"Operation Armageddon" in 1969 would have been mass suicide for Irish - STAY ON TOPIC

Kalashnikov_Kid

The Irish general public made a good job of burning down the British Embassy anyway.

I'll say it again - not once did the British Army hold control even in South Armagh - never mind the whole of Northern Ireland - so when there's a will there's a way - never underestimate that.

Outnumbered armies have defeated the British Army before by relatively simple tactics, such as local knowledge of the terrain.

JONJO THE MISER

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

The Irish general public made a good job of burning down the British Embassy anyway.

I'll say it again - not once did the British Army hold control even in South Armagh - never mind the whole of Northern Ireland - so when there's a will there's a way - never underestimate that.

Outnumbered armies have defeated the British Army before by relatively simple tactics, such as local knowledge of the terrain.

Well said my dear man, but you see most of the posters saying we would not of won it are Brits so of course there going to say that. The Irish were always a tough bunch and we have a great warrior mood when challenged unlike the Brits who Just pillaged and raped much of the world, lets remember they were defeated by a small amount of Americans when they had colonies there:D, oh and Jeez look how there getting trashed in Afganistan:D.

Poccington

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

oh and Jeez look how there getting trashed in Afganistan:D.

They're getting trashed in Afghanistan? Definitely not.

Witcher

dlofnep wrote: »

If we had crossed that invisible line, it would have been the moral thing to do. Maybe we would have suffered loss - but to sit back and let a foreign army murder our countrymen was the biggest sin of all.

The IRA killed too in our name lets not forget that, we arent blameless either.



Who said that?

It's the sentiment in this this thread among some posters.


Yes they would.

Debateable.


It wasn't even an issue of independance, it was a human rights issue - where innocent civilians were murdered by a nation's official armed forces.

Then it was a job for the UN, not for us to invade the North and be beat back by the British. A war doesnt solve human rights issues.



It has nothing to do with "anti-British". It has to do with objections to their foreign policy. You might try cod a lesser person with that association rhetoric, but not me

yeah..:rolleyes:



They did cross the border and fight. However, membership of the IRA was illegal - so it wasn't exactly the easiest thing to do.

I'm not talking about as part of the IRA, some posters here seem to think the people of the country were wild with anti Britishness, admittedly it was there in some form but not enough to have people marching up there and beating the British "back to the glens on antrim", people had families to keep.



They would have been already home. The British would have suffered similar losses. The international community would inevitably have to step in.

No, they would have been in Britain, saying "its a 32 county Ireland" etc doesnt make it so:). Similar losses? They had superior equipment, experienced soldiers, better mobility. We were relying on CIE for God sake.



1916 wasn't an easy chapter in our history, but it was a necessary chapter. And this would have been to, if FF had the balls to actually stand up against the British terrorists.

No, they realised we would have been beat to sh1t.:)

PK2008

The British Army was deployed to Northern Ireland to stave off a sectarian civil war, which could have destabilised the Republic of Ireland aswell and resulted in mass ethnic cleansing.

They made alot of mistakes as they got drawn into policing and counter terrorism but for the most part they did stop a much bloodier conflict from developing.

They kept it a fairly low intensity conflict with a murder rate lower than some comparitvely populated American cities.

lennymurphy

The US was a NATO ally of The UK and would have done nothing.

Under international law The Republic would have been invading a neighbouring country and The UK would have been entitled to evict them.

Individual countries at The UN might have supported The Republic's invasion, or stayed neutral, or put forward numerous ceasefire and other motions. Any that mattered would have been vetoed at the security council by The UK.

As regards the practicalities on the ground. Newry could have been taken due to the small number of Protestants, who would probably have fled prior/following The Irish army's arrival. The West bank of The Foyle could have been taken due to the small number of Protestants who'd have fled across the Foyle. Enniskillen and Straban likewise could have been taken with the Protestants involved fleeing.

The RUC and 'B'-Specials would have drawn up a defencive parameter surrounding these towns and would have been reinforced by locally based UK soldiers (3000 infantry, with all that entails).

The UK state would then have issued The Irish government with a formal and final ultimatum to withdraw all Irish soldiers from UK soil or face immediate and devastating attack.

