The glorious 12th

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So, would you support a statue of Dev then?

Churchill done a lot more for Ireland than Dev. He saved us from Nazis because, as explained earlier, if UK fell, Hitler would have invaded us too, like he did other neutral countries. No, I would prefer more beds in hospitals or even houses for Irish homeless than wasting money on further statues.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Churchill done a lot more for Ireland than Dev. He saved us from Nazis because, as explained earlier, if UK fell, Hitler would have invaded us too, like he did other neutral countries. No, I would prefer more beds in hospitals or even houses for Irish homeless than wasting money on further statues.

Is that Churchill of the Black and Tans of which you speak?

Nite janfebmar...I'm convinced you will not sleep under an Irish moon ...but by all means, carry on pretending.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is that Churchill of the Black and Tans of which you speak?

Nite janfebmar...I'm convinced you will not sleep under an Irish moon ...but by all means, carry on pretending.

Well, as some may say, I have a balanced opinion of Churchill, reviewing all the facts. He had his faults, and made mistakes like everyone else. However he is best remembered for arguably leading the free world in standing up to Nazism in the early years of WW2, and saving these islands from Nazism, and helping to liberrate western Europe.

I am convinced the moon has no nationality, but if you are convinced it is Irish, keep on pretending.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Well, as some may say, I have a balanced opinion of Churchill, reviewing all the facts. He had his faults, and made mistakes like everyone else. However he is best remembered for arguably leading the free world in standing up to Nazism in the early years of WW2, and saving these islands from Nazism, and helping to liberrate western Europe.

I am convinced the moon has no nationality, but if you are convinced it is Irish, keep on pretending.

He really isn't by serious historians and anyone other than little Englanders. At best he had a rich supply of the bon mot, but as a military strategist he was criminally inept (see Galipoli and elsewhere) and as a politician, as Tory elitist as they come. Not to mention his ingrained racist 'man of his time' sensibility.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He really isn't by serious historians and anyone other than little Englanders. At best he had a rich supply of the...

Yes he is. For example the Americans named a U.S. navy ship after him, and afaik have a statue of him in the White House. He saved these islands from Nszism.

Do you think Develera was right in shooting by firing squad the ira in Irish prison I named four of them, bet you cannot name more, as you did not even know about them.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

janfebmar wrote: »

Well, as some may say, I have a balanced opinion of Churchill, reviewing all the facts. He had his faults, and made mistakes like everyone else. However he is best remembered for arguably leading the free world in standing up to Nazism in the early years of WW2, and saving these islands from Nazism, and helping to liberrate western Europe.

I am convinced the moon has no nationality, but if you are convinced it is Irish, keep on pretending.

He really isn't by serious historians and anyone other than little Englanders. At best he had a rich supply of the bon mot, but as a military strategist he was criminally inept (see Galipoli and elsewhere) and as a politician, as Tory elitist as they come. Not to mention his ingrained racist 'man of his time' sensibility.

How strange that he is honoured by so many countries whilst you francie appear to know better than all those people and countries-your extremist republican views are supported by a minority,probably the majority of them here,cheering you on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honours_of_Winston_Churchill

Stop moaning ffs

Awful. Only one of the fifteen terrorists involved in the murder faced prison. Thanks to the “Good Friday Agreement” the terrorist spent less than 2 years behind bars.

https://twitter.com/onthisdayuda/status/1154877455498383361?s=21

_blaaz

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Awful. Only one of the fifteen terrorists involved in the murder faced prison. Thanks to the “Good Friday Agreement” the terrorist spent less than 2 years behind bars.

https://twitter.com/onthisdayuda/status/1154877455498383361?s=21

That young lad was only killed and his body hidden and only realeased so as his funeral would occur same day as the local orange parade


Utterly dispicable people,known unionist terrorists were following catholics to work and seen observing who was leaving/entering pubs in run up to killing that child

Dammo

_blaaz wrote: »

That young lad was only killed and his body hidden and only realeased so as his funeral would occur same day as the local orange parade


Utterly dispicable people,known unionist terrorists were following catholics to work and seen observing who was leaving/entering pubs in run up to killing that child

Is there a particular reason for wanting this poor lad to be buried on the day of the orange parade?

