Real IRA is ready for 'long war'

[Oisín]

Real IRA is ready for 'long war'

The Real IRA have vowed to continue their armed campaign and say they are prepared for a "long war."

In the organisation’s New Year message, the leadership of the Real IRA said they would continue to target police and British military targets, as well as drug dealers.

“In the past 12 months Óglaigh na h’Éireann have continued to organise, developand consolidate,” the statement reads. “We have carried out a number of attacks against British state interests in Ireland and our volunteers have stood shoulder to shoulder with our communities against the scourge of drugs. Óglaigh na h’Éireann have taken direct action against a number of drug networks across the country and, in the coming year, we not allow our communities to face this menace alone.

“In the coming year Óglaigh na hÉireann will continue to resist the British occupation of Ireland by any and all means including the force of arms. However, all republican organisations must remain disciplined and no one should engage in attacks or threats that they cannot immediately defend or explain. For our part, Óglaigh na h’Éireann will stand behind any actions we take,” the leadership’s statement said.

The dissident group acknowledged it is facing a difficult task, insisting their campaign would last as long as necessary.

“Republicans must develop realistic short and medium term goals.

“2009 will not be the year of victory and another phase of the long war is yet to begin in earnest. Óglaigh na h’Éireann is facing a huge uphill struggle but we will face it full-on; make no mistake, we are here for the long haul.”

The Real IRA also slammed the Catholic Church’s criticism of their campaign. “We would advise the church to clean up their own back yard before commenting on others. They should take the plank out of their own eyes before worrying themselves about the splinters in others.

“It is perhaps a small mercy that the church is no longer a major player in forming opinions in Irish society,” it said.
[Link] (http://www.derryjournal.com/politics/Real-IRA-is-ready-for.4837630.jp)

[Revenant]

Do the Real IRA have a position on multiculturalism?.

[Oisín]

Do the Real IRA have a position on multiculturalism?.
The Real IRA are a non-political army with only one objective, to force a British withdrawal from the 6 counties.

[chap]

In your view, who should control areas which are 75%+ Protestant?

[Oisín]

In your view, who should control areas which are 75%+ Protestant?
I already outlined my view in this (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=385) thread. By joining a united Ireland Ulster Protestants would have TEN TIMES the political influence they currently have as citizens of the UK. They would be far better placed to look after their own interests and safeguard their values and culture in a united Ireland than they currently are as a shrinking and insignificant minority (1.6%) in the UK.
Anyway, to answer your question specifically, by control I presume you mean govern/police? IMO the same impartial, non-sectarian government that looks after areas that are 75%+ Catholic, this will only ever be possible in a free and united Ireland.

EDIT: It certainly shouldn't be the RUC/PSNI which has a long standing tradition of brutal sectarian murder and collusion with loyalist murderers and drug dealers.

[Beorn]

As Revenent hinted at, perhaps the IRA should concentrate primarily on the effects multiculturalism and fading loyalties to culture Ireland has and will continue to suffer before taking on the long road again.

[chap]

I already outlined my view in this (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=385) thread. By joining a united Ireland Ulster Protestants would have TEN TIMES the political influence they currently have as citizens of the UK. They would be far better placed to look after their own interests and safeguard their values and culture in a united Ireland than they currently are as a shrinking and insignificant minority (1.6%) in the UK.
Anyway, to answer your question specifically, by control I presume you mean govern/police? IMO the same impartial, non-sectarian government that looks after areas that are 75%+ Catholic, this will only ever be possible in a free and united Ireland.

EDIT: It certainly shouldn't be the RUC/PSNI which has a long standing tradition of brutal sectarian murder and collusion with loyalist murderers and drug dealers.

Pride is an important emotion. Protestants would quickly seek to separate were Ireland one unified state. Who would deny them that right?

[Loyalist]

Even with the possibility of some sort of greater proportionate representation, few, if any, Protestants would support a united Ireland. No matter how one tries to spin it, that British connection is a fundamental element of Ulster Protestant identity. Imposing a nationality on one group, while simultaneously liberating another in the same state, is contradictory on the most basic of levels. Unification will only result in another tidal wave of violence, as it will be loyalists taking up arms in a fight closely paralleling the nationalist struggle in previous decades.

[Soldier of Wodann]

In your view, who should control areas which are 75%+ Protestant?

