British army's involvement in N.Ireland conflict: helped OR worsened the conflict?

The British Government sent the British army into Northern Ireland in a "limited
operation" to restore law and order in 1969. It followed three days and two nights of
violence in many parts of Northern Ireland. The soldiers replaced the exhausted
Irish police who had been dealing with the tension for a long period of time and
were at a breaking point. The arrival of the British troops was greeted with
enthusiasm from both sides who wanted a break in hostilities. The British army
helped the conflict by separating the two sides and performing a peace-keeping
role.
The British army's presence worsened the conflict as it strengthened the resolve of
the IRA as it was a demonstration of the British government's interference in
N.Ireland's politics. The IRA was now determined to use more violence to drive out
pro-British elements. This resulted in a hostile reaction by the British army in turn.
Bloody Sunday was the first incident in which the British army accidentally killed
Catholic civilians and started ta vicious cycle of violence which saw the N.Ireland
conflict escalate.
Also in their efforts to defeat the IRA, there were incidents of collusion between the
British Army and loyalist Protestant (who were armed) throughout the conflict. This
included soldiers and policemen taking part in loyalist attacks while off-duty, giving
weapons and intelligence to loyalists, not taking action against them, and hindering
police investigations. The security forces also had double agents and informers
within loyalist groups who (in some cases) organized attacks on the Catholics. Thus
the British army's cooperation with the Protestant loyalists worsened the conflict as
it intensified and prolonged the situation.

Source A makes me surprised about source B as they disagree about the success of
the NHS. In source A, it is written that Thus source A is saying that the NHS was
successful. In source B, it is written that Thus source B is saying that the NHS
was unsuccessful. Source A does not agree with source B and this is unexpected.
Thus source A makes me surprised about source B as they disagree about the
success of the NHS.
After cross-referencing to source C to A and D to B, Source A does not make me
surprised about source B in disagreeing about the success of the NHS as source C
supports source A in saying that the NHS was successful. In source C, it is written
that Thus source C is saying that the NHS was successful. Source C supports
source A. I have now found a source that supports source A and this shows why A
states that the NHS was successful. In source D, it is written that Thus source D
is saying that the NHS was unsuccessful. Source D supports source B. I have now
found a source that supports source B and this shows why source B states that the
NHS was unsuccessful. Therefore both sources A and B can be supported by other
sources and their respective stands on the NHS are expected. Therefore source A
does not make me surprised about source B in disagreeing about the success of the
NHS.
After examining the motives of both sources A and B, Source A does not make me
surprised about source B as they disagree about the success of the NHS. The
producer of source A is the British Minister of Health. His audience are the British
citizens. They will know that the NHS was successful. They will then feel happy at
the success of their healthcare system. They will then show greater support for the
NHS. As the Minister of Health, he is likely to exaggerate about the good points of
the NHS and lie/cover up about the bad points of the NHS as he is trying to defend
his own ministry and protect his own job. Therefore A is unreliable. The producer of
source B is a British opposition politician. His audience are the British citizens. They
will know that the NHS was unsuccessful. They will feel angry for the failure of their
healthcare system. They will support the opposition in changing the NHS for the
better. As an opposition politician, he is likely to lie/exaggerate about the bad points
of the NHS so as to push blame on the ruling party. He will then benefit from more
support from the British citizens as they support the ruling party less. This makes B
unreliable. Therefore both A and B are unreliable for expected reasons and thus
they differ. Thus after examining the motives of both sources A and B, Source A
does not make me surprised about source B as they disagree about the success of
the NHS.

Guide to writing the Conclusion paragraph for Combined Humanities SEQ

1. Topic sentence: State your stand (which factor?) according to Criteria (Root
cause/solution, Impact [scope-> areas (social, economic or political), geographical
spread, number of/groups of people affected e.g ], Impact (time duration)
2. Cross-analysis part 1: Chosen factor VS other factor 1
3. Cross-analysis part 2: Chosen factor VS other factor 2
4. Repeat topic sentence
Sample question
The following are traffic policies in Singapore:
(i) The area licensing scheme
(ii) The Electronic Road Pricing scheme
(iii) The Vehicle Quota System
Are any one of these more important than the others in ensuring smooth traffic flow
in Singapore? Explain your answer. (12m)
In conclusion, the VQS is more important than the others in ensuring smooth traffic
flow in Singapore as it is the root solution. The VQS is more important than the ALS
in ensuring smooth traffic flow in Singapore as the ALS was not very effective as it
was prone to human error and too manpower intensive. The VQS is more important
than the ERP in ensuring smooth traffic flow in Singapore as the ERP also can
discourage use of certain routes during peak hours. If drivers choose to pay the ERP
rates, they would still use the routes and cause traffic jams. As compared to the ERP
and ALS, the VQS addresses the problem at its root by directly controlling the total
car population in Singapore. Without cars, potential drivers will have no choice but
to use public transport which helps reduce traffic flow and this ensures smoother
traffic flow. Therefore in conclusion, the VQS is more important than the others in
ensuring smooth traffic flow in Singapore as it is the root solution.
Sample question
Was the Iraq-Kuwait war more disastrous for Iraq or Kuwait? Explain your answer.
(12m)

In conclusion, the Iraq-Kuwait war was more disastrous for Kuwait than Iraq in terms
of the areas in which it was negatively affected. Kuwait was negatively affected in
terms of its environment (air and water pollution as a result of the burnt oil wells
and dumping of oil into the Persian Gulf), infrastructure (which was damaged during
the war), economy (when its oil wells were burned by Iraqi forces), military losses
(in which it lost when fighting with the Iraqi forces) and civilian casualties (many
were killed directly in the fighting and many others were killed indiscriminately by
the Iraqi troops). In comparison, Iraq was only negatively affected in terms of its
military losses (which it lost when fighting with the UN forces), its infrastructure
(from bombings by the UN forces) and civilian casualties (as a result of bombings by
the UN forces). Therefore in conclusion, the Iraq-Kuwait war was more disastrous for
Kuwait than Iraq in terms of the areas in which it was negatively affected.