Was our neutrality during WWII a folly?

unkel

LOL as if any player cared about what status Ireland wished to call upon itself during the war

It's a bit like during a fight between a tiger and a bear, there's this annoying little fly who shouts to both that he is neutral. But while the tiger is dying, the fly still manages to eat quite a bit of sh1te out of the tigers hole

(bodice ripper gave the short answer already )

purplepanda

Latchy wrote: »

Either way , the Irish government and the Allies had a plan of action in place that should the republic ( or EIRE as it was referred to then by the British ) be invaded by the Nazis, the American and British forces would join up with the 500,000 strong Irish Army to try repel the invasion which probably would have involved fighting on several fronts .

Whilst plans were certainly made for that scenario, Ireland didn't have the military strength to join the Allies & Britain didn't have the spare military capacity to help defend Ireland in that event from German aggression. Perhaps when the USA joined in the war Ireland should have followed suit.

Ireland was certainly pro Allies, in the same way that Sweden was pro Nazi, there's many shades of neutrality.

As for neutrality Norway, Netherlands, Belgium & others were offiically neutral without any Allied forces stationed on their soil, by then it was too late. A German invasion of Ireland would have had plenty of warning beforehand for Allied counter measures.

In the event of a successful German takeover of Southern England, Allied forces would have used Ireland for a counter offensive base. There would have been no way of keeping out of the war in that event.

Wibbs

Seaneh wrote: »

You'd swear they were the only ones to sign a ****ing book of condolences for Hitler.

Other than Portugal we were.

An Coilean

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, the simple fact is that the German military machine very impressive as it was(your average German soldier was worth about 3-4 Us/British soldiers and around 8-10 Soviet soldier going on some stats) was not geared up for crossing bodies of water beyond the scale of a large river. They were almost entirely tactically focused on land battles. Heinkels and the like first, followed by Stukas and panzers supporting the infantry. EG When they won the battle of France and were looking at the upcoming battle of Britain, they had to change the rules/procedures for their single engined flight crews who had been previously restricted from crossing bodies of water beyond a couple of miles. Hasty additions of life rafts and life jackets being the most of it.

They most certainly hadn't anywhere close to the capacity of invading Ireland from mainland Europe and invading from the UK, if they had succeeded there, which over and above the UK propaganda was a pretty tall order. PLus even if they had taken southern England the British as a whole would likely have just gone further north and kept harrying them. It was pretty much never gonna happen. Seriously, read up on the actual capacities of their various mechanisms of war. Shít their fighter planes like ME109's could barely make London from France, their Stukas ditto. Their longer range light(in comparison to later B17's etc) bombers could go further but were highly vulnerable to single seat fighters without escort.

On the sea they were outmatched by the Royal Navy, no question, however had they managed to gain air supremacy over the surthern most part of England, something they very nearly achieved. Then the question of invasion became much more possible, the Luftwaffe could have inflicted enough damage on the then unprotected Navy to force them out of their Suthern Bases.
The Germans may not have had the seabourn resourses of the Brits, but Norway showed they were capable of pulling off a Seabourn Invasion. Once the German army got on land, there really was not enough North for the Brits to retreat into, the Germans would simple persue and defeat them, British Land Forces at the time simply did not have the numbers or Equipment to hold of the German Army on Land.
Interestingly the British high Command studied the IRA of the Tan War as a template for resistance should the Germans make it ashore.

bluecode

Latchy wrote: »

Along the east coast of Dublin and other part of Ireland then it was common (from the view of an airplane ) to see E.I.R.E written in large white stone so as any misdirected German planes would know they weren't flying over UK

One can only guess at the The German style helmets ,were they to piss the Brits off :pac: or ( should they invade ) welcome the Germans on arrival ?

I dunno

Actually in reality those signs were for the Allies, particularly for the Americans. In fact later those Eire signs were numbered so the Allies could check the number and figure out where they were. As for the German helmets, they were actually made in England by Vickers who later made Spitfires. They were soon got rid of and the British supplied us with British helmets, British equipment, planes, tanks and weapons. So much for our neutrality.

Not only that we supplied the British with lots of intelligence. Indeed at one point when the commander of the Coast watching service went on a tour of all the posts in the country. He was accompanied by a Royal Navy officer. Yes that's right a British spy went along with an Irish army commander.

My own opinion is that we really should have joined the war once the Americans were in. If for no other reason than for the masses of dollars it would have brought in. Dev blew it because of his short sighed anti American attitude. Even though he was American.