_blaaz

Dammo wrote: »

Is there a particular reason for wanting this poor lad to be buried on the day of the orange parade?

Trimpulism and show catholics whos boss tbh

Its literally all what the orange order stand for....theres dozens of similar cases (they stopped outside the grandparents house,where the mother of the quinn kids was greiving to play up their knees in fenian blood song in 95)

...but the sectarianism about down is something else,this kid wasnt in wrong place,wrong time ....there was obv going to be some catholic killed....they sing chamts commerating leghinbridge massacre and families involved have to leave landline phones off hook on nights of ireland matchs or else will get abusive phonecalls

firemansam4

janfebmar wrote:

On on the contrary, most Irish are good, very good. I said that earlier. You really need to stop demonising people because they are not unrepentant extremist Irish Republicans.

A lot of your posts seem to come across anti Irish to me.
You seem to be very pro British everything in regards to anything associated with the troubles on this Island.

For example I would say the vast majority of Irish people South of the border would have a very bad view of the involvement the BA had in the North, especially in regards to Bloody Sunday. But you defend them vehemently as keepers of the peace.

Same with the OO, and the shenanigans that go on the night before.
You don't have to be a republican to see the sectarian bigotry that happens around the 12th. Yet you defend it and come out with whataboutery of something nowhere near on the same scale.

Now I don't agree with everything that Francie posts here, and I am far from a republican myself. But I agree with him on that point...

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

How strange that he is honoured by so many countries whilst you francie appear to know better than all those people and countries-your extremist republican views are supported by a minority,probably the majority of them here,cheering you on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honours_of_Winston_Churchill

Churchill is honoured for the 'good' he did, the bad he did is ignored, put to one side. Same as Russell, no doubt. Unless you think the bad stuff he did was good Rob? Could you tell whether you thought it was?

This small bit of his bad stuff for instance?


4 million people (Yes 4 million) in Bengal starved to death in a 2 year famine in 43-44. When questioned on why he was diverting food from there to the war effort, cuddly Winston said:

Winston wrote:

“starvation of anyhow underfed Bengalis is less serious than that of sturdy Greeks” and Indians were, in any case, “breeding like rabbits”

Could you let us know how you feel about this FACT? Would you erect a 'statue' to a man who did this or said that?

droidman123

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Churchill is honoured for the 'good' he did, the bad he did is ignored, put to one side. Same as Russell, no doubt. Unless you think the bad stuff he did was good Rob? Could you tell whether you thought it was?

This small bit of his bad stuff for instance?


4 million people (Yes 4 million) in Bengal starved to death in a 2 year famine in 43-44. When questioned on why he was diverting food from there to the war effort, cuddly Winston said:



Could you let us know how you feel about this FACT? Would you erect a 'statue' to a man who did this or said that?

Aw sure he had his "flaws" francie,thats all,just flaws

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

4 million people (Yes 4 million) in Bengal starved to death in a 2 year famine in 43-44.

It was actually 1 to 3 million. 30 million people died in the famine of 1958-1961 in China. Even I'm modern times, when countries are not fighting world wars and have access to modern machinery and transportation, the Ethiopian famine of 1983 to 1985 left 1.2 million dead.

As you have a thing about colonies, it can be noted that Ethiopia was once an Italian colony. The famine there before colonisation was believed to be even worse.

Stop moaning ffs

janfebmar wrote: »

It was actually 1 to 3 million. 30 million people died in the famine of 1958-1961 in China. Even I'm modern times, when countries are not fighting world wars and have access to modern machinery and transportation, the Ethiopian famine of 1983 to 1985 left 1.2 million dead.

He was talking about Churchill endorsing a famine in India.

Stop trying to deflect. You’re really really bad at it.

janfebmar

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

He was talking about Churchill endorsing a famine in India.

He was not able to fix all of the world's problems in the early 1940's. He was not God. He could only do so much. The Bengal famine of 1770 was four times worse, that famine took about 10 million lives.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

He was not able to fix all of the world's problems in the early 1940's. He was not God. He could only do so much. The Bengal famine of 1770 was four times worse, that famine took about 10 million lives.

