Easter Sunday/ 2006

axer

murphaph wrote:

I disagree. I believe much more could have been achieved for everyone on the island if the constitutional politicians had been left to get on with it.

Would it be the 63rd home rule act or the 64th home rule act that you think would have been enforced. I somehow think that the unionists would have continued to block any sort of home rule - forever!

axer

murphaph wrote:

Conscription into the British Army was never applied to any part of the island of Ireland so it has and still is entirely optional for irishmen and women to join the british armed forces.

They threatened to do it though but they knew they would never get away with it.

Sgt Sensible

axer wrote:

Would it be the 63rd home rule act or the 64th home rule act that you think would have been enforced. I somehow think that the unionists would have continued to block any sort of home rule - forever!

Unionist MPs got a bill with negotiable provisions through which would have excluded Ulster from home rule. The question was whether it was acceptable for a minority to use the threat of civil war to prevent the democratic process. In retrospect the unionists paranoia about home rule equalling rome rule was reasonably well founded.

Snickers Man

murphaph wrote:

Conscription into the British Army was never applied to any part of the island of Ireland so it has and still is entirely optional for irishmen and women to join the british armed forces. Many still do of course so the rising didn't stop that

I'm fully aware of that. I also strongly suspect that the only reason conscription wasn't introduced into Ireland when the rest of the UK got it in 1916 was because of the rising and its aftermath.

But conscription is not the point. The point is that the army was seen as a career by many Irishmen, for whatever reason, and the British Army in which they served used them for the most heinous purposes. It's always the case with Imperial armies. The worst savages come from the countries that they've taken over. It's brilliant psychology: "Look Paddy. You can be as good as the top dog (well not quite, but you can certainly be a cut above the other riff raff if you really show the fighting qualities which makes you famous as a race)"

It's not only the Irish who were patronised in this way. The Ghurkas too. What wonderful chaps they were. So good with a knife.

And it's not just the British Army. Some of the worst savages in the German Army were the Croat Ustashis. A large part of the bitterness in the Balkan wars of the 1990s is a hangover from what they got up to in the second world war.

Truly there is no greater contempt than that with which tuppence ha'penny looks down on tuppence.

wrote:

If it wasn't for those british armed forces you clearly hold in such low regard, we'd have been overrun by Nazi Germany before the yanks could get the finger out and help us. Again, assisted by many thousands of brave irishmen in their ranks.

My grandad was one. And you're talking crap. Hitler never had any notion of invading Ireland. Once he'd put Britain back in its box in 1940, his only interest was in keeping it at bay while he concentrated on his real war which was in the east against the soviets.

What you dewy-eyed romantics can't or won't face is that the main conflict of the second world war was that between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. That's where most of the fighting was, that's where the vast majority of the German army was committed, that's where most of the casualties were suffered.

The Western Front was a sideshow.

And within 25 years of its ending, the British Empire was gone.

They lost.

Victor

axer wrote:

Thats what it looks like to me too. It is a shame that the government are that disrespectful to those who died for Ireland. As bad as people think "the shinners" are, at least they commemorate it for the right reasons.

You mean Irishmen in Army uniforms being killed by Irishmen in volunteer uniforms?

murphaph

Snickers Man wrote:

I'm fully aware of that. I also strongly suspect that the only reason conscription wasn't introduced into Ireland when the rest of the UK got it in 1916 was because of the rising and its aftermath.

But conscription is not the point. The point is that the army was seen as a career by many Irishmen, for whatever reason, and the British Army in which they served used them for the most heinous purposes. It's always the case with Imperial armies. The worst savages come from the countries that they've taken over. It's brilliant psychology: "Look Paddy. You can be as good as the top dog (well not quite, but you can certainly be a cut above the other riff raff if you really show the fighting qualities which makes you famous as a race)"

It's not only the Irish who were patronised in this way. The Ghurkas too. What wonderful chaps they were. So good with a knife.

And it's not just the British Army. Some of the worst savages in the German Army were the Croat Ustashis. A large part of the bitterness in the Balkan wars of the 1990s is a hangover from what they got up to in the second world war.

Truly there is no greater contempt than that with which tuppence ha'penny looks down on tuppence.

The british army is still seen as a career choice for irish people today! The rising did NOT stop irish people joing the british army so you can drop that line now.

Snickers Man wrote:

My grandad was one. And you're talking crap. Hitler never had any notion of invading Ireland. Once he'd put Britain back in its box in 1940, his only interest was in keeping it at bay while he concentrated on his real war which was in the east against the soviets.

What you dewy-eyed romantics can't or won't face is that the main conflict of the second world war was that between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. That's where most of the fighting was, that's where the vast majority of the German army was committed, that's where most of the casualties were suffered.

