If They Want It Then They Can Have It.

Ramontxo

Donor
I am a (Catholic) Basque Nationalist since always. I have had quite a few discussions with my friends regarding Ulster right to decide it's own future according to what the majority of its population wants even if that was rather unusual in my own social environment. That said the Ulster establishment and their treatment of the Catholic community were their own worst enemy. The situation up to the Troubles was one of legal discrimination electoral laws rigged against them and of course the RUC which rather than protect their Catholic neighbors were rather actively helping the extremist loyalist against them.
Sorry if this derail this thread.
 

nezza

Andrew Marr 2007

"The introduction of the peacekeeping troops and the reaction of the loyalists has gone down in history as one of the most hateful times in our history. UU took a leaf out of the Nazi playbook when it came to what effectively became the occupation of Ulster. Anyone who wasn't regarded as "loyal" to the twisted, evil interpretation of alliegence to Ulster and the Crown was a target.

It must be noted here that many did not adhere to this nightmarish policy. Many ordinary protestants risked their lives to help both what was left of the shattered Catholic minority left in the province as well as the peacekeepers. Their bravery has I feel been overlooked shamefully....
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Gladsome said:
That seems a safe choice of nations, being both British allies whilst simultaneously uninvolved, relatively speaking, in the ethnic and religious divide.
Click to expand...
Think so?

Kenyans? 1 in 4 Kenyans are Roman Catholic. Then there is the whole African thing.

Danes would be more acceptable, the Church of Denmark is on the Lutheran branch of Christianity., although I doubt any group that prevents Paisley & Company from a full out pogrom against Catholics is going to be acceptable.

Question is what are the ROE for the troops

Wolf of Badenoch said:
View attachment 484075
Click to expand...
Ah, the UVF.

Making the IRA seem reasonable by comparison since 1966
 
Last edited:

nezza

Rules of Engagement follow the standard UN principles:
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/principles-of-peacekeeping

In this case the UK and ROI have asked the UN to intervene. The mandate is to prevent any further turmoil. In real terms this means:

1. Stop any attempts by the loyalists to turn the province into effectively an rogue state
2. Ensure the catholics to return home
3. Create conditions to allow political control by the UK to be restored
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
nezza said:
Rules of Engagement follow the standard UN principles:
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/principles-of-peacekeeping

In this case the UK and ROI have asked the UN to intervene. The mandate is to prevent any further turmoil. In real terms this means:

1. Stop any attempts by the loyalists to turn the province into effectively an rogue state
2. Ensure the catholics to return home
3. Create conditions to allow political control by the UK to be restored
Click to expand...
So classic Blue Berets. Symbolic but toothless. The murder of Hakija Turajlic' in a Blue Beret APC, Somilia, Rwanda, Srebrenica, etc. pretty much say it all. The concept of "robust peacekeeping didn't exist.

Ya', this is going to be fun.
 
Don Quijote

Don Quijote

Banned
CalBear said:
Think so?

Kenyans? 1 in 4 Kenyans are Roman Catholic. Then there is the whole African thing.

Danes would be more acceptable, the Church of Denmark is on the Lutheran branch of Christianity., although I doubt any group that prevents Paisley & Company from a full out pogrom against Catholics is going to be acceptable.

Question is what are the ROE for the troops
Click to expand...
This is completely misunderstanding what Loyalists have as their priorities. They probably have next to no interest in the peacekeepers' religion, because they aren't going to become permanent residents and increase the Catholic population. Aside from the casual racism that was more prevalent in the 70s, their ethnicity is also irrelevant to the issue. What is the problem, is the effective surrender by Britain's own forces to the IRA, in favour of letting the UN handle the situation. Not unreasonably, it's seen as a betrayal by Wilson's government.

Now make no mistake, the hardline Loyalists who opposed the reform attempts by the likes of Terence O'Neill were perfectly happy to fix the system in order to keep Catholic Nationalists well away from political power. It didn't bother them that Catholics had worse prospects in education and employment. But the "Loyalists as Nazis" thing is stretching credibility rather too far. Opposition to Sunningdale was based on wanting to keep the status quo of the 1920s-60s, not to start massacring Catholics left, right and centre.


Ah, the UVF.

Making the IRA seem reasonable by comparison since 1966
Click to expand...
Well not really. Opposite sides of the political fence, but equally capable of pointless atrocities. Unless the IRA's greater death toll somehow makes them more reasonable.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Don Quijote said:
This is completely misunderstanding what Loyalists have as their priorities. They probably have next to no interest in the peacekeepers' religion, because they aren't going to become permanent residents and increase the Catholic population. Aside from the casual racism that was more prevalent in the 70s, their ethnicity is also irrelevant to the issue. What is the problem, is the effective surrender by Britain's own forces to the IRA, in favour of letting the UN handle the situation. Not unreasonably, it's seen as a betrayal by Wilson's government.

