Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 11:54 am  

Will you learn how to quote please?!!

Durham Giant wrote:

well you could always answer the question have you done anything warrior type other than type on a keyboard

Oh I'm sorry, what is required to pass your approval test?

You talk about a moral compass and try to lecture me on the morality of war and military tactics to differentiate between military targets and terrorism ion your last post. And then for some reason WW2 does not come into it.

Once the logic of your arguments is undermined you try to move the goalposts. You should read yopur posts back.

Because each conflict is different. The causes behind each conflict are different. The reasons for each action are different. As time passes the standards of the age change and what is deemed acceptable in conflict change. Your comparisons are pointless and a sign of weakness that you can't stick to the issue we're discussing, you feel the need to bring up historical events in some vain attempt to back yourself up.

Wiki is your frind again you are a lazy lover not prepared to look for any information to educate yourself.

The BBC article was reporting from a study of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, titled "Sanctions and childhood mortality in Iraq", that was published in the May 2000 Lancet medical journal.[49] The study concluded that in southern and central Iraq, infant mortality rate between 1994 and 1999 had risen to 108 per 1,000. Child mortality rate, which refers to children between the age of one and five years, also drastically inclined from 56 to 131 per 1,000.[48] In the autonomous northern region during the same period, infant mortality declined from 64 to 59 per 1000 and under-5 mortality fell from 80 to 72 per 1000, which was attributed to better food and resource allocation.

Those sanctions were led by Britain and the US and enforced by them therefore they have to accept the responsibility for the outcome of those actions. |But if it makes you feel better and morally superior to Republicans most of them were not directly killed by military action by the Brits, they were just slowly starved to death or denied medication or medical treatment. They even stopped antibiotics and innoculation so kids died of relatively minor infections and preventable diseases.

Maybe they were just trying to terrorise the Iraqi people by punishing them all for the actions of saddam.
You do not need to go far to find many other examples of British actions or inactions that killed millions of children you could always type in Concentration camps in SA, Bengal famine, Tasmanian aborigines etc etc.

Right, so where does it state "the British killed a million children". Yes, a international political effort may have increased child mortality in some areas of Iraq and yes, we do have to accept some responsibility for that.

I'm just surprised you've not brought up the potato famine yet.

As you are the one who started with insults based on Nationality and are quite happy to defend the morality of the British as opposed to us plastic paddies it seemed only right you would see all the others the Brits have fooked over in the past centuries in similar racial or national stereotypes. How else would you be able to justify your superiority when it comes to war terror and killing your opponents.

But you are a wannabe paddy, aren't you?

Because you think and express youyrself like a taxi driver where everything is black and white approach. Brits good, republicans bad.You certainly are no thinker. Your posts are littered with emotive terms just like a sun copywriter examples highligthed in red.

Is that right? I can think enough to operate the quote button and form grammatically correct sentences with correct spelling, thank you. I think you must scan-read posts, because you certainly don't take much in and keep throwing out contradictory replies.

I make my own mind up, which seems to be more than you can manage.

It is a lot easier to side with the popular view than it is to challenge it. But then again you would be quite happy to be associated with the Suns view of the Irish troubles.

Hang on, I thought I wasn't a thinker, and everything was black and white? So have I made my mind up or not?

Let me say it again. Just because I understand a cause, doesn't mean I agree with it. I understand the cause of Irish Republicanism, but having grown up in the shadow of their threat, having witnessed the Manchester bomb and having a good friend (a Catholic Republican) who lost her father (Brian McCrory) at Omagh, I still find McGuinness' involvement in politics distasteful.

Ps, I've not read the Sun or any similar tabloid in about 20 years.

I agree with you on this point. Hence it would support the arguement that it was a war rather than a mtter of Criminality or Law and Order. Mind you the IRA taught the SAS a few lessons about fighting as well. The story of Francis Hughes who used to walk around the filds in Armagh wearing a camo jacket with IRA written on the back in big white letters was a good one. He was ambushed by the SAS, shot one dead and injured the other two.

I believe rumpelstiltskin has already embarrassed you over this little paddy legend.

