Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The wondrous adventures of Sinn Fein (part 2)

Options
13839414344334

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,883 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Mad
    blanch152 wrote: »
    Bizarre post.

    It reminds me of a teengager playing FIFA or Football Manager who wonders why Hartlepool can't win the Premier League in real life just by buying Messi and Ronaldo.

    It is so far removed from the reality of that time. Two words - Cold War. For the UK, this wouldn't be about the threat from the South, it would be about the message being sent to the Soviets and the possible reaction to any invasion. The Irish Army would have been crushed as a lesson to others. We would have lost territory, seen a proper newly-drawn fortified border put in place.

    The sentiments in the post are also redolent of a mindset that sees violence as the answer to problems. That is the mindset that has caused the problems on these islands.

    Yes yes lads, we know that you would have sat like good little subjects and waited for the idea of democracy to occur to the British and Unionists.

    Aren't yis great.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    maccored wrote: »
    the traditional 'they' have - it'll be a whole new generation of 'they'

    and that's why no one trusts shinners ,

    because they use the tactic of poisoning the minds of the weaker willed young people to carry out their agenda then abandon them when of no further use

    always have done


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    maccored wrote: »
    what sensationalist rubbish

    BTW, if you think introducing the border because of a Brexit failure wont cause trouble then you are deluded

    Not deluded at all. Plain to see that there are some, including posters here who can't wait to indulge themselves again. Sick


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    Yes yes lads, we know that you would have sat like good little subjects and waited for the idea of democracy to occur to the British and Unionists.

    Aren't yis great.

    mad


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    and that's why no one trusts shinners ,

    because they use the tactic of poisoning the minds of the weaker willed young people to carry out their agenda then abandon them when of no further use

    always have done

    the 'they' wont be shinners either - its'll be alot of people who dont want a border.

    once more you people dont seem to know what yous are on about


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Not deluded at all. Plain to see that there are some, including posters here who can't wait to indulge themselves again. Sick

    plain to see people like yourself dont seem to understand what a border will do. are you called Boris per chance?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    maccored wrote: »
    plain to see people like yourself dont seem to understand what a border will do. are you called Boris per chance?

    "A border" does nothing. It is a geographical feature

    Evil, moronic, misguided or malicious individuals "do" things


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Truthvader wrote: »
    "A border" does nothing. It is a geographical feature

    Evil, moronic, misguided or malicious individuals "do" things

    yeah, like put a border there. do you ever stop and read out loud the ****e you type?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Edgware wrote: »
    "If Lynch had invaded"

    General idea was that we would have done well to hold Newry for 24 hours.

    A Wikipedia entry seems to have the main bullet points.
    The plan to occupy Newry would not save any Catholic refugees, as it was a predominantly Catholic town with no inter-sectarian riots.

    The Catholic parts of Derry had suffered assaults from the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Protestant mobs, but was effectively ring-fenced on the introduction of British troops in August; as of October 1969, further attacks were unlikely.

    Invading the territory of a much larger and much more powerful country was too much of a risk to the security of Ireland.

    The United Kingdom could retaliate massively. The possibility of British occupation as a result of the plan was highly likely.

    The plan ignored the incompatibility of forces. The United Kingdom was a member of NATO, while the Irish Defence Forces were much smaller than the British Armed Forces, had inferior arms and transportation in comparison to British forces, and had only minimal air and naval capabilities. The Defence Forces were said to train for "World War II operations using World War I weapons", such as the Lee–Enfield rifle, although most Irish soldiers were armed with FN FAL 7.62 automatic rifles. Former Irish officers such as Vincent Savino recalled that the Irish Army was "so short of the basics", having been allowed to run down since 1945 by the same politicians who now wanted it to undertake such a dangerous mission. By contrast, British forces in Northern Ireland consisted of almost 3,000 heavily armed soldiers of the 2nd Queens Regiment, the Royal Regiment of Wales, and the Prince of Wales's Own Regiment of Yorkshire. These troops had considerable experience in training and conventional large-scale combat tactics, and many had returned from guarding NATO's Northern Flank. They were equipped with Humber Pig and Saracen armored personnel carriers. Royal Air Force F-4 Phantom and Harrier jets were also stationed at airbases within short flying time from Northern Ireland. These forces would have been capable of dealing decisively with any Irish military incursion into the area. The mismatch was reflected in the choice of title. According to security analyst Tom Clonan, "irrespective of the element of surprise, the Irish Army would have been subject to a massive British counterattack – probably within hours of their initial incursion. Irish casualties would have been very high as the British would have sought to swiftly and indiscriminately end the Republic's capabilities and occupy the Republic via military intervention".