Now make no mistake, the hardline Loyalists who opposed the reform attempts by the likes of Terence O'Neill were perfectly happy to fix the system in order to keep Catholic Nationalists well away from political power. It didn't bother them that Catholics had worse prospects in education and employment. But the "Loyalists as Nazis" thing is stretching credibility rather too far. Opposition to Sunningdale was based on wanting to keep the status quo of the 1920s-60s, not to start massacring Catholics left, right and centre.



Well not really. Opposite sides of the political fence, but equally capable of pointless atrocities. Unless the IRA's greater death toll somehow makes them more reasonable.
Click to expand...
While I'm not about to defend a terror group like the Provos, it is interesting to compare/contrast the targeting of the PIRA and the UVF.

Personally I sort of see things as "a Pox on both their houses".
 

sonofpegasus

A thug with a gun is just a thug with a gun whatever their 'cause' might be. The last thing these guys usually want is a peaceful solution, as that renders then irrelevant and reduces them to their true status of murdering criminality. One sides patriot is the other sides terrorist and there are no winners. The best case scenario in NI could be considered if the Various extreme factions target each other with the least collateral deaths to the general population. It is worth remembering that there were political factions in the UK in the 1970's who seriously suggested a withdrawal of the British troops and giving the Problem to Dublin, a strategy known at the time "as putting the boot on the other foot". IIRC there were suggestions that Dublin's fear of such an event was one reason why they started some cross border cooperation, though of course it could just be a myth.
 

Wolf of Badenoch

Donor
nezza said:
Rules of Engagement follow the standard UN principles:
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/principles-of-peacekeeping

In this case the UK and ROI have asked the UN to intervene. The mandate is to prevent any further turmoil. In real terms this means:

1. Stop any attempts by the loyalists to turn the province into effectively an rogue state
2. Ensure the catholics to return home
3. Create conditions to allow political control by the UK to be restored
Click to expand...

4. Allow the Labour Party to ring its hands in anguish and watch the horror unfold.
 

Wolf of Badenoch

Donor
[QUOTE="CalBear, post: 19402386, member: 1243" Personally I sort of see things as "a Pox on both their houses".[/QUOTE]

A phrase heard often in certain circles in the Province in the 1970's
 

Wolf of Badenoch

Donor
sonofpegasus said:
A thug with a gun is just a thug with a gun whatever their 'cause' might be. The last thing these guys usually want is a peaceful solution, as that renders then irrelevant and reduces them to their true status of murdering criminality. One sides patriot is the other sides terrorist and there are no winners. The best case scenario in NI could be considered if the Various extreme factions target each other with the least collateral deaths to the general population. It is worth remembering that there were political factions in the UK in the 1970's who seriously suggested a withdrawal of the British troops and giving the Problem to Dublin, a strategy known at the time "as putting the boot on the other foot". IIRC there were suggestions that Dublin's fear of such an event was one reason why they started some cross border cooperation, though of course it could just be a myth.
Click to expand...

Hmm, not sure that Dublin's fear was solely motivated by having Ulster dumped in its lap. More to do with the Marxist underpinnings of much the PIRA.
 

nezza

Tony Benn's Diary 3rd August 1974

"Watched Wilson and Cosgrove at the UN today. Cosgrove struck me as calm, authoritative and mature. Harold wittered on about how ordering the pullout was 'heartrending" which I thought was hypocritical.

Spoke to Gerry Fitt today. He spoke about the influx from the North and how the Republic are coping magnificently

I have to say that the Kenyan and Danish troops are proving to be most efficient but I know that the loyalists will soon find a way to stifle them"
 

Titanicus

CalBear said:
So classic Blue Berets. Symbolic but toothless. The murder of Hakija Turajlic' in a Blue Beret APC, Somilia, Rwanda, Srebrenica, etc. pretty much say it all. The concept of "robust peacekeeping didn't exist.

Ya', this is going to be fun.
Click to expand...

UN peacekeeping missions have had both successes and failures. They failed in Rwanda and Bosnia, Somalia, albeit they have succeeded in Burundi and Sierra Leone, and other nations. It depends on how much resources do the UN peacekeepers have and if they're not afraid to start shooting if need. Although considering the period this happens in, UN peacekeeping missions aren't very well developed and haven't learnt from their mistakes in Bosnia and Rwanda among other missions, so it could go down in flames any way.
 

nezza

5th August 1974, Downing Street

Wilson: "Mr Cosgrove and myself have had a vey constructive conversation regarding the situation in Northern Ireland. We are highly concerned about what is happening and seek to bring an end to the turmoil.

The British government is determined to ensure that there will be no constitutional change to the status of Northern Ireland unless or until the people of Northern Ireland wish it However our aim is peace.

We have therefore decided to embark on a series of meetings to first end the strife and then to look at the future of the island of Ireland. I call upon all those who feel they have part to play in the country's future, be they loyalist, unionist, republican or nationalist to put down their weapons and embark on dialogue"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top