And yet depite the Saville inquiry you still believe that in some way the Nationalists who were marching provoked the British Army which led to them being shot. Look at your post where you talk about this

I believe the shot fired by the Official IRA sniper probably had a lot to do with it.

Seriously, the Saville enquiry was only ever going to have one outcome. No-one on the Republican side was ever going to admit to being armed, or having a nail bomb, or firing a shot. Meanwhile, in the real world, that march was full of IRA of all description. However, I accept that once the first bullets had been fired the Paras lost control and their actions were deplorable.

No i still dont tyhink you understand the film. And as for the plastic Limey bit your right it is not clever but i used it to challenge the peety insults you started throwing around at Plastic Paddies. Is that alright plastic limey

I'm sure you've convinced yourself you read something deep and meaningful into Four Lions beyond the comedy and the darkly satirical message it sends about British jihadis and their cause.

By the way, my grandparents were English, Scottish, Sicilian...and Irish. I think you need another insult.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 12:03 pm  

peggy wrote:

I am quite sure the country would have continued to fight in response. Whether we would have used spineless c0ckheaded bastarrrds to murder little kids on a Saturday afternoon in the middle of town I’m not sure.

I've already stated my views on the IRA tactics of killing innocent civillians earlier in this thread.....However, it seems to me that you agree with me that any establishment figure of the opposition is a fair target??

With that in mind, we come back to the original argument, that the British Government and the Head of State were legitimate targets of the IRA and so rather than being 'murdering b**tards' they were actually fighting a fair war when aiming their guns and bombs at Mountbatten, members of the Armed Forces in Ulster and the Grand Hotel in Brighton?

[Durham Giant]

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 2:53 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

A war the IRA/INLA have lost.

Bearing in mind the British army accepted they could never beat the IRA that is debatable. Bearing in mind where this thread started i would also question whether you are correct.

What you do show is the fact that you often present yourself as a bit of a lefty it goes to show that scratch your surface and under that skin you are still Red White and Blue.

People like you always remind me of a quote by Trotsky,

"The British Socialist who fails to support by all means possible the uprisings in Ireland desrves to be branded with infamy if not a bullet".

[Durham Giant]

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 3:36 pm  

Cronus wrote:

Will you learn how to quote please?!!

Last refuge of the Sin Bin forum, what is next spelling ! always handy to deflect from the arguements eh. A sure sign that you are struggling with the arguements.

Oh I'm sorry, what is required to pass your approval test

?

I will take that as acceptance that you are just a Keyboard warrior then.

Because each conflict is different. The causes behind each conflict are different. The reasons for each action are different. As time passes the standards of the age change and what is deemed acceptable in conflict change. Your comparisons are pointless and a sign of weakness that you can't stick to the issue we're discussing, you feel the need to bring up historical events in some vain attempt to back yourself up.

Right, so where does it state "the British killed a million children". Yes, a international political effort may have increased child mortality in some areas of Iraq and yes, we do have to accept some responsibility for that.

I'm just surprised you've not brought up the potato famine yet.

Bizzarre comment the peace process has been in place since 1998 and yet i bring up British Military actions as late as 2003 and 2008 and you suggest that my arguement is weak and i have to rely on historical incidents. My God you must be about 12 if you think 2003 is old history.

You are a bit lazy re Iraq and the deaths of children there. You suggest that there may have been an increase in child mortality in some areas of IRAQ.

An increase how very well spun. Here are some suggestions from people far more qualified than I which suggests it was a wholesale killing of children.

