Remembrance Sunday = PoPpY DaY

LordSutch

May I suggest that you 'Heroditas' revisit Posts 8 & 21.

Serenity Now!

gandalf wrote: »

Also is it just me or weren't the Soviets on the allied side in the war?

No, its not just you. Many fail to realise that the USSR and Germany were Allies when the war started and both shared the spoils of Poland after the invasion. The treaties between Germany and the USSR crumbled over Finland, Romania and the Baltic nations. They remained Allies until Hitler went east.
One of the many hypocritical elements of the beginning of the war was the Phoney War of Britain and France declaring hostilities to Germany alone and ignoring the USSR's culpability in the start of it all..............and of course, doing nothing about it.

Heroditas

Camelot wrote: »

May I suggest that you 'Heroditas' revisit Posts 8 & 21.

I read them the first time.
You failed to mention that the British Legion changed its wreath laying ceremony from November to July to coincide with the Irish Day of Commemoration. Ireland has its own memorial day - the British Legion acknowledge this too yet people feel the need to ram November 11th down our throats and get us to acknowledge it.
we get the message, the UK has its day, Ireland has her own. We'll remember our dead on our own day thank you.

LordSutch

And Mary McAleese will attend the annual service in St Patricks Cathedral (Dublin) on Remembrance Sunday to remember the fallen - The Armistace was made on the 11th Hour - of the 11th Day - of the 11th Month.

(Not July).

Heroditas

You really are being very needy.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mcaleese-leads-tributes-to-the-fallen-war-heroes-1432457.html


Oh and another link too....

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/Republic-gets-behind-Poppy-Appeal.4337121.jp

A Dub in Glasgo

Camelot wrote: »

Wow, you do have strong opinions on the Poppy & the wearing of such Mad Finn,

and you do not?

tallus

Camelot wrote: »

And Mary McAleese will attend the annual service in St Patricks Cathedral (Dublin) on Remembrance Sunday to remember the fallen - The Armistace was made on the 11th Hour - of the 11th Day - of the 11th Month.

(Not July).

And yet they remember WWII veterans on the same date too ? As far as I remember WWII ended in April in Europe, and August in Asia. So the 11th is really a moot point in the context of your post.
I don't see why anybody here should wear a poppy, you have your opinion I have mine, I see it as more of a british thing.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion though. Anybody who wants to wear a poppy is perfectly entitled to, same as the easter lily.

madden1

Camelot wrote: »

And Mary McAleese will attend the annual service in St Patricks Cathedral (Dublin) on Remembrance Sunday to remember the fallen - The Armistace was made on the 11th Hour - of the 11th Day - of the 11th Month.

(Not July).

Mad Finn a few posts back equated the poppy and the Easter lilly as republican and unionist symbols,
If Mary McAleese was so gracious as to attend a remembrance for the british who died in wars, when can we expect her Maj the Queen to reciprocate by attending a remembrance cermony for Irish who died in war fighting for Ireland.

Mad Finn

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Utterly sick comment. Belittle all you like the dehumanisation (and afterwards, constitutional dehumanisation) of an entire demograph and the widespread mass hysteria which preceded 1935 where Jews are banned from all kinds of professions, possessions plundered or smashed up and prohibited from areas of society they were already assimilated into. .

I would call it provocative rather than sick. It is a FACT that many American States had laws almost exactly equivalent to one of the two laws, collectively known as the Nuremberg Laws, ie the one outlawing marriage and sexual relations between people of different races. And that it kept those laws until 1967. Do you deny that?

BTW I think you are right to point to this as the start of the legal dehumanisation of Jews. Once you say that an entire race of people is not fit to carry your children you are a major step down the road to seeing them as mere vermin that can be snuffed out as you would a cockroach.

But if it was so manifestly evil, why did it take America another 30 years to remove such laws from the last of its state's legislatures? No answer needed. Just think about it.

Serenity Now! wrote:

At the end of the day, deValera's Ireland still bludged its way out of the war while waiting to see who would win it and enjoyed the comfort of no Nazi or Soviet landing of their shores with an intent.

Totally unfair. He wasn't standing on the sidelines waiting to see who won. He probably realised that joining the war would split the country asunder and there would have been another civil war, which would have facilitated a Nazi invasion. In the extremely unlikely event that they ever had a notion of doing so.

