Easter Monday 2009: a fateful anniversary

Snickers Man

This Easter Monday (April 13th) is the anniversary of one of the watershed moments in the history of the British Empire.

It was on that date 90 years ago that British troops under the command of Brigadier Reginald Dyer opened fire on a crowd gathered in the centre of Amritsar in the Punjab and slaughtered several hundred people. The exact figure is disputed, but even conservative British estimates put the figure at over 300 dead and around a thousand injured.

There are interesting parallels to be drawn between that incident and the situation in Ireland at the same time.

Both India and Ireland had been agitating for Home Rule. Both had bitter folk memories of mistreatment at the hands of the empire. The famine was still in the living memory of some in Ireland. The Indian Mutiny and the savage British reaction to it had only occured 60 years perviously in India.

In both countries, there had been general support for the British Empire in the First World War. Despite agitating for Home Rule, many in India had supported the war and thousands of Indians had served in the British Army, most of them in a particularly bitter campaign in what was then called Mesopotamia.

In Ireland, the Nationalist leaders had urged Irishmen to enlist in the Army and many thousands had done so. They had high hopes that their sacrifice would be rewarded by a sympathetic response to their reasonable demands for Home Rule.

During the war, there had been not unnaturally some contact between some more militant nationalists in both India

and Ireland with the German empire, followed later, in the case of India at least, by contact with the new Bolshevik government in Russia. A common alliance with "our gallant allies in Europe"perhaps)

In both cases, the British preferred to see these developments as evidence of a worldwide conspiracy (an "axis of evil" perhaps?) against the benign rule of the British Empire. In 1918 it had sent a Judge called Rowlatt to India to investigate the situation there. His response was to beef up anti-dissident legislation which gave the authorities remarkable powers of coercion against any daring to challenge their authority.


In India, the end of the war saw an upsurge of agitation for Home Rule. One of the places where nationalist sentiment was strongly expressed was the Punjab state in northern India. Punjab in general, and the city of Amritsar in particular was and is the centre of the Sikh population. This is a religion separate from the Muslim and Hindu religions which account for most of the Indian population. The Sikhs also have a long history of military service in
both the British and Indian armies in which they were disproportionately represented. Many Punjabis had fought for the British, now they were demanding their own independence, or more accurately a greater say in the running of their own country.

Putting repressive legislation such as the Rowlatt Acts on to the statute books is only part of the story; how it is put into effect depends largely on the willingness and determination of those officials and agents on the ground to enforce such regulations.

In Amritsar in early 1919, those in power were a particularly hard-headed bunch determined not to allow upstart natives to damage the integrity or prestige of the British Empire. The Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab was an Irishman, the Tipperary born Sir Michael Francis O'Dwyer who had an impeccable Catholic education at a school which later amalgamated with the renowned Clongowes Wood college.

O'Dwyer's military commander was a ruthless thug named Reginald Dyer who would brook no tolerance of dissent. Together these two men contributed much to the situation which brought the disaster about.

The immediate situation was caused by the arrest of two Indian nationalist leaders who had come to speak in Amritsar. A crowd gathered to protet on April 10 and to demand their release. They were fired upon and several people killed. Riots broke out in the city resulting in the destruction of some European property and the deaths of several white people, including a woman dragged off her bicycle and stabbed to death.

Dyer responded brutally to these outrages, imposing martial law and subjugating the population to all manner of restrictions to let them know who was boss. No Indian, not even residents, were allowed to walk along the street on which the woman cyclist had been killed; they had to crawl on all fours. All Indians had to "salaam" British officers, in effect salute them as they would their commanders. Failure to do so would result in arrest. (These last two tidbits come not from Indian propaganda but from the official British government report into the ensuing massacre)

By 13 April, martial law including a ban on all public meetings was in force. Despite this, several thousand Sikhs had gathered in Amritsar for a religious festival, many of them coming from outlying towns and villages. Given the scanty communications of the time, many would not have been aware that a ban on gatherings and meetings was in force. Those that did probably thought. "What the hell. What are they going to do about it anyway? It's not as if we are going to start a violent uprising?"

