Alan Shatter Minister of Defence : Irish WW2 Neutrality 'Morally Bankrupt'

Morlar

I thought the lack of discussion of this statement is a bit odd. Considering it (in my view) really amounts to a planned assault on the integrity, character and morality of the Irish state & nation during the period of WW2 on the basis of Irish Neutrality.

Considering the content I think it has recieved very little attention in the Irish media. The British media coverage is not so reluctant.

I am curious if Alan Shatter, Irish Minister of Defence is reflecting the Fine Gael position, or just the Alan Shatter, Jew, Irish Minister of Defence position.

Also curious about what the Sinn Fein or Fianna Fail response to this new form of historical revisionism would be.

I did find it distasteful that at one point he essentially says Ireland has no moral authority to criticise Israel for it's actions on the basis of
our neutrality during WW2 :

However, there were questionable things both done and not done and we should not be in denial nor should we ignore that the conduct of our State,
at that time, in the eyes of some, delimits Ireland’s moral authority and credibility when today we seek to lecture later generations of
those whose families survived the Holocaust on the conduct of their affairs in Israel, without regard to the extent to which they believe
themselves under existential threat.

I am curious about how other people recieved this statement (not just the snippet above) - opinions ? For, against ?

Here is the full official text of this speech :

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/SP12000011

Speech by Alan Shatter TD, Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence Opening ‘the Shoah in Europe’ exhibition The Atrium, Department of Justice and Equality, 51 St Stephen’s Green

23rd January 2012 at 6pm


Oireachtas colleagues, Ambassadors, Ladies and Gentlemen

Allied soldiers arrived at the gates of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp sixty seven years ago this week, that is, on the 27th January 1945. It had become the largest graveyard of the Jewish people in history. An estimated 1.1 to 1.3 million people were exterminated there, 90% of them Jewish men, women and children. Others exterminated included Roma families, people with disabilities, homosexuals, prisoners of conscience and religious faith.

Nothing could prepare the camps liberators for what they witnessed in Auschwitz. The remnants of the gas chambers and the crematoria; the mounds of bodies; the stench of death; the piles of clothes; of teeth; of childrens’ shoes and barely living skeletal survivors; the speaking bones who greeted their arrival. By the war’s end, it was estimated that 6 million Jews had been exterminated by the Nazi killing machine in pursuit of the objective of a Judenfrei world. If Hitler had achieved his objectives no Jewish community in Europe would have been exempt from the Nazi slaughter, not even those resident in neutral Ireland. In Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, a map of Europe prepared by Adolf Eichmann, one of the main architects of the extermination policy, includes the estimated 4,000 members of the then Irish Jewish community targeted for extermination. Clearly, had Germany succeeded in invading Britain, our proclaimed war time neutrality would have provided no protection for the small Irish Jewish community nor presented any real barrier to a German invasion.

It is of vital importance that we and future generations remember and learn from the horrors of the past to ensure they are not repeated in the future. In his book "The Drowned and the Saved" Primo Levi writes "human memory is a marvellous but fallacious instrument. This is a threadbare truth, known not only to psychologists but also to anyone who has paid attention to the behaviour of those who surround him or even to his own behaviour. The memories which lie within us are not carved in stone; not only do they tend to become erased as the years go by, but often they change or even increase by incorporating extraneous features."

Despite everything witnessed, the accounts of survivors and the voluminous records maintained by Germany itself of the Nazi killing machine and the many Holocaust Memorials and museums worldwide, there are now too many in Europe who know very little of the horrors perpetrated in the second quarter of the last century and far too many in the State of Israel’s neighbours in the volatile Middle East engaged in Holocaust denial. Again in the words of Primo Levi "the further events fade into the past, the more the construction of convenient truth grows and is perfected."

