>14 deaths out of 3,500 killed in the entire conflict

Oh my goodness, who are these degenerate losers?

>>18321584
Those are the communist heroes leading the Irish revolution in 2026. Get with the times, British Nazi

>>18321566
The troubles were over a decade so one death a day on average, 14 is a lot especially when they were fleeing civilians.

>>18321563
the priest has to make it all about him, typical

File: ulsterloyalists.png (2.6 MB)

2.6 MB PNG

KAT

File: curfew.jpg (395 KB)

395 KB JPG

>>18321801
northern ireland will suffer the same fate, no more brother wars

>>18321563
>insert KFC joke here

>>18321563
Didn't kill enough papists. The British state betrayed loyalists.

>>18321904
so did the irish state, sinn fein became a bunch of socialists as far back as the 60s, they planned to open the borders to ooga booga rape as soon as the troubles were over

File: 20250612_195525.jpg (130.6 KB)

130.6 KB JPG

>>18321801
Seething retard.

File: 20250612_195603.jpg (119.9 KB)

119.9 KB JPG

>>18321801

>>18321914
Windsor Castle hosts Ramadan celebrations now lol.

File: 1741357536288-1.jpg (321.4 KB)

321.4 KB JPG

>>18321944
Forgot the image

File: _85265314_orangeghana1.jpg (56.9 KB)

56.9 KB JPG

>>18321914

File: MindrapedBrit.png (515.9 KB)

515.9 KB PNG

>>18321801
Lol

File: mob-lynching-2-british-soldiers-440nw-144273i.jpg (37.1 KB)

37.1 KB JPG

>>18321801
Guess what this image is of?

>>18321801
I was looking for this exact image yesterday. Thank you.

File: 20250612_195548.jpg (354.5 KB)

354.5 KB JPG

>>18321986

File: Rishi-Sunak-with-the-Diversity-Built-Britain-coin.jpg (75.8 KB)

75.8 KB JPG

>>18321914
Never forget that it was diversity that built Britain

File: images (22).jpg (52.7 KB)

52.7 KB JPG

>>18321914
The UK parliament is so diverse and beautiful.

>>18321914
>>18321988
Brits always idolized the monarchy while Irish idolized Proto-Marxists like Wolfie Smith. It was always a left wing vs reaction fight. There is no Ireland without Socialism.

File: 20250206_211726.jpg (190.2 KB)

190.2 KB JPG

>>18321999
Who the fuck is Wolfe Smith? Are you by chance some dumb American retard who was dumb enough to put his name on his posts? Lol. Jon Kolner

>>18321563
Protesters/rioters shouldn't have been demonstrating. Public demonstrations had been banned in Londonderry at the time due to the increase in violence

>>18322004
Better known as Wolfe Tone- Smith was his name in exile/ hiding from the British

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfe_Tone

>>18322015
Nowhere on that article does it say Smith. You're a bit of a retard Jon tbqh.

>>18322021
Yes, Theobald Wolfe Tone used the name Smith (or Citizen Smith/James Smith) while in hiding and operating as an agent for the United Irishmen in France.
Arrival in France: When Tone arrived at Le Havre on February 1, 1796, he used a fake American passport under the alias James Smith.
Military Alias: While working with French forces to plan an invasion of Ireland, he was often referred to as Adjutant-General Smith.
Context: He adopted this alias to travel and operate securely as he sought French support for the Irish independence movement.

Bloody Sunday is a day that absolutely should live in infamy, especially because of how pointless and retarded it was.

Don't forget that while of course Republicans opposed the British Army, many Irish Catholics welcomed them in the hopes that they would protect them from the RUC+Loyalists. Bloody Sunday, which didn't have to happen, not only sent many straight into the arms of the IRA but also radicalised much of the Catholic population against Britain permanently.

The Troubles ABSOLUTELY could have ended in the 1970s, but Britain was so utterly inept and so hopelessly deluded about the idea of Ulster Unionists being worth working with that they managed to fuck it all up completely. Not to mention that the IRA's revange for it (Warrenpoint) was not only more deadly but also a great propaganda win for them.

People also forget that the Parachute Regiment shot innocent Protestants in Loyalist areas; but Ulster Loyalists will still LARP and say
>I STAND WITH SOLDIER F
>HAHA, BLOODY SUNDAY WAS A GOOD THING
because they are retards.

File: Screenshot_20211012-023515~2.png (331.6 KB)

331.6 KB PNG

>>18322036
>because they are retards

Sure they have banners and murals with Cromwell on them even though the Parliamentarian forces killed more Protestants in Ulster than the Irish Catholics did when the war broke out.

File: london74_jpg.png (927.6 KB)

927.6 KB PNG

>>18322053
That one is easier to understand; Unionists see themselves as under siege by a hostile majority, and Cromwell as a "Protestant Hero coming to destroy the evil Irish Catholics" is something many of them easily identify with.

There are a lot of contradictions in Irish history but yes, Ulster Unionism is relatively bereft of "heroes." Most Ulster Unionist heroes either
>were actively hostile to half of Northern Ireland's population
>later came to disavow what Ulster Unionism has lead to
>literally set back Ulster Unionism, but perhaps managed to kill a handful of Catholics while doing so

Ulster Unionist heroes should be men like Gusty Spence, David Irvine, and so on; people from working class Loyalism who actually sincerely believed (and often were) trying to make things better. Spence came to understand that the UVF's campaign was pointless, Irvine knew that co-operation with working class Nationalists was the only real hope for any positive change in Northern Ireland. Each time an actual "hero" like this rises, most Unionists reject them because they're "too friendly with themmuns." They instead prefer
>Ian Paisley
Blithering retard who did more harm to Northern Ireland+Unionism than the IRA could have ever hoped.
>Michael Stone
Another tard who launched sporadic attacks on Republicans, humiliated Loyalism, and was left to rot in prison.

The only heroes they can claim are
>heh, BTFO'd the catholics
Whilst Nationalism has folk heroes seen as defenders of their community, statues to famous revolutionaries or rebels, or living legends who spent the last 20 years in a similar fashion to veterans of the War of Independence. Unionism languishes under very corrupt and dogmatic retards who mostly just wanna LARP as hard lads while crying as Sinn Féin beat them again and again and again.

File: images(57).jpg (36.1 KB)

36.1 KB JPG

I like bloody sundae more.

>>18321563
Who are these 2 boomer trannies

>>18321801
Someone should ban the Irish from painting murals. They're always so hideous and embarrassing.

>>18322160
Those are Ireland’s finest

I'm still not convinced that the IRA narrative of the paras just blindly shooting into a civilian crowd is true.

>>18322080
The greatest republican hero bombed a furniture store and starved himself because he didn't want to be treated as the terrorist that he was.

>>18322574
>> In response to a question in the House of Commons on 5 May 1981 the UK Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, said, "Mr Sands was a convicted criminal. He chose to take his own life. It was a choice that his organisation did not allow to many of its victims."[43]


Damn. A rare Thatcher W.