Whatever their true sentiments, they were not going to be given an option either way. As the meeting gathered, in a garden largely enclosed by the surrounding suburbia, Brigadier Dyer moved his troops into place. The narrowness of the streets prevented him from moving in an armoured car equipped with a heavy machine gun. Nevertheless, he had a squad of largely Indian soldiers armed with rifles and plentiful ammunition. Armed with his martial law ban against gatherings of more than four or five people he opened up without warning. The ensuing carnage has become part of Indian folklore.

The Lieutenant Governor O'Dwyer sent Dyer a cable saying that he "approved Dyer's actions". A British government inquiry would later censure Dyer's actions as "un-British" but a subsequent newspaper campaign and public collection would elevate him to the status of hero and demand that his actions were necessary, Just and in the interest of civilisation as we knew it.

What lessons are there for today:

1) The big powers in the world, whatever their protestations about freedom, civilisation and equal treatment for all are ruthless in the exercise of their power. Anybody who dissents from the status quo that favours them is a terrorist, barbarian or medieval potentate that must be put down regardless of the cost.

2) Debts of honour are paid from the purse of self interest. It didn't matter how many nationalist Irish volunteers were slaughtered at Gallipoli or how many Sikh nationalists were killed or died of thirst or malnutrition in Iraq. The interests of the Empire were paramount and if these bloody natives thought that their service was anything but its own reward then they were so sadly deluded that they deserved nothing more than the bayonet.

3) Arguments about democracy for all, civil rights, reasonable entitlements and gratitude for past favours are to be relegated to secondary status to that of the interests of the major powers. No doubt there were many in Britain, and France and America who might have thought "If it weren't for us, you bloody Indians would all be speaking German now!"

4) If you accept the trite pro-Empire arguments of a previous generation, you will be called upon to believe the updated contemporary version. The war against terror today is no different to the Great War for Civilisation (go on,
check the campaign medals for WWI if you don't believe me) of 1914-1918.


Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

REMEMBER AMRITSAR!!!

McArmalite

"If it weren't for us, you bloody Indians would all be speaking German now!" Very good Snickers, very good.
O'Dwyer was a Catholic unionist from Tipperary, and was later assassinated by an Indian Sikh patriot. It should be pointed out that many men from Ireland were invovled in these terrible atrocities. Nowadays it's supposed to be enlightened and trendy to push the argument of glorifying the praticipation of men from Ireland in these massacres under cliches like " embracing all traditions on the island of Ireland " and “to highlight the proud tradition of the Irish soldier, whatever uniform he wears or wore.” Since a few Irishmen were in the Waffen SS in WW2, surely they deserved to be honoured as much as those in the british army ?

A fine example of this Gombeenism is the so called " Mayo Peace Park " http://www.mayomemorialpeacepark.org/. Surely if it was indeed a true peace memorial, they would be putting up a memorial to the victims of these atrocities perpetrated by men from Ireland in foreign army's in many parts of the world, including Ireland.

Snickers Man

I'm mildly surprised that:

1) given the juxtaposition of dates (Easter Rising for those of a lunar disposition/Amritsar for those who prefer Gregorian anniversaries);

2) the Irish connection__not only was O'Dwyer Irish but Dyer himself went to school in Cork although I have not been able to discover any stronger Irish connection;

3) the clear parallels between Ireland and India at the time, both countries supporting Britain in the war while still demanding greater autonomy from the mother country

4) the preference among some media commentators for remembering every WWI or WWII British Army engagement and pointing out the Irish contribution (just wait until next year when the 70th Anniversaries of Irish born VC winners and Battle of Britain pilots are marked with a host of indignant "Why oh why does nobody here know about this?" columns)

....that none of our national papers seem to have mentioned this event at its anniversary.

Oh well. Maybe we don't want to be reminded about that sort of thing.

Shutuplaura

Snickers Man wrote: »

4) the preference among some media commentators for remembering every WWI or WWII British Army engagement and pointing out the Irish contribution (just wait until next year when the 70th Anniversaries of Irish born VC winners and Battle of Britain pilots are marked with a host of indignant "Why oh why does nobody here know about this?" columns)

....that none of our national papers seem to have mentioned this event at its anniversary.

This is sadly true.

