User Comments

1. 

   9/18/08

   poisonapplesauce

   I don't see anything wrong with her comments. They are being blown out of proportion.

   [reply]
   1. 

      9/18/08

      aningeniousname

      Would you feel the same if some Hollywood airhead said the same thing about joining Al quada?
   2. 

      9/18/08

      poisonapplesauce

      You just love to try to piss people off. Two totally different things, if Al Quada was a country specific group, who was angry at their country, and all other means of communication and efforts to change the country have failed so they resorted to violence then you would have a legit argument.
   3. 

      9/18/08

      aningeniousname

      It's not a different thing at all. They are both terrorist organisations but the IRA has a far bigger victim count than Al quada. The only difference is the IRA didn't attack New york, that was were they raised money to bomb British streets.
   4. 

      9/18/08

      MadameX

      Of course there's no justification for targeting civilians the way the IRA has,but to say that the "only difference" is geography is just silly, since it overlooks the fact that the IRA arose in response to occupation and control by a foreign government.
   5. 

      9/18/08

      aningeniousname

      Northern Ireland is British, has been for over 300 years and the majority of its population want to remain British. But I am not going to argue the rights and wrongs of that whole situation. I was merely making the point that Poisonapplesauces comments were insensitive and crass to people who have lost people in the Irish conflict as they would be to Americans who had lost people on 911.
   6. 

      9/18/08

      poisonapplesauce

      @ aningeniousname- maybe instead of targeting people you should ask for clarification. MadameX was correct in the last part of her statement as to why the IRA was formed, and based on the time that the movie in question was set for that is the IRA she (McGowen) was speaking of. She merely stated that she empathized with people who wanted to ensure better rights of their citizens, the way it was spun was contrary to her initial meaning. It was spun, and apparenty the way you are also taking it is "Hell yeah the IRA's cool". That is not what she meant. I don't see how empathy is equal to condoning.
   7. 

      9/18/08

      aningeniousname

      "You just love to try to piss people off."
      "maybe instead of targeting people you should ask for clarification."
      
      Maybe you should not be so paranoid. I wasn't trying to piss you off or target you. I was merely making a point.
2. 

   9/18/08

   lastingchange

   Al Qaeda also arose in response to occupation and control by a foreign government (Soviet occupation of Afghanistan). It's also well documented that Al Qaeda was provided with arms, finance and support by the CIA, via the Pakistani ISI agency.
   
   Anyway - terrorism is terrorism. I might be unusual in that I know a family who lost a son to an IRA bomb, and also a family who lost relatives in 9/11 - their hurt & grief is their same regardless of the similarities or dissimilarities between the two terrorist organisations.
   
   Thanks,
   
   Adrian

   [reply]
   1. 

      9/18/08

      MadameX

      Do you think that hurt and grief differs from that experienced by the Iraqi civilian families who have lost children to American forces?
3. 

   9/18/08

   lastingchange

   Is that rhetorical question? Can I ask, what is the motivation behind the question?

   [reply]
   1. 

      9/18/08

      MadameX

      No, it wasn't. It was a serious one. Your comment seemed to draw a parallel between the IRA and Al Qaeda that is based in the results--innocent people die and their families suffer. Clearly, that's a negative result, but it's one that many people seem to consider acceptable in other contexts (both Iraq and Afghanistan, just recently). Perhaps you're not one of those people and believe that attacking civilians is unacceptable under any circumstances. But it is difficult to reconcile the idea that the IRA is "just like Al Qaeda" because they kill innocent civilians while claiming the moral high ground for our own military, which does the same.
      
      The motivation for the question was mixed. Partly to point out what I said above. Partly to try to understand if/why you were differentiating the killing of civilians by non-governmental groups from that which occurs officially.
4. 

   9/18/08

   lastingchange

   Thanks for the clarification - it is appreciated:
   
   - I agree that drew a parallel between Al Qaeda and the IRA based on the suffering they caused. I don't see that as being controversial.
   
   - I also drew a parallel, in response to your original point, that both organisations came into being in response to occupation and control from a foreign power (something your first post overlooked).
   
   - At no point did I refer to (directly or indirectly) how I feel about the wars in Iraq / Afghanistan (and certainly I claimed no moral high ground for anybody's military, nor made differentiations re: the killing of civilians).
   
   (As it stands, I believe the war in Iraq was launched under completely false pretenses and the suffering, the destruction & loss there in the name of oil/war-profiteering/smacking down a treacherous former ally/etc renders the ruling class morally bankrupt. In Afghanistan there was at least a demonstrable link between the country & Al Qaeda (unlike in Iraq), but my own view is that Al Qaeda is a problem created by the West (literally) and then harnessed by the West in later years to erode personal liberties in the name of a bogus "War On Terror").
   
   MadameX - you seem humanist in your thinking and I suspect we have similar views in many ways. So, to answer your question then: no, I think it's the same hurt & grief the world-over and it's a tragedy beyond words.
   
   Thanks,
   
   Adrian

   [reply]