At the same time Loyalists all across Northern Ireland would have started massive attacks upon Nationalist areas fully supported by The RUC and 'B' Specials without regard for the lives of Nationalist men, women and children - in other words actual pogroms would have taken place on a large scale.

The 'Irish' in Britain would have been placed in an extremely vulnerable position and attacks upon them by the mainland British would likely have occurred, although it is likely the mainland police would have been able to protect most of them.

Within the week 20 000 British soldiers would have been moved into position, complete with strike aircraft support. If the Irish army had not retreated south of the border, then assaults upon the four named towns would have commenced.

It is assumed that by now all Catholic civilians involved would have moved south of the border, allowing a clear killing zone in each area to develop for The UK forces to exploit. If this hadn't happened, then The Irish Army would have been guilty of war crimes for using civilians as human shields. In any case UK operations would certainly have continued. Massive air strikes would then have occurred, followed by artillery barrages, followed by full infantry assaults (with armour support). It is envisaged that The Irish would have suffered at least 50% casualties prior to unconditional surrender which would have taken place within a week of the initial air strikes.

Only Irish military targets of any significance south of the border would have been hit.

Following the expulsion of The Irish Army, the likely outcome would have been:

(i) The arrest of The Irish Government by The Irish Police/Army and their subsequent imprisonment.

(ii) The return of Catholics to Newry and the other three towns (if they wished to return).

(iii) The restoration of law and order across Northern Ireland.

(iv) Ireland would pay reparations to The UK for any damage caused.

Would the troubles have developed the same way following this? Difficult to say. A lot of Catholics would have fled the north and east of the province. But who knows?

Happy Monday

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

The Irish general public made a good job of burning down the British Embassy anyway.

I'll say it again - not once did the British Army hold control even in South Armagh - never mind the whole of Northern Ireland - so when there's a will there's a way - never underestimate that.

Outnumbered armies have defeated the British Army before by relatively simple tactics, such as local knowledge of the terrain.

And tell me this - whose head is that on that legal tender used in South Armagh - seems the Brits got in there eventually.
The laugh is this - you Republicans lost your war and still don't even realise it!

dlofnep

No, they would have been in Britain, saying "its a 32 county Ireland" etc doesnt make it s

Britain is an Island consisting of England, Scotland and Wales.

They would have been still in Ireland. Ireland is my home and their home.

Manic Moran

what weapons?? ireland isn't f**king texas, every person isn't armed with 3 sub-machine guns, shotguns etc,

And yet many Boardsies scoff at our gun nuts...

NTM

JONJO THE MISER

Happy Monday wrote: »

And tell me this - whose head is that on that legal tender used in South Armagh - seems the Brits got in there eventually.
The laugh is this - you Republicans lost your war and still don't even realise it!

No the republicans didnt loose the war, they knew they will be the majority by 2015, if you look at the north now 4 out of 6 counties has a Nationlist majority, Derry city is 80% Nationlist and Belfast is 50% Nationlist, so why would you want to carry on a war when by 2015 you will be the majority population and by 2050 will be 75% of the population if prjections are to be believed.

Kalashnikov_Kid

Happy Monday wrote: »

And tell me this - whose head is that on that legal tender used in South Armagh - seems the Brits got in there eventually.
The laugh is this - you Republicans lost your war and still don't even realise it!

I gladly realise that the war is over - don't be so quick to judge.

You're clutching at straws to have a cheap dig at me. Where are the British Army now? That's right - not here. My comment stands.

If you ever actually bothered reading about the Troubles you would know that it was a nighmare area to police - and still has its problems today. I doubt any British Army soldier rubbed his hands with glee upon being stationed there.

Witcher

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

I gladly realise that the war is over - don't be so quick to judge.

You're clutching at straws to have a cheap dig at me. Where are the British Army now? That's right - not here. My comment stands.

If you ever actually bothered reading about the Troubles you would know that it was a nighmare area to police - and still has its problems today. I doubt any British Army soldier rubbed his hands with glee upon being stationed there.

Thats some kind of victory in your eyes is it? "oh yeah lads we fuked up law an' order up der":rolleyes:

dlofnep

Blay wrote: »

"oh yeah lads we fuked up law an' order up der":rolleyes:

There never was "law and order" in the first place. Murdering civilians doesn't count as law and order I'm afraid.

