Now that the dust has settled, were they in the wrong?

Original and Anti-Treaty side in the civil war were the good ones. As far as I'm concerned the closer you get to modern times the worse they get. Splinter groups many of which don't have an actual agenda besides "Fuck British people" and "United Ireland for people that don't want it".

>>3193788
How popular is a United Ireland nowadays?

>>3193801
IRRC it's more popular in Ireland than the north. I think people are still pro United Ireland but aren't willing to endure violence anymore, especially because it hasn't actually accomplished anything in a long time.

>>3193783
they all were.

the British/British Military were fucking stupid and basically made enemies by doing stupid shit whenever possible

the IRA and Paramilitaries were stupid, doing reckless shit, and both behaving like a bunch of thugs.

If you kick a dog enough times it'll bite you.

It's not a right/wrong thing, it's just what happens.

>>3193976
This.

Literally nobody in the troubles was "the good guy" as just about ever belligerent did terrible fucking things.

The only real commendable thing was the Maze Prison Escape, other than that it was just a dirty conflict of revenge bombings and innocent deaths.
The guys who turned to peace are the real heroes.

RIP Chuckle Brothers.

>>3193801
Very unpopular with unionists but they'll bring it about faster than SF ever will. You really cannot find a more retarded group of people. Unionism in NI relies entirely on the DUP and the DUP are hated by a huge amount of the people who vote for them. They bleed voters to middle ground and then nationalist parties.

Once the hardliner DUP loyals start dying off in the next decade or so, there's probably going to be a real serious shift in votes toward nationalists. They already have a majority in the assembly.

>>3193783
Is it just me or is everyone in that photo either super weedy or a manlet?

>>3194015
Who was the least bad faction? The RUC? Christ, I'd hate to give the award to the guys that ONLY beat the shit out of suspects.

File: 1458004604739.gif (9KB, 482x363px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 482x363px

>>3194044
>least bad

A retarded idea, but I suppose British Footsoldiers on the basis they killed the least people.
The higher up Brits colluded with the UVF/RUC and orchestrated some godawful shit.

A majority of the IRA's targets were "legitimate" targets (the blue) such as army, police, security forces, etc etc etc

The undeniable "worst" guys were certainly the loyalist paramilitaries.
They made absolutely 0 impact on the fight against the IRA, instead they killed almost exclusively civilians (and more civilians than the IRA) and gave the nationalists infinite ammunition against them; the loyalist paramilitaries were undeniably bigger assholes.

But all in all I'd say the average tommy was "the least bad" but if we're talking faction wise, the IRA killed much less civilians if you group together Unionist Paras+British Security Forces (which makes sense seeing as they worked together)


That said, both sides are still abhorrent.

>>3194044
>>3194070
Before you ask

>Loyalists killing loyalists/IRA killing IRA
Punishment killings and infighting. Killing informers or troublemakers.

As you can see, Loyalists killed more loyalists than republican paras. They really are retarded.

>>3194070
I feel like it's worth considering that the British Security forces appear to have killed more civilians than Republicans (civilian to hostile ratio looks like a little over one) and while they're no where near the ratio of either the loyalists or republicans they were a state actor as opposed to non-state like the others. They ought to be held to a higher standard and saying that you killed less civilians than an opposing terror organization, while stilling killing more civilians than you killed terrorists, isn't exactly an accomplishment.


Basically they look pretty bad not because of their total number of civilians killed in comparison to Republicans, but because the amount they killed period is a problem when they were supposed to be the one with the most integrity.

>>3194102
Of course they look bad, they sided with Loyalists instantly.

The British Army were called in and welcomed by people on both sides of the community as people in the catholic communities did often just want an end to the conflict. What actually happened was the British army immediately sided with the loyalists and became added to the long list of reasons why life sucked for catholics in Belfast.

They were very bad. The reason I paint them as "least shit" is because sometimes the average tommy would just be stuck in a bad situation and while I can't really condone actions by the army, I can understand some of them being scared out of their fucking wits.

The undeniable bigger enemy of the peace and civilians was the Loyalists, however. They are arguably the reason the conflict started; the IRA weren't even active at the time when loyalists started gunning people down and shooting them in the street.
The first "death" of the troubles is considered to be when some old faggot got beat to death by the RUC.