He was diverting food from the region and when asked about it, said:

Winston wrote:

“starvation of anyhow underfed Bengalis is less serious than that of sturdy Greeks” and Indians were, in any case, “breeding like rabbits”

Stop moaning ffs

janfebmar wrote: »

He was not able to fix all of the world's problems in the early 1940's. He was not God. He could only do so much. The Bengal famine of 1770 was four times worse, that famine took about 10 million lives.

As Francie just illustrated he not only ignored millions yes MILLIONS dying. He actually celebrated it as he saw them as expendable and as animals who deserved it.

janfebmar

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

As Francie just illustrated he not only ignored millions yes MILLIONS dying. He actually celebrated it as he saw them as expendable and as animals who deserved it.

And yet he sent them food. Not enough food ( just as the world let 1.2 million Ethiopians die in front of Television cameras in the 1980s).

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

And yet he sent them food. Not enough food ( just as the world let 1.2 million Ethiopians die in front of Television cameras in the 1980s).

Are we putting up statues to the people who allowed Ethiopians to die? Are we ignoring their racist comments on it?

Must have missed all that, do show.

Stop moaning ffs

Bye jan.

Odhinn

janfebmar wrote: »

He was not able to fix all of the world's problems in the early 1940's. He was not God. He could only do so much. The Bengal famine of 1770 was four times worse, that famine took about 10 million lives.

And that lets him off the hook for a famine that he could have stopped how, exactly?

janfebmar

Odhinn wrote: »

And that lets him off the hook for a famine that he could have stopped how, exactly?

He could not have prevented the 1770 Bengal famine , which took a third of the population, as he was not even alive then. He could just try to reduce the effects of the famine in the early 1940, which was much less severe, taking about 3.5% of the population.

Next thing is you will be blaming him for the 1980's Ethiopian famine, which took 1,200,000 lives, even though it was in a time of relative world peace, in front of the worlds TV cameras.

_blaaz

janfebmar wrote: »

HHe could just try to reduce the effects of the famine in the early 1940, which was much less severe, taking about 3.5% of the population

Why did he not then??

Why did he leave millions to die in concentration camps for years and do fcuk all to help.them?

RobMc59

janfebmar wrote: »

Odhinn wrote: »

And that lets him off the hook for a famine that he could have stopped how, exactly?

He could not have prevented the 1770 Bengal famine , which took a third of the population, as he was not even alive then. He could just try to reduce the effects of the famine in the early 1940, which was much less severe, taking about 3.5% of the population.

Next thing is you will be blaming him for the 1980's Ethiopian famine, which took 1,200,000 lives, even though it was in a time of relative world peace, in front of the worlds TV cameras.

The world owes so much to Sir Bob Geldof for his and Midge Ure's efforts with band aid to help them.

Stop moaning ffs

RobMc59 wrote: »

The world owes so much to Sir Bob Geldof for his and Midge Ure's efforts with band aid to help them.

Here comes the deflection brigade

Odhinn

janfebmar wrote: »

He could not have prevented the 1770 Bengal famine , which took a third of the population, as he was not even alive then.

I know. So why did you bring it up? It's entirely irrelevant.

janfebmar wrote: »

He could just try to reduce the effects of the famine in the early 1940, which was much less severe, taking about 3.5% of the population.

But he didn't try, according to the historical records, and he gave his reasoning as quoted earlier in the thread.


India has never suffered a famine since they gained independence afaik.

janfebmar

RobMc59 wrote: »

The world owes so much to Sir Bob Geldof for his and Midge Ure's efforts with band aid to help them.

You would still wonder how the world allowed 1.2 million people to starve then, in an age of jumbo jets, television, relative world peace , modern technology etc. I can understand how a famine could happen 40 years earlier in times of world war, when the worlds powers were all stretched.

_blaaz

Odhinn wrote: »

India has never suffered a famine since they gained independence afaik.

Neither has ireland....im noticing a trend here

Odhinn

janfebmar wrote: »

You would still wonder how the world allowed 1.2 million people to starve then, in an age of jumbo jets, television, relative world peace , modern technology etc. I can understand how a famine could happen 40 years earlier in times of world war, when the worlds powers were all stretched.

We aren't talking about that though, we're talking about how churchills incipient racism led him to be responsible for millions of unnecessary deaths in Bengal in the 1940's.