3 ms·

People are appropriately scouring your position because there was exactly what you are imagining: a population, living West of the rest of the UK, lobbing terro

People are appropriately scouring your position because there was exactly what you are imagining: a population, living West of the rest of the UK, lobbing terrorist attacks at London. It's just that it was the Irish, not the Welsh, doing the attacks. History has given reason to the IRA's despicable methods; once the British got tired of the unionists' intransigeance, they sat down at the negotiation table and hammered a real deal to really end the violence. The Palestinians engaged in violent warfare against the Israelis studiously study the IRA and the results they got. So your example is actually an example that proves that the Palestinians' methods could lead to success for them. You'll have to try again.

Sabinus 4mo ago
If the IRA's demands were that the British had to accept enough Irish migration to become a minority in their country (the right of return) somehow I don't think their despicable methods would have paid off. The difference between the Irish and the Palestinians is the Irish took a real compromise and peace deal. They didn't demand the instant return of Northern Ireland and refuse all compromise to that issue, committing multiple generations to fruitless violence and high death rates.
- Sabinus 4mo ago
  Edit/clarification: I forgot about British multiculturalism. You would have to imagine Britain had similar 'national and ethnic trauma' to Israel for first IRA example to really work.
  - philistine 4mo ago
    The IRA's goal was to unite Northern Ireland with the rest of Ireland. That goal, while not as hard to attain as the right of return, was still unacceptable to the UK. The IRA achieved some of its goals, and clearly decided to bide their time in peace. The Palestinians could hope for the same sort of partial victory, with a negotiated peace with the Israelis.
    - philipallstar 4mo ago
      It was unacceptable to Northern Ireland.

Sabinus 4mo ago

If the IRA's demands were that the British had to accept enough Irish migration to become a minority in their country (the right of return) somehow I don't think their despicable methods would have paid off. The difference between the Irish and the Palestinians is the Irish took a real compromise and peace deal. They didn't demand the instant return of Northern Ireland and refuse all compromise to that issue, committing multiple generations to fruitless violence and high death rates.

Sabinus 4mo ago
Edit/clarification: I forgot about British multiculturalism. You would have to imagine Britain had similar 'national and ethnic trauma' to Israel for first IRA example to really work.
- philistine 4mo ago
  The IRA's goal was to unite Northern Ireland with the rest of Ireland. That goal, while not as hard to attain as the right of return, was still unacceptable to the UK. The IRA achieved some of its goals, and clearly decided to bide their time in peace. The Palestinians could hope for the same sort of partial victory, with a negotiated peace with the Israelis.
  - philipallstar 4mo ago
    It was unacceptable to Northern Ireland.