Estimates of deaths due to sanctionsEstimates of excess deaths during sanctions vary depending on the source. The estimates vary [30][37] due to differences in methodologies, and specific time-frames covered.[38] A short listing of estimates follows:

Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."[30][39]
Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq Denis Halliday: "Two hundred thirty-nine thousand children 5 years old and under" as of 1998.[40]
"probably ... 170,000 children", Project on Defense Alternatives, "The Wages of War", 20. October 2003[41]
350,000 excess deaths among children "even using conservative estimates", Slate Explainer, "Are 1 Million Children Dying in Iraq?", 9. October 2001.[42]
Economist Michael Spagat: "very likely to be [less than] than half a million children." He claims that these estimates are unable to isolate the effects of sanctions alone due to the lack of "anything resembling a controlled experiment".[43]
"Richard Garfield, a Columbia University nursing professor ... cited the figures 345,000-530,000 for the entire 1990-2002 period"[8] for sanctions-related excess deaths.[44]
Zaidi, S. and Fawzi, M. C. S., (1995) The Lancet British medical journal: 567,000 children.[45] A co-author (Zaidi) did a follow-up study in 1996, finding "much lower ... mortality rates ... for unknown reasons."[46]

Most of these relate to infant mortality so i think it would be fair to extrapolate that if you looked at children 5 to 16 these would be lower estimates.

Were you out campaigning against sanctions and the effect on Iraqi kids or were you too busy venting you spleen about Republicans.

But you are a wannabe paddy, aren't you?

No i am fully fledged.

Is that right? I can think enough to operate the quote button and form grammatically correct sentences with correct spelling, thank you. I think you must scan-read posts, because you certainly don't take much in and keep throwing out contradictory replies.

Hang on, I thought I wasn't a thinker, and everything was black and white? So have I made my mind up or not?

See my first point. Last refuge of someone who cannot stick to the arguements . Raise irrelevances, distract from the discussion in the hope that smart arsed comments make you look better.

Let me say it again. Just because I understand a cause, doesn't mean I agree with it. I understand the cause of Irish Republicanism, but having grown up in the shadow of their threat, having witnessed the Manchester bomb and having a good friend (a Catholic Republican) who lost her father (Brian McCrory) at Omagh, I still find McGuinness' involvement in politics distasteful.

I made that point several posts ago you chose your side and i chose mine.

Ps, I've not read the Sun or any similar tabloid in about 20 years

.

But obviously when you did read it it had such an impact on you that it seems to have become a significant part of your vocabulary and attitudes.

I believe rumpelstiltskin has already embarrassed you over this little paddy legend.

I was going to add to RS post. The information he posted is correc t but the Soldier shot despite being a Para had ben seconded to the SAS and he was part of an SAS ambush. You could check some of this out on Wiki if you want. So i would argue that the account i gave is pretty accurate.

I believe the shot fired by the Official IRA sniper probably had a lot to do with it

.

Which i believe was a couple of hours prior to the Paras openinf fire and had virtually no impact on the actions of the paras that day.

Seriously, the Saville enquiry was only ever going to have one outcome. No-one on the Republican side was ever going to admit to being armed, or having a nail bomb, or firing a shot. Meanwhile, in the real world, that march was full of IRA of all description. However, I accept that once the first bullets had been fired the Paras lost control and their actions were deplorable

.

Yet you still have to try to justify the actions of the paras and cannot seem to blame them completely.

I'm sure you've convinced yourself you read something deep and meaningful into Four Lions beyond the comedy and the darkly satirical message it sends about British jihadis and their cause

.

No not really. But i wont bother putting yourself out of your misery.

By the way, my grandparents were English, Scottish, Sicilian...and Irish. I think you need another insult

.

