Confusing remembrance of 1916

axer

lostexpectation wrote:

the failed rising

flogen wrote:

I agree the rising was a failure

The rising was not a failure. Those heros knew what they were doing when they went out that day. They knew that there was a high chance they would not win a military war like that - they sacrificed themselves for independence. I am talking of the sacrifice that they knew would inspire the country to fight for independence - THEY WERE RIGHT!

THEY DID NOT FAIL!

How could this country not commemorate such a contribution to Ireland.

Cork

axer wrote:

The rising was not a failure.
How could this country not commemorate such a contribution to Ireland.

It was a failure. It was never going to succeed.

That said, Sean Lamass was probably one of this country's greatest leaders. Dev gave us the 1937 constitution, got back the treaty ports and stood up to the IRA in the 1940s.

There is much that this country scould commerorate.

Anyway the 1916 gig will now include more that just 1916.

Cork

Diorraing wrote:

You see, 1916 sparked it all off.

No - It did not.

The quest for independence did not begin with 1916.

But I surpose one day to look back & acknwodge our past is not a bad thing.

We should use the event to remind people the true meaning of republicanism.

Republicanisim has nothing to do with activity around Dublin Port, Warrington, Enniskillen, killing Gardai etc.

Barry Aldwell

Interesting question - would 1916 hold a place anywhere near as important in the history of the state if the leaders had not been executed, thus turning the tide of public opinion against the British?

lostexpectation

Barry Aldwell wrote:

Interesting question - would 1916 hold a place anywhere near as important in the history of the state if the leaders had not been executed, thus turning the tide of public opinion against the British?

so what yer saying is instead of marching the Irish Army should line up on O'Connell street and we can all perform mock executions on them

Diorraing

Cork wrote:

No - It did not.

The quest for independence did not begin with 1916.

But I surpose one day to look back & acknwodge our past is not a bad thing.

We should use the event to remind people the true meaning of republicanism.

Republicanisim has nothing to do with activity around Dublin Port, Warrington, Enniskillen, killing Gardai etc.

I, at least, went to the effort of showing you how 1916 sparked off the War of Indpendance. Would you mind showing me the same courtesy and explain how it did not instead of simply stating: "No - It did not. The quest for independence did not begin with 1916."

axer

Cork wrote:

It was a failure. It was never going to succeed.

It did succeed. It inspired the Irish People fight for their independence.

catholicireland

I'd just like to say that its amazing to read how people are against the celebrations of 1916 because they were "violent" and "bloody". Of course they were. It was a war of independance. Get over it. The interesting thing is that those who oppose it never speak of the bloodthirsty british or how they prevented us from having our own goverment by direct rule.

Victor

lostexpectation wrote:

so we're told, so why are people so keen to claim it as there own I just can't figure it out.

I think the idea is to reclaim in from SF.

does anyone know what other events are occuring on the 75th anniversary, i really can't find mention of anything other then the military parade...

75th ?

lostexpectation

Victor wrote:

I think the idea is to reclaim in from SF.

75th ?

90th sorry.

LordSutch

Cork wrote:

Yes - We should be proud. Look at our economy, our unemployment rate etc.

We have much to be proud of.

But it has to be remembered the 1916 rising did not have popular support and today in a democratic society - actions similar to 1916 would not hold up.

While I agree that we should be proud of our independence and indeed our Economy, we should also remember that this State was the economic "Basket-Case" of Europe for the first 65 years (Approx) after independence!

Of course hindsight is a great thing but may I suggest that if we had not left the Union in the fashion that wed did, then many of the ills that this State had to endure for those decades would not have happened, and that we would have gained independence anyway (after the Nazi threat had gone away in Europe) but without the Economic Grief of being a backwater!

And as for 1916 itself - I am on the side of the fence (wall) that says the rising was a huge mistake that directly led to the permanent division of this Island for generations to come.................

Skalragg

Cork wrote:

No - It did not.