I would think it is time for the British Isles to get over petty things such as this. I am surprised the IRA still gives a shit about Catholicism Vs. Protestantism. The fact of the matter is, Ireland belongs to the Irish the same as England belongs to the English. Those who settled there and are protestant ought to be assimilated into Irish culture, irrespective of religion or descent, since the Irish are of largely the same culture and stock of those who colonized them.

I wouldn't think that, though, if the British in the area actually showed the strength of their forefathers in further expanding the realm of the Germanics. Their time has ended, the Irishman is now their moral and spiritual superior.

[Oisín]

As Revenent hinted at, perhaps the IRA should concentrate primarily on the effects multiculturalism and fading loyalties to culture Ireland has and will continue to suffer before taking on the long road again.
There are a few cultural Nationalist groups already doing that, the IRA, whether Provos, Contos or the Reals have only ever been about forcing a British withdrawal and they're not going to deviate from that.

[Oisín]

Pride is an important emotion. Protestants would quickly seek to separate were Ireland one unified state. Who would deny them that right?
Why is it that Irish Protestants who make up a minority of the Irish population should have the right to keep our nation divided? The last time a vote was taken on an all Ireland basis the Irish people voted overwhelmingly in favour of a unified Irish Republic, the British ignored this and imposed partition under the threat of 'immediate and terrible war'. It is the right of the Irish people as a whole to decide our future.

[chap]

I would think it is time for the British Isles to get over petty things such as this. I am surprised the IRA still gives a shit about Catholicism Vs. Protestantism. The fact of the matter is, Ireland belongs to the Irish the same as England belongs to the English. Those who settled there and are protestant ought to be assimilated into Irish culture, irrespective of religion or descent, since the Irish are of largely the same culture and stock of those who colonized them.

As a result of conquest and settlement, the island of Britain is shared by three nations. Four if you include the Cornish.

Realistically, the same is now going to be true for the island of Ireland. The Ulster Protestants, different by tradition, and somewhat of blood also, will not tolerate living in a united Irish state.

Who knows, maybe the Protestants are irrational. Maybe the streets will be paved with gold in a united Ireland. But that's their business and not mine. A united Ireland could only be maintained through force of arms - which would alienate the Protestant population still further.

[chap]

Why is it that Irish Protestants who make up a minority of the Irish population should have the right to keep our nation divided? The last time a vote was taken on an all Ireland basis the Irish people voted overwhelmingly in favour of a unified Irish Republic, the British ignored this and imposed partition under the threat of 'immediate and terrible war'. It is the right of the Irish people as a whole to decide our future.

Why should the Irish Catholics deny the Irish Protestants the right to self determination?

If Protestant villages, towns, districts, decide to secede from a united Ireland, that is their right.

[Oisín]

Even with the possibility of some sort of greater proportionate representation, few, if any, Protestants would support a united Ireland. No matter how one tries to spin it, that British connection is a fundamental element of Ulster Protestant identity. Imposing a nationality on one group, while simultaneously liberating another in the same state, is contradictory on the most basic of levels. Unification will only result in another tidal wave of violence, as it will be loyalists taking up arms in a fight closely paralleling the nationalist struggle in previous decades.
The way the situation is laid out now a united Ireland will become a reality when the majority wish it so no-one is suggesting imposing a nationality or identity on anyone. If one day the people of the 6 counties vote for unification loyalists will have no right whatsoever to launch a campaign of violence as unification will have happened democratically under the guidelines of the GFA which their own community voted for!
As for a tidal wave of violence, please. From the UVF, UDA & UFF? Even when they were being spoon fed information by the British army and RUC they still couldn't manage much more than abducting innocent Catholics in taxis and then murdering them. The British army report examining the Troubles described the loyalist 'paramilitaries' as "little more than a collection of gangsters" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm). Now that they have called ceasefires and stopped shooting innocent Catholics they're too busy wiping each other out in drug turf wars to be considered any real security threat.

[Soldier of Wodann]

As a result of conquest and settlement, the island of Britain is shared by three nations. Four if you include the Cornish.

Realistically, the same is now going to be true for the island of Ireland. The Ulster Protestants, different by tradition, and somewhat of blood also, will not tolerate living in a united Irish state.

Who knows, maybe the Protestants are irrational. Maybe the streets will be paved with gold in a united Ireland. But that's their business and not mine. A united Ireland could only be maintained through force of arms - which would alienate the Protestant population still further.

I am curious as to how many actually still care about such frivolous things, especially when the British are far, far more secularized than the Irish.

Despite being TOTALLY different at the time, the British came together under English control. I am confused as to why so many British find it unthinkable that the same would happen to Ireland under (what a shock) Irish leadership.