Witcher

dlofnep wrote: »

There never was "law and order" in the first place. Murdering civilians doesn't count as law and order I'm afraid.

Suppose the IRA led the way with Christian charity eh? Donating a bomb to Omagh didnt go down well.

Happy Monday

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

I gladly realise that the war is over - don't be so quick to judge.

You're clutching at straws to have a cheap dig at me. Where are the British Army now? That's right - not here. My comment stands.

If you ever actually bothered reading about the Troubles you would know that it was a nighmare area to police - and still has its problems today. I doubt any British Army soldier rubbed his hands with glee upon being stationed there.

British troops are still armed and stationed in the North.
IRA have completely disbanded and surrendered all weaponry.
The North remains part of the UK.
By my scorecard they have won handsomely. :pac:

pablomakaveli

Happy Monday wrote: »

British troops are still armed and stationed in the North.
IRA have completely disbanded and surrendered all weaponry.
The North remains part of the UK.
By my scorecard they have won handsomely. :pac:

If you had any cop on you'd realise the troubles in the North had no winners.

Kalashnikov_Kid

Happy Monday wrote: »

British troops are still armed and stationed in the North.
IRA have completely disbanded and surrendered all weaponry.
The North remains part of the UK.
By my scorecard they have won handsomely. :pac:

Are armed British troops patroling the streets?
Any armed checkpoints when crossing the border?

Around 3000 people died on both sides during the course of the troubles, mostly through attritional tit-for-tat killings. To say that anyone won handsomely from that is to disprespect all people that were anyway involved.

An Fear Aniar

PK2008 wrote: »

Exactly, even if we had 10 times the amount of volunteers than British soldiers we would still have been defeated by the vastly technologically superior British military machine, which could have targeted and wiped out volunteers from the safety of the sky, sea or even British shores themselves.

Doesn't always work out like that. e.g. Soviets in Afhganistan and the present campaign...

.

Happy Monday

pablomakaveli wrote: »

If you had any cop on you'd realise the troubles in the North had no winners.

If you'd wake up and smell the coffee you'd realise that the Brits did win - kept the 6 counties - kept their army in the North - Queen remains head of state. IRA disbanded and serving in a regional power sharing body with Unionists at its head. Apart from Prince Philip throwing the ball in for the Ulster final I'm not sure how much more the Brits could have been given.

Happy Monday

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

Are armed British troops patroling the streets?
Any armed checkpoints when crossing the border?

Around 3000 people died on both sides during the course of the troubles, mostly through attritional tit-for-tat killings. To say that anyone won handsomely from that is to disprespect all people that were anyway involved.

They don't need to patrol as you have given them your weapons.
Let me say it again - they won handsomely - you lost and surrendered.
AND YOU KNOW IT!

rossie1977

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

oh and Jeez look how there getting trashed in Afganistan:D.

comparing ireland to afghanistan, oh lordy

first things first afghanistan is ten times the size of the island of ireland with six times the population

comparable climates.............
comparable landscape...........

the highest mountain in afghanistan is 25,000ft, there are numerous other mountains in the country between 17,000-22,000ft, by contrast the highest mountain on this island is 3400ft high, just a slight difference :rolleyes:

afganistan is also landlocked so no chance of attack from the sea, unlike ireland where every county could be attacked from the sea without one foreign soldier setting footing in the 26 counties

Afghanistan like switzerland is a logistical nightmare of a country to fight a war, unlike switzerland though temperatures get very high in summer, kabul averages 40C in summer

PK2008

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

Doesn't always work out like that. e.g. Soviets in Afhganistan and the present campaign...

.

Ireland could not sustain the amount of losses that the Afghans suffered in the war with the USSR, it would be catastrophic considering there was only 1.5 million males in Ireland in 1969 (only a fraction of which would be able to fight), plus we wouldnt have military aid from America like the mujahadeen had.