His attitude condemmed this country to decades of isolatonism and poverty. He was a traitor to this country at every level.

We are still suffering the legacy of his shortsighted parochial isolationism.

May he rot in hell.

wendell borton

Why get invlved in a war were we would have been mere pawns, just look at the sacrifices made by the polish fighting with the allies in places like monte casino just to be betrayed and see europe carved up by the big powers.
What difference would have direct action in the war achieved, ireland supported the allies in lots of other ways such as suppling weather reports.

Keeping ireland out of the war was probably devaleras only real achievment and his reposte to churchills ungratitute his finest moment as Taoiseach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isNOQ3zQ2F0

General General

I agree that we should have joined in when the Yanks did.

Not doing so, we lost out on a lot of grants, which is most unlike us.

wendell borton

General General wrote: »

I agree that we should have joined in when the Yanks did.

Not doing so, we lost out on a lot of grants, which is most unlike us.

We received aid as part of the marshall plan from the yanks.
We also got money later on from the germans for the bombs they droped here.

fasttalkerchat

wendell borton wrote: »

Keeping ireland out of the war was probably devaleras only real achievment and his reposte to churchills ungratitute his finest moment as Taoiseach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isNOQ3zQ2F0

I love that interview. From 4:45 is amazing.

dj jarvis

Rigol wrote: »

As Wibbs said above, the Rushkies were the real end of Adolf.
But if Germany had the choice to invade Ireland I believe at first they would have made 'an offer you cant refuse' to us...which would have been grasped. I don't see a reason for an ethnic cleansing of us, he liked the Brits ethnically and we're very similar and integrated. Plus why waste the resources, and we were Vatican property anyway...not worth the diplomacy.

Otherwise they'd have done some kind of token political thing to give them reason to squash us, while claiming some weak righteousness in front of the world, and for the history books too.

Like someone else said, they wouldn't want us being a swinging door for the yanks to eventually come through.

Anyway, the Russians finished WW2. If Germanys resources had never been used on Russia then G.Britain was a gonner. They poured millions of men, and thousands of tanks and aircraft into the eastern front. If they'd sent that stuff west then there'd be no contenders.

i disagree - the Finns were " offered " a land and naval deal by the soviets in exchange with not being bombed and invaded - the Finns as any self defending nation told then to **** off - the soviets done a Germany and engineered a reason to invade natural Finland, the Finns out gunned, 20 to 1 held and fought back a soviet army 20 times the size - twice , in the winter war and the continuation war

they fought the soviets to a stand still - and in the end gained and held their sovereignty - of the nations who agreed to the soviet deal , Estonia - Latvia remained in soviet control till the 90's

the irish army was not any better armed or originated than the Finns , i think we could have done the same , as a guerilla force the Irish would have been a major pain in the hole to whoever invaded us

i have seen to this day children in Helsinki,walking around with tee shirts with the logo " thank you marshall marnnerhiem " , because he saved them from 60 years of soviet invasion , and enslavement

i think it would have been the same in Ireland - once they were in - they would have been here for generations

as much as i dislike dev - i think this was his aim

fasttalkerchat

dj jarvis wrote: »

i think it would have been the same in Ireland - once they were in - they would have been here for generations

If there's one thing we're good at its guerrilla warfare. Anyone wanting to invade Ireland could have taken Dublin in a day but it would have taken decades to gain any sort of control over us. And you can only imagine the task being undertaken teaching German to the people of Cork!

dj jarvis

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

If there's one thing we're good at its guerrilla warfare. Anyone wanting to invade Ireland could have taken Dublin in a day but it would have taken decades to gain any sort of control over us. And you can only imagine the task being undertaken teaching German to the people of Cork!

even worse - could you imagine german spoken with a cork accent - holy foook :eek:

hande hoch booooyyyyyy

fasttalkerchat

dj jarvis wrote: »

even worse - could you imagine german spoken with a cork accent - holy foook :eek:

hande hoch booooyyyyyy

Or Cork spoken with a German accent. Something like these Chinese Lads:

General General

wendell borton wrote: »

We received aid as part of the marshall plan from the yanks.
We also got money later on from the germans for the bombs they droped here.

I never let a fact get in the way of my bullsh!t.

