[ SECRET POST #2805 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2805 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 054 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

So does that mean the surviving native Americans would be right to start fucking up some whities?

Can native Americans start using human shields and start killing white Americans? and still be considered to be in the right with the press? Because that shit is overdue for them.

Does that mean the IRA where the good guys?

Oh, no, they were the bad guys. The native American uprising would be a bad thing. Know why? Because in both those scenarios the people they would be attacking are not jews.
If you want to do bad guy things, and be thought of as the good guys, make sure you pick on the jews.
And this mentality is fucking everywhere, and is the reason Israel is taking precisely ZERO% shit from anyone attacking them.

[(Anonymous)]

The IRA were the good guys. Not perfect - I don't support everything they did, and atrocities were committed on both sides - but they were the good guys.

And American Indians had a lot of right on their side in violently resisting American expansionism in the 19th century, and have a lot of legitimate and valid claims against the American government today.

Similarly, Palestine has many valid and legitimate claims against Israel, even if both sides do bad things. These are actually very good analogies you're making here, so well done.

[(Anonymous)]

The IRA were not the good guys. The ones who marched peacefully, and came to the table peacefully, and talked peacefully, they were the good guys. The ones who planted bombs, and murdered people in front of their families and then hid the bodies, and shot and killed British soldiers in the last few years, they were not the good guys.

The outcome does not justify the means.

[(Anonymous)]

They were bad times on both sides and both sides were intensely violent and did many things wrong. I refuse to place the blame solely on the IRA for the violence and ultimately, the IRA were fighting to redress legitimate grievances that were not being heard and that were being responded to with violence.

(and, for reference, I was never talking about the Continuity IRA or any of those assholes, which I would have hoped would have been obvious but w/e)

[insanenoodlyguy]

I'm willing to accept that the IRA had good people in it.

But thinking the IRA itself was good is just so insane I deleted a paragraph of text because there is no fucking reasoning with somebody like you.

[(Anonymous)]

They were fighting to redress serious and real grievances. Even setting aside the question of independence, there were real and profound and glaring injustices in Northern Irish society, and the IRA and similar organizations developed in response to that injustice, and to the refusal of those in power to make serious changes, and the violent reactions that were seen on both sides.

I didn't and don't say that they were perfect. They did some awful things. People on both sides did awful, awful things. The Troubles were not a good time. But, on the whole, the IRA were responding to serious injustices.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Having a legitimate grievance doesn't make you a good guy and it never has.

[(Anonymous)]

They used the only means available to them to pursue it.

[(Anonymous)]

You mean they used non-violent protest coupled with a will to work within the political structure so as not to prolong the process with violence which would only serve to make the British dig their heels in to save face?

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, I see, we're living in a fantasy land where the British would have listened and that tactic would have changed anything in a million years, and also where there weren't other groups in Northern Ireland committed to violence who would have attacked them, and were attacking them, consistently.

[(Anonymous)]

Worked for Gandhi.

[elephantinegrace]

Sorry to break this to you, but Gandhi's nonviolent protests came with a giant side of bloody, bloody violence.

[sabotabby]

Not to defend the IRA (who went from being a legitimate resistance group at one point in history to a gang of organized criminals who used politics as a smokescreen) but don't go dragging Gandhi into it, please. Not until you've read a bunch about Indian history and the other factors, violent and otherwise, that made independence possible.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Even if you weren't full of shit, that still doesn't make somebody "the good guys"

[(Anonymous)]

I think we just fundamentally disagree on what makes someone the good guys.

[(Anonymous)]

Not acting like murderous assholes bombing memorial ceremonies or attacking innocent people would seem to be a good start towards that definition. Looks like the IRA failed at the first step.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Yeah see, anybody who does these sorts of things loses any right to call themselves the good guys.

Doesn't matter if it's a just cause. Doesn't matter if Machiavelli approves and it works out great overall in the end. You do shit like this, you are at best a bad person working towards a good future. Which still makes you a bad person (and the whole "works out in the end" is pretty damn fucking subjective)

[(Anonymous)]

Doing terrible things, even in the service of a good end, isn't it.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. Wow. Someone actually said "the IRA are the good guy," with no irony whatsoever. I didn't think that level of naivete existed.

[(Anonymous)]

Pretty common in the United States, specially the North Eastern corner. NORAID was the second biggest funder of the IRA, behind selling Child Pornography, right up to early September 2001. Then something happened to make them think that funding foreign terrorists might just be wrong. Can't think what though. Hey, from his point of view Osama thought his cause was just and righteous and he did have a bit of a point too.

[(Anonymous)]

I live in the Northeast, and I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I've never, in my life, had anyone say to me that they thought the IRA were the good guys.

[(Anonymous)]

Hang out in Irish neighborhoods in Queens, NYC or Boston. You might hear it then.