Bloody Sunday. This Might Be A Lively Topic.

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

Here is the Question, should the Soldiers who were involved in Bloody Sunday be prosecuted, especially as their enemy's leaders have escaped any punishment and even been elected to Parliament, although they never took up their seats.

 

My opinion, the soldiers were doing their duty.

 

Angel1.

[woodview 10]

Don't know about doing their duty, that throws it open to debate.

But, to have a terrorist amnesty, then hunt down people who were youngsters at the time, and there under orders is wrong.

Either a line is drawn under the troubles, or it isn't. Can't have two sets of actions.

[Lex Luthor 10]

If the soldiers were acting under orders, it has to be traced back to the original person (s) who gave the order and what was their rationale. 

[woodview 10]

7 minutes ago, Lex Luthor said:

If the soldiers were acting under orders, it has to be traced back to the original person (s) who gave the order and what was their rationale. 

What about the thousands who were killed and injured by both Unionist and Republican terrorists, in acts that were planned over long periods of time. It's been decided to stop those prosecutions and issue amnesties.

How can the two be reconciled?

[Halibut 12]

1 hour ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

Here is the Question, should the Soldiers who were involved in Bloody Sunday be prosecuted, especially as their enemy's leaders have escaped any punishment and even been elected to Parliament, although they never took up their seats.

 

My opinion, the soldiers were doing their duty.

 

Angel1.

If they knew the people they were firing on were unarmed civilians they were guilty of murder.

[Hots on 10]

The Northern Ireland troubles were/are a unique situation and that society will never move on while both sides seek impossible justice for historic wrongs.

 

A line should be drawn under it  all and move on.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Hots on

[woodview 10]

48 minutes ago, Halibut said:

If they knew the people they were firing on were unarmed civilians they were guilty of murder.

How does that sit with the amnesty on terrorists who murdered civilians? How can there be two paths???

[melthebell 863]

Some people need to relearn what bloody Sunday was. It was nothing to do with terrorism.

In fact it was bloody Sunday that made the terrorism worse.

[woodview 10]

4 minutes ago, melthebell said:

Some people need to relearn what bloody Sunday was. It was nothing to do with terrorism.

In fact it was bloody Sunday that made the terrorism worse.

No doubt it did. But can you explain why it is appropriate to charge someone who was a youngster at the time, there under orders, and did a terrible thing, but terrorists who, through their own free will, engaged in planned killings over decades????

[melthebell 863]

21 minutes ago, woodview said:

No doubt it did. But can you explain why it is appropriate to charge someone who was a youngster at the time, there under orders, and did a terrible thing, but terrorists who, through their own free will, engaged in planned killings over decades????

Nonsense arguements

[woodview 10]

1 minute ago, melthebell said:

Nonsense arguements

why? can you explain the differences and the amnesty on terrorists? What those soldiers did was wrong, and ordinarily, they should face the full force of the law. Steps have been taken to draw a line under all the troubles, I don't understand how this aspect is different. I might be wrong, but you'll have to explain the difference.

[*Wallace* 333]

I heard the sister of a victim on the news this morning she said her brother was killed by a bullet up the backside that went through his body and exited through his underarm while trying to crawl away.