And the significance of this is what. Are you trying to deny some british identity now. Fair enough it must be hard been British and been part of their baby killing actions in Iraq ( oops i have slipped into Sun mode.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:08 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote: I've already stated my views on the IRA tactics of killing innocent civillians earlier in this thread.....However, it seems to me that you agree with me that any establishment figure of the opposition is a fair target?? With that in mind, we come back to the original argument, that the British Government and the Head of State were legitimate targets of the IRA and so rather than being 'murdering b**tards' they were actually fighting a fair war when aiming their guns and bombs at Mountbatten, members of the Armed Forces in Ulster and the Grand Hotel in Brighton? Had the Nationalists simply targeted the RUC and the British Military, possibly even members of the Government, then there may be some credence in that point of view. Although, for me personally, the ideal of a "fair war" does raise a smile, and is the sort of fruit bat loopery the likes of Durham would come out with. Admitedly he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, that would be a stakeknife eh Durham? However, you cannot conveniently ignore for the sake of your own conscience, the many cruel acts and sectarian violence they wrought on the civilian population in Northern Ireland and beyond, from their political aspirations. What was the political point they were trying to make at Kingsmill in 1976 when they stopped a minibus taking workers home and massacred the 10 Protestants onboard?..... Omagh?..... Inniskillen?..... the many people who simply disappeared after being taken away for a chat by that killing Unit commanded by Gerry Adams? Hopefully though, the JEAN McConville killing will come back to bite the master revisionist on the booty. Incidentally, that's my favourite photo of the pair of them. I readily acknowledge the conditions that Catholics had to live under in NI in the sixties were deplorable, and had to change. I also understand the particular sectarian edge that Irish history brings into the equation, and the easy and quick acceptance of violence as simply another option. Adams made that clear with his "Armalite and the Ballot box" spiel. But if you have enough personal conviction to join a terrorist organisation in pursuit of those ideals, then don't complain if the by your actions you meet somebody in uniform, armed with a large rifle, and with the authority of HM Government coming towards you. Milltown is full of those who failed to understand the meaning of the word, consequences.

Dita's Slot Meter wrote: I've already stated my views on the IRA tactics of killing innocent civillians earlier in this thread.....However, it seems to me that you agree with me that any establishment figure of the opposition is a fair target?? With that in mind, we come back to the original argument, that the British Government and the Head of State were legitimate targets of the IRA and so rather than being 'murdering b**tards' they were actually fighting a fair war when aiming their guns and bombs at Mountbatten, members of the Armed Forces in Ulster and the Grand Hotel in Brighton? Had the Nationalists simply targeted the RUC and the British Military, possibly even members of the Government, then there may be some credence in that point of view. Although, for me personally, the ideal of a "fair war" does raise a smile, and is the sort of fruit bat loopery the likes of Durham would come out with. Admitedly he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, that would be a stakeknife eh Durham? However, you cannot conveniently ignore for the sake of your own conscience, the many cruel acts and sectarian violence they wrought on the civilian population in Northern Ireland and beyond, from their political aspirations. What was the political point they were trying to make at Kingsmill in 1976 when they stopped a minibus taking workers home and massacred the 10 Protestants onboard?..... Omagh?..... Inniskillen?..... the many people who simply disappeared after being taken away for a chat by that killing Unit commanded by Gerry Adams? Hopefully though, the JEAN McConville killing will come back to bite the master revisionist on the booty. Incidentally, that's my favourite photo of the pair of them. I readily acknowledge the conditions that Catholics had to live under in NI in the sixties were deplorable, and had to change. I also understand the particular sectarian edge that Irish history brings into the equation, and the easy and quick acceptance of violence as simply another option. Adams made that clear with his "Armalite and the Ballot box" spiel. But if you have enough personal conviction to join a terrorist organisation in pursuit of those ideals, then don't complain if the by your actions you meet somebody in uniform, armed with a large rifle, and with the authority of HM Government coming towards you. Milltown is full of those who failed to understand the meaning of the word, consequences.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:16 pm  

Durham Giant wrote:

Last refuge of the Sin Bin forum, what is next spelling ! always handy to deflect from the arguements eh. A sure sign that you are struggling with the arguements.

No, just a sure sign you're an imbecile. The quote facility is simple to use.

I will take that as acceptance that you are just a Keyboard warrior then.

Take it as you like, I'm not after your approval.

Bizzarre comment the peace process has been in place since 1998 and yet i bring up British Military actions as late as 2003 and 2008 and you suggest that my arguement is weak and i have to rely on historical incidents. My God you must be about 12 if you think 2003 is old history.

Erm, I believe you were talking about WW2, imbecile.

You are a bit lazy re Iraq and the deaths of children there. You suggest that there may have been an increase in child mortality in some areas of IRAQ.

An increase how very well spun. Here are some suggestions from people far more qualified than I which suggests it was a wholesale killing of children.