False Prophet

It would have been crazy to join a war for a number of reasons.
1. Nobody knew when the next war would be,so why show our hand?
2. Being neutral helped us in europe etc for years as on nobody side
3. Once that door is open, could have led us to joining other wars iraq etc.
4. Enough Irish have died in foreign wars.
5.Allies knew about the concentration camps and did nothing. We would have made no diff.
6. We were a new nation, staying neutral made us more independent and stand on our own feet
7.Easy to say it now but the germans were working and improving on long range land missiles. If they had made advances in this or developed the atomic bomb where would we be?

Capt'n Midnight

Seaneh wrote: »

You'd swear they were the only ones to sign a ****ing book of condolences for Hitler.

Ireland was neutral, we had a German Embassy, it was protocol to sign the fecking book just as it would have been to sign it for any other nation.

The point being that we didn't do the same for Roosevelt

Sulla Felix

I think so. We would have contrivutfed fsck all, but its the principle of the thiknh. Nazism needed to be opposed.

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

LOL as if any player cared about what status Ireland wished to call upon itself during the war

Actually they did because of our strategic position. Hence Churchill was hopping mad over the treaty ports business. Having Ireland on board during the battle of the Atlantic would have likely saved thousands of lives and tons of materiel.

An Coilean wrote: »

On the sea they were outmatched by the Royal Navy, no question, however had they managed to gain air supremacy over the surthern most part of England, something they very nearly achieved. Then the question of invasion became much more possible, the Luftwaffe could have inflicted enough damage on the then unprotected Navy to force them out of their Suthern Bases.

Funny enough as far as shipping in the channel went the Germans for a time had something approaching air superiority. The British lost a significant amount of tonnage to dive bomber and e boat attack. Dover was effectively off the list as an anti invasion port and coastal convoys were suspended. The Germans essentially won "the battle of the channel" if such a name had been applied, but that's history of the victors for you.

The Germans may not have had the seabourn resourses of the Brits, but Norway showed they were capable of pulling off a Seabourn Invasion.

Just about. Against a foe that was confused(if brave) in response and capitulated quickly enough, had biplanes and inferior technology across the board and still the Germans lost 3 cruisers, 10 destroyers and numerous frieghters and submarines, not to mention 5000 dead.

Once the German army got on land, there really was not enough North for the Brits to retreat into,

Actually there was. Again look at the effective range of German aircraft that would have been there to support their troops, a support that was in a much bigger capacity than allied thinking of the time and a massive part of the German army's effectiveness.

Interestingly the British high Command studied the IRA of the Tan War as a template for resistance should the Germans make it ashore.

They did too. Well it was damned effective.Though I suspect even the Tans at their worst wouldn't match up to the German's repsonse to such tactics given their record elsewhere. It would have been very bloody.

Sulla Felix wrote: »

I think so. We would have contrivutfed fsck all, but its the principle of the thiknh. Nazism needed to be opposed.

We did in fact contribute, albeit "unofficially". Never mind the tacit support of the allied cause - German pilot crashes = active mission therefore interned. Allied pilot crashes = clearly a training mission so according to the rules of neutrality off you go Ted - tens of thousands of Irish men and women signed up for the allied side in the British and US forces and many died fighting the Nazi's and indeed the Japanese. As ever even with the enmity within these islands signing up wasn't so black and white. EG Brendan "Paddy" Finucane, Spitfire ace with 20 odd kills to his name and the youngest wing commander in RAF history at 21, whose dad had served as an Irish volunteer under Dev in the Easter rising, so hardly a "west brit".

Dyr

dj jarvis wrote: »

even worse - could you imagine german spoken with a cork accent - holy foook :eek:

hande hoch booooyyyyyy

never mind the accent, imagine the level of arrogance :eek:

Bassic

LordSutch wrote: »

Did we not call ourselves EIRE back then? Irish Merchant ship the SS Irish Oak 1943 http://www.mariner.ie/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/oak.jpg

On another issue, guess who these guys are on a training exercise in 1939 > http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSW-zeeNLQyRIRR00EpEjt1VTyUhKRHCXtAfpTOyE5wEk3R7R18ew

And No, they're not Germans :eek:

And have a guess where the helmets were made!

pauldla

Given that we'd just gone through several centuries of occupation by one of the belligerents, who was still in occupation of part of the country; given that we'd recently fought a very bitter war of independence against that country, which ended with a highly unsatisfactory (for some) truce that had lead to an even more bitter civil war; and given that we had then had an 'economic war' with that same country again, it's hard to see how Dev could have sold entry to the war on the Allied side without dangerously re-opening old wounds. At best there would have been widespread discontent in the country at the move, and at worst it could have started another civil war. The IRA were certainly prepared for it: Tim Pat Coogan tells of how an IRA raid on the Free State Arsenal in 1939/early 1940 (not sure of the date, I don't have the book to hand) had secured for the IRA over one million rounds of ammunition, among other goodies.

