If Lynch had invaded

Fratton Fred · 02-09-2009 2:38pm

recharge wrote: »

What you on about lad?? There has being peace between the two countrys the last 900 odd years?????????????

And when do i say the Irish Goverment had anything to do with the canary wharf??

tell me when there was war then?

there has been several rebellions against British rule and you could almost call cromwell's re-conquest as war I suppose (Although that was as much an over spill of the English civl war as it was Ireland V England) but the country of Ireland and the Country of England/Britain have never been at full blown, total war.

sliabh · 02-09-2009 3:09pm

MrMicra wrote: »

Surely the purpose of an invasion would have been to stabilise the situation, get the RUC under control and SURRENDER to the British Army when they arrived.

The whole thing could have been handled in a manner that actually improved relations between the 2 countries.

I can't see how it would have managed to do anything other than inflame a situation that was already boiling over.

Outside of a Peter Sellers film, having someone invade your country (especially if it is to "help" and point your failure to restore order locally) is not going to endear them to you in any way. The numbers of Irish troops available would be so small (relatively speaking) that they wouldn't be able to contribute much. Especially as the local police and army would have to treat them as the enemy, and the Unionist opoulation would also oppose their presence.

jiggajt · 02-09-2009 3:21pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

there has been several rebellions against British rule and you could almost call cromwell's re-conquest as war I suppose (Although that was as much an over spill of the English civl war as it was Ireland V England) but the country of Ireland and the Country of England/Britain have never been at full blown, total war.

Actually it was a spill over of the Civil war until Charles bogged off with the remaining Royalist forces leaving Hugh Dubh o Neill to fight cromwells forces directly. Then you could argue it became an Ireland V England thing.

Also, there was the Nine Years War 1594-1903 in which Hugh o Neill and Hugh Roe o Donnell fought against the Elizabethan English. This was followed by the Flight of the Earls and subsequently the Ulster Plantation.

Also in the 1570s and 1580s the Desmonds of Munster were at war with the British and their subsequent defeat heralded the Muster plantation.

But i suppose these were mainly wars against provinces/chieftains and not an Ireland V England war. Maybe thats why we lost them all!! Where's Ray Houghton when you need him???:D

Jo King · 02-09-2009 3:31pm

chalkitdown wrote: »

I've always thought that Lynch should have sent a token force over the border.
The British have always denied that there was any war in Ireland so as to prevent U.N. getting involved.

An incursion would have forced the British to engage the U.N. and could have resulted in U.N. soldiers on the streets in the North.

This would have resulted in much fairer policing for all, and probably a much shortened 'troubles'.

If there had been an incursion, one of the things the British would have considered doing was give Lynch a list of 50 important pieces of infrastructure in the Republic. Airports, power stations, rail lines , bridges, broadcasting stations, factories etc. They would tell him that until his troops withdrew they would bomb all of these items of infrastructure from the air, starting in three hours time. The country would have been ruptured into smithereens in a night.

MarchDub · 02-09-2009 3:39pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

tell me when there was war then?

there has been several rebellions against British rule and you could almost call cromwell's re-conquest as war I suppose (Although that was as much an over spill of the English civl war as it was Ireland V England) but the country of Ireland and the Country of England/Britain have never been at full blown, total war.

The Irish War of Independence was a war between the nations - whether your definition of "full blown" can be met or not. [We call the Iraq War a war yet the Western powers and the "coalition of the willing" have not used their full blown force of nuclear weapons. It nevertheless is a war.]The newly established Dail had ratified the Declaration of Independence in early 1919 and pledged the IRA to fight to withhold it. The IRA at this point was made the official army of the new Irish state.

The Tans were an auxiliary force sent in when the war was already almost two years old and not going well on the British side. We have many documents that support this - British Army dispatches show an army increasingly frustrated with the situation they found themselves in. The IRA’s guerrilla tactics were frustrating the traditionally trained army. We also know that Lloyd George had asked for an estimate of how much it would cost the British to win the war and was told a further £100 million and 100,000 men. He decided to not pay that price and this led him to the negotiating table and the Treaty.

sliabh · 02-09-2009 3:42pm

MarchDub wrote: »

We also know that Lloyd George had asked for an estimate of how much it would cost the British to win the war and was told a further £100 million and 100,000 men. He decided to not pay that price and this led him to the negotiating table and the Treaty.