The quest for independence did not begin with 1916.

But I surpose one day to look back & acknwodge our past is not a bad thing.

We should use the event to remind people the true meaning of republicanism.

Republicanisim has nothing to do with activity around Dublin Port, Warrington, Enniskillen, killing Gardai etc.

the 1916 rising did spark off the beginning of an independence movement, people at that time were quite content with home rule, this all changed once 15 leaders of rebellion were executed in prison. thats when the public started saying that independence is what they wanted. The majority of people wanted it, once we got independence the thing which bothered people was that some wanted the brits completely out of the country and to give us all our land back, while others believed we should be happy with what we got and it was a steppiong stone towards getting our stone back,.

Cork
u seem to have a very strange understanding of irish history, welll....thats the view ive gotten from ur numberous historically incorrect posts

axer

flogen wrote:

I think you can respect the violence of 1916 and not the violence of the modern IRA, because the truth is that the War of Independence was fought by freedom fighters and the "war" the IRA fight today is fought by terrorists.

That does not make sense. So you are telling me that those that fought in 1916 were not terriorists? Of course they were. How you can make the distinction is beyond me.

http://www.dictionary.com wrote:

ter·ror·ism
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

I'm pretty sure thats what the rebels in 1916 were doing.

flogen wrote:

It's not easy, but people can celebrate the likes of 1916 without condoning violence, it's just about understanding that violence may have been needed then but is now a thing of our past.

But the IRA would have claimed (before it disarmed at least) that they believed that violence was needed in their time too - how can one say that violence is needed at one time but not another - where is the line?

ArthurF wrote:

Of course hindsight is a great thing but may I suggest that if we had not left the Union in the fashion that wed did, then many of the ills that this State had to endure for those decades would not have happened, and that we would have gained independence anyway (after the Nazi threat had gone away in Europe) but without the Economic Grief of being a backwater!

Like Scotland & Wales? Which are still not even countries?

ArthurF wrote:

And as for 1916 itself - I am on the side of the fence (wall) that says the rising was a huge mistake that directly led to the permanent division of this Island for generations to come.................

I think the leaders after the rebellion should have fought for the whole country and not just for the south, but I can see why they chose to sign the treaty. The chances are if there had not been any rebellion there would not have been ANY republic of Ireland.

/edit:I know alot of people want to celebrate the rising in order to take it away from what they call the hijacking of the anniversary by SF and/or the IRA - but can I put it this way to all of those people who think like that - Why were they the only ones commemorating the 1916 rising in the past? Were they not in effect keeping the commemorations alive? so why do people feel the need to grab it back from them when our own government didnt want it - that is hypocrisy - "we'll commemorate it when we feel like it".

I hope the government are not commemorating the 1916 rising just to take it away from another group though I am glad the state is officially commemorating it after so long - but why not commemorate it for what it is/was - a momentus achievement/sacrafice by a group of Irish civilians who through their sacrifice gave hope, courage and the feeling of "we can do this" to their fellow Irishmen to gain their freedom.

ateam

To Axer...in response to your last point...do you disagree with a military parade to commemorate 1916?

axer

ateam wrote:

To Axer...in response to your last point...do you disagree with a military parade to commemorate 1916?

No, I believe a military parade should be part of the 1916 easter rising commemorations.

murphaph

Would anybody bother going into town to watch Oglaigh na hEireann march down O'Connell Street with their less than impressive arsenal, to watch an Air Corps 'fly by' with a Marretti (sp?)? Give me a break, it'd be pure sh!te and you all know it. Paddies day is less about religion today than ever, half naked brazilian samba dancers aren't exactly the Catholic Church's idea of what the day was all about. It's a decent festival and getting better. I'd rather celebrate being a peaceful multicural Ireland than watch the defence forces being made march around for no real reason.

Diorraing

murphaph wrote:

Would anybody bother going into town to watch Oglaigh na hEireann march down O'Connell Street with their less than impressive arsenal, to watch an Air Corps 'fly by' with a Marretti (sp?)?.

