British poppy: should the Irish commemorate people who fought for the British Empire?

Cú Giobach

ejmaztec wrote: »

Anyone with any sense over there doesn't fall for the propaganda, not like the good old days when no-one really knew what was going on due to the primitive communications set-up across the world. People were probably only getting information on 1% of what was actually happening.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss how easily people can be manipulated, history shows us clearly how governments had no problems (moral or technical) doing this in the past and though the methods may change the results would be the same.
What I found fascinating lately were Derren Brown's last few shows, he shows brilliantly how easy it is to manipulate people, en mass and individually, to do things they would swear blind they would never do.

Dyr

r Cameron said: 'This seems outrageous. The idea that wearing a poppy to remember those who have given their lives for our freedom is a political act is absurd. Wearing a poppy is an act of huge respect and (British) national pride. I hope that FIFA will reconsider.'

Did nobody tell Cameron that the poppy actually represents everyone who died or suffered in all world wars ever in the history of the multiverse and not just the british army?

Thats the problem with bulsh***ing lads, everyone has to remember the same lie :pac:

arybvtcw0eolkf

No (I'm Irish)

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss how easily people can be manipulated, history shows us clearly how governments had no problems (moral or technical) doing this in the past and though the methods may change the results would be the same.
What I found fascinating lately were Derren Brown's last few shows, he shows brilliantly how easy it is to manipulate people, en mass and individually, to do things they would swear blind they would never do.

From Herman Goering;

Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Cú Giobach

By the way if IRA attacks on Britain were examples of "Ireland attacking Britain" then the Dublin and Monaghan bombings were examples of "Britain attacking Ireland".

Cú Giobach

Stefan Weak Paw wrote: »

From Herman Goering;

A true master of the art.
Though not as good as J.G.

Gingko

skregs wrote: »

Speak for yourself, you fool. It's still less than a hundred years since the Easter Rising and the War of Independence. Lots of people had grandparents/great grandparents involved in it.

Not forgetting to mention many atrocities in the north in the 60s and 70s etc. Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy massacre etc and possible involvement in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

I don't consider myself republican or even nationalist but I am an Irishman that believes Fred Fratton is either completely delusional or just a sad WUM? Is anybody taking him seriously at this stage?

Morlar

Cú Giobach wrote: »

A true master of the art.
Though not as good as J.G.

The ironic thing is that he genuinely sought to avoid WW2.

Fratton Fred

Gingko wrote: »

Not forgetting to mention many atrocities in the north in the 60s and 70s etc. Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy massacre etc and possible involvement in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

I don't consider myself republican or even nationalist but I am an Irishman that believes Fred Fratton is either completely delusional or just a sad WUM? Is anybody taking him seriously at this stage?

You know people involved on those days do you?

KeithAFC

No (I'm British/not Irish)

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Have you been living under a rock for the last 40 years? You've never heard of the bomb attacks at Manchester, Birmingham, Guildford, Warrington, Deal and of course the ones at Canary Wharf, Bishopsgate, Ealing, Harrods, Hyde Park and the BBC.

They were all carried out by the IRISH Republican Army, so I don't think it is too much of a leap of faith to think that it was an Irish person who carried them out.

You probably aren't aware also that Bobby Sands was a member of the same organisation.

The PIRA said they had been fighting on behalf of the Irish people. Everyone seems to forget those actions which stemmed from Republican aggression. Everyone is happy to bring up Bloody Sunday and Ballymurphy but never Bloody Friday or Guildford or Enniskillen or Shankill bomb.

Gingko

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You know people involved on those days do you?

Involved no, walking down the street and hit with a bullet yes! Unfortunately.

Fratton Fred

Cú Giobach wrote: »

By the way if IRA attacks on Britain were examples of "Ireland attacking Britain" then the Dublin and Monaghan bombings were examples of "Britain attacking Ireland".

Bobby Sands claimed "The Irish" had never bombed Britain. It is pretty clear they have.

It is also hypocritical (which actually was my point) that someone names themselves after a well known member of that organisation and then tries to be morally outraged about the murder of children.

Cú Giobach

Morlar wrote: »

The ironic thing is that he genuinely sought to avoid WW2.

Sure don't wars and stuff interfere with opulent lifestyles. Not to mention using up the stocks of morphine.

ejmaztec

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss how easily people can be manipulated, history shows us clearly how governments had no problems (moral or technical) doing this in the past and though the methods may change the results would be the same.
What I found fascinating lately were Derren Brown's last few shows, he shows brilliantly how easy it is to manipulate people, en mass and individually, to do things they would swear blind they would never do.

As regards International propaganda, It's still a lot more difficult now, because there's a hell of a lot more information around.

Cú Giobach

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Bobby Sands claimed "The Irish" had never bombed Britain. It is pretty clear they have.