And Collins also knew that the IRA was on the verge of collapse. It was fortuitous that the British Government was ready to talk. Had the "war" continued another 6 months the IRA may not have been able to keep going.

jiggajt · 02-09-2009 3:42pm

Jo King wrote: »

one of the things the British would have considered doing was give Lynch a list of 50 important pieces of infrastructure in the Republic. Airports, power stations, rail lines , bridges, broadcasting stations, factories etc. They would tell him that until his troops withdrew they would bomb all of these items of infrastructure from the air, starting in three hours time. The country would have been ruptured into smithereens in a night.

Haha, 50! We didnt even have 50 important pieces of infrastructure back then. Bomb, Dublin, Shannon, Ardnacrusha and Croke park and there'd be nothing left!

MarchDub · 02-09-2009 3:44pm

sliabh wrote: »

And Collins also knew that the IRA was on the verge of collapse. It was fortuitous that the British Government was ready to talk. Had the "war" continued another 6 months the IRA may not have been able to keep going.

Agree - the British had no idea of what was happening on the Irish side. A serious failure in their intelligence.

McArmalite · 02-09-2009 3:45pm

MrMicra wrote: »

The purpose of the documentary was to whitewash Lynch by presenting an unrealistic worst case scenario. We have seen this trend for a while. First Lemass now Lynch. It is part of a political agenda on the part of elements within RTE to ensure the survival of Fianna Fail as a political force.

Totally agree. RTE like all the other insitutions of the state but maybe worse, is full of cronies. I didn't watch the programme as I knew that the that the theme and conclusion of the programme was going to be. Well, Fianna Fail the Republican party so dearly wanted to live up to it's rethoric of the 30' 40's 50' and 60's - " the cause of our fathers, we'll be with you all the way men " etc, etc - but that they decided in a genuine humanitiarian concern that it would be better not to intervene and though we had bloodshed for 25 years, it was all for the better somehow and the Good Friday Agreement is the be all and end all for everyone and aren't we such a great little nation, blah, blah, blah

McArmalite · 02-09-2009 3:49pm

chalkitdown wrote: »

I've always thought that Lynch should have sent a token force over the border.
The British have always denied that there was any war in Ireland so as to prevent U.N. getting involved.

An incursion would have forced the British to engage the U.N. and could have resulted in U.N. soldiers on the streets in the North.

This would have resulted in much fairer policing for all, and probably a much shortened 'troubles'.

Exactly. If the Irish army had gone it, it would not have been seen internationally as an ' invasion ' but would have been seen as coming to the rescue of the Catholics in the six counties facing an onslaught. It would have had the full backing of the International community, the USA especially - just like Eygpt had in Suez and Iceland in the Cod War* in the 1970's when britain humilated themselves. And not just Irish America, the plight of the Civil Rights marches etc obviously had huge resonations across the American public. Internationally britian was seen ofcourse as the instigator of the troubles. It had created and sustained the secterian apartheid state, their certainly would have been no sympathy world wide for the ' invasion ' of british terroitory.

If britain was a world power who can throw it's weight about like some imagine, how come they didn't bomb Iceland in the 1970's for cutting their fishing nets, ramming their trawlers and firing missiles at their navy. As well as burning down the british embassy in Reykjavík - technically british soil ?

Or attack Libya for Lockerbie ?

* For those of you too young http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

MrMicra · 02-09-2009 3:50pm

This documentary presents absurd and worst case scenarios as if they were the likely result it was made for party political reasons.

sliabh wrote: »

I can't see how it would have managed to do anything other than inflame a situation that was already boiling over.

Especially as the local police ... would have to treat them as the enemy, and the Unionist opoulation would also oppose their presence.

If the local police took on the Irish army they would have died. The programme misrepresented the weapons used by our army.

sliabh wrote: »

Especially as the local ... army would have to treat them as the enemy

.
As suggested above a surrender could have been stage managed In a way that de escalated tension. An 'invasion' could have forestalled the growth of the IRA. It might even have led to a permanent liaison between the British and Irish armies and would have forced (through international attention) the destruction of the RUC.

Lynch was a cowardly, vacillating, partitionist incompetent. This program is an attempt to excuse his stupidity.
Lynch inflamed tension by making stupid threats for short term political advantage. People died because of his words this documentary is an attempt to whitewash him.

Every Fianna Fail Taoiseach except Lynch and Reynolds was corrupt. Jack Lynch ruined the Irish economy and by making his speech and doing nothing killed people.

