Lebanon

I am wondering why nobody has mentioned the situation in Lebanon on here.

This board was full of opinions on other conflict, most notably the ongoing trouble in Iraq.

People seem to shy away from discussion of the Middle East problem and I’ve never sure why this is.

Is it because the situation is very complicated and nobody really understands it?

Or is it because people feel unwilling to voice their opinions in case they find themselves at odds with everyone else?

Surely not many people can think of a logical argument to support the terrible campaign of murder that they are inflicting on Beirut at the moment. But in saying that, I’m criticising the Jews – right? Is that what people are afraid of?

Why?

If the UK had responded to Republican terrorism by bombing Ireland back into the Stone Age in the 1980s, there would have been an international outcry.

Why is it okay for Israel to do that to Beirut now?

Johnny Come Lately wrote: If the UK had responded to Republican terrorism by bombing Ireland back into the Stone Age in the 1980s, there would have been an international outcry.

Without offending anyone here,maybe they should have. Britain took a far too soft approach-they did fuck all and let the IRA walk all over them,then the ones they did catch they freed on a "as long as you promise not to do it again".

Im all for peace,who isnt? Unforunately quite a few people. But the only way you can stop them is by hitting them twice as hard when they hurt you. Sad,but true.

[orange]steve[/orange][black]one[/black] wrote:

Without offending anyone here,maybe they should have. Britain took a far too soft approach-they did fuck all and let the IRA walk all over them

Hardly. The SAS brought the IRA to a standstill in the 90's, particularly in the boarder areas where their influence is most felt. pushing them to the talks.

LOL...you use the same argument as myself....seek mental help mate.

My line goes, that if the Brits dealt with the Lower Ormeau concerned reisdents chucking bricks, by unleashing attack helicopters there MIGHT just be a spot of outcry.

Don't think it's a Jewish thing, from what I hear there's a lot of suppression of the "wrong sort" of Jew in Isreal, tho I cannot vouch for the accuracy of my source on that. The Isrealis act against Arabs in a way that's awfully resonant with a way the Jews were treated not so long ago.....talk about abused kids becoming abusers themselves :(

Christopher Owens wrote:

[orange]steve[/orange][black]one[/black] wrote:

Without offending anyone here,maybe they should have. Britain took a far too soft approach-they did fuck all and let the IRA walk all over them

Hardly. The SAS brought the IRA to a standstill in the 90's, particularly in the boarder areas where their influence is most felt. pushing them to the talks.

Yup, and sneaky and ilegal their tactics were too, BUT they didn't carpet bomb Andytown ;)

I'm not going to say anything on the subject, everyone knows my opinions on the middle east.

I do however look forward to when the usual suspects rear their ugly head and start spouting the usual anti american "the west is evil and all terrorists are great" bollocks.

Doctor? wrote:

Yup, and sneaky and ilegal their tactics were too, BUT they didn't carpet bomb Andytown ;)

No, the IRA did that themselves.

Uncle Liam wrote: ...everyone knows my opinions on the middle east.

I don't

Christopher Owens wrote:

Doctor? wrote:

Yup, and sneaky and ilegal their tactics were too, BUT they didn't carpet bomb Andytown ;)

No, the IRA did that themselves.

Thought it was just my lot that burned down their own corner shop to piss the other lot off.

By that token, the isrealis should really have bombed Tel Aviv airport I suppose.

Can anyone, who's paid more attention to the news than I have, explain to me what flatening the civillian airport was all about?

Johnny Come Lately wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote: ...everyone knows my opinions on the middle east.

I don't

i was thinking that! bizzare post by liam!

The Germans are being realistic - they know that Israel may have to be stopped at some point. But they're under intense pressure from their own Jewish lobby to walk away from it.

In a bizarre argument, they seem to be saying that a German soldier should never shoot at an Israeli soldier in case he causes offence?

BBC News Report

Johnny Come Lately wrote: But they're under intense pressure from their own Jewish lobby to walk away from it.

In a bizarre argument, they seem to be saying that a German soldier should never shoot at an Israeli soldier in case he causes offence?

All i will say is that Israelis are cunts when it comes to the cashpoint or bus queue .

Johnny Come Lately wrote: I am wondering why nobody has mentioned the situation in Lebanon on here.

This board was full of opinions on other conflict, most notably the ongoing trouble in Iraq.

People seem to shy away from discussion of the Middle East problem and I’ve never sure why this is.

Is it because the situation is very complicated and nobody really understands it?

Or is it because people feel unwilling to voice their opinions in case they find themselves at odds with everyone else?