File: 467867005_540125562263532_3391922394574319482_n_jpg.png (574.6 KB)

574.6 KB PNG

>>18322559
>IRA narrative
That isn't the IRA narrative. It's the widely accepted findings of multiple extensive investigations after a failed attempt to cover it up; this is why the British Government apologised. There is an acceptance of guilt on the British side, but a refusal to allow anyone involved to be charged with any crime; it's now more or less impossible to charge anyone because the British Government will block it and multiple soldiers presented have already committed perjury in the past regarding the day.

It was a relatively simply event; a handful of protestors threw stones at the windows of a building occupied by Paratroopers. The Paratrooper started shooting people, then claimed that the people they shot were holding guns, then went silent when it was revealed that this wasn't true.

The Paratroopers were quite infamous for poor discipline throughout the early 1970s in NI; both Protestants and Catholics wound up killed by them when they opened fire during relatively mild disturbances or gatherings.
>>18322574
>Bobby Sands
>Greatest Republican
Not really, just a very very famous one.
>bombed a furniture store
Yes, the IRA openly targeted commercial centres to kill Northern Ireland's economy. Dunno why brainlets struggle with this.
>starved himself because he didn't want to be treated as the terrorist that he was
The Hunger Strikers demands were mostly for a restoration of conditions that were previously in place and then repealed. Every single one of their demands were granted following the strike, and the IRA was hugely bolstered.
>>18322583
>Thatcher W
Thatcher was an overwhelming net loss to British efforts in the war. Totally misjudged the IRA and the Republicans, tried to take a """strong""" approach and ended up humiliated with the IRA massively strengthened and Britain in an even worse position than before. She didn't accomplish any meaningful damage to the Republican movement-the complete opposite in fact.

>>18322682
>There is an acceptance of guilt, but a refusal to allow anyone involved to be charged with any crime
a bit like the pub bombings eh?

File: rare-photo-of-provisional-ira-volunteers-at-a-checkpoint-in-v0-wjpfmi7jv0ma1.jpg (80.2 KB)

80.2 KB JPG

>>18322684
Not really, anon. Republicans have been incredibly merciful and proactive in regards to normalising NI and trying to reach out to Unionists-a gesture that has yet to be returned.
>like the pub bombings, eh?
Why would they show any good faith when the last several decades has shown them that it will never be returned in kind? Why jeapordise themselves politically (in a way that Unionism will take advantage of) when the same gesture is not returned?

Many leading Republicans carry/carried murder charges for most of their lives. They might have been out of prison, but there was no confusion-they were killers. Everyone agrees that the Paratroopers murdered civilians on Bloody Sunday, and that they're guilty-but nobody is allowed to seek justice because it makes the British Government look bad.

An insane amount of tolerance and generosity is shown by Republicans/Nationalists toward Britain, and it just isn't returned.

>>18322692
>Yeah ok but-
cope

>>18322695
Okay anon, if you don't want to read
>tl;dr
Republicans/Nationalists have no reason to show yet more grace and generosity in regards to legacy issues, since Britain never does the same.

>>18321801
Brootal.

I remember being on a Unionist Instagram post a few years ago and the Irish republicans were all leftoid antiracists in the comments. That's when I begun to view the IRA as cringe. But still, the British are gay too, sadly. Wish Ireland wasn't such a leftist shithole with a brown PM (even their WWII PM was brown).

>>18321801
You're gonna kill me? Ok then I'll be waiting :)

>>18322697
kek, anon they protected them for the same reason the IRA protected their bombers. You don't fuck over your team.

>>18322682
Can't think of anyone more universally praised and beloved in republican circles than Bobby Sands.
Ruinating small business owners is evil even if you don't kill anyone, but of course alot of these bombings did kill people as the IRA didn't really care about that either.
That the British to an extent caved and that the IRA was bolstered from it only reinforces my point desu as a rational person would have seen his "martyrdom" for what it was, a retarded terrorist killing himself for a retarded reason, but republicans aren't rational so they rioted and joined the IRA in protest of this "injustice".

>>18322698
>> even their WWII PM was brown

Ireland was neutral in WWII and offered condolences to Germany after Hitler’s suicide. Iirc they hosted a German embassy at that time.

>>18322698
They had an embassy and this guy was representivative of Germany in Ireland in 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Hempel

>>18322698
>> When the United States envoy David Gray[3] took over the German embassy and its archives on 10 May 1945 on behalf of the victorious powers, Hempel had already destroyed all significant records, with the tacit support of the government of Ireland, according to diplomat David Gray.[4][5]

>>18322709
Republicans have "fucked over their team" many times to try demonstrate a reconciliatory nature to Britain/Unionists.
>>18322712
He's certainly praised and beloved, but that doesn't make him the greatest; just very, very, very well known. He certainly isn't revered as the best of the IRA, moreso just as one of the better political leaders.
>Ruinating small business owners is evil even if you don't kill anyone
The word evil by this stage carried little weight. Everyday governance in NI was quite evil to Catholics until it fell apart. No, the IRA didn't care-neither did any belligerent in the conflict. Civilians got the rough end from all sides.
>a rational person would have seen his "martyrdom" for what it was
Anon, hunger stiking was already a well established thing within Irish Republicanism. Quite famously it happened in the 1920s too, and was seen as an incredibly principled act of defiance. In fact, starving as an act of defiance or to bring shame to your enemy is something that is recorded almost as far back as written history in Ireland goes-something that Republican papers at the time made a show of.

Sacrifice and martyrdom in the face of overwhelming odds had become a huge thing in the Republican movement and proved extremely effective. I think people just get angry because it worked so well.
>>18322769
>offered condolences to Hitler
Never happened.
>>18322769
Hempel was selected specifically because he (at the time) wasn't a member of the Nazi Party.
>>18322777
Not really surprising given the environment between the US and Ireland at the time; the allies were angry that Ireland hadn't agreed to be used as an airstrip.

>>18321969
I’m American
I’ve been taught that only blacks were ever lynched in all of history, ever

I don't even care if Johnny Adair is a homo, I just think everything about the conflict is hilarious. Shame this thread got discord trooned too.

>>18322986
Again, I can't think of anyone who is more revered and you haven't named any.
>the IRA didn't care-neither did any belligerent in the conflict. Civilians got the rough end from all sides.
So I guess we agree that Sands was a violent scumbag who deserved to be locked up as a common criminal?
>hunger stiking was already a well established thing within Irish Republicanism
And? If anything that should have made the masses LESS susceptible to manipulation by that tactic.
>Sacrifice and martyrdom in the face of overwhelming odds had become a huge thing in the Republican movement and proved extremely effective
But to be enthralled by it you have to actually believe that his martyrdom was righteous, that he was justified in his belief that IRA terrorists should not be treated as the criminals they were, but that's retarded which makes him and anyone who hails him as a great martyr look like a fool.

>>18322986
>>>> Ireland remained neutral during World War II. Germany had an ambassador in the country, Eduard Hempel, until 1945. De facto, however, there was intelligence and military cooperation of Ireland with the western enemies of the Third Reich: the United Kingdom and the United States. Éamon de Valera was the only head of government in the world to condole with the German embassy after Adolf Hitler's suicide in 1945. He later protested to the British embassy about the death sentences imposed on the main war criminals during the Nuremberg trials.

