• Lommy241@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      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.

      • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        7 months ago

        And your mistake is in calling the IRA terrorists. I think you mean the English were terrorizing the Irish people.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          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.

          • Squizzy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            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.