world response to "troubles" / violence in northern ireland?

Question

i am very confused on this topic.
1) what was the reason that British troops invaded Ireland - supposedly to keep the peace and what not, but didn't something have to initiate that?
2) why didn't US intervene?
3) why didn't other countries intervene?!

oh and, the IRA.. were they a certain religion? all i know is that they didn't want Britain's involvement

please help. websites/citing would be even more superb.

Answer 1

Sorry are you for real????


The British troops did not invade....it is a part of the United Kingdom. The increase in troops was to support peace and the laws of the country from the terrorist factions that called themselves the IRA. And these were terrorists who killed people regardless of their religeon etc, they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Other countries didnt become involved because it was an internal matter not an international one. The only real foreign involvment came from USA, where people who did not have to live with the "troubles" supplied money to help the IRA. An area I find trouble sum considering the USA's stance on terrorism now!!!! And countries such as Libya and Syria who trained the terrorists.

And the IRA were Catholic (but how any religeous person can support violence is beyond me!).

Answer 2

Ouch, whole can of worms there!

Ireland was ireland til the brits invaded. Then the Irish wanted it back, so brits gave back the bits they didn't want (after a bit of a scrap) but kept the industrious north.

Ireland is Ireland and personally, as an Englishman, I think it should be their country and run by them. My ex wife (may she rot in hell, lol) is an Irish girl and one of her grandparents was an original founder member of the 1st IRA. Although I don't agree with the (70's, 80's; n 90's) methods of getting the message across, I do agree with their sentiments about Ireland being for the Irish.

And the US were not allowed to intervene cos the Brits and Irish were killing enough of each other without adding the 'friendly fire' element and wiping everyone out, thank you very much ;-).

Other countries didn't intervene for the same reason they didn't during the Falklands war between UK and the 'Argies'. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too political. Agreed with the Argies but had to stand by UK as a 'Western' member of nato, united nations, europe, legoland and disneyworld.
Lillylivered t@ssers, the lot of them.

Hope this clarifies things a little. I may post an 'edit' in a short while ;)

Answer 3

the British invasion of Ireland dates back to the English King John (more than 900 years ago - the "bad King John "lackland" of Robin Hood legend fame)

Due to crimogeniture, he was only given Ireland to inherit.

...for a few hundred years, after the English occupation, the "Orangemen", (the Brits, -who were Prodestant), understandably (?) considered Ireland their home...the Irish, who were devout Catholics continued to Disagree...



So, there were two factions of trouble - English vs the Irish - and Catholics vs. Prodestants.

A double edged sword...territorial and religious.

The Irish Repubic Army was not a religion, they were Irish Catholics, hating the British Prodestants (and visa versa) who wanted 'the Brits OUT of their homeland".

This 'war' began WAY before the US was even in existance.

The book Trinity, by Leon Uris is a really layman friendly way to get an overview of Irish history -

My first trip to Ireland turned out to be on the day that Bobby Sands died, in the English "H Block" from a hunger strike against the continued British rule. It was an experience I have NEVER forgotton - there are countless movies on this Irish Freedom Fighters against British Rule subject - this is definatley a history worth the time to study - and,
particulary, of late, the movie: The wind that shakes the Barley, about the 1920's massacre by the British is definalty worth seeing.

I've studied this history for more than 30 years now - I encourage you keep reading - go to Ireland - it's a country you will never forget - the history is heartbreaking, the people warm and amazing - and is not so different than the 'conquerer syndrome' that is a historical reality among nations and people....

as in the attocities of Europeanexpansionism against the Native Americans in the US.....

ps--there is even documentation on the English instigating the potato famine to genocide the Irish.

Answer 4

england was only able to capture nothern ireland, and some ofthe irish in northern ireland still consider themself Irish, and despise being rulled by the british. its a naturaly unstable area
1) ireland was origionaly a part of england after the the "Act of Union, but the supporters of this act were mostly in the north, with few in the south, so the south left
england wanted ireland because there power hungary hypocrites
2) because england was our ally, and helping ireland might destroy that alliance, and helping england would sour relations with ireland
3) same reason, and because it wasnt really that major, it was just seen another small squable between the irish and the english

Answer 5

not greater violence than in different civilized international locations. besides the shown fact that i do no longer stay in Northern eire anymore, the wide-unfold public of my family nevertheless stay there. They watch the violence of their backyards on the small screen television. for many human beings, their day by day existence is unaffected by way of the sporadic outbursts over there now. They stay away from the hotspots. There have not been British tanks rumbling by way of downtown Belfast or in Derry for some years. this is a gorgeous land and the individuals interior the north are friendlier and greater hospitable then their southern neighbours (as i've got heard from lots of people who've visited the two). you would be as risk-free there (in all probability safer than) as you're in Canada or america or England or any ecu usa.