Surely not many people can think of a logical argument to support the terrible campaign of murder that they are inflicting on Beirut at the moment. But in saying that, I’m criticising the Jews – right? Is that what people are afraid of?

Why?

If the UK had responded to Republican terrorism by bombing Ireland back into the Stone Age in the 1980s, there would have been an international outcry.

Why is it okay for Israel to do that to Beirut now?

I think part of it is that Israel is surrounded by enemies. Pretty much every country in the Middle East wants Israel destroyed. When surrounded & outnumbered, perhaps it's considered more acceptable to respond to each attack with overwhelming force?? Different situation in Britain. It's not like the Republicans are surrounding & outnumbering the UK. It's a bit like "pick on someone your own size". I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but to answer your question, but perhaps the international community cuts Israel more slack because their survival potentially depends upon their ability to bomb the shit out of their enemies, who are numerous. The United Kingdom's existence will certainly never be endangered by the IRA. Just a though.

This has been going on in one form or another for decades. Nobody there seems to be willing to learn anything from their past and there's no underlying commitment to resolve differences so people can get on with their lives, which is what most just want to do. History teaches us that we learn nothing from our history!

Beirut looks like its back to square one again - there was something about $500 odd million from the Saudis to rebuild a few bigwigs' houses but the tourists and meaningful investment are probably gone for years. It said on TV here that more civilians died in Iraq this week than did in Lebanon, that's not flavour of the month here anymore either.

Most Americans still think Africa is a country...I kid you not. Zimbabwe doesn't get a mention but you'd find it pretty offensive to your sensibilities if you knew some of what had been going on there. Its not Katushkas and laser guided bombs with cameras in the nose there though.

Christopher Owens wrote:

[orange]steve[/orange][black]one[/black] wrote:

Without offending anyone here,maybe they should have. Britain took a far too soft approach-they did fuck all and let the IRA walk all over them

Hardly. The SAS brought the IRA to a standstill in the 90's, particularly in the boarder areas where their influence is most felt. pushing them to the talks.

So what did they do from 67-92?

The 22nd were only used on a handful of jobs when there was a high threat to national security on the english mainland.

Steve Lea wrote: This has been going on in one form or another for decades. Nobody there seems to be willing to learn anything from their past and there's no underlying commitment to resolve differences so people can get on with their lives, which is what most just want to do. History teaches us that we learn nothing from our history!

Beirut looks like its back to square one again - there was something about $500 odd million from the Saudis to rebuild a few bigwigs' houses but the tourists and meaningful investment are probably gone for years. It said on TV here that more civilians died in Iraq this week than did in Lebanon, that's not flavour of the month here anymore either.

Most Americans still think Africa is a country...I kid you not. Zimbabwe doesn't get a mention but you'd find it pretty offensive to your sensibilities if you knew some of what had been going on there. Its not Katushkas and laser guided bombs with cameras in the nose there though.

Yeah, Sudan, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Burindi, and Rwanda, have all had tremendous atrocities within the last 10 years. Makes taking away all the white farmers' land in Zimbabwe seem tame by comparison.

A very complex situation. One which I've been following but am nowhere near qualified enough to give a valid viewpoint.

Anyone can spout what they've just read/saw on the news.

Having said that the Israelis do seem a right bunch of cnuts.

[orange]steve[/orange][black]one[/black] wrote:

So what did they do from 67-92?

Realised their intelligence was shit. Slowly but surely built a solid database of information. Killed IRA members at Loughall and Gibralter. Thatcher refused to give into hunger strikers.

[orange]steve[/orange][black]one[/black] wrote: The 22nd were only used on a handful of jobs when there was a high threat to national security on the english mainland.

They also trained RUC with their tactics, leading to further dead IRA and INLA.

Standstill in the 90's? Bollocks!

A brief history of Provisional IRA activity in the 1990's:

93- Shankhill Bomb 93- Warrington Bomb 96- Canary Wharf 96- Manchester Bomb

yep, the IRA were definitley at a standstill.

What actually happenned was the conflict had come to a stalemate, so Gerry and the boys decided to try and reach a compromise because they realised they were getting absolutely no where.

It had absolutely nothing to do with the IRA being brought to standstill. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit of IRA history would know this. If the provos wanted the war to go on, they could still be going today.

C'mon peeps

to compare NI to Lebanon is a waste of time.

I appreciate NI guys may have empathy, but thats just an emotion.

Do you think current peace talks include comparisons to history?

Actually, given the fuckwit conducting them, they may do

Uncle Liam wrote:

It had absolutely nothing to do with the IRA being brought to standstill. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit of IRA history would know this. If the provos wanted the war to go on, they could still be going today.

