'The Haunting Soldier' sculpture vandalised

Chips Lovell

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet there you are only seeking to give pride of place in our capital city to these representatives of the "heroic" myth nonsense of modern-day British nationalist.

There you go again. Who is "only" seeking this? Nobody.

arybvtcw0eolkf

My guess here is the pond in 'the Green was dredged for cleaning and the bottom feeders went skulking about their work.

ohnonotgmail

I see this thread has gone as well as can be expected.

fryup

don't you know its the "curried chips brigade"

you know the ones that hang out outside late night takeaways ... tracksuit wearing, celtic supporting, up the ra chanting, wolfe tones listening, low IQ toe-rags that unfortunately every town & city in this country has

(if only we could cull a certain segment of the population)

Franz Von Peppercorn

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Loads of people have put their lives on the line for what they have believed in. You might have missed the ISIL guys in the Middle East lately? Do you seek to commemorate them? If not, why not?



Like the rest of the apologists for the crimes of the British Empire, you fail to explain why the footsoldiers of that Empire deserve respect from an Irishman who believes in the freedom of this small country from being ruled by that state, and occupied by its legions of footsoldiers who have garrisoned this island for many centuries now.

Your heroes; you commemorate their thuggery against my people and many, many other peoples across this planet to your heart's content.

Hmm. Isn’t it possible to differentiate between the general British soldier as imperialist (as in that archway you pointed out), and the soldier fighting a militaristic Germany?

Franz Von Peppercorn

fryup wrote: »

don't you know its the "curried chips brigade"

you know the ones that hang out outside late night takeaways ... tracksuit wearing, celtic supporting, up the ra chanting, wolfe tones listening, low IQ toe-rags that unfortunately every town & city in this country has

(if only we could cull a certain segment of the population)

I’d say it’s the wokes.

RandomName2

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Hmm. Isn’t it possible to differentiate between the general British soldier as imperialist (as in that archway you pointed out), and the soldier fighting a militaristic Germany?

But they were fighting for the British King, therefore by definition imperialists.

Never mind that volunteering was initially seen as a sign of good faith in relation to Home Rule, which was the first major step for Irish independence.

wexandproud

Odelay wrote: »

You’ve shown disrespect for men that put their lives on the line for what they believed in. They didn’t fanny about whining about a flag, they got in with it.
That deserves far more respect than you’ll ever achieve tapping away on your keyboard about something you have had no experience of.

I often wonder if some of the posters who are so anti everything British could open their minds for just a short time and go and visit some of the places along the battle lines. Go and just look at the very sad graveyards and read the names of the young irish men who were part of the generation that were ''butchered and dammed '' . Men for the most part who went , yes ' for the queens Schillng ' but for no other reason than to feed their family . Go like I have done and visit a few places and think of the awful sadness and tragedy it was .
some of the same poster are always talking about the injustice's the british army carried out , [and yes their were terrible things done] , while defending the fight for Irish freedom , the the same fight that sometimes involved bombing pubs , offices ,and city center's ,killed and maimed innocent people .I'll bet some of those who are quick to knock the brits have plenty of friends and relations who are happy enough to support or be supported by the ''the enemy '' when it suits them

facehugger99

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Guarantee you there'll be at least some people along to defend this vandalism and rail about "the Brits".

The mouth-breathers rarely disappoint.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes - you can read, yes? The context of their making the decision to go to war in the summer of 1914 didn't entail much courage given the then strength of the British Empire and the anticipation that war would be over soon, not to mention the relatively good pay. Do you really think they would have been "courageous" if they knew of the deathtoll in, say, the Somme? Not to mention all the guys who were shot for deserting when the reality of this new type of war became clear. The answer to that question of their courage is a definitive 'No' because it's very noticeable that when the deathtoll became so high, the British couldn't recruit in Ireland. You're looking at the past from the vantage point of 1918 and projecting a whole slew of misplaced values on the guys who volunteered in the summer of 1914. Really poor history.


