Would you wear a poppy?

sprinkles

I don't think that the poppy is a symbol of "Britishness" despite what it may seem. For me its a simple commemoration for those who fought not just for britian, lets not forget who depended on britian to fight for them in this war. I have no particular love for Britain in any way but I have to acknowledge the sacrifice so many made. Ok they may have been making this sacrifice with the view to save their own counrty but did it not save ours?

MrNuked

sprinkles wrote:

I don't think that the poppy is a symbol of "Britishness" despite what it may seem. For me its a simple commemoration for those who fought not just for britian,

I think it specifically commemorates the soldiers in the British army who died in a particular battle in Flanders Fields, as well as the Allied dead in general.

sliabh

MrNuked wrote:

It was during the First World War wasn't it? Same difference if so.

Not it's not really. The first world war also was over when the war of independence started (in the winter of 1918/19).

MrNuked wrote:

And no I don't know enough history to be able to argue this point much further,

It shows.

MrNuked wrote:

The Irish military could not stand up to a strong foe however, and Ireland is strategically an excellent base for attacks on Britain and Europe.

Your theory lacks one thing. Where was the foe that the British army was defending us from until WWII started?

The only nation we had fought with was the UK. No one else had declared an interest in us. When the second world war started the UK was concentrating on defending itself. It's interest in keeping Germany out of Ireland then was purely selfish. Indeed Churchill had made it clear that if they felt the need was there they would have invaded themselves. There was nothing altruistic about their actions in the second world war.

MrNuked wrote:

hitler described Ireland as "an unsinkable aircraft carrier".

No that was Churchill, referring to the UK.

MrNuked

sliabh wrote:

Your theory lacks one thing. Where was the foe that the British army was defending us from until WWII started?

We had foe because we were not a target while we were part of the British empire, which was too powerful to consider. If we were reliant on native defences we would have been an easy target and therefore a foe would have been likely.

sliabh wrote:

It's interest in keeping Germany out of Ireland then was purely selfish.

That should be "Its", Mr Know-all. Does your dislike of Britain make you refuse to learn to use the language properly too? I already said their reason for protecting us was that we would have made a strong base for attacking their own country, so what is your point?

magpie

Not it's not really. The first world war also was over when the war of independence started (in the winter of 1918/19).

The 1918 General Election that brought a landslide Sinn Fein victory, which lead to the formation of Dail Eireann, that lead to the War of Independence was won on one major issue: Conscription.

There was a threat than general conscription would be introduced in Ireland in 1918 and it was this that swung the majority of the voting population in favour of independence.

Anyway, this is all straying from the point.

The question is should we honour Irishmen who fought in WW1 and WW2 or not?

A Dub in Glasgo

The red poppy goes back to 1921

By the end of the 20th century the British Legion were producing annually over 32 million 'lapel' poppies, 100,000 wreaths and 400,000 Remembrance crosses. In the days leading up to Remembrance these poppies can still be seen everywhere, even in the lapels of people normally discouraged (or even barred) from advertising their favourite charities - such as politicians, the police, and TV newsreaders.

But the poppy has had its problems. Some people who have chosen not to wear it have faced anger and abuse. It's also got involved with politics. In Northern Ireland, for example, it became regarded as a Protestant Loyalist symbol because of its connection with British patriotism. And a growing number of people have been concerned about the poppy's association with military power and the justification of war. Some people have wondered why, with a state welfare system, the services of the British Legion (slogan: 'Honour the dead, care for the living') are still needed; some say it's disgraceful that they were ever needed at all - though the many suffering people who have depended on help from the British Legion are profoundly grateful. (Governments have been grateful too: 'Governments cannot do everything. They cannot introduce the sympathetic touch of a voluntary organisation'!) But the question lingers: if the dead are said to have 'sacrificed' their lives, then why weren't the living, who came out of the same danger, being suitably honoured and cared for by the state that sent them into it? The language of Remembrance, in the light of that, looks more like propaganda than passion.