A lot of pro-brit shitters will try and play it off as "THE IRA KILLED MORE PEOPLE SO OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE THE BADDIES" when in reality, nobody in that conflict came out clean. Unionists do not have the moral high ground whatsoever.

>>3194070
>>3194072
>>3194102
Poor NI civilians. Whoever wins, they lose. What was the attitude like by the 90s? Probably something like "Just fucking stop! Kingdom, Republic, we'll be a province of China if it means you fucking stop!"

>>3194123
Agreed 100%. I understand the actions of individual soldiers completely it's just a little bewildering to see a civilian death toll that high which speaks to command having a horrible doctrine more than problems with actual soldiers.

Least worst is definitely the best way to characterize it.

>>3194123

>they sided with people who weren't trying to kill them

It's a damn mystery. Really activates my almonds.

File: disgusted basileus.png (65KB, 316x456px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 316x456px

We have this thread regularly and there's always the same bollocks "they were all bad xd" replies, every time without fail, why do people fucking make them when retards on /his/ are going to spit neutralist plebeian consensus' at them.

>>3193783
They're vicious fucking catholics. Of course they're wrong.

>>3193783
They were justified, but so was Britain. The way I see it, conflict was unavoidable.

>>3193979
This desu.

File: queer.png (158KB, 1673x965px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1673x965px

This faggot:
>>3194070
>>3194072
proves my point here:
>>3194156

EVERY
FUCKING
THREAD
I've tried in the threads I've seen it to combat this sort of tepid "middle class" opinion (the same sort in norn iron who call themselves "Northern Irish" tend to spout it) but it's clearly useless as you'll go on believing the inoffensive.
Absolute N I G G E R S I hate you all.

>>3194204
love the anger.

New position: NI and Scotland split off from the UK and form a new Celtic country taking their portions of the Union Jack with them. The currency of the new nation will be the Dram. It will be backed by single malt whiskey stored in a Fort Knox-style warehouse in Ballindalloch. Some poor schmuck descended from Rory O'Connor will be dragged from his home and crowned the new king of Inebria, the name I've just thought of for this hypothetical land. While separatists from neither country are currently proposing such a scheme, I believe they can be convinced through their mutual desire, their need, their absolutely irrepressible compulsion to piss off the English.

>>3194252
>Inebria
>currency back by malt whiskey
My sides

File: 1501111018563.png (13KB, 165x115px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 165x115px

>>3194156
>>3194204
Barely coherent rage without any form of rebuttal is a great way to convince people, keep it up!

>>3194133
Pretty much, there was a massive vote in favour of the union post-troubles and it was probably just to say "fucking cut it out."

>>3194150
The catholic civilians didn't try to kill them. They wanted the British to end the conflict, not escalate it.

>>3194204
I'm a very unapologetic republican. IRA acted like fags after not very much time at all. Marty did a good job of turning the country round. A better job than the other chuckle brother but both of them deserve thanks.

Maybe the reason people lean to the side of "all sides were bad" is because they all did things that they really didn't need to.

The IRA sort of get a free pass because they were fighting for people who were actually oppressed but to say they dindu nuffin is retarded.

It's not "Muh neutrality xxD" to say everyone acted like a dick in what is widely considered as a dirty conflict.

Retards who try to claim either side are free of guilt are just that-retards.

Also
>now that the dust has settled

It definitely hasn't. Loyalists are still fucking reeling after the republicans and brits cucked them so hard.

>>3194133
Watch '71. It's quite an accurate movie which portrays the conflict well while being wholly accessible to a newcomer.

File: 1438450649206.jpg (44KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 540x960px

>>3194459
Coalescing everything into "sides" so broadly is retarded, how you think the IRA deserves blame for things attributed to rogue sectarian people and sadists is beyond me, and how you define a "side" by a few outlying incidents like muh Omage and muh Kingsmill I'll never know.

>>3194368
Whenever I do I never receive a response and the same threads just pop up again with the same posts, and evidently the same people.

http://desuarchive.org/his/thread/3158098/#3158719

>>3193783
they used to have a purpose and values

now they're just terrorists drive-by shooting innocent cops for no reason.