The debt the British people owe to Gerry Adams...

[ViolentPanda]

** Can a passing Mod please correct the typo in Gerry Adams name above? Ta very much.


This is aimed at British posters.

It may seem a provocative viewpoint, and I know there are many who harbour ill-will towards the bould Gerry, but these are some very plain facts...

There are many thousands of republican ex-prisoners and activists. Over the years the majority of these, for various political and/or personal reasons, walked away, perhaps disillusioned.

Gerry Adams (and his cohort) also came to view the armed strategy as being a zero sum, no-win situation. The difference is that they - and Adams in particular - stayed, developed a new strategy and eventually brought the Republican movement with them. This broke the deadlock and introduced new thinking.

They did this at considerable personal risk. That they pulled this off without getting shot by their own still amazes me, as does the fact that there was no large-scale feud.

What I find amazing is how long Adams et al managed to sustain their "new thinking" in the face of some pretty truculent internal opposition.

If the British people were waiting on their politicians to break the cycle and have the vision and balls to break the cycle, they would still be waiting - and the IRA would still be blowing up your major cities.

The Provisional IRA, dearie.
Have the stickies done anything except scratch their arses in the last 30 years?

No matter what your politics, it is hard to deny these plain and simple truths - although I don't expect that will stop lots of people getting their knockers in a twist over it.

THAT is why, instead of whinging and uttering banalities on the other G. Adams thread, you should have the grace to acknowledge his contribution to the Peace strategy that has helped the British govt out of the corner they had painted themselves into.

Please note:

1. If you are replying to this it might be helpful if you could try to answer the points above, rather than ranting and raving about 'whataboutery' and 'whaddiffery'.

2. (for Irish posters) I am well aware that the Republican Movement that Gerry A and co built - and certainly the Tankie entity that is Sinn Féin - would tolerate no such dissidence from it's orthodoxy today. That does not change Adams' contribution, which history (and future generations) will judge.


e2a 'whadiffery' and to embolden point 1

I agree that "history" will judge, and a good thing too, given how many people who were only tangentially involved (Bill fucking Clinton, anyone?) have benefitted/profited from the peace.

 

[ViolentPanda]

This would be the same Gerry Adams who IRA man Brendan Hughes claimed ordered the death of a mother of ten, and that he rigged elections for?

Brits should be thankful for a murdering vote rigger? A man who set up Paramilitary ex judiciary death squads?

Judging Adams on what is claimed rather than proven isn't exactly a standard many of our parliamentarians (or indeed the "man on the street") would go for if applied to them, is it?

 

[krtek a houby]

There's no doubt Adams saw which way the wind was blowing. He came in from the cold and huge inroads into a peaceful future were made. But asking the British public to thank the man? Hmmm.

I always feel sorry for the likes of John Hume. Completely forgotten when it comes to acknowledging the architects of peace.

 

[kyser_soze]

I don't necessarily disagree with the tenor of the OP, but by the same chalk it was John Major as PM who engaged with Adams in that peace process against the ideological position of his own party. If he'd rejected Adams and gone hardline about Ireland, would Adams still be alive today? Would his position in 'turning around' the PIRA toward a political settlement have remained tenable if the UKG had rejected his overtures?

I'm not about to make a moral point about his involvement in NLC operations, and their effects, either way. His moral stance on denying his membership of the IRA and murder may well be repugnent, but in this world it's business as usual.

 

[kyser_soze]

Thanks Gerry for swapping the armalite for an armani,

Is that yours? Pretty good if it is.

 

[Sue]

I always feel sorry for the likes of John Hume. Completely forgotten when it comes to acknowledging the architects of peace.

You mean John 'Nobel Peace Prize Winner' Hume...? Hardly forgotten..!

 

[krtek a houby]

Is that yours? Pretty good if it is.

Not mine, no. It is good tho...

 

[LiamO]

What I find amazing is how long Adams et al managed to sustain their "new thinking" in the face of some pretty truculent internal opposition.

The Provisional IRA, dearie.
Have the stickies done anything except scratch their arses in the last 30 years?

Howya VP. Straight to the crux, as usual.

The difference I suppose is that the Sticks just jumped, precipitating a series of internecine feuds (Sticks V Provies; Sticks V Irps etc etc right through the 70's and 80's up til the night the IRA put the IPLO out of business). They also left behind the Provisional IRA with the militarists firmly in command and in an almost unassailable position.

Adams et al actually brought their movement and their constituency with them! Without leaving behind a substantial militarist rump and without a huge shooting match.

That is their achievement and it is a significant one - one without historical precedent.

Whatever people may think of Adams or the republican movement - and both polar opposites ('they're all murderers' and 'they are all traitors/sell-outs') have posted here.