This is another thing that gets me about this whole poppy caper. It's an attempt to pass judgement with the benefit of hindsight on the actions OUR country took at a particular time in its history. We were absolutely right to stay out of the war. Absolutely right.

serenity now! wrote:

the number of Irish who died at Gallipoli was more than double that number according to the seminal historian of the event, L.A.Carlyon. Its remembered as an ANZAC operation and this misconception is further enforced with the ridiculous slant on Peter Weir's movie, Gallipoli. There were more British casualties and mortalities at Gallipoli than Aussie or Kiwis.

I'm curious as to how he arrived at that. I reckon there were about 2,500 maximum soldiers killed while serving with the Irish regiments in Gallipoli. As I mentioned before, however, not all of these would have been Irish.

He may have included all casualties suffered by the batallions which made up the 10th Irish division, but again, not all of those would have been Irish either. There were batallions from the Hampshire Regiment, for example, included in the 10th.

It depends on what one means by Irish,I suppose.

I reckon a round 2,000 Irish fatalities is pretty close to the mark.

Camelot wrote:

Anyway - the original question from the pages of the Irish Times has still not been answered.

Well let me answer with a question: Have you stopped beating your wife?

Seriously. If you want to wear a poppy to commemorate some old great uncle or grandad that you never heard about until recently then you are at liberty in this imperfect but democratic little republic to do so. But the agenda behind the letter writer in the Times is to demand: "Why doesn't everybody see it my way?"

He's not asking "Why can't I wear a poppy?" He's asking "why doesn't everybody else, up to and including the head of state?"

Because we don't all see it his way. This state's very existence is a rejection of the cause for which the British Army went to war. How on earth anybody should expect Uachtaran na hEireann to "commemorate" the soldiers of another army that fought against the establishment of this state and frequently used recruits from this island to put down rebellions elsewhere in its Empire by people who were only trying to get what we have now, is beyond me.

LordSutch

madden1 wrote: »

Mad Finn a few posts back equated the poppy and the Easter lilly as republican and unionist symbols,
If Mary McAleese was so gracious as to attend a remembrance for the british who died in wars, when can we expect her Maj the Queen to reciprocate by attending a remembrance cermony for Irish who died in war fighting for Ireland.

I suppose they (the fallen) in WWI would have considered themselves British at the time, (even if they were from the island of Ireland), and I suspect that it is these soldiers who died in the Poppy fields & in WWII that Mary McAleese & the congregation of St Pat's commerate & pay tribute to on or near the 11th of the 11th. Remembrance Day now includes all those who lost their lives in past wars (not just the Great War & WWII).

Thirdfox

Seems like a debate happens on this every year...
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54360047&highlight=thirdfox+poppy#post54360047

Here's my thoughts on it
"For me the poppy represents the opium wars that the British were involved in when they decided to force the sale of illegal drugs to China a few hundred years ago resulting in thousands if not millions of lives being ruined. International law was abandoned by London and China had to pay out huge compensation (and tracts of land including Hong Kong and later Kowloon) in trying to keep illegal opiates out of the country.

So no, the poppy has a special meaning to me and I would not wear it. But I would respect the fact that for others the poppy means no such thing and wear it to commemorate war dead."

Serenity Now!

Mad Finn wrote: »

I would call it provocative rather than sick. It is a FACT that many American States had laws almost exactly equivalent to one of the two laws, collectively known as the Nuremberg Laws, ie the one outlawing marriage and sexual relations between people of different races. And that it kept those laws until 1967. Do you deny that?

Bollocks, its "provocative". One country did this but it doesn't suit your delivery so mention another country who did it instead. Nice play but as solid as warm water.

Mad Finn wrote: »

BTW I think you are right to point to this as the start of the legal dehumanisation of Jews. Once you say that an entire race of people is not fit to carry your children you are a major step down the road to seeing them as mere vermin that can be snuffed out as you would a cockroach

I didnt say it was the start. I said it was a continuation of what happened. The dehumanisation started two years before the race laws.

