The message of this cartoon is to show that there are no real victors in the conflict no matter who was being accused. This is evident in source A in the image that two different parties (IRA and British Army) are accusing each other for the pile of bodies with the caption in “He fired first!”.This tells me that they are trying to blame each other for the death of innocent civilians in Northern Ireland. This shows that there are no winners in the conflict as both sides suffered heavy casualties. [L3/6]

Answer Fazlina [L3/6

(a)

The message of this cartoon is show that there were no victors in this conflict no matter  who was blamed. This is evidenced in source A illustrating two different parties blaming each other for the number of deaths caused with the caption in source A “he fired first!”This tells me that they are trying to blame each other for shooting the civilians causing many deaths in Northern Ireland. Thus the message of this cartoon was to encourage both sides to stop the conflict because there is no real winner as both sides suffers casualties.

Dalwin

ANSWER LIMIN:
I can infer from source D that both parties, the marchers and troops, were at fault. This is because the eye-witness wanted to portray to the world that the marchers and troops expressed hatred and violence against each other, however the troops were the ones that killed people. This can be evidenced from,"There was nothing more than stones being thrown at the army; no shots,no nail bombs or petrol bombs whatsoever." This shows that that troops were at fault.

This source is reliable as the provenance of the source is a marshal at the March, thus does not represent any parties. This source can be cross referred to source B, where the British army were seen firing at the marchers. This can be evidenced from,"The soldiers were not being fired at as they were standing in upright position and didn't try to cover." This shows that it was a one-sided fight and the marchers were at the mercy of the soldiers. Thus, this source is reliable.

ANSWER MINGJUN

This is evident in " the army has an intolerable task in Northen Ireland. Events like yesterdays must make a peaceful settlement immensly more difficult.But for the British it is not a solution to get out and leave the the place to a bloody civil war."

When cross-referencing with source A, it shows an IRA member and a British soldier claiming that the other party shot first. This shows that both sources agree that they do not know who shot first .

Thus it is reliable. Because it is reliable, it is useful as evidence about the conflict.

ANSWER RIZWANA: Source E is useful as evidence about the conflict because none of the sides blamed.

this is evident in " Individual soldiers misjudged their situation yesterday cannot yet be known" and "The army has an intolerably difficult task in Northern Ireland". This shows that British nor Northern Ireland is at fault due to misjudged situation.

However, when cross referenced to back ground information, it shows that members of IRA might have shot first. This shows that IRA is at fault for the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Thus, source E is not useful as evidence about the conflict in Northern Ireland as source E contradicts the background information which says that the IRA is at fault.

Source F does not prove that the army did not shoot first. In contrast, source F tells me that British army had shot the civilians first. This is evident when source F says,’ I saw a civilian aiming and I fired at him.’ and ‘It is not remarkable that mistakes were made and some innocent civilians were shot.’ This shows that the British army had shot first which included some civilians with no weapons. 

From source B, it further supports the fact that the british army had shot the civilians first. This is evident when source B says,’Four or five other soldiers started shooting at the fleeing crowd.’ and ‘It was obvious that the soldiers were not being fired at as they were standing at an upright position and didn’t try to find cover.’ This shows that the british army had shot the civilians first which is thus not reliable in saying that the army did not shoot first. Hence when source F is unreliable, it cannot be proved to say that the army did not shoot first. 

Source F is from a report of the official British inquiry, so it was published under the consultant from the British governement. And due to that, the british government obviously did not want the fault to lie in them and as a result, had tried to explain their reasons for shooting the civilians first. Thus, source F has a hidden motive. When there is a hidden motive, it cannot be reliable. Hence source F cannot prove that the army did not shoot first.

ANSWER VALERIE :

Source F proves that the army did not shoot the civilians first , to a certain extent . Source F tells me that the first firing was started by civilians who were armed in the catholic dominated area . This is evidenced in "in the relevant half-hour probably as many shots were fired at the troops as were fired by them." Hence it suggests that the civilians were only shot by the British army because they were aiming their firearms at the army with the intention of shooting first . Similarly , the source states that "they were too well-trained for that" , showing that the soldiers are well trained to not have shot innocent civilians due to panic in the situation .

However source F also shows that the British army is not entirely certain that they only shot down the armed protesters when they were mixed with innocent civilians in the incident . This is evidenced in "But where soldiers have to engage gunmen who are mixed in with innocent civilians they have an impossible task .In these circumstances it is not remarkable that mistakes were made and some innocent civilians hit ." This shows that the British army may have been the one who fired first at the innocent civilians . Thus source F proves that the army did not shoot the civilians first , only to a certain extent .