Mountbatten wanted United Ireland

kreuzberger

Sihtric ua Ímair 917–921
Gofraid ua Ímair 921–934

Blácaire mac Gofrith 940–945

Amlaíb Cuarán 945–947
Blácaire mac Gofrith (again) 947–948
Gofraid mac Sitriuc 948–951
Amlaíb Cuarán (again) 952–980
Glúniairn 980–989

Echmarcach mac Ragnaill

Murchad mac Diarmata mac Mael na mBo

Diarmait mac Mail na mBo

Domnall mac Murchada mac Diarmata

Gofraid mac Amlaib mac Ragnaill

Toirdelbach Ua Briain

Muirchertach Ua Briain

Enna mac Diarmata mac Mael na mBo

Donnchad mac Domnail Remair mac Mael na mBo

Gofraid Meranach after1091–1094

Domnall mac Muirchertaig ua Briain

Donnchad mac Murchada mac Diarmata

Diarmat mac Enna

Enna mac Donnchada mac Murchada


Conchobair mac Tiorrdelbach Ua Conchobair


Conchobair Ua Briain

:):)


some fine nordic examples of the unassimilated viking kings of dublin

Shutuplaura

Kreuzberger wrote: »

unbelievably yer man has set out to prove ireland wasnt a united country by pointing out how Mr Mac Murrough was expelled from Ireland by a unified Irish force under command of the huigh king of Ireland and had to tour around outisde of the country in order to find allies . He also points to the seemingly unassimilated viking king who went to the gaelic speaking scottish highlands to have a yarn with his relatives .

He's a complete troll. I've come across him saying the exact same things on other sites. When seriously challanged he'll retreat to his bunker and start posting pictures of brave tommies charging Goose Green, giving the bosche a good pasting or teaching the fuzzy wuzzys a thing or too about european civilization with the aid of a trusty Martini Henry and some great british pluck.

Some of the quotes above are attributed to the wrong posters.
But it makes great reading as you appear to contradict yourselves

Cjoe

I know this thread is old but the mountbatten programme was on RTE last night.
It was very sad to hear the young fermanagh lads father speak about seeing his child get blown up only a few hundred yards away. He mentioned nothing about the north, just the sheer pain of loosing a son and it was heartbreaking to hear.

On Mountabatten, honestly I couldnt care less about him being killed
He was a british solider who supported the crown and its colonies. He also never publically came out to support a United Ireland whatever people close to him say.
He died during a war. Which to most soliders is a fitting end. You live by it.....

But the IRA do loose credibility and support, which they did at the time, for killing the two children aswell.
The other side of the story is the hypocisy by the british governement.
Honestly what do you expect if you keep kicking a dog down and then give out when the dog bites your leg off.

Anatomy Boy

Louis Mountbatten was not a soldier at the time of his death, he was long retired from the Navy.
Of course he supported Great Britain and it's colonies, he was a British citizen. What do you expect?
Finally he did not die during a war as is befitting to soldiers. He was murdered during a guerilla campaign by cowards who hid a bomb on his boat.

The IRA murdered 4 innocent people on that day, an act which disgusted the world and most of Ireland.

Cjoe

Anatomy Boy wrote: »

Louis Mountbatten was not a soldier at the time of his death, he was long retired from the Navy.
Of course he supported Great Britain and it's colonies, he was a British citizen. What do you expect?
Finally he did not die during a war as is befitting to soldiers. He was murdered during a guerilla campaign by cowards who hid a bomb on his boat.

The IRA murdered 4 innocent people on that day, an act which disgusted the world and most of Ireland.

Just because he is british doesnt mean he has to support the occupation of colonies. I know plenty of british people who feel it completly wrong for them to have been and still be part of ireland. If you support a british government in the north then you have no respect for the people of Ireland. Mountbatten might have been a charming likeable man but he never showed or said anything to push for peace in the north or a united Ireland.
He was a prominent member of the royal family which is the symbol of british colonialism. Something which has lost Ireland both protestant and catholic lives and the 6 counties and also dismantled our language down to the bare bones.

You cannot do what he and the british army and government did through those years and not expect reprissals.

But I would like to say again the killing of innocent children and civillians is utterly wrong and I have only had very limited support for the IRA because of this.

Fratton Fred

Cjoe wrote: »

If you support a british government in the north then you have no respect for the people of Ireland.

I support the British government in Northern ireland, for as long as the majority of people up there want it that way. Please don't tell me I have no respect for people i consider to be friends.

Cjoe wrote: »

Mountbatten might have been a charming likeable man but he never showed or said anything to push for peace in the north or a united Ireland.

you could say the same for me, do i deserve to die as well?

Cjoe wrote: »

He was a prominent member of the royal family which is the symbol of british colonialism. Something which has lost Ireland both protestant and catholic lives and the 6 counties and also dismantled our language down to the bare bones.

