Compensation Madness?

[P.K.]

No, you are totally right. A trained soldier who has been in the thick of these situations does not have the same understanding compared to someone who uses google or reads a couple of books.

I think LDV is right as well. When you're in the shit you know so little it's difficult to see a broader view. You can't see a long-term view that's for sure. I certainly struggled to see beyond the here and now. Not that it bothered me at the time because there were more immediate concerns and that's the difference.

 

Looking at it from a distance and with hindsight you can get a broader and longer-term understanding.

 

I suspect, but I do not know, that the attempt to view ALL parties as victims is a tacit admission that the situation at the time was bloody dreadful. Shamefully so. The Catholics were discriminated against for years and years and nothing was done about it. That's not condoning the murder of innocents by all parties for which long prison terms were served. It's just telling it like it is.

 

But having posted that I'm absolutely against any compo for some psychotic murdering little thug who took two aimed rounds through the centre of the target whilst trying to engage the security forces or murdering the innocents. So the question then is if a Coroners Report is sufficient grounds to deny payment as they can't be found guilty in a Court of Law? Well, not down here anyway...

[manshimajin]

No, you are totally right. A trained soldier who has been in the thick of these situations does not have the same understanding compared to someone who uses google or reads a couple of books.

Nor do squadies have the same perspective as citizens who have had to live through civil unrest for 30 years.

 

This thread demonstrates that even on the IOM the Northern Ireland situation is still incredibly divisive - imagine what it is like amongst the people who live with it on a day to day basis. A line does need to be drawn under it - and ultimately it will be. Controversially that may be when Northern Irish politicians recognise that they will hold the balance of power in an all-Ireland Government and take a step that is currently unthinkable to many of them. Maybe also when they stop preaching 'winners and loser' and preach 'the better future of our children'.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Though I make the distinction with the security forces. If you treat all as victims of the political set-up and situation in Northern Ireland you can't except those who killed the security forces as they represented the very tool of the state that was much to blame for the situation. It does hoever make the issue tricky, because as Jimbms says, members of the paramilitary organisations committed horrenoud acts against the security forces. Do you compensate the torturer? But those who shot or bombed soldiers I tend to see in a different light. They followed an analysis of the conflict and many were also indoctrinated into the belief that the army and police were the enemy. And it quite understandable given the history of the province and much of the behaviour of the army at times. Such examples being the use of CV gas in the streets alienating the population, the Pitchfork killings which were suspected to be committed by the UDR but were in fact members of one of the scottish regiments, and bloody sunday.

 

But then a lot of these same people would have killed civilians too. You can't make distinctions, so you either compensate all or none. Or that is how it seems to me anyway.

[cheesemonster2005]

I should point out that I strongly believe in the Republican cause and that Northern Ireland should become a part of the Republic of Ireland. However violence is not the answer and has done no favours.

[Freggyragh]

I agree with Immortal Puppet's sentiments. The people, from both communities, are just great. Joey Dunlop, George Best, Seamus Heaney, Barry McGuigan - the people who transcended the politics - they were the heroes of the era for me.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I should point out that I strongly believe in the Republican cause and that Northern Ireland should become a part of the Republic of Ireland. However violence is not the answer and has done no favours.

 

Why do you believe it so strongly?

 

I agree with Immortal Puppet's sentiments. The people, from both communities, are just great. Joey Dunlop, George Best, Seamus Heaney, Barry McGuigan - the people who transcended the politics - they were the heroes of the era for me.

 

Mines Frank Carson.

[Freggyragh]

I should point out that I strongly believe in the Republican cause and that Northern Ireland should become a part of the Republic of Ireland. However violence is not the answer and has done no favours.

 

No, you shouldn't point that out. If you agree that violence is not part of the solution then you condemn it unequivocally.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I should point out that I strongly believe in the Republican cause and that Northern Ireland should become a part of the Republic of Ireland. However violence is not the answer and has done no favours.

 

No, you shouldn't point that out. If you agree that violence is not part of the solution then you condemn it unequivocally.

 

Freggyragh, I don't understand what you mean, from my understanding the Republican is not simply about violence, though many carry out violence in the belief that it furthers the republican cause.

[Freggyragh]

The thread is about compensating terrorists as well as victims of terror. Like other posters I understand that the Peace Process has to involve some counterintuitive measures, but it is hard to take. Leading the thread off into a political debate on the pros and cons of the republican and unionist causes is a step too far for me. Many of the people who were maimed or died had no strong views one way or the other. Forget the songs, the murals, the historical narrative, the uniforms and the parades - there were no 'legitimate targets', there were people, human beings with families and friends who were shot, beaten, stabbed and blown to bits. Some people stoked the cycle of violence, and I don't care what the cause was for, the means did not justify it.

[MilitantDogOwner]

Mr Shoe, sorry to piss on your chips but I spent 10 years in the Armed Forces, and known good lads who were killed by your so called fucking heroes. Good men who used road side bombs, nail bombs, IED's and sniper weapons. Good men who willing put the lives of innocent men, women and children. Like I said to LDV, what ever you say all I've got to say is Manchester Bombing. I myself was involved in a potential shooting on UK soil so you might say my experience is a little more relative than yours.

 

"If some good man somewhere lost his sons and brothers to murder and then he becomes a vicious murderer seeking revenge, then I think the poor suffering wife/mother/sister deserves a little respect" And what of the wives, mothers, sons and daughters of the service men and women, killed off by the IRA "Soldiers"? DO they not deserve respect or does wearing a uniform and not a balclava make you the bad man, not the guy planting the bomb in pubs?? And what of the civilians? How many of them died for your heroes cause?

 

Well wait a second here MilitantDogOwner, you are beginning to make a contrast between the British Army and the IRA in terms of good and bad. The British is not intrinsically some force for good in the world regardless of the intentions and personalities of the men who comprised it. And British people can be just as mistaken in calling British soldiers heroes as much as the IRA. The IRA were seen to be heroes at many times during the Troubles just as much as the British soldiers are seen to be heroes in Iraq. Yet I don't think the issue is about one of contrasting the conduct of the British Army and the IRA in this case. What point is trying to be proved?

 

And what is your experience more relevant for? Commenting on compensation, the IRA, terrorism? You don't necessarily have to have experience of being involved in the Troubles to comment on it, or have more authority.

 

It really doesn't make any difference what weapons were used to kill security forces, in respect of what is ok and what is not. It's war and the republicans were the weaker side, it therefore relied on the forms of weapons that worked best. It is no reflection of good and bad.

 

No I'm making the distinction between a force playing (mainly) by the rules i.e. The Security Forces, and the TERRORISTS who used nail bombs, roadside IED and using civilians as legal targets. Is that clear enough or do you need it explaining clearer?

[MilitantDogOwner]

No, you are totally right. A trained soldier who has been in the thick of these situations does not have the same understanding compared to someone who uses google or reads a couple of books.

Nor do squadies have the same perspective as citizens who have had to live through civil unrest for 30 years.

 

This thread demonstrates that even on the IOM the Northern Ireland situation is still incredibly divisive - imagine what it is like amongst the people who live with it on a day to day basis. A line does need to be drawn under it - and ultimately it will be. Controversially that may be when Northern Irish politicians recognise that they will hold the balance of power in an all-Ireland Government and take a step that is currently unthinkable to many of them. Maybe also when they stop preaching 'winners and loser' and preach 'the better future of our children'.

 

Although you ask any squaddie who had to do a foot patrol in Ireland during the troubles and they will tell you unless you were there you would not understand. They didn't call it Bandit Country for no reason. Every man and woman could be a potential shooter, spotter for a shooter or holding the detonator for an IED. They may dress like a civilian but in reality they are IRA.

[MilitantDogOwner]

It really doesn't make any difference what weapons were used to kill security forces, in respect of what is ok and what is not. It's war and the republicans were the weaker side, it therefore relied on the forms of weapons that worked best. It is no reflection of good and bad.