>>18321801
This pic makes taigs seethe so bad it's unreal

>>18321563
Bloody Sunday was a fully justified police action, if Britain had done 100 more of them they would have won the troubles. IRA were funded by Mossad, Israel wanted revenge on Britain for its control of the Mandate.

File: muralfag.jpg (376.9 KB)

376.9 KB JPG

>>18322162
Irish people are great at murals. In the south the murals looking amazing and aren't political shite just historical and cultural figures. In Belfast is a cringe old bastard boomer called Davy Devenny who's responsible for all the shit murals and has taken over the peace wall in Belfast to paint his gay and shit murals and the narcissist old faggot even refers to the wall as "his wall". Hopefully he will die soon and there will be no more cringe as fuck and gay murals on that wall in Belfast. The man should be beaten to death for being such a fag.

File: G8XN0dxWUAMXjNS(1).png (542 KB)

542 KB PNG

>>18323047
>no no, look!
And what's the source? The article you posted does not provide one; the "further reading" section contains no sources that point to the event actually happening.

There does not exist anywhere an actual source for this claim, nor for the other claims such as Ireland allowing German U-Boats to refuel at Irish ports. Many of these rumours originated with Unionist politicians in Northern Ireland who wanted to make the Free State look bad; picrel is a work of complete fiction, and yet many to this day accept it as fact.

There isn't and has never been any evidence of the "condolences" thing ever actually happening.
>>18323031
>you haven't named any
Brendan Hughes are far more widely revered in terms of IRA Volunteers. Sands was indeed in the IRA, but is better known for his role as a political representative.
>So I guess we agree that Sands was a violent scumbag
Yes, anon, I agree that the men and women grabbing guns and bombs to kill people were typically quite violent characters.
>deserved to be locked up as a common criminal
we literally know with hindsight that this was a mistake. Binary approaches to things like this are how Republicans did so well for so long.
>If anything that should have made the masses LESS susceptible to manipulation by that tactic
The Hunger Strikers had every single one of their demands granted, Britain's position was permanently weakened, and the Republican position permanently strengthened. I think you are misjudging who "lost" the situation.
>But to be enthralled by it you have to actually believe that his martyrdom was righteous
Acts of defiance against a government that hates you are extremely easy to see as righteous. The IRA's cause was even easier to justify in the Troubles than it was in the 1920s.

I again think you are perhaps simply angry that the Irish side has heroes, and the British side does not.

>>18323114
Take your meds you schizo nonce.

>>18323020
Did you take your name out of the posts Jon Kolner? You're still getting swatted. Nice shotgun in your profile pic btw. I hope your not holding it when the swat team comes

>>18323562
That’s not even me, asshole.

File: mountbatten.jpg (985.9 KB)

985.9 KB JPG

Since there is clearly confusion ITT about the 1981 Hunger Strike involving Bobby Sands, the facts are very simple.
>Hunger striking as an act of defiance (and to bring disorder+shame to your enemy) is a well established tradition amongst Irish nationalists who have been caputred/imprisoned

>1960s; internment is introduced. Thousands of Irish Catholics are imprisoned without trial, often in Long Kesh-which was styled as a POW camp
>Many in these prions adopted a military-esque code of conduct; holding drills, classes on history/politics, and so on
>In 1972 the rights to do the above were refused to those who had been convicted of a crime
>Hunger Strike happens in 1972
>Rights restored thanks to IRA hunger strike; IRA prisoners were now "Special Category Status" and were treated as prisoners of war
>1976
>Britain decides to try end this, to push harder for the criminalisation of the Republican movement
>Protests against this go on through the 1970s
>1978, Republican prisoners issue "5 demands"
>These demands are essentially demanding the return of POW conditions
>Hunger Strike in 1980
>Eventually called off, Britain agrees to "review" the demands
>No change, clear the demands aren't being met

>New hunger strike in 1981 (this is the one Bobby Sands took part in)
>Hunger strikers die
>All of their demands are implemented
>Sands becomes a martyr
>Massive boost to IRA recruitment
>Huge surge of IRA activity
>Entire nationalist (both pro-IRA and anti-IRA) galvanised against the British Government
>Riots all over Ireland
>International condemnation

There was a notion by 1981 that the movement was starting to lose support; the Hunger Strike (and particularly Britain's response to it) created a new lease of life for Republicans. Everyone who thinks that some sort of stupid "strong arm" approach to the IRA or the Troubles is the exact sort of person who would have handed them victory.

Irishfag thoughts on mass immigration and ethnic replacement?

File: 284586324_173175625097826_6538508418435383708_n.jpg (349.5 KB)

349.5 KB JPG

>>18323571
My thoughts are that /pol/ discussion should stay on >>>/pol/ so that every single Irish history thread doesn't get swarmed and ruined by racebaiting faggotry.

We already have multiple seething Brits that spam these threads, don't need our own people filling it with /pol/slop.

éire/pol/ was a thing and existed for a reason, do some work, look through the /pol/ archives and revive it if you want to chat about all that I guess. Just tends to ruin /his/ threads.

>>18323544
The shared history of Ireland and Hitlerian Germany is best celebrated within the Reich era drama film “Mein Leben fur Ireland”, a film which is like a history book written with lightning how prescient it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Life_for_Ireland

The film covers the story of two generations of an Irish nationalist family; starting with Michael O'Brien (Werner Hinz) and following with his son, also Michael (Will Quadflieg), eighteen years later in 1921.[4]
The film commences in Dublin in 1903. A squad of police officers break into a thatched hovel and evict the family, throwing a young child to the floor. However they are ambushed by a group of Irish nationalists and a long gun fight ensues. Michael O'Brien is captured and is sentenced to death. While he is in prison, his pregnant fiancée Maeve visits him and they are secretly married. Afterwards, Michael hands his wife a silver cross that will always be worn by the best Irish freedom fighter. On the cross, the words My life for Ireland are engraved.
Eighteen years later, in 1921, his son Michael Jr. is expecting to pass his school leaving exams. As the son of an infamous Irish nationalist, he has been educated at St Edwards College, a school run by British teachers. In this way the British government attempt to re-educate Irish pupils into "worthy" British citizens.

File: G_LHgtNWAAADqW0.png (340.6 KB)

340.6 KB PNG

>>18323580
The reality of Ireland's role in WW2 is best left to historians such as James O'Neill, who regularly posts the following (and more) on X or elsewhere regarding the matter-not whatever you manage to scrape from WIkipedia, which this time seems to be one of several anti-Britain films created by Nazi Germany.

>>18323586
Ireland was an unspoken ‘Axis power’ in the 40s. Stfu

It was like the fourth Tojo, Hitler, Mussolini ally.

>>18323589
Ireland wasn't even the most German of the neutral powers. Neutral Spain allowed German U-Boats to refuel, Sweden sent 140,000,000 tonnes of iron to Germany, Switzerland financed/sold them arms.

Ireland helped the Allies exactly enough to still be able to avoid getting bombed; calling Ireland "neutral" is honestly a push, they were Allied in all but name. Of course, the Prime Minister of NI wanted to invade them anyway.