It is also hypocritical (which actually was my point) that someone names themselves after a well known member of that organisation and then tries to be morally outraged about the murder of children.

That little line of chat started from this, and no Ireland did not attack Britain.
"The Irish" also refers to the Irish people not an Irish person or couple of people. People from Ireland attacked Britain, the people of Ireland did not, there is a huge difference.

pmcmahon wrote: »

Ireland has also attacked Britain sunshine.

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Really? When was this mo chara?

Morlar

ejmaztec wrote: »

As regards International propaganda, It's still a lot more difficult now, because there's a hell of a lot more information around.

Look at the Gulf War one, PR firms were hired in washington to lobby politicians, they invented a story about babies being ripped from kuwaiti incubators all superbly delivered by a tearful professional actress. Hey presto War. It's not that difficult to get a people on the side of War. In the long run dissenting voices are lost in the mix. Look at Iraq after 911 (even though if there was a single country to blame then it would be Saudi). Look at Libya etc., 50 yrs from now no one will mention protests or dissenting voices or anything else, and so access to random information channels is irrelevant when it comes to decisions to go to war, mainstream media & geo politics.

Cú Giobach

ejmaztec wrote: »

As regards International propaganda, It's still a lot more difficult now, because there's a hell of a lot more information around.

People in arguably the worlds most advanced country have been scared shitless of a terrorist attack for the last 10 years, I wonder what colour alert they have today.
How many of them cheered when their boys went of to Iraq because of the imminent danger Saddam posed to the US. Just because people have access to information doesn't mean they will judge it rationally.

Morlar

http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/images/f/fc/IraqMobileProductionFacilities.jpg

The point is you can lie BIG to get support for a war, there is rarely any comeback if you win the war.

Look at Colin Powell he told flat out lies to the world about WMD and mobile biological chemical warfare factories. Where was the international clamour for truth and justice in the aftermath of that ?

Did he even apologise ? 'I believed it at the time.'

Fratton Fred

Cú Giobach wrote: »

That little line of chat started from this, and no Ireland did not attack Britain.
"The Irish" also refers to the Irish people not an Irish person or couple of people. People from Ireland attacked Britain, the people of Ireland did not, there is a huge difference.

So when you say that Britain oppressed Ireland, you are saying that the people of Britain oppressed the people of Ireland?

Prefab Sprouter

No (I'm Irish)

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Sure don't wars and stuff interfere with opulent lifestyles. Not to mention using up the stocks of morphine.

It also played havoc with the Stag Hunting Season

Gingko

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So when you say that Britain oppressed Ireland, you are saying that the people of Britain oppressed the people of Ireland?

I don't think anyone is saying that fred.

Morlar

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So when you say that Britain oppressed Ireland, you are saying that the people of Britain oppressed the people of Ireland?

British government & agents of same represent the people of britain.
Irish govt represent the people of Ireland.

How difficult is that ?

Gingko

Morlar wrote: »

British government & agents of same represent the people of britain.
Irish govt represent the people of Ireland.

How difficult is that ?

Rubbish!!! No they did not represent the majority of British people! Just like the last Fianna Fáil government did not represent the majority of Irish people.

Morlar

Gingko wrote: »

Rubbish!!! No they did not represent the majority of British people! Just like the last Fianna Fáil government did not represent the majority of Irish people.

Actually they do, whether or not you like it is irrelvant.

Who represents the interests of the German people ? The German Govt.

Whether or not all Germans would vote the same at this point in time as when they elected Merkel is irrelevant.

skregs

Gingko wrote: »

Rubbish!!! No they did not represent the majority of British people! Just like the last Fianna Fáil government did not represent the majority of Irish people.

They represented you whether you liked it or not.

ejmaztec

Morlar wrote: »

Look at the Gulf War one, PR firms were hired in washington to lobby politicians, they invented a story about babies being ripped from kuwaiti incubators all superbly delivered by a tearful professional actress. Hey presto War. It's not that difficult to get a people on the side of War. In the long run dissenting voices are lost in the mix. Look at Iraq after 911 (even though if there was a single country to blame then it would be Saudi). Look at Libya etc., 50 yrs from now no one will mention protests or dissenting voices or anything else, and so access to random information channels is irrelevant when it comes to decisions to go to war, mainstream media & geo politics.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

People in arguably the worlds most advanced country have been scared shitless of a terrorist attack for the last 10 years, I wonder what colour alert they have today.
How many of them cheered when their boys went of to Iraq because of the imminent danger Saddam posed to the US. Just because people have access to information doesn't mean they will judge it rationally.

More people would have fallen for it 60 years ago than would now.

Morlar

ejmaztec wrote: »

More people would have fallen for it 60 years ago than would now.

I think 60 yrs ago people were convinced that they were the height of sophistication too.

Cú Giobach

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So when you say that Britain oppressed Ireland, you are saying that the people of Britain oppressed the people of Ireland?

