Bombing Tactics of the IRA

Your editorial stated that the March 20 bombing in England, which took the lives of two children, showed that the IRA conducted its campaign “with absolutely no regard for innocent human life . . . a calculated effort to maximize casualties.”

This is typical of The Times’ inability to analyze news related to Northern Ireland. If the IRA wanted to conduct a campaign “with absolutely no regard” it would simply set off bombs without warning. IRA bombings are preceded by warnings--the dispute in this case is over whether the warning was specific enough and whether the police ignored the warning or tried to find the bomb before clearing the area, as they have done on other occasions. The IRA is, of course, conscious of the fact that when civilians are injured or killed, regardless of whether it provided adequate warnings, there will be a backlash against it, which, moral considerations aside, is why it makes the effort to avoid such tragedies.

That is why the IRA’s non-combatant fatality rate is less than half that of the British security forces, despite the fact that the latter do not use the risky tactic of bombing. That does not, however, excuse the IRA for pursuing a strategy that stupidly depends on the goodwill of British security forces.

SCOTT S. SMITH

Thousand Oaks