AIBU to ask you who started the Troubles in the North of Ireland?

[1FineDane]

If you watch this new BBC documentary, what is your answer?
I know British people think the IRA started the whole shit, but this is a BBC documentary and fairly unbiased.

I hope you watch it to realise what history there is in Northern Ireland.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0008c47/spotlight-spotlight-on-the-troubles-a-secret-history-episode-1

I hate the term 'the troubles'. Makes it all sound so trivial. I know it's what it is commonly known as, that's not me having a go at posters for using it. But I just think it's a terrible term for something that was far from trivial.

The British.

Whitewash? Excuses? Trump? You mean trying to underestand how both sides became so entrenched, so it might become possible to unpick it is a stupid idea? OK!

The FACT is that there are many nice and many awful people on both sides of The Troubles. Fucked if I am ever going to see that differently!

Pshaw!

The Ireland/ N Ireland border was sold as temporary by Westminster who was acting as arbitrator. Westminster told Belfast, the permanent border will be further south and told Dublin the permanent border would be further north to get both sides to agree to the GFA. When they found out about the sleight of hand, both Dublin and Belfast were livid and that is why part of the GFA includes the provision that the “border” will never be a hard border because that was only way they could keep it official that the current border was meant to be temporary pending further negotiations.

I think you're confusing the events of 1921 with the Good Friday Agreement (assume that's what you mean by the GFA) of 1998. The 'temporary border' was put in place in 1921. There was never any question in 1998 of the border being moved further south or further north. How could it? The British Govt can't just give away another country's sovereign territory.

I know British people think the IRA started the whole shit

Actually no, some do. Many British people know that the causes are way more complex than that. What an ignorant statement.

arya absolutely. I can understand the reasoning behind mainly sticking to English history, it’s the ignorance and lack of acknowledgement of the part England played that infuriates me.

If it’s any consolation it’s not just Ireland. Slavery was all Americans, and a handful of English slave traders. No mention of our real involvement. Ww2, no mention that nobody in power gave a fuck about persecution until it became about European power, and no acknowledgement that our good allies the soviets were doing equal evil in their gulags, and after the war we sent people back to execution and gulags because we wanted to keep onside with our good buddy the ussr. No, we just fought evil Hitler.

I had a similar conversation online to you a few years ago, about countries that theoretically speaking England would owe compensation to. Ireland was met with the same shock as if I’d suggested the Isle of Wight. Because we let loads of them come here to work at all the various times their country was doing badly and I was ridiculous to suggest there was anything more than the odd individual loner causing any trouble over the centuries.

Whitewash? Excuses? Trump? You mean trying to underestand how both sides became so entrenched, so it might become possible to unpick it is a stupid idea? OK!

You took exception to my answer to the OP's question, because I didn't proportion blame equally to 'both sides'. It is what it is, there's no point in trying to deny it to make one side look better retrospectively. Of course during The Troubles (and I agree with PP, it's an awful term that serves to minimise it) there were dreadful crimes committed by people from both sides of the community, targeting innocent people from both sides of the community, and that endless cycle of tit for tat shootings and bombings was appalling. But the OP asked how it started and I answered it.

Great post TrainspottingWelsh

And we disagree on some things. That's fine!

I didn't actaully 'take exception' I just didn't agree with you. It happens!

And I don't apportion blame equally. Not in recent times. Far from it!

But I know that it isn't cut and dried, right and wrong, as the documentary series the OP was watching has, so far, been quite clear on!

I will be watching it with a fairly open mind...

Thank you Sakura7 . Just what I was going to say. It still surprises me that so many people in Britain do not understand that the Republic of Ireland is a sovereign country and the U.K. government has no right to move or change its border.

I hate the term 'the troubles'. Makes it all sound so trivial. I know it's what it is commonly known as, that's not me having a go at posters for using it. But I just think it's a terrible term for something that was far from trivial

What a fantastic post. And look how divisive the topic is, and how defensive we are in our responses.