File: GvW1lu6W8AAVKyv.png (3.1 MB)

3.1 MB PNG

>>18323592
>most german
Most *pro-German.

King George V wouldn't have thanked them for their help if they hadn't helped.

>>18323592
When you ride with de Valera you ride with Tojo.

File: images(12).png (110.4 KB)

110.4 KB PNG

>>18323597
>de valera
>tojo
They were more into the Big Fellow.

>>18323600
Here is to the pro-Nazi President of Ireland who never formally declared war on Germany and who issued condolences to the German embassy after his suicide - an illegitimate Cuban-American born out of wedlock in a poverty row home for lost youth in the Bronx!

Truly he represents what free Ireland is about

File: KKK_-_St_Patricks_Dau.jpg (1 MB)

1 MB JPG

>ITT: Taigs Seething
Imagine being the eternal victim race of history. Btfo'd by a bunch of outnumbered and outgunned ulstermen. btfo'd across the atlantic by a bunch of blokes in pointy hats

>>18323573
kek this is the same response every time. You don't give a fuck about Irish demographic integrity and preservation, you just want to spite enemies who are long dead(and defeated respectively in their own nation)

File: 1761311809743306_png.png (66 KB)

66 KB PNG

>>18323636
>same respose everytime
Because /pol/posting belongs on >>>/pol/.

Here, I even dug up the old éire/pol/ logo from the threads. Go make a thread instead of shitting up this one.

>>18323639
Cope
You're historically illiterate as well. You thought the whigs of the 1790s were anti catholic when in reality they wanted to repeal anti catholic laws. Historically illiterate fenian retard

>>18323641
>You thought the whigs of the 1790s were anti catholic
Did I? Don't believe I've ever said anything of the sort. The "Whigs" (assuming you are referring to the followers of Henry Grattan and the Patriot movement) did indeed partially repeal many Penal Laws largely thanks to the efforts of the Catholic Committee's work; the Roman Catholic Relief Act of '93 absolutely couldn't have happened without the work of people like John Keogh and the other Convention members.

I am sorry that you want /his/ to be /pol/, I think it's better that the two are separate.

>>18323646
You stated Wolfe tone wasn't a whig because he was catholic when in reality the whigs of the 1790s didn't care about catholicism. the anti catholics of the period were tories

>>18323651
Not that guy but Wolfe tone wasn’t catholic. He was a Protestant (likely deist) who supported the Catholics begrudgingly to push the British out of Ireland but afterwards he wanted to get rid of the Catholic influence as had been done in France during the reign of terror.

>>18323656
And he was a whig but our irish history retard keeps denying that he was for some strange deranged reason

>>18323651
>You stated Wolfe tone wasn't a whig because he was catholic
I can promise you I never said anything of the sort, kekked.

Tone started off as a Whig (once his career abroad went up in flames) and indeed literally called himself a Northern Whig. But he's best known for his work when he moved beyond that. He also wasn't a Catholic, he was Anglican.
>Whigs are the time didn't care about Catholicism
Right, but the Irish House of Commons was not 100% Whigs. Grattan himself knew that the Irish House of Commons could not win over the anti-Catholic attitudes of many of the Ascendancy seats, which is partly why they ended up dissolving the Catholic Committee.
>>18323659
See above. I typically use the term "Patriot" to differentiate the movement that saw the 1782 Constitution because they do deserve to be separated from the Whigs. The Irish Patriot movement was very much its own thing; inspired by Whig politics but joining them with a distinctive Irish identity that called for very strong self-government in Ireland, which the Whigs opposed.

File: Portrait_of_Henry_Grattan_-Martin_Archer_Shee__png(1).png (140.2 KB)

140.2 KB PNG

>so blisteringly angry that /his/ posters don't want every thread to be full of /pol/ slop that he is trying to suggest that people were calling wolfe tone a catholic

This is why I think certain people need to stick to their containment board, because they just get too emotional discussing history. The argument of
>Tone; Whig or Rebel
is actually an extremely interesting one. Most historians have landed on the latter side, but studying his early Whig-sympathetic era is absolutely worth it.

Sadly, I think >>18323651 is mostly focused on how history can add kindling to whatever personal issues he has today with anonymous posters on 4chan. Sad stuff

>>18323668
>> He also wasn't a Catholic, he was Anglican.

You are correct that he was raised Anglican despite his alliance with Catholics but being a Robespierrean he was as almost certainly either a materialist or a Cartesian/ Jefferson-esque Deist of that time.

>>18323672
>>18323668
>sad
says the one pretending tone wasn't a whig.
He was a whig just like the founding fathers and french revolutionaries were. His worldview was entirely based on enlightenment french and english whig beliefs.

>>18323631
"intolerance"


Huh?

>>18323693
I guess I don't always feel a need to label these guys with one ideology when they were clearly influenced by multiple.

Tone started off writing as an "independent Irish Whig" and his views evolved over time. French revolutionary material certainly influenced him, but so too did the "revolutionary" Volunteer movement of the 1780s which was more inspired by the American revolution than the French one. Many from various camps have tried to claim him but realistically Tone said shit from every angle which is why people try to avoid labelling him as one thing or the other. Between 1790 and 1798 his ideology shifted radically and he expressed views that were everything from
>THE POOR MUST RISE UP AGAINST THE RICH
to
>we don't HAVE to be a Republic, just so long as the problems are solved
>>18323699
Nobody ITT is pretending he wasn't a whig, you are just insisting that we are. You have managed to reply to two posts which quite literally confirm he began as a Whig to "prove" that I am claiming he wasn't. Blanket terms in history are almost always bad.

This is why you should stick to >>>/pol/

You look retarded.

>>18323701
The irish were historically known for their intolerance.
Compare 1960s england to 1960s ireland for example.
the irish, despite what retarded american plasic paddies will tell you about le fighting irish, are highly parochial, and subservient to authority and the opinion of the masses. it's village gossip mentality on a country wide scale.

>>18323705
>>18323708
>The myth of national rebelliousness stems from centuries of dominance by England; but the Irish were never natural rebels and lawbreakers, they just never accepted rule by a foreign race. Under their own leaders they have proved to be docile, first towards Éamon de Valera’s conservative Catholic state, and now to the revolutionary order which replaced it (and which despises its inheritance).

>The common English criticism, that their neighbours were unquestioning in their obedience to a clergy, has seamlessly continued with secularisation and the replacement caste of journalists, politicians and NGOs, painfully conformist in their thinking and obsessed with signalling moral value and maturity; this is a wider European problem but especially prevalent in Ireland.

>Although banterous, the Irish are also quite reticent in many ways, more so than the English, less likely to complain about bad service or minor mistreatment, and have a ‘mustn’t grumble’ mentality. This was visible during the pandemic, when the country endured the longest and most stringent lockdown in Europe.

>When Ireland embraced Christianity sixteen centuries ago, it was unusual in how quickly it converted. Most countries saw decades of conflict, a culture war between the old faith and the new, but the Irish seemed to accept St Patrick’s religion within a generation, without a fight. The same thing has happened with the new religion, Ireland’s elites embracing progressivism with rapid speed – perhaps only Canada has gone further down the road so quickly.