As the years pass by and the remaining survivors of the Nazi horror who can tell the story firsthand reduce in number, it becomes more important than ever that we keep alive the shocking memory of the Holocaust. It is crucial that we never forget what happened or diminish the scale of the horror that was perpetrated by the Nazi regime. This important exhibition, which will continue for the next three weeks and which I am privileged to open this evening, is an important contribution to raising awareness of the Holocaust. The Holocaust Education Trust Ireland has worked with Mémorial de la Shoah in Paris and the French Embassy in Ireland to bring this exhibition to Dublin and I am particularly pleased to host the exhibition in the Department of Justice and Equality. I would like to extend a very warm welcome to Luc Levy who works with the Mémorial de la Shoah, the producers of this exhibition and to the French Ambassador, Madame Emmanuelle D’Achon. I would also like to extend a warm welcome to Boaz Modai, the Israeli Ambassador, who represents a State which provided refuge and a home for tens of thousands of Jewish people following the horrors of the Second World War.

The timing of this exhibition has been arranged to coincide with Ireland’s 10th National Holocaust Memorial Day commemoration which will take place this coming Sunday, the 29th January. This commemoration event, which is now firmly established in the Irish national calendar, has been supported by my Department since 2003 and I am very pleased to be in a position to continue that support. Exhibitions such as this; Holocaust Memorial Day Commemorations and the work of the Holocaust Education Trust in Ireland are all excellent examples of what can be done to raise awareness of the Holocaust.

I am also pleased that Ireland became a full member of the International Task Force on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research in December 2011. This Task Force is a voice of moral authority on the international stage in raising awareness about the Holocaust and can help address the dynamics that we know precede mass killings and genocide.

The importance of this exhibition is that it provides a global view of the Holocaust in Europe, starting with the growth of the Nazi movement, through the different stages of the persecution, inhumane treatment and extermination of millions of Jews, up to the Nuremburg Trials. It also gives a picture of both the political and military reactions of a number of States to this tragedy which included disinterest of some nations toward the fate of the Jews and looks at reactions at an individual level including Jewish resistance and the Righteous among Nations.

It is difficult to comprehend how a society could have allowed such unimaginable atrocities to occur. We must remember that the Holocaust did not occur in a vacuum. These acts of evil emerged in one of the more modern and sophisticated societies of the era.

Tools and advances made toward human progress were used for human destruction. Scientific and medical advances designed to heal and save lives were used to kill. Education which should enlighten was used to justify grotesquely immoral actions. People made choices. Some chose to be involved in some way in the destruction, others chose to do and say nothing, while some chose to resist the evil and do the right thing to support, protect and save the persecuted.

An inconvenient truth is that those who chose to do and say nothing during this unprecedented period in European history include this State. In the period following Hitler coming to power and preceding the Second World War, the doors of this State were kept firmly closed to German Jewish families trying to flee from persecution and death. The advice of the anti-Semitic then Irish Ambassador in Berlin, Charles Bewley, that Ireland should be protected from the contamination that would result from granting residential visas to Jewish refugees resulted in practically all visa requests being refused. This position was maintained from 1939 to 1945 and we should no longer be in denial that, in the context of the Holocaust, Irish neutrality was a principle of moral bankruptcy. This moral bankruptcy was compounded by the then Irish Government who, after the war, only allowed an indefensibly small number who survived the concentration camps to settle permanently in Ireland whilst refusing entry and permanent residence to many more and also by the visit of President De Valera to then German Ambassador Edouard Hemple in 1945 to express his condolences on the death of Hitler. At a time when neutrality should have ceased to be an issue the Government of this State utterly lost it’s moral compass.

So, in understanding the Holocaust and maintaining its memory, in ensuring that the conditions which allow such evil to flourish to such devastating consequences can never again prevail, we should not forget or ignore the failures of this State and this State’s responsibility for such failures. John Bruton, as Taoiseach, in the Spring of 1995, acknowledged our State’s failures and honoured the memory of those millions of European Jews who died in the Holocaust. When doing so, he acknowledged that the Holocaust "was not the product of an alien culture. It happened in Europe in living memory. It was a product of intolerance, bigotry and a distorted concept of nationalism." In the midst of the ongoing fiscal and banking crisis that currently impacts on the nations of Europe, including our State, we should never lose sight of the extraordinary contribution of the European Union in providing the political architecture for peace and stability in Europe. As Europeans we must all ensure that in addressing vital issues of immediate concern that affect the lives of tens of millions, it is the European ideals of peace, cooperation and solidarity and not extreme nationalism nor narrow domestic political concerns which motivate our actions.

