Talk:Provisional IRA South Armagh Brigade
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.) |
||
|
Article Grading: WikiProject Northern Ireland tasks:
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Irish Republicanism WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.) |
||
| High | This article is on a subject of high-importance for Irish Republicanism-related articles. | ||
|
Article Grading: WikiProject Irish Republicanism tasks:
|
|||
[edit] British withdrawal from South Armagh
I was about to revert the changes made by Weggie on October 25, but I think that the supposed blatant PoV he claims is something to be discussed here.
There are some questions to be made about:
- Was the full demilitarization of South Armagh a major Republican objective or not?
- Was the IRA brigade there effectively wiped out or defeated in any way by the British Army?
- Was the control of roads achieved by the British security forces at any time of the conflict in S.A.? (They were forced to resupply their bases by helicopter).
- How can anybody consider "successful" an army retreating from a conflict zone, with an unbeaten enemy still lurking there?
Thanks.
-
- The British Army remained unbeaten as well - the peace process alone led to the withdraw (not complete as yet) as the troops are not needed. The army didn't retreat, it was withdrwan after the politics of murder were abandoned by the republican mvt in favour of negociation. The watch tower policy was highly successful as was the helicopter resupplies in keeping a solid military presence in a republican heartland - which is another POV as yours is a POV.Weggie 18:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
First of all, You didn't answer any of the questions, especially that related to the Republican political goal of removing the military presence from S.A.. If just the first question has an affirmative response (by You or by other readers), then the brief line I wrote should stand in the article.
In the other hand, yup, the British were unbeaten as well, but they are the third (if not the second) best army in the world (the Republicans were just a well organized guerrilla or terrorist group, not the Wehrmacht), and they outnumbered the IRA by far. As You say, the British also have helicopters and electronic surveillance; the IRA didn't, and still it was undefeated. The UK forces wanted and could have the IRA eliminated, both politically and military, but they failed; the Republicans realized that they couldn't do the same to the British long time before. Well, I concede that all this is just a point of view.
I guess you can think the East German Army and the Soviets were also undefeated when the Berlin wall fell, as part of another peace process; yes, that could be an interesting PoV too. Yet, the desire of freedom of the German people was accomplished anyway. Best regards.
-
-
- It's also worth pointing out that there are no 'winners' in Northern Ireland only the grieving relatives. The reason that the British Army didn't wipe out the S.Armagh 'ra was public policy - Slab Murphy head of the IRA lived next door to the British Army for years in their watchtower and the local members of the IRA were named under parliamentary privilige. This was a counter-insurgency/policing mission to back up the RUC/PSNI not a mission to 'wipe out' anyone.Weggie 09:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
Well, the first question remained unanswered, so In my opinion the line I've introduced sometime ago should be restored in the article, unless somebody could get out claiming that the Republicans and their supporters welcomed the presence of UK troops in the region. I am not posting something like "The IRA forced the British Army out", or "The Republican pressure expelled the British security presence", what would be obviously PoV, I just wanted to reflect the fact that, as a result of the GFA, Republicans achieved a major political objective by obtaining the so called "normalization" in South Armagh.
About the other issues, Ok, may be the BA soldiers were there not to wipe out anyone, but the SAS still gunned down almost all the members of East Tyrone'ra Brigade and the Gibraltar three. Also a good number of civilians or unarmed Republican sympathizers fell to Royal Army bullets since Bloody Sunday up to the cease-fires. It's obvious they failed to do the same in S.A., but certainly the cause was not self-restraint. DagosNavy 16:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- The demilitarisation of South Armagh was the aim of both the UK Govt. and the provos. The British Army was sent to support the RUC/PSNI - the reason they are leaving is the improved security situation brought on by the GFA. I should point out that the PSNI will still have an active presence in South Armagh, so the British state will still be represented in many of the bases that the British Army was stationed. Don't forget that the army shared the RUC/PSNI bases (the BA was in support of the police). The SAS arrested far more people that they killed, an example in South Armagh is the Caraher sniper squad. Your comment about self-restraint is POV, the facts do not support your assessment, the British Army showed massive restraint in South Armagh under the circumstances - nearly all the provos were known to intelligence, British state policy dictated that this was a policing operation where normal legal rules applied. The provos were treated as common criminals not an army to be wiiped out, that's why so many of them ended up in prison and not 6ft under Weggie 17:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Ok, Weggie. Finally, you have answered the key question: "The demilitarisation of South Armagh was the aim of both the UK Govt. and the provos", so you have conceded that my statement must be included in the text. I insist, no matter the cause, no matter if it was also the goal of any other group or State, normalization in S.A. was a Republican objective, so I feel free to restore the line to the article. The PSNI doesn’t count as a military force, so its presence doesn’t change the validity of my statement.
Certainly, the other issues are PoV and a matter of discussion. The PSNI (unlike the now defunct RUC) is an entirely civilian new force, open to both communities and also open to a genuine cross-border cooperation. Even members of the Irish Garda can fill its ranks. Its aim is just normal policing for the community, without the strong militarized profile and the political bias that characterized the RUC. The PSNI doesn’t display the “Royal” title anymore, so the nationalist and republicans view of them will be that of a local force rather than a “brit” one. They will be accountable to the local residents trough the monitoring of the political parties, they will not use Army helicopters or watchtowers to control the life of the people in the border. The life will be as normal as in any place of Western Europe. In the other hand, the real criminals (Murphy and his fellows, if you want), will be just criminals, they will now be unable to hide themselves under the cover of a dubious "patriotism". They will cannot claim anymore the status of militants; they will be prosecuted as the mobsters they are. The fact that the Caraher sniper team was handed over to the RUC and not executed in sight by the SAS was a political gesture, since by 1997 there was a great expectation for another PIRA cease-fire and the effect of another Loughgall would have been potentially disastrous to the Peace Process. The IRA army council was also showing some restraint in NI, waiting for the outcome of the May UK elections to enter the proposed multi-party talks. Had the capture of Caraher and his men took place (for example) in 1992, there is not doubt the sniper squad members would have died. Remember that the Royal Marines shoot dead Caraher’ brother in 1990 just for breaching a checkpoint or something lenient than that, I believe. I would call this trigger-happy, not restraint. Wether they killed or arrested PIRA members in S.A., they never were able to neutralize the Brigade's activities. DagosNavy
-
-
- The SA provos achieved nothing - the GFA started the process of demilitarization as per the Patton recommendations after the security situation improved to which is why the material was removed. No GFA, no troop withdrawls from South Armagh 19:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Weggie 19:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-
Ok, take it easy. I will include the statement with the clarification that the strategic goal yourself have already admitted was the aim of the provos and others, was the result of the GFA provisions and in exchange of the PIRA decommissioning, avoiding any reference to words like achievement or retreat. I repeat, I never intended to post nothing more than the fact that the normalisation was a political objective of the Sinn Fein/IRA, since this is an article about the Republican main force in S.A., not about the GFA or about the British Army in NI. I think this modification cannot be seen as PoV in any way. DagosNavy