The Western Front was a sideshow.

And within 25 years of its ending, the British Empire was gone.

They lost.

Yes my grandad also fought (he deserted the Irish Army to do it). Now, if you really want to believe that Germany would have left us alone and in doing so left the only real location to invade (liberate) western Europe from to the americans et al then I believe it is naive of you. They had operation Gruen (green) and although little thought had gone into it, the Germans were aware of Ireland's historical importantce to Britain as somewhere it could be attacked from. To call the western front a sideshow really belittles what happened, notwithstanding the 20 odd million soviet casualties. The British Armed forces held Nazi Germany at bay for just long enough, in particular the RAF were instrumental in keeping Britain and Ireland free nations.

LordSutch

I for one, will certainly Not be at the 1916 Rising commeration . . . .

I am from a non-Nationalist, non-Republican background and I fervently believe that the 1916 rising did more damage to Ireland in so many ways - Politically, Economically, Culturally, Religeously, then add to that the North South dimension (ruined), British Irish relations (ruined), Protestant, Roman Catholic, Returnees from the Western Front, Ex-service men! which ever way you look at it, the Rising was a massive mistake, and we are still trying to repair the damage today! & the Country still isnt United, (but was it ever)?

P.S. I would have been a "Redmondite" if I had been around in 1916, had I survived the trenches.

axer

ArthurF wrote:

I am from a non-Nationalist, non-Republican background and I fervently believe that the 1916 rising did more damage to Ireland in so many ways - Politically, Economically, Culturally, Religeously, then add to that the North South dimension (ruined), British Irish relations (ruined), Protestant, Roman Catholic, Returnees from the Western Front, Ex-service men! which ever way you look at it, the Rising was a massive mistake, and we are still trying to repair the damage today! & the Country still isnt United, (but was it ever)?

Give a viable alternative than the easter rising then if you think it was such a mistake.

Snickers Man

murphaph wrote:

The british army is still seen as a career choice for irish people today!

In vastly reduced numbers though. We have independence to thank for that.

murphaph wrote:

Now, if you really want to believe that Germany would have left us alone and in doing so left the only real location to invade (liberate) western Europe from to the americans et al then I believe it is naive of you. ... the Germans were aware of Ireland's historical importantce to Britain as somewhere it could be attacked from.

I quite agree. If they had really wanted to invade Britain they would probably have taken us first. But they never did. Wonder why? Maybe they had bigger fish to fry elsewhere.

murphaph wrote:

To call the western front a sideshow really belittles what happened, notwithstanding the 20 odd million soviet casualties.

I'm sure it was no fair ground for those caught up in it. What I meant was that compared to the titanic nature of the Eastern Front (the real war) it was a sideshow.

murphap wrote:

The British Armed forces held Nazi Germany at bay for just long enough, in particular the RAF were instrumental in keeping Britain and Ireland free nations.

Well I find it ironic to see that you have no problem with the indiscriminate wholesale slaughter of civilians which was Bomber Command's stock in trade.

You know, the closest the British come to agonising over the murderous deeds of their fighting men (in the way that people on one side of the debate here are wringing their hands over 1916) is when they contemplate the actions of Bomber Command.

The airmen didn't get a campaign medal at the end of the war.
Their actions were largely written out of history.
In some cases, when the likes of Dresden were brought to prominence in later years, they were largely disowned.

In fact, if you read a book called Bomber Command by Max Hastings (a former editor of the Daily Torygraph and no leftie) you will see how utterly futile much of the actions of Bomber Command were. But they sure killed a lot of civilians.

Now, why do you as (presumably) an Irishman have so little problem with that but such a huge problem with what happened on your own country's path to independence?

And to bring things back to the topic which is remembrance of 1916, I guess the main point I am trying to make is that by ignoring 1916 we are creating a vaccuum which a vociferous body of opinion will want to fill with remembrance of another military tradition which is part of our past. One that was far more murderous than anything Pearse and the boys ever got up to.

LordSutch

axer wrote:

Give a viable alternative than the easter rising then if you think it was such a mistake.

I did say that I would have been a Redmondite, therefore I would have agreed with "Home Rule" thus moving the Power from Westminster to Dublin and giving us control over our own affairs, but keeping close ties with Britain non the less, but I do not agree with the Mono cultural, Roman Catholic, narrow minded Republican State that was formed in the years after 1916.

And what were those who masterminded the Rising thinking of? re relations with Britain and the North? I dont think it was going to win many friends - and neither did it, as by all accounts the leaders were dispised by all and sundry after the City lay in tatters.