>>18323721
Sorry anon, I have too much self respect to allow myself to sit here and pretend that the aimless substack blithering of a British man who revived his career through the "social commentary" equivilant of edgelord posting is worth reading, let alone debating.

A far better book exists to describe the phenomenon of post-independence Irish conservatism, it's called
>Ireland, Colonialism, and the Unfinished Revolution (McVeigh and Rolston)
and it came out before the article you're copy and pasting did. Please stop pulling your views on politics and history from random retards on the internet.

>>18323722
is for >>18323712

I am sorry that such a blinding, obssessive hatred of Ireland exists in some people and I can only hope they grow out of it.

>>18323721
The irish were always known as conservative, inward minded and as having a village mentality. I don't know why you have so much trouble accepting this obvious fact. You can read accounts of travellers touring ireland in the 18th and 19th century to confirm this

>>18323726
You are applying an incredibly broad statement to millions people across thousands of years. It isn't a "fact" and you know this. I dunno what it is you hope to convince anyone of with this bizarre drivel other than the notion that you desperately scour the internet every day trying to find anecdotal evidence that supports your obsession.

I would in all honesty say I could more confidently and effectively criticise the Republic of Ireland/Irish Free State than you can. Just a dire way to be, anon.

>>18323736
Cultural anthropologists would agree with me. National and ethnic characters are real and you're schizophrenic if you deny that some cultures are more closed or open than others.

>>18323544
Hughes is obscure compared to Sands
>I think you are misjudging who "lost" the situation.
I'm not arguing over who won or lost the situation at all, I'm arguing over whether their demands were reasonable and over whether Catholics were reasonable to support them and hail them as martyrs and you have hardly even tried to convince me that the answer is not an unequivocal no.
>Acts of defiance against a government that hates you are extremely easy to see as righteous.
The government didn't fucking care about terrorists killing themselves, and neither did they hate Catholics.
>The IRA's cause was even easier to justify in the Troubles than it was in the 1920s.
It objectively isn't as a majority in Ireland wanted to leave the Union, a majority in Northern Ireland didn't, and ultimately this is what it was all about.
>I again think you are perhaps simply angry that the Irish side has heroes, and the British side does not.
Again, a terrorist who bombed a furniture store for no good reason and starved himself to death for no good reason is not a hero. The many men and women who put their life on the line to protect the people of Ulster from violent thugs like Bobby Sands are heroes though.

And insulting somebody for desperately scouring the internet trying to justify their obession is funny for a guy who scours the internet, save hundreds of vintage photos and makes hundred post long threads to justify his hatred of ulster loyalists.
Stop projecting.

>>18323740
I am not saying there are no difference between cultures, anon.

I'm saying that
>yeah, the Irish were always conserative and docile!
and using snippets from a washed up British columnist is very retarded. I would instead suggest that you focus on the aftermath of the Flight of the Earls and the power that the Catholic Church (and its foreign power bases) had in Ireland, the division between those who sought and end to persecution via the loyalty to the Stuarts and those who sought full severance from England. I would then suggest you read about the reshaping of Ireland in the 1690s into the 18th Century, and how rapid and very radical changes to both the economy and topography of the island influenced Irish society.

I would then say you should read up on those "diaries of people travelling Ireland" when it was in the pits of British colonial rule and ponder whether there was a reason that most people were too preoccupied to form some sort of doomed secessionist or revolutionary movement until the end of the 18th Century. I would then point out that from the moment the Union was implemented the majority view in Ireland was that it ought to be repealed, but that O'Connell and others helping to transform the impoverished Irish from a bilingual culture in touch with their roots to a mongolot urbanised group of labourers.

I would then say perhaps you should find a different outlet for your obsession, because you won't like the end result of your research.

>>18323705
Paraphrase of Wolfe Tone I read once

“Even if Ireland were whole I would still oppose the Bourgeois class in my native homeland.”

>>18323752
I've read countless history books on ireland. And those aren't even required i just need to go over there myself and see how people act vs how they act back home, which i have done plenty of times.
The irish have a small village mentality on a bigger scale. it's similar to how the law of jante works in scandinavia. no scandinavian would get mad at me saying the law of jante exists yet when i say that irish people are more collectivistic and conservative you start sperging out and raging for no reason.

>>18323741
>Hughes is obscure compared to Sands
No he isn't kekked. In terms of "people in the IRA" Hughes outstrips Sands every time. Sands did fuck all as part of the IRA, most of what he's known for was politics and prison activity.
>I'm arguing over whether their demands were reasonable
Fair enough. I say they are very reasonable, as they were asking for a resumption of something that was taken from them and it was decided to grant them. I apologise if that was unclear!
>The government didn't fucking care about terrorists killing themselves
The Government was also regularly working with terrorists when it suits then, and were throwing people in prison for nothing. I don't think "what the Government thought" carries basically any weight here. We KNOW that their attempt to strong-arm the IRA failed and blew up in their face.
>It objectively isn't as a majority in Ireland wanted to leave the Union
The first IRA attacks of the revolutionary era were opportunistic, and against the RIC. The Provisional IRA's campaign started after Loyalist Paramilitaries had been carrying out attacks for years. Northern Ireland was highly oppressive toward Irish Catholics, the United Kingdom in 1919 was not.
>not a hero
I don't think we get to decide that, do we?
People clearly identified with him, his cause, and his sacrifice. We can sit here today and smugly say "heh, I wouldn't have fallen for it" but if you're an Irish Catholic in 1980s Northern Ireland and a very popular local politician starves to death in a British prison (flanked by mocking and derision from Britain) you probably would have been pissed off.
>The many men and women who put their life on the line to protect the people of Ulster
If they had dealt with the Loyalist paramilitaries in the 1960s instead of protecting them and then attacking the civil rights movement, their lives probably wouldn't have been on the line in the first place.

In terms of "time to fight back", 1969 is far easier to justify than 1919.

>>18323755
>you start sperging out
Anon if either of us can be accused of sperging out, I'm afraid it isn't me.

Again, I think there's plenty to be said, studied, and fixed about Irish society. But you are doing it from a
>the irish are just like this, aka worse, heh, I win again!
perspective. Actual historians, anthropologists and other researchers approach it from a
>what are the socio-economic factors that influenced Irish society in history, and what way does Ireland's history continue to shape it
perspective.

In short; I think you try to study to fuel a personal obsession, while others do it because its what the're interested in.

>>18323766
>what are the socio-economic factors that influenced Irish society in history, and what way does Ireland's history continue to shape it
>perspective.
Feel free to tell me what socio economic factors made it so 16th century irish women were described as chaste by both english and non english foreign visitors to ireland
retard

>>18323760
>I don't think we get to decide that, do we?
>People clearly identified with him, his cause, and his sacrifice.
Yet when Ulster Loyalists say this about Lenny Murphy or Michael Stone suddenly they're le bad guys.
KEK

>>18323741
I am expanding upon >>18323760 to say that I am by no means saying that Loyalists have no right to look to certain people as heroes.