Mad Finn wrote: »

Totally unfair. He wasn't standing on the sidelines waiting to see who won. He probably realised that joining the war would split the country asunder and there would have been another civil war, which would have facilitated a Nazi invasion. In the extremely unlikely event that they ever had a notion of doing so.

This is another thing that gets me about this whole poppy caper. It's an attempt to pass judgement with the benefit of hindsight on the actions OUR country took at a particular time in its history. We were absolutely right to stay out of the war. Absolutely right

The "benefit of hindsight" is what affords you the delusion that belittling with moral relativism the Nazis policies concerning their Jews and Jews in occupied countries somehow proves an entirely different point.
Sat on sideline and would have gone with wherever it suited, had the situation required an ultimatum and the island thanks to the sacrifices of many of its own and other countries was able to carry on. Somehow though, remembering those who fell or were wounded for doing this is deemed a bad thing.

Mad Finn wrote: »

I'm curious as to how he arrived at that. I reckon there were about 2,500 maximum soldiers killed while serving with the Irish regiments in Gallipoli. As I mentioned before, however, not all of these would have been Irish

Well, he's an historian so I would say he got off his arse and spent quite a few years researching it instead of keying in search words on google or wiki-f**king-pedia.

Heroditas

Camelot wrote: »

I suppose they (the fallen) in WWI would have considered themselves British at the time, (even if they were from the island of Ireland), and I suspect that it is these soldiers who died in the Poppy fields & in WWII that Mary McAleese & the congregation of St Pat's commerate & pay tribute to on or near the 11th of the 11th. Remembrance Day now includes all those who lost their lives in past wars (not just the Great War & WWII).

Massive supposition and suspicion there.
What about those who followed Redmond's advice and went to fight in WWI to try and convince Britain that Ireland deserved Home Rule?

cabinteelytom

Reasons not to wear a poppy: (An incomplete list)
Life's too short and fragile to be a saddo obsessively wearing a poppy for three weeks. (Well maybe for a while if the BBC paid me a million a year.)
It's a British symbol.
Personally hate all that militarism, 'have respect for people who have been trained to kill [you]' thing. Wouldn't wear anybody else's symbol either.
I would be a hypocrite if I pretended that any relative of mine has served in Her/His Majesty's forces. Buiachas le Dia, we were never that desperate.
The mawkish symbol rarely suits my colour scheme.
I wouldn't like to appear to appreciate the sacrifices made during the Malaya, Kenya ,Aden campaigns.
Personal dislike of being badged or labelled.
Don't wish to be mistaken for an intellectually retarded supporter of modern neo-imperialism eg 'intervention in failed states' cant.
Britain is a wealthy country and should pay it's own soldiers properly rather than make them charity cases upon the world.

madden1

Camelot wrote: »

I suppose they (the fallen) in WWI would have considered themselves British at the time, (even if they were from the island of Ireland), and I suspect that it is these soldiers who died in the Poppy fields & in WWII that Mary McAleese & the congregation of St Pat's commerate & pay tribute to on or near the 11th of the 11th. Remembrance Day now includes all those who lost their lives in past wars (not just the Great War & WWII).

Did you not claim this on post 8 Fifty Thousand IRISH Men died in the Great War, but can you tell me how many died in the rising (1916) now all of a sudden they considered themselves British, "Make your mind up"
would you like to see Lizzy follow President McAleese example or not.

LordSutch

Being British in an Irish context is nothing new madden1 so get over it, many people are British & Irish, or Scottish & British, or Welsh & British, or even English & British! and back in 1918 I would suggest that Irish peoples perception of being 'British' & Britishness were very different from the negative connotation that the word 'British' has amongst many Irish Nationalists today!

Both my parents were British & proud of that fact, even though they were Irish.

A Dub in Glasgo

Some confused people in here

Anyway it seems to me that Arthur does not want to just wear his poppy, he wants to ensure everybody else is wearing one and if they don't he wants to belittle and condemn them for not doing as he does.

Petty and juvenile stuff

Latchy

Camelot wrote: »

Being British in an Irish context is nothing new madden1 so get over it, many people are British & Irish, or Scottish & British, or Welsh & British, or even English & British! and back in 1918 I would suggest that Irish peoples perception of being 'British' & Britishness were very different from the negative connotation that the word 'British' has amongst many Irish Nationalists today!