I have discussed this in recent years with all sorts of people including Doormen in the late one in an english pub; football hoolies; countless construction workers; republican ex-combatants; ex-British army officers & squaddies; Loyalist ex-prisoners; ex-RUC & Screws etc etc.

In all of these conversations I have encountered less hostility and emotional reaction than on this thread - but I suppose that is the difference between the interweb and a face-to-face conversation.

 

[ViolentPanda]

There's no doubt Adams saw which way the wind was blowing. He came in from the cold and huge inroads into a peaceful future were made. But asking the British public to thank the man? Hmmm.

I won't thank him just for doing what was best, but I will acknowledge his role in helping bring (relative) peace between PIRA and the British government.

I always feel sorry for the likes of John Hume. Completely forgotten when it comes to acknowledging the architects of peace.

No, he isn't forgotten, not by anyone who actually knows the history, rather than getting theirs from the yellow press. He was awarded a Nobel Peace prize in acknowledgment of his achievements.
Now, I'll be the first to acknowledge that some of his fellow laureates aren't exactly shining examples of humanity (Kissinger, anyone?), but that just makes Hume's work stand out more brightly.

 

[N_igma]

Also the position in 1969 was a lot more different than 1994. By then there was a general acceptance that the military campaign just wan't going to cut it, most mainstream Republicans accepted this. Incidentally I think bombing financial institutions is a lot more effective than killing a few policemen and soldiers. The IRA should have focused more on doing that during the struggle.

 

[krtek a houby]

I won't thank him just for doing what was best, but I will acknowledge his role in helping bring (relative) peace between PIRA and the British government.


No, he isn't forgotten, not by anyone who actually knows the history, rather than getting theirs from the yellow press. He was awarded a Nobel Peace prize in acknowledgment of his achievements.
Now, I'll be the first to acknowledge that some of his fellow laureates aren't exactly shining examples of humanity (Kissinger, anyone?), but that just makes Hume's work stand out more brightly.

Thanks for mentioning Henry. I think Hume was a man of dignity and am glad he didn't become a media whore like Gerry did. But yes, in acknowledging one "side" we also have to acknowledge the other.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don't necessarily disagree with the tenor of the OP, but by the same chalk it was John Major as PM who engaged with Adams in that peace process against the ideological position of his own party. If he'd rejected Adams and gone hardline about Ireland, would Adams still be alive today? Would his position in 'turning around' the PIRA toward a political settlement have remained tenable if the UKG had rejected his overtures?

I'd say that what Major did was to "bring into the light" an engagement that had already been going on between Irish Republicans and the UKG since (at least) the early 1970s, and that the to and fro of those 20-odd years of feeling out each others' positions and sticking points allowed both Sinn Fein and the UKG to proceed from strategically sound bases in any negotiations.
AS for Adams' position, if Major's government had pulled down the negotiations, all he'd have done is turn around to his people and say "see? We gave them every chance, and they still fucked us over. Bring on the semtex!".

I'm not about to make a moral point about his involvement in NLC operations, and their effects, either way. His moral stance on denying his membership of the IRA and murder may well be repugnent, but in this world it's business as usual.

Quite. SOP.

 

[kyser_soze]

I won't thank him just for doing what was best, but I will acknowledge his role in helping bring (relative) peace between PIRA and the British government.

This nearly summarises my post, TBH.

 

[LiamO]

I don't necessarily disagree with the tenor of the OP, but by the same chalk it was John Major as PM who engaged with Adams in that peace process against the ideological position of his own party. If he'd rejected Adams and gone hardline about Ireland, would Adams still be alive today? Would his position in 'turning around' the PIRA toward a political settlement have remained tenable if the UKG had rejected his overtures?

I'm not about to make a moral point about his involvement in NLC operations, and their effects, either way. His moral stance on denying his membership of the IRA and murder may well be repugnent, but in this world it's business as usual.

True. But my point is that ONLY Adams, McGuinness & co could - and did - deliver their constituency (relatively) intact. Hulme, Major, Reynolds etc simply had no influence over either the IRA or the republican community.

 

[LiamO]

This nearly summarises my post, TBH.

and the OP tbf

 

[ViolentPanda]

Howya VP. Straight to the crux, as usual.

The difference I suppose is that the Sticks just jumped, precipitating a series of internecine feuds (Sticks V Provies; Sticks V Irps etc etc right through the 70's and 80's up til the night the IRA put the IPLO out of business). They also left behind the Provisional IRA with the militarists firmly in command and in an almost unassailable position.

Adams et al actually brought their movement and their constituency with them! Without leaving behind a substantial militarist rump and without a huge shooting match.

