Which the DUmpmonkiez fail.
jberryhill (36,483 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026277172
History question - Did we call the Irish Republican Army "Roman Catholic Terrorists"?
And if not, why not?
Many did. A great many did. You have to remember that DUmpmonkiez have no clue about history. They pick out a part that they feel supports whatever leftist agenda hthey have at the moment not really understanding the parts that caused it to happen that way.
Ask a DUmpmonkie why Ireland is divided into two countries...
unblock (26,693 posts)
9. they called them terrorists, yes. but not so much religious terrorists.
Uh... yes. yes they did. The religious wars in Great Britian went on longer than the US has been around.
nichomachus (10,882 posts)
11. Oh, no. It was all about religion.
That's why the Protestants used to dress up in orange and march through the streets. It was to provoke the Catholics and incite them to violence -- so the British could complain about the Catholic terrorists.
sabrina 1 (50,412 posts)
16. No, it was not a religious war. Think of the American Revolution and you will better understand what
it was about.
Those guys in Orange were descendants of the British Empire and in this country were the Loyalists.
The loyalists here and there were happy to remain part of the British Empire.
Had everyone been treated equally by the Empire, here and there, we might still be British subjects.
You know what happened here, what happened in Ireland was centuries of rebellion by the Native Irish (catholics) mostly losing as it is hard to defeat an Empire.
In 1916 the 'terrorists' (catholics/native Irish) rose up again and this time managed to take back their country not before many of them were executed (those 'terrorists' are now some of Ireland's most respected and honored heroes)
By 1922 most of Ireland was free from British occupation and rule. And the 'terrorists' became heroes.
But not the northern province.
The Native Irish rebelled against the bigotry and mistreatment by the British once again starting in the '60s. A repeat of the past, many died, were tortured etc. The loyalists resisted any rights being given to the native Irish, see your photo.
So it is 'Loyalists V Native Irish'
Or you could think of it as 'Republicans V Democrats'
The north of Ireland was resettled by the English to form a toe hold on the island way back before the War of the Roses. Way to the times of the 100 years war and beyond that.
Even when England was Catholic (Before Henry VIII) there was bitter blood twix England and Ireland.
riderinthestorm (17,397 posts)
20. I'll mention Michael Collins as he's a hero to this Irishwoman nt
He's my third son's name sake.
riderinthestorm (17,397 posts)
97. Whatever the strong religious identification, it wasn't a religious war, It was a war for independence.
The ability of the DUmpmonkiez to ignore the facts continually amazes me.
truebluegreen (5,538 posts)
102. It was not about religion.
It was about power, and the way the upper classes had divided and conquered the working class in Ireland. When it looked as if the working class might rise up and demand better pay, working conditions, civil rights, etc., the power establishment exploited the religious divide to maintain control. It was the same old technique that has been used for centuries to maintain privilege; in this country the "divide" most often used is race or ethnicity, not religion, but it is the same ugly game.
So says the Dumpmonkie communist.
Adrahil (2,818 posts)
93. There is a difference between rebels and partisans and "terrorists."
The Irish Repulicans during the War for Independence was partisans (initially), and then a genuine military force in rebellion. The terrorism didn't emerge until later with the PIRA and the UDA (and similar organizations) in Northern Ireland.
The 'troubles' in the 1970s in Northern Ireland was the Provisional Wing of the IRA or PROVOs changing the way the war had been fought. They started targeting civilians.
KatyMan (1,827 posts)
46. No, there was conflict before there were ever
Protestants. Like all of history, it's much more complicated than black and white.
Buzz Clik (30,768 posts)
53. Nope. The conflict traces back to the 17th century
English and Scottish protestants settled Northern Ireland after the British subdued a long string of rebellions.
No- in 1320 the English king send a huge army into northern Ireland to take it over and resettled it with his followers. That is the primary cause of the divided island to this day.
Buzz Clik (30,768 posts)
148. No. We were NOT tracing the first conflict, but the first conflict related to IRA.
Get with the context.
You have to take the past into consideration in how people act in the present (or in this case the past)
Buzz Clik (30,768 posts)
152. Whatever. Have fun. I'm done.
run away little DUmpmonkie