It is appropriate that we revisit the morality of the conduct of our State during the 1930s and 40s, whilst of course being conscious of the fact that only a short time earlier, we had regained our independence from Britain and there was an understandable concern by Government to ensure, insofar as possible, political stability on this island at a time of global conflict. However, there were questionable things both done and not done and we should not be in denial nor should we ignore that the conduct of our State, at that time, in the eyes of some, delimits Ireland’s moral authority and credibility when today we seek to lecture later generations of those whose families survived the Holocaust on the conduct of their affairs in Israel, without regard to the extent to which they believe themselves under existential threat.

When viewing this exhibition no one should assume that what happened in the past cannot be repeated in the future. The truth is we should pay greater attention to the dead. We must never forget the lessons of the past when we make, or urge others to make, decisions which impact on the future. We should never ignore the extent to which their past impacts on their perception of the present and fuels their fears of the future or causes them to question the judgement of others.

For well over a decade, we have commemorated and paid tribute to the estimated 10,000 Irish people who died in British uniforms during the Second World War. Many who fought in British uniforms during that War returned to Ireland. For too many years, their contribution in preserving European and Irish democracy was ignored. Some of those include members of our Defence Forces who left this island during that time to fight for freedom and who were subsequently dishonourably discharged from the Defence Forces. I believe it is also appropriate that we revisit the manner in which they were treated whilst also remembering that those who served in our Defence Forces throughout that time performed a crucial national duty. It is untenable that we commemorate those who died whilst continuing to ignore the manner in which our State treated the living, in the period immediately after World War II, who returned to our State having fought for freedom and democracy. This is an issue to which I hope to return in my role as Minister for Defence later this year.

In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Lynn Jackson and her colleagues in the Holocaust Education Trust Ireland for their continued important work.

I would particularly like to commend the Crocus Project, which encourages national school children to plant yellow crocus bulbs in memory of the 1.5 million Jewish children and thousands of other children who died in the Holocaust. This Irish initiative has now been extended to the UK, Croatia, Poland, Malta, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic. I am delighted that my Department actively supported the Holocaust Education Trust Ireland in initiatives such as the Crocus Project, the production of the Holocaust Timeline and Teachers Handbook as well as the development of other educational, research and raising awareness materials.

I would also like to express our sincere gratitude to ‘our survivors’, who give so generously of their time to recount their personal stories to our children in schools around the country.

I know that there are teachers here this evening as well and I would like to acknowledge their contribution to teaching our children about the Holocaust, about the dangers of racism and the importance of respect, equality and integration.

Congratulations to all those involved in organising this excellent and informative exhibition and I wish it every success.

ENDS

Manach

Other - please explain

As someone whose family had served in the Irish DF during the Emergency, and as someone with a history degree, I am annoyed that Mr. Shatter has such a poor grasp of the realities of that period and its impact on the Ireland of that time. Neutrality was the clearest choice as an independant country who had not the resources to wage war and was still scarred by the partition of the country.

Morlar

Other - please explain

Manach wrote: »

As someone whose family had served in the Irish DF during the Emergency, and as someone with a history degree, I am annoyed that Mr. Shatter has such a poor grasp of the realities of that period and its impact on the Ireland of that time. Neutrality was the clearest choice as an independant country who had not the resources to wage war and was still scarred by the partition of the country.

I am also kind of a bit dumbfounded by the ignorance & arrogance of his statement above to be honest.

He made those comments on Moday - they were not reported anywhere until Wednesday when his 'pardon for deserters' sorry pardon for those who 'left' remarks were picked up upon. The rest of his statement was ignored.

They have still not had a proper airing in the Irish media in my view.

If I had to guess I'd say that many are still shocked by the cheek of it.

An Irish Minister of Defence declaring the Irish state to have been 'morally bankrupt' on the basis of our non-beligerence status during WW2 is a massive development and a lot to take in. This is a complex well worded statement obviously prepared long in advance. Nothing relaxed or off the cuff about any of this.

