Can you elaborate? Seems like you disagree with this guy’s statement that a nation’s population cannot be generalized by the actions of terrorists from said nation.
The IRA were terrorists who killed their own people. They literally killed other Irish people, including other IRA sects. Look up the IRA leaders; a lot of them died in IRA-ordered bombings or assassinations. There was no unified IRA.
That’s why the president of Ireland is denouncing them. That’s what the article is about. The British being bad doesn’t mean the IRA was good. They can both be bad and there are more than two parties in every situation.
Sorry, irony didn’t translate well there. It was supposed to be a parody of the binary mindset “I don’t wanna think about nuance and individual differences, just enemies and allies”.
Also, forgive my cynicism, but I’m not confident that every middle school teaches that level of critical thinking. I’m not actually sure we even touched on that in high school. I’m from Germany, but my school was rather centrist with respect to the Overton Window at the time. Much of history was painted rather black and white and avoided complicated details about morality.
There was a civil war and divisions of the structure, but there was a structure and overall goal. I wouldn’t say leaders like that because they may have led a branch and of course it being a paramilitary force they did not have HR nor qualms about taking lives so there was violent disagreements.
They most certainly were bad, but Ireland would not be what it is today without the IRA. ThebTaoiseach is not the president.
Can you elaborate? Seems like you disagree with this guy’s statement that a nation’s population cannot be generalized by the actions of terrorists from said nation.
And your mistake is in calling the IRA terrorists. I think you mean the English were terrorizing the Irish people.
The IRA were terrorists who killed their own people. They literally killed other Irish people, including other IRA sects. Look up the IRA leaders; a lot of them died in IRA-ordered bombings or assassinations. There was no unified IRA.
That’s why the president of Ireland is denouncing them. That’s what the article is about. The British being bad doesn’t mean the IRA was good. They can both be bad and there are more than two parties in every situation.
All that nuance is making my head hurt. Can’t I just say “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”? It sounds so much simpler and snappier.
They can both be your enemy, friend.
Didn’t you go to middle school?
Sorry, irony didn’t translate well there. It was supposed to be a parody of the binary mindset “I don’t wanna think about nuance and individual differences, just enemies and allies”.
Also, forgive my cynicism, but I’m not confident that every middle school teaches that level of critical thinking. I’m not actually sure we even touched on that in high school. I’m from Germany, but my school was rather centrist with respect to the Overton Window at the time. Much of history was painted rather black and white and avoided complicated details about morality.
I’m 99% sure that the user above you is being sarcastic.
There was a civil war and divisions of the structure, but there was a structure and overall goal. I wouldn’t say leaders like that because they may have led a branch and of course it being a paramilitary force they did not have HR nor qualms about taking lives so there was violent disagreements.
They most certainly were bad, but Ireland would not be what it is today without the IRA. ThebTaoiseach is not the president.