Bloody Sunday

[Stan']

Link.

So after so many years, it's finally been sorted out.

This country will apologise to absolutely anyone now.

[Trieste]

Shouldn't you be watching the World Cup or drinking tea or something? Stop being a prick about absolutely anything and everything you can get your claws on.

[Callie Del Noire]

It's a massive issue (similar to the Kent State shootings here in the US) and has been a point of contention for DECADES.

To see some sort of decision like this shows that the government was looking into it. I was always a bit split from what I read since it was just as easy to see the Provos instigating it for some 'handy Martyr's for the cause'.

[consortium11]

I've only briefly looked over the report ut from first glances it looks remarkably balanced for such a document... normally they end up swinging hard one way or the other.

The long and short of it is that the soldiers who opened fire and killed people reasonably believed they were in danger due to earlier woeful decisions y their comrades in other areas (such as firing above the protesters heads) but at that point they lost all control and in a state somewhere between blind panic and cold blooded ruthlessness broke all rules of engagement at est shooting stone throwers instead of nail bombers and at worst people fleeing and helping the injured. It is right and proper that that should e made public although I'm of two minds about prosecutions at this late stage. At the same time there was an IRA sniper team in a pre-arranged position that opened fire before they were aware that anyone had been shot.

I'm not a ig fan of David Cameron ut I thought he handled the apology with dignity and respect. Whether it is logical or right that someone should apologise for something that happened when he was 6 years old and had nothing directly (or really indirectly) to do with him is another question as is did the enquiry really need to spend £200 million... but those are questions for another day... it cheapens the horror of what happened to really discuss them down.

[Stan']

Shouldn't you be watching the World Cup or drinking tea or something? Stop being a prick about absolutely anything and everything you can get your claws on.

I don't drink tea.  That's a stereotypical view of "British" people, and your comment is in no-way related to the article.  I'm not being a prick.  All I'm saying is that an apology wasn't needed, it makes us look weaker than we already are.

Yeah, my problem is they've spent so much money on this.  He had nothing to do with this, yet why should he be apologising?  These men believed they were in danger, and they reacted in a way most of us would.  Save yourself.  No one is innocent.

[Neroon]

I've only just got to this thread.  I see no reason to be personal about things, so please, let's all be civil.

As for why Cameron is apologising, it's fairly straightforward.  There is a difference between the position of Prime Minister and the person who holds that position. David Cameron isn't apologising as himself, he is apologising as the Prime Minister, on behalf of the government.  It doesn't matter if he was only a child at the time of the atrocity, he is acting as the institution.

[Callie Del Noire]

I've only just got to this thread.  I see no reason to be personal about things, so please, let's all be civil.

As for why Cameron is apologising, it's fairly straightforward.  There is a difference between the position of Prime Minister and the person who holds that position. David Cameron isn't apologising as himself, he is apologising as the Prime Minister, on behalf of the government.  It doesn't matter if he was only a child at the time of the atrocity, he is acting as the institution.

EXACTLY.

Well stated.  And if there is to be any long term peace in Northern Ireland, all sides have to admit to mistakes and move on. My first memory of Irish television when I moved to Ireland years ago was a broadcast that included news on the assassination of Lord Mountbatten (which had happened a few months earlier) and a more recent bombing that was believed aimed at a mixed religion couple (one Roman Catholic and one Anglican).

I spent 2 1/2 years in Ireland growing up and it confused me for a long time what the problem was. Reading over the 'Troubles' and such made me sad. I have watched from a distance, seeing how the peace process has been going and a move like this .. while possibly galling to the government of the UK, shows they are genuinely intent on healing the wounds.

[SuperHans]

Shouldn't you be watching the World Cup or drinking tea or something?

Liiiitle bit of ignorant stereotyping there.

But I think there should have been an apology. The British Army opened fire on citizens that have now been proved to be innocent, so yes. It would be irresponsible to do otherwise. If those soldiers now face trial, so be it. A crime has been committed and must be paid for.

[Cheka Man]

If they ever do face trial, dosen't the Good Friday Agreement (the one that let out all the terroists) apply to the soldiers too?

[SuperHans]

If they ever do face trial, dosen't the Good Friday Agreement (the one that let out all the terroists) apply to the soldiers too?

