The Irish Catholic vs. Protestant Divide

The Irish troubles go back hundreds of years, and whatever spin others want to apply to the ‘troubles’ the basic antagonism, according to Regan, is the catholic vs protestant divide.

“The partitioning of the Emerald Island into a protestant North and a catholic South was applying a band-aid, not a solution,” says Regan, “because there are just as many Catholics in the North as there are protestants in the South – but it is the raving Catholics in the North who refuse to live in peace.”

"A great many Northern Irish – peace loving Catholics and Protestants - left for England after 1969 when the British Army moved in,” says Regan, “and we left in 1992.”

“For 38 years until July 31 2007 the British Army’s occupation of Northern Ireland was its longest continuous military campaign in its history,” says Regan, “and I fail to see what it has done, other than delay the inevitable reunion of the Emerald Isle.”

"Apart from satisfying the blood lust of some raving Protestants who would rather die or cause innocent people to die than suffer under majority Catholic rule, the 38-year British army presence in Northern Ireland was a total waste of resources and money and lives."

"If we have 9/11 to thank for anything," says Regan, "it's bringing perspective and sense to the raving lunatics of both religions in Northern Ireland, and particularly the financial backers of the Catholics in the USA."

is a western v islamic clash inevitable?

There is little doubt that both Western civilization - now led by the USA - and the Islamic revolutionaries want to rule the world, if not politically than culturally or economically, but it is by no means inevitable that the antagonism that currently exists will develop into an all-out bloody clash.

There are two outcomes for this scenario:

• There will be an all-out bloody clash in which one is the victor - wiping the other out completely; or both wiping each other out and a third power, such as India or China, stepping in to rule the world; or


• There won't be an all-out bloody clash - life will go on as it has since 2001 with the western world having two choices. Either adapt to repeated and endless attacks by fanatic Islamic revolutionaries, or face the facts - of Vietnam, Cyprus, Algeria, Ireland, etc - and give up by getting out of the Middle East and trusting that the Islamic revolutionaries don't have the power to take over the rest of the world.

Whichever outcome happens over the course of history, what is inevitable is that Islamic freedom fighters/terrorists are going to play an important part in shaping the future of the western world. Like the IRA in Ireland, they are never going to give up. Their cause will pass from generation to generation. Our future, then, is in their hands.

As stated previously, if America really wanted to avoid repeating history it might have followed the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament and turned the other cheek after 9/11. By following the Jewish Old Testament 'eye for an eye' dictum, America appears to have fallen into a trap from which the only escape may be to give the terrorists what they wanted in the first place.

Complete withdrawal from the Middle East, however, would mean that all that rhetoric about 'not giving in' was a complete and utter show of stupid peacockery that caused a terrible and unnecessary loss of human life.

Complete withdrawal may also mean sacrificing Israel.

Is the western world prepared to do that?