Both my parents were British & proud of that fact, even though they were Irish.

Very true .In the same way that people call themselfs american irish /canadian irish /australian irish .Britishness in the southern ireland perception of the word is seen in the negitive context due to our very stormy history between the two islands but remember irishmen were fighting irishmen and inflicting horrific assaults upon each other in the civil war and what % of them if any i wonder , also choose to fight for the british in WW1 ? .

When WW2 came about they were still joining up and an estimated 50,000 southern irishmen joined up to fight as Tommies against the Nazis .

LordSutch

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Some confused people in here

Anyway it seems to me that Arthur does not want to just wear his poppy, he wants to ensure everybody else is wearing one and if they don't he wants to belittle and condemn them for not doing as he does.

Petty and juvenile stuff

I dont care who wears a Popppy or not Glasgow Dub, this thread is meant to revolve around the opening post & its not meant to be about ones Nationality or compulsary Poppy wearing :rolleyes: but seeing as others are confused & ignorant by what the Poppy symbol stands for, then I am bound to answer, seeing as I started this Thread in the first place.

Pretty useless post from you Dub which answers nothing.

madden1

Camelot wrote: »

Being British in an Irish context is nothing new madden1 so get over it, many people are British & Irish, or Scottish & British, or Welsh & British, or even English & British! and back in 1918 I would suggest that Irish peoples perception of being 'British' & Britishness were very different from the negative connotation that the word 'British' has amongst many Irish Nationalists today!

Both my parents were British & proud of that fact, even though they were Irish.

"Did you lift that from a Monty Python sketch":D

And you views on her Maj the Queen is she going to follow President McAleese example?

Mad Finn

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Bollocks, its "provocative". One country did this but it doesn't suit your delivery so mention another country who did it instead. Nice play but as solid as warm water.

Now now. Gandalf said the full extent of what the Nazis were up to was not known by de Valera at the outbreak of the war. You pointed out that the Nuremberg Laws were well known at the time. Go back and read your post.

The implication is, that one should have known that putting laws like that on the statute book must have given anybody a pretty clear indication of the intentions of the regime.

I merely pointed out that many US states, like about half, had on their statute books at the outbreak of war laws which forbade sex or marriage between whites and people of other races. Especially blacks. Some of these laws had been inherited from the 17th century. Some had been updated in the 20th century.

My point is, if the existence of such discriminatory laws were such clear evidence in themselves of the malevolent intent of a regime, how come America didn't come under closer scrutiny? I rather suspect that the existence of such horrible laws in "the world's greatest democracy" gave respectability to similar laws elsewhere.

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Well, he's an historian so I would say he got off his arse and spent quite a few years researching it instead of keying in search words on google or wiki-f**king-pedia.

Well stamp my foot as well! I said I was curious as to how he came by that figure because I have done my own researches, relying on a little more than Google and Wikipedia, and I have come up with a vastly different figure.

Instead of enlightening me with Mr Carlyon's methods, though what an Australian writer is doing conducting a forensic examination of Irish numbers at Gallipoli I don't know, you assume that I get all my info from Wikipedia.

I have conducted an independent first hand research into the number of men killed in Gallipoli while serving with Irish regiments. I have not completed it yet, because it is painstaking. So far I have come up with 2,282 such men, split between the Royal Dublin, Munster, Inniskilling and Irish Fusiliers, the Royal Irish Rifles, the Royal Irish Regiment, the Leinster Regiment and the Connaught Rangers.

That is not teh final figure, although it is close. I would be very surprised if the total exceeds 2,500.

Again, not all of these men were Irish. But then, this methodology of counting fatalities in Irish regiments and giving that number as Ireland;s war dead is the one followed by the Islandbridge memorial. I reckon about 70% were, but that's rule of thumb. So I stick to my estimate, and it is an estimate, of about 2000 Irishmen killed at Gallipoli, give or take.

Now tell me whatCarlyon's method was or else take back that vile slur that I rely exclusively on Google and Wikipedia.