There is a bloke in Castlebar operating whats called the Mayo Peace Park which seeks to honour Irish soldiers who fought for the empires of Britain and America. Now honouring these guys is fine if its your thing but calling it a peace park is a load of auld nonsense. Very dissapointingly I believe he actually recieved lotto funding for this endevour. Its all well and good to get misty eyed about the fine Irish regiments of the British Army but these regiments were responsible for some horrific actions in remote parts of the empire (the repression of the so caleld Indian Mutiny of 1857 is a major case in point). Its sad that people are pushing Irelands close connection to the British Empire as something to be proud of. The British Empire was a terribly rascist institution that certainly wasn't benevolent, as much as its apologists like to claim.

One thing that really annoys me is the allied propaganda about the German atrocities in Belgium in the 1914-18 war. Well at the same time Britain escalated the war against Germany in Africa, in the face of German colonial attempts to adopt a neutral stance for the duration. The result was hundreds of thousands of dead africans, victims of British policy. Yet because they are far away, and black, unlike the white christian Belgians, this is ignored. War of liberation my ar se.

I guess its the same thing with this. Dyer was stamping down hard or opposition to the Raj. The same public who honestly believed the Germans were brutes condoned his actions, because the victims were poor drak skinned and far away.

That famous gurrier Dan Breen was ahead of his time in his opposition to the Empire in all its forms, meeting with, and aparently offering his services to Indian Nationalists in the early 1920's.

I guess its an accident of history really. There is close links between Ireladn and the UK that shouldn't be ignored and a great many of these links were very positive. Its a pity that celebrating this is becoming synonamous with adopting a little englander view of world history.

Shutuplaura

McArmalite wrote: »

A fine example of this Gombeenism is the so called " Mayo Peace Park " http://www.mayomemorialpeacepark.org/. Surely if it was indeed a true peace memorial, they would be putting up a memorial to the victims of these atrocities perpetrated by men from Ireland in foreign army's in many parts of the world, including Ireland.

Snap! I mentioned it in my reply but I completely missed your earlier reference to this abomination. The biggest loosers in the empire were dark skinned and poor. Therefore they didn't matter to the British (and Irish) establishment running their empire. This yahoo has proved that they still don't matter to some people in our country and is a complete shame on the nation.

What bugs me even more is that the bugger aparently honours Irish people killed serving in the US military in Vietnam. Millions killed for nothing. If the US did it to a western nation their agression would have been looked on like that of the Germans. Of course the dead are only slopes so it obviously doesn't matter.

Hopefully the people of Mayo will take it upon themselves to vandalise the thing.

Denerick

McArmalite wrote: »

A fine example of this Gombeenism is the so called " Mayo Peace Park " http://www.mayomemorialpeacepark.org/. Surely if it was indeed a true peace memorial, they would be putting up a memorial to the victims of these atrocities perpetrated by men from Ireland in foreign army's in many parts of the world, including Ireland.

One of the great disgraces of the Free State/De Valera Republic is the way in which they treated the Irish fallen of WWI and other conflicts. These were Irishmen who for one reason or another fell to their death in a land far far away. Don't tarnish their memories with your ill thought out adolescent Republicanism.

Shutuplaura

Denerick wrote: »

....fallen.....

The Fallen. That always makes me laugh, like it was some sort of accident. They were not fallen, they were killed or put plainly, the dead. How some squaddie blown to bits in a muddy hole came to be considered 'fallen' is covered in Peter Fussell's book The Great War and its Modern Memory. In it he writes about how writers attempted to mitigate its horror and try impart some sort of mythical greatness to the industrialised slaughter through a subtle change in the vocabulary of warfare. The enemy became a 'foe', a horse a 'stead', the dead have become the 'fallen' and of course Germans became 'huns'.

Any besides this McArm is quite right. Please explain how a park commemorating Irishmen killed in Imperial armies can be considered a 'peace' park? How were those Irish who allowed themselves be sent to Vietnam in the 1960's advancing the cause of peace? Seems like a very legitimate question to me.

Morlar

Shutuplaura wrote: »

Please explain how a park commemorating Irishmen killed in Imperial armies can be considered a 'peace' park? How were those Irish who allowed themselves be sent to Vietnam in the 1960's advancing the cause of peace? Seems like a very legitimate question to me.

"to commemorate all those from the County, who served and died in wars in the cause of world peace" Which would include WWI & WWII btw.