OK so I suspect the OP is out to to berate anyone who doesn’t have the same opinions as her on the topic, but I am interested in what others think about what they would have done instead of Op Banner, or if they think Op Banner was a good idea, but badly managed, (that’s what I would lean towards).

Imagine if Scotland voted for independence, but Edinburgh and the regions bordering England had a majority against it and the British Govt decided "we're keeping them, we'll draw a new border further north. Southern Scotland will remain in the UK and the Republic of Scotland will be independent." Unthinkable now, but that's not a million miles away from what happened 100 years ago in Ireland, except Ireland had to fight for independence rather than achieve it through the ballot box.

On a Brexit thread the other day people were discussing it leading to possible Scottish independence and I saw someone, possibly more than one person, say that Scotland should never be able to become independent unless English people could vote for it too, and if England said no, we want to keep you, that should be the end of it. I was scratching my head thinking 'have these people never heard of Ireland? Because letting the rest of the UK have the veto on whether or not Ireland should have Home Rule (OK, not quite the same, but still) at the start of last century worked out so well...

I raise you Hadrian, then!

Or Antoninus.

Or any other border, if we are heading for whataboutery!

That is how new territories, new countries, are made... or are we supposed to remain stagnant... and if so from what date?

That's what makes the UK and Ireland, Brexit etc such issue dense topics, such political hot potatoes. We don't have m/any agreed baselines for any compromise, or change!

I saw someone, possibly more than one person, say that Scotland should never be able to become independent unless English people could vote for it too, and if England said no, we want to keep you, that should be the end of it. Really?

Weird. Especially as the biggest block is that the EU won't accept Scotland as an independentt country - yet!

That is how new territories, new countries, are made... or are we supposed to remain stagnant... and if so from what date?

Sure, Britain drawing artificial borders in other countries' territories is just progress.

Many British people know that the causes are way more complex than that

This could politely be described as a rather generous assessment

I'd say that most English people don't know the difference between Northern and Southern Ireland and are unsure who governs them.

Not most Mumsnetters obviously, cause we is smart innit , but I'm NI-born and have lived in England for years, and have found very few people who know (or care) why these bloody Irish folk are so pissed off all the time.

Sure, Britain drawing artificial borders in other countries' territories is just progress. I did mean globally...

Thank you sakura. As an English person I just don’t see why we can’t as a society hold our hands up and admit we caused a shit storm. Instead of trying to compartmentalise it and pass the buck as though we are being held responsible as individuals.

The Catholics were treated as second class citizens, they began to protest as they saw how the civil rights in America had made changes. They was trouble during these marches with the police in Northern Ireland being very heavy handed. The prime minister began to realise that the Catholics had a point which made the unionist weary. They feared that this would lead to a United Ireland. Ian paisley became very popular because of he played into the fears of the unionst. The violence erupted and the army was brought into to calm the situation. Unfortunately things escalated the fighting on both sides increased, many Catholics left and moved to the republic as refugees. I knew about the troubles as I was taught in school but the documentary last night was an eye opener.

I'm not mad keen on watching the programme as having grown up in it was enough, frankly. We were able to hate paramilitaries on both sides equally, it does stick in the throat to not be able to condemn the violence now without also saying "but I see why it happened". None of the Catholics or Protestants I knew personally were ever involved in violence and I find the idea that if you lived there, you'd have joined in very insulting. Everyone growing up there was a victim in some way.

I thought it was a fascinating show and hope as many people as possible watch it. It makes me wonder how things would have been if Catholics had being treated equally in NI. There was very little support for the IRA until the troubles commenced. It really shows how important the GFA agreement is, it made everyone equal, Catholic, Protestant, Irish and British. It makes me so mad how it is now dismissed as a nuisance and irrelevant due to the issues with Brexit.

I think one thing that should be remembered is that the poor of England, Wakes and Scotland also suffered for centuries.

Wales