Yeah, in fact, I would be honoured to attend such a march. I find it insulting how you belittle our defense forces. Óglaigh na hÉireann are one of the most respected armies in the world. They do fantastic peace keeping work in some of the most dangerous areas in the world. I, for one, will be out on Easter Sunday, not only to commemorate my country's heroes but to show my respect to our fantastic armed forces of whom I am exterely proud

LordSutch

murphaph wrote:

Would anybody bother going into town to watch Oglaigh na hEireann march down O'Connell Street with their less than impressive arsenal.

But which Oglaigh na hEireann?

The Fianna Fail version or the Sinn Fein version?

Hagar

It's a big street. Why not both?

Wickerman1

Do you mean theÓglaigh na hÉireann that defrauded millions of punts from the state in false deafness claims because their guns were too loud! not that they have ever had a chance to use them.

They are a disgrace and embarrassment to the Irish people and should not be confused with the brave souls of 1916.

Our schools and hospitals could have benefited from this cash instead of lining the pockets of these wasters.

Shame on them.

flogen

ArthurF wrote:

But which Oglaigh na hEireann?

The Fianna Fail version or the Sinn Fein version?

The one that represents the Irish Republic.

Wickerman1 wrote:

Do you mean theÓglaigh na hÉireann that defrauded millions of punts from the state in false deafness claims because their guns were too loud! not that they have ever had a chance to use them.

They are a disgrace and embarrassment to the Irish people and should not be confused with the brave souls of 1916.

Our schools and hospitals could have benefited from this cash instead of lining the pockets of these wasters.

Shame on them.

I may be wrong but I don't think the brave souls of 1916 went by the name of óglaigh na héireann, so there shouldn't be too much confusion.

Diorraing

flogen wrote:

The one that represents the Irish Republic.



I may be wrong but I don't think the brave souls of 1916 went by the name of óglaigh na héireann, so there shouldn't be too much confusion.

Unfortunately, they were also known as Óglaigh na hÉireann (Irish Volunteers) but also there was the IRB and Irish Citizen army. So many Óglaigh na hÉireann

murphaph

There's only one Oglaigh na hEireann today and since the foundation of the state, anyone who believes otherwise should find somewhere else to live as they're not believers in our country but believers in subversives who would seek to destroy that country by attacking the institutions of our democratc state.

I personally can think of a million better things to do than stand and watch men and women in uniform parade in a Stalinist type display. Not for me I'm afraid. It's a sign of weakness that we even think we have to grasp onto this whole 1916 gig.

ateam

murphaph wrote:

There's only one Oglaigh na hEireann today and since the foundation of the state, anyone who believes otherwise should find somewhere else to live as they're not believers in our country but believers in subversives who would seek to destroy that country by attacking the institutions of our democratc state.

I personally can think of a million better things to do than stand and watch men and women in uniform parade in a Stalinist type display. Not for me I'm afraid. It's a sign of weakness that we even think we have to grasp onto this whole 1916 gig.

I disagree. I see the Rising as a source of pride and national identity. We are all grateful that we no longer belong to a foreign power. We are only commemorating for one day...that's all!

LordSutch

ateam wrote:

I disagree. I see the Rising as a source of pride and national identity. We are all grateful that we no longer belong to a foreign power. We are only commemorating for one day...that's all!

