|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 7940794)
No kidding. I think they do a good job under the circumstances, I'd just wish any pejorative comments would cease.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Alan2005
(Post 7940812)
I agree - but I don't think you see that many truly pejorative comments; a lot of iaink's seem to be banter done with varying degrees of success. I do know I'd be a lot less tolerant as a mod, but then I'd never do the job for the reasons I gave earlier.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 7940833)
It just was a generalized concern not an indictment of anybody in particular.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Alan2005
(Post 7940858)
Haha - I knew that. This issue seems to have contaminated several threads now - it's like a virus.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
One of my older car forums kept it simple
Don't like the Moderation.................. Move! in fact the more i think about it almost all the forums I've ever been on in the Internet have had that philosophy, one put it neatly... "this ain't a democracy no matter how hard you try to make it one" |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Alan2005
(Post 7940783)
Who'd want the job anyway? No offene to iaink or CO, but it's a suckers job. You don't get paid, you get loads of shit, it takes up time. I fail to see what they get out of it.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 7940787)
The motivation for training the FARC was never really established. It may have simply been a combination of political ideology and personal gain.
There's no evidence that they were members or supporters of the CIRA or RIRA. |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 7940953)
certainly personal gain, though it may be the case that a concrete reason was never established in court, the men involved certainly were known republican terrorists and had links to the Real IRA. Continuity IRA are another ball park altogether, these were the old time republican hardliners who genuinely thought they may still succeed in their struggle for a united Ireland. Real IRA were/are simply the criminal element who have seen their power dissipate with the advent of PSNI and lack of wider support.
The provos were considered a criminal terrorist organization for 30 years, now look where they are now. History is replete with these turn arounds, usually depending on who wins. |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 7940988)
I never seen any link between these men and the RIRA, the PIRA yes. Designating criminality can a be tricky business when it comes to political conflict. War without 'crime' is impossible.
The provos were considered a criminal terrorist organization for 30 years, now look where they are now. History is replete with these turn arounds, usually depending on who wins. With regard to criminality, yes, but i would say war crimes would be particular to ethnic cleansing, rape, assault, thefts and plundering during the actual war or after the battle, if you see my point. The groups in Ireland on both sides were actively engaged in prostitution, drug dealing, bank robberies to name a few in order to fund raise. The other side being just career criminals who operated under the banner of these orginisations for protection then paid up for this. Sorry if this reads like a lecture, but i believe there is a real difference between PIRA its splinters and other groups across the world. I think they will be forever unique in their operation, the length of time they did it for, funding and the atrocities they committed in a leading NATO, UN, G8 etc country. |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 7941010)
Perhaps not, but the link is there, PIRA had dissolved by this point.
With regard to criminality, yes, but i would say war crimes would be particular to ethnic cleansing, rape, assault, thefts and plundering during the actual war or after the battle, if you see my point. The groups in Ireland on both sides were actively engaged in prostitution, drug dealing, bank robberies to name a few in order to fund raise. The other side being just career criminals who operated under the banner of these orginisations for protection then paid up for this. Sorry if this reads like a lecture, but i believe there is a real difference between PIRA its splinters and other groups across the world. I think they will be forever unique in their operation, the length of time they did it for, funding and the atrocities they committed in a leading NATO, UN, G8 etc country. I spent a lot of my graduate work working on the history of Irish British relations, with particular focus from the 1920s to the GFA. My biggest problem was to remain as objective as I could but I've always struggled to not take sides. That said, other perspectives and experiences are always welcome. |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 7941010)
Perhaps not, but the link is there, PIRA had dissolved by this point.
With regard to criminality, yes, but i would say war crimes would be particular to ethnic cleansing, rape, assault, thefts and plundering during the actual war or after the battle, if you see my point. The groups in Ireland on both sides were actively engaged in prostitution, drug dealing, bank robberies to name a few in order to fund raise. The other side being just career criminals who operated under the banner of these orginisations for protection then paid up for this. Sorry if this reads like a lecture, but i believe there is a real difference between PIRA its splinters and other groups across the world. I think they will be forever unique in their operation, the length of time they did it for, funding and the atrocities they committed in a leading NATO, UN, G8 etc country. |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Novocastrian
(Post 7941072)
Where do you stand on the Mafia?
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by Oink
(Post 7941055)
I don't mind discussion at all as long it doesn't evolve into argumentum ad hominem. I agree with lots of your points it just small forum like this can gloss over the complexities of such a long political conflict. Nearly all such conflicts will have splinter groups whose vision/ideology is considered purer.
I spent a lot of my graduate work working on the history of Irish British relations, with particular focus from the 1920s to the GFA. My biggest problem was to remain as objective as I could but I've always struggled to not take sides. That said, other perspectives and experiences are always welcome. With regard to your work i think that is very interesting and you will have more knowledge than me, on that point where do you stand on Michael Collins, folk hero? rebel? terrorist? martyr? |
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 7941083)
well i would say they are purely a criminal organisation, not terrorist linked, or are they? not heard it before to be honest if they are.
|
Re: Which is more 'newsworthy'?
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 7941093)
oh absolutely, you could go on forever i agree.
With regard to your work i think that is very interesting and you will have more knowledge than me, on that point where do you stand on Michael Collins, folk hero? rebel? terrorist? martyr? |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 10:13 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.