You cannot do what he and the british army and government did through those years and not expect reprissals.

so on that basis, it would be acceptable top kill the Pope or any of his bishops, as he symbolises pretty much the same thing to a lot of people

Cjoe wrote: »

But I would like to say again the killing of innocent children and civillians is utterly wrong and I have only had very limited support for the IRA because of this.

that is very generous of you.

Cjoe

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I support the British government in Northern ireland, for as long as the majority of people up there want it that way. Please don't tell me I have no respect for people i consider to be friends.

you could say the same for me, do i deserve to die as well?

so on that basis, it would be acceptable top kill the Pope or any of his bishops, as he symbolises pretty much the same thing to a lot of people

that is very generous of you.

A slight majority are loyalists, who were put there by the english to ensure the area stays within engish rule and are still there and are still goverened by britan because of "Majority Rules" even though the majority got there through murder and theft and unwanted occupation.

You were not part of the british colonial army or a member of the royal family were you? So your not like mountbatten.

How am i condoning killing popes and bishops?

Fratton Fred

Cjoe wrote: »

A slight majority are loyalists, who were put there by the english to ensure the area stays within engish rule and are still there and are still goverened by britan because of "Majority Rules" even though the majority got there through murder and theft and unwanted occupation.

You speak about this as though it were yesterday. The majority of the people in hte US are there under the exact same circumstance as the majority of Northern Ireland who wish to remain part of the UK. What is difficult to comprehend about that?

Cjoe wrote: »

You were not part of the british colonial army or a member of the royal family were you? So your not like mountbatten.

so all retired british forces members are justified targets, or is it all members of the royal family?

Please don't tell me you think all memebrs of the Royal Family are justifiable targets and then say that i have no respect for the Irish. Personally i have no respect for anyone who wants to kill my head of state.

Cjoe wrote: »

How am i condoning killing popes and bishops?

A lot more people suffered in the name of the Pope than have ever suffered at the hands of the English Monarch. To a lot of people, the Pope symbolises imperialism, murder, sanctioned child abuse etc.

you cannot suggest the English Monarch is a bonafide target, without accepting that the pope should be as well, just not to you.

Cjoe

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You speak about this as though it were yesterday. The majority of the people in hte US are there under the exact same circumstance as the majority of Northern Ireland who wish to remain part of the UK. What is difficult to comprehend about that?

so all retired british forces members are justified targets, or is it all members of the royal family?

Please don't tell me you think all memebrs of the Royal Family are justifiable targets and then say that i have no respect for the Irish. Personally i have no respect for anyone who wants to kill my head of state.


A lot more people suffered in the name of the Pope than have ever suffered at the hands of the English Monarch. To a lot of people, the Pope symbolises imperialism, murder, sanctioned child abuse etc.

you cannot suggest the English Monarch is a bonafide target, without accepting that the pope should be as well, just not to you.

So because it wasnt yesterday it makes it all irrelevant? Does history have a sell by date that says when your past this moment in history it becomes irrelevant in discussion?
I cant comprehend how you can just assume that "well majority rules so thats that" and not take into account what was done to take and retain the land and who it actually belongs too.

I never said you had no respect for the Irish.
Those who have taken part in colonialisation of areas around the world where they were unwanted are of course yes. Dont expect to take over an area around the globe where you arent wanted and not expect a violent reaction. Not that I personally condone it but I realsie its part and parcel of unwanted occupation.

Ya of course he is. I have no problem with that and if it happened in the morning I could see why. But it has nothing to do with this

MarchDub

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You speak about this as though it were yesterday. The majority of the people in hte US are there under the exact same circumstance as the majority of Northern Ireland who wish to remain part of the UK. What is difficult to comprehend about that?

No, you are not comparing like with like.
"Ulster" is not the same as "Northern Ireland" and vise versa. Ulster was planted with outsiders to create a loyal population in the region in the 17th century but when it came to drawing the lines around Northern Ireland in 1920 the border was essentially gerrymandered leaving out three counties in Ulster - in order to guarantee a permanent majority to Unionists in the newly created "state". The whole of Ulster would have been majority nationalist by then as evidenced by the election results of 1918. This was a politically created majority - by the Government of Ireland Act 1920. And this is why arguments like this just lead down blind alleys.

Fratton Fred

MarchDub wrote: »

No, you are not comparing like with like.
"Ulster" is not the same as "Northern Ireland" and vise versa. Ulster was planted with outsiders to create a loyal population in the region in the 17th century but when it came to drawing the lines around Northern Ireland in 1920 the border was essentially gerrymandered leaving out three counties in Ulster - in order to guarantee a permanent majority to Unionists in the newly created "state". The whole of Ulster would have been majority nationalist by then as evidenced by the election results of 1918. This was a politically created majority - by the Government of Ireland Act 1920. And this is why arguments like this just lead down blind alleys.

