Is there any difference between terrorism by the IRA in the 70's and today's problems.?

John T

Yes, there are differences, but both in the end are terrorists.

The evil of a group that attacks civilians is the cause of the problem. That is never justified. Therefore, regardless of any perceived or real justifications for the conflict involving northern ireland, the IRA was wrong. Thankfully that is over.

Al-Qaeda were outsiders in Afghanistan. The Taliban were Afghanis killing other Afghans because of infractions such as women not covering their face or attempting to gain an education. Still, they were deposed because they refused to give up Al-Qaeda.

Saddam was likewise evil and deposed, though he was killing his citizens for political rather than religious reasons. Al-Qaeda in Iraq is primarily outsiders as well.

Lynda Lou

Even though the IRA were terrorists, at least when they planted car bombs, they gave warnings to the police as to where the bombs were on most occasions. These muslims are downright evil and won't be happy until every non muslim person in the world is dead.

david c

Pre warning before the bomb went off!!!
Not always but most of the time the IRA gave you warning, im not defending that just giving you the facts...Where as today terrorist want to make the biggest impact at any cost...

easyericlife

So how exactly is blowing up the World Trade Center about keeping the UK out of Iraq.

felix

IRA - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. IRA were opposing the occupying powers. Excellent example of a terrorist.

Today's issue is religious - "get troops out of Iraq" is just a smokescreen:
The Koran instructs Islamics to heap up a mountain (of corpses) of non believers

ainejosie

EDWARD CARSON Irish Unionist.Conservative Member of Parliament, Barrister, Judge,Organized a shipment of GERMAN RIFLES into Larne Habour, April, 1914. He was Opposed to Home Rule for IRELAND. He stated He would neither serve King, nor Kaiser. Would IRENE M, Class Him A TERRORIST?? Makarios, was considered a Terrorist, Kenyatta, Begin These people were termed Terrorists by the BRITISH GOVERNMENT. they later were Invited to have TEA with the QUEEN...When will ADAMS receive his Invitation?? Tell me IRENE M.......

PATRICK

the Muslims are cowards

Baz

You say that we are in there country, have you been going around with your eyes closed, there more of them in our country than in there own, and we are paying to keep them.

shevek_v

The difference is one of scale. Contemporary terrorism is international, capable of drawing potential recruits from almost any country on the planet. The Provos were mainly from one small region, were a much more cohesive force and confined their activities mainly to Northern Ireland and mainland Britain.

Contemporary terrorism is a loose alliance of terrorist organisations and like minded individuals who have an international aim in mind - the establishment of a modern Caliphate, the imposition of their world view on Islam and the overthrow of what they see as corrupt Arab governments.

This is a much more difficult proposition to deal with militarily than the Provos and the Official IRA. The problem arose because the "Great Powers" thought they could use Islamist terrorists to further their own ends - ie the defeat of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and the securing of oil resources and energy corridors for strategic pipelines after the fall of the Soviet Union.

ohiofirefighter42

The biggest difference I see is that the IRA attcks buildings and infrastructure. They called and warned where a bomb had been planted so innocent people could be evacuated, with the terrorists of today the main goal is to kill as many innocent civilians as possible, as a matter of fact, the goal seems to be to kill as many women and children as they can

Beastie

Err, sorry to be a bit patronising here, but there's one really, really fundamental difference.
Northern Ireland isn't 'someone else's country.' It's part of Britain, irrespective of what a large chunk of the population would like. The majority in Northern Ireland still want to be part of Britain, so until the minority become the majority, it's part of Britain. And yes, I know all about the history and the politics, so don't bother telling me I don't know what's happened there over the years.
Therefore the big difference is that it's not even remotely the same.

Snowy

There are loads of differences, which should be apparent to anyone with a brain, not least that the Irish terrorism was only dressed up as two different types of Irish Christianity fighting each other about which country they belonged to.

The current terrorism is pretty much exclusively being done by people who say they are doing it because they are Muslims and they belong to a global muslim state (the Ummah) which supercedes nationality.

Either way if you have your child blown to bits by a terrorist the resulting bloody charred mess of ripped human flesh is the same, whatever twisted logic is employed by the murderer to do it, or whether it was paid for in an Irish bar in Boston or a Mosque in Pakistan.

Murder is murder.