Even if Dev had wanted, with all his heart and soul, to enter the war against the Nazis, he would have been restrained from doing so by the political realities of the day. Entering the war would have been a much greater folly.

Nolimits

To those giving Dev a hard time about signing the book of condolences, though history has judged this to be a bad move, at the time I think it was more about the German Ambassador with whom De Valera had a good relationship with, and even liked. He gave up his radio when asked, and generally caused no bother. He behaved more admirably than the American Ambassador for instance who De Valera didn't like, and kept trying to get replaced.

Dyr

Latchy wrote: »

It's strange to think that Hitler thought he could take on the might of the Soviet Union while also fighting the Allies on 3 major fronts ,Europe ,Africa and Italy .

Some of his major gaffs ...

1. Not allowing the 3 reserve panzer divisions to join the defense at Normandy ( the Furher wasn't to be awakened )

People make a big deal about adolph having a lie in but Rommel and some of the other big wigs had previously had a bust up about where the panzer divisions should be deployed. Rommel wanted them distributed close to the beaches so they could support the infantry or counter on the beaches. The others wanted them massed in large units out of the reach of allied air/naval power so they could counter attack in strength againstthe main allied landings once they figured out where they were. What I read was that Rommel was overruled but on the day everyone bottled making the decision of where to commit the panzers to because they weren't sure which landings were diversions or not.

LordSutch

Bassic wrote: »

And have a guess where the helmets were made!

Taken from post #56

"In fact later those Eire signs were numbered so the Allies could check the number and figure out where they were. As for the German helmets, they were actually made in England by Vickers who later made Spitfires. They were soon got rid of and the British supplied us with British helmets, British equipment, planes, tanks and weapons. So much for our neutrality".

pragmatic1

getzls wrote: »

Surely this is a cowards excuse?

Irelands shame.

Ireland's shame your hole. We had an enemy of our own that treated us like they were nazis for a long time. And if you look at what the British empire has done around the world, they make the nazis look soft.

jugger0

We were right to stay out of it, but if we did enter then i hope it would be to reclaim the rest of our Island from foreign invaders.

pauldla

LordSutch wrote: »

Taken from post #56

"In fact later those Eire signs were numbered so the Allies could check the number and figure out where they were. As for the German helmets, they were actually made in England by Vickers who later made Spitfires. They were soon got rid of and the British supplied us with British helmets, British equipment, planes, tanks and weapons. So much for our neutrality".

As an aside, the army museum in the Curragh has a bren carrier from that period. The story I heard (from one of the lads who worked there), was that they had been supplied in error by the British Army during WW2. Apparently we had wanted to order bren straps (ie straps for carrying bren machine guns) and not the desert vehicles known to any who have ever bought an airfix kit. Apparently bren carriers are next to useless in the Irish climate, being designed for use in the desert, but we kept them anyhow.

indioblack

Nolimits wrote: »

To those giving Dev a hard time about signing the book of condolences, though history has judged this to be a bad move, at the time I think it was more about the German Ambassador with whom De Valera had a good relationship with, and even liked. He gave up his radio when asked, and generally caused no bother. He behaved more admirably than the American Ambassador for instance who De Valera didn't like, and kept trying to get replaced.

If history has judged de Valera's signing of the book of condolences to be a bad move then history is right to do so - offering your sympathy at the demise of Mr Hitler because the German ambassador is your chum is not just a bad move - it's stupid.
People say it was just protocol.
Why adhere to protocol at this time? Where was the German state in April/May of 1945?
Did anybody receive these condolences in Berlin? I bet that cheered them up no end.
Keeping the Free State out of the war was practical considering the circumstances.
This business of de Valera offering condolences is embarrassing and should be consigned to the trivia of history.

pauldla

141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »

Id like to think if both the UK and Ireland were partially occupied both countries would unite.

Me too; from what I've read, I couldn't see Dev going over to the Nazis. More likely that, had the UK been invaded, he would have stuck to the Neutrality policy until it was too late to do otherwise, at which point Ireland would have become another Denmark. "Ja, ja, of course you are neutral. Ve respect that, und unsere troopen are here to help! Here is zat fourth field you were looking for. Und congratulations, you have a new government!"

whatstherush

Robert fisk wrote a good book about the period, in time of war.... I think it was called. One interesting tid bit from it was that on ve day a group of trinty students hung a tricolour out a window opposite college green and burnt it. A group of ucd students including a certain Charles J replied by burning a union jack opposite them.

Bassic

LordSutch wrote: »

Taken from post #56

"In fact later those Eire signs were numbered so the Allies could check the number and figure out where they were. As for the German helmets, they were actually made in England by Vickers who later made Spitfires. They were soon got rid of and the British supplied us with British helmets, British equipment, planes, tanks and weapons. So much for our neutrality".

They were a great looking uniform, helmets were a bit weak. I remember they were littered all over the place where I grew up.

dttq

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Nazi-Plans-to-invade-Ireland-revealed--97376329.html

Seanchai

DeValera never, ever, ever gave his condolences upon the death of Hitler to the German ambassador in Ireland. No matter how many times all these rabidly anti-Irish poppy-loving types like Lord Sutch claim it, it is not true for this very, very simple reason: the Germans did not have an ambassador, or an embassy, in Ireland.

Duh. This is how intellectually sloppy the anti-Irish brigade is in these discussions.

---

But, it should be noted that the British state did collaborate with Mr Hitler for no fewer than 6 years, 1933-1939, before it finally declared war on Nazi Germany. The courage. The polite name the British use for this (highly popular at the time) collaboration is 'appeasement', but as with all such things it beguiles the truth. In post-WW II revisionism, all these British nationalists are very, very keen to ignore the following facts from the 1930s:

1) In the war between communism/socialism and fascism/capitalism, the British state firmly favoured the latter. This was shown in its support for Franco during the Spanish Civil War 1937-39, most infamously through using the British Navy to prevent arms getting to the (democratically-elected) socialist government of Spain and ensuring they get there from Hitler to Franco and the Fascists. The average British person was made feel, by the British establishment, more terrified of communism than of fascism. And the attitude of Christian churches reinforced this fear.

2) There was widespread sympathy among British nobility and upper classes for both the fascism of the rightwing of the Tory party and of Oswald Mosley, and of the Nazism of their Saxe-Coburg-Gotha cousins over in the royal family in Germany (the British royal family changed their surname from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor in 1917).

3) Even far-right British organisations such as the Royal British Legion, which ironically organises the British poppy commemorations of WWII victims today, organised volunteers to go and fight for Nazism in the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia 1938. The most infamous of these British nationalist organisations that supported the Nazis was the British Legion Volunteer Force. Yes, how on earth the British nationalists can attack Dev with that record is incredible. Brazen. They hate when it's mentioned. DeValera is a nice distraction from Britain's perfidy to its newfound post-WWII self. Here's an acknowledgement of this British treason from, of all organisations, Britain's Daily Mail.

4) The Nazis even had a regiment composed of British people. It was proposed by the British nationalist John Amery and was known as the British Free Corps. It is yet another source of shame for apologists of British imperialism/haters of Irishness like Lord Sutch who rant on this website about how bad all Irish people who have resisted British rule here are.

5) As several other posters have noted WWII was essentially won by the sacrifice of troops and people from the USSR. Some 20 million people from that part of Europe died. Some 40,000-60,000 people died in the Battle of Britain that the British always go on about in their deeply partisan "commemorations". That's perspective. The fact that these British nationalists do not commemorate that incredible non-British sacrifice every year confirms how rabidly xenophobic, politically British and tribal is their poppy celebration.

indioblack

Seanchai wrote: »

DeValera never, ever, ever gave his condolences upon the death of Hitler to the German ambassador in Ireland. No matter how many times all these rabidly anti-Irish poppy-loving types like Lord Sutch claim it, it is not true for this very, very simple reason: the Germans did not have an ambassador, or an embassy, in Ireland.

Duh. This is how intellectually sloppy the anti-Irish brigade is in these discussions.