DJsail · 02-09-2009 3:54pm

We could argue all day as to what constitutes an actual war, conflict or the troubles and the historic basis to the escalating violence that led Ulster to a spiraling lack of morality on both sides which it has only recently begun to recover from, the thread was pretty specific on asking peoples opinion on the RTE doc and as such found it an incredible waste of time and resources.

In a Republic where non-fictitous events such as gangland crime, un-employment, the re-emergence of emigration and drug dependence not to mention other issues such as the class divide in modern Irish society can be ignored to give us an account of how our under equipped and inexperienced defence force of the day (Thankfully things have changed) may have taken a trip to Newry only to be shot by the security forces of the North, well lets put it this way, the TV licence fee is vastly over priced!:rolleyes:

sliabh · 02-09-2009 4:08pm

MrMicra wrote: »

As suggested above a surrender could have been stage managed In a way that de escalated tension.

I can't really see how this would happen. And even in a best case where things didn't get worse, if the leader of any country ordered an invasion just so his troops could surrender he would be kicked out of government on the spot (even if his party wasn't "Republican", and the army they surrendered to wasn't the historical British bogeyman). It would make the country the laughing stock

MrMicra wrote: »

Lynch was a cowardly, vacillating, partitionist incompetent...
Jack Lynch ruined the Irish economy and by making his speech and doing nothing killed people.

I am not sure where you get your history from, but just on the economic side alone Lynch was minister for Industry and Commerce in the Lemass government of the 1960's and worked with Lemass and Whitaker in implementing the "Programme for Economic Expansion" which gave Ireland its first boom in the 60's.

And as for being cowardly, during the arms crisis he was the one that forced Haughey and his gang out of the party. That and a lot of his other actions saved lives in the South and North. He was fairly consistent in building relations with the British government in contrast to some who would have inflamed the situation in the north by providing tacit support to the IRA.

Just remember the British and American governments weren't shy about bombing of Libya for providing supporting to "terrorism".

brianthebard · 02-09-2009 4:15pm

MrMicra wrote: »

The purpose of the documentary was to whitewash Lynch by presenting an unrealistic worst case scenario. We have seen this trend for a while. First Lemass now Lynch. It is part of a political agenda on the part of elements within RTE to ensure the survival of Fianna Fail as a political force.

If we have a programme about Haughey then we'll know this is the case. Wait wasn't there a series already? :eek: Oh noes! Honestly though I agree with you although it is hard to see how much mileage they could get out of making programmes about the few coalition governments there were between FF, but there could definitely be more about the CnaG period on RTE, it was the formative period of the state after all....

dtgk1987 · 02-09-2009 4:21pm

The answer is simple ladies and gentleman. The Irish Defence Forces would have not been able to defeat the British army in the north of this country. The Irish Defence Forces were under equipped. The most important thing to luck at from a military point is the Irish had no air cover. The idea was that the Defence Forces would cross the border and rescue people. It was not ment to be an invasion. I doubt very much that the LEGITIMATE government of this country would have let the Defence Forces train the P.I.R.A who we must rember did not recognise and probably still doesnt recongnise the DEMOCRATICALLY elected Irish government. Jack Lynch held this country together. Any body who agress with an invasion of the North in 1969 is a dillusional fantasist

dtgk1987 · 02-09-2009 4:27pm

the F.C.A were given 50 rounds of ammunition for their bolt action .303 Lee Enfield rifles. The P.D.F were equipped with state of the art FN FAL 7.62mm Assault Riflles

DJsail · 02-09-2009 4:35pm

dtgk1987 wrote: »

the F.C.A were given 50 rounds of ammunition for their bolt action .303 Lee Enfield rifles. The P.D.F were equipped with state of the art FN FAL 7.62mm Assault Riflles

I don't know what's more freightening believing a .303 could actually make a difference in the escalating situation or sending in the FCA:eek:

jiggajt · 02-09-2009 5:26pm

Im quite baffled as to why the program chose a ficticious invasion of Newry anyway? Derry would have made MUCH more sense as that was where all the trouble was anyway! Newry couldnt be further away from what was going on at the time!

DublinDes · 02-09-2009 5:59pm

MrMicra wrote: »

If the local police took on the Irish army they would have died. The programme misrepresented the weapons used by our army.

Who would have died, the RUC ? What would the RUC a police force have had, handguns and maybe a few rifles. And what were the B Specials, a bunch of red neck part timers. And anyway, they were a Police force, their trained to point there guns at bank robbers shouting throw your weapons down or whatever. Not saying the Irish army was the best army in the world, but it wouldn't take much to take on a few middle aged coppers would it ?

DublinDes · 02-09-2009 6:04pm

dtgk1987 wrote: »

the F.C.A were given 50 rounds of ammunition for their bolt action .303 Lee Enfield rifles. The P.D.F were equipped with state of the art FN FAL 7.62mm Assault Riflles

The FCA were probably better armed than the RUC and B Specials FFS. What did the loyalist coppers have, revovlers and a dozen or two rounds at best :rolleyes:

2 or 3 of the regular army soldiers armed with automatic FN assault rifles and grenades, anti tank guns ( like an RPG but more pwoerful ) etc would have gone through a dozen or two of them.

MarchDub · 02-09-2009 7:54pm

jiggajt wrote: »

Im quite baffled as to why the program chose a ficticious invasion of Newry anyway? Derry would have made MUCH more sense as that was where all the trouble was anyway! Newry couldnt be further away from what was going on at the time!

The road system is the reason probably. Ground forces have to be manoeuvered into place the easiest way possible - with a thought also given to retreat facilities. Back in 1969 Donegal had virtually no decent roads so moving an army through there to Derry would have been difficult to impossible - maybe still true today. Newry was much more accessible for an Irish Army to move into quickly and more easily.

MrMicra · 02-09-2009 10:34pm

DublinDes wrote: »

Who would have died, the RUC ?

Yes the RUC read the whole post. The RUC could not have pushed the Irish army out of Derry and once the Brits got there we could have retreated/ 'surrendered'. The aim of protecting (being seen to protect) northern catholics would have been achieved.

captainblack · 02-09-2009 11:20pm

recharge wrote: »

i understand the difference between the irish army and pira, but was just making general refferences between the conflicts between the two nations over the years. As PF said a gurellia warefare i tough would of had a totally different out come such as snatch raids across the border od something similar.

And with the canary warf bobbings i dont think the PIRA were really loosing, it was a finincal war at that stage and they demonstrated they could inflect huge damage in londons finincal district, but who has time for terriousm at that stage?? There fight was well and truely over.

You seem to be forgetting that Northern Ireland was two thirds Unionist at the time. Fighting a guerrilla war is possible with popular support. Ultimately The UK could have given Loyalists the green light to ethnically cleanse Nationalists from NI. Remember, Nationalists begged the British to send the army in to protect them from Loyalists at this time.

As for PIRA - they lost. Simple as. Informers, British agents at a high level, loss of support, Catholic living standards too high, Loyalist actions to much for Republicans and/or their support base - take your choice.

captainblack · 02-09-2009 11:27pm

brianthebard wrote: »

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, I'm pretty sure a conventional army fighting in civilian clothes would go against the geneva convention and other agreements? Seems very unlikely. Aside from that I doubt the Irish Army had or has any training in guerilla warfare? Finally wouldn't this mean joining forces with an illegal army or armies? I didn't watch the show because to be frank I find history programmes on tv to be seriously reductive and hair rippingly dumb.

Yes, it's very amusing. According to many in Ireland, The Irish can do anything they fancy, but Loyalists and The UK must be called to a much higher standard! I sometimes wonder if this shows a gross inferiority complex?

captainblack · 02-09-2009 11:33pm

walrusgumble wrote: »

Was it actually clever to bring this programme out? what does it achieve? hopefully not too many unionists were watching this. hopefully people like paisley are still on those tranquillsers.

Unionists will have watched. They are aware of most of it anyway.

captainblack · 02-09-2009 11:39pm

chalkitdown wrote: »

I've always thought that Lynch should have sent a token force over the border.
The British have always denied that there was any war in Ireland so as to prevent U.N. getting involved.

An incursion would have forced the British to engage the U.N. and could have resulted in U.N. soldiers on the streets in the North.

This would have resulted in much fairer policing for all, and probably a much shortened 'troubles'.

This is pure fantasy. The UK had a UN veto and wouldn't have brought in The UN under any circumstances. They'd just have killed The Irish soldiers then got on with the next job.

captainblack · 02-09-2009 11:47pm

DublinDes wrote: »

Who would have died, the RUC ? What would the RUC a police force have had, handguns and maybe a few rifles. And what were the B Specials, a bunch of red neck part timers. And anyway, they were a Police force, their trained to point there guns at bank robbers shouting throw your weapons down or whatever. Not saying the Irish army was the best army in the world, but it wouldn't take much to take on a few middle aged coppers would it ?

The RUC/B Specials were all armed. Pistols certainly, but also carbines and Sten guns. They also had armoured cars. It's naive to believe The Stormount Government only saw them as police. Many were ex-British Army.

And they would have been on the defencive. A three to one advantage is assumed for a successful infantry assault.

MrMicra · 03-09-2009 12:15am

The RUC were the dregs of society. They were cowards. They would have ran.

McArmalite · 03-09-2009 9:28am

captainblack wrote: »

You seem to be forgetting that Northern Ireland was two thirds Unionist at the time. Fighting a guerrilla war is possible with popular support. Ultimately The UK could have given Loyalists the green light to ethnically cleanse Nationalists from NI. Remember, Nationalists begged the British to send the army in to protect them from Loyalists at this time.

As for PIRA - they lost. Simple as. Informers, British agents at a high level, loss of support, Catholic living standards too high, Loyalist actions to much for Republicans and/or their support base - take your choice.

The true voice of unionism speaks

" Ultimately The UK could have given Loyalists the green light to ethnically cleanse Nationalists from NI. You made some job of " ethnically cleanse Nationalists " form the Falls Road, Ardoyne etc when 20 or so IRA men along with the men and youths armed with petrol bombs ran you back. In Derry the IRA was non existant and still they kept the RUC and unionist mobs out of the Bogside and Creggan with petrol bombs alone.

Tell me, apart from where you vastly outnumbered nationalists, was their much attempts to " to ethnically cleanse Nationalists " in places such as Strabane, Enniskillen, Crossmaglen

But sure they were going to slaughter everyone if their was an attempt to introduce Home Rule into any part of Ireland, then it was in Ulster ( the 9 counties of it ), and then they settled for only six counties of Ulster and abounded their brethern without a shot been fired in Donegal, Monaghan, Cavan, Leitrim and indeed Dublin where Carson was from and had returned unionist MP's in teh 1918 election for Trinity and Rathmines ( Rathmines was the yuppie part of Dublin back then).

And " the loyal Ulster people would not be pushed any further " if the Anglo Irish Agreement wasn't dropped, same with the Good Friday Agreement, if the RUC cap badge was changed, blah, blah, blah :rolleyes: The unionists, their the greastest mouthpieces and windbags in history. As is said,these are the very people who could abondoned without a whimper the brethern in Donegal, Cavan, Dublin etc

" Remember, Nationalists begged the British to send the army in to protect them from Loyalists at this time. " No it was the Irish army they had begged to to come in. All accounts I have ever heard of and read when they started to see the lorries arriving in the distance, no one knew if it was the Irish army, the brits or UN. Both sides at this point were exhaused and after 3 days of constant fighting weren't in the mood to start arguing about whoever came in between them.

In August 1969, you did indeed attempt to " to ethnically cleanse Nationalists " and they beat you back

McArmalite · 03-09-2009 9:42am

captainblack wrote: »

This is pure fantasy. The UK had a UN veto and wouldn't have brought in The UN under any circumstances. They'd just have killed The Irish soldiers then got on with the next job.

BTW, should that not be Captain Orange

You mean it's the American's second veto at the UN as britain does as Uncle Sam says. Did they use their veto during the Suez crisis fiasco ? Or the Cod War* with tiny Iceland or when the US invaded Grenada** ? britain is only America's bitch at the UN.

* ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars )
**(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenada_invasion )

captainblack wrote: »

The RUC/B Specials were all armed. Pistols certainly, but also carbines and Sten guns. They also had armoured cars. It's naive to believe The Stormount Government only saw them as police. Many were ex-British Army.

And they would have been on the defencive. A three to one advantage is assumed for a successful infantry assault.

The RUC - a bunch of overweight middle aged coppers armed with revolvers and a few bolt action rifles and sten guns for f**k's sake. The B Specials - a bunch of red neck bible thumping Paisleyites reservists armed with the same or even less.

Like I said previously, 20 or so IRA men armed with handguns and bolt action rifles kept they at bay down on the Lower Falls etc

If Lynch had invaded

Comments