I dont see the problem with a garden of rememberance to Irish men who fought and died in wars around the globe & were never honoured for their sacrifice - going down in history being counted in casualty/fatality figures as 'UK' = xxxxxx. They deserve to be recognised for their sacrifice. Whether or not you agree with calling them the 'Fallen' as opposed to calling them 'the blown to bits' is irrelevant & distasteful in my view.

Whether you agree with all of the wars they fought in is also irrelevant you dont get to cherry pick history and current trends should not detract from the fact that they were Irish people who fought & died for what was in effect their country at that time. In my view its perfectly reasonable to have a memorial to recognise and honour their sacrifices.

Denerick

The garden is not for peace but for reflection, maybe if more people didn't rush to condemnation then we wouldn't find whole countries getting wrapped up in pointless wars.

There is a long history of the great war being benigned in this country, despite the loss of 30,000 Irishmen in that conflict. Look through your extended family tree. Its quite possible you have a relative who died in it.

These were young men caught up in conflicts for one reason or another. They were sent to die by countries waging a pointless war. They indeed are the fallen, your pathetic attempts to talk about things you cannot possibly understand is embaressing...

Shutuplaura

Denerick wrote: »

The garden is not for peace but for reflection, maybe if more people didn't rush to condemnation then we wouldn't find whole countries getting wrapped up in pointless wars.

There is a long history of the great war being benigned in this country, despite the loss of 30,000 Irishmen in that conflict. Look through your extended family tree. Its quite possible you have a relative who died in it.

These were young men caught up in conflicts for one reason or another. They were sent to die by countries waging a pointless war. They indeed are the fallen, your pathetic attempts to talk about things you cannot possibly understand is embaressing...

Sorry, why can't I possibly understand?

Two granduncles fought in the war, one was killed in 1917, one lived to get killed in the civil war. I think both were seriously misguided for joining up, one unfortunately paid the ultimate price. I don't dishonour his memory by calling him 'fallen'. He was killed in a terrible conflict on an otherwise quiet day on the western front and buried at a casulty clearing station a few miles behind the lines. Not a nice way to go and not a death I'd describe as 'fallen'.

What did his death do for world peace? He sacrificed his life for sure but what did he sacrifice his life for? An empire that fought on in Russia, Iraq, Ireland, India and Turkey after 1918? A flawed peace plan which caused the grievences that led to the second world war with an even greater loss of life? Perhaps the poor bugger sacrificed himself for poor catholic Belgium, a country renowned for the brutality of its own empire in Africa. Reflecting on this rather than 'the fallen' might stop a war. This hallowed rememberance nonsense is actually getting in the way of serious reflection on how to avoid future conflict. That to me is a proper way to honour my relatives memory.

This country might not have built actual monuments to those killed in a war started and finished before this state even existed. What it did do though is ensure that Ireish people never had to face fighting in a second world war, or face being bombed by the luftwaffe. Dev, who you criticise looked after the living Irish people not the dead who can't be helped now anyway. His attitude and th Irish distaste for militarism has been a very real monument to the Irish dead of WW1. And unlike a cenopath which as an empty grave serves no purpose, this legacy has saved lives. I like to see this as a living memorial to the Irish people killed in the war.

Shutuplaura

Morlar wrote: »

Whether or not you agree with calling them the 'Fallen' as opposed to calling them 'the blown to bits' is irrelevant & distasteful in my view.

No I have to disagree. Do you think a soldier during the war would call a dead comerade 'the fallen'? No, he'd say johnny has gone west, bought it, been gassed, machine gunned or blown to bits. All descriptive terms. Identity tag were dog tags or in the British army 'dead meat tickets'. I think its highly relevant what people call the dead of these wars. I perfer to be honest and I find it strange that you find this honesty, that soldiers at the time shared distasteful.

Morlar wrote: »

.....They deserve to be recognised for their sacrifice......In my view its perfectly reasonable to have a memorial to recognise and honour their sacrifices.

