The essence of the GFA allowed for reunification through peaceful / political means
No, through the majority acquiescing
Remarkable stupidity by SF if they think their new voters give a flying fuck about republicanism
We know that Console lost a load of money because Paul Kelly stole it. Similar with PAul Kiely and the CRC. And Liverpool lost the league that time because Stevie G fell over then spent the rest of the game shooting from 30 yards.
Teach-faidh ar la
3 Likes
Do you wanna edit in a bit more or are you done?
Where have SF come out and said that? - that was a throw away comment from someone here who claims to not even vote
I think you definitely couldnât be a senior party figure. I find it hard to think you could even be a member, well in theory you could, but in reality, if you were a Sinn Fein member at a party meeting or whatever, or even in private conversation, would you voice the view that the SDLP had the right idea in the 1970s and not the IRA? I donât think you would.
How long did it take this sort of stuff to die out in FFG? Can you be even today be a member of Fine Gael and say that the Treaty was a sell out or be a member of Fianna Fail and say that the Treaty was justified?
And how long will this sort of stuff exist for in the future in Sinn Fein? When do we think a Sinn Fein politician would feel confident enough to publicly voice the view that the IRA campaign 1969-97 was wrong in general? Would it ever happen, at least in, say, the next 40 years?
1 Like
Im talking about the whatsapp messages you put up, theres no talk of housing or healthcare there
The IRA was two dogs and a man by the late 60s â why did it become what it became? In the answer youâll find some answers as to why the conflict will never be fully condemned in the wider sense.
Donal sounds republican enough but Iâd watch Henry like a hawk.
5 Likes
There are members of FF and FG whose parents and grandparents were on the opposite side for example.
Do you want lads to drop it into every text message they send ?? They were responding to the David Cullinane incident and in their own way condemning it / steering people away from such sloganism. I was merely using it as a minor reference to @Dziekanowski questionâs above.
Sinn Fein will never say the more recent IRA campaign was wrong because they believe it was right. Just as Sinn Fein (and FF and FG) would never say the 1919-1921 campaign was wrong.
You wouldnât have the stunning numbers that voted for SF on Saturday if this was an issue for voters. Just like people moved on in 1932 and voted for FF in droves, the same is true now. The troubles and the complex moral issues surrounding the IRAâs campaign simply arenât relevant to most people. FF and FG are flogging a dead horse trying to make it an issue, it failed miserably.
1 Like
SF IRA are a very pragmatic party. They used violence when it was a means to an end and stopped using it when it ceased to be useful.
They (The core leadership) will employ whatever tactics they believe will get them to their ideological destination - their version of republicanism, nationalism and a United Ireland. In a United Ireland they believe they would quickly become the FF of 60s and 70s in terms of vote share. They are organised to do that. That is their strategic goal.
Brexit has moved the dial for definite to now make that goal achievable within 10 to 15 years.
At the moment they have fixed on populism as that means. That Eoin OâBroin piece I referred to above is interesting as he is their brains and âacceptable faceâ but he refer to there being a continuous link to the radical republicanism of Gerry Adams and that not changing.
He was out on Grand Parade with his little Union Jack cheering Her Maj a few years ago no doubt.
You have written some excellent stuff over the last week or so. The break did you good
I love these grand statements â thereâs truth in there - but iâll put it to you again â the IRA didnt exist by the mid 60s ⌠a few relic guns from the 20s and a handful of men⌠Why did it become what it did?
You might revise your statement above when you come to a conclusion.
There was only about 3-4 Independents in those governments in the early 80âs.
Looking at the breakdown of the independents, I make it:
6 FF gene pool (Grealish, Canney, McGrath, OâDonoghue, Healy Rae X2)
5 FG gene pool (Naughten, Lowry, Fitzpatrick, Verona, Shanahan)
3 might as well be FG gene pool (Harkin, Collins, Fitzmaurice)
2 ex-Labour (MacNamara, Connolly)
1 ex-IRA/SF (Carol Nolan)
2 far left (Pringle, Murphy)
1 army guy (Berry)
If itâs a FF/IRA-SF coalition theyâre still five or six seats short. Not easy to make up such numbers by way of independent support. While the gene poolers have crossed the floor in terms of who theyâve dealt with in recent years (Lowry backing the FF/Green government, Canney and Boxer the FG government) I couldnât see any of the FG gene pool willing to deal with a FF/SF alliance.
Lowry will want to smooth the succession path for Young Lowry and with FG failing to take a seat in Tipperary for the second election running thereâs a vacancy on the FG ticket next time and I wouldnât rule out a reconciliation. Shanahan supposedly is open to rejoining FG and I have a suspicion that when people are busy looking elsewhere theyâll suddenly be back to two FG seats in Wexford too.
Other than knowing that heâs very angry I would need a translator to work out what Peter Fitzpatrick is saying but a FG man in a border area backing iRA/SF, no chance. Naughten doesnât look like heading back to the fold but when you listen to him the pitch is very much as if heâs still in the FG government.
This means youâre looking at the FF gene pool and maybe the other 3. Michael Collins is possibly the angriest TD elected and I canât imagine him doing a deal with anyone while Fitzmaurice enjoys siting on the pot. IRA/SF could try to bring in some of the left-leaning but some of them wonât want to deal with FF while others wonât want to deal with SF!
It really has to be the Greens and FF, which will be 87.
1 Like
And if the roof doesnât cave in more of the 75% who didnât vote for them will vote for them.
It grew organically from a need to defend their community. For sure. Then it didnât need to do that but the leadership and structure was in place and generally armies donât lay down weapons until defeated. The IRA being no different. If not defeated militarily it had been politically.