If I was to say Britain oppressed Ireland I would mean the country of Britain oppressed the country of Ireland, referring to government endorsed acts.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Have you been living under a rock for the last 40 years? You've never heard of the bomb attacks at Manchester, Birmingham, Guildford, Warrington, Deal and of course the ones at Canary Wharf, Bishopsgate, Ealing, Harrods, Hyde Park and the BBC.

They were all carried out by the IRISH Republican Army, so I don't think it is too much of a leap of faith to think that it was an Irish person who carried them out.

You probably aren't aware also that Bobby Sands was a member of the same organisation.

They weren't carried out by Ireland (in the same way that your official security services have incessantly attacked and murdered Irish people, including using bombs).

They may have been carried out by Irish people, but none of the actions were endorsed by either the country, or the Irish people. How are you somehow trying to claim that they were?

Cú Giobach

ejmaztec wrote: »

More people would have fallen for it 60 years ago than would now.

The biggest danger is believing that such a thing can't happen, that is exactly when it will happen, because people won't actually believe it is happening.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

They weren't carried out by Ireland (in the same way that your official security services have incessantly attacked and murdered Irish people, including using bombs).

They may have been carried out by Irish people, but none of the actions were endorsed by either the country, or the Irish people. How are you somehow trying to claim that they were?

Except the Irish people who voted Sinn Fein, name themselves after members of that organisation and still, to this day, defend those actions.

Fratton Fred

Cú Giobach wrote: »

The biggest danger is believing that such a thing can't happen, that is exactly when it will happen, because people won't actually believe it is happening.

This is all getting a bit conspiracy theoryesque, but the "Third Wave" experiment shows haw this could quite easily happen.

ejmaztec

Morlar wrote: »

I think 60 yrs ago people were convinced that they were the height of sophistication too.

Had they had as much access to information as we have today, they would have been.:P

Cú Giobach

Fratton Fred wrote: »

This is all getting a bit conspiracy theoryesque, but the "Third Wave" experiment shows haw this could quite easily happen.

I honestly believe things like that should be taught or explained in schools, too many times I heard as I was growing up "but how could people do that" or "that could never happen now", referring to the Holocaust.
We are all humans and are all the same under the skin, if one bunch of people can do something then so can another.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Except the Irish people who voted Sinn Fein, name themselves after members of that organisation and still, to this day, defend those actions.

That is an entirely different argument to the one you're putting forward which was that Ireland has bombed England!

You seem outraged at the fact that a few bombs have gone off in England killing a number of people, do you not share the same outrage towards the terror that your country has waged on Ireland killing untold amounts?

old hippy

Gingko wrote: »

Yes and like I said, your a hippy? Lands without borders? Think I'm obviously more of a hippy then you? :P

It's not a competition, brother

Gingko

Can the moderator put this thread to leaba please?

Morlar

ejmaztec wrote: »

Had they had as much access to information as we have today, they would have been.:P

Every generation thinks its the bees knees in terms of intellect, technological development, sophistication and all the rest of it. I think it's an arrogant & empty assumption to make. For the first world war we had the propaganda about 'Germans making soap out of the dead', stories about 'the crucified candaidan', ww2 we had 'Germans making soap out of jews', Gulf war one we had 'Iraqis ripping kuwaiti infants from incubators', gulf war 2 we had 'WMD poised to strike', libya 2011 we had. . . . 'gaddaffi is butchering his own people'.

Methods change but people in power can still start wars when they really want to. All they have to do is keep pace with technology and be careful in how it's choreographed, stage managed & presented.

Governments, internet service providers, internet search engines & traditional mass media outlets hold all the cards in terms of which sides of the story you get presented with or which information you might be able to find if you know where to dig. No individual has the resources to check every single source & it becomes about the volume more than about the integrity.

My prediction is that for future wars instead of PR firms lobbying with tearful actresses - next time around you will have an element of social media manipulation on a mass scale, much like for example Israel & pro isreal advocacy groups currently already use large numbers of people to manipulate social media and internet forums. I think it would be foolish to think that out of every generation that has ever been this is the one to see the end to wars, or, this is the one to finally has the ability to see through warmongering propaganda.

Anyway - poppies = Nay !

old hippy

Gingko wrote: »

Can the moderator put this thread to leaba please?

Indeed. It's exceptionally tragic & is a testament to man's inability to love one another.

bobbysands81

Gingko wrote: »

Can the moderator put this thread to leaba please?

People are still voting on the topic at hand, and, as long as it stays civil then there's no harm keeping it open.

bobbysands81

old hippy wrote: »

Indeed. It's exceptionally tragic & is a testament to man's inability to love one another.

The more you post the more you sound like a true Republican!

citytillidie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You know people involved on those days do you?