If I were a young lad on the Shankill Road in October 1993, I can only hope I'd have the courage and conviction to join the UDA and fight back. As far as I'd have known, the IRA were just trying to wipe out any Protestants as possible. The difference here is that when you expand that outwards, the people who should be Loyalist heroes (again; veteran Loyalists who saw through both Britain's bullshit and the dead-end of sectarianism) are mostly left to rot by the wayside because Loyalists prefer to focus on people who killed Catholics.

Republicans and Nationalists have many heroes-both constitutional and physical force-all of whom were driven by far better sounding causes like
>muh equality
>muh freedom
>muh independence
Whilst within Loyalism it was mostly
>fuck catholics
>can we please go back to before all this started where all the catholics stayed out of the way?
>fuck catholics
With the exceptions to this rule being Lundyfied and abandoned.

>>18323778
In their view loyalists fought for freedom and independence. But you ignore that because you have a seething hatred of ulster loyalists that you try to justify by spamming on /his/

>>18323772
Unless you give me actual sources I don't really know what you want me to respond to. I can only assume you are that anon who spammed that one Alan Macfarlane book for months?
>>18323777
See >>18323778.

When Loyalists say they idolise Michael Stone, people look up Michael Stone and find a UDA man who carried out sporadic and arbitrary attacks on Catholic civilians for various organisations before getting arrested for tossing a grenade at a funeral. He did not have any serious political weight or talent, he wasn't any sort of local hero, he just ran around killing Catholics-mostly civilians, occasionally getting lucky and hitting someone in the IRA.

They just aren't really comparable. Sands was a violent man too, but not only did he not kill anyone he was a very popular politician and quite literally an elected MP.
>>18323788
I don't ignore that, anon. The post you are replying to acknowledges that. I am saying that now, with hindsight, when we have the new information, pretending that most of the UDA/UVF were doing anything more than shooting random Catholics makes one not only wrong but very retarded.

Gusty Spence came to this realisation in the 1970s. Do you reckon you know better than he did?

>>18323793
By attending the funeral of terrorists who murdered innocents you are implictely agreeing to the murder of innocents. How can you do that and be mad when somebody has the balls to attack you for it?
And the IRA are fine with celebrating the warrington bombings and the birmingham pub bombings so why is it LE BAD when UDA gadgies go around shooting catholics? Why is it fine when catholics kill protestant civilians but bad when protestants do it back?

>>18323760
>Sands did fuck all as part of the IRA, most of what he's known for was politics and prison activity.
And? He's still more famous than Hughes.
>The Government was also regularly working with terrorists when it suits then
That's grossly disingenuous as only certain elements at the lower end of the hierarchy did it.
>I don't think we get to decide that, do we?
You have literally said that loyalist heroes aren't real heroes so why should we not also apply scrutiny to the people republicans hail as heroes?
>We can sit here today and smugly say "heh, I wouldn't have fallen for it" but if you're an Irish Catholic in 1980s Northern Ireland and a very popular local politician starves to death in a British prison (flanked by mocking and derision from Britain) you probably would have been pissed off.
History is full of collective stupidity that you likely would have participated in if you were there, as is the presence, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be called out. Also, Sands only became a "very popular local politician" because of the popular embrace of the hunger strike, don't confuse cause and effect.
>1969 is far easier to justify than 1919.
1981 certainly isn't though.

>>18323802
>By attending the funeral of terrorists who murdered innocents you are implictely agreeing to the murder of innocents
Was the Enniskillen bombing fair game then? After all, the British Army murdered many innocents.
>why is it LE BAD when UDA gadgies go around shooting catholics
It's bad when anyone does it, anon.

The point you're missing here is that while every single belligerent (Irish, Loyalist, British) killed many innocent people, the ideas and justifications that drove each are very different.

>Republican
Tageting commerical and government buildings, aiming to create political and economic instability. Most civilian deaths happened as a result of inadequate bomb warnings or a failure to respond to bomb warnings. (Sinn Féin sorts will claim every civilian death via bomb was because Britain "deliberately ignored them" but this obviously is not true).

The number of times that the IRA went out and shot someone because they were a Protestant is a very small fraction of the number of times Loyalists did it.
>British Army
Targeting Irish Republicans, and those who help them. Occasionally colludes with Loyalist Paramilitaries to do so.
>Loyalists
Kiling Catholics because they're Catholic.

So yes, people do tend to say there's a difference between
>IRA Gunman who was an elected politician, popular local figure, campaigned for social reform, and sacrificed his life (gaining not only the demands, but more) for his cause
and
>Petty theif who ran around shooting random catholics until he got thrown in jail

Sands is probably the worst possible person to try and choose for a "evil anti-protestant IRA" since he not only grew up around Protestants but was victimised by Loyalist tartan gangs for many years before he finally decided to get involved with the IRA.

File: 462284201_830669619281489_3718763767735078412_n_jpg.png (102.5 KB)

102.5 KB PNG

>>18323813
>And? He's still more famous than Hughes.
I just disagree. Sands is more famous, yes, but in a conversation about "IRA Men" Hughes would outstrip Sands, as would the likes of Joe McCann.
>That's grossly disingenuous as only certain elements at the lower end of the hierarchy did it.
I don't think so; it happened. We know that the RUC were not above board, we know that Irish Catholics hadn't forgotten the abuses of the Northern Ireland Parliament up to its collapse, so again-"the government thinks X" isn't really very relevant in a place where the Government has no serious mandate whatsoever.
>You have literally said that loyalist heroes aren't real heroes
I have said that people who idolise them struggle to be taken seriously because unlike Republican/Nationalist counterparts they rarely have any positive contribution to offer-just a career of killing Catholics. Said scrutiny IS applied to Republicans and always has been.

I listed people who should be heroes (and to some, are) but who are usually left behind because they're seen as too friendly to themmuns.
>History is full of collective stupidity that you likely would have participated in if you were there
I don't think taking up arms to fight back against people who are killing you is "historic stupidity."

Like I said, I am not an Ulster Loyalist but it's extremely easy to understand why anyone would have joined the UVF or the UDA at the time.
>1981 certainly isn't though.
The campaign didn't begin in 1981, anon. In fact, as I've said, it was actually in danger of fizzling out. But Britain deciding (again, incredibly stupidly) to suddenly try to strongarm the IRA out of prominence and having it spectacularly blow up in their face gave the IRA a big boost. People get angry if they think the Government-especially a hostile one-is being punitive when it isn't really necessary.

>>18323814
No unlike you trying to justify your position with semantics i am actually logically consistent. Every action done by protestants and the british state against catholics was justified. I don't have to pretend my people were ACKCHUALLY doing it to target infrastructure or instability. Yeah i'm sure bombing pubs and people shopping on the high street is really damming for british infrastructure you retarded spastic.
I'd have more respect for taigs if you just admitted to bombing people because you like killing your enemies instead of engaging in sophistry. you don't see bosnians in the balkans arguing that them killing random serbs was destroying infrastructure. they brag about it.