An achievement in itself, given that many of his contemporaries could have, if they'd felt like it, have started said shooting match. I've always suspected that part of what carried the argument is the simple demographic truth of Northern Ireland: Wait long enough, and the Loyalists cease to become a problem, and in the meantime, establishing themselves as a party of government, and one that doesn't pull anywhere near as many stunts as the Unionists, is all gravy.

That is their achievement and it is a significant one - one without historical precedent.

Whatever people may think of Adams or the republican movement - and both polar opposites ('they're all murderers' and 'they are all traitors/sell-outs') have posted here.

The extreme poles of that argument are equally worthless. If we (as individuals and as collectives) refused to engage with "murderers" and "traitors", our "civilisation" would be much nearer the Hobbesian horror of "everyone versus everyone" than it currently is.

I have discussed this in recent years with all sorts of people including Doormen in the late one in an english pub; football hoolies; countless construction workers; republican ex-combatants; ex-British army officers & squaddies; Loyalist ex-prisoners; ex-RUC & Screws etc etc.

In all of these conversations I have encountered less hostility and emotional reaction than on this thread - but I suppose that is the difference between the interweb and a face-to-face conversation.

It's easier to convince people with rationality in real life, in my experience.

 

[Random]

An achievement in itself, given that many of his contemporaries could have, if they'd felt like it, have started said shooting match. I've always suspected that part of what carried the argument is the simple demographic truth of Northern Ireland: Wait long enough, and the Loyalists cease to become a problem, and in the meantime, establishing themselves as a party of government, and one that doesn't pull anywhere near as many stunts as the Unionists, is all gravy.

Was the threat of mass violence from Loyalists also much less by the 1990s than it had been in the 1980s, as well?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Was the threat of mass violence from Loyalists also much less by the 1990s than it had been in the 1980s, as well?

IMO the degree of threat was the same, but the ability to carry out a threat of mass violence was diminished, possibly because of the eruption of open feuding (rather than the more usual bullet-in-the-head-in-an-alley type) in and between Loyalist groups, but perhaps also because of an erosion in support for paramilitarism by local communities, and because the state was also "reeling in" some of its ops and operatives.

 

[8den]

Judging Adams on what is claimed rather than proven isn't exactly a standard many of our parliamentarians (or indeed the "man on the street") would go for if applied to them, is it?

It's a claim made by Brendan Hughes on his death bed, theres plenty of other circumstantial evidence that Adams had a senior position in the IRA in Belfast at the time.

 

[LLETSA]

The extreme poles of that argument are equally worthless. If we (as individuals and as collectives) refused to engage with "murderers" and "traitors", our "civilisation" would be much nearer the Hobbesian horror of "everyone versus everyone" than it currently is.

Exactly right. Most people, it seems, rarely choose to think this point through.

 

[likesfish]

so he sorted out the monster he was responsible for building cheers for that.
pity they could'nt figure it out in the 70s that the armed struggle was going nowhere although the loyalists helped keep it going for a bit.

 

[Garek]

so he sorted out the monster he was responsible for building cheers for that.

Can explain this comment a bit more? I think really things kicked off when the NICRA was killed off (somewhat literally you could say). I think it is important to remember that Bloody Sunday, and other events, completely discredited the idea of non-violent action to advance the rights of the Nationalist/Catholic community.

 

[N_igma]

Loyalists escalated their killing campaign in the early 90's. The mid to late 80's were a bad time for all the paramilitaries cos of the touts and security force infiltration.

 

[likesfish]

best agent mi5 ever had

 

[8den]

Judging Adams on what is claimed rather than proven isn't exactly a standard many of our parliamentarians (or indeed the "man on the street") would go for if applied to them, is it?

The claim against Adams comes from a reliable IRA source, and death bed confession. The claims about Adams IRA membership come from Hughes, Ed Moloney, Peter Taylor, and Richard English all of whom are journalists who have written some of the most definitive accounts of the troubles.

Adams has called these accounts libellous, but has never challenged them in court.

 

[N_igma]

Heh Richard English used to lecture me in uni, smart man!

 

[8den]

Heh Richard English used to lecture me in uni, smart man!

Sorry Hughes is a former IRA man, and English is a historian specialising in the troubles. Moloney and Taylor are journalists. All maintain that Adams a senior member of the Belfast IRA.

The fact is Adams and McGuinness were more than likely IRA men. Adams possibly ordered the execution of Mc Conville.

 

[N_igma]

No doubt that they were ra men but their level of involvement is not and probably will not be fully known.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Adams possibly ordered the execution of Mc Conville.

I'm possibly the son of god

 

[likesfish]

I doubt he'd have got the peace process rolling if he did'nt have influence on the ira.
the idea he isn't a member of the ira senior leadership is ridiculous