The Wolfe Tones

Who knows? Could also be a distraction from what the 'real' Tories are doing with the Legacy Bill. Here we are discussing etiquette (that's all this story is about really) while the real story is elsewhere.

OK, a group of youngish people at EP, some high on drink and/or drugs, young enough to not have lived through the times when the IRA murdered our Gardai and Irish army, among countless civilians, did go to the Wolfe Tones. However it is a credit to the people of Ireland that 99% of people did not go.

In DeValera time, DeVelera and the Irish government executed some IRA prisoners. 99% of the people were fine with that too, there was no outcry. During the troubles, SF had a miniscule vote here in the Republic. It is amazing how some young people now do not understand the past.

I would say the same if a band got up on a stage in N.I. and with a sound system and loudspeakers whipped a crowd of thousands up in to a frenzy chanting UDA slogans. Very dangerous stuff. Both I would feel very sad about.

If you're to accept that rationale you'd have to accept that the spate of Al Qaeda/ISIS bombings/atrocities in Europe over the last 20 years was not terrorism but a war, or that September 11th was part of a war, not terrorism.

I'd categorise it as terrorism rather than a war.

Nonsense. If Russia hadn’t gotten involved, we’d live in a very different world now. The Allies would judge been routed in WW2

So you admit the British Army were welcomed by the Catholic community.

The notion the Provos weren't defeated reminds me of that Monty Python "let's call it a draw" sketch.

The Provos failed and failed utterly. Their aim was a united Ireland by force. They never advanced that aim one iota.

The notion they weren't defeated is laughable.

The bizarre thing about the Troubles is the outcome at the end of it all - the Good Friday Agreement - was a comprehensive victory for Unionism, yet the Unionists like to delude themselves into thinking they lost, whereas it's the opposite on the Provo side - they lost and lost big but delude themselves into thinking they won.

Delusion is a terrible thing.

The Western Allies would won anyway, it just would have taken a bit longer. America's firepower was so overwhelming it would have crushed the Nazis. Stalin himself admitted that without American aid the Soviets (you seem determined to erase the role of the other Soviet republics besides Russia) would have lost.

In 1940 alone - when the UK and commonwealth were up to their neck fighting Nazism - The Soviet Union rapidly became Germany’s main source of imported animal feed ( Germany, contrary to popular belief, relied heavily on horses etc for transportation). In 1940 the Soviet Union also supplied Germany with 74 per cent of its phosphates needs, 67 per cent of its asbestos imports, 65 per cent of its chromium supplies, 55 per cent of its manganese, 40 per cent of its nickel imports and 34 per cent of its imported oil.

Of course, a few years later, convoys were going from the UK to Russia, with aid to fight the Nazis. In the period from 1st October, 1941, to 31st March, 1946, the UK supplied to the Soviet Union 5,218 tanks, of which 1,388 were from Canada. The UK supplied 7,411 aircraft, including 3,129 aircraft sent from the United States of America. As previously explained on the 10th May, 1944, the aircraft from the United States of America were sent on United States Lend Lease to the Soviet Union as part of the British commitment to the U.S.S.R. in exchange for the supply of British aircraft to United States Forces in the European Theatre. The UK also sent about £120 million ( a fortune in them days) of raw materials, foodstuffs, machinery, industrial plant, medical supplies and hospital equipment

Not sure where you get your history, possibly from youth Fine Gael.

The IRA were finished. They barely had any numbers. It was over. Then the UVF decided to start a bombing campaign and killed innocent Nationalists from 1966. Many Unionists were unhappy with Nationalists receiving equal rights and wanted to quash any campaign for it. We know of the police force violently opposing peaceful demonstrations, loyalist mobs started burning Nationalists out of their homes. Northern Nationalists were isolated and received no support from the South. They also received very little support from the Southern IRA. You may be aware of the I Ran Away graffiti.

Into the breach emerged the PIRA and we should be all grateful that they did. They defended their communities. Many died or spent years in prison for doing so. We all know that some did some horrible things but we have to remember that they had the local police force beating and murdering Nationalists, loyalist mobs saying any Catholic will do in their murder campaign, the British armed forces which were meant to restore peace started shooting innocents dead on our streets. Under this sort of sustained attack and with very little outside support, the PIRA fought bravely and stuck with targeting active participants for the huge majority of their operations.

The opposite was true for the British side. Why the PIRA are being criticised for fighting against tyranny while the British side are receiving praise is down to a media campaign lasting decades and partitionists trying to rewrite history. Gladly more people are seeing through this. Many of the young people going to the Wolf Tones also see through the revisionism. The PIRA are heroes to many and rightfully so.

I'm in my late 50's so lived through the section 31 era in the South. I'm not entirely sure what your point is here. Are you saying that if Section 31 hadn't existed, there would have been much more, open, active support for the Provo's campaign in the South? If so, it's a fallacy. Section 31 as I recall it was more of a token gesture than anything else - you could still hear Gerry Adams and co. being interviewed on TV but with the ludicrous charade of having an actor dubbing his words. Anyone seriously interested in what was going on could easily find out by reading a good enough spread of media coverage from multiple sources, both "official" and unoffical independent coverage, interviews and of course following the dally litany of atrocities on both sides. The existence of Section 31 didn't turn me against "the armed struggle". It was the endless atrocities and the feeble apologies of "oh sorry we made another mistake but it's really the Brit's fault because if they weren't here there'd be no armed struggle etc. etc. ad nauseum."

It was boots on the ground that also helped the Russians. The British sent 15,000,000 pairs of boots to the USSR. The Russians quite liked these, mainly because they kept their feet relatively warm. It was not just the airplanes etc the British sent the Russians which helped win the war. There were some Irishmen on those Artic convoys, brave men they were, more than a few perished.