 

Having seen the effects of a nail bomb first hand LDV, I think you'll find that it does make a difference what weapons are used. When a member of the security forces shoots a target its face to face and the fatalities are limited to that one target. A nail bomb is indiscriminant, doesnt care how old you are, what colour you are, where you were born and certainly doesnt care if you are an anarchist. It is designed to mutilate and kill any one in range.

 

Your more than welcome to have an opinion on the politics of the subject but dont think because you read a book once or saw something on google you can start talking horse shit about the weapons of warfare.

[MilitantDogOwner]

It really doesn't make any difference what weapons were used to kill security forces, in respect of what is ok and what is not. It's war and the republicans were the weaker side, it therefore relied on the forms of weapons that worked best. It is no reflection of good and bad.

So what you are saying is that torturing a squaddie using a blow torch acid and a stanley knife isn't a bad weapon get fucking real as MDO said if you havn;t experienced the situation there first hand or seen the results of your so called murdering scums fair fight then STFU you have no grounds to comment

 

No, no, no. I am referring to attacks made on security forces using IEDs, road side bombs, nail bombs aimed at the security forces. Not the implements of torture (of which cannot be condoned).

 

I don't need to see to know what was going on so no I won't shut up. The fact that MDO or yourself were in the armed forces doesn't give him nor you the experience to comment on what were appropriate or wrongful tactics anymore than my experience gives me that ability. Why is that some military men seem to think that matters involving the military cannot be understood by the civilian or that they have some better understanding? Tosh.

 

I mean JESUS H FUCKING CHRIST LDV ARE YOU THAT RETARDED?!?!?

 

Have you ever seen a gun shot wound? Or the remains of limbs and bodies after a nail bomb? Ever held a dying mate in your arms? How can you understand anythign to do with the military and life in the military without ever having been in it? I can read a book and suddenly become an expert on Hydron Colliders but a book is nothing compared to actually designing, building and maintaining a Hydron Collider.

 

Your just a typical arm chair General who wouldnt cope fives minutes in the real world where the bullet meets the meat. If it was in my power I would drag your arse to the field hospitals in Iraq and Afganistan and have you spout your horseshit to the men and women (from both sides of the conflict) in the beds there and see how long you'll last.

[manshimajin]

[]

Nor do squadies have the same perspective as citizens who have had to live through civil unrest for 30 years.

 

This thread demonstrates that even on the IOM the Northern Ireland situation is still incredibly divisive - imagine what it is like amongst the people who live with it on a day to day basis. A line does need to be drawn under it - and ultimately it will be. Controversially that may be when Northern Irish politicians recognise that they will hold the balance of power in an all-Ireland Government and take a step that is currently unthinkable to many of them. Maybe also when they stop preaching 'winners and loser' and preach 'the better future of our children'.

 

Although you ask any squaddie who had to do a foot patrol in Ireland during the troubles and they will tell you unless you were there you would not understand. They didn't call it Bandit Country for no reason. Every man and woman could be a potential shooter, spotter for a shooter or holding the detonator for an IED. They may dress like a civilian but in reality they are IRA.

MDO I was there from 1969 through 1973. Through the major bombing campaign in NI, the tit for tat murders, no go areas and Internment. So I think I have a realistic perspective. It may not be the same as yours but it is realistic.

[Mr Shoe]

Mr Shoe, sorry to piss on your chips but I spent 10 years in the Armed Forces, and known good lads who were killed by your so called fucking heroes. G

 

You see, the troubles were kept going so long by extremists.

 

Your comments are extreme. You see only the British as good and the IRA etc as bad. You can say "fuck em" all you want, it doesn't help. You should relax. See the bigger picture. I bet you think the Gazans(sp) were asking for it.

 

And, just to piss on your theories, I'm from loyalist stock. But my family weren't extreme - I've heard (horrific) stories from both sides. And just because I have sympathy for a community that had zero recourse to justice for crimes committed against them, doesn't make me sympathetic to their cause. They were very bad people. But then, so were some of the security/loyalist forces.

 

Oh, up in arms now, I appear to have criticized the Forces!!!

 

Just to clarify (before you do), I've never seen the severed limbs of a dying man. As a rule, kids weren't really shown that kind of stuff.