Sinn Fein had the IRA. The Republican Party has their own "IRA" (militias, ProudBoys, Boogalloo, etc.)

@basilfawlty89 Well said.

@basilfawlty89 I think the analogy is apt because in both cases there is a "legit" political party and a terrorist militia. The American Republicans and their attendant militia are just as convinced as to the righteousness of their cause as Sinn Feinn and the IRA, although I understand Irish Republicanism is of course not the same.

@Human1000 maybe, but why does no one ever point a finger and draw an analogy with the loyalists, who btw were also terrorists and had paramilitaries. They committed more atrocities against civilians than the IRA did, see Lenny Murphy.

@Human1000 That is a bit of a forced false equivalence. And being declared a terrorist organization is more about politics and optics then anything else.

@basilfawlty89 I agree the loyalists were terrorists -- you'll get no disagreement from me. The minority, Protestant hold on power in Belfast had more of an analogy with our often minority rule of the Republican party in the US Congress.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I understand where the analogy seems strained. Again, grappling with something all together new here so looking for paradigms to help make sense of it.

I shan't challenge your opinions about the IRA for now -- I have enough on my plate! I will say that the IRA as an "army" was never going to defeat the British in an actual war of territory. No disagreement there.

@Human1000 Actually the IRA did exactly that everywhere except for the Northern Counties and the reason that didn't happen was because of what most Americans would compare to gerrymandering.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Northern Ireland was your great compromise with the Brits. I'm referring to the IRA that developed after the Irish Republic.

@Human1000 The modern IRA was literally created by the Brits when they massacred people who tried the peaceful civil rights approach. It is the same reason armed groups of First Nations people came about in Canada and the US. Frankly it is the only way they got results.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I think you mean caused by or a result of Brits but also the Protestant choke hold in Stormont, no?

First Nations got nowhere in the US. Can't speak to what happened in Canada, but the US committed genocide before putting them in land ghettos where they still suffer.

@Human1000 I am saying if it had not been for Bloody Sunday the events in NI probably would have tracked closer to that of the Civil Rights movement in the US. In fact that is what inspired the protest that resulted in the massacre.


Short term I would agree with you but Leonard Pelletier and more recently the Water Protectors are what got the current generations interested in allying themselves with First Nations groups and supporting their causes.


In Canada we have made a bit more progress in recent years ironically because of overreactions by the government in the 90s in particular. I mean the government deployed more troops to fight over a luxury golf course in Oka then they deployed to Yugoslavia. Even the most checked out person at the time saw that as a bit over the top.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I'll be more carful if I attempt such an analogy again. I appreciate your perspective and information.