By the way, islamic terrorism against western targets started ten years before the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan, so check your dates before making sound bites..

pheromonefudge

yes. agree or not, the IRA wanted the UK out of greater Ireland completely, and thus had an objective goal. this had shades of culture to it (i.e. Catholic vs Protestant, generally speaking) but was not focused on this.

modern troubles are about how Islam hates the West, and vice versa, and have been fuelled by the cretinous decison to invade Iraq and generally meddle in the Middle East with sinister foreign policy.

its got to the point where I dont think radical Islam will want anything other than the destruction/takeover of the West. which wont happen, so short of grace breaking out, it will be a long slog, at least for our generation

danor

if as you say the problems we have today are similar to the IRA problems of the 70s then surely the issue should be sorted out by peace talks. The IRA trouble came to an end because a few forthright men got around a table and talked peace not war. Why are we not talking peace with to days terrorists instead of going to war with them. Does this make sense!

Kevin

Primarily and fundamentally yes on both counts. In the first instance the Americans considered the IRA to be freedom fighters and as such they were soldiers of Ireland.

Funnily enough the Taliban and the other arab lot are not freedom fighters but terrorists.

I guess there was no Oil in Ireland then.

francis f

after reading most of the above answers i can now say my piece.
during the three years that i served in northern ireland i came to recognise one thing both the ira and uvf thought of themselves as armies of the people so in essence they were freedom fighters, they both did more than their fair share of damage but it seems only the ira's work was ever documented and taken by the media.
the middle east is exactly the same situation but on a much larger scale, al queda and the taliban are on and the same but they are also using much the same tactics. the only reason the ira ever used to issue warnings was because it was concerned about killing their own people namely catholics so yes they had a concience.
the middle east however feel that by killing these people and themselves with blatant disregard for innocents that they will be rewarded for their efforts in the next life, hence the reason for suicide bombers.
so in closing i see only one difference between the ira and al queda and that is concience the ira had one the other doesnt and that is the more deadly thing an enemy who are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice and die themselves for the so called greater good.

Happy Murcia

No difference,both want the UK out of another countries politics and lands,both use covert terrorist activities.The only difference is that the IRA usually gave a warning.
One other thing ,the IRA were allowed to solicit funds openly in the US until the 1980s and were backed by prominent US citizens.But then so was Osama Bin Laden.all gets very confusing doesn`t it?

grodno

The IRA killed more people but now they are in the Irish Government. One day Abu Hamza will be foreign secretary in a future Labour administration.Bet your reduced pension on it.

alienmiss

we weren't the problem with the ira. we weren't bothering anyone when the attack was launched against the world trade center.

macan

No this is just an excuse.
You must stop making pitiful excuses for people killing and hurting innocents.

The text book reads that the Catholic MINORITY requested British military intervention from the RUC.

If they have legitimate grievances, then appropriate avenues exist even under a very heavily regulated semi-democracy.

A similar example:
We have an area called Aceh- which has worse Islamicist terror group called GAM- they will behead even small Christian native girls for their Arabic and Malay national funded jihadi movement. By Malay- I also include ethnic Pakistani dwelling in Malaysia.

In 2004 we killed a documented 2014 GAM- of these numerous Pakistani and Malay passport holders and native fifth columnist. The true figure is somewhat higher.

They may form a legitimate legal political movement- but they chose violence and terror- there is one only legit pro Aceh party- and they disown the terrorist- not like your Sinn Fein.

I am certain in your more advanced democracy there exists better avenues than available to my people.

à®â™¥Nikkiâ™¥à®

2 differences...irish and muslims...thants the difference.
Either way both evil fookers.

Ivan R

Hello,

(ANS) No! there is a BIG difference and its a significant one. Back in the 1970's and talking specifically about Northern Ireland. The problems related mainly to a territorial dispute over land or territory, Yes! OK it was between catholics and protestants but there was mixed up within this much bigotry & tribalism.

Today the current terrorism is about winning over hearts & minds, its a battle for mental territory if you like. This makes the problem of terror much harder to counter strike because the territory isn't so much a physical one like land as such but its an attempt to bomb us into submission through extremism.