Estimates of deaths due to sanctionsEstimates of excess deaths during sanctions vary depending on the source. The estimates vary [30][37] due to differences in methodologies, and specific time-frames covered.[38] A short listing of estimates follows:

Unicef: 500,000 children (including sanctions, collateral effects of war). "[As of 1999] [c]hildren under 5 years of age are dying at more than twice the rate they were ten years ago."[30][39]
Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq Denis Halliday: "Two hundred thirty-nine thousand children 5 years old and under" as of 1998.[40]
"probably ... 170,000 children", Project on Defense Alternatives, "The Wages of War", 20. October 2003[41]
350,000 excess deaths among children "even using conservative estimates", Slate Explainer, "Are 1 Million Children Dying in Iraq?", 9. October 2001.[42]
Economist Michael Spagat: "very likely to be [less than] than half a million children." He claims that these estimates are unable to isolate the effects of sanctions alone due to the lack of "anything resembling a controlled experiment".[43]
"Richard Garfield, a Columbia University nursing professor ... cited the figures 345,000-530,000 for the entire 1990-2002 period"[8] for sanctions-related excess deaths.[44]
Zaidi, S. and Fawzi, M. C. S., (1995) The Lancet British medical journal: 567,000 children.[45] A co-author (Zaidi) did a follow-up study in 1996, finding "much lower ... mortality rates ... for unknown reasons."[46]

Most of these relate to infant mortality so i think it would be fair to extrapolate that if you looked at children 5 to 16 these would be lower estimates.

Were you out campaigning against sanctions and the effect on Iraqi kids or were you too busy venting you spleen about Republicans.

That's all very nice. Still doesn't say "the British killed a million children", does it?

No i am fully fledged.

Of course you are. I bet you can do the accent and wear a green hat on Paddy's Day.

See my first point. Last refuge of someone who cannot stick to the arguements . Raise irrelevances, distract from the discussion in the hope that smart arsed comments make you look better.

Just looking at your posts makes me look better.

But obviously when you did read it it had such an impact on you that it seems to have become a significant part of your vocabulary and attitudes.

I can only assume you read the scrawlings of a small child in that case.

I was going to add to RS post. The information he posted is correc t but the Soldier shot despite being a Para had ben seconded to the SAS and he was part of an SAS ambush. You could check some of this out on Wiki if you want. So i would argue that the account i gave is pretty accurate.

All sorts of people get seconded to the Special Forces. Pilots, medics, intelligence, other troops. That doesn't make them a member of the Special Forces. But that doesn't make such a good paddy legend to tell down the pub, does it?

Which i believe was a couple of hours prior to the Paras openinf fire and had virtually no impact on the actions of the paras that day.

No, the Official IRA gunman on William St fired at troops at the Presbyterian Church shortly after 3.55, just after the very first few shots were fired.

Yet you still have to try to justify the actions of the paras and cannot seem to blame them completely.

Not really. Their actions weren't justifiable. But if you think there were no other factors and the Paras simply started shooting for no reason you're an idiot.

No not really. But i wont bother putting yourself out of your misery.

Aw, go on, I'm intrigued.

And the significance of this is what. Are you trying to deny some british identity now. Fair enough it must be hard been British and been part of their baby killing actions in Iraq ( oops i have slipped into Sun mode.

Must harder being a plastic paddy and celebrating them blowing up women and children in town centres.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:19 pm  

Durham Giant wrote:

Bearing in mind the British army accepted they could never beat the IRA that is debatable. Bearing in mind where this thread started i would also question whether you are correct.

What you do show is the fact that you often present yourself as a bit of a lefty it goes to show that scratch your surface and under that skin you are still Red White and Blue.

People like you always remind me of a quote by Trotsky,

"The British Socialist who fails to support by all means possible the uprisings in Ireland desrves to be branded with infamy if not a bullet".

The IRA lost full stop and that is obvious. As for being a lefty - wrong. I hate the IRA and what they did in the name of their cause as they were a bunch of cowards who hid behing the Catholic Church and still do I bet. Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people on here by any chance ? One thing I always found funny were the Irish Americans who supported The Cause but yet knew nothing at all about it and found the IRA a romantic idea to get behind those poor IRA people fighting the tyrannical British Government. People like me ? Just because you don't agree with what I say is no excuse for that sort of inferrence is it ? Funny you should mention Leon Trotsky - he got a pickaxe in the head.

