"Operation Armageddon" in 1969 would have been mass suicide for Irish - STAY ON TOPIC

FACEPALM

How many troops did they say we sent across the boarder in dream land?

bug

What a load of me b*llix

rossie1977

120 and the battle once the british got involved would have lasted an hour

well at least it would have down as the shortest invasion in history

Spiritoftheseventies

FACEPALM wrote: »

How many troops did they say we sent across the boarder in dream land?

Less said about this programme the better. No wonder historians dont mention it. First time I had heard about it.

Dartz

I love the way it says.

"Having made their point internationally, the Irish government most likely would've withdrawn...... but here's what would've happened if they hadn't."

I'm also surprised at how close I pinned it..... For a Walter anyway.

If they had've gone over, never in their right mind would they have stayed.

pablomakaveli

rossie1977 wrote: »

120 and the battle once the british got involved would have lasted an hour

well at least it would have down as the shortest invasion in history

Surprisingly not. I think there was a war in South America that lasted around 90 minutes.

Dr. Baltar

What a **** show.

Dartz

rossie1977 wrote: »

120 and the battle once the british got involved would have lasted an hour

well at least it would have down as the shortest invasion in history

Second Shortest war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zanzibar_War

K-9

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes but the words "can no longer stand by". Totally gave the wrong impression that government was going to take a stand against Northern Sectarianism.. Filled Irish Catholic up north with false hope. What did it achieve in the end?

It did, but you have to remember emotions where running high. Just looking at the Arms crisis footage, some still believe Lynch knew what was going on and turned a blind eye. Maybe he did as they where totally defenseless. Seamus Twomey in Belfast had some old WW11 guns, which was about the extent of the IRA's capabilities then. They actually where laughed at then, they where so bad! Hard to believe, but that is what led to the split into the Officials and Provos.

What did it it achieve in the end? I'd say Sunningdale, the Anglo Irish Agreement etc. etc. Slowly but surely the British realised NI had to have ROI influence.

FACEPALM

FACEPALM wrote: »

How many troops did they say we sent across the boarder in dream land?

300 or 400 lightly armed troops, a bit like the charge of the light brigade

Spiritoftheseventies

K-9 wrote: »

It did, but you have to remember emotions where running high. Just looking at the Arms crisis footage, some still believe Lynch knew what was going on and turned a blind eye. Maybe he did as they where totally defenseless. Seamus Twomey in Belfast had some old WW11 guns, which was about the extent of the IRA's capabilities then. They actually where laughed at then, they where so bad! Hard to believe, but that is what led to the split into the Officials and Provos.

What did it it achieve in the end? I'd say Sunningdale, the Anglo Irish Agreement etc. etc. Slowly but surely the British realised NI had to have ROI influence.

End of the day, Lynch made a speech that was totally misleading. A strongly worded condemnation was what was required. By using words "cannot stand by" it created confusion everywhere.

dloob

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes but the words "can no longer stand by". Totally gave the wrong impression that government was going to take a stand against Northern Sectarianism.. Filled Irish Catholic up north with false hope. What did it achieve in the end?

Was it not to put the idea of the Irish crossing the border in the minds of the british?
To avoid that very messy situation the British Army was sent in to try and restore order.

ejmaztec

The war never happened, but the looting's still going on, especially in Newry.

bug

A total waste of what.. an hour and 25 minutes.

It was what it was, a bit of political positioning at the time. At least I hope so, otherwise the fukwits who were governing us at the time are worse than the current ones.

There was nothing revealed, jesus, boards users revealed more before the programme.

A total fantastic load of crap. I would have been more informed if I had watched the Hills on MTV for an hour.

Kalashnikov_Kid

bayviewclose wrote: »

End of the day, Lynch made a speech that was totally misleading. A strongly worded condemnation was what was required. By using words "cannot stand by" it created confusion everywhere.

Yeah. A 'down with that sort of thing' speech would have been more effective...

K-9

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes but the words "can no longer stand by". Totally gave the wrong impression that government was going to take a stand against Northern Sectarianism.. Filled Irish Catholic up north with false hope. What did it achieve in the end?

Depends on what you interpret "can no longer stand by" means. It is been handed down as him saying "not stand idly by".

He set up refugees camps. Why more did not go to them, I don't know!

