Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Memorial for 1957 'Edentubber bombers'

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    FTA69 wrote: »
    I said it was doubtful that many people here giving out about IRA memorials would have no bother with certain British Army memorials.
    It is a matter of authority. The IRA "volunteers" undertook the actions that they did and claimed to be acting on behalf of the people of Ireland when the plainly did not have a mandate to do so. I think it a little perverse that the elected officials in a state should be commending subversives whose ambition was to over throw the state.

    And I don't think the various great war memorials have the same political overtones. IMO, with these memorials, most people now would reflect on the human cost of these wars and less on the (forgotten) politics that spawned them.


  • Options
    #63
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    lugha wrote: »
    It is a matter of authority. The IRA "volunteers" undertook the actions that they did and claimed to be acting on behalf of the people of Ireland when the plainly did not have a mandate to do so. I think it a little perverse that the elected officials in a state should be commending subversives whose ambition was to over throw the state.

    in 1948 a General Army Convention issued General Order No. 8 prohibiting "any armed action whatsoever" against the forces of the Republic of Ireland. This amounted to a de facto recognition of the Southern Irish state. Under the new policy, IRA volunteers who were caught with arms in the Republic of Ireland were ordered to dump or destroy them and not to take defensive action.
    Wikipedia.

    It helps to have the facts before formulating a strong opinion.


  • Options
    #64
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    in 1948 a General Army Convention issued General Order No. 8 prohibiting "any armed action whatsoever" against the forces of the Republic of Ireland. This amounted to a de facto recognition of the Southern Irish state. Under the new policy, IRA volunteers who were caught with arms in the Republic of Ireland were ordered to dump or destroy them and not to take defensive action.
    Wikipedia.

    It helps to have the facts before formulating a strong opinion.

    If all of that is true, then how come they've been involved in shootouts and murdering Gardai ?

    https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9606&L=IRL-POL&P=6122


  • Options
    #65
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    If all of that is true, then how come they've been involved in shootouts and murdering Gardai ?

    https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9606&L=IRL-POL&P=6122

    I figured it wouldn't take long for someone to post something about Jerry McCabe murders.

    Insofar as I am aware, those murders were the actions of the Provisional IRA in modern times, and not the old IRA from the 50's (of which this thread concerns).
    Now, maybe you're insinuating that the rules governing the old IRA were grand-fathered in, after all the splits within the republican movement.
    But i don't know if that's true.
    If you believe it IS true, than please provide proof.
    Otherwise you are simply muddying things by throwing in crap from a different organization from a different era.
    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #66
    T runner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 ✭✭✭T runner


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Hypothetical situation: the Wellington monument does not exist. Plans are drawn up to erect the largest obelisk in Europe to commemorate The Duke – do you really think nobody would speak out against such a proposal?

    Yes I do think they would speak out and rightly so. These monuments dont commemorate anything honourable.

    There should be no monument to the Edentupper bombers. For exactly the same reasons there should be no other war memorials. Im not suggesting we demolish them (maybe some of the ugly looking ones) but we can easily change them for a purpose that is more representative of the Irish people and this countries neutrality in wars.

    The Wellington monument could mark the history of the peacekeeping efforts
    of the Republic of Ireland to date. Something positive where we tried to stop people from being killed rather than celebrating people who suceeded in killing others successfully or otherwise.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    I figured it wouldn't take long for someone to post something about Jerry McCabe murders.

    Did you read the link, or did you just pick one of the many listed out of the blue ?
    BluePlanet wrote: »
    Now, maybe you're insinuating that the rules governing the old IRA were grand-fathered in, after all the splits within the republican movement.
    But i don't know if that's true.
    If you believe it IS true, than please provide proof.

    Why should I provide proof of what standards criminals and thugs have ?
    BluePlanet wrote: »
    Otherwise you are simply muddying things by throwing in crap from a different organization from a different era.
    :rolleyes:

    I'll accept that there's a generally-accepted subtle distinction between the "old IRA" and the "Provisional IRA", in terms of what tactics they viewed as acceptable.

    However any confusion that arises is down to the scum who operated since, and not to ordinary people who are not privy to the operations of criminal gangs.

    Mind you, it would be great if the republican mindset could also make an equivalent-but-reverse distinction in terms of the RUC and PSNI.

    But as always, we're expected to accept anything from the republican side as gospel while allowing their double-standards to prevail re "the other side".

    The very existence of such monuments is another example; if the British erected a monument to soldiers in Belfast who died while on their way to engage an IRA unit (and that's assuming that those involved in this were going to target a so-called "legitimate target") then there would be "republicans" screaming blue murder.


  • Options
    #68
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    T runner wrote: »
    The Wellington monument could mark the history of the peacekeeping efforts
    of the Republic of Ireland to date. Something positive where we tried to stop people from being killed rather than celebrating people who suceeded in killing others successfully or otherwise.

    Nice idea. However part of moving forward involves learning lessons from the past.

    If all of the current monuments had an added enscription saying "Forget them not, lest by forgetting we allow it happen again" or something like that, I'd be fine with all of them.


  • Options
    #69
    dxhound2003
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭dxhound2003


    The landmine they were carrying was meant to kill as many Crown Forces personnel as possible and any civillians who happened to be in the way. Seeing as it was to "mark" Armistice Day 1957 isn't it time Sinn Fein honoured the men/women of 30 years later who "marked" Rememberance Sunday 1987 in Enniskillen.

    Of course it would mean identifying who they were but with the Peace Process that shouldn't be a problem, they won't do jail and they will be able to glory openly at last in their achievement. They deserve the same honour as the men of '57, maybe even more so as they succeded in their mission.


