How can IRA actions during 1916 and 1921 be considered 'terrorist' actions?

Answer 1

Following a 1916 uprising and years of guerrilla war led by the legendary Irish nationalist Michael Collins, the British government decided in 1920 to split up Ireland, which it had ruled for centuries. An independent state was created in the island's predominantly Catholic south, with its capital in Dublin; a smaller, northern district called Ulster, with a Protestant majority, remained part of the United Kingdom. The south descended into civil war over the partition, which cost Collins his life and led to the rise of Eamon DeValera as the president of the new Irish Free State. DeValera refused to vacate Ireland's claim to the North and steered a strict neutral course in world affairs during the decades in which he would remain in power in the Republic of Ireland, as the Free State became known. In the North, the Catholic minority, many of them with "republican" or "nationalist" sympathies," found they faced discrimination for jobs, housing, and in their treatment before the law. On the other side, Protestant "unionists" held sway, controlled the patronage that doled out government jobs, and remained fiercely loyal to the British crown. Throughout much of the 20th century, Northern Ireland's shipyards, linen mills, and other manufacturing hubs played an important role in the economy of the British Empire. Catholic residents, however, largely were excluded from this prosperity, and when the conflict the Irish call "the Troubles" erupted in 1969, the Catholic unemployment rate in some parts of the province topped 30 percent. The IRA actions were coined "terrorist actions" because the British Media said so. If England was being taken over by Another Country and fought to regain its freedom by fighting the aggressors, that action would be considered a defending your country. IRA was defending the country.

Yes, depending on your interpritation of it. It could also be considered actions more or less the actions of the Founding Fathers of the United States. If you wanted to be technical about it, you could say that George Washington was like an Osamma Bin Laaden of his time, as far as the British were concerned. The events in Ireland in 1916 in some ways have parallels with the current resistance in Iraq. Minus the suicide bombers that is, trying to fight to get rid of an occupying military force. That is terrorism depending on your perspective. Pre-emptive wars = terrorist reigemes taking over others ? and freedom fighters like Washington are considered terroristsw