Comments on: Terrorism in Northern Ireland and Israel http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/terrorism-in-northern-ireland-and-israel/ Commentary about Zionism, anti-Zionism, antisemitism and the conflict in the Middle East Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:20:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5-RC1.1 By: Mark D http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/terrorism-in-northern-ireland-and-israel/#comment-4064 Mark D Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:59:07 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=1139#comment-4064 I think you've framed this perfectly. Excellent post. I think you’ve framed this perfectly. Excellent post.

]]> By: Lynne T http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/terrorism-in-northern-ireland-and-israel/#comment-4046 Lynne T Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:39:38 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=1139#comment-4046 Eammon and Terry: Some time ago, I recall either reading or hearing a radio report on how peace in Northern Ireland had left a lot of "militants" without employment, so they were turning to organized crime. Their targets, however, were not uniformed members of the British Army or the local police, but average citizens. Are we really looking at the Irish equivalent of jihaddis here, or an effort to divert attention and policing resources from extortion rings, illegal drug trade or whatever? Eammon and Terry:

Some time ago, I recall either reading or hearing a radio report on how peace in Northern Ireland had left a lot of “militants” without employment, so they were turning to organized crime.

Their targets, however, were not uniformed members of the British Army or the local police, but average citizens. Are we really looking at the Irish equivalent of jihaddis here, or an effort to divert attention and policing resources from extortion rings, illegal drug trade or whatever?

]]> By: Terry Glavin http://blog.z-word.com/2009/03/terrorism-in-northern-ireland-and-israel/#comment-4025 Terry Glavin Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:50:47 +0000 http://blog.z-word.com/?p=1139#comment-4025 I think it may be that we're both being a bit glib here, Eamonn. You're quite right to point out that the IRA's "armed campaign" was never supported by anything but a minority of Irish nationalists, but I certainly didn't suggest, or mean to suggest, that the Provisional IRA's violence was merely an extension of the civil rights campaign. That would have been a distortion of history indeed. While I agree with O'Neill that it's important to distinguish between the "pointless terrorism" of the recent murders and the IRA violence of the past, you're quite right to point out that it didn't just come from nowhere, and should be situated within pathological currents that have long existed within Irish nationalism. But it is a bit glib to suggest that the central Irish republican purpose of a united, 32-county republic is "not a political objective." The main currents of republicanism have always articulated political objectives, and have situated the struggle for unification as a necessary condition for their achievement. It's necessary to recognize this, if only because it exposes most clearly how the "physical force" Irish republicans got it wrong. At any rate, the point was that you can't negotiate with a pathology, there's nothing to discuss, and just as it is important to distinguish between savagery for its own sake and eruptions of violent Irish nationalism, it's important to notice that Talibanism is not a national liberation movement, and Hamas is not Sinn Fein, which Henry McDonald so clearly explained in his excellent essay here at Z Word. Cheers, TG I think it may be that we’re both being a bit glib here, Eamonn.

You’re quite right to point out that the IRA’s “armed campaign” was never supported by anything but a minority of Irish nationalists, but I certainly didn’t suggest, or mean to suggest, that the Provisional IRA’s violence was merely an extension of the civil rights campaign. That would have been a distortion of history indeed.

While I agree with O’Neill that it’s important to distinguish between the “pointless terrorism” of the recent murders and the IRA violence of the past, you’re quite right to point out that it didn’t just come from nowhere, and should be situated within pathological currents that have long existed within Irish nationalism. But it is a bit glib to suggest that the central Irish republican purpose of a united, 32-county republic is “not a political objective.” The main currents of republicanism have always articulated political objectives, and have situated the struggle for unification as a necessary condition for their achievement. It’s necessary to recognize this, if only because it exposes most clearly how the “physical force” Irish republicans got it wrong.

At any rate, the point was that you can’t negotiate with a pathology, there’s nothing to discuss, and just as it is important to distinguish between savagery for its own sake and eruptions of violent Irish nationalism, it’s important to notice that Talibanism is not a national liberation movement, and Hamas is not Sinn Fein, which Henry McDonald so clearly explained in his excellent essay here at Z Word.

Cheers,

TG

]]>