It wasn't intended to be that way, maybe i worded it incorrectly or maybe you miss read it. My point was that there has been events, during which some police have died, because of the uniform, it wasn't directed solely at your dads friend...We could go round in circles here. Why am i even trying to explain this? You know police got killed because of just this reason, a uniform. It seems we have turned full circle...
Beel you say? Hmm, I think I smell the rank odour of hypocrisy here dumbass, you wrote the template on "Beel" when I happened to post something you took offence to. What me to post it again and let everyone see what "Real Beel" reads like? ****ing child.
You want to play a game. please log in to view this image It's called how many threads can Dev bore to a close
Yep, very good Medro, Nev started calling me boring about 3 years ago, then every other deranged ****wit on the Hun board picked up the baton and started using the same tired ****e as if it was somehow comedic gold. Baldy, Beeling, Druggie. Heard them all a million times and they are no truer now than they were then, so you crack on venting the same ****e, it's all you have
My point regarding Gibraltar was that it was a stupid thing to do.Republican attacks grew exponentially in the wake. Thatcher effectively signed the death warrants of hundreds on either side when she ordered executions rather than arrests.The British knew all along that there wasn't a military solution but just did what they wanted anyway.
If you send the SAS on a mission then there is no need to issue orders to shoot on sight. It's implied in their remit.
Screw it, as I said before if you make the free choice to join a military organisation then you accept that you might be killed by another army. Given that if the IRA wanted to fight a war they had to go guerilla because of the size of their foe, in the British Army, they can not complain if the British Army went Guerilla back on them. We can of course point out the hypocrisy of the likes of the British government claiming the moral high ground while using similar tactics itself (as well as collusion), but in the end it was fair game to fight fire with fire. My biggest moral qualms are when either side deliberately killed Civilians, whether it be the likes of the IRA at Greysteele, or the British Army on Bloody Sunday. The IRA have been rightly vilified for some of the acts carried out in their name, and it is right that we vilify the elements of the British security forces who colluded in murder of civilians too.
We are not far apart in our opinions Mick. In my experience we believed in fighting fire with fire but we always felt like we were fighting with one hand tied behind our backs because of the rules of engagement (The Yellow Card). Whilst I agree that on many occasions innocent people were killed by the Security Forces I always think we should acknowledge that plenty of people were arrested and taken alive too. As i've always said, if there was a shoot to kill policy in place (even with a nod and a wink) then no one told me or my mates.
Yes. I take the point all the same. A point which I would guess the IRA accepted too because Kingsmill wasn't an IRA operation. I know how that reads, so I'll clarify that by saying I know the evidence suggests IRA weaponry and volunteers were responsible. But the fact that it was carried out under the name of South Armagh Republican Action Force tells a story that the IRA kinda knew it didn't really fit with their MO.
