|
|
|
|
|
by mhoad
1429 days ago
|
|
I suspect it was the partisan and kind of BS nature of the claim. The IRA weren’t blowing up school buses full of children or libraries. They even had a very clear policy of trying to minimise civilian casualties in a way that loyalist groups absolutely did not, in fact they made a point to intentionally target civilians repeatedly. So to make the claim that the OP did like it was some black and white scenario where violence against civilians was only going in one direction is objectively wrong. Nobody is upset with the claim that the IRA were a terrorist group. They were. They did a lot of bad shit, including killing civilians but that was never any kind of policy and it never made sense for their objectives. It was correctly considered to be “bad for the cause” to piss off the support network that enabled them to operate at all. Agreed with about about thank fuck for the peace process though. |
|
I'm sorry I screwed up, it was a polytechnic I was thinking of rather than a library: http://bufvc.ac.uk/tvandradio/lbc/index.php/segment/00168003...
I'm also unsure how they were minimizing civilian casualties when the blew up multiple pubs and apartment stores in the UK.
That said I'll cop to being unreasonable and biased in my first comment, I did disregard the violence committed by the RUC. I was reflexively responding to what came across as a minimization of the IRA and ended up doing what I was accusing the person I was replying to of doing.
I'll update the original comment if HN still allows it.