But the essential thing is that we are where we are. the people that live in NI who class themselves as British did not move here, in the large part, it was not even their great grandparents who moved to Ireland, it was long before that.

Killing Mountbatten achieved what exactly? it was just a ruthless cold blooded murder of an easy target. I worked with a lady who had the surname McMahon, she moved to the UK just after mountbatten's murder. She was from a nationalist family in Northern Ireland but did some work for the Mountbattens. she was filled with guilt after the murder because she shared the same surname with the bomber and left the area.

She really loved the family and although she was no fan of British rule, she was deeply saddened by their murder and often said it bought nothing but shame on Irish nationalists.

ejmaztec

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But the essential thing is that we are where we are. the people that live in NI who class themselves as British did not move here, in the large part, it was not even their great grandparents who moved to Ireland, it was long before that.

Killing Mountbatten achieved what exactly? it was just a ruthless cold blooded murder of an easy target. I worked with a lady who had the surname McMahon, she moved to the UK just after mountbatten's murder. She was from a nationalist family in Northern Ireland but did some work for the Mountbattens. she was filled with guilt after the murder because she shared the same surname with the bomber and left the area.

She really loved the family and although she was no fan of British rule, she was deeply saddened by their murder and often said it bought nothing but shame on Irish nationalists.

Yes, it was another screw-up on the PR front for the IRA at the time, and did them no good whatsoever, quite the opposite.

Cjoe

It was a major dent in the IRA's reputation.
But as with most situations like this such as Omagh it was a watershed and made people react. And react in a generally positve way.
Thathcher woke up and realised she had to act and it opened up dialogue between both governments.

MarchDub

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But the essential thing is that we are where we are. the people that live in NI who class themselves as British did not move here, in the large part, it was not even their great grandparents who moved to Ireland, it was long before that.

Killing Mountbatten achieved what exactly? it was just a ruthless cold blooded murder of an easy target. I worked with a lady who had the surname McMahon, she moved to the UK just after mountbatten's murder. She was from a nationalist family in Northern Ireland but did some work for the Mountbattens. she was filled with guilt after the murder because she shared the same surname with the bomber and left the area.

She really loved the family and although she was no fan of British rule, she was deeply saddened by their murder and often said it bought nothing but shame on Irish nationalists.

I wasn't by any means defending the killing of Mountbattan. I never support violence. By anyone.

McArmalite

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Killing Mountbatten achieved what exactly?

Killing Mr. Mountbatten and 19 Para scum was revenge for Bloody Sunday. The evening of Bloody Sunday the IRA released a statement saying that " Bloody Sunday is something that the people of Ireland will never forget, the IRA will make sure it is something the people of britain will never forget either ". And they lived up to their promise.

( BTW, the Mountbatten operation should not have been carried out due to the children present. I have always said it was wrong - even to Republicans who have done time in prison etc. It would have been much more efficent to drive up alongside him and finish him with a bullet, but the Provos wanted the "spectacular" of a huge bomb killing him. I have no sympathy for Mr Mounbatten or his cousin Mrs Windsor who awarded the CO of the Paras in Derry a CBE. Reap what you sow )

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

Killing Mr. Mountbatten and 19 Para scum was revenge for Bloody Sunday. The evening of Bloody Sunday the IRA released a statement saying that " Bloody Sunday is something that the people of Ireland will never forget, the IRA will make sure it is something the people of britain will never forget either ". And they lived up to their promise.{/quote]

I'm sure their mothers are so proud of them.

McArmalite wrote: »

( BTW, the Mountbatten operation should not have been carried out due to the children present. I have always said it was wrong - even to Republicans who have done time in prison etc. It would have been much more efficent to drive up alongside him and finish him with a bullet, but the Provos wanted the "spectacular" of a huge bomb killing him. I have no sympathy for Mr Mounbatten or his cousin Mrs Windsor who awarded the CO of the Paras in Derry a CBE. Reap what you sow )

oh I hope so.

Anatomy Boy

That's Lord Mountbatten! He hasn't been a "Mister" since 1917, and I think you'll find you've missed some of "Mrs. Windsor's" titles too.

MarchDub

Anatomy Boy wrote: »

That's Lord Mountbatten! He hasn't been a "Mister" since 1917, and I think you'll find you've missed some of "Mrs. Windsor's" titles too.

Oh Lordy, and you're right, Mrs. Windsor is actually Mrs. Mountbatten, no wait, Battenberg [before the name change]...no, it was Hanover or Saxe-Coburg[before THAT name change] .

I'm old enough to remember Princess Anne getting married and the English Press falling over themselves to get a peep at the register to see what the Royal Family name actually was. It begged the question - just who are these people?

You have to love all that English "tradition" that they successfully re-invent with practically every generation.