**The Global Jihad is doomed to utter failure from day 1 because underneath any form of extremism is actually a fundamental weakness, an basic insecurity. Life and the universe cannot be reduced down to black & white terms, or positions, or ideologies. The rest of the planet doesn't believe in this perversion of Islam and doesn't want it, even moderate Muslims don't want it.

My sincere feelings & concern go out to the moderate Muslims because the terrorists want to divide & rule us, they want to create in us a fear and have suspicion of ordinary peaceful Muslims. It is of course called Islam-aphobia.

**On a personal level I feel that religion is now the cause of more pain, hatred & suffering in the world than is the cause for peace, love, compassion and kindness and mutual understanding.

Ivan

quasar

no difference at all why do you think IRA decided on peace now,???? because we have decided to fight terrorism now not just protect people,

lordkelvin

Oh Geeze.... Just in case you hadn't noticed... *THEY* are in your country... *NONE* of them were Iraqi.... It just amazes just how far some people can stick their head to avoid reality.

Plato

One difference is the IRA were not suicide bombers.
Only one I can remember who died for 'the cause' was Bobby Sands-he starved himself to death.
Does not excuse what they did though.
There are no boundaries with ' man's inhumanity to man'

Hello

I don't understand what you mean when you state "once again we are in someone else's country"...???

Northern Ireland IS STILL PART OF UK... THE PEOPLE HAD A REFERENDUM AND THE RESULT WAS THE MAJORITY WANT TO REMAIN PART OF UK...

So.. maybe you are saying the IRA entered "someone elses' country"..?

For goodness sake !

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm
QUOTE
"An internal British army document examining 37 years of deployment in Northern Ireland contains the claim by one expert that it failed to defeat the IRA.
The admission is contained in a discussion document released by the Ministry of Defence after a request under the Freedom of Information Act..... It describes the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters"...... It concedes for the first time that it did not win the battle against the IRA - but claims to have "shown the IRA that it could not achieve its ends through violence". ... UNQUOTE

THESE ARE NOT MY WORDS.. but the words of those in the know...but I detect a smidgen of respect for "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force" up against a legal professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force.

The difference between terrorists of then and those of today?

The promise of 70 mythical virgins waiting for the most vulnerable MEN and BOYS in exsistence today..!!.. MADE TO THEM BY MEN.. unfortunately !

How can REAL LIFE compare to that fairy tale?

There is no difference as regards a terrorist of the 1970's and that of today either.. they dress like you or I... or could be your neighbour for all you know..and they are cowards for not putting on a uniform and fighting a battle for thier Country in a more honourable way... uniform v uniform thereby reducing the chances of civilian fatalities... not that terrorists care a jot about who gets killed - including themselves .. so no difference there either...

Silly me, I almost forgot - USA actually FUNDED the IRA... sent pots of $$$$ over to help thier cause... good job there wasn't any oil there.... then your claim about "in someone elses' country" would have been more accurate !!

Chelsea_Loyalist

No. They are and were just bloodthirsty terrorists..!! And anyways...there was no occupation by British forces in Northern Ireland as it was the Roman Catholics that called them into the country. And as for some answers to this question that said the IRA always gave warnings about their bombs....then I can just say these people have very short memories.

mike h

There are political and ideological differences of course.

But terrorism is terrorism.

The IRA and these numerous muslim fanatic groups are all the same. Cowards. Bullies who prey on civilians and don^t have the balls to attack military bases.

run to the hills

get rid of religion and we can all dance around naked

RENE

Ah eventually though everyone must have forgotten about the IRA attrocities not only the 70's remember the omagh bombing as usual not only protestant people but catholic men women children and unborn children have been researchin the video footage. They also killed Prince Phillip's (the queens husband) uncle Lord Louis Mountbatten along with his 14yr old grandson among others on holiday in Co Sligo, He fought and survived 2 ww only to be blown up on his little fishing boat. I just cannot beleive that terrorists that have done more harm than any to the british people would be given a share in the running of the NI parliment effecitivly we bowed down to republican bullies and we ask how dare the suspected Al Quida do this how many have they killed.
Republican bands march round our countries in the UK celebrating with permision i may add the killing and slaughter over decades just hope the Taliban dont invest in flutes or we will be seeing them also.
The Orange Order get a bad name for parading they are rememering the fallen who fought to keep us all free, many
catholic men fought in the fields of France also. There's has never a religious fight just plain old fashioned bulling

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: