Nelson's Pillar

Fratton Fred

The little Irelanders are out in force today.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The little Irelanders are out in force today.

No Fred, theres nothing "little irelander" about wanting to remove the symbols of empire from prominence.

Dyr

Apparently it caused a lot of gaiety and general amusement when it was done, so that's obviously a good thing

Nodin

Bambi wrote: »

Apparently it caused a lot of gaiety and general amusement when it was done, so that's obviously a good thing

...applause, gaiety and general amusement. The vast majority were glad it was gone, a majority that's grown over time. Here we just have the last hold outs and a few WUMS.

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

...applause, gaiety and general amusement. The vast majority were glad it was gone, a majority that's grown over time. Here we just have the last hold outs and a few WUMS.

Nelson was by all accounts a pretty swell guy. What exactly do you oppose about him? His nationality? That he defended England? That Irishmen served under him? What exactly is the problem?

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Nelson was by all accounts a pretty swell guy. What exactly do you oppose about him? His nationality? That he defended England? That Irishmen served under him? What exactly is the problem?

It's a monument to another countrys military placed in the main street of the capital as a triumphalist symbol. I see you've dropped the "vote on it" line and adopted another tack.

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

It's a monument to another countrys military placed in the main street of the capital as a triumphalist symbol. I see you've dropped the "vote on it" line and adopted another tack.

Triumphalist over the French not the Irish. It was erected to commemorate our victory. Also at the time he was our countryman.

I haven't dropped anything. It's clear to me you value your anglophobia more than democracy.

MRnotlob606

At least someone got rid of it. It was glorifying the British Occupation of Ireland.

kingchess

storker wrote: »

Nothing to do with tugging forelocks, just the ability to have a sense of self that isn't wrapped up in nationalism.

You mean not Irish nationalism anyway,but of course English(British?) nationalism is A-okay with you.to quote Nelson himself at the battle of Trafalgar,"England expects that every man will do his duty" and I think that it is very commendable of you to take that message to heart over a hundred years later,wrong but still commendable of you.

A Dub in Glasgo

storker wrote: »

Nothing to do with tugging forelocks, just the ability to have a sense of self that isn't wrapped up in nationalism.

There is enough evidence in this thread alone that suggests it is wrapped up in nationalism.... just not Irish nationalism

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Triumphalist over the French not the Irish. Also at the time he was our countryman. It was erected to commemorate our victory..

The French were not the enemy of the Irish people, he was not our "countryman", it was not "our" victory.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I haven't dropped anything. It's clear to me you value your anglophobia more than democracy.

"Anglophobia" my arse. You're getting desperate now.

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

The French were not the enemy of the Irish people, he was not our "countryman", it was not "our" victory.

The French were clearly the enemy of the Irish people since we were at war with them.

Regardless, whether or not you consider the French (imperialists!) your enemies or not it doesn't change the fact you were wrong when you said the pillar was erected as a symbol of triumphantism over the Irish. The pillar was erected to commemorate our victory over the French.

"Anglophobia" my arse. You're getting desperate now.

What else do I call a man who doesn't want a statue of a man in Dublin purely because he's English.

storker

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

There is enough evidence in this thread alone that suggests it is wrapped up in nationalism.... just not Irish nationalism

Cite?

diomed

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What else do I call a man who doesn't want a statue of a man in Dublin purely because he's English.

Careful now. They'll be calling you a west-Brit. :pac:

Sheep Lover

Just another jingoistic advertisement to a dead empire that was based on the suffering of other countries. Should have blown up years before that.

storker

kingchess wrote: »

You mean not Irish nationalism anyway,but of course English(British?) nationalism is A-okay with you.to quote Nelson himself at the battle of Trafalgar,"England expects that every man will do his duty" and I think that it is very commendable of you to take that message to heart over a hundred years later,wrong but still commendable of you.

Sorry but you're talking utter rubbish. Please quote one thing I've said that displays British nationalism.

While you're at it, please explain clearly why my post indicates that I am following 200-year-old orders.

Over to you...

end of the road

diomed wrote: »

He was a great lad. Jackeens worship him.
Why should terrorists from a foreign country (Northern Ireland) have a right to blow up our monuments?

they were not terrorists from a foreign country. they were oppressed catholics from the northern part of this country. they are irish.

riffmongous wrote: »

You must have missed the part when they sent over all the colonists

i'm afraid you are replying to a "good unionist/loyalist" who hates this republic, and who will deny that ireland was a colony dispite the facts.

Iwasfrozen

end of the road wrote: »

they were not terrorists from a foreign country. they were oppressed catholics from the northern part of this country. they are irish.

Terrorists? Check.
Foreign country? Check.

Terrorists from a foreign country? Check.

cajonlardo

maryishere wrote: »

the ira only blew off the top...not that difficult. It took more explosives at ground level to destroy the remainder, but nobody ever claimed our Irish army lads in '66 were ultra efficient.

glynf wrote: »

My father encountered it at a house party one night shortly after, apparently it did the rounds for a good while. He was also there when the army were tasked with demolishing the remainder of the column, and made a balls of it blowing out windows all over the place due to too much explosives.

If you care to take yourself down to the national archives you can view some interesting papers on the Army's work. Included in the file are four letters from Civil Engineering firms from Ireland, the U.K and Germany. Each one declined the job on the grounds they were nervous about the proximity of the other buildings. There are also two letters congratulating the Army Engineers on what was deemed to be a success by their Civilian Peers.

When the Army Engineer corp visited the businesses they advised the business to leave any windows open and warned that any fixed glass would be broken. Several of the shop owners claimed their buildings were damaged but on investigation, that damage was deemed to be far older - possibly from the rising.
Several dodgy claims were settled because it was believed to be cheaper than fighting a court case.There are photos in the archives showing moss and grass growing in some of the cracks. There was also unavoidable genuine damage to buildings - you cannot possibly blow up a stone structure without an amount of shrapnel striking buildings so close. This damage was minimal - if it was not those buildings would exhibit either damage or repairs to this day.
Still unconvinced?

Several of the men present that day went on to do the explosive effects on the Movies Blue Max and the Red Baron amongst other war movies shot in Ireland. When you are placing explosives in aircraft made of beech and covered with linen and there is a live pilot involved you are playing in the big league. Several of those men present were also involved in the formation of the E.O.D that exists in the Army today and pioneered the reputation the Irish E.O.D has earned internationally.

Men on duty that day survive and are obviously elderly.
Neither of you have any right to slur their names.
These men served the state with distinction and were highly thought of by people who were actually qualified to judge them.

I've said it before. I am sure the Irish Army has had bad days and days when things went badly wrong. This day just wasn't one of them

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The French were clearly the enemy of the Irish people since we were at war with them. .

"we" were not at war with France.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What else do I call a man who doesn't want a statue of a man in Dublin purely because he's English.

British, lionised for his role in defence of the Empire.

Nodin

diomed wrote: »

Careful now. They'll be calling you a west-Brit. :pac:

Giving out labels when something is so self evident is a bit redundant.

end of the road

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Terrorists? Check.
Foreign country? Check.

Terrorists from a foreign country? Check.

wrong, they were irish freedom fighters from northern ireland, which is irish

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

"we" were not at war with France.

Yes "we" were and your insistence to the contrary is nothing more than a bizarre attempt to rewrite history.

British, lionised for his role in defence of the Empire.

Defence of his country you mean.

Iwasfrozen

end of the road wrote: »

wrong, they were irish freedom fighters from northern ireland, which is irish

Wrong, they were Northern Irish terrorists from Northern Ireland, which is Northern Irish.

A Dub in Glasgo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Wrong, they were Northern Irish terrorists from Northern Ireland, which is Northern Irish.

I bet you are confused that the most northerly part of Ireland is not in Northern Ireland. Do you still refer to Southern Ireland?

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes "we" were and your insistence to the contrary is nothing more than a bizarre attempt to rewrite history. .

We were a colony, subjugated once more not seven years before the battle of Trafalgar.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Defence of his country you mean.

Their empire, not ours.

Iwasfrozen

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I bet you are confused that the most northerly part of Ireland is not in Northern Ireland. Do you still refer to Southern Ireland?

Who mentioned Southern? Northern Ireland is a political term.

A Dub in Glasgo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Who mentioned Southern? Northern Ireland is a political term.

and Northern Irish is not a nationality

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

We were a colony, subjugated once more not seven years before the battle of Trafalgar.

We were a home country of the United Kingdom. Hundreds of Irish died fighting the French. The people who (according to you) weren't our enemies and we weren't at war with.

Their empire, not ours.

Nelson fought the French to protect his country from invasion.

Also the British empire was very much partially ours. We helped build it, administered it and fought to maintain it. You might as well say Galicia wasn't part of the Spanish Empire.

Iwasfrozen

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

and Northern Irish is not a nationality

Yes it is

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

The French were not the enemy of the Irish people.[i/quote]

Ah yes, good old Napoleon. Much nicer than the imperialist Brits.

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We were (.............) Empire.

Thousands of Africans and Indians/Pakistanis died fighting in various wars for the empire. Try telling them they were a "home country".

Again, your concern for a statue in comparison to your attitude to catholic/nationalists in ni is rather telling. Of course its a bit pointless, as the statue is destroyed and, like many things, is not coming back.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Ah yes, good old Napoleon. Much nicer than the imperialist Brits.

Sorry Fred, do you have a point there?

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

British, lionised for his role in defence of the Empire.

No, lionised for his role in defeating the French imperial navy.

I thought defeating empires was your thing.

Victor

My name is URL wrote: »

Dun Laoghaire pier serves a purpose, as does the GPO and Customs House

What purpose does a monument to a foreign colonist serve?

It was a viewing tower and a popular tourist attraction. Fair enough do away with the statue, no need to do away with the tower.

Of course, many statues have been done away with. No particular need to blow them up on a shopping street when there are people around.

riffmongous wrote: »

You must have missed the part when they sent over all the colonists

WAs Nelson one of them?

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, lionised for his role in defeating the French imperial navy.

I thought defeating empires was your thing.

.....emmm, the British were the empire that were occupying us, so in all honesty where you're going with this is a mystery.

Nodin

Victor wrote: »

It was a viewing tower and a popular tourist attraction. Fair enough do away with the statue, no need to do away with the tower.

Of course, many statues have been done away with. No particular need to blow them up on a shopping street when there are people around.

.....which brings me back to "it should have been moved".

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

Thousands of Africans and Indians/Pakistanis died fighting in various wars for the empire. Try telling them they were a "home country".

Again, your concern for a statue in comparison to your attitude to catholic/nationalists in ni is rather telling. Of course its a bit pointless, as the statue is destroyed and, like many things, is not coming back.

Those Africans and Indians shot and beaten by Irish soldiers? Yeah I'm sure they didn't consider us a home country.

My concern for the statue is not nearly as great as my concern for your liberal revision of history. But then historical accuracy was never a feature of Irish republican rethoric, especially the northern variety where any semblance of moderation was long ago replaced by an irrational hatred of all things English.

Ice Maiden

Berserker wrote: »

I know that, neither was I. I was talking about their neighbours in NI who aspire to being Irish. Unionist and Loyalist people behave themselves when they come down here.

I know you were - just pointing out your double standards. And also "they don't behave themselves in their own country" - they? Be more specific. Loyalists indeed don't "behave themselves in their own country" either.

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Those Africans and Indians shot by Irish soldiers? ................

The ones killed by the Germans, French, Japanese and so on. For a fan of the Brits you don't know that much about them...or maybe its like I said earlier - the brown lads don't count.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

My concern for the statue is not nearly as great ................

.....as your deep hatred for irish nationalism, republicanism and seemingly everything else that stands against systematic oppression. Bit strange that.

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

The ones killed by the Germans, French, Japanese and so on. For a fan of the Brits you don't know that much about them...or maybe its like I said earlier - the brown lads don't count.

I doubt they thought much of Ireland tbh.

Do you think the brown lads being shot at by Irish soldiers considered us a home country?

.....as your deep hatred for irish nationalism, republicanism and seemingly everything else that stands against systematic oppression. Bit strange that.

Oh I'm all for republicanism. The American and French kind. Not your kind which seems to involve blowing up children in busy shopping streets. People you lionize.

As stated before you seem to have no problem revising inconvenient historical truths to fit your world view.

Nodin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you think the brown lads being shot at by Irish soldiers considered us a home country? .

I doubt it, given the sectarian discrimination here.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Oh I'm all for republicanism. The American and French kind. Not your kind which seems to involve blowing up children in busy shopping streets. People you lionize.

No, you don't seem one for that either. Some bizarre libertarian hellfest perhaps.

My name is URL

Victor wrote: »

It was a viewing tower and a popular tourist attraction. Fair enough do away with the statue, no need to do away with the tower.