A Dub in Glasgo

sprinkles wrote:

I don't think that the poppy is a symbol of "Britishness" despite what it may seem. For me its a simple commemoration for those who fought not just for britian, lets not forget who depended on britian to fight for them in this war. I have no particular love for Britain in any way but I have to acknowledge the sacrifice so many made. Ok they may have been making this sacrifice with the view to save their own counrty but did it not save ours?

If you buy your plastic red poppy from the British Legion, it is a symbol of 'Britishness'

sliabh

MrNuked wrote:

That should be "Its", Mr Know-all. Does your dislike of Britain make you refuse to learn to use the language properly too?

Ordinarily I wouldn't bother arguing this point any further, attacking a poster for their spelling is pretty lame and shows the argument has reached it's end. But for the record, I don't have a "dislike of Britain". I have British friends, I spend a lot of time in their country. I don't wear the poppy, but I don't have a problem with anyone that chooses to do so either.

And my use of "it's" was correct. I suggest you read up on the difference between "it is" contracted to "its" and "it's" as the possessive form of the pronoun.

sprinkles

MrNuked wrote:

That should be "Its", Mr Know-all. Does your dislike of Britain make you refuse to learn to use the language properly too?

kinda petty, don't you think :rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo

magpie wrote:

The question is should we honour Irishmen who fought in WW1 and WW2 or not?

You can certainly honour them but you do not have to wear a red poppy to do that

magpie

Good job on cutting and pasting the blurb from the PPU (the white poppy people) website, who you've already plugged once. Of course they have problems with the red poppy, they are selling an alternative.

You can certainly honour them but you do not have to wear a red poppy to do that

What, we're allowed to do so, but not with any public display just because the Nordies have hijacked the whole thing (as per ****ing usual). Does that mean we're not allowed to fly the tricolour because it's used at IRA funerals?

MrNuked

sliabh wrote:

Ordinarily I wouldn't bother arguing this point any further, attacking a poster for their spelling is pretty lame and shows the argument has reached it's end. But for the record, I don't have a "dislike fo Britain". I have British friends, I spend a lot of time in their country. I don't wear the poppy, but I don't have a problem with anyone that chooses to do so either.

And my use of "it's" was correct. I suggest you read up on the difference between "it is" contracted to "its" and "it's" as the possessive form of the pronoun.

So you're saying you meant "It is interest in keeping Germany out of Ireland then was purely selfish"? Your usage was not correct.
Your "It shows" remark abiout my knowledge of history was pointless, irritating and displays a degree of intellectual arrogance. I pointed out your poor grammar to help you overcome this obnoxious and delusional feeling of superiority you have. I bet you were even complimented when I called you "Mr Know-all", yes?

landser

There are many reasons not to wear the poppies, all of wbich overlap and intertwine.

An irish nationalist may not wear one for no other fact that it is British. Likewise an anti-imperialist or pacifist (even British ones) may not wear one as to do so may imply a support for war. I wear one for a simple reason: to remember the poor bastards from Siberia to Sligo and from the Arctic sea to Cape Horn, who were slaughtered in their tens of thousands every day and to thank f**k that I wasn't one of them. WW1 had nothing to do with freedom or lofty ideals, it was a 19th century royalist war fought with 20th century weaponry and 18th century tactics.

magpie

This is an emotive subject and could descend into downright abuse so let's try to keep this civil and rational.

Indeed

A Dub in Glasgo

magpie wrote:

Good job on cutting and pasting the blurb from the PPU (the white poppy people) website, who you've already plugged once. Of course they have problems with the red poppy, they are selling an alternative.



What, we're allowed to do so, but not with any public display just because the Nordies have hijacked the whole thing (as per ****ing usual). Does that mean we're not allowed to fly the tricolour because it's used at IRA funerals?

Read what you will into my post....

You do not need to wear a British Legion poppy to honour the Irish dead

doh.ie

magpie wrote:

Does it? I thought it showed support for Sinn Fein. Unfortunately there is no national day of commemoration in The Republic of Ireland for 1916 or the War of Independence, otherwise I would be happy to show my support. When a charity or government agency not connected with Sinn Fein sells Easter Lillies and the money goes towards charitable causes (for instance cross-cultural understanding in the North) I will gladly buy and wear one.

Agreed. Would never consider wearing a lily for the reasons above.

As for the poppy, I would have no problem wearing this, and hope the numbers here expressing similar sentiments means we're finally heading towards getting over the anti-Britishness associated with it and other issues. It does appear that the younger generation doesn't have half as much baggage as our parents and grandparents had in this regard, which is great to see.

For me, the poppy symbolises the remembering of those from the UK and Ireland who died during the two World Wars and its connotations are not inherently British.

I am impressed by the white poppy campaign mentioned earlier, which has aims I'd support even more fully than the red one.

sliabh

I guess it comes down to a few things:

• Do you feel the poppy is a "British" symbol
• Do you feel that it is appropriate to mark the sacrifice if Irish men and women in the service of another country (and I know in WWI it technically was the same country) through the poppy.

Personally I think the answer to the first one is yes. But the second is a personal choice. It's certainly not something that should be forced on someone one way or the other.

If anything I think it was become a little devalued in the UK as people are being compelled to wear them. The general public have mixed feelings about poppies, from apathetic to supportive based on what you see in the streets. But god help a media figure that doesn't wear one. John Snow (the channel 4 news presenter) is about the only person on UK TV that I can think of that doesn't wear one at this time of year.

doh.ie

Remember last year when Jonathon Ross didn't wear one on Film 2003 (by accident, IIRC) and they had to superimpose one on, which was obvious every time he moved more than a few inches.

Was surprised to see that it had well extended into BBC1 children's programming last Saturday morning, though the presenters had tried to make it cooler by pinning 'em on their T-shirt sleeves...

I agree, though, if you're a UK presenter, it's absolutely expected that you'll wear one, and the removal of the choice makes more of a statement than actually wearing it in the first place. Snow is about the only exception, or are there others on Ch4? Must keep an eye on the soaps this week, see if there's any visible sign among characters there as well.

A Dub in Glasgo

I thought UTV had introduced a ban

Swarfboy

I am Irish and nationalist but nobody will stop me wearing for a couple of days a year a flower of my choice to honour my Grandfather who went to war in WW1 and survived.
Neither will anyone ever stop me from celebrating the Easter Rising everyyear and flying my tricolour that my other grandfather raised as he fought for his country... He also was one of the few that never admitted that the Civil war was over.. a staunch man who watched his own parents being killed by British soldiers... we on this side of the world live in a free society where all facets of our past should be acknowledged and appreciated for what it is .......all our history.!

magpie

we on this side of the world live in a free society where all facets of our past should be acknowledged and appreciated for what it is .......all our history.!

Amen.

If anything I think it was become a little devalued in the UK as people are being compelled to wear them.

I agree that this is also wrong, and reeks a little of the handing out of white feathers and beating up of conchies.

Sleepy

MrNuked wrote:

So you're saying you meant "It is interest in keeping Germany out of Ireland then was purely selfish"? Your usage was not correct.
Your "It shows" remark abiout my knowledge of history was pointless, irritating and displays a degree of intellectual arrogance. I pointed out your poor grammar to help you overcome this obnoxious and delusional feeling of superiority you have. I bet you were even complimented when I called you "Mr Know-all", yes?

Sliabh's grammar here was technically correct if poorly constructed. Where the word 'It' represents a noun it adopts it's grammatical rules. In this particular case, when 'It' represented 'Brittan', it adopts the apostrophe used to indicate possession.

Correct usage of which can be displayed by: Sliabh's grammar.

Incorrect usage of which can be displayed by: MrNukeds grammar.

[/pedantry]


Personally I wouldn't wear a poppy though I'd certainly drop a few euro into a collection bucket for veterans of either world war. In large part I wouldn't wear one just to avoid the narrow minded gobsheens who would insist on reeling off provo dogma at me for wearing one. I prefer to avoid them if at all possible.

MrNuked

FFS. There is no apostrophe iin the word "its" when indicating possession. That's the sort of thing you learn when you're about six. Is there anybody else over six in this ****ing thing?

Look:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_apost.html

"Apostrophes should not be used with possessive pronouns because possessive pronouns already show possession -- they don't need an apostrophe. His, her, its, my, yours, ours are all possessive pronouns."

Sleepy wrote:

Sliabh's grammar here was technically correct if poorly constructed. Where the word 'It' represents a noun it adopts it's grammatical rules. In this particular case, when 'It' represented 'Brittan', it adopts the apostrophe used to indicate possession.

Correct usage of which can be displayed by: Sliabh's grammar.

Incorrect usage of which can be displayed by: MrNukeds grammar.

[/pedantry]


Personally I wouldn't wear a poppy though I'd certainly drop a few euro into a collection bucket for veterans of either world war. In large part I wouldn't wear one just to avoid the narrow minded gobsheens who would insist on reeling off provo dogma at me for wearing one. I prefer to avoid them if at all possible.

Hagar

My favourite war veteran tale is the one where Tony Blair is walking through Knightbridge when he sees a legless beggar lying on the footpath with a sign across his chest that says "Spare a few coins for a Falklands' veteran". Tony dropped a quid in his hat and the man replied "Gracias Senor".

It's all in the perspective.

chill

We should wear the poppy for what is meant to signify - simple acknowledgement of the sacrifice of soldiers fighting for freedom.

Wear it and get over this stupid and sad brit-hating crap that infects a thankfully diminishing section our population.

A Dub in Glasgo

Wear it if you want to wear it. Do not push the guilt trip thing like they do over here if you do not want to wear a red poppy. There are plenty of people who do not like what the red poppy represents.

Hairy Homer

magpie wrote:

With the obvious exception that Ireland is the only country whose citizens fought for the Allies in WW1 and WW2 that deems it socially unacceptable to commemorate their War Dead on November 11, Armistice Day.

I never said don't commemorate it or them. I'm arguing about how we should remember and interpret it today. And wearing the poppy is not, in my opinion, the way for us to do it.

To wear the poppy is implicitly to endorse the British Army’s side of the fight, not just in two world wars but before and since. It is wholly inappropriate, in my opinion, for Irish people to be expected to endorse retrospectively the actions of an army of a government over which we have no influence, whether or not some of our own compatriots fought in that army.

Considerably more Irish people served in the British Army in WW1 (for exactly the same reasons as people from Scotland, Wales and (gasp) England)

In actual fact, and I’ll get you the figures, the rate of recruitment in Ireland even before conscription was introduced, was much lower than in England, Scotland or Wales. Why do you think that was?

And how can you be sure that what motivated English, Scottish and Welsh lads to join up? Or Irish lads for that matter? Now that really would be an interesting topic of debate but as the last Irish veteran of World War One died a few years ago, it would be hard to answer.

And does it matter why?

Of course it matters why. It's absolutely fundamental to any understanding of today's world that we ask: why did hundreds of thousands of young men volunteer to go off to fight for their king and country, especially in the case of those for whom, as one memorably put it: 'I never saw the king and it wasn't my bloody country'

Does it? I thought it showed support for Sinn Fein.

Interesting parallel. The money collected from the sales of those emblems during the troubles went to 'prisoners' dependants' In other words, by commemorating the fallen of a previous war, you were helping in the welfare of the victims of a subsequent one. And your public wearing of the emblem signified your support of the actions of that organisation both in the past and currently.

The poppy is no different. Yes the Royal British Legion was founded shortly after the first world war, when there was a pressing need for a charity for the thousands/millions of needy dependants and yes, it took as its emblem one of the few pieces of fauna that survived the carnage in Flanders but its purpose and meaning is ongoing and changing.

Far from ‘writing out of history’ the fact that many Irishmen fought in the British Army wearing the poppy is an endorsement of one view of history. That the British Army was and is a force for good, that you agree with the engagements it fights and the action it takes and has taken. That’s fine for a British person, although I know there are many there who do not agree with everything their army does and do not take pride in many of its engagements of the past. (eg colonising half of Africa and India while dealing very severely with any natives who objected)

To buy one is to contribute to the welfare of military victims of war. Can't really argue with that and I don't.

To wear one is to signify your support for that army in all its wars, including current ones. There is no escape from that fact. Check it out for yourself.

Unfortunately there is no national day of commemoration in The Republic of Ireland for 1916 or the War of Independence,

Actually there used to be. There was always a military parade on Easter Monday to commemorate 1916. I remember being brought to one as a kid. But with the upsurge of violence in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s on, it was considered to be too politically risque to continue it.

Thanks for crediting me with the ability to form my own opinions. Incidentally, is it my imagination or did Gerry Adams' grandfather not fight in the First World War?

He could well have done. John Hume's father did and Danny Morrison's father or grandfather also fought in one.

I have a question for you all: If a green poppy were made available that commemorated Irishmen who fought in all wars, on all sides, and the money went to a good charity would you buy and wear one? If so maybe that's something we on the boards community can look towards instigating for next Armistice Day.

I am 100 per cent in favour of people re-examining the facts of history and not being afraid to confront them. I just feel that wearing a poppy implies support for one particular interpretation of history, and not one that I would share.

Victor

magpie wrote:

while avoiding a wider, possibly beneficial suggestion

Fair enough, I just don't think *all* servicemen deserve honouring.

magpie wrote:

You have a talent for pedantry and picking holes in an argument, ..... that is highly commendable. Big up yourself.

magpie

It is wholly inappropriate, in my opinion, for Irish people to be expected to endorse retrospectively the actions of an army of a government over which we have no influence

Nobody's expecting you to do anything. This debate is about whether those who wish to should be allowed to do so without facing ridicule/threats/approbrium for doing so.

In actual fact, and I’ll get you the figures, the rate of recruitment in Ireland even before conscription was introduced,

Conscription was never introduced in Ireland

why did hundreds of thousands of young men volunteer to go off to fight for their king and country

In the case of the Volunteers, as I said before, 200,000 of them signed up in the belief that Home Rule would be granted at the end of the War. As such, does this not qualify them as worth remembering as nationalist martyrs as much as Pearse, Connolly et al? Of course we'll never know if they were right or wrong as the minority left behind took matters into their own hands.

commemorating the fallen of a previous war, you were helping in the welfare of the victims of a subsequent one

Which wars would these be then? Does this include Free State Troops as they were the official army?

I am 100 per cent in favour of people re-examining the facts of history and not being afraid to confront them. I just feel that wearing a poppy implies support for one particular interpretation of history, and not one that I would share.

Fair enough, which was presumably the whole point of this thread. I note however that the wording of the poll is not exactly balanced, for instance there is no "Anyone who doesn't wear a poppy should be stripped of their passport for dishonouring those who gave their lives in 2 world wars".

I find it reassuring that, nonetheless, over 50% of people voted in favour of wearing one / being allowed to wear one.

There was always a military parade on Easter Monday to commemorate 1916. I remember being brought to one as a kid. But with the upsurge of violence in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s on, it was considered to be too politically risque to continue it.

Yes, I'm aware of that. The big 1966 parade and all that. I didn't say "We've never had one", I said "We don't have one".

Hairy Homer

magpie wrote:

Nobody's expecting you to do anything. This debate is about whether those who wish to should be allowed to do so without facing ridicule/threats/approbrium for doing so.

Who said anything about threats? I said 'would you wear one?' as an Irish person, and went on to make a case for why I think it is inappropriate for Irish people to do so. I never said you should be beaten up for wearing one.

Though I think Mary McAleese is quite right not to wear one. Even when attending a ceremony of remebrance with the queen. Fair play to her

Conscription was never introduced in Ireland

It wasn't introduced in Britain until 1916. My point was that recruitment figures from Ireland until that point were very much lower than in Britain itself. There are some figures in a book I have at home written by a well known British historian. I must remember to dig them out.

In the case of the Volunteers, as I said before, 200,000 of them signed up in the belief that Home Rule would be granted at the end of the War. As such, does this not qualify them as worth remembering as nationalist martyrs as much as Pearse, Connolly et al? Of course we'll never know if they were right or wrong as the minority left behind took matters into their own hands.

You're getting to the nub of it now. The Irish relationship with the British Army is a subtle and complex one. Wearing the same emblem to commemorate not just those men but also those who put down (or tried to put down) rebellions in such countries as Palestine, Cyprus, Aden, India, Iraq (several times) Kenya, Malaya, Oman, Falklands etc etc not to mention our own country is wholly inappropriate, in my view.