Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrnoodle
That's the first time I've heard it explained in a way that makes sense. But it's still wrong. If the second group harbors, funds, and defends the first group, screw em. They now belong to the first group as well.
|
That's easy to say, but it doesn't hold up. Plenty of Americans sent money to the IRA, out of sympathy for Irish independence. Plenty of Americans have sympathy for Irish independence, but sent no support. Most Americans didn't think about it either way in their daily lives, but might have had an opinion (informed or not) if asked.
Now, knowing what the IRA did with the money, it's easy to say that the first group is just as responsible as the IRA itself, and that would be reasonable. But if your response is "screw em", and you initiate a campaign that causes some people in the first and second groups start to actually
join the IRA, and gets the third group to start thinking about the IRA's cause more seriously - causing some in group three to move to groups one and two - you are worse off than you were before.