Again I'd have to disagree. Why do they deserve to be recognised for their sacrifices? Sacrifice by itself is only noble if the cause is worthy of rememberance. I question the nobility of the cause. This peace park doesn't do that. In fact it works on the premise that all sacrifice is worth of rememberance. I'd dispute that. The British Army included many Irish people who perhaps thought that they were serving their country, fair enough, thats their business. The British Army was a colonial police force expert in stamping out with violence movements for national self determination, and was commiting atrocities in India even at the time it was supposedly fighting for the independance of small (white) countries in Europe. The allies clearly were not fighting for peace because they fought continuously after 1918 all over the world, stamping out rebellions and establishing new outposts of empire in Iraq, Syria etc. Commemorating a lie is perpetualting a lie.

And that is specifially dealing with WW1 and WW2. As for comemorating the Mayomen who fought and kileld for Uncle Sam in the terrible indo-chinese wars of the 1960's and 1970's - well, I don't see how ignoring Ireland's anti-colonial past and focusing on Irelands unfortunate role in imperial adventures encourages peace in this case at all. Perhaps a realistic condemnation of wars of agression and all who partake in them might help though.

Denerick

Nobody remembers the war dead in the hopes of world peace, though that is what we would all like to see happen.We remember the war dead, the fallen, because they were young men who died in a most terrible manner. We mourn them for their youth and we pity them for being manipulated by those in authority.

Stop being such a big fecking child about it.

mrtaylor1981

Denerick wrote: »

your pathetic attempts to talk about things you cannot possibly understand is embaressing...

And this coming from a fella who talks about - Good Place To Masturbate In Trinity
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59309215#post59309215

Those embarressing... erections
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59906022#post59906022

And that he's a Closet Trekkie

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59329656#post59329656

:D:D

Denerick

mrtaylor1981 wrote: »

And this coming from a fella who talks about - Good Place To Masturbate In Trinity
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59309215#post59309215

Those embarressing... erections
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59906022#post59906022

And that he's a Closet Trekkie

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59329656#post59329656

:D:D

Stalker freak.

McArmalite

Denerick wrote: »

One of the great disgraces of the Free State/De Valera Republic is the way in which they treated the Irish fallen of WWI and other conflicts. These were Irishmen who for one reason or another fell to their death in a land far far away. Don't tarnish their memories with your ill thought out adolescent Republicanism.

Ah yes, Walrusgrumble's ' friend ' Denerick .Well it says it all about this poster when he takes issue with me about WW1 even though I did not specifically mention it, while in the OP Snickers mentioned it twice " It didn't matter how many nationalist Irish volunteers were slaughtered at Gallipoli....The war against terror today is no different to the Great War for Civilisation " but he gave him a thanks for the post :rolleyes: Doubtless though the Walrus will be soon on giving him a thank you and him likewise as the two of them can hardly make 3 or 4 posts without congratulating each other !!!!

There is a large memorial park in Islandbridge Dublin to WW1. Dev and FF contributed to it. But ofcourse that wouldn't be enough for him, he'll have to come back with some silly, childish irrevelant reply regardless :rolleyes:

McArmalite

mrtaylor1981 wrote: »

And this coming from a fella who talks about - Good Place To Masturbate In Trinity
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59309215#post59309215

Those embarressing... erections
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59906022#post59906022

And that he's a Closet Trekkie

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=59329656#post59329656

:D:D

:rolleyes::rolleyes: And this is the fella who is always telling people to grow up, stop being so childish etc Even on this thread alone

Don't tarnish their memories with your ill thought out adolescent Republicanism.......They indeed are the fallen, your pathetic attempts to talk about things you cannot possibly understand is embaressing......Stop being such a big fecking child about it.

Doubtless now he'll reply with a typical devastating comment such as " Your a big hairy banana, my bicycle is bigger than yours, Santa says I have more toys than you " etc, etc.

Denerick

Mc Armalite, your a twat. Its being well stated many times before but you really really are a fecking twat.

Denerick

McArmalite wrote: »

Ah yes, Walrusgrumble's ' friend ' Denerick .Well it says it all about this poster when he takes issue with me about WW1 even though I did not specifically mention it, while in the OP Snickers mentioned it twice " It didn't matter how many nationalist Irish volunteers were slaughtered at Gallipoli....The war against terror today is no different to the Great War for Civilisation " but he gave him a thanks for the post :rolleyes: Doubtless though the Walrus will be soon on giving him a thank you and him likewise as the two of them can hardly make 3 or 4 posts without congratulating each other !!!!