    In 1969, both the Republic and the UK were applying to join the European Economic Community. The Republic's application would likely have been jeopardised if it had invaded a "friendly neighbour".

    While the Irish government had called for United Nations involvement in Northern Ireland in August 1969, launching a localised but technical invasion and then calling again for intervention would have led to universal condemnation, being contrary to international law. The Republic of Ireland had joined the UN only in 1955.

    All members of NATO are bound by the North Atlantic Treaty to oppose a military incursion on a member state; this would probably force the United States and the rest of the NATO members to intervene.

    The targets for covert operations, such as the BBC offices in Belfast, were already guarded by the British Army to protect them from local rioters. None of these targets were linked to the inter-sectarian riots.

    An intrusion might have provoked new and more widespread sectarian rioting, causing hundreds of deaths.

    An invasion of Northern Ireland by the armed forces of the Republic would likely have met with the same overwhelmingly negative international response as the UK's invasion of the Suez Canal zone during the Suez Crisis in 1956.

    In other words, only a lunatic would have seriously considered the proposal as workable and achievable.

    I know its easy to roll one's eyes at the Irish Republican keyboard warriors among when they trot out such outrageous stuff like this, but it is a good insight into the mentality. They actually really really believe the hype and their own propaganda, that plans like invading the North were workable and achievable.

    This view of Irish Republicanism is more like a religious cult than a political movement in my opinion given the zealot and fanatical belief in their owns powers to achieve the impossible. That is why we still have jacked up idiots in the New IRA killing people, for 'the cause'.

    It is no surprise. People like Sean MacStiofain, a megalomaniac idiot of the highest order pretty much demanded the surrender of the British upon their first secret meeting. The meeting was a disaster because the head of the PIRA thought himself as an Irish re-incarnation of Julias Ceaser.

    Today, we have our own little Sean MacStiofain's online fighting the same fights, in a hope that they will be right, one day. :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    A Wikipedia entry seems to have the main bullet points.



    In other words, only a lunatic would have seriously considered the proposal as workable and achievable.

    I know its easy to roll one's eyes at the Irish Republican keyboard warriors among when they trot out such outrageous stuff like this, but it is a good insight into the mentality. They actually really really believe the hype and their own propaganda, that plans like invading the North were workable and achievable.

    This view of Irish Republicanism is more like a religious cult than a political movement in my opinion given the zealot and fanatical belief in their owns powers to achieve the impossible. That is why we still have jacked up idiots in the New IRA killing people, for 'the cause'.

    It is no surprise. People like Sean MacStiofain, a megalomaniac idiot of the highest order pretty much demanded the surrender of the British upon their first secret meeting. The meeting was a disaster because the head of the PIRA thought himself as an Irish re-incarnation of Julias Ceaser.

    Today, we have our own little Sean MacStiofain's online fighting the same fights, in a hope that they will be right, one day. :D

    excuses excuses. travesties were going on and the south turned a blind eye virtually. Yet another who couldnt care less what happens to people in the north. you should be ashamed of yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,883 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Not deluded at all. Plain to see that there are some, including posters here who can't wait to indulge themselves again. Sick

    And it's back to good old fashioned lying about what people are saying.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly



    I have never characterised this as a 'take over' or 'invasion' but a measure to protect people whom the entire world could see (even Wilson and Callaghan could see ffs) NEEDED immediate protection.

    A foreign military entering without consent or permission another countries territory is by the legal definition an invasion and would be seen as such.

    Since we would not have the UN on our sides, invading a NATO country would have actually seen the USA take the sides of the UK on this, and would jepordise our membership of the EEC.
    We DID NOTHING about this, to our lasting shame.