As regards the current campaign in Afghanistan; the Brits have only lost about 200 men compared to about 20,000 insurgents over 8 years which is an excellent record

JONJO THE MISER

Happy Monday wrote: »

British troops are still armed and stationed in the North.
IRA have completely disbanded and surrendered all weaponry.
The North remains part of the UK.
By my scorecard they have won handsomely. :pac:

Where are you from? You know if you want to live in Ireland you respect us, otherwise we dont need your kind around here.
And i think its the nationlists who have won Handsomely, they will be a majority in a few years:D, and go to any part of the world and say your Irish and they love you, say your a Brit or Pom and they dont really like you that much. I think anyway the poms go there hated, America, Canada and espically Aus oh and lets not forget Eastern Europe where the drunken yob poms go for stags, some culture. Of course the great think about Britain today is that Immigrants have replaced the olde white brit in most cities and the white Brits will be a minoroity in a few decades.

PK2008

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Where are you from? You know if you want to live in Ireland you respect us, otherwise we dont need your kind around here.
And i think its the nationlists who have won Handsomely, they will be a majority in a few years:D, and go to any part of the world and say your Irish and they love you, say your a Brit or Pom and they dont really like you that much.

"We"???

You dont speak for the rest of us mate.

"Not in my name"

Happy Monday

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Where are you from?

Cathrach na Gaillimhe. :cool:

Dr. Baltar

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Well said my dear man, but you see most of the posters saying we would not of won it are Brits so of course there going to say that. The Irish were always a tough bunch and we have a great warrior mood when challenged unlike the Brits who Just pillaged and raped much of the world, lets remember they were defeated by a small amount of Americans when they had colonies there:D, oh and Jeez look how there getting trashed in Afganistan.

On your first point: I am not British. I am 100% Irish and I would consider myself a Republican. However, that does not stop me from also being realistic. If you honestly believe that in 1969 that little old Ireland could have defeated The United Kingdom and its NATO allies and could then annex the 6 counties then you sir, are completely delusional!
Our Army, Navy and Joke of an Air Force are vastly outnumbered by NATO and were even more-so outnumbered in 1969. The idea that unarmed civilians would have marched north en masse to help the army is also ridiculous! It didn't happen in 1916, it wouldn't happen in 1969 and it won't happen in 2009 either.

Secondly, you say that we Irish people are a "tough bunch" and that this would have helped us in our war against Britain and NATO. It doesn't matter if you're as tough as Mr. T when you have Harrier Jets bombarding you!

Thirdly, A small amount of Americans? On the contrary, the Americans had wide suppport in the colonies and were also helped by the French who were based in Canada and throughout the Atlantic which prevented the Brits from re-supplying their troops in America.

And trashed in Afghanistan? I seem to remember thousands of casualties on the Taliban's side while only 200 British troops have been KIA? Also, there is now a democratically elected government in Afghanistan so I would call the Brits pretty successful.

Let me tell you something very clearly as a fellow republican. If you think that the British are weak, then you are vastly mistaken and are also showing alot of disrespect to our fore-fathers by underplaying their achievement of defeating the largest empire on earth in the 1920s.

Also, I disagree with posters here that we "lost the war". In my opinion, there were no winners. However, the greatest victory this country has seen has been the disarmament of the IRA, the peace process and the ability of our Northern Brothers to actually have a normal life now.
I do believe our nation can be re-united, but if the only way that can be achieved is through violence then I hope that we remain divided forever.
The death of one more person isn't worth that. Nothing is.

JONJO THE MISER

Happy Monday wrote: »

Cathrach na Gaillimhe. :cool:

Sure.

Dartz

lennymurphy wrote: »

...stuff...

Now then, what if the government had headed the ultimatum to withdraw? 12 hours maybe... just enough time to embarass them into action. And it would have left them quite a bit red-faced...

Everyone's assuming that the Government 'stays the course' and actually fights a full blown war. There's no way in hell anyone would be stupid enough to do that, even if we had been dumb enough to 'invade'. Throwing around the words 'invasion' and 'war' like it would've been D-day is moronic.... in a pitched battle it would've been a bloody slaughter.

Military Power is really another option in politics, the trick to using it is to use just enough power, to make the opposition do what you want them to. What was the aim of the Irish government at the time?

To ensure the safety of nationalists in Northern Ireland.

The aim was *not* to recapture the six counties for glorious freedom and 32 county Republic... hurrah!!

Jack Lynch did this by hinting not to delicately that the Irish Republic may step in to defend the rights of people, who by rights, the British Army should have been protecting... Remember that the British Army was first welcomed by nationalists.

Then of course, it all went to **** after Bloody Sunday.

A full blown invasion for the sake of annexation is a war of aggression. Escorting refugee's across the border and protecting them from sectarian attacks though... that might be politically justifiable. The aim isn't to capture territory, the aim isn't to fight, it's not a *war* war, just a military action.

You also have to remember that the other half of war is propeganda and information. We have to portray our actions as just to the world. As our troops cross the border, our leaders are on television and radio stating their exact aims... that it is not an occupying military force, that they wish only to provide transport and security to nationalist refugee's who wish to cross the border, and that they will withdraw as soon as this mission is completed, and also calmly point out that this action is only necessary because the British government has been unwilling (not unable) to protect those who it by rights should be protecting itself.

Irish troops would have crossed the border on Buses? Who says those buses have to return empty. Be true to our word and park those buses in the centres of Newry, Enniskillen, any border town and offer and offer anyone who wants a ride to the Republic a seat on those buses. Give them time to prepare.

This must be seen to be completely and transparently voluntary. No single person should be forced to board, otherwise we would lose face, and we could be portrayed as organising an enforced migration, which is illegal under international law. 2-5 hours should be enough time.

The British Army cannot mobilise instantly, it will take them time to respond. What happens next, depends on how Downing Street answers this. Worst case scenario is they just tell the Army to go for it...that will get brutal.... but the best case for our aims is if they give an ultimatum to withdraw as this will give us a finite time. I'd say that this would probably be likely, since we have clearly stated that our aim is not to occupy British territory. We agree to withdraw by the stated hour, and comply graciously with this.

Make it perfectly clear that buses have been loaded with refugees, and are not being used for military purposes after this point. If somebody decides to bomb them, they look bad, not us.

Either way, any willing refugee is driven across the border by bus. If there is not enough space, they will be escorted by the withdrawing army on foot.

Of course, if the British decide to take the violent approach, it quickly becomes a rearguard action... the aim at all times being to ensure the safety of those trying to make it across the border.

After the Irish Army has pulled out, the British garrison the towns fully, and increase their troop presence in the North to deter a similar action.

The end result is an increased British presence in Northern Ireland, and that hopefully we have embarrased them into improving the security situation, and taking better care of nationalist civilians. In (admittedly naive) theory, we would never have had to directly engage British forces to do this.

To the international community, we don't look like the evil Swastika bearing agressors, and if the British Army tries to follow us back across the border, it will just look like they're kicking a puppy that shat on their carpet.

Our aim was to embarrass the British government into action, and they've either done pretty much what we wanted them to, or completely flattened us into the ground.

It seems simple on paper. Cross the border, occupy three towns just long enough to embarrass them, then get the hell out before they can roll over and squash you... then pray they don't follow.

Unfortunately, that right there is the risk of using military power.... we'd just get bloody steamrollered if they didn't do what we expected.

And either way, it would all go to **** when Bloody Sunday happened, and we've probably added ten or twenty years worth of sectarian distrust so the peace process would take a long time to get started. But from this *very* comfortable armchair, it seems like the most plausible type of action.

I guess it's a bloody good thing some of us aren't in government if we're allowed to be this naive in public, eh?

JONJO THE MISER

Sir Baralot wrote: »

Let me tell you something very clearly as a fellow republican. If you think that the British are weak, then you are vastly mistaken

quote]

Well my dear man by 2050 The white British will be a minority in there country and there already a minority in London, Birmingham and a lot of other cities, the muslims control vast parts of Bradford and oldham and fair play to them, so yes the British are weak and it will be great to see Immigrants overtake the white British. If you ask any Immigrant here in Ireland they love Ireland but despise britain espically the polish. All of the Racist attacks in northern Ireland are at the hands of British loyalists not the Natonlists who embrace the Immigrants.

Happy Monday

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Sure.

You can be sure - from Salthill - previous posts of mine will bear this out.
Where are you from?