There is a large memorial park in Islandbridge Dublin to WW1. Dev and FF contributed to it. But ofcourse that wouldn't be enough for him, he'll have to come back with some silly, childish irrevelant reply regardless :rolleyes:

That memorial took years and years and years of rambling to get through. Literally years of pointless Republican debates and callous disregard for those who died before 'the real ireland' emerged in 1919.

Your such a fecking twat, don't even know why I bother replying to you.

P.S- Have you found out who Michael Brennan is yet? Scrap that - have you ever read a book?

Shutuplaura

Denerick wrote: »

Nobody remembers the war dead in the hopes of world peace, though that is what we would all like to see happen.We remember the war dead, the fallen, because they were young men who died in a most terrible manner. We mourn them for their youth and we pity them for being manipulated by those in authority.

Stop being such a big fecking child about it.

You are the only one calling people names.

About the park, its pushing an agenda, implying they died to secure world peace when that chauvonistic view of world affairs is an hopefully always should be an athema to Irish people. Thats my view anyway. I suispect its the view of the organisers otherwise it would be called a rememberance park.

Denerick

Shutuplaura wrote: »

You are the only one calling people names.

About the park, its pushing an agenda, implying they died to secure world peace when that chauvonistic view of world affairs is an hopefully always should be an athema to Irish people. Thats my view anyway. I suispect its the view of the organisers otherwise it would be called a rememberance park.

That is insane. And I wouldn't call people names if they weren't so A) Heartless, Retarded like McArmalite or C) Trolling stalker freaks like that poster back a bit.

How on earth is the park pushing an agenda, chauvinistic or otherwise? The only chauvinism going on here is the pent up nonsense that you call your brain activity. No-one is saying they died for world peace, the only one claiming that is you because you are so small minded you are incapable of thinking outside some rubbish a radical historian told you in a Z list book.

Its called a remembrance park. Only the most shrill and irrational analysis of that name could associate it with chauvinism and all the other BS that is spewing out of your mouth like a slurry tank.

Fratton Fred

Shutuplaura wrote: »

About the park, its pushing an agenda, implying they died to secure world peace when that chauvonistic view of world affairs is an hopefully always should be an athema to Irish people. Thats my view anyway. I suispect its the view of the organisers otherwise it would be called a rememberance park.

What makes the Irish so special? war should be an abhorrant to everyone, not just the Irish. Surely there is no better way to highlight the futility of war than by remembering all those young men and women who died? sweeping their deaths under the rug just hides the brutality doesn't it?

Shutuplaura

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What makes the Irish so special? war should be an abhorrant to everyone, not just the Irish. Surely there is no better way to highlight the futility of war than by remembering all those young men and women who died? sweeping their deaths under the rug just hides the brutality doesn't it?

Well we did go through our own decolonization struggle in recent times. I don't think it makes us different from the entire planet, but does make us different from the worlds great 20th century imperial countries. We have close ties to one of them for sure, but that doesn't make us the same.

As for the garden, does it make it plain that they died in vain? I don't think it does. It puts the names of locals who died in Vietnam or WW1 alongside Irish soldiers who died in peacekeeping operations with the UN, therefore trying to imply some sort of similarity of mission that doesn't actually exist. Like it or not, thats how it will be seen by a great many people. If its intention is otherwise, its a deeply flawed gesture.

And one last thing, I don't believe Irelands involvement in either war should be swept under a rug. I loved the Collins Barracks exhibition on the Irish in Uniform that had quite a bit on the Irish in the British Army. I don't think the language of rememberance adopted in the UK and the commonwealth is appropriate - not for any anti-British reasons. The war means different things to Irish people.

Shutuplaura

Denerick wrote: »

That is insane. And I wouldn't call people names if they weren't so A) Heartless, Retarded like McArmalite or C) Trolling stalker freaks like that poster back a bit......

Sorry, which one am I? Do tell.

Fratton Fred

Shutuplaura wrote: »

Well we did go through our own decolonization struggle in recent times. I don't think it makes us different from the entire planet, but does make us different from the worlds great 20th century imperial countries. We have close ties to one of them for sure, but that doesn't make us the same.