In contrast, the Irishmen who stayed at home in 1914 risked financial impecunity for their families and career advancement if the country remained under British rule when the war was over.

No, you're the one who's done that.

And you're still that someone risking career advancement i braver that someone who joined an army knowing they were going to war.

If someone stayed back for their own principles/politics, that's fine. My granddad, who I'm proud of, did that. But that doesn't mean that they were any more brave than the soldier who headed off.The soldiers who headed off joined an army that was going to war. And that's not even including those who went off to fight because of Redmonds call to arms, who were fighting for irish freedom.

You're effectively making a distinction between people based on your political beliefs and are saying that one group is brave and the other isn't, entirely because of the side they fought on.

Doctors room ghost

fryup wrote: »

don't you know its the "curried chips brigade"

you know the ones that hang out outside late night takeaways ... tracksuit wearing, celtic supporting, up the ra chanting, wolfe tones listening, low IQ toe-rags that unfortunately every town & city in this country has

(if only we could cull a certain segment of the population)

I’d be all for doing a pond rat cull.drown them in barrels of rainwater.nice and cheap and no impact on the environment.either that or fill a shipload and bring them about 30 miles out to sea. If they swim back unaided they have earned their entitlements for that week.repeat as necessary

Sundew

Roll on the Irish Civil War Commemorations!

whisky_galore

Can't say I'm surprised...it is Dublin/Dumpland after all.

Doctors room ghost

whisky_galore wrote: »

Can't say I'm surprised...it is Dublin/Dumpland after all.

Not good whiskey.that won’t go down well.expect discussion about junkies,culchies,heroin,copper faced jacks,nurses,Sam maguire,mayo people and sheep.may or may not contain references to molly Malone and coddle

riffmongous

valoren wrote: »

Precisely. The statue itself represents a returning soldier, the body language, his expression implying despair, sadness, trauma, dismay etc. It is certainly in no way represented as a means of glorification either for having fought a fight or for fighting for the 'empire'.

This was a cowardly protest conducted in the most cowardly manner possible under the cover of darkness by cowards.

Maybe it represents one of the soldiers who tied a man to a chair so he could be shot, or one of the Staffordshires after murdering 15 people on North King Street, realising what they have done

Church on Tuesday

It's heartening to see most people here are appalled by this cowardly act of vandalism.

Apart from the usual suspects of course, but then that is to be expected.

Shows how far we have come as a proud nation and as a proud, inclusive and more importantly, aware people.

Ashbourne hoop

All the mindless vandalism has done, and it is mindless vandalism, is highlight the statue. There was a big crowd there at lunchtime taking pics. It's an impressive piece of work.

mattser

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

It's heartening to see most people here are appalled by this cowardly act of vandalism.

Apart from the usual suspects of course, but then that is to be expected.

Shows how far we have come as a proud nation and as a proud, inclusive and more importantly, aware people.

They're more to be pitied than laughed at or taken seriously.

Strazdas

Despicable thing to do. That sculpture represents the Irishmen who returned from WW1.

The fanatics who did this obviously think they're more Irish than the rest of us.

Who the hell vandalises a sculpture? It's not even a statue but is intended to be a work of art.

Strazdas

mattser wrote: »

They're more to be pitied than laughed at or taken seriously.

Every country has its collection of loons and fanatics who clutch to a particular political ideology (which usually involves them hating on people).

riffmongous

riffmongous wrote: »

Maybe it represents one of the soldiers who tied a man to a chair so he could be shot, or one of the Staffordshires after murdering 15 people on North King Street, realising what they have done

Or one of the 5,999,999 who didn’t.

storker

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Guarantee you there'll be at least some people along to defend this vandalism and rail about "the Brits".

...along with accusations of "cap-doffing" and "forelock-tugging".

valoren

riffmongous wrote: »

Maybe it represents one of the soldiers who tied a man to a chair so he could be shot, or one of the Staffordshires after murdering 15 people on North King Street, realising what they have done

It is to remember those soldiers from all sides who died in the war. A common humanity, a memorial from the Irish people. That's the great thing about art; it's completely subjective. If you want to interpret it as maybe representing that then that's all grand.

Unfortunately, pond scum got infuriated by a memorial statue to the point of vandalizing it. Whatever point, if at all, they are trying to make is lost as they did it like cowards.

Church on Tuesday

storker wrote: »

...along with accusations of "cap-doffing" and "forelock-tugging".

Whilst wearing English soccer kits.

Franz Von Peppercorn

RandomName2 wrote: »

But they were fighting for the British King, therefore by definition imperialists.

Don’t accept that. Yes they signed up for King and Empire. But the war wasn’t about expanding the British empire.

Never mind that volunteering was initially seen as a sign of good faith in relation to Home Rule, which was the first major step for Irish independence.

True.

Rory28

I consider this an embarrassment for our country. No love for the monarchy but this is not about them, its about the regular soldier. Its easy for those who are saying the would not have taken "the queens shilling" now but if you had a family at home in 1914 and were penniless then would you be so principled?

The way we treated those coming back from the British army is a disgrace.

Sundew

riffmongous wrote: »

Maybe it represents one of the soldiers who tied a man to a chair so he could be shot, or one of the Staffordshires after murdering 15 people on North King Street, realising what they have done

Or perhaps it represents my Great-Uncle , who died in horrific circumstances in Gallipoli! As far as I’m concerned the person who did this may as well have pissed on his grave.
And it ain’t a Dublin thing either!
http://clareherald.com/2018/10/e70000-glass-memorial-to-ww1-dead-vandalised-in-ennis-19188/

Gravelly

In my experience the lads who go on about west brits, the queens shilling, etc. etc. know little to nothing about their own family's history, and they certainly don't have a clue of their grandfather or great-grandfathers motivations in joining up or not. There was little in the way of the luxury of principles at the time - most who joined up did it because they or their families would starve if they didn't, and most who didn't were either afraid (understandably) or they couldn't leave because of ties to a farm, family business, or sick or elderly relatives. I doubt many of our forebears would recognise the motivations we assign to them now.

Timberrrrrrrr

storker wrote: »

...along with accusations of "cap-doffing" and "forelock-tugging".

Makes me cringe when they start spouting that sh/te

Timberrrrrrrr

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Whilst wearing English soccer kits.

And watching English tv channels but complaining about all of the poppies on show

Strazdas

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Don’t accept that. Yes they signed up for King and Empire. But the war wasn’t about expanding the British empire.

The Irish state didn't even exist in 1914 and nor was there an independence movement. Most Irish nationalists were merely looking for Home Rule which had already been promised by the British Government.

The idea that the men at the front were betraying the independence movement is idiotic in the extreme, as it didn't even exist for the first two years of the war (the IRB was a tiny and highly secretive organisation and even Pearse was initially in favour of Home Rule).

MrMusician18

Rory28 wrote: »

I consider this an embarrassment for our country. No love for the monarchy but this is not about them, its about the regular soldier. Its easy for those who are saying the would not have taken "the queens shilling" now but if you had a family at home in 1914 and were penniless then would you be so principled?

The way we treated those coming back from the British army is a disgrace.

Given that is true for many that enlisted, it is hard to argue that those that did enlist did so out of principle.
There is a certain element of sanitising and rewriting history going on here, that the men who fought did so to defend the rights of small nations.

The reality is that it wasn't about principle for many, but about employment at a time when Ireland was suffering extreme economic hardship as a result of imperial policy.

JohnnyFlash

Deleted User wrote: »

How very Royal British Legion of you.

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes - you can read, yes?

Deleted User wrote: »

Another devastating cliched response from a long-standing apologist for the thugs of the British Empire.

You seem completely incapable of engaging in any sort of respectful debate when someone challenges you to come down off your green soapbox. You do this in every thread.

You insult, apply labels, and engage in this really weird sort of cultural cringe where you are so thin-skinned and unsure about your Irishness that you seek to apportion blame about pretty much everything that is wrong in this country to the legacy of having been at one stage colonised. It’s really bizarre, and a little bit worrying at this stage. You’ll do yourself a misfortune going round in such a state of anger all the time about Perfidious Albion. It can’t be good for your mental health.


Yip, ‘cap doffing’, forelock tugging, West Brit, Sindo Reader, Redmonite, John Bruton, jackeen, Tony O’Reilly, Blueshirt, Southern Unionist, crony capitalism, William Martin Murphy, Royalist etc etc.

Grayson

valoren wrote: »

It is to remember those soldiers from all sides who died in the war. A common humanity, a memorial from the Irish people. That's the great thing about art; it's completely subjective. If you want to interpret it as maybe representing that then that's all grand.

Unfortunately, pond scum got infuriated by a memorial statue to the point of vandalizing it. Whatever point, if at all, they are trying to make is lost as they did it like cowards.

There were WW1 graves in the cemetery across the road from where I went to secondary school. My history teacher brought us over there to show us. I used to try and imagine what their lives were like, what the war was like.

It's the same in every town in Ireland. There's graves from that war across the country. It's something that would have affected every part of the country.

And remember, even republicans like Tom Barry enlisted.

riffmongous

Rory28 wrote: »

I consider this an embarrassment for our country. No love for the monarchy but this is not about them, its about the regular soldier. Its easy for those who are saying the would not have taken "the queens shilling" now but if you had a family at home in 1914 and were penniless then would you be so principled?

The way we treated those coming back from the British army is a disgrace.

I don't disagree much with that Rory, but what tends to irk a lot of people is that we've seen a lot of commemorating recently and it's all gone to great pains to focus purely on remembering the soldiers, and almost no criticism of why they died, instead it's all been thinly veiled militaristism and patriotism and never a word about the people and reasons who caused their suffering, which you'd think would be the most important thing to take from WW1, it's buildup and aftermath

kateee47298

I don't really think that it was a form of protest, just an excuse to destroy something. I wonder do these people actually get enjoyment out of destroying something or whether they were just off their heads and thought it would be "a bit of craic". Shame on them.

CrankyHaus

Vandalising Art is a disgrace, but what did people expect when a tribute to "The British Soldier" was placed on one of the 1916 battle sites over the anniversary of Bloody Sunday?

I actually liked the installation myself but a little respect for our own history would have involved putting this piece on display in a less sensitive place at a less sensitive time.

What's next on the Agenda, sending the Iwo Jima memorial on tour to My Lai? Perhaps they can send this same memorial to Amritsar next year on 13 April and see how the Indians like it.

klaaaz

Strazdas wrote: »

Despicable thing to do. That sculpture represents the Irishmen who returned from WW1.

That's very odd. The sculpture was on display first in England to remember their soldiers. Pity you are making up propaganda.

Rory28

riffmongous wrote: »

I don't disagree much with that Rory, but what tends to irk a lot of people is that we've seen a lot of commemorating recently and it's all gone to great pains to focus purely on remembering the soldiers, and almost no criticism of why they died, instead it's all been thinly veiled militaristism and patriotism and never a word about the people and reasons who caused their suffering, which you'd think would be the most important thing to take from WW1, it's buildup and aftermath

That is a fair point. They are remembered as heroes when in my opinion they were victims of an elite class that spared little thought for them at the time.

RandomName2

riffmongous wrote: »

it's all been thinly veiled militaristism and patriotism and never a word about the people and reasons who caused their suffering, which you'd think would be the most important thing to take from WW1, it's buildup and aftermath

I have literally seen no commemoration of that nature but perhaps there has been to some degree in the UK, and I have not seen it.

