An independent report says that the IRA has laid down its arms, according to this report in the Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/nira05.xml and numerous ABC news bulletins I have heard this morning.

This must have some implications for the Iraq situation. Ireland was never as big a mess as Iraq, but time, continued resolve, discussion and giving the terrorists some say in the political process, can bring hostilities to an end.

The report by Independent Monitoring Commission "...concluded that the IRA no longer had the capacity to mount a terror campaign and did not want to go back to violence which resulted in 1,755 deaths during the Troubles."

The sad thing about Ireland, is that the very legitimate agenda of addressing historic wrongs perpetrated by English Protestants since Cromwell, was persued in very horrendous ways by the indiscriminant bombings of 'anyone' who happened to be around.

The concept of the IRA is a legitimate political outcome of historic cultural and economic genocide by the English. The 'terror' aspect is not legitimate. (where it effected civilians)

The point you raise about 'laying down of arms' is clearly connected to "Giving the 'terrorists' a voice" but I cannot accept the word 'terrorist' in this instance. I don't think even the key IRA people would condone the Armagh bombing. But the 'aspirations' of the IRA were given voice, and that's more the key.

Again..I emphasize we should use the terms 'Enemies and Allies' in describing human conflict.

In the case of the IRA there are specific historical wrongs which they were fighting against.

In the case of Iraq, its not quite the same. The Sunni's are fighting for their previous privileged and powerful and economically better position....which was BASED on the oppression of the Shia and Kurds
So their struggle has no moral legitimacy.

Boaz, I am aware that you never let the facts stand between you and your opinions, but this has to be a personal best for you in the muddleheadedness stakes.

>>The sad thing about Ireland, is that the very legitimate agenda of addressing historic wrongs perpetrated by English Protestants since Cromwell<<

Tell me, how would you feel about a "very legitimate agenda of addressing historic wrongs perpetrated by the English settlers on the Aboriginal people of Australia?"

>>The concept of the IRA is a legitimate political outcome of historic cultural and economic genocide by the English<<

The IRA is, and always has been an unscrupulous terrorist organization, even enlisting the support of Germany in the middle of WWI.

>>I don't think even the key IRA people would condone the Armagh bombing<<

On this one, you are half-right (I am assuming you mean Omagh) in that the sheer stupidity of the Real IRA upset the plans of all the other IRAs - Provisional, Continuity, INLA etc etc. The sheer weight of the public's revulsion rubbed off on them all, which of course meant they were forced to "condemn" it.

>>Again..I emphasize we should use the terms 'Enemies and Allies' in describing human conflict.
In the case of the IRA there are specific historical wrongs which they were fighting against.<<

OK, here's the thing. The most recent version of the troubles had nothing at all to do with Cromwell, but the economic disadvantage being meted out by one brand of Christian (the protestant majority) on another brand of Christian (the catholic minority) in the region known as Northern Ireland.

The six counties involved had consistently and continuously voted to be a part of the UK, and be governed by Westminster. The terrorists decided unitlaterally that this was an affront, and waged vicious guerrilla warfare on the country, against the democratic wishes of its populace.

So who is the enemy, and who the ally in this scenario? The terrorist, or the citizens pursuing their democratic right to a government of their choice?

The IRA may have just officially declared a laying down of arms in Ireland but they havent been carrying out any major terrorist attacks in Ireland for some years now as far as I can discern and have largely turned their attention to criminal activities and the odd payback killing.

I spoke of this on another website a couple of months ago and I said it was my belief that the fundamentalist Catholic religion in Ireland is no longer as fundamentlist as it once was and in the past few decades since the IRA started its campaign it has become more liberal. like the Catholic religion in Australia where Catholics and protestants now marry each other freely whereas this was frowned upon when I was growing up.

Once the strict doctrine is taken out of the different branches of the Christian faith then there are not a whole lot of barriers to intermarriage between them . This is probably especially true of the younger generations growing up with modern western ideas in Ireland in the past two or three decades.

I believe the IRA has ceased its killing more because a lot of intermarriage has taken place between the Irish Catholic Tribe and the English Protestant Tribe in the past few decades and not because the IRA has become all warm and fuzzy all of a sudden.

The tribal relationship is such that over time you may have bloodlines connected to people in different counties though tribal intermarriage . With the tribal lines becoming becoming blurred the
terrotorial hostilies are slowly dying away.

Onya Pericles, nothing like a bit of English Patriotism :)

On the legitimate right of the Indigenous Australians ? yep.. same deal. They do have a legitimate grievance, they just don't have the firepower, and God help us if they ever do head in that direction and obtain aid from covert Saudi or other middle eastern influences who can recognize an opportunity when they see one.

I have a friend at Gym named .....wait.."Brendan" :) yep he is Irish and Catholic.
The IRA in all its manifestations, is undoubtedly a creation of the forces you mentioned, but is also a creation of the various discriminatory laws inherited from the post Cromwell period. Land, Inheritance in interfaith marraiges etc.

Don't worry, I fully recognize that history is complex, I was just trying to make the general point that when legitimate grievances are addressed, peaceful outcomes are possible. Don't pick too hard on my history.

SHARKFIN... you make an interesting point about intermarraige. I'd love to know your source for that ? It reinforces my own view that the best future for Australia is an intermarried one. All ethnicities should be encouraged to unshackle themselves from ethno purity and be a part of a new 'Australia' which is similar to the modern 'English' who is a combined Angle, Saxon,Jute, Norman,Viking and Celt.
aah..they are all just 'poms' like Pericles :)

My post, Boaz, had nothing to do with patriotism, English or otherwise, and it is thoroughly discourteous of you to pretend otherwise.

>>Again..I emphasize we should use the terms 'Enemies and Allies' in describing human conflict.<<

You managed to avoid answering my key question - who is the enemy and who the ally in this scenario? And if you pick one, please explain, not in terms of Cromwell, the potato famines or the Battle of the Boyne, but in terms that are relevant today.

When both sides have legitimate grievances, why do you see it necessary that disinterested outsiders get involved by picking a team to support? What value does it add, and how does it equate with your mantra of loving thy neighbour?

Take a look at the history of the USA's support of the IRA over the years. Then pick a timeslice and explain how, at that moment, their policy was right? Count the number of dead bodies on both sides that were facilitated by the USA government's tacit, and occasionally explicit, support of the terrorists. Compare and contrast with the US sponsorship of the Taliban in the 1980s.

>>Don't worry, I fully recognize that history is complex, I was just trying to make the general point that when legitimate grievances are addressed, peaceful outcomes are possible. Don't pick too hard on my history.<<

History is never about generalizations, Boaz. It is about human beings making decisions about their attitudes towards other people.

On a sadder note (and you can check this out with Brendan, Boaz) my own opinion is that the jubilation over a final settlement in Ireland is premature. The emphasis will simply swing from one set of militants to another.

And Graham, as far as parallels with Iraq are concerned, I would point out that it has taken many centuries for the Irish troubles to reach this point.