Mad Finn

Camelot wrote: »

I dont care who wears a Popppy or not Glasgow Dub, this thread is meant to revolve around the opening post & its not meant to be about ones Nationality or compulsary Poppy wearing :rolleyes: but seeing as others are confused & ignorant by what the Poppy symbol stands for, then I am bound to answer, seeing as I started this Thread in the first place.
.

And you started the thread by referring to a letter in the Irish Times which urged more Irish people and institutions in Ireland to follow a particular line.

You also implied in your original post that those who demurred were guilty of "forgetting" their past.

So with all due respect, to say now that you don't care whether people do or don't is a tad disingenuous, given the tone of your initial post.

I agree with your later line. I don't care how individuals view their history. But the institutions of this state and their figureheads have a different responsibility. When Mary McAleese leaves the Aras she can attend all the Remembrance Day commemorations she likes wearing a Union Jack hat band for all I care. But while she's our president, her first duty is to represent the independance of this state in ceremonial roles.

So no feckin' poppies, Your Excellency. All right?

luckat

Ireland's a free, independent republic. Get over it.

The men who went to volunteer in World War I were largely Irish Volunteers who answered the nationalist John Redmond's call to fight for "the rights of small countries" on the basis that this would cause the long-disputed Home Rule bill to be voted through after the war.

They were demobbed in 1918, and when the War of Independence began in 1919, huge numbers went to war again, fighting this time for the independence of their country.

I used to know these tough old guys when I was a kid. Proud Irishmen.

cabinteelytom

A time to remember ...the Gallipoli campaign.
Once the element of surprise was lost landing a force on the Turkish mainland had realistically no chance of success or even survival; but it was Churchill's idea, so it went ahead. The first troops to land on the now reinforced shore were shot to pieces as they disembarked from poorly designed landing craft. Prominent in the casualties on that early learning curve were two numbered Irish divisions (the fifty third and eighty second, or similar) , informally known as the 'Dublins' and the 'Leinsters'. The combined remnant was called the Dubsters. The Ulster Division was the only Irish division with a name linking it to it's homeland. They did not want these divisions to foster a martial form of Irish nationalism. Their officers were almost entirely English. (cf the Polish Legion of General Pilsudski which survived the war and founded an independant Poland).
Churchill's grasp of mathematics was weak, and the realities of supplying a beachhead on a hostile shore two thousand miles from one's industrial base, and some hundreds of miles from the base port (Suez) were inadequately considered.
Churchill departed as 1st Sea Lord to spend 6 weeks on the western front (with his portable bath).
By dint of heroic effort and much wasted transportation resource Gallipoli bled the British and Commonwealth war effort for over a year. The final evacuation under fire was a remarkable feat. 'Impressive going forwards, but magnificent in retreat'.
Churchill was exonerated by a House of Commons enquiry from responsibility for the debacle. The solidarity of the British establishment was undefeated.
Not even the most west british Irishman has any reason to thank Britain for the Gallipoli campaign. Nor do I feel obliged today to endorse the decision of some Irishmen to join HM forces in 1914 and later. I think they didn't really know what they were getting themselves into, and once subject to military discipline, found they had little choice in what happened next.

Mad Finn

cabinteelytom wrote: »

A time to remember ...the Gallipoli campaign.
Once the element of surprise was lost landing a force on the Turkish mainland had realistically no chance of success or even survival; but it was Churchill's idea, so it went ahead. The first troops to land on the now reinforced shore were shot to pieces as they disembarked from poorly designed landing craft. Prominent in the casualties on that early learning curve were two numbered Irish divisions (the fifty third and eighty second, or similar) , informally known as the 'Dublins' and the 'Leinsters'. The combined remnant was called the Dubsters. The Ulster Division was the only Irish division with a name linking it to it's homeland. They did not want these divisions to foster a martial form of Irish nationalism.

I agree with the gist of what you say, but with respect, your facts are in a bit of a muddle.

There were indeed many Irishmen slaughtered on the first day of Gallipoli, mainly at V beach where the defences were strong and the plan of attack hopelessly optimistic. They did not, though, come from a "numbered Irish Division" They were from a battallion each of the Royal Dublin and Royal Munster Fusiliers, official not informal regimental titles.

They were slaughtered in such numbers, then and later on, that there were not enough men to make two separate battallions, the basic permanent unit of organisation in the British Army. So they were temporarily amalgamated into a combined battallion known informally as the Dubsters.