As for the garden, does it make it plain that they died in vain? I don't think it does. It puts the names of locals who died in Vietnam or WW1 alongside Irish soldiers who died in peacekeeping operations with the UN, therefore trying to imply some sort of similarity of mission that doesn't actually exist. Like it or not, thats how it will be seen by a great many people. If its intention is otherwise, its a deeply flawed gesture.

And one last thing, I don't believe Irelands involvement in either war should be swept under a rug. I loved the Collins Barracks exhibition on the Irish in Uniform that had quite a bit on the Irish in the British Army. I don't think the language of rememberance adopted in the UK and the commonwealth is appropriate - not for any anti-British reasons. The war means different things to Irish people.

did they die in vain? I doubt anyone would argue that those that gave their lives in WWII died in vain, they died stopping the greatest evil the world has seen. When the US marched in to Vietnam they thought they were doing the right thing, as did the Australians and the french before them.

I fail to see how war could mean anything different to an Irish person than to anyone else, the Irish participated in a great many of them, just under a different flag. OK Ireland had a war for independance but in the grand scheme of things, it wasn't that big. Algeria's war of Independance cost 1.5million lives.

I don't like terms like "Maturity as a Nation" and all that, it all sounds very patronising, but I do think Ireland should face up to the fact that it was part of the UK, not a colony and as such played a part in the imperial wars it now pretends to find so abhorrant. Do you really think the people of India facing the rifles of the Irish soldiers really cared that there was the odd revolution in Ireland and Irish catholics were not allowed to teach children? to them, the Irish were the rottweilers of the British empire, not the victims.

McArmalite

Shutuplaura wrote: »

You are the only one calling people names.

About the park, its pushing an agenda, implying they died to secure world peace when that chauvonistic view of world affairs is an hopefully always should be an athema to Irish people. Thats my view anyway. I suispect its the view of the organisers otherwise it would be called a rememberance park.

The so called Mayo 'Peace' Park is pushing an agenda, it'd implying that it is quite ok for Irishmen to go off and join in perpetrating war crimes and endless bloodshed in foreign armys against people in small countries the other side of the world as somehow being a 'normal' thing for young Irishmen to do.

Let it be pointed out that those Irishmen who have died in the recent conflicts in the middle east where only doing it out of a warped sense of adventure, in the interests of naked greed of the west. They certainly don't deserve to be labeled as peacekeepers in any form.

BossArky

Denerick wrote: »

Mc Armalite, your a twat. Its being well stated many times before but you really really are a fecking twat.

Denerick wrote: »

I wouldn't call people names if they weren't so A) Heartless, Retarded like McArmalite or C) Trolling stalker freaks like that poster back a bit.

Permanent H&H ban.

You have been warned with a shorter ban before.

jonsnow

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What makes the Irish so special? war should be an abhorrant to everyone, not just the Irish. S

It is abhorrent to us.Thats why the Irish nation state hasn,t been involved in a war since 1923.

jonsnow

Fratton Fred wrote: »

. When the US marched in to Vietnam they thought they were doing the right thing, as did the Australians and the french before them.

German soldiers invading the USSR thought they were doing the right thing


[/quote]I fail to see how war could mean anything different to an Irish person than to anyone else, the Irish participated in a great many of them, just under a different flag. OK Ireland had a war for independance but in the grand scheme of things, it wasn't that big. Algeria's war of Independance cost 1.5million lives.[/quote]

Yeah well we,ve never participated in one under our own flag when we had more of a choice about the matter.How are the wars in afghanistan and Iraq going.Have you won your war on terror yet!!
Algeria is a much bigger country with a much bigger population and it went on for much longer.Like with like please.



[/quote] "I do think Ireland should face up to the fact that it was part of the UK, not a colony and as such played a part in the imperial wars it now pretends to find so abhorrant.[/quote]
Ireland was a colony of the UK for a very long time.Eventually it was granted a limited franchise.The decisions to partake in Imperial wars were never undertaken by the Irish.If we so relished our place in the UK why do you think we continously rebelled against the established order.