I do realise that Norhtern Unionists would not have agreed "initially" to Home Rule, but it should have been worked on, and an all inclusive settlement would have "evolved" in the following years, instead of the 1916 leaders banging in another nail into the coffin that might have been Irish Unity?

axer

ArthurF wrote:

I did say that I would have been a Redmondite, therefore I would have agreed with "Home Rule" thus moving the Power from Westminster to Dublin and giving us control over our own affairs, but keeping close ties with Britain non the less, but I do not agree with the Mono cultural, Roman Catholic, narrow minded Republican State that was formed in the years after 1916.

Well their were really only 2 cultures on this island - those of the protestants and those of the catholics. Considering some of the protestants/unionists demanded their own region then I think it is no wonder Ireland became a "Mono cultural, Roman Catholic, narrow minded Republican State" after that.

Easter Proclamation wrote:

The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.

ArthurF wrote:

And what were those who masterminded the Rising thinking of? re relations with Britain and the North? I dont think it was going to win many friends

Ahh, come on, thats sounds like an inferiority complex - we wouldn't like to rub them up the wrong way now would we.

ArthurF wrote:

and neither did it, as by all accounts the leaders were dispised by all and sundry after the City lay in tatters.

Back this up please. That is not true and even the minority in Dublin that were against it were fed lies/propaganda of the Rising participators helping the Nazis.

ArthurF wrote:

I do realise that Norhtern Unionists would not have agreed "initially" to Home Rule, but it should have been worked on, and an all inclusive settlement would have "evolved" in the following years, instead of the 1916 leaders banging in another nail into the coffin that might have been Irish Unity?

How many more years would you reckon it would have taken to work on the unionists? It took 34 years to get the fourth home rule act enforced and it only got enforced because it excluded 6 counties from it. So maybe at least 100 years later on the 63rd home rule act the unionists would have thought "actually, hold on one second, I think we should do this".

murphaph

Snickers Man wrote:

In vastly reduced numbers though. We have independence to thank for that.

No, we have increased prosperity. Irishmen still joined british ranks in great numbers for decades after independence. The numbers in the British Army as a whole are drastically reduced today over what they were 100 years ago too though SM, so the numbers of english, scot and welsh are also much reduced given the nature of modern warfare.

Snickers Man wrote:

I quite agree. If they had really wanted to invade Britain they would probably have taken us first. But they never did. Wonder why? Maybe they had bigger fish to fry elsewhere.

That's just wrong. The Battle of Britain was Germany's first assault on GB. They intended knocking out the RAF before a seaborne invasion. They didn't reckon on the RAF at least 'drawing' with them though so phase II couldn't proceed. It was then that Hitler really turned his attention east.

Snickers Man wrote:

Well I find it ironic to see that you have no problem with the indiscriminate wholesale slaughter of civilians which was Bomber Command's stock in trade.

I don't know where you got that from but you must remember that the german people popularly supported Hitler and the Nazis, unlike the irish population wrt. Pearse & Co. who had no such popular support.

Snickers Man wrote:

Now, why do you as (presumably) an Irishman have so little problem with that but such a huge problem with what happened on your own country's path to independence?

I am saddened that tens of thousands of german civilians perished under allied bombers but Germany did start the war and it's government had popular support of its people and went to war (by invading Poland) in their name. The irish rebels did not have such an elected mandate.

murphaph

axer wrote:

Well their were really only 2 cultures on this island - those of the protestants and those of the catholics. Considering some of the protestants/unionists demanded their own region then I think it is no wonder Ireland became a "Mono cultural, Roman Catholic, narrow minded Republican State" after that.

Rubbish. There was a healthy sized prod population in the Free State in 1921 which all but disappeared within a decade. The proclamation was just words, words that the likes of DeV had no interest in (hence the right hand of McQuaid writing our catholic constitution and damning us to decades of unquestioned catholic dogma and misery for many).

axer wrote:

Back this up please. That is not true and even the minority in Dublin that were against it were fed lies/propaganda of the Rising participators helping the Nazis.

Sorry, what? The Nazis, in 1916? A bit premature methinks!

A Dub in Glasgo

murphaph wrote:

I am saddened that tens of thousands of german civilians perished under allied bombers but Germany did start the war and it's government had popular support of its people and went to war (by invading Poland) in their name.

I am against the killings of civilians but in the case of the allied bombings of civilian areas... they got what was coming to them so tough.

The allied bombing of civilans was clearly a war crime but because they won the war, it is not considered as such. Hell, people do not even consider it as terrorism!

wb

Flex wrote:

Im proud of the fact that Ireland is a free country today and that we fought to take back our freedom, rather than begging the people who took it from us to let us have (some of) it back when it suited them to do so; plus Im proud to be Irish and dont have an inferiority complex that causes me to resent my countries freedom because it means Im an Irish citizen rather than British citizen; so Ill definitely be out that day.