Yes, because there's no difference at all between firing at a bunch of people for fun/revenge to being active in a long-running national independence campaign.

But to be serious, letting those soldiers off would be a massive slap in the face to Republicans who are, at the moment, fully cooperating with the other side for peace. If justice isn't done, something like this would turn the peace process very sour.

[consortium11]

Yes, because there's no difference at all between firing at a bunch of people for fun/revenge to being active in a long-running national independence campaign.

But to be serious, letting those soldiers off would be a massive slap in the face to Republicans who are, at the moment, fully cooperating with the other side for peace. If justice isn't done, something like this would turn the peace process very sour.

Didn't you mention ignorant stereotyping above?

The report itself says that the soldiers weren't shooting for "fun" or "revenge". At the time they opened fire they legitimately believed they were in danger and thus were justified in shooting. However, at some stage they went far beyond the terms of engagement and it turned into a session of effectively blind panic and firing at anything that moved... which tragically generally meant those trying to help the wounded.

Yes, they committed an evil and yes I can see the arguments for why they should be charged. That said, characterising them as firing for "fun/revenge" seems just as partisan as those who say there is no argument for charging at all.

[HairyHeretic]

If justice isn't done, something like this would turn the peace process very sour.

Maybe, maybe not.

What age are those soldiers now? 50s? 60s? Older? Putting them on trial will not change anything that happened. It won't bring anyone back.

Will some people want to see them put on trial? Probably.

But I think more people want to leave the past where it is, in the past. Because when you dig it up, and start using it to justify things .. well, let's just say that Norn Iron has hundreds of years and hundreds of incidents that certain segments of the population have happily used in the past to justify thier side, and their actions.

Thankfully those people are dying out. The rest of the population are sick and tired of it all, and just want what everyone wants. A normal life.

[SuperHans]

Didn't you mention ignorant stereotyping above?

The report itself says that the soldiers weren't shooting for "fun" or "revenge". At the time they opened fire they legitimately believed they were in danger and thus were justified in shooting. However, at some stage they went far beyond the terms of engagement and it turned into a session of effectively blind panic and firing at anything that moved... which tragically generally meant those trying to help the wounded.

Yes, they committed an evil and yes I can see the arguments for why they should be charged. That said, characterising them as firing for "fun/revenge" seems just as partisan as those who say there is no argument for charging at all.

Alright, perhaps that was over the top. True that none of us were there and it's difficult to say definitively, but 99% of witness reports from the time and later on report that the protesters were entirely peaceful. There may have been some fringe elements causing trouble like at the G8 protests, but from what people said at the time (mostly protesters admittedly, but some bystanders) there was very little doubt the crowd in question were only intent on protesting peacefully.

[SuperHans]

Maybe, maybe not.

What age are those soldiers now? 50s? 60s? Older? Putting them on trial will not change anything that happened. It won't bring anyone back.

Will some people want to see them put on trial? Probably.

But I think more people want to leave the past where it is, in the past. Because when you dig it up, and start using it to justify things .. well, let's just say that Norn Iron has hundreds of years and hundreds of incidents that certain segments of the population have happily used in the past to justify thier side, and their actions.

Thankfully those people are dying out. The rest of the population are sick and tired of it all, and just want what everyone wants. A normal life.

True. You have Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley sitting in a room together, perfectly amiable in their joint decision making. Even a massive row over policing couldn't ruin things. And that's just on top; as far as people themselves are concerned, you're no longer in danger walking on, say, Falls or Shankhill road in Belfast. These places are now tourist sites for both Loyalists and Republicans to enjoy.

But that said, now that this verdict has been cast, many people will want to see the guilty punished. Even if it doesn't concern them, reading about the soldiers escaping trial will certainly provoke anger. There are still hardcores out there, even in the younger generation, and they are the brothers/sisters/friends/partners of those ready to forget the past. All I'm saying is, opinions can spread like wildfire and people will always find it difficult to move on if they feel justice isn't being served.

Unless, of course, the acknowledgement that wrongdoing was done, especially from a conservative prime minister, is enough. I doubt many would get too much satisfaction from seeing a pensioner be paraded in the dock.