Reminds me of the Balkans, not suitable for Northern Europeans at all.

Tsk tsk.

[Oisín]

Why should the Irish Catholics deny the Irish Protestants the right to self determination?

If Protestant villages, towns, districts, decide to secede from a united Ireland, that is their right.
By your logic areas of England that are majority black and Muslim should have the right to secede and form their own micro-nations.

[Loyalist]

The last time a vote was taken on an all Ireland basis the Irish people voted overwhelmingly in favour of a unified Irish Republic, the British ignored this and imposed partition under the threat of 'immediate and terrible war'.

Of course an all-Ireland referendum would support unification; Protestants and/or Unionists are a clear minority when examining the population of the island as a whole.


It is the right of the Irish people as a whole to decide our future.

Ulster Protestants also have a right to decide their future, and their position has been made quite clear. When speaking of the "Irish people", first head to Northern Ireland, and ask how many Protestants feel they are included in that category.

[Oisín]

A united Ireland could only be maintained through force of arms - which would alienate the Protestant population still further.
No-one is talking about forcing a united Ireland onto anyone.

[Oisín]

Of course an all-Ireland referendum would support unification; Protestants and/or Unionists are a clear minority when examining the population of the island as a whole.
Would you apply the same logic to England? Presuming one day a Nationalist party has a majority in parliament, should the minorities be allowed to break away and form their own micro-nations where they are the majority so they can carry on doing as they please? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Ulster Protestants also have a right to decide their future, and their position has been made quite clear. When speaking of the "Irish people", first head to Northern Ireland, and ask how many Protestants feel they are included in that category.
How many times do I have to say it? I am not talking about forcing Protestants into a united Ireland against their will. The idea is that they reclaim their Irish Republican roots and vote for a united Ireland themselves.

[Loyalist]

Would you apply the same logic to England? Presuming one day a Nationalist party has a majority in parliament, should the minorities be allowed to break away and form their own micro-nations where they are the majority so they can carry on doing as they please? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Any regional conflict within England cannot fairly be contrasted to Ireland, particularly when speaking hypothetically.


How many times do I have to say it? I am not talking about forcing Protestants into a united Ireland against their will. The idea is that they reclaim their Irish Republican roots and vote for a united Ireland themselves.

How many times do I have to say it? It's called reality; that's never going to happen. Lay out the perks of unification on the table all you want, Protestants aren't simply going to abandon the Unionist tradition and become born-again Republicans. That might have worked centuries ago when the entire island was under the domination of Britain and an Anglican elite, allowing some common Catholic/Dissenter identity to emerge, but that is in no way applicable to today. The people who you're referring to as historical Irish Republicans are, today, the most firebrand Unionists (Presbyterians and Methodists have long since displaced Anglo-Irish Anglicans in that role). Now let me ask you; assume Protestants continue to overwhelmingly reject a united Ireland, meaning it is against their will, what happens then?

[Oisín]

Any regional conflict within England cannot fairly be contrasted to Ireland, particularly when speaking hypothetically.
Foreigners with a different tradition and culture displacing the natives and then demanding special treatment, it's the exact same.

How many times do I have to say it? It's called reality; that's never going to happen. Lay out the perks of unification on the table all you want, Protestants aren't simply going to abandon the Unionist tradition and become born-again Republicans. That might have worked centuries ago when the entire island was under the domination of Britain and an Anglican elite, allowing some common Catholic/Dissenter identity to emerge, but that is in no way applicable to today. The people who you're referring to as historical Irish Republicans are, today, the most firebrand Unionists (Presbyterians and Methodists have long since displaced Anglo-Irish Anglicans in that role).
The most hard line Unionist party are now sharing power with Sinn Féin and Britain has washed it's hands of the NI statelet with the GFA, we're more than halfway towards a united Ireland as it is :thumb001:
Another 300,000 votes isn't as impossible as you'd like to think it is.

Now let me ask you; assume Protestants continue to overwhelmingly reject a united Ireland, meaning it is against their will, what happens then?
Well seen as neither of us can predict the future we'll just have to wait and see wont we.

[Loyalist]

Foreigners with a different tradition and culture displacing the natives and then demanding special treatment, it's the exact same.

In-fighting amongst the English isn't comparable to the ethnic, cultural, and religious divide in Ireland. Unless you're speaking of Cornwall.


