Donate SIGN UP

The IRA

Avatar Image
Grunty | 16:37 Thu 28th Jul 2005 | News
10 Answers
So the IRA are going to be good boys and girls now.  It would be nice to believe that members won't just join the Provisional IRA or the Real IRA etc., and what might happen when the army and the security infastructure have been scaled down?  Adams and McGuinness are reported to have resigned from an organisation that they have never been in, so how much can we believe?  How much significance should we attach to the fact that the government now has other uses for the security services? 
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 10 of 10rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Grunty. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The problem with any organisation that recruits fundamentally violent people as members is what happens to them when the powers-that-be decide that they no longer feel their means are justified. Messrs Adams and McGuiness obviously possess the intelligence and vision to move onwards and upwards, but for the average IRA foot soldier, for whom 'the Cause' has provided a 'family' and a belief system, channelling all that violence and hatred elsewhere will prove mor difficult. They are the 'weapons' that really need to be 'de-commissioned' - but to what?
Good points Andy. I think the problem is that it really hasn't been all that political for some time. Essentially the IRA and the loyalist groups for that matter have been nothing more than the NI version of organised crime. I think Adams and McGuiness are bright enough to know that and they know where thier bread's butterred. I can't see the NI rackets ending they will just have less of a banner to hide behind.
Does this change in policy from terrorism to run of the mill criminality have anything to do with the government sanctioned death of a suspected terrorist?
Doubt it kempie. After all 3 IRA members were shot dead in a very deliberate manner by the SAS in 1988 in Gibralta and we had a fair number of attacks after that including the Stock Exchange and the Baltic Exchange
The difference being that this publicly stated 'shoot to kill' policy is operating on mainland Britain.

The IRA is the Provisional IRA (PIRA).

I think the main reason for a change in tactics is because of the negative publicity terrorism faces in this modern world.  Remember that American's in north east America happily donated money to the IRA 'freedom fighters', well, until they realised what terrorism is all about (9/11).

All military establishments still continue to use a security alert status based on terrorism.  It's very rarely ever at the bottom alert, even through the IRA ceasefire.

I have no faith whatsoever in this as a major step forward.
It'd have been as accurately reported as "yet another" ceasefire.
Brilliantly put andy in the first reply here, it's the individuals that are the problem, not the weapons.

And where was McGuinness when they chose to release the story. As loosehead said they know where their bread is buttered, and where is this cause they are meant to be fighting for.

The leftover 'organised crime' element should not be underestimated. They part-control a pan-european empire worth BILLIONS of pounds, involving money-laundering, counterfeiting, smuggling and drug dealing. Terrorism was bad enough, but in terms of numbers of deaths, the toll will remain high unless this problem is sorted. The IRA and others had to fund themselves over decades, and became  very adept at illegal money creation.

They won't all suddenly pack this in to open chip shops in Belfast.

And the Yorkshire Ripper has promised not to kill anyone ever again, so now can he be invited to power sharing?

1 to 10 of 10rss feed

Do you know the answer?

The IRA

Answer Question >>