Of course, many statues have been done away with. No particular need to blow them up on a shopping street when there are people around.

Many votes (as early as the 20's) had taken place prior to its destruction which sought to have the statue replaced or the column moved but for whatever reason it never happened.

It was only after it was bombed that the government transferred ownership to DCC from private trustees

They could have decided to restore the plinth but didn't.

Anyway this thread is very clearly more about the person that sat atop it rather than the blank canvas of a simple column.

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

.....emmm, the British were the empire that were occupying us, so in all honesty where you're going with this is a mystery.

I'm just correcting you Nodin, that's all.

Nelson wasn't defending the empire, he made his name helping prevent the French conquer Europe. He was, in effect, defending his own country from invasion.

Fair enough, move his statue, but why do some have to take it further and start trying to slander the guy.

Nelson came from an average back ground and rose through the ranks due to his ability and not because of who he buggered at prep school.

He was popular with officers and men alike and was a remarkable sailor.

Iwasfrozen

Nodin wrote: »

I doubt it, given the sectarian discrimination here.

I doubt it too, but not for sectarian reasons.

No, you don't seem one for that either. Some bizarre libertarian hellfest perhaps.

I thought you lads considered America the ultimate libertarian hatefest no?

Actually who am I kidding the whinging class represented by SF consider anything which isn't free a facet of libertarianism.

beach_walker

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you think the brown lads being shot at by Irish soldiers considered us a home country?

Wait, you admit your beloved British Empire had a bad side?!

And it's curious logic you're going by. Does the presence of American loyalists in the American war of independence mean they were a home country? Or indeed that there were a fair few Indians involved in the suppressing of the Indian mutiny give them a similar status?

Home country, lol. What a term!

Iwasfrozen

beach_walker wrote: »

Wait, you admit your beloved British Empire had a bad side?!

And it's curious logic you're going by. Does the presence of American loyalists in the American war of independence mean they were a home country? Or indeed that there were a fair few Indians involved in the suppressing of the Indian mutiny give them a similar status?

Home country, lol. What a term!

No the home countries only ever meant the British Isles.

It's a contemporary term, look it up.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm just correcting you Nodin, that's all.

Nelson wasn't defending the empire, he made his name helping prevent the French conquer Europe. ...........

.....ahh, that old nonsense.

Iwasfrozen wrote:

Actually who am I kidding the whinging class represented by SF

It's amazing (and more than amusing) the close correlation between resentment of SF and its voters and angry snobbery. Likewise the resentment of many in what might be termed the "establishment" towards revolutionary movements overall and irish revolutionaries in particular.

steddyeddy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I doubt they thought much of Ireland tbh.

Do you think the brown lads being shot at by Irish soldiers considered us a home country?


Oh I'm all for republicanism. The American and French kind. Not your kind which seems to involve blowing up children in busy shopping streets. People you lionize.

As stated before you seem to have no problem revising inconvenient historical truths to fit your world view.

Actually Native Americans were quick to empathise with our own colonial problems:


The Choctaw people have a history of helping others – one of the best examples is the $170 that was given to the Irish in 1847 during the potato famine. To realize the beauty and generosity of this story, one has to understand what a challenging couple of decades this had been for the Indian people.

In 1831 the Choctaw Indians were forcibly removed from their ancestral lands in Mississippi to what is now known as Oklahoma. The Choctaws were the first of several tribes to make the trek along The Trail of Tears. The years during and immediately following this journey were very difficult for the tribal people. The winter of this particular Trail of Tears was the coldest on record - the food and clothing of the people were severely inadequate and transportation needs were not properly met. Many of the Choctaws did not survive the trip, and those that did not perish faced hardships establishing new homes, schools, and churches.

A few years after this long, sad march, the Choctaws learned of people starving to death in Ireland. The Irish were dying because although there were other crops being grown in their country, all but the potato were marked for export by the British rulers. The Irish poor were not allowed any other sustenance than the potato, and from 1845-1849 this vegetable was diseased. Only sixteen years had passed since the Choctaws themselves had faced hunger and death on the first Trail of Tears, and a great empathy was felt when they heard such a similar story coming from across the ocean. Individuals made donations totaling $170 in 1847 to send to assist the Irish people. These noble Choctaw people, who had such meager resources, gave all they could on behalf of others in greater need.

A Dub in Glasgo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes it is

Is that the same way Ulster is a nationality?