File: spence_2008822b_jpg.png (495 KB)

495 KB PNG

I feel like a broken record here but again
>Gusty Spence
>Hardline Loyalist, founding member of the UVF
>Joined during a time when many Loyalists were anticipating some sort of attack from the IRA (justifiably)
>Ends up in prison
>In the early 1970s, he becomes disillusioned with the UVF's campaign and starts to organise them politically
>Managed to get the UVF to agree to a ceasefire, believes they should shift away from shooting random Catholics and toward politics
>UVF legalised in 1974
>Spence tries to get UVF men to enter politics and organise
>Serious political talent
>Uh oh, it doesn't work
>Someone decided to kill 30+ people in the Republic of Ireland with the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings
>No impact on the IRA, nor on Republicanism
>Spence outraged by this pointless act
>Already the UVF is split between people who support him and people who would like to keep killing random Catholics
>Spence's dream of a true Loyalist political campaign to match that of Sinn Féin fails

The PUP was an attempt to revive that spirit, but we know how that went. Spence is now often both worshipped and criticised by Loyalists despite the fact that he left the UVF entirely in 1978 and didn't look back.

>Every action done by protestants and the british state against catholics was justified
The UVF burned a Protestant civilian to death while trying to burn down a Catholic owned pub in June 1966. The IRA was not active at the time. The intended target was not associated with the IRA. They then shot 4 random Catholic civilians-again with no paramilitary ties.

How did that help their cause? If you re-read my posts you'll find that I do not in any way suggest the IRA dindu nuffin, just that they obviously had a doctrine whereas Loyalists did not.
>I'd have more respect if you just admitted to bombing people
Republicans do admit that, anon. In fact Republicans have gone on to admit that several particularly bad bombings were retarded, and internal splits (sometimes with violent consequences) happened throughout the Troubles when Republicans did things that were deemed as pointlessly evil. I would say said disagreements were more about optics than any real concern for civilian life, but they happened all the same.

Loyalists were aimlessly killing Catholics. Republicans were trying to bring down Northern Ireland and kill British Security Forces.
>TAIGS TAIGS TAIGS TAIGS
it's a containment board for a reason, anon >>>/pol/

>>18323843
>The UVF burned a Protestant civilian to death while trying to burn down a Catholic owned pub in June 1966
We all make mistakes
>The IRA was not active at the time. The intended target was not associated with the IRA. They then shot 4 random Catholic civilians-again with no paramilitary ties.
Based
>How did that help their cause?
How did killing 2 kids by bombing a high street in warrington help the cause of the IRA?
>Loyalists were aimlessly killing Catholics
Good
>Republicans were trying to bring down Northern Ireland and kill British Security Forces.
Republicans were aimlessly killing protestants.

File: na-fianna-eireann-longford-july-2001_jpg.png (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB PNG

>>18323849
>getting so turned around in edgelord contrarianism that you start agreeing with me about Loyalists lacking a doctrine/serious direction
I accept your concession. See you next thread.

>>18323852
He still can't answer how bombing a random british high street helps free northern ireland. absolutely mind broken and seething.

I wouldn't mind the facetious "it's cool when we do it :^)" attitude that brits have if they also had the wherewithal not to act so serious in the exact same discussion about how "immoral" their enemies are, it's so blindingly stupid

>>18323868
>heh, fuck you catholics, we're going to kill you all!
>killing papists is a good thing, line up and die taigs
>NOOO NO THE HECKIN BRITISH PUBERINOS
every time

>>18323816
>in a conversation about "IRA Men" Hughes would outstrip Sands, as would the likes of Joe McCann.
This is only about who has the most popular appeal in the movement, and the answer is clearly Sands.
>unlike Republican/Nationalist counterparts
Bombing small businesses and killing yourself is not a positive contribution.
>I don't think taking up arms to fight back against people who are killing you is "historic stupidity."
The resurgence of the IRA in 1981 was because of the Hunger Strikes, i.e. people were taking up arms because IRA thugs voluntarily chose to kill themselves, not because their own community was under lethal attack.
That the IRA was in decline before the Hunger Strike shows that all the debacles in the late 60s and early 70s was not at the top of peoples minds anymore so you certainly can't use what happened back then to justify the entire 28-year long terrorist campaign, even when looking at it from the terrorists own perspective
>People get angry if they think the Government-especially a hostile one-is being punitive
The government was not being punitive though, the strikers deaths were entirely of their own making.

File: lesser-seen-angles-of-the-ira-rally-in-andersonstown-1980-v0-8bd0yh13gjyf1_png.png (197 KB)

197 KB PNG

>>18323884
>and the answer is clearly Sands.
He is more popular but not because of his IRA activity, that's what I'm saying. His activity in the IRA is seen as a footnote.

If we're talking about IRA stuff, Sands rarely if ever comes up. Republicanism/Politics, sure. But he is famous as political leader, not an IRA volunteer. For fuck's sake Gerry Kelly the freak that he is would be a bigger name in an IRA top-trumps discussion.
>Bombing small businesses and killing yourself is not a positive contribution.
The Hunger Strikers had all of their demands granted+implemented for Republican prisoners, which was their goal. They also saw their movement get an enormous boost of support. They brought international condemnation to Britain. I don't think being reductive serves anyone.
>The resurgence of the IRA in 1981 was because of the Hunger Strikes
I dunno what point you're getting at here.

I said that the IRA's campaign that began in 1969 is much easier to justify than the one that began in 1919. It didn't start and stop, and the IRA remained active throughout.
>you certainly can't use what happened back then to justify the entire 28-year long terrorist campaign
I'm not. They began their campaign in 1969, a very easy decision to justify. But by 1981 they indeed were not simply fighting because of what happened before, they had openly rejected the legitimacy of any British solution and were fighting for a total British withdrawal from Northern Ireland.

This shift in strategy (away from the hard and fast attacks of the 1970s into the more prolonged attacks on Security Forces from the 80s onwards) was underway years before the Hunger Strike even began. If you want to debate the logic of THAT decision, that's a different matter.
>The government was not being punitive though
This is not a rhetoric that would have been easily believed by those at the time, given how it was handled and commented on by the likes of Thatcher.

>>18323899
>They brought international condemnation to Britain.
Only from leftists who were sympathetic to the IRA to begin with.
>I dunno what point you're getting at here.
The point I quoted, you claimed they took up arms against people who were killing them, but in 1981 this was objectively not the case.
>It didn't start and stop, and the IRA remained active throughout.
But there were low points and high points, as the old incentives to support an armed struggle became less relevant the IRA declined, but then resurged when new incentives came into the fray.
>They began their campaign in 1969, a very easy decision to justify. But by 1981 they indeed were not simply fighting because of what happened before, they had openly rejected the legitimacy of any British solution and were fighting for a total British withdrawal from Northern Ireland.
Total British withdrawal was ALWAYS their goal, but I was not refering to their goals, I was refering to what made people sign up, that muh civil rights and muh bloody sunday are not relevant for the resurgence in IRA support in 1981.
>given how it was handled and commented on by the likes of Thatcher.
Her take has already been posted ITT, "Mr Sands was a convicted criminal. He chose to take his own life. It was a choice that his organisation did not allow to many of its victims."
And she was correct, it was THEIR choice. The government would have gladly fed them if they wanted to eat, don't see how there was anything punitive about it.

