believe that the IRA were in the right during the Irish War of Independence and the Irish Civil War - Although whether some individual members can be seen as heroes is certainly questionable. Following that, I support much of their work until the split of much of the organisation's left wing in the 30s and the descent in backwards-looking conservative nationalism and ultimately terrorism.
How were they right in the Civil War? The Anglo-Irish Treaty was the best deal possible for Ireland. Any reasonable person was surprised Ireland got so much. The British were not leaving the North, and the Irish had no way to take the North. It simply was not going to happen.
Ireland had suffered so much harm, it needed peace. The last thing it needed was Irish killing Irish. An "IRA" victory in the Civil War would have resulted in a return of Brtish occupation. it would have been a disaster and likely the end of Irish independence. It would have NEVER won one inch of Northern Ireland.
I mean again, Americans did not murder George Washintgton because he failed to get Canada.
by Novus America » Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:19 pm
Glasgia wrote:Novus America wrote:
How were they right in the Civil War? The Anglo-Irish Treaty was the best deal possible for Ireland. Any reasonable person was surprised Ireland got so much. The British were not leaving the North, and the Irish had no way to take the North. It simply was not going to happen.
Ireland had suffered so much harm, it needed peace. The last thing it needed was Irish killing Irish. An "IRA" victory in the Civil War would have resulted in a return of Brtish occupation. it would have been a disaster and likely the end of Irish independence. It would have NEVER won one inch of Northern Ireland.
I mean again, Americans did not murder George Washintgton because he failed to get Canada.
I am saddened by the loss of Michael Collins in the fighting - However, he was not murdered. It was war and he was a casualty.
The Anglo-Irish treaty enforced the sectarian divide already present in Ireland. It served as a mandate for the terrorisation of Irish Catholics in the north, defining the new "Northern Irish" state as a Protestant one and therefore ensuring that the state would continue the oppression of Catholics in the period following - And similarly, it allowed Protestants in the south to be viewed as "non-Irish" and persecuted the same. Although a continuation of the war would've been harsh on Irish people both sides of the border, it was necessary to prevent the mess that ensued - Creating a united Irish state, rather than a distinctly Catholic "free state" in the south and a distinctly Protestant "Northern Irish" state in the north.
by Ardoki » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:24 pm
Novus America wrote:United Marxist Nations wrote:While I do think they should have limited their attacks only to the British Army and the Unionist paramilitaries, there was really no recourse except for violent action; Bloody Sunday proved that.
Again the tactics used are what makes a "terrorist". Causes are often complex and debatable. Deliberately murdering civilians especially your own for political purposes is the very definition of terrorism.
United Marxist Nations wrote:Ecrotia wrote:Casualty Responsibilities
Republican paramilitary groups 2058
Loyalist paramilitary groups 1026
British security forces 363
Of those killed by British security forces:
187 (~51.5%) were civilians
145 (~39.9%) were members of republican paramilitaries
18 (~4.9%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries
13 (~3.5%) were fellow members of the British security forces
Of those killed by Republican Parties:
1080 (~52%) were members/former members of the British security forces
723 (~35%) were civilians
187 (~9%) were members of republican paramilitaries
57 (~2.7%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries
11 (~0.5%) were members of the Irish security forc
All these numbers are too high, but it appears the Republicans killed more civilians and Irish people
They killed fewer civilians as a ratio to total casualties compared to either the security forces, and, especially, the Loyalist militias, which you left out:
Of those killed by loyalist paramilitaries:
877 (~85.4%) were civilians
94 (~9%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries
41 (~4%) were members of republican paramilitaries
14 (~1%) were members of the British security forces
by WCJNSTBH » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:32 pm
The Neo-Hellenic Republic wrote:Gerry Adams, ex-IRA member, patriot, and hero to the Irish people. It was only in 2006 that he was removed from the US terrorist watchlist, something I find he should have never been on in the first place.
The Irish Republican Army, from '17 to '94 they fought to free my beautiful country, but alas the terrorist armies of Britannia were victorious.
That wasn't the case for the first War of Independence when Britannia's sons were forced back to London, and the RA was victorious. The Brits have called them terrorists in spite of their heroic victory, so NSG, do you think the RA were terrorists, or heroes?
If you couldn't tell, I find them to be incredibly heroic and its no surprise the people of Ireland love them. Tiocfaidh Ar La! Sing up the RA!
by Reutoa » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:48 pm
The Presidential Republic of Reutoa19 year old Rockefeller Republican, College Student studying History to be a Teacher, Former Campaign Aide, aspiring pescatarian
WELD 2020"Every time you stand up for an ideal, you send forth a tiny ripple of hope."
-Senator Robert F. Kennedy
by The New Sea Territory » Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:13 pm
| Ⓐ ☭ | Anarchist Communist | Heideggerian Marxist | Vegetarian | Bisexual | Stirnerite | Slavic/Germanic Pagan | ᚨ ᛟ |
Solntsa Roshcha --- Postmodern Poyltheist
"Christianity had brutally planted the poisoned blade in the healthy, quivering flesh of all humanity; it had goaded a cold wave
of darkness with mystically brutal fury to dim the serene and festive exultation of the dionysian spirit of our pagan ancestors."
-Renzo Novatore, Verso il Nulla Creatore
by Prussia-Steinbach » Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:36 pm
New Hellenica wrote:They're terrorists. Not freedom fighters.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Dazchan, Emotional Support Crocodile, Foxyshire, Ifreann, New Temecula, The Black Forrest, Tungstan
Advertisement