There was in fact an "Irish" Division, the 10th, that was sent out later in the campaign. As I mentioned before however, not all these were Irishmen and not all of the Division was made up of Irish named regiments. They were messed around a good deal, split up and sent into action piecemeal with soldiers from other Divisions.

The issue of the treatment of Irish soldiers was a very touchy one at the time. John Redmond, the Nationalist leader, was furious at the lack of recognition in terms of medals for the Irish regiments, and of coure the issue of who the senior officers were going to be was highly controversial.

Redmond wanted a fair representation of good, reliable, Nationalist, ie Catholic, officers for the independent army of an Irish Home Rule State, sort of like the Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians had.

But of course most officers in the Irish regiments, especially the senior ones, were either British or at the very least from good loyalist Anglo-Irish stock. The British always thought the Irish made excellent cannon fodder.

Fionnanc

I'll wear the poppy. 50 thousand Irishmen died in WW1, many more served. The Irish volunteers had 100,000 members in Ireland in 1916. Of these at most 1,500 took part in the Easter rising. Most of these came out on the basis of a forged order. So a minority in a minority launced the Easter Rising, decieving their fellow members, while many more IRishmen served in the British army as volunteers. A minority in a minority launched a doomed uprisiing by deception, killing thousands and destroying Dublin, when the majority of Irish people were supporting Britain because the constitutional campaign for home rule had succeeded.

The leaders of the Eastern Rising gloried in the cult fo blood and sacrifice for the nation. Their movement had many similarities to the later Freikorps and Blackshirts and if successful in their uprising would have been willing allies to fascism.

Maybe somebody has links concerning Pearse's relationships with boys in his school?

A Dub in Glasgo

Fionnanc wrote: »

The leaders of the Eastern Rising gloried in the cult fo blood and sacrifice for the nation.

The leaders of WW1 glorified in the cult of blood sacrifice. Just look at the slaughter that was brought onto the troops by those at the top.

Heroditas

Fionnanc wrote: »

Maybe somebody has links concerning Pearse's relationships with boys in his school?

I assume you do if you're going to bring the matter up.

ardmacha

Ireland's a free, independent republic

Part of Ireland is a free, independent republic.

You can wear a poppy and say that it only has to do with the Irishmen in the First World War or whatever and ignore its broader symbolism. You could also wear a swastika and say that you were doing so only because the Nazis fought against communism and ignore the broader symbolism. In neither case are you codding anyone.

McArmalite

Fionnanc wrote: »

I'll wear the poppy. 50 thousand Irishmen died in WW1, many more served. The Irish volunteers had 100,000 members in Ireland in 1916. Of these at most 1,500 took part in the Easter rising. Most of these came out on the basis of a forged order. So a minority in a minority launced the Easter Rising, decieving their fellow members, while many more IRishmen served in the British army as volunteers. A minority in a minority launched a doomed uprisiing by deception, killing thousands and destroying Dublin, when the majority of Irish people were supporting Britain because the constitutional campaign for home rule had succeeded.

The leaders of the Eastern Rising gloried in the cult fo blood and sacrifice for the nation. Their movement had many similarities to the later Freikorps and Blackshirts and if successful in their uprising would have been willing allies to fascism.

Maybe somebody has links concerning Pearse's relationships with boys in his school?

" The Irish volunteers had 100,000 members in Ireland in 1916. ..... Most of these came out on the basis of a " of complete lies " because the constitutional campaign for home rule had " been promised AFTER WW1, when undoubtably britian would have reneged on it's implimentaion, just like they did to the Home Rule bills of 1886 and 1893. If WW1 was about the freedom of small nations, why is it the british empire was bigger after it than before it ??

Well I would have thought that the Black and Tans and Auxilliary's would have had much more " similarities to the later Freikorps and Blackshirts ", although luckily for us nationalists, due to world opinion and in particuliar Irish influence in America, britain didn't get the chance to impliment concentration camps like they did in the Boer War or use poisionous gas like they did in the 30's against the Kurds in Iraq.

Nothing could be more about engaging " in the cult fo blood and sacrifice " than by wearing a poppy.