sinn fein and the IRA are two sides of the same coin, same differing methods but each implicitly supports the other.
AnswerA quick note -Sinn Fein has not always supported the IRA, and was not at first implicitly involved with them. For example, when the IRA was the IRB (Irish Republican Brotherhood) at the time of the Easter Rising of 1916, the IRB/A did not even inform Sinn Fein that it was to take place, and the two did not work together. However, Sinn Fein gre infamous because they became somehow implied with the rising and so were benefitted by a reputation of hardline actions for independence.
Sinn Fein does not rule or give orders to the IRA, and is a different organisation. I personally do not condone the measures which the IRA take in their attempts at a complete Irish Republic, but Sinn Fein is nowadays a political party, who represents the views of many members of the IRA about the need for a republic, and independence throughout Ireland etc, but does not represent terrorist views. In short, Sinn Fein has little control over the IRA, and though I'm sure many members are involved in bothg roups and believe in both idealogies, Sinn Fein has always publicly condemned acts of Terrorism from the IRA.
AnswerAs a matter of fact, it is only in recent years that Sinn Fein has condemmed a few, SELECTIVE acts of violence by the IRA. Omagh in 1998 was the very first time in their existence that they did so. They refused time and time again to do so in the past, and to this day still refuse to call IRA acts of violence criminal; they merely state that they are wrong.And seeing as the President, Vice-President of Sinn Fein (Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness) as well as T.D. Martin Ferris have not only being members and commanders of the IRA for decades, as well as sitting on the IRA Army Council for several years, it can be said that Sinn Fein does in fact dictate to the IRA.
AnswerI have never heard Sinn Fein condemn any act committed by the Provisional IRA. Recently they have said that one or two should not have happened. They did indeed condemn Omagh but that was carried out by the Real IRAThere will always be terrorism as long as people say that other countries should be wiped out. When people learn tolerance, terrorism will decline - but I'm not holding my breath for that.
You cannot completely end terrorism, only hold it off. And even then, there really isn't any other way to hold off terrorism than to give the terrorists what they want, or make them go away by force. They will keep coming, though. Sad truth.
Supported for what? You must give as much background information as possible in your question. It is not always possible to read between the lines of a vague question, but we do our best.
No. Terrorism is a threat to ALL countries. Communism is only a threat to NON-communist countries. Big difference, that. no the west has always been stupid terroism is just to gain fear and it is not threat to the west but what ever the extrimits where Jews,chiristan,or Islamic belive must be " pureifed".
Most definitely not, he was born into a fairly rich family and he always supported the right-wing political parties.
when a one person causes the death of another it is always inhumane, "manslaughter" is a term used in a court of law, meaning that the person who caused the death did NOT contemplate it but committed the crime in a moment of madness and rage.
No, it's not true. Terrorism is a strategy, not a goal.
There will always be terrorism as long as people say that other countries should be wiped out. When people learn tolerance, terrorism will decline - but I'm not holding my breath for that.
Many Muslims and their leaders and representative organisations do protest and speak out about terrorism committed by Muslims, just like people from other religions do. It does not always get media attention, but it does happen. Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. In the UK there was a lot of terrorism by the IRA in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, who would be said to be Christian. Christianity has nothing to do with terrorism either. Terrorists carry out terrorism, not religions. People belonging to all religions carry out terrorism, but despite what people try to make people believe, no religion preaches terrorism. Anyone who commits a terrorist act is not following their own religious teachings.
Defining terrorism has always been difficult. One of the criteria for an act being considered a terrorist act is often the use of violence for the furtherence of political or social goals. Political terrorism specifically refers to terrorism whose goal is to effect political change.
Please provide the excerpt for me to identify the supported theme.
Not correct. Islam is always against terrorism. Refer to question below.
Hes always supported him
He never betrayed Caesar and always supported him.
Terrorism is the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal. The tactic of terrorism is available to insurgents and governments; terrorism includes both the detection of potential acts and the response to related events. The United States has not met its national security goals to destroy terrorist threats; terrorism has always been a problem in my country. Since Al-Qaida's attack to the World Wide Center in New York, there are plenty of Islamic, Indian, and Iraq terrorists living in the United States.
Terrorism.Another View: Terrorism is an act of war, not a criminal offense. The crime most costly to public is burglary or larceny of personal goods.Original View: Terrorism isn't always an act of war, and you can get arrested if you're suspected to be planning it.
You cannot completely end terrorism, only hold it off. And even then, there really isn't any other way to hold off terrorism than to give the terrorists what they want, or make them go away by force. They will keep coming, though. Sad truth.