Grateful that we are an independent State maybe, but I am certainly Not grateful for what the insurgents did in Easter 1916 -
and neither am I grateful for the way in which we gained our independence in 1922.
(You only have to read this thread to see that the scars from 1916 remain with us to this very day)!

murphaph

Very true Arthur. This island could have been far less divided had home rule been given the chance, indeed we could have expected Scotland and Wales to follow suit a lot sooner with 4 nations in a much looser coalition than the old UK, it's possible in fact that we will head there someday as we are seeing more and more cooperation beween the UK&I on issues of immigration, law and order and so on. We share a common history and our cultures are more similar than different. I'd much prefer if we had home rule with tax determination as a single truly united island than the mess we have today. Even if a 'traditional' UI is achieved, it will take centuries for the protestant community in NI to feel at home, if ever-that's wh I think more east-west links need to come about to bring true peace to these islands.

axer

murphaph wrote:

This island could have been far less divided had home rule been given the chance

And who's fault is that? Home rule would never have been implemented - EVER!!! The unionists/loyalists would have blocked it (and indeed did) by whatever means necessary. Maybe if the british government had dealt with those who violently opposed it at the time (instead of letting the Army in the Curragh refuse to deal with the issue) then we would not have the mess of a divided island that we have today. It was/is the British Government who caused/dealt very badly with this mess. Neither those who fought for Irish freedom in 1916 nor the signatories of the treaty caused this mess - it was the British Government.

Terry

axer wrote:

And who's fault is that? Home rule would never have been implemented - EVER!!! The unionists/loyalists would have blocked it (and indeed did) by whatever means necessary. Maybe if the british government had dealt with those who violently opposed it at the time (instead of letting the Army in the Curragh refuse to deal with the issue) then we would not have the mess of a divided island that we have today. It was/is the British Government who caused/dealt very badly with this mess. Neither those who fought for Irish freedom in 1916 nor the signatories of the treaty caused this mess - it was the British Government.

indeed.
the british government are to blame for the whole thing. they were the ones who invaded in the first place. had they not invaded, then there would not have been a 1916 rising.
i think some people are forgetting the basics here.
the british were the invaders here. they didn't give a damn about us or our economy. we were just another part of the empire. (i don't want to hear that united kindom of great britain and Ireland crap).
somebody said we left the union too soon.
when would have been the right time? after WW!? after WW2? 1972? when thatcher was in power?

the fact of the matter is that the british were violent oppressors across the globe and the heroes of 1916 stood up and took the chance of fighting back. they failed, but their murders at the hand of the british government inspired that generation to fight against the oppressors and they should always be remembered for that.
don't like it here? fuck off to the britain you seem to love so much. i'm sure the BNP would be happy to have you as a member.

as for the army marching in the parade, why the hell not?
they are as much a part of this country as anyone alse and should be honoured for their bravery in the face of danger in places like lebanon and kosovo.

also, someone mentioned that if the Irish army were bigger, that they would be an invading force.
would you ever cop the fuck on. Ireland had a similar population to britain 500 years ago. we didn't go invading other countries back then. why would we do it now? there are countries out there with much smaller armies who were part of the invading force in iraq. numbers have nothing to do with the Irish army.
and don't argue that Irish immigrants to america, australia etc. is the same as invading other countries. it's not. the Irish were forced out of this country because the british oppressors were comeplete bastards back then.

use of the word oppressor in reference to the british invaders is completely valid. see the penal laws for reference.

Diorraing

ArthurF wrote:

Grateful that we are an independent State maybe, but I am certainly Not grateful for what the insurgents did in Easter 1916 -
and neither am I grateful for the way in which we gained our independence in 1922.
(You only have to read this thread to see that the scars from 1916 remain with us to this very day)!

If it weren't for 1916 and 1922 the best position we'd be in would be like Scotland or Wales without any independence.
I am grateful for the rebels of 1916 because they ensured that I was born and reared in a free Ireland and that democracy was prevelant in our society.
Read the proclamation, understand the ideals and you will understand why it is so important to commemorate 1916

samb

Diorraing wrote:

If it weren't for 1916 and 1922 the best position we'd be in would be like Scotland or Wales without any independence.

This is a crucial point. Scotland and Wales could easily achieve independance today if enough of them actually wanted to. If 1916 hadn't happened we would certainly have achieved independance by now and probably would have done so with little blood-sacrafice. The situation in the north could also have been better. Perhaps independance would have been planned, and partition avoided (or changed, three county partition maybe).