    You are the only one who bleats on about this shame, as if starting a foolish war we could never win would somehow rescue us from it.

    I also never said anything about 'asking Ulster Lyalists 'nicely' to stand down, I proposed that the British should have treated that move as the sedition and attack on democracy that it was. Hint: see how they treated Irish people who attempted similar. We had to wait for over 3000 people to die for the British to govern with anything remotely resembling an even hand.

    Oh, this military invasion is now democratic. Would there be a referendum in the South to see to this?

    What are you actually talking about? Bleating out some soundbites, like democratic, or peacekeeping does not dress up this plan as anything other than a steaming pile of hot dog $hit.

    You have no credibility, even your allies here are avoiding backing you up on this one.
    The proposal you have is unhinged.

    Your plan would have likely led to a re-occuption of a large part of the Republic by the British and we would have zero allies in the world.
    Of course what we miss here is evenhanded criticism of that from our hat doffing forgiving partitionists.

    Oh your favourite three words, hat-doffing and partitionists. The dogma of ultra nationalism at display right here.
    If you are even remotely skeptical of this plan, because its down right lunacy you must be a hat-doffing partitionist, right?

    The Irish Army was dead set against Lynch's plan, are they also paritionists?
    Are they not 'real' Irish republican 'men'
    Have we reduced rational thought and logic down to a big green willy waving competition on who is the biggest RA head?

    Look, lets just say you rolled the dice on this mad idea of yours and have been truly and utterly found out, like Eamon Dunphy would say.

    Just say that your idea was wrong, not thought out and we can leave it there, unless you really want to triple down on this mad idea of yours.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    excuses excuses. travesties were going on and the south turned a blind eye virtually. Yet another who couldnt care less what happens to people in the north. you should be ashamed of yourself.

    Oh another one.

    So, tell me, even with the information available to us today and every credible analyst saying that an invasion would have been a disaster for the Republic and would have done nothing to help nationalists in the north.... we should have done it anyway....?

    Really? :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    maccored wrote: »
    the traditional 'they' have - it'll be a whole new generation of 'they'

    You'll trigger a few with that ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    The programme was made from a partitionist, deferential point of view and never considered the mood in Westminster to be anything other than the bulldog Churchillian one. That's a Tory thing and they wouldn't be opening fire on the streets of Ireland until 1972.

    Ah, yes, it was Fake News or Biased News? Or something.
    So tell me what independent analyst agrees with your version of events or are you just making it up?

    Francie knows the real truth, an invasion would have been a roaring success for us all.

    It is a real real pity you weren't in a position of influence back then to make it all happen.
    Same as in 1920, as you could have told Collins and Co. to invade the North as well.
    You were just born a few decades too early Francie!
    That is the true 'What if' of history!
    Partition folks...it will nver allow this island to exist in peace and stability - 100 years of factual evidence of that if you take the blinkers off.

    Again, partition was inevitable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    Truthvader wrote: »
    "A border" does nothing. It is a geographical feature

    It obvious you didn't have to cross that 'border' on a daily basis. It wasn't just a geographical feature, it was the British trying to split communities with their fortifications, road blocks, stop and search tactics and general harassment of Irish citizens.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,883 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    Ah, yes, it was Fake News or Biased News? Or something.
    So tell me what independent analyst agrees with your version of events or are you just making it up?

    Francie knows the real truth, an invasion would have been a roaring success for us all.

    It is a real real pity you weren't in a position of influence back then to make it all happen.
    Same as in 1920, as you could have told Collins and Co. to invade the North as well.
    You were just born a few decades too early Francie!
    That is the true 'What if' of history!



    Again, partition was inevitable.

    I am engaging in what if...based on what I know of the attitudes at the time. That RTE programme about something I wasn't even talking about...an actual invasion - assumed that the British was been led by a Churchillian Tory - it wasn't. Simple as that.

    Read the material - know the context Mark.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,883 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Truthvader wrote: »
    "A border" does nothing. It is a geographical feature

    There you have it...the confirmation that you are debating from a complete lack of knowledge is complete.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭dundalkfc10


    To be fair Mark thought last night a TD should ask her Boyfriend a fellow TD, a question to get answers she wanted instead of bringing it up in the Dáil


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    blanch152 wrote: »

    The sentiments in the post are also redolent of a mindset that sees violence as the answer to problems. That is the mindset that has caused the problems on these islands.