Fratton Fred

MarchDub wrote: »

You have to love all that English "tradition"

Yeah, I do actually.

You ought to take a stroll around Windsor Castle sometime, there is an amazing amount of History there, all the way back to some French bloke called William.

ejmaztec

MarchDub wrote: »

Oh Lordy, and you're right, Mrs. Windsor is actually Mrs. Mountbatten, no wait, Battenberg [before the name change]...no, it was Hanover or Saxe-Coburg[before THAT name change] .

I'm old enough to remember Princess Anne getting married and the English Press falling over themselves to get a peep at the register to see what the Royal Family name actually was. It begged the question - just who are these people?

You have to love all that English "tradition" that they successfully re-invent with practically every generation.

That was the only time that it was changed out of choice, for reasons that were obvious at the time (eg the German connection). The other name-changes resulted from different royal families inheriting the title, in the early days usually by one competitor beating the lard out of another, and in more"civilised" times of marriage etc...

This aristocratic carry-on is the same all over Western Europe.

I can see that you're really keen to get stuck in to a bit of royal study, so you can meet up with like-minded individuals on the following link.:p

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/

MarchDub

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You ought to take a stroll around Windsor Castle sometime, there is an amazing amount of History there, all the way back to some French bloke called William.

Yeah - William the Bastard, in more ways than one. Violent conquest was his byword. Some modern English commentators - Michael Woods comes to mind - "blame" Will for the violent streak in English military expansion. They hang the forced establishment of Empire on these Viking/Normans - and date British military violence to this violent overthrow of Harold.

Mind you, William had the Pope at his back -

MrMicra

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Killing Mountbatten achieved what exactly? it was just a ruthless cold blooded murder of an easy target.

Christopher Beaumont who was private secretary to Sir Cyril Radcliffe, chairman of the Indo-Pakistan Boundary Commission wrote:

“The viceroy, Mountbatten, must take the blame - though not the sole blame - for the massacres in the Punjab in which between 500,000 to a million men, women and children perished…The handover of power was done too quickly."

The speed of the handover was entirely driven by Mountbatten and Mountbatten alone for reasons that are not clear.

That however justifies only Mountbatten's death and not the murders of Philip Maxwell or Nick Knatchbull.
Why for example could he not have been shot by a sniper?

ejmaztec

MrMicra wrote: »

The speed of the handover was entirely driven by Mountbatten and Mountbatten alone for reasons that are not clear.

That however justifies only Mountbatten's death and not the murders of Philip Maxwell or Nick Knatchbull.
Why for example could he not have been shot by a sniper?

Mountbatten was assassinated because of Britain handing over power too quickly in India? I don't thing that could be classed as a war-crime under any circumstances.

I suppose had the handover not been so quick, that would have been another reason for him being a target.

I didn’t realise that people here were so concerned with what the Punjabis had to suffer.

MrMicra

ejmaztec wrote: »

Mountbatten was assassinated because of Britain handing over power too quickly in India? I don't thing that could be classed as a war-crime under any circumstances.

I suppose had the handover not been so quick, that would have been another reason for him being a target.

I didn’t realise that people here were so concerned with what the Punjabis had to suffer.

His negligence was directly responsible for 500,000 deaths. Fratton Fred asked what was achieved; the answer is the violent death of a man responsible for 500,000 untimely deaths.

Your parochialism and borderline racism is noted.

ejmaztec

MrMicra wrote: »

His negligence was directly responsible for 500,000 deaths. Fratton Fred asked what was achieved; the answer is the violent death of a man responsible for 500,000 untimely deaths.

Your parochialism and borderline racism is noted.

That's the kind of groundless comment one would expect to accompany the contrived "excuse" for Mountbatten's assassination.

b12mearse

PDN wrote: »

It turned out 'Uncle Dickie' offered to do anything he could to help bring about a United Ireland: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/queens-cousin-wanted-united-ireland-1254247.html

Should he now be regarded as a martyr?

sure he did. thats why he was blown to pieces...

Fratton Fred

Actually I think blaming the labour government of the time on the mess in India would be more appropriate.

Not as handy though if you are looking for an excuse for cold blooded murder.

Pyro202

this is stupd, he may have wanted it, but what good does wanting something do??, they got their man, he didnt do anything to free us....from his familys control....and wouldn't have been able to do anything

Fratton Fred

Pyro202 wrote: »

this is stupd, he may have wanted it, but what good does wanting something do??, they got their man, he didnt do anything to free us....from his familys control....and wouldn't have been able to do anything

they got their man, they got his wife and they got two young children as well. These three bystanders were not unfortunate casualties, the scum bag who did it knew they were on the boat with Lord Mountbatten and did not care, they were executed in cold blood along with an old man.

explain to me what, in the ****ed up world that is Northern Ireland politics, justifies that.

Explain to me how the murder of three more innocent people helps the families of those murdered on bloody sunday?