  • Options
    #70
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Did you read the link, or did you just pick one of the many listed out of the blue ?
    I got a couple lines into it.
    Is it just laziness on your part?
    Tell you what, in future if you are going to cite examples please do so explicitly. Rather than placing the onus on your debating partner to scroll through a page of text trying to find your example. It's absurd.
    Mind you, it would be great if the republican mindset could also make an equivalent-but-reverse distinction in terms of the RUC and PSNI.
    They do, bar a small sub-set of anti-GFA ones.


  • Options
    #71
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    I got a couple lines into it.
    Is it just laziness on your part?

    Tell you what, in future if you are going to cite examples please do so explicitly. Rather than placing the onus on your debating partner to scroll through a page of text trying to find your example. It's absurd.

    What are you on about ? What's "my" example ? :confused:

    If there were a single example, then I'd have given it.

    I provided the list of all the Gardai murdered (thereby proving that it wasn't some once-off occurrence) and you decided to pick on a single example that you admit you were waiting for someone to point out.

    So it was by no means laziness; the fact that there was a page to scroll through isn't my fault. Personally, I'd have much preferred if there were none to even link to, but criminals obviously don't think that way.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    in 1948 a General Army Convention issued General Order No. 8 prohibiting "any armed action whatsoever" against the forces of the Republic of Ireland. This amounted to a de facto recognition of the Southern Irish state. Under the new policy, IRA volunteers who were caught with arms in the Republic of Ireland were ordered to dump or destroy them and not to take defensive action.
    I fail to see the relevance. Either the individuals in question here discounted this instruction and went on a solo run, or perhaps it was the case that the order did not extend to actions against the Northern state. Either way, they were attempting by force, and with no mandate from the Irish people to change the political structure of this island. More than a nod in the direction of fascism, wouldn't you agree?


  • Options
    #73
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    I think the important question to ask here is, would this memorial being erected make the majority of the people in the north feel that the Republic is a country they would like to be a part of?


  • Options
    #74
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    lugha wrote: »
    I fail to see the relevance. Either the individuals in question here discounted this instruction and went on a solo run, or perhaps it was the case that the order did not extend to actions against the Northern state. Either way, they were attempting by force, and with no mandate from the Irish people to change the political structure of this island. More than a nod in the direction of fascism, wouldn't you agree?
    Simply:
    From the article linked in the OP they were enroute to a target in the North. Which means they were not targetting the government of the Rep of Ireland. In your post you've incorrectly stated that the old IRA (in 1957) were trying to overthrow the government of the Rep. I've posted a refutation of that, in which it states a defacto recognition of the government of the Rep. of Ireland.


  • Options
    #75
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    I think the important question to ask here is, would this memorial being erected make the majority of the people in the north feel that the Republic is a country they would like to be a part of?
    Why is that important? The majority population of the North does not elect local council members here.


  • Options
    #76
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    Why is that important? The majority population of the North does not elect local council members here.
    Presumably the intention of the men who blew themselves up was to further the goal of a united Ireland. Therefore the best thing the council could do to honour those intentions, since I presume thats what a memorial is intended to do, would be to send a clear message that Ireland is a modern and welcoming community which is not tolerant of violent acts. So they shouldn't erect the monument.


  • Options
    #77
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    Simply:
    From the article linked in the OP they were enroute to a target in the North. Which means they were not targetting the government of the Rep of Ireland. In your post you've incorrectly stated that the old IRA (in 1957) were trying to overthrow the government of the Rep. I've posted a refutation of that, in which it states a defacto recognition of the government of the Rep. of Ireland.
    Well then I guess my post stated wrong. :) I guess the 1980s-1990s equivalent of the IRA bears a bit too heavy on my mind.
    In any case my substantial point is that they acted without authority. They didn't have a mandate, even informally, from the people. Can you defend such actions?


  • Options
    #78
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,415 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    lugha wrote: »
    In any case my substantial point is that they acted without authority. They didn't have a mandate, even informally, from the people. Can you defend such actions?
    History is replete with examples. In our own state the 1916 uprising lacked a popular mandate, yet here were are nearly 100 years later enjoying the fruits of thier endeavour.


  • Options
    #79
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #80
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    History is replete with examples. In our own state the 1916 uprising lacked a popular mandate, yet here were are nearly 100 years later enjoying the fruits of thier endeavour.
    Yes, that 1916 lacked a popular mandate is often cited by republicans as a justification for their actions. What they seem to miss is the question as to how legitimate were the actions of 1916? Even if you set aside the debate as to whether independence would have come anyway and accept that the actions of 1916 brought it about, you need to assert under what circumstances can you argue that the ends justifies the means, and proceed as republicans of various hue have done in the last hundred years, presuming that they have an entitlement to act, against their wishes, on behalf of the Irish people. Personally I would say never. If you want to act on behalf of the people, you must have the support of the people, even if the people are wrong :P. Otherwise couldn't I decree that the true wish of the Irish people is to live in a fascist state, and dismiss all denials on the grounds that a future Irish generation might agree with me. The men of 1957 being discussed here has similar contempt for the Irish people. I see no reason to build monuments to such arrogance.


  • Options
    #81
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,853 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    dxhound2003 wrote: »
    The landmine they were carrying was meant to kill as many Crown Forces personnel as possible and any civillians who happened to be in the way. Seeing as it was to "mark" Armistice Day 1957 isn't it time Sinn Fein honoured the men/women of 30 years later who "marked" Rememberance Sunday 1987 in Enniskillen.
    You are forgetting that civilians were "valid military target" simply because they are in the general proximity of HMG's forces! :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
Advertisement