---

But, it should be noted that the British state did collaborate with Mr Hitler for no fewer than 6 years, 1933-1939, before it finally declared war on Nazi Germany. The courage. The polite name the British use for this (highly popular at the time) collaboration is 'appeasement', but as with all such things it beguiles the truth. In post-WW II revisionism, all these British nationalists are very, very keen to ignore the following facts from the 1930s:

1) In the war between communism/socialism and fascism/capitalism, the British state firmly favoured the latter. This was shown in its support for Franco during the Spanish Civil War 1937-39, most infamously through using the British Navy to prevent arms getting to the (democratically-elected) socialist government of Spain and ensuring they get there from Hitler to Franco and the Fascists. The average British person was made feel, by the British establishment, more terrified of communism than of fascism. And the attitude of Christian churches reinforced this fear.

2) There was widespread sympathy among British nobility and upper classes for both the fascism of the rightwing of the Tory party and of Oswald Mosley, and of the Nazism of their Saxe-Coburg-Gotha cousins over in the royal family in Germany (the British royal family changed their surname from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor in 1917).

3) Even far-right British organisations such as the Royal British Legion, which ironically organises the British poppy commemorations of WWII victims today, organised volunteers to go and fight for Nazism in the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia 1938. The most infamous of these British nationalist organisations that supported the Nazis was the British Legion Volunteer Force. Yes, how on earth the British nationalists can attack Dev with that record is incredible. Brazen. They hate when it's mentioned. DeValera is a nice distraction from Britain's perfidy to its newfound post-WWII self. Here's an acknowledgement of this British treason from, of all organisations, Britain's Daily Mail.

4) The Nazis even had a regiment composed of British people. It was proposed by the British nationalist John Amery and was known as the British Free Corps. It is yet another source of shame for apologists of British imperialism/haters of Irishness like Lord Sutch who rant on this website about how bad all Irish people who have resisted British rule here are.

5) As several other posters have noted WWII was essentially won by the sacrifice of troops and people from the USSR. Some 20 million people from that part of Europe died. Some 40,000-60,000 people died in the Battle of Britain that the British always go on about in their deeply partisan "commemorations". That's perspective. The fact that these British nationalists do not commemorate that incredible non-British sacrifice every year confirms how rabidly xenophobic, politically British and tribal is their poppy celebration.

So tell me what diplomatic representation did the third Reich have in the Free State during the "Emergency"?

Seanchai

indioblack wrote: »

So tell me what diplomatic representation did the third Reich have in the Free State during the "Emergency"?

The German state had a legation in Ireland: the country wasn't important enough to have an embassy in. That legation had a minister (Eduard Hempel), rather than an ambassador.

Sulla Felix

Wibbs wrote: »

We did in fact contribute, albeit "unofficially". Never mind the tacit support of the allied cause - German pilot crashes = active mission therefore interned. Allied pilot crashes = clearly a training mission so according to the rules of neutrality off you go Ted - tens of thousands of Irish men and women signed up for the allied side in the British and US forces and many died fighting the Nazi's and indeed the Japanese. As ever even with the enmity within these islands signing up wasn't so black and white. EG Brendan "Paddy" Finucane, Spitfire ace with 20 odd kills to his name and the youngest wing commander in RAF history at 21, whose dad had served as an Irish volunteer under Dev in the Easter rising, so hardly a "west brit".

Yeah, I should have really said "over and above what we were already doing". I was reading about Finucane only last week. A elderly customer of mine gave me a load of photocopies of newspaper clippings on him and a lot of other "Ireland and WW2" stuff out of the blue.

Wibbs

Seanchai wrote: »

1) In the war between communism/socialism and fascism/capitalism, the British state firmly favoured the latter. This was shown in its support for Franco during the Spanish Civil War 1937-39, most infamously through using the British Navy to prevent arms getting to the (democratically-elected) socialist government of Spain and ensuring they get there from Hitler to Franco and the Fascists. The average British person was made feel, by the British establishment, more terrified of communism than of fascism. And the attitude of Christian churches reinforced this fear.

Yep S and I always found it interesting that Churchill of all people was one of the lone few voices in the wilderness shouting about the Nazi threat. Most of the British ruling class were a little more for them than agin them(putting it kindly), especially as they were against those damned Bolsheviks. In that sense one of hitlers biggest blunders was to not use that as much as he could have.

As several other posters have noted WWII was essentially won by the sacrifice of troops and people from the USSR.

Very much so. If Hitler hadn't invaded the USSR then Britain(and anywhere else in Europe they took a shine too) would have been fooked. Hitler needed to be opposed by an even bigger bastard than he could ever hope to be in the form of Komrade Joe. The Russian people suffered near unimaginable sorrow and losses. They were well used to it under Stalin so add in fighting for their country(often under the barrel of a gun) wasn't so great a step. The other allied losses are but a piss in the ocean by comparison. IT was the weight of men(and women) and materiel that the Soviets threw at Hitlers forces that really won the war.