    This is the true cause of the problems on this island, the knee jerk reaction to call to violent solution to every political problem.
    It is the unfortunate legacy of the rising, which was a military defeat and disaster but stoked a change in mindset due to the British reaction.

    Since then we have had numerous failed rebellions and campaigns to try and fight for Ireland's freedom, whatever that is, all of them failing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,931 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Agree, lost complete control. Even includes the threat that they will be back killing if Brexit doesn't go in some unspecified way that suits them. Found out again

    The threat of violence is never far away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    I am engaging in what if...based on what I know of the attitudes at the time. That RTE programme about something I wasn't even talking about...an actual invasion - assumed that the British was been led by a Churchillian Tory - it wasn't. Simple as that.

    Read the material - know the context Mark.

    You mean you know much more than a historian, military personal, civil servants, security analysts, ex-Irish Army officers, politicians..... they were all wrong and you were right.

    An invasion would have been a success and .....

    Do you have ANY actual independent verifiable opinion other than your own that would back you up on this crazy unhinged plan?


  • Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    markodaly wrote: »
    This is the true cause of the problems on this island, the knee jerk reaction to call to violent solution to every political problem.
    It is the unfortunate legacy of the rising, which was a military defeat and disaster but stoked a change in mindset due to the British reaction.

    Since then we have had numerous failed rebellions and campaigns to try and fight for Ireland's freedom, whatever that is, all of them failing.

    The next big campaign will be the border poll which will set Ireland on course for unification as the young vote north and south will be mobilised to the max.

    After that we will see the sad we faces of all the west brits boiling their piss when they realise they'll have to help fund it and SF will be the largest party on the island :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,646 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    The next big campaign will be the border poll which will set Ireland on course for unification as the young vote north and south will be mobilised to the max.

    After that we will see the sad we faces of all the west brits boiling their piss when they realise they'll have to help fund it and SF will be the largest party on the island :D

    Grade A for effort.
    But you fail on the originality front.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,931 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    The next big campaign will be the border poll which will set Ireland on course for unification as the young vote north and south will be mobilised to the max.

    After that we will see the sad we faces of all the west brits boiling their piss when they realise they'll have to help fund it and SF will be the largest party on the island :D

    The last paragraph just sums up the sectarian triumphalism of Irish republicanism. It isn't about the ideals, it isn't about making peoples' lives better, it is just about being able to rub somebody's faces in it.

    The "they'll have to fund it" just shows up the stupidity of it all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,496 ✭✭✭irishgrover


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    The next big campaign will be the border poll which will set Ireland on course for unification as the young vote north and south will be mobilised to the max.

    After that we will see the sad we faces of all the west brits boiling their piss when they realise they'll have to help fund it and SF will be the largest party on the island :D

    Generally speaking, I have very limited respect for people who think if you don't support SF you are a west brit. It's the mental equivalent of waving a big red flag that says "I'm a fooking idiot...."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭dundalkfc10


    markodaly wrote: »
    Grade A for effort.
    But you fail on the originality front.

    Only a matter of time


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    Oh another one.

    So, tell me, even with the information available to us today and every credible analyst saying that an invasion would have been a disaster for the Republic and would have done nothing to help nationalists in the north.... we should have done it anyway....?

    Really? :pac:

    'oh another one' ... you do realise how that makes you sound - oh ye of little knowledge on this subject?

    the south should have done something. where were the discussions? why are you assuming attack was the right option? were was the dialogue?


  • Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭grayzer75


    blanch152 wrote: »
    The last paragraph just sums up the sectarian triumphalism of Irish republicanism. It isn't about the ideals, it isn't about making peoples' lives better, it is just about being able to rub somebody's faces in it.

    The "they'll have to fund it" just shows up the stupidity of it all.

    Dry your eyes and start saving for the big unification party ye wet wipe......


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,665 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    grayzer75 wrote: »
    You'll trigger a few with that ;)

    mentioning SF or referring to the way the north was run or that the brits were murdering scumbags as much as anyone seems to trigger them


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement