British poppy: should the Irish commemorate people who fought for the British Empire?

rich1874

Ah it was so refreshing (actually, not in the least bit refreshing) to see the good old argument of 'what harms does it do? If you don't like it just ignore it' so early on in the tread.

What harm does it do? it inspires a culture of 'Us against them' in Great Britain, our closest and most important neighbor. Far from commemorating the individual efforts of ordinary men and women in the past, it glorifies the cuture of British Imperialism that has caused utter devastation the world over and carries it on to create support for the current (illegal)War on (of) Terror. The British government absolutely love this time of the year, a wonderful way to deflect from the illegal wars they are involved in, and focus on the individual efforts of ordinary men and women, a lot like the 'Support our Troops' jingoism created in the USA to create a proxy support for the War on Terror, to create a culture of 'if you speak out against the war, then you obviously don't support our wonderful men and women' (sounds a lot better than 'Support our War').

If the red poppy doesn't annoy you then you're not really paying attention. If you have the attitude of 'What harm does it do?' to seemingly small things like this then what will ever change? It's the same as soldiers in uniforms being paraded about before football matches and Soccer AM showing pictures of servicemen in football jerseys as they point a machine gun out of a helicopter door. It creates a desire to support WAR!

So there is no grey area with the red poppy, if you think it does no harm then you think war does no harm. If it annoys you, then war annoys you. Simple as that. (incidentally, would it annoy you if TV personalites starting wearing flowers to commemorate dead members of the KKK, or the nazis, or the IRA, or the taliban... etc....)

Tiocfaidh Armani

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah, the blind moralistic bull**** of the terrorist sympathiser.

Great comeback. You have a hard-on for imperialism you sad little man.

Dyr

getz wrote: »

isent it strange how some people feed on republican propaganda like kids on toffie

I love nice soft toffee, but I don't need any republicans (and are'nt we all republicans in this republic? if you were'nt one you'd probably feel compelled to p**s off somewhere else I imagine) to tell me what the brits were up to post 1945, trying to keep whatever was left of their empire after the Japanese had gone through it like a dose of salts

old hippy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah, the blind moralistic bull**** of the terrorist sympathiser.

Tbf, the actions of the imperialists could also be described as terrorism. I have no regard for either lot - just to clarify.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

But (circa) 25,000 civilians have died in Afghanistan, for what reason? It's utterly disgusting.

The soldiers in the British Army have all been paid by the British Government to kill many of these people. The British Government, and taxpayers, should be looking after the welfare of these ex-Army men and women if they fall on hard times, they shouldn't be made beg as it makes it look like even their own have turned their back on them.

You do know that the vast majority of the civilians killed were killed by the people you are defending right?

It isn't ISAF bombing girl's schools and killing teachers.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Not being coy, just trying to make it relevant.

There are two reasons to buy a poppy, one to remember those who fell and the other to support those who were injured. There probably aren't too many Kenya veterans running around in need of support.

And every western army plays a supporting role to the US, it's called NATO, but you already knew that didn't you.

So its mostly post 1968...Aden, NI, Iraq.

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah, the blind moralistic bull**** of the terrorist sympathiser.

terrorists = freedom fighter
who gets to decide who is right or wrong

i'm not anti British and i agree with certain wars but i hate this view that if you fight but don't belong to a nations army you are a terrorist

Tiocfaidh Armani

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You do know that the vast majority of the civilians killed were killed by the people you are defending right?

Where is BS81 coming out and supporting the Taliban?

Fratton Fred

Tiocfaidh Armani wrote: »

Great comeback. You have a hard-on for imperialism you sad little man.

Resorting to attacking the poster Mr Armani? Tut tut.

Fratton Fred

laoch na mona wrote: »

terrorists = freedom fighter
who gets to decide who is right or wrong

i'm not anti British and i agree with certain wars but i hate this view that if you fight but don't belong to a nations army you are a terrorist

When your strategy is to target civilians, then you are a terrorist organisation.

old hippy

Second attempt. Whilst I do like & appreciate the concept of the Republic, I certainly don't buy into the terrrorism and the terrorist mindset that is perpetuated by a tiny minority of die hards. And the talk of what was done to us by the brits etc. Tired, old and irrelevant.

Time to focus on the future, if we have one.

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

When your strategy is to target civilians, then you are a terrorist organisation.

like the brits and the civil rights campaign?