The fact that these British nationalists do not commemorate that incredible non-British sacrifice every year confirms how rabidly xenophobic, politically British and tribal is their poppy celebration.

To be fair, we always remember those close to us and usually pay lip service to others. Hardly a British trait.

LordSutch

Seanchai wrote: »

DeValera never, ever, ever gave his condolences upon the death of Hitler to the German ambassador in Ireland.
No matter how many times all these rabidly anti-Irish poppy-loving types like Lord Sutch claim it, it is not true for this very, very simple reason:
the Germans did not have an ambassador, or an embassy, in Ireland.

Duh. This is how intellectually sloppy the anti-Irish brigade is in these discussions.

Oh dear Lord, you're back from your week long ban with a real cracker :rolleyes:

Here is a list of posters who say otherwise, note my absence old bean.

namloc1980: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80771428&postcount=5

Latchy: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80772381&postcount=13

Chughes: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80772505&postcount=15

Colmustard: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80773044&postcount=16

Seaneh: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80776604&postcount=51

Nolimits: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80778526&postcount=73

Indioblack: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80779616&postcount=80

Here's an account of the event from the Irish Independent
Click > http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dev-expected-hitler-death-backlash-2418490.html

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Ireland? declaring war? Ha!
What a laugh that would have been.

Wibbs

LordSutch wrote: »

Oh dear Lord, you're back from your week long ban with a real cracker :rolleyes:

Yes and no. He's correct in that we didn't have a German ambassador in Ireland technically speaking anyway. They had a legation. In the end the title is kinda moot, but he is correct.

hightimes1

No it wasnt folly, but because we live in violent universe it seems that way

LordSutch

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes and no. He's correct in that we didn't have a German ambassador in Ireland technically speaking anyway. They had a legation. In the end the title is kinda moot, but he is correct.

But what about this article then? > http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dev-expected-hitler-death-backlash-2418490.html

I think Seanchai is messing about with technicalities.

dj jarvis

LordSutch wrote: »

But what about this article then? > http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dev-expected-hitler-death-backlash-2418490.html

I think Seanchai is messing about with technicalities.

yea , i don't remember Nazi marches in Dublin or the swastika being flown in Dublin , but i have seen it in London , by the British elite , pre 39 support for the Nazis was rife in British high society - was there not a members club book once found in London, of loads of lord and ladies and mps backing the Nazis and fascism


dev was one man - the brutish establishment is much much more than one.

stop fingering the Irish for being pro Nazi - the brutish elite were 100 time more pro Nazi - people in glass houses and all that

LordSutch

Hello, what, fingering Irish people, brutish elite, swastikas, high society book club, etc etc, I guess you mean Oswald Mosley and his crazy followers? but does that have anything to do with Dev giving his condolences on Hitlers death?

indioblack

Seanchai wrote: »

The German state had a legation in Ireland: the country wasn't important enough to have an embassy in. That legation had a minister (Eduard Hempel), rather than an ambassador.

And did not de Valera convey his condolences to the German representative in the free State upon the death of Hitler?

Seanchai

LordSutch wrote: »

Here is a list of posters who say otherwise, note my absence old bean.

namloc1980: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80771428&postcount=5

Latchy: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80772381&postcount=13

Chughes: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80772505&postcount=15

Colmustard: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80773044&postcount=16

Seaneh: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80776604&postcount=51

Nolimits: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80778526&postcount=73

Indioblack: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80779616&postcount=80

Here's an account of the event from the Irish Independent
Click > http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dev-expected-hitler-death-backlash-2418490.html

LordSutch,

Unsurprisingly, you're completely wrong again. Among a resplendent litany of atrocious links supporting your sole argument across Boards.ie (Britain and all things British are great; Ireland and all things Irish are crap), linking an Independent Newspapers article as support for your latest historical inaccuracy shows why you have so many of them. And to reference posters on Boards.ie as evidence that you're correct, rather than as indicators that you're once again incorrect, is comical. Hello? I have never actually seen a poster support his argument by quoting another poster. That's hilarious in a really, really depressing way.

No educated person would 1) treat Independent Newspapers as a source for historical facts; 2) claim that the German state had an embassy and ambassador in Ireland.