It was always good to hear on the news of a dead IRA member ( or more ) and it's just a shame that not all of them were finished off as they are a bunch of low life cowards who deserve nothing but contempt. It's a shame that no-one put a bullet in the head of Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams but we can live in hope and have two pieces of walking and talking excrement removed from this world.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:36 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

One thing I always found funny were the Irish Americans who supported The Cause but yet knew nothing at all about it and found the IRA a romantic idea to get behind those poor IRA people fighting the tyrannical British Government.

I remember being in a bar in Hell's Kitchen, New York in April 2003. I was out with the cast of "Vincent in Brixton" and things were getting messy. Two very loud and obnoxious local lads found out I was English and declared to all around that "I should get out of Ireland".

I tried to take it in good humour but they carried on a bit so I stopped them and asked had they ever been to Ireland (no), were they Irish (some of the ancestors apparently were), what should be done with the Protestant population if the British left Northern Ireland (blank stares), and whether they thought the Good Friday Agreement was a positive development (blank stares).

Then I told them that not only was I part Irish, I visited the island of Ireland regularly and am godfather to two Northern Irish boys. Then I told them that just as Al Qaeda had flattened Manhattan 2 years earlier, the (P)IRA had flattened my home city, as well as killing 2 young boys a few miles in attacks down the road.

To be fair they took it well and backed down, and left us all well alone.

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 5:38 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

It's a shame that no-one put a bullet in the head of Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams but we can live in hope and have two pieces of walking and talking excrement removed from this world.

A fair comment and I understand why these two people would stoke up these sorts of feelings in people.

However, do you apply the same thinking to Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron, etc?

[Durham Giant]

Re: The Queen and Martin McGuinness : Sun Jul 01, 2012 6:36 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

The IRA lost full stop and that is obvious. As for being a lefty - wrong. I hate the IRA and what they did in the name of their cause as they were a bunch of cowards who hid behing the Catholic Church and still do I bet. Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people on here by any chance ? One thing I always found funny were the Irish Americans who supported The Cause but yet knew nothing at all about it and found the IRA a romantic idea to get behind those poor IRA people fighting the tyrannical British Government. People like me ? Just because you don't agree with what I say is no excuse for that sort of inferrence is it ? Funny you should mention Leon Trotsky - he got a pickaxe in the head.

It was always good to hear on the news of a dead IRA member ( or more ) and it's just a shame that not all of them were finished off as they are a bunch of low life cowards who deserve nothing but contempt. It's a shame that no-one put a bullet in the head of Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams but we can live in hope and have two pieces of walking and talking excrement removed from this world.

Fascinating stuff DMW. Quite happy to jump on the anti Tory bandwagon hence i assumed you were towards the left. What i do get though is the stench of sectarianism that comes through in your posts. Anyone would think you were a Rangers fan or their Edinburgh equivalent Hearts. A bit of scots presbyterianism in there maybe.

I was waiting for the Cowards bit which is why i pre-empted it by using the Francis Hughes story earlier. Regardless of which slightly differing accounts from me and RS hardly the actions of a coward.

I must have touched a nerve with my Trotsky quote, but again i wrongly assumed that you were on the left and i used it to challenge the hyposcrisy of thos left wingers who quite happily support National Liberation struggles in palestine, SA or Rhodesia but do not have the Cojones to challenge British nationalism.

It was amazing how the 1st couple of years everyone hated Thatcher but a little war in the South Atlantic and the left had no idea what to do. Wham bam everyone is waving the flag and geting behind our boys.

I was going to write that it would have been worrying to have you next to me on the workers barricades as the workers seize power. Then the army march against us ready to smash our heads in with rifle butts and poor little you saying, " we cannot shoot back they are flying the Union Jack and singing rule britannia".

However after reading your posts i am fairly certain that at the first whiff of being accused of being anti patriotic you would have been off like a flash.