Well put flex. Sums up my feelings entirely

axer

murphaph wrote:

Rubbish. There was a healthy sized prod population in the Free State in 1921 which all but disappeared within a decade. The proclamation was just words, words that the likes of DeV had no interest in (hence the right hand of McQuaid writing our catholic constitution and damning us to decades of unquestioned catholic dogma and misery for many).

True, their was a considerable protestant population in the free state at that time but alot of them moved up north - I believe it was something like 50,000 less protestants over a 10 year period. While there were instances of intimidation most just left for the protestant state that was being created as they had always had a sort of upper hand over the catholics and could not stand being on the same level as catholics. There weren't exactly many of the leaders left after the rising so I don't think Dev was the best representative of them. If the other leaders had been involved in writting our constitution AND if the north had been part of the Republic then I believe Ireland would not have become such a mono cultural/religious state.

murphaph wrote:

Sorry, what? The Nazis, in 1916? A bit premature methinks!

Yep, sorry, I meant the central powers.

Diorraing

The 1916 rising was as democratic a rising as there ever was. There was absolutely nothing democratic about Britain's rule in Ireland. Three Home-Rule bills were voted down by that bastion of democracy that is The House of Lords. The war was no excuse not to grant Home Rule, it would have taken some of the burden off the British but they needed us to supply them with food etc. They saw us as complete subordinates to them.
The 1916 rising was completely inspired by Robert Emmet, a republican protestant, the proclamation spoke of cherisihing "all children of the state equally". It was inclusive, there wasn't one element of anti-protestantism about it.
In a time where violence was ubiquitous, the rising was not anomalous. You cannot impose today's standards on those living in a time where war was rampant. There was no democratic path to be taken because there was simply no democracy in Ireland (What mandate did the British have to be there in the first place!?!)
And how much was the public against the rising. Sure, they were pissed off that their city was in flames. But while openly criticising the rebels, they knew that they would be killed. How do you go from one mindset to the complete opposite in such a short space of time!?!

11.3 SECONDS

Is it true that Sen. David Norris has declined an invite to the parade ?

I heard ascribed to him the reply that on Easter Sunday he would be going to church to celebrate the rising of Jesus Christ and not the uprising of Padraig Pearse.

Why would he say this ?

As far as a military parade is concerned I wonder what the Air Corps will put up for a fly past ? I suppose they could hire in the Red Arrows to display green white and orange smoke down O'Connell Street !

model

murphaph wrote:

The British Armed forces held Nazi Germany at bay for just long enough, in particular the RAF were instrumental in keeping Britain and Ireland free nations.

Are you implying the Germans would have invaded and taken over Ireland? Well I must question and offer you to be mistaken regarding your history. Ireland at the time was not a free nation, and remains today what it was then. Operation Green was a plan by the Germans to divert British attention towards Ireland, by sending a number of boats to the south of the country. With all due respect my friend, the Germans had no plans of "invading" Ireland as such, they had intended on working with the IRA due to the history between the two. Allies would be a poor, yet reasonable way to put the relationship.

In conclusion, you are wrong to suggest Britain kept us free from Germany, when really they were the ones who invaded us and Germany had no plans for an invasion of Ireland. Britian was worried of a possible, as a well-used phrase in history goes, "war on two fronts", and therefore was distracted somewhat from concentrating on what was more important.

murphaph

^^shockingly trusting of this benevolent Nazi Germany there model. The germans would certainly have wanted to take control of the british industrial part of this island, ie, Northern Ireland. They would never have left Shorts and H&W among others out of their control! Now, if you think they would have respected the international boundary around the six counties after they'd ridden roughshod over almost every other border in continental Europe then I think you're sadly misguided.

The only countries they didn't invade were allies (or at least had similar outlooks) of theirs (Fascist Spain and Italy, the big Nazi bank of Switzerland and Romania etc.). We were certainly not allies of theirs and we actively assisted the Allies in many ways during WWII. Germany would have been aware of this and we would have paid the price too.

lostexpectation

Victor wrote:

the Rising was on the Moday, the Bank Holiday, a civic 'event'. The Shinners always hold their thing on the Sunday.

so does that mean the shinners have been pushed out of their place or have moved to seperate themselves?

16 days and couting and still no statement on whats happening...

murphaph

lostexpectation wrote:

so does that mean the shinners have been pushed out of their place or have moved to seperate themselves?