Being from Derry I do, and I will never support a compain that helps out ex service men that shot dead innocent people, not just here in Ireland but all over the World.

Gingko

bobbysands81 wrote: »

People are still voting on the topic at hand, and, as long as it stays civil then there's no harm keeping it open.

Don't think it's doing anyone regardless of sides or opinion any good at this stage?

old hippy

Morlar wrote: »

My prediction is that for future wars instead of PR firms lobbying with tearful actresses - next time around you will have an element of social media manipulation on a mass scale, much like for example Israel & pro isreal advocacy groups currently already use large numbers of people to manipulate social media and internet forums.

Yeah, I agree there. But point it out & you inevitably get called an "anti-semite" :rolleyes:

philologos

No (I'm Irish)

Cú Giobach wrote: »

There is no such thing as "an evil country", power and policies are wielded and set by minorities (ie; the rich and powerful) in favour of their own vested interests.
The British empire was exploitative in nature, this was the very reason for its existence and to exploit others is generally considered wrong.

Many things it did were wrong, much as any country has made significant mistakes. One could look to any country and say that. However to say that it is wrong to commemorate the dead at war as a result is wrong in my opinion. Nobody is saying that anyone who happens to wear a poppy is obligated to explain everything wrong that the British Empire ever did.

My point was simple and has been brought beyond it's logical conclusion which was that it is wrong to say that nothing good came from it.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I'll give you the words of Tacitus writing in the 1st century regarding the Roman occupation of Britain.
And so the population was gradually led into the demoralising temptations of arcades, baths and sumptuous banquets. The unsuspecting Britons spoke of such novelties as 'civilisation', when in fact they were only a feature of their own enslavement.

As for Tacitus, to be honest with you I don't see the significance of what he said in considering why people wear the poppy.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I am not saying in this thread who does or doesn't have a right to live on this island, all I am saying is that in a situation where you have distinct national groupings, if one group of people exercise power and privilege over another to the detriment of one group this will lead to tension and hatred.
The problems on this island were not caused by who ran the place but how they ran it.

Of course, but both sides were involved. It's wrong to say that both weren't actually. And again, it doesn't have much bearing as to why people should or shouldn't wear the poppy which is recognised in many countries not just Britain.

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Well the flag of the republic of Ireland represents the coming together of the two main "tribes" on this island and the wishes of many is to unite "catholic, protestant and dissenter".

If that is the case unfortunately many on this thread don't represent what the tricolour does.

old hippy

bobbysands81 wrote: »

The more you post the more you sound like a true Republican!

LOL! I'm just tired of the endless war of words (albeit, I'm drawn to it like a moth to a flame, a fly to a turd etc).

Mind you, it's better than a war of arms.

KeithAFC

No (I'm British/not Irish)

citytillidie wrote: »

Being from Derry I do, and I will never support a compain that helps out ex service men that shot dead innocent people, not just here in Ireland but all over the World.

Ok, so you don't support the Poppy appeal? Fine. I think this thread is running out of fuel now to be honest. Going in circles.

old hippy

KeithAFC wrote: »

Ok, so you don't support the Poppy appeal? Fine. I think this thread is running out of fuel now to be honest. Going in circles.

Is it much of a surprise? Intransigence is not the sole preserve of unionists.

gurramok

Do the 287 Irish people according to the poll who voted that British soldiers from all wars should be remembered agree with Cameron that the poppy is a symbol of British pride?

I just wonder if they have a change of heart after Cameron's reaction to the FIFA banning of poppys as a political symbol today. Or are they really British after all?

Dr.Syn

No (I'm British/not Irish)

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Can you tell me when 'the Irish' or 'Ireland' have bombed Britain please.

I refuse to answer that infantile remark! It is too easy for you to look up.

There seems to be an idea that only Britain wear the poppies, The poppy appeal people send poppies to 160 countries. That same charity also gives help to the injured service men and women Including the Irish regiments and servicemen and women.

crash davis

Most people do what they do out of self-interest. And if somebody is born in Ireland it doesn't make him/her automatically worthy of commemorating, which seems to be the general idea behind those who push for these Irish-born British soldiers to be commemorated here.


I had to respond to this, because it dishonours so many Irish soldiers who fought in the first World War, a war they signed up for because they were told that it would help our nations struggle for independence.

Anyway, no I don't believe that Irish people should involve themselves in Poppy Day, since it's basically turned into a propaganda piece, with the British spouting out the same auld rhethoric every single year, demonstrated quite clearly in their laughable and quite embarrassing episode with FIFA. Talk about a mountain out of a molehill, and all for a Poppy, which, I might add, could be seen as very offensive to other nations when displayed on a world stage. What if they were playing Germany or Afghanistan?

If you want to acknowledge Irish heroes of WWI, go to the Irish National War Memorial Gardens and pay your respects. Don't subscribe to this political tool of the Uk.