Possibly Irish media are unsure how to proceed on this due of sensitivity over Shatters Judaism and the desire to avoid the accusation, or appearance of anti-semitism. Perhaps the prospect of being seen to be antagonistic towards issues surrounding the holocaust is playing a part. In any event the general media handling and silence is noticeable.

Border-Rat

Other - please explain

Mr. Shatter's heart and allegiance is not to this Country. It is to Israel. Now, I know we have our own fair share of dual citizenry, but we always, or usually, respect the host Country. This isn't the first time this man has insulted me.

As for neutrality, I firmly would've backed it then and do now as well. I am for strict military non-involvement with the exception of severe provocation in the 06 Counties. In WW2 the Germans showed us no notable lack of respect. I am fine with that, we had no beef with Germany. In fact, Hitler pointed out the hypocrisy of America when they presented a list of Countries to Germany of whom they demanded security and Ireland was on the list. To a roaring applause, Hitler pointed out that it was not Germany that Ireland was afraid of, but England. The speech is actually on youtube.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

I'd be interested to know how Mr. Alan Shatter, our Minister for Defence, feels about Israelies using Irish Passports, when they carry out assassinations in foreign countries.

Morlar

Other - please explain

marcsignal wrote: »

I'd be interested to know how Mr. Alan Shatter, our Minister for Defence, feels about Israelies using Irish Passports, when they carry out assassinations in foreign countries.

According to our Defence Minister our policy of not declaring war on countries which have not declared war on us 70+yrs ago removes our moral authority to question anything israel does. Including invading and attacking neighbouring countries and using Irish passports to carry out murder.

Cardinal Richelieu

Other - please explain

Could you see him saying that if Cumann na Gael were in office during the Emergency? That opens a debate, would Cumann na Gael have brought Ireland into the War?

marcsignal

Other - please explain

Morlar wrote: »

According to our Defence Minister our policy of not declaring war on countries which have not declared war on us 70+yrs ago removes our moral authority to question anything israel does. Including invading and attacking neighbouring countries and using Irish passports to carry out murder.

If that is the view he personally holds, then I feel his position as Minister for Defence of this State is no longer tenable.
If he is shown to have such divided loyalties, that makes him a potential security risk imo.

museologist

Other - please explain

Morally Bankrupt?

I would have thought it was morally bankrupt to cast a politically divided and unarmed nation into a war. Even if Eire was armed by the Allies, the political divisions within Ireland would probably have led to civil war in the absence of a convenient attack by Germany. Those who make 'moral argument' always ignore this factor just as Geoffrey Roberts, a fine History lecturer at UCC, does here:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2012/0128/1224310867283.html

Ireland does have a case to answer with regard to its treatment of Jews after the war when the horrors of the holocaust was apparent. I don't understand why more Jews did not get in then. In the context of this and Shatters comments I don't understand why Irish Jews planted and dedicated a Forest to Eamon de Valera in 1966.

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

museologist wrote: »

Morally Bankrupt?

I would have thought it was morally bankrupt to cast a politically divided and unarmed nation into a war. Even if Eire was armed by the Allies, the political divisions within Ireland would probably have led to civil war in the absence of a convenient attack by Germany. Those who make 'moral argument' always ignore this factor just as Geoffrey Roberts, a fine History lecturer at UCC, does here:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2012/0128/1224310867283.html

Ireland does have a case to answer with regard to its treatment of Jews after the war when the horrors of the holocaust was apparent. I don't understand why more Jews did not get in then. In the context of this and Shatters comments I don't understand why Irish Jews planted and dedicated a Forest to Eamon de Valera in 1966.

I think the argument of the time was that they were not Christian. German refugees from catholic areas were taken in as they had the same faith as the Irish and were therefore easier to look after. An impoverished country such a Ireland could ill afford too many refugees. Germans were starving at the time and we could only take in 700 kids, which was not a lot.

I would say Britain has more a case to answer than Ireland. After all they turned away the Jews before the war actually started. How many lives could have been saved there?
Even after the war they would not let them go to Palestine.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

Anyone know if this apparent 'Moral Bankrupcy' has left any unfavourable impression on the Leaders, or Irish Representatives of, the Jehovas Witnesses, the Gay Community, Pave Point/Travellers, the Handicapped, and Communists ?

Did Mr Alan Shatter mention them ? Or is he only speaking for the Jewish Community here?

BlaasForRafa

marcsignal wrote: »

If that is the view he personally holds, then I feel his position as Minister for Defence of this State is no longer tenable.
If he is shown to have such divided loyalties, that makes him a potential security risk imo.

I'd expect a better standard of post from you tbh.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I'd expect a better standard of post from you tbh.

Sorry BlaasForRafa, but I feel insulted by his remarks, as an Irish person, and as someone who had 5 relatives who contributed to the Allied cause in WW2.

I would still like to know, whether Mr. Shatter feels, using Irish passports to carry out murders in foreign countries, is also morally bankrupt? and until such time as I hear his view on that matter, I flat refuse to be ‘guilt tripped’ by him.

I’d also like to ask him the same questions this respected female Jewish intellectual from Yad Vashem is asking.

For the record, I'd appreciate it if you do not try to infer, that I have my knife in Mr. Shatter because of his religion. I'd like it to be known, that I have, in the past, many times, voted for Ben Briscoe, even though he was a Fianna Failer. I did so because, Ben Briscoe is, and always was, a man of honourable integrity. Alan Shatter is no Ben Briscoe imo.

This stuff about the Holocaust gets ratcheted up every year around this time, and sadly, it is usually followed, in the weeks after, by the Palestinians getting a savage kicking.

Also, you seem to have overlooked that I stressed the word 'If' in my post you quoted. This means, that I am open to hear his explanations, and would be happy to retract and apologise to him on this forum, 'If' those answers to the questions I have asked, are satisfactory.

It's not the first time we have disagreed on here regarding the M.E. (because the M.E. and the Holocaust are intrinsically linked), and I have always fully respecteed your opinion on the matter, as I have no issue whatsoever with the existance of the state of Israel. I simply find Mr. Shatters take on this, hypocritical, and do not feel he has any right to throw stones at anyone, from that big glass house of his.

Mance Rayder

Other - please explain

Alan Shatter is Jewish, maybe this shaped his opinion somewhat.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

CiscoStudent wrote: »

Alan Shatter is Jewish, maybe this shaped his opinion somewhat.

Maybe, maybe not. His religion is his own private business.
It's not his Jewishness I have a problem with, it's his Chutzpah.

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

the topic has made headlines in Germany and Die Welt has an article on it (unfortunately only in German)

http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article13841239/Irland-stellt-sich-seiner-dunklen-Vergangenheit.html

the article speaks of Irelands 'dark past'.

Could someone tell me if Charles Bewley, Irish ambassador to Berlin from 1933-39, was an anti-semite, as claimed in the article?

Turbine

Other - please explain

Whoever wrote that article is either British themselves or completely biassed.

They talk of the "alleged deserters", "as they were called", and the "anti-British" attitudes of the Irish that led to the deserters being court martialed.:rolleyes:

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

Turbine wrote: »

Whoever wrote that article is either British themselves or completely biassed.

They talk of the "alleged deserters", "as they were called", and the "anti-British" attitudes of the Irish that led to the deserters being court martialed.:rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kielinger

Jawgap

Alan Shatter has a point - up to a point!

Ireland's neutrality during WWII was fundamentally morally bankrupt given it was all but guaranteed by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. Ireland was content to enjoy the umbrella of this protection without officially contributing to it.

That said, that does not condemn the country to forever being excluded from commenting on comtemporary issues such as the Middle East - if anything our recent history, and the Defence Forces' involvement there, leaves us well placed to comment on events there.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

Fuinseog wrote: »

Could someone tell me if Charles Bewley, Irish ambassador to Berlin from 1933-39, was an anti-semite, as claimed in the article?

I understand Charles Bewley was not fond of the Jews. I recall he is said to have made the remark....

"Ireland never persecuted the Jews, because we never let too many in"

.... and that's as good as verbatim from what I can remember.

Anti-Semitism was not uncommon in Europe at the time, and Ireland was a staunchly Catholic country.
I have no reason to doubt that he (Bewley) made that remark.

Turbine

Other - please explain

Jawgap wrote: »

Alan Shatter has a point - up to a point!

Ireland's neutrality during WWII was fundamentally morally bankrupt given it was all but guaranteed by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. Ireland was content to enjoy the umbrella of this protection without officially contributing to it.

That said, that does not condemn the country to forever being excluded from commenting on comtemporary issues such as the Middle East - if anything our recent history, and the Defence Forces' involvement there, leaves us well placed to comment on events there.

Britain was as much of a threat to Ireland as Germany was, so to say Ireland was taking comfort by the presence of the Royal Navy and RAF around Ireland is completely false.

marcsignal

Other - please explain

Turbine wrote: »

Britain was as much of a threat to Ireland as Germany was, so to say Ireland was taking comfort by the presence of the Royal Navy and RAF around Ireland is completely false.

I agree. Churchill <sarcasm>who of course had a long track record of admiration and respect for the Irish</sarcasm> said that had the Treaty Ports been needed during the war, would have been siezed by HM Forces.

Jawgap wrote: »

That said, that does not condemn the country to forever being excluded from commenting on comtemporary issues such as the Middle East - if anything our recent history, and the Defence Forces' involvement there, leaves us well placed to comment on events there.

I agree with you there.

Morlar

Other - please explain

Jawgap wrote: »

Ireland's neutrality during WWII was fundamentally morally bankrupt given it was all but guaranteed by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. Ireland was content to enjoy the umbrella of this protection without officially contributing to it.

Ireland did not ask for, expect or receive protection from the RAF or the Royal navy throughout WW2.

Irish fire engines went north to protect Northern Irish civilians.
Irish men volunteered in their tens of thousands to join the British army or join the merchant marine & British industrial war effort (leaving aside for the moment those who deserted the Irish army to do so).

The single greatest threat of a violation of Irish Neutrality and invasion of Ireland was the prospect of a British invasion of Ireland to 'take back' ie forcefully capture certain Irish ports.

The RAF/Royal Navy did not protect Ireland whatsoever, in fact barring a handful of isolated accidental instances the Germans did not attack Ireland to begin with, no more than they attacked neighbouring Switzerland (which presumably you will now claim the RAF and Royal Navy also protected with their magical umbrella).

The RAF did attack shipping which included Irish boats. but the claim - I take it you are claiming that by their exsistence they protected Ireland ? - is a nonsense. We were their natural buffer zone & it is widely acknowledged that our neutrality prevented German kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe from violating our waters & airspace for the most part (something I believe Churchill and his cabinet disagreed on but is in my view the case).

Could I ask you a hypothetical question - if there had been a Nato Vs Warsaw Pact conflict in Europe, say during the early 1980's do you also think that in that scenario the RAF and Royal Navy would by their exsistence also have provided neutral Ireland with some kind of umbrella protection ? Or is this theory uniquely applicable to WW2 ?

johngalway

I disagree with Alan Shatter - No it was not Morally Bankrupt

I'm not Jewish and I think Ireland should have involved itself in WW2 on the Allied side.

There is the argument about partition and our own old enemy the British but......

What the Axis side were about was indefensible, in any mans language, and we should have tried our best to stop it, whatever that may have amounted to.

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

marcsignal wrote: »

I understand Charles Bewley was not fond of the Jews. I recall he is said to have made the remark....

"Ireland never persecuted the Jews, because we never let too many in"

..

did Joyce not say the same in Ulysses?

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

johngalway wrote: »

I'm not Jewish and I think Ireland should have involved itself in WW2 on the Allied side.

There is the argument about partition and our own old enemy the British but......

What the Axis side were about was indefensible, in any mans language, and we should have tried our best to stop it, whatever that may have amounted to.

Leaving 'The Chosen People out of the Equation' the Axis were about protecting Europe from Communism, an ideology both the church and big business were not fond of. The Americans and NATO took over this role after 1945.