You're just factually wrong, plainly and simply. Wrong.

namloc1980

Seanchai wrote: »

LordSutch,

Unsurprisingly, you're completely wrong again. Among a resplendent litany of atrocious links supporting your sole argument across Boards.ie (Britain and all things British are great; Ireland and all things Irish are crap), linking an Independent Newspapers article as support for your latest historical inaccuracy shows why you have so many of them. And to reference posters on Boards.ie as evidence that you're correct, rather than as indicators that you're once again incorrect, is comical. Hello? I have never actually seen a poster support his argument by quoting another poster. That's hilarious in a really, really depressing way.

No educated person would 1) treat Independent Newspapers as a source for historical facts; 2) claim that the German state had an embassy and ambassador in Ireland.

You're just factually wrong, plainly and simply. Wrong.

Did De Valera express condolences to the German representative in Ireland upon the death of Hitler? A simple yes or no will suffice.

kowloon

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes and no. He's correct in that we didn't have a German ambassador in Ireland technically speaking anyway. They had a legation. In the end the title is kinda moot, but he is correct.

And I'll add this to wrap it up nicely.

And a further article, not from a newspaper, also from the national archives.

I remember looking at some of the Case Green beach photos, the Germans put a little effort into photographing potential landing beaches, so it at least speaks to some intention.

I'm not sure they would have done a very good job of invading Ireland. It wouldn't have made sense to do it as a springboard into the UK. The crossing was longer and isolating the channel from the Royal Navy with mines is a much easier task than trying to bracket off a chunk of Irish coast and the entire route to it. They had to loot every canal and pier in occupied Europe to find enough barges to carry the initial wave for Seelowe, this wouldn't be a runner for Ireland. Then there's the lack of air cover.

People's view of invasions is tinted by later Allied undertakings which had the benefit of a massive logistical tail and specialised vessels and landing craft to make the task easier. Even then they had to scale back their plans more than once to concentrate resources. The Germans had none of these advantages.

Seanchai

indioblack wrote: »

And did not de Valera convey his condolences to the German representative in the free State upon the death of Hitler?

De Valera did that; and if that's the worst thing British nationalists have on him, Dev's doing great. That happened some twenty-one years before Dublin's Jewish community established a forest in Israel in honour of Éamon de Valera. Perhaps our apologists for all things British like Lord Sutch could explain that?

De Valera's condolences also happened some six years after the British Prime Minister had stopped his six-year-long actual collaboration (1933-1939) with Mr Hitler in his invasions of other countries and imprisonment of political opponents. Dev's condolences was also some 6 years before the British erected concentration camps in Kenya, hanged tens of thousands of Kenyans and imprisoned almost 1 million Kenyans in "enclosed villages". Ouch. They don't teach that over there, I'm sure.

British people of a nationalistic bent don't like to face up to their country's support for Hitler for all those years - a collaboration/appeasement policy which, worse for British nationalists, at the time was very popular in Britain - so Dev is a handy distraction and bête noire for British nationalists. The most nationalist of whom, the Royal British Legion, actually organised volunteers to go and fight for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in their invasion of what is now the Czech Republic. Will Lord Sutch and company remember that British history (now treason) the next time they buy their poppies off the same Royal British Legion?

Ah, and there you have it.

An Coilean

Wibbs wrote: »

Very much so. If Hitler hadn't invaded the USSR then Britain(and anywhere else in Europe they took a shine too) would have been fooked. Hitler needed to be opposed by an even bigger bastard than he could ever hope to be in the form of Komrade Joe. The Russian people suffered near unimaginable sorrow and losses. They were well used to it under Stalin so add in fighting for their country(often under the barrel of a gun) wasn't so great a step. The other allied losses are but a piss in the ocean by comparison. IT was the weight of men(and women) and materiel that the Soviets threw at Hitlers forces that really won the war.

Well thats a very debatable point, some historians would argue that Victory was all down to the Soviets, others that American and British Airpower won the war.
You can guess which country each claim is predomantly based in.
For me it is a little bit of both, without the widespread disruption of the German war industry caused by the allied bombing, the huge moral effect city after city being reduced to rubble had on the home front and the forced withdrawl of the Luftwaffe from the eastern front to try and defend Germany, it would have been much harder if not impossible for the Soviets to hold of the Germans.
Without the Soviet armies in the East wearing down the German Land Forces, there would have been nothing the Western Allies could have done to liberate Western Europe, the German Army easily outmatched anything the Western Allies could have put into the field.