The most hard line Unionist party are now sharing power with Sinn Féin and Britain has washed it's hands of the NI statelet with the GFA, we're more than halfway towards a united Ireland as it is :thumb001:
Another 300,000 votes isn't as impossible as you'd like to think it is.

I have a feeling that the DUP is going to be hammered at the next election by the UUP-Conservative coalition. Either way, the Conservatives are going to sweep to victory in Westminster, and that is the last party which will simply abandon Northern Ireland. But, as you say, we'll wait and see. ;)

[Oisín]

In-fighting amongst the English isn't comparable to the ethnic, cultural, and religious divide in Ireland. Unless you're speaking of Cornwall.
No I was thinking more along the lines of the Muslims who have established colonies all over England.

I have a feeling that the DUP is going to be hammered at the next election by the UUP-Conservative coalition. Either way, the Conservatives are going to sweep to victory in Westminster, and that is the last party which will simply abandon Northern Ireland.
Well even if the DUP to get hammered then all that means is it will be the UUP sharing power with Sinn Féin instead, nothing will change that. I was certain that the Conservatives would clean up at the next general election too until recently, Brown is starting to steady the boat lately and making a comeback in the polls. According to this (http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKTRE4B120020081202) he's only one point behind, although that is 4 weeks old. If Brown can keep the country ticking over through the current economic crisis I think he has a good chance of being elected, bear in mind he doesn't even have to hold a GE until 2010. With the global economy the way it is people might be more inclined to back the devil that they know rather than the untried & untested Cameron.
Even if the Conservatives are in power it makes no difference, they could do nothing to stop a united Ireland if that's what the people vote for, Britain is bound by international treaty to accept and implement the result of any referendum.

But, as you say, we'll wait and see. ;)
:thumb001:

[TheGreatest]

Why support this IRA if they have no position of anything?


I find it hypocritic that most of the men leading the Scottish Independence Movement have a bad track record regarding multi-culturalism. So you're going to throw out the British, so you can have East Indian Scotsmen? :confused: :rolleyes2:

[Fortis in Arduis]

Why support this IRA if they have no position of anything?

I find it hypocritic that most of the men leading the Scottish Independence Movement have a bad track record regarding multi-culturalism. So you're going to throw out the British, so you can have East Indian Scotsmen? :confused: :rolleyes2:

Absolutely. It makes no sense to support these demagogues, unless they can come up with a a proper programme. Perhaps similarly it makes next to zero sense to support the Unionist cause beyond supporting democracy itself.


Why is it that Irish Protestants who make up a minority of the Irish population should have the right to keep our nation divided? The last time a vote was taken on an all Ireland basis the Irish people voted overwhelmingly in favour of a unified Irish Republic, the British ignored this and imposed partition under the threat of 'immediate and terrible war'. It is the right of the Irish people as a whole to decide our future.

They are white Britons who live in that particular area and have done for a very long time.

Perhaps when the nature of British politics changes for the better their presence will cease to be such a sort point for Irish nationalists.

I hope so.


Would you apply the same logic to England? Presuming one day a Nationalist party has a majority in parliament, should the minorities be allowed to break away and form their own micro-nations where they are the majority so they can carry on doing as they please? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

How many times do I have to say it? I am not talking about forcing Protestants into a united Ireland against their will. The idea is that they reclaim their Irish Republican roots and vote for a united Ireland themselves.

The minorities could certainly try that, but they might find themselves in untenable isolation.

I am in favour of the localisation of economy and democracy, issues which supercede whether one is Protestant, Catholic, Irish or British.

This is the long term; everything else is wallpaper - JMVHO...

[Oisín]

Why support this IRA if they have no position of anything?
Armies are not meant to be political, the IRA are about forcing a British withdrawal nothing more nothing less. No-one's asking you to support them. I posted this thread because the Real IRA's aim of a free united Ireland is one that is shared by all Irish nationalists.

[Revenant]

What's the RIRA relationship with the older IRA, if there is one?.

I am only asking this question from a position of pretty much total ignorance here.

I hope, sincerely, that differences can be sorted out and goals achieved amicably for both sides without the need for fighting.

[TheGreatest]

Well the last IRA did have a social aim and that was an unified; socialist Ireland. And most of the supporters of the provisional IRA were anti-Protestant and staunchly Catholic, maybe that's a reason why it never took off in Northern Ireland? :confused:


Had the Provisional IRA succeeded, I seriously doubt that the Northern would have had more representative power..

[Oisín]

What's the RIRA relationship with the older IRA, if there is one?.

I am only asking this question from a position of pretty much total ignorance here.