Really?

I thought 911 scuppered the strategy of the IRA.

Uncle Liam wrote: Standstill in the 90's? Bollocks!

A brief history of Provisional IRA activity in the 1990's:

93- Shankhill Bomb 93- Warrington Bomb 96- Canary Wharf 96- Manchester Bomb

yep, the IRA were definitley at a standstill.

Compared to the 70's, yes.

And it's Shankill.

Uncle Liam wrote: What actually happenned was the conflict had come to a stalemate, so Gerry and the boys decided to try and reach a compromise because they realised they were getting absolutely no where.

It had absolutely nothing to do with the IRA being brought to standstill. Anyone who knows even the slightest bit of IRA history would know this. If the provos wanted the war to go on, they could still be going today.

Standstill is another word for stalemate.

Anyone would also know that loyalists were starting to gather effective information on IRA/Sinn Fein members and killing them, and that was adding extra pressure. Senior IRA members from the period have said that with this pressure, coupled with the fact that they knew the British government wouldn't cave in, they resolved to talk.

Steve's original thought was that Britain weren't hard enough on the IRA. That was what my original post was about. I'm sure you're aware that the East Tyrone brigade was the most effective, and that after Loughall, they suffered really badly, which shows the effect that the SAS/British Army had on the unit.

your point is:

Hardly. The SAS brought the IRA to a standstill in the 90's, particularly in the boarder areas where their influence is most felt. pushing them to the talks.

Which is bollocks. The importance of Gibralter is vastly overplayed. And yes, the Loyalist paramilataries did start to up their killings of IRA men, but it was nothing that forced Sinn Feins hand. Throughout the 90's the IRA were as strong in areas such as South Armagh and Derry as they ever were. And its not as if the Republican population disapproved, seeing as Sinn Fein election results repeatedly improved from 92 onwards!

Fuck the IRA

I still have a pic from my last trip to Dublin where me & mates ripped off the Sinn Fein sign from their Dublin Head office. We didnt know we had until some Irish girls we were with translated the Gaelic. We thought it said 'Sinn Fein Library'. Irish rozzers kept phoning my mate that booked the apartment we stayed in next door for ages, coz we left the sign there. He just told them to fuck off.

ho hum, hope Gerry Adams isnt at Electric Picnic

how do you know?

If David Cameron can blag a ticket to V, then i'm sure Gerry could get in at Electric Picnic.

Plenty of posts about bloody Ireland then. I should have known it was a mistake to bring that up as an illustration of my own point!

Of course Israel are surrounded by enemies, but shy is that? Because they've quietly got on with living their own lives and let others get on with living theirs?

Uncle Liam wrote: your point is:

Hardly. The SAS brought the IRA to a standstill in the 90's, particularly in the boarder areas where their influence is most felt. pushing them to the talks.

Which is bollocks.

Oh really? Allright, they weren't the only reason for talks, but I was responding to Steve's theory about Britain. NOT about the endgame in general. I wasn't really expecting you to do you usual in jumping down my throat every time I make a post

Uncle Liam wrote: The importance of Gibralter is vastly overplayed.

Now this intrigues me. Please explain.

Uncle Liam wrote: And yes, the Loyalist paramilataries did start to up their killings of IRA men, but it was nothing that forced Sinn Feins hand.

I would believe that if your men are being killed by your enemies, and that you believe that the police are supplying the killers with the imformation, you and your supporters might start to feel pressure.

In 1992 and 1993, loyalists were killing more people than the IRA. 37 in 1992 and 46 in 1993. That was bound to create some pressure on the IRA, the so called 'defenders' of the Catholic population.

Uncle Liam wrote: Throughout the 90's the IRA were as strong in areas such as South Armagh and Derry as they ever were.

They're traditional holds. That's to be expected. And there wasn't really anywhere for disillusioned ones to go: the INLA, IPLO were dismissed as drug dealers, while it's debatable how much support the dissidents have. I wouldn't be suprised if a good lot of disillusioned ones still stayed on, because they had invested so much into the republican movement.

Uncle Liam wrote: And its not as if the Republican population disapproved, seeing as Sinn Fein election results repeatedly improved from 92 onwards!

I'm sure a few votes were 'stolen.' Definetly wouldn't suprise me, especially from about 92-94. I don't think the Catholic population fully got behind Sinn Fein until after the ceasefire.

Hey, I've got a great idea!

Why can't you two knobs start your own thread about Ireland and leave this one for a discussion about Lebanon?