Fratton Fred

Nodin wrote: »

So its mostly post 1968...Aden, NI, Iraq.

In terms of those that died, mostly pre 1945.

In terms of those that get support from the RBL, I'd say mostly the two Iraq wars and Afghanistan.

old hippy

laoch na mona wrote: »

like the brits and the civil rights campaign?

And the whataboutery continues until the end of time....

:rolleyes:

SWL

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Says the man who names himself after a terrorist.

You better tell the Cubans they named a street after Bobby Sands – oh wait the Americas still think the Cubans are terrorist as well.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter – As a matter of interest what would you have done if a foreign force occupied your country sat back and let it happen or done something about it hopefully it’s not the former as I believe it reflects badly on the character

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Aah, the blind moralistic bull**** of the terrorist sympathiser.

Play the ball not the man FrattonFred.

That's not cricket!



...interesting that you couldn't negate my point so attacked me instead.

Fratton Fred

SWL wrote: »

You better tell the Cubans they named a street after Bobby Sands – oh wait the Americas still think the Cubans are terrorist as well.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter – As a matter of interest what would you have done if a foreign force occupied your country sat back and let it happen or done something about it hopefully it’s not the former as I believe it reflects badly on the character

So did the Iranians. It must be nice to have such bastians of civil liberty support your "Freedom Fighter".

And don't talk about invading powers and occupying forces ffs.

bobbysands81

SWL wrote: »

You better tell the Cubans they named a street after Bobby Sands – oh wait the Americas still think the Cubans are terrorist as well.
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter – As a matter of interest what would you have done if a foreign force occupied your country sat back and let it happen or done something about it hopefully it’s not the former as I believe it reflects badly on the character

As does Paris... and quite a few other places around the world.

It's alright to invade foreign countries with paid mercenaries but God forbid if the locals ever dare to rise up against them to protect their lands or stand up for their rights then they'll be derided as terrorists.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Play the ball not the man FrattonFred.

That's not cricket!



...interesting that you couldn't negate my point so attacked me instead.

You didn't make a point to negate to be honest.

SWL

Fratton Fred wrote: »

When your strategy is to target civilians, then you are a terrorist organisation.

Serious question did you vist NI during the war (i dont believe in calling it the troubles as it undermines the suffering people went through)

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So did the Iranians. It must be nice to have such bastians of civil liberty support your "Freedom Fighter".

And don't talk about invading powers and occupying forces ffs.

by your definition when the IRA killed british soldiers it wasn't terrorism
also by your definition loyalists were undoubtedly terrorists

SWL

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So did the Iranians. It must be nice to have such bastians of civil liberty support your "Freedom Fighter".

And don't talk about invading powers and occupying forces ffs.

Why not its a simple question what woud you have done?

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

As does Paris... and quite a few other places around the world.

It's alright to invade foreign countries with paid mercenaries but God forbid if the locals ever dare to rise up against them to protect their lands or stand up for their rights then they'll be derided as terrorists.

Deliberately Killing children isn't protecting land, it is terrorism.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You do know that the vast majority of the civilians killed were killed by the people you are defending right?

It isn't ISAF bombing girl's schools and killing teachers.

LOL!!!

Where have I stood up for the Taliban? To put it very very mildly I think they are utter vermin.

However, they have not killed anywhere near as many people as have died in the name of the British Empire.

SWL

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Deliberately Killing children isn't protecting land, it is terrorism.

So what would you call members of the BA shooting dead teenagers in cars in NI

ejmaztec

bobbysands81 wrote: »

As does Paris... and quite a few other places around the world.

It's alright to invade foreign countries with paid mercenaries but God forbid if the locals ever dare to rise up against them to protect their lands or stand up for their rights then they'll be derided as terrorists.

What's your opinion on the Taliban?

laoch na mona

SWL wrote: »

So what would you call members of the BA shooting dead teenagers in cars in NI

patriots

Fratton Fred

laoch na mona wrote: »

by your definition when the IRA killed british soldiers it wasn't terrorism
also by your definition loyalists were undoubtedly terrorists

Yes. I have never said otherwise.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

LOL!!!

Where have I stood up for the Taliban? To put it very very mildly I think they are utter vermin.

However, they have not killed anywhere near as many people as have died in the name of the British Empire.

Then why are you criticising the British Army for being in Afghanistan?

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Yes. I have never said otherwise.

just checking is all