Rose McGowan and the IRA

I imagine, had I grown up in Belfast, I would 100 per cent have been in the IRA. My heart just broke for the cause. Violence is not to be played out daily and provide an answer to problems, but I understand it

Rose McGowan during the Toronto Film Festival. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0919/1221773888185.html

When I first droped down by my computer to scribble down some words I had in my mind that I should give short comment over the UCD - Sligo Rover match at UCD Bowl, but then, in an attempt to act a bit more Irish, and a bit less Norwegian, I did choose to read some news in the Irish Times. I do not regret that. This is why I like Ireland; they do actually have something to debate, and the IRA do always bring forth strong feelings in both directions, and his time it's Rose "Kick Arse" McGowan who have been the smart mounth. (I have only seen her in Planet Terror, and Cherry in the IRA would have been...less fortunate for Her Majesty's Forces well being) My first tought after reading the article was; Do they critisise her because she, to a certain extent, may have right? Not to make a major issue of the Troubles, but rather look at the consept of violence, that sometimes it's the only way, tho the Western democracies mostly will reject that. With all respect for SDLP (Social Democratic and Labour Party)and their work for peace in the North, but, untill Sinn Féin was granted access to the Peace Process, what did they achive? From 1970 to the Good Friday Agreement, what did they achive? Gerry Adams did for some time ago say that "hadn't it been for the presens of the IRA had it been no peace process". Well, a peace process hadn't been necessary in the first place at all if it had been no IRA. But, then again, what kind of NI had it been without the Troubles, without a major reform in Stormont? Did the Civil Right marches help anything concerning that, and did they prove that the democratic way of solving dissagreements (open dialogue) work best? I think that at least 14 boys up in Derry who, if they still were alive, might slightly disagree. And just for the record, in the Science Building were the history of the UCD is at exhibiton, they're writing that such marches mostly ended in street fights with the RUC. Peace actions who ends in riots. Or, just to quote the character of James Nesbitt in the Bloody Sunday (2002)

I just want to say this to the British Government... You know what you've just done, don't you? You've destroyed the civil rights movement, and you've given the IRA the biggest victory it will ever have. All over this city tonight, young men... boys will be joining the IRA, and you will reap a whirlwind.

Sometimes the democracy deny its self, and rather to be the option, it leavs no options. Just a quote from a movie, but still, in the context of the chaotic situation in the North in the 70s and 80s, Thatcher the Iron Lady, Long Kesh, UVF, UDA, UDR, the ethnical cleaning in Belfast and Derry (both sides), the internment without trial and Operation Banner...or to bring it to Belfast as miss McGowan refered to; the Lower Falls Curfew. May it be a slightly possibility that miss Rose perhaps have a point? Ofcourse peopel suffered at both sides, a lot of innocents died. War is cruel, no sharp cut edges between heros and badguys, but if the soldiers who come to save the province from the terror ends up as a player instead of a referee in the conflict, that you're a "threat" to the society simply by having another political view(Republican/Nationalist instead of Loyalist/Unionist); that you run the risk of internment by to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Is it still expected that we shall relax, take a breath, and then walk stright over to the guy with the power and the gunn to say that we do dissagree on certain oppressious points of the policies of the ruling party/class etc? And, is it still expected that when the answer is "NO", that we should bow, and go back home and find a better argument? And finally, after doing that ad nauseam, are we still expected to continue and/or accept the terms?

Wouldn't we all, if the situation suddenly turned, and left us with the option of live in silent fear, to face the barb wire and the bullets if we raised our voice for the Cause, or to fight a war we maybe never will win, but at least we would fight for whatsoever we belive in, choose the last one? The problems would still be there, no dubt, but if the ears are deaf for the voice, it may sometimes listen to the Armalite. Not a personal rule, but rather logic, and that's perhaps one of the reasons why she gets critisized?

A bit long, quite heavy, but still; I felt that I had to write something about the article.