I find what Robert Mugabe is doing is indefensible. The same with the Taliban. Let us send a few thousand young Irishmen to fight these evils. How can neutral Eire stand by and not send troops to Afghanistan? We owe to humanity. I really find we are missing out on a great adventure. Let them die on foreign soil fighting a war they know little about. There is great money to be made and a great way to solve youth unemployment.

perhaps some Irish felt the same in 1939?

marcsignal

Other - please explain

Fuinseog wrote: »

did Joyce not say the same in Ulysses?

Very possibly. Maybe Bewley was quoting him, but I can remember that comment being associated with Bewley. I'm sure I can remember it from a Documentary on this very subject on RTE about a year ago. Ben Briscoe (Jr) that I mentioned earlier, was interviewed, and claimed his father had some run in with Bewley, politically.

edit:

I'd like to also add, to the general discussion, that if Mr. Alan Shatter was from a Russian or former Eastern Block backround, had pro Putin leanings, and started lecturing us on our position during the Cold War, in the light of American atrocities in Vietnam etc. I would consider that an insult too, and would also question his integrity on the basis that the Russians were also recently up to malarky with Irish passports.

Fuinseog

Other - please explain

marcsignal wrote: »

Very possibly. Maybe Bewley was quoting him, but I can remember that comment being associated with Bewley. I'm sure I can remember it from a Documentary on this very subject on RTE about a year ago. Ben Briscoe (Jr) that I mentioned earlier, was interviewed, and claimed his father had some run in with Bewley, politically.

edit:

I'd like to also add, to the general discussion, that if Mr. Alan Shatter was from a Russian or former Eastern Block backround, had pro Putin leanings, and started lecturing us on our position during the Cold War, in the light of American atrocities in Vietnam etc. I would consider that an insult too, and would also question his integrity on the basis that the Russians were also recently up to malarky with Irish passports.

It is interesting that Briscoe served in the LDF the precursor to the FCA during the Emergency and did not feel the need to desert and join a foreign army.

Turbine

Other - please explain

johngalway wrote: »

I'm not Jewish and I think Ireland should have involved itself in WW2 on the Allied side.

There is the argument about partition and our own old enemy the British but......

What the Axis side were about was indefensible, in any mans language, and we should have tried our best to stop it, whatever that may have amounted to.

If you're referring to the concentration camps, the Allies didn't know about these till the end of the war.

So effectively what you're saying is that Ireland should've sacrificed tens of thousands of her citizens in attempting to crush the Axis forces.

We had no business getting ourselves involved in that war, and Éamon de Valera was right to keep us out of it. He saved a lot of lives in taking that decision.

johngalway

I disagree with Alan Shatter - No it was not Morally Bankrupt

Turbine wrote: »

If you're referring to the concentration camps, the Allies didn't know about these till the end of the war.

So effectively what you're saying is that Ireland should've sacrificed tens of thousands of her citizens in attempting to crush the Axis forces.

We had no business getting ourselves involved in that war, and Éamon de Valera was right to keep us out of it. He saved a lot of lives in taking that decision.

The Jews in Germany were persecuted long before the outbreak of war.

The Nazi's overrunning most of Europe should have been reason enough, if it's good enough for people to cry over the occupation of Ireland by Britain, then sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

As an independent nation we had every right to get involved. And don't get me started on that man who signed a book of condolences for Hitler.

Turbine

Other - please explain

johngalway wrote: »

The Jews in Germany were persecuted long before the outbreak of war.

The Nazi's overrunning most of Europe should have been reason enough, if it's good enough for people to cry over the occupation of Ireland by Britain, then sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

As an independent nation we had every right to get involved. And don't get me started on that man who signed a book of condolences for Hitler.

America stayed neutral right up until 1942. Britain was happy to stand by and let Germany invade Czechoslovakia, and to add salt to the wound then went and signed a treaty alongside France with Germany to let the Germans keep most of Czechoslovakia. Britain only declared war on Germany because they knew they'd be knocking on their own door eventually, and had to stop them while they still could.

So lets not pretend the Allies went to war with Germany to defend the sovereignty of others, they all had their own agendas.