Rather the remembrance seems to have been more in the nature of

Wifred Owen wrote:

In all my dreams before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

But instead of sympathy or empathy with the fallen of WW1 I find our embittered armchair nationalists in their dreams of perpetual conflict jeering at the long dead, all with an oily veil of militarism and faux patriotism.

weldoninhio

vonlars wrote: »

What makes you think it's a British soldier? 200,000 Irishmen fought in WWI. Should we forget them simply because of whose side they were on while fighting for peace?

As the old saying goes, fighting for peace is like fcuking for virginity.

Edgware

Conall Cernach wrote: »

A statue to a British soldier in the place of one of the key battlegrounds of the Easter Rising. Who thought it was a good idea to put it up there in the first place?

"key battleground" Thats where Markievitz ordered trenches to be dug being a military genius. All overlooked by three four storey buildings so it would like shooting fish in a barrel for the British

P_1

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Vandalising Art is a disgrace, but what did people expect when a tribute to "The British Soldier" was placed on one of the 1916 battle sites over the 100th anniversary of Bloody Sunday?

I actually liked the installation myself but a little respect for our own history would have involved putting this piece on display in a less sensitive place at a less sensitive time.

What's next on the Agenda, sending the Iwo Jima memorial on tour to My Lai? Perhaps they can send this same memorial to Amritsar next year on 13 April and see how the Indians like it.

You do realise Bloody Sunday was in 1920 right?

CrankyHaus

P_1 wrote: »

You do realise Bloody Sunday was in 1920 right?

Fair point. Any response to rest of what I wrote?

RandomName2

Edgware wrote: »

"key battleground" Thats where Markievitz ordered trenches to be dug being a military genius. All overlooked by three four storey buildings so it would like shooting fish in a barrel for the British

Don't you dare speak like that. Constant Markievitz gave up his life fighting in that park.

P_1 wrote: »

You do realise Bloody Sunday was in 1920 right?

It was actually in 1905

frosty123

fryup wrote: »

don't you know its the "curried chips brigade"

you know the ones that hang out outside late night takeaways ... tracksuit wearing, celtic supporting, up the ra chanting, wolfe tones listening, low IQ toe-rags that unfortunately every town & city in this country has

No doubt they shout for man utd and liverpool too

But of course they're too thick to realise the irony

AudreyHepburn

I’d be very willing to bet that those responsible for this frankly childish act are the same fools that bleat on about the big bad British while wearing Premiership football jerseys without any real understanding of what they’re talking about.

There is a world of difference between celebrating the British Empire and commemorating the ordinary men who risk their lives in the trenches for a war none of them would have wanted and the sooner people understand and accept this the better.

The Irish men who went to war, like my Great Grandfather, deserve to be remembered.

P_1

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Fair point. Any response to rest of what I wrote?

It's in front of the Fusiliers Arch. Like it or not, thousands of Dubs were sent to the slaughter in WW1. Seems a good spot to commemorate them in my eyes. Again the statue was for the regular working class who were sent to die,not to the elite scum who sent them

klaaaz

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I’d be very willing to bet that those responsible for this frankly childish act are the same fools that bleat on about the big bad British while wearing Premiership football jerseys without any real understanding of what they’re talking about.

Stereotype much? I find those that are in full support of the British military here tend to be of Unionist stock.
Anyway, the statue is likely to have been vandalised by antifa types as an act of protest, note the red paint symbolising red blood. They didn't throw green paint!!

Rory28

klaaaz wrote: »

Stereotype much? I find those that are in full support of the British military here tend to be of Unionist stock.
Anyway, the statue is likely to have been vandalised by antifa types as an act of protest, note the red paint symbolising red blood. They didn't throw green paint!!

You don't have to fully support the British Army to have sympathies for those Irish who died. Merely have to sympathize with the individual.

Maybe the vandals were colourblind?