File: ab67616d0000b2736987cf4a56b126d512d83319.jpg (101.2 KB)

101.2 KB JPG

>>18322005
>Londonderry

>>18324021
Yes, it's called Londonderry

>>18322583
>rare Thatcher W
Thatcher was a good PM. She took a tough stance of terrorism and got us the Falklands back

>>18322692
>An insane amount of tolerance and generosity is shown by Republicans/Nationalists toward Britain
Yeah a three decades long campaign of terrorism is so "tolerant and generous." Dickhead

>>18323114
>IRA were funded by Mossad
The IRA is pro-palestine lol

File: average polposter.jpg (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB JPG

>>18321801
>briks only

>>18321563
COME IN YOU BLACKS AND TANS

COME FUCK MY ARSEHOLE LIKE A MAN

SHOW MY WIFE YOUR BBC BEFORE YOU RAIL HER

TELL HER HOW MY LITTLE PRICK

COULD NEVER MATCH YOUR BIG BLACK DICK

FROM THE ORANGE FLOWING PLAINS OF TANZANIA

What's the point of your ancestors migrating to a place if you're just going to spend your entire life bitching about the natives, fighting them off, preserving the little piece you have? It's way more comfy to just be a regular Brit not being autistic about stuff like that. They don't even get by properly anyway they just rely on billions in gibs from the English year in year out. Being an ulster-scot is the most retarded, pointless ethnicity on the planet.

>>18323589
>Ireland was an unspoken ‘Axis power’ in the 40s
No it wasn't lol

>>18323868
??? we never do that.
You guys do though so I guess this is just projection.

>>18323880
>heh, fuck you protestants, we're going to kill you all!
>killing planters is a good thing, line up and die huns
>NOOO NOT THE HECKIN CIVILIANERINOS
Every time
>>18324051
What's the point of taigs trying to genocide protestants despite their entire culture coming from protestants?
They can go back to having their shitty haircuts and speaking gaelic and worshipping the stuarts. nobody's stopping them from doing that.
>Being an ulster-scot is the most retarded, pointless ethnicity on the planet.
Yet they contributed far more to irish republicanism than the irish themselves have. funny that

>>18324039
She's responsible for turning the norf into a shithole, that alone should outweigh any positives.

>>18324093
>We contributed to this thing that wouldn't have needed to exist if we didn't impose ourselves and pester you to begin with
Wow...cool uhhh thanks I guess

>>18324082
I was remarking on something someone in this exact thread was doing
Playing blind and mindlessly reversing insults is something else you people do so thanks, both of you, for bringing that up as well, I had forgotten about that one

>>18324047
IRA was literally funded by Gaddafi to destabilize Britain.

>>18324335
I know

>>18324095
The north has always been worse off

>>18324508
It was far from as bad before Thatcher decided to strangle northern industries at the same time as she made massive welfare cuts.

>>18324044
>dickhead
Yeah, they have. Since the Troubles ended, an overwhelming majority of goodwill and outreach across the divide has been Nationalists and Republicans being decent toward Unionists. For fuck's sake, Sinn Féin (literally the political wing of the IRA back in the day) attended British coronations, they attend the annual remembrance service, all sorts.

Unionism can't even stomach bilingual signs in a swimming pool without chimping out. They cannot even admit or acknowledge that there was ever anything wrong with Northern Ireland, they cannot admit or acknowledge that their neighbours ever had legitimate greivances, they just cry and cry and cry about "muh IRA" as their voteshare shrinks and shrinks.

Perhaps if all the big hard Loyalist lads didn't want to have Northern Ireland be smashed to bits by the IRA, they shouldn't have chimped out and attacked the Civil Rights Movement. Republicanism famously struggles when social+economic issues are being answered and solved by the state-it historically only really survives or thrives when the state is perceieved to be failing its people.

>>18324602
How was this bad?

File: 1280px-2022_Northern_Ireland_Election_Map.svg_png(1).png (364.8 KB)

364.8 KB PNG

It is remarkable to me that we have watched the total collapse of political Unionism in the last decade and yet Unionists are still in denial about it.
>Sinn Féin the largest party by a wide margin
>East Belfast now host to its own GAA Club, Irish language schools
>City Centre history tours heavily focus on United Irishmen history, multiple statues throughout the city centre of famous rebels
>Two new statues of rebel Irishwomen (one of whom is literally holding a revolver) on the grounds of Belfast City Hall
>Neverending funding/opportunities for those trying to open up new avenues for distinctively Irish history

The perception of Northern Ireland as some sort of ultra-british enclave is absolutely retarded, most of it simply isn't like that. Keep in mind that picrel is for the NI Local Assembly; the Westminster election layout is even funnier. Sinn Féin were yet again the clear frontrunner, winning 7 seats (27%) with the runner up being the DUP with 5 seats (22.1%).

But since Sinn Féin refuse to take seats in Westminster, Unionism decides to pretend that it's some sort of dominant force despite the fact that all 3 Unionist parties would need to vote together on everything in Westminster to even match Sinn Féin if they were present. Just endless crying about the IRA and Catholics.
>"BLOODY SUNDAY WAS A GOOD THING"
>"FUCK TAIGS"
>"IRA SCUM"
And then they lose another election. Really gets the noggin joggin

>>18325187
NTA but Thatcher are fans are retards on this issue because they think it's
>nooo the heckin workers, they need to work unproductive coal mines forever for big money!!!

When in reality its
>Workers are working, surviving off shitty wages
>"Fuck you guys, you're all out of work now."
>Zero aid to get them into other jobs, zero aid while they look for other jobs, government essentially telling them to fuck off and leave them alone

The lucky ones would see their old factory get bought out by Smiths or some other confectionary company, but most were just told
>hello! this industry that generations of your family have depended upon is gone
>no, we aren't going to give you any help or guidance on what do to
>yes, your rent is still due

I dunno what it is about Britain that causes this bizarre trend of hating your own people.

Didn't happen.

>>18321801
Imagine being forced to choose between these two.

So what I'm getting from this thread is that both sides are completely pozzed and would rather bicker with eachother than do anything about it.

>>18325179
Tldr. Northern Ireland is still British. Seethe, troon

File: ab67616d0000b273f7b4100762764018858da72c.jpg (90.4 KB)

90.4 KB JPG

>>18324033
>it's called Londonderry

>>18325921
It is you retarded taig faggot
Taigs burnt it down and British Ulster scot BVLLS funded by london guilds rebuilt it

File: ab67616d0000b273c187d7d1a56012005d589e5a.jpg (85.5 KB)

85.5 KB JPG

>>18325967
>It is you retarded taig faggot

No wonder that place is such a shithole when all they do is argue about shite like whether it's called Londonderry or Derry and about signposts, flags, marches and bonfires instead of things that actually matter.

File: Viper_the_Rapper's_face.jpg (19.8 KB)

19.8 KB JPG

>>18325992
>Londonderry

>>18325921
Yes it literally is. Cope

File: s-l1200.jpg (187.2 KB)

187.2 KB JPG

>>18327235
>Yes it literally is. Cope

>>18327273
Delusional