[/quote] , [I]the Irish were the rottweilers of the British empire, not the victims.[/quote]
Victims often become abusers themselves.I think you,ll find that Irish troops were not so much rottweilers as cannonfodder.
When my great Grandfather was one of only two survivors in his landing craft out of 32 at gallipoli because of abysmal british generalship.He wasn,t there for the greater glory of the british empire.He was their because he was destitute and poor.And when the british burned down his native city cork a few years later he refused to accept the pension to which he was entitled

Shutuplaura

Hi Fred.

I'm not sure what you are getting at exactly. To try address your points however.

Algeria was part of Metropolitan France, sending deputies to Paris etc, but it waged a de-colonization struggle just the same. Exact same thing with Ireland. The country was intimately involved in the British Empire once but chose to go down a different route.

Sure they lost a lot more people and the French waged a terrible war against the insurgancy - but that is of course besides the point. The significance of any event to an individual is in how they relate it to their own previous experiences, not on some comparative exercise. People in Cork didn't relate their experience to the Armenian Genocide of a few years but to their own lives. In that context, going from a peaceful society to even a guerrilla war can be very formative and traumatic.

As to whether the Indians at Amritsar cared about the Irish struggle for independance - well I'm confident few really appreciated the difference between the Irish and the rest of Britain anyway. It was of no relevance to them but that is besides the point. We as a country opted out of Imperial Policing after 1922. Actually, we opted out before that. Irish recruitemtn fell continuously from mid 1916 onwards and there was a spirited anti-conscription campaign in 1918.

You may not fully understand it but it does point to the fact that Irish people at the time did start to see war in a different light. A burning issue in Lisbon referendum was if there was going to be any defence obligations, Almost 80 years later.

I don't see it as a lack of maturity not wanting to celebrate Irish involvement in the British Army. I perhaps would agree if someone were refusing to acknowledge the dept of Irish involvement in the 18th, 19th and early 20th century B.A., but you can do that without a park or garden, without either celebration of condemnation. I could equally say however that it points to a lack of maturity on the part of the British that they cannot accpet that their empire wasn't run for the benifit of the native peoples and that the vast majority of its subjects would probably have been much better off if the British hadn't shown up. Thats a different matter for a different thread.

The peace park is part of an ongoing attempt by a minority to push an alternative point of view. Its equating peacekeeping with Imperial Policing and the adventures of GB trying to maintain a balance of power on mainland Europe. Its honouring genuine Irish soldiers alongside British soldiers of Irish birth. Should Ireland honour the Irish members of the French Foreign Legion? Not really, thats for the French Government to do. If a family wants to put that on a headstone in an Irish graveyard fair enough and noone should stop them.

Fratton Fred

jonsnow wrote: »

It is abhorrent to us.Thats why the Irish nation state hasn,t been involved in a war since 1923.

except Afghanistan of course.

that does kind of go against the IRA's claims to be waging a war as well. From what I could see, a lot of Irish people openly supported that one.

Fratton Fred

Shutuplaura wrote: »

I'm not sure what you are getting at exactly. To try address your points however.

The peace park is part of an ongoing attempt by a minority to push an alternative point of view. Its equating peacekeeping with Imperial Policing and the adventures of GB trying to maintain a balance of power on mainland Europe. Its honouring genuine Irish soldiers alongside British soldiers of Irish birth. Should Ireland honour the Irish members of the French Foreign Legion? Not really, thats for the French Government to do. If a family wants to put that on a headstone in an Irish graveyard fair enough and noone should stop them.

What i am getting at, is that there should be some sort of memorial to war, to demonstrate that it is nasty and people die. I heard a quote the other day i liked "War is ****, anyone who thinks otherwise is a bloody fool". that came from a serving officer. I don't see any better way of demonstrating that than displaying the names of those that died.

Where do you draw the line on who to remember? those that died under the Irish flag on UN missions? it is ok becuase that was UN sanctioned. What then, about Korea. That was UN sanctioned as was Bosnia. What about Irish soldiers serving in the British army in Afghanistan, that is UN sanctioned and supported by Ireland. should those guys be remembered even though they died fighting in a different army? it is, after all, a cause supported by Ireland.

If you pick and choose, who decides? who has the right to retrospectively say "that war was bad, that one was good"?

Here's an example, what about Bobby Sands? he was a member of a terrorist organisation that killed and maimed innocent people. Should he have a memorial? Should he be remembered the way he is, after all, most people in Ireland did not support the IRA's war, didn't they?