Re: The UK march agaimst Bush

In article <9gdlrv042cb6qbu8apahidrt54kmbgmi3q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, 
vonroach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 says...
> >In that case, they shouldn't have gone at all. The Catholics were being

> >all but forced over the border at the time.
> 
> They were sup****ting terrorists.

<cough cough>
They were the victims of terrorists. The army was originally sent to NI 
to protect the Catholics from the Protestants. Catholics lined the 
streets as the Army moved in and invited soldiers into their homes for 
tea and biscuits.

That didn't last long of course.

> 
> >Had the army not intervened, NI would have been Catholic free within a 
> >couple of years.
> 
> There is no evidence for that statement.

True. It is but an opinion. Certainly there was an exodus of sorts at 
that time and I don't expect the situation would have improved without 
intervention.


> 
> >Why were the army originally sent to NI?
> 
> The army WAS sent to keep the peace in a ****tion of the Nation and
> fight a war against terrorists.

Correctish. As long as you understand the terrorists at the time were 
Protestant.


> Your country might be a good deal more
> healthy today if you had done that elsewhere. But better late than
> never.
 
Elsewhere such as?
And we have learnt much from our dealings with the IRA, although our 
Government seems to have forgotten them in recent times.