Remember IRA slogans daubed on the walls in 1969 was "IRA = I Ran Away!"

Darr3nG

How true is it that some defence forces actually crossed the border?

Is there any documented evidence of this?

K-9

bayviewclose wrote: »

A strongly worded condemnation was what was required.

Huh?

Spiritoftheseventies

K-9 wrote: »

Depends on what you interpret "can no longer stand by" means. It is been handed down as him saying "not stand idly by".

He set up refugees camps. Why more did not go to them, I don't know!

Remember IRA slogans daubed on the walls in 1969 was "IRA = I Ran Away!"

End of the day documentary was poorly though out. End of the day, Lynch didn't invade but made a rushed speech. Cant believe he brought that piece of paper to RTE studios. Surely he had a secretary who could have looked over speech with him.
And speech that went out on air. Was never made clear what changes RTE Newsman had made to speech and who put in words "can not stand by.

Adamisconfused

That was a complete waste of time. Typical RTE rubbish. I'm off to get some panadol. That camera work was dreadful and headache inducing.

Spiritoftheseventies

Adamisconfused wrote: »

That was a complete waste of time. Typical RTE rubbish. I'm off to get some panadol. That camera work was dreadful and headache inducing.

Think camera work was probably due to budgetary cut backs. Im trying to give them the benefit of the doubt!

FACEPALM

I think they forgot to add this bit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8_GfE8PP1E

Run_to_da_hills

bayviewclose wrote: »

Think camera work was probably due to budgetary cut backs. Im trying to give them the benefit of the doubt!

Cam phone at that. :rolleyes:

Spiritoftheseventies

K-9 wrote: »

Huh?

A strongly worded condemnation would have shown Government's displeasure. By implying that they might invade North they were immediately going to send out the wrong message.
As a result tonight we had a british source calling our Army "puny" and in the end it did not cast us in a good light.

markok84

That program was absolute rubbish. RTE had the opportunity of doing a very informative documentary but instead they resorted to shaky cameras, repeating themselves every two minute (in case we forgot what the f*ck it was we were watching) and the whole "what if" scenario for the final hour was completely pointless. What a waste of time.

mikemac

120 troops? 50 rounds of ammunition??

I know a small bit about guns. The Lee Enfield has been modified and adapted over decades but it was also around in WW1.
So using a bolt action rifle in the military that was designed over 50 years ago....

What a shambles

gollem_1975

The FCA / reserve army guys would have had the WWII Lee Enfields (.303's)

the regular army guys would have had the same as the regular British army - the FN FAL

Adamisconfused

It’s all, “what if?”, but it’s even more pointless than most what if questions? What if the Germans had taken Moscow in 1941 is a real question. What if the Dublin government sent 120 soldiers to some field outside Newry is beyond ridiculous. Even if Lynch had a big enough pair to use military intervention, that’s not how it would have happened. If it was, then some people should have been put against a wall for even suggesting it. Such utter drivel.
Also, why did we only hear from typically anti-republican former ministers and British army officers? Where are the “republican voices” to answer for the likes of Boland or even those of the Irish army who weren’t simply junior reserves at the time?
D4 balderdash and piffle.

guinnessdrinker

gollem_1975 wrote: »

The FCA / reserve army guys would have had the WWII Lee Enfields (.303's)

the regular army guys would have had the same as the regular British army - the FN FAL

In fact the Irish army's FN rifles were also capable of firing automatic bursts as well as sinlge shots but the British SLR riflie could only fire single shots and was not capable of automatic fire.

Spiritoftheseventies

Adamisconfused wrote: »

It’s all, “what if?”, but it’s even more pointless than most what if questions? What if the Germans had taken Moscow in 1941 is a real question. What if the Dublin government sent 120 soldiers to some field outside Newry is beyond ridiculous. Even if Lynch had a big enough pair to use military intervention, that’s not how it would have happened. If it was, then some people should have been put against a wall for even suggesting it. Such utter drivel.
Also, why did we only hear from typically anti-republican former ministers and British army officers? Where are the “republican voices” to answer for the likes of Boland or even those of the Irish army who weren’t simply junior reserves at the time?
D4 balderdash and piffle.

Again how does a head of this country turn up at RTE with a piece of paper like that and no government aide to look over the speech.
Still in the dark who actually penned the crucial words "can not stand by". The RTE news man or Lynch?