I don't think the ira set out to bliw up children..... sounds to me like trying to defend or at least give an excuse for the atrocities that they inflicted. As I said if the ira were supposedly an army & calling themselves that then why not wear a uniform, be identifiable & not be cowardly killers hiding behind women & children.
TBH Jock, like your own countrymen, the English have a lot to answer for in the way they treated both Scots and Irish. Before jumping on the bandwagon could I suggest you take time to read a little Irish history and learn about how the English landowners in Ireland treated the locals during the last century.
It may open your eyes.
I could never support an organisation like the IRA but before condemning them as Terrorists hiding behind women's skirts once again I suggest you look back to the last war and the operations of our own SOE (Special operations executive) who infiltrated France and used similar tactics. It would have been impossible for the Irish to form an army to oppose the forces of the British army and therefore they formed a militia.
There are many examples of how, we, the English put down their uprisings, the Easter uprising in Dublin was one such instance were over 400 people were massacred in 1916 and a further 1600 injured.
There was also the potato famine that caused hardship and death amongst the Irish population whilst the English landowners looked on and failed to assist the local population. All this has caused a hatred of the way the English ruled Ireland and eventually led to an uprising by the Irish in a bid for their freedom.
I saw an interesting programme in the series "who do you think you are" were Irish comedian Brendan O'Carroll researched his ancestry and in particular the death of his grandfather who was executed on his own doorstep by members of the notorious "Black and Tans". It was shown, and confirmed, that the participants in this execution were members of the British Military.
As I have said, I do not condone the IRA for their tactics, nor do I seek to defend them, but before condemning a player who has lived through the troubles that I doubt many of us on here have experienced I strongly advise people to look at the background history and the reasons why the player resents the wearing of a symbol that to his people is inflammatory.
Does this not also have bearing on the way some people see the taking of the knee that is currently being booed at matches?