Pushed out I'd say. To be honest, it would have been better if they'd been left with it instead of the state sanctioning the rising once again. There are still very mixed views on it as can be seen in this thread. It's not universally supported by any means. I'm sure all the same celtic jersey wearing troglodites will be out in force on O'Connell St for this too, only this time they'll not be lobbing bricks at the members of the institutions of this state.

A Dub in Glasgo

murphaph wrote:

Pushed out I'd say. To be honest, it would have been better if they'd been left with it instead of the state sanctioning the rising once again. There are still very mixed views on it as can be seen in this thread. It's not universally supported by any means. I'm sure all the same celtic jersey wearing troglodites will be out in force on O'Connell St for this too, only this time they'll not be lobbing bricks at the members of the institutions of this state.

How many Celtic fan rioters were there? You seem to think that the majority of the rioters were Celtic fans. I counted about 10-15, how many did you count? I also spotted guys wearing designer labels and Aston villa garments.

lostexpectation

murphaph wrote:

Pushed out I'd say. To be honest, it would have been better if they'd been left with it instead of the state sanctioning the rising once again. There are still very mixed views on it as can be seen in this thread. It's not universally supported by any means. I'm sure all the same celtic jersey wearing troglodites will be out in force on O'Connell St for this too, only this time they'll not be lobbing bricks at the members of the institutions of this state.

what was the SF parade that everyone was giving out about on here a good while back it wasn't easter sunday last year was it?

i doubt they got bricks lobbed at them, but i think that they got quite a bad reception giving the amount of posts on it here.

I think the biggest disruption will be to the people trying to get bargins in clerys

oh and i meant to say in passing that the biggest reason there was less trouble on paddy's this year then last was simple bad weather.

ateam

Does anyone know the time the parade is starting at, what streets it will go down etc...

Diorraing

We heard the same old tripe when Kevin Barry and the other IRA volunteers to be reinterred. Fintan O Toole and the D4 media were there saying no-one will turn up for. On one of the coldest days of that year over 5,000 people came out to honour them and the celtic-jersey brigade were in the overwhelming minority there. Mark my words, the same will happen this Easter and Muphaph and friends will be forced to eat their words.

arbeitsscheuer

flogen wrote:

Maybe when they celebrate Irish Independence as a whole (rather than a lost battle which was a small part of it),
...Seems like a fair idea but badly executed... excuse the pun.

I actually concur with this point.

In addition, it should be pointed out that, by-and-large, your average Irish person was in no way sympathetic to the Irish Volunteers, right up until the executions in Kilmainham began to take place - Britain managed to shoot itself in the foot quite spectacularly, and from then on Irish public opinion was always against them, and for a united, republican Ireland.

I think celebrating your nation's past and origins is a commendable idea (at least in the current political climate which endorses the "nation-state" ideal) but it would be nice if people actually bothered to investigate their history and challenge the doctrine forced down their throats from a young age, rather than taking everything in their history books as read.

Zombrex

Personally I'm gonig to be remembering the brave British soldiers who decided that the best way forward for Ireland was to execute the leaders of the Rising and blame Sinn Fein for it. For without their bravery and determination we would not have had the war of independence and we would not have won our freedom. People forget the sacrifice of the British and RIC and their actions, and how they helped shape the modern free Ireland and I think we should all take time over Easter to remember and celebrate what they did for Ireland by, you know, murdering and killing a load of people.

Hell, it makes as much sense as remember the members of the Rising themselves :rolleyes:

murphaph

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

You seem to think that the majority of the rioters were Celtic fans.

Show me where in my post I said or implied that and I'll send you a tenner.

murphaph

Diorraing wrote:

We heard the same old tripe when Kevin Barry and the other IRA volunteers to be reinterred. Fintan O Toole and the D4 media were there saying no-one will turn up for. On one of the coldest days of that year over 5,000 people came out to honour them and the celtic-jersey brigade were in the overwhelming minority there. Mark my words, the same will happen this Easter and Muphaph and friends will be forced to eat their words.

I'll eat nothing, though I'm sure if a paltry 5000 out of a population of 5 million turn out you'll also view that as 'popular support' :rolleyes:

Maybe they weren't wearing their celtic jerseys that day because it was "one of the coldest days of the year".

If a few thousand turn out, can I infer that the other 4,500,000+ people don't support the commemorations and by extension the original events? That seems fair enough if you are going to claim that if 5,000 people show up then I should eat my words. I predict a few thousand will turn out. None of my (non-D4) friends will be going, they're ordinary dubs like me, mostly born into ordinary RC familes like me, not west-brits or anything like it, but certainly not convinced that 1916 was something we should celebrate. Anyway, enjoy waving your tricolour in the rain.