I hope, sincerely, that differences can be sorted out and goals achieved amicably for both sides without the need for fighting.
The RIRA was formed in 1997 by some senior members of the Provisional IRA who were not happy with the PIRA leadership and the way the peace process was going. Initially PIRA members called to the homes of RIRA members and told them to cease activities and stop using PIRA arms dumps under threat of death. PIRA have now decommissioned their weapons and no longer exist as a functioning military unit so RIRA members are no longer under threat from them and many RIRA Volunteers are disaffected PIRA members. The Provisional Republican movement now rejects violence and is committed to achieving its goals through solely peaceful means.
If it's a subject you're interested in I highly recommend reading Ed Moloney's A Secret History of the IRA (http://www.google.ie/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Secret-History-IRA-Ed-Moloney/dp/014101041X&ei=4PllScHkEYzY0gX5m6SiBA&usg=AFQjCNEwrZDngOz7QrklG0FBY52OcTOUfA).

[Oisín]

Well the last IRA did have a social aim and that was an unified; socialist Ireland. And most of the supporters of the provisional IRA were anti-Protestant and staunchly Catholic, maybe that's a reason why it never took off in Northern Ireland? :confused:


Had the Provisional IRA succeeded, I seriously doubt that the Northern would have had more representative power..

Without wanting to sound rude judging by your post I'd hazard a guess that you haven't much interest in Irish history or in the history of the Troubles and Irish Republicanism.
The PIRA certainly did 'take off' in northern Ireland, it fought the British army for 30 years, eventually the conflict came to a standstill with the British army admitting it did not defeat the IRA (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm). Out of the conflict came the peace process, with the UK government for the first time ever conceding that if the majority of NI citizens vote for unification with the south then it will happen, the Provisional Republican movements political wing Sinn Féin now shares power with the major Unionist party, the DUP, in a devolved NI Assembly and are committed to working for their goal of a united Ireland through entirely political means.
While it's true that the the majority of PIRA Volunteers were Catholic the organisation was not anti-Protestant and it is/was not a sectarian conflict, though that's not to say that there were not incidents of sectarian violence, but given the history of Irish-British relations that's hardly surprising.
When a united Ireland does come about the Ulster Protestants of north east Ireland will be a minority of roughly 16%, they are currently a 1.6% minority within the UK so they certainly will have more representation and will be much more able to safeguard their culture and tradition than they are in the UK. As the UK continues to darken and become more multi-cultural everyday hopefully they will realise that before it's too late.
I don't really think there's anything more for me to say on the subject at the minute as otherwise myself and Loyalist will just be going round in circles again :D

[Fortis in Arduis]

This is realpolitik:




Distributism, also known as distributionism and distributivism, is a third-way economic philosophy formulated by such Roman Catholic thinkers as G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc to apply the principles of Catholic Social Teaching articulated by the Roman Catholic Church, especially in Pope Leo XIII's encyclical Rerum Novarum[1] and more expansively explained by Pope Pius XI's encyclical Quadragesimo Anno[2] According to distributism, the ownership of the means of production should be spread as widely as possible among the general populace, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (indirect socialism) or a few large businesses or wealthy private individuals (capitalism). A summary of distributism is found in Chesterton's statement: "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."[3]

Essentially, distributism distinguishes itself by its distribution of property (not to be confused with redistribution of property carried out by socialism). Distributism holds that, while socialism allows no individuals to own productive property (it all being under state, community, or workers' control), and capitalism allows only a few to own it, distributism itself seeks to ensure that most people will become owners of productive property. As Hilaire Belloc stated, the distributive state (that is, the state which has implemented distributism) contains "an agglomeration of families of varying wealth, but by far the greater number of owners of the means of production."[4] This broader distribution does not extend to all property, but only to productive property; that is, that property which produces wealth, namely, the things needed for man to survive. It includes land, tools, etc.[5]

Distributism has often been described as a third way of economic order opposing both socialism and capitalism. However, some have seen it more as an aspiration, which has been successfully realised in the short term by commitment to the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity (these being built into financially independent local co-operatives and family owned, small businesses).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism

This is what the BNP base their economic plan on.

[Cenél nEógain]

The Real IRA planted last weeks 300lb carbomb at Castlewellan. The target was once hit by the Provos with a 300lb carbomb killing 3 british soldiers. The british dismantled the bomb piece by piece to look for clues as to who planted it, suggesting the Real IRA are still 'rogue', i.e. not infiltrated as believed by some.