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

Gingko

old hippy wrote: »

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

:rolleyes:

Hey old hippy, once again I agree with your general vibe! But and there is a but! Leave aside Irish history (conflict in north only ended 13/14 years ago) for a moment, the british and american forces are still unacceptable to many people across the globe. They are there to keep the same elite empowered? This world is certainly not a better place for them! They continue to exploit and divide lands and cultures.

You say your a hippy, surely you agree or at least see my point? republicans, freedom fighters or terrorists, whatever people see them as? They were born out of injustice, oppression and yes imperialism? If imperialism did not exist there would be no reaction? No doubt Mr fratton will disagree. The british and US forces work for the elite, anglo american bankers and corporations etc. These are the real enemy of the people everywhere!

We do have a future and it is renewable energy, wind, wave and solar power. Permaculture for communities and real democratic sustainable governance. Hopefully one day civilisation will reach enlightenment? Hopefully?

Fratton Fred

SWL wrote: »

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

Possibly criminals, but that should be for a court to decide. That isn't a completely black and white example.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

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

What say you about this then?

According to the White House, America's 'War on Terrorism' makes "no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor terrorists. We are working to disrupt the flow of resources from states to terrorists while simultaneously end state sponsorship of terrorism."

Given that in her recent report, Nuala O'Loan found that the British security forces have supported, harboured and resourced terrorists* and that George Bush has said that "if you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist", should we now open the debate on whether we are going to allow Shannon to be used as a base for air strikes on London by the US Air Force?


first quote taken from -
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/nationalsecurity/index.html (two thirds of the way down the page)
* For examples see pages 133-138 of O'Loan's Report
second quote taken from near the start of
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060406-3.html

Fratton Fred

Gingko wrote: »

Hey old hippy, once again I agree with your general vibe! But and there is a but! Leave aside Irish history (conflict in north only ended 13/14 years ago) for a moment, the british and american forces are still unacceptable to many people across the globe. They are there to keep the same elite empowered? This world is certainly not a better place for them! They continue to exploit and divide lands and cultures.

You say your a hippy, surely you agree or at least see my point? republicans, freedom fighters or terrorists, whatever people see them as? They were born out of injustice, oppression and yes imperialism? If imperialism did not exist there would be no reaction? No doubt Mr fratton will disagree. The british and US forces work for the elite, anglo american bankers and corporations etc. These are the real enemy of the people everywhere!

We do have a future and it is renewable energy, wind, wave and solar power. Permaculture for communities and real democratic sustainable governance. Hopefully one day civilisation will reach enlightenment? Hopefully?

Did you know there is a conspiracy theories forum?

Tiocfaidh Armani

Fratton Fred wrote: »

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

When did that happen? Oh yeah, I know....

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/other/1976/murray76.htm

The IRA on the other hand did not DELIBERATELY murder children. It happened accidently in all conflicts, but the link above shows MURDER!

Gingko

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Possibly criminals, but that should be for a court to decide. That isn't a completely black and white example.

Thats a disgusting comment Fratton, and i doubt very much your a happy individual. Good luck!

getz

No (I'm British/not Irish)

Bambi wrote: »

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

not all the republicans are bad,i remember the one who reached down a manhole to defuse a bomb,so it would not go off and distrupt a football match between his favourite team derry city and benfica,what was his name ?dident he stand in ireland for president as far as fighting the japanese in the last war ,if you know your history [and you dont] the british were fighting the germany,italy and japan in three different continents at the same time,at one stage britain stood alone, on one side britain and the commonwealth,france the USA,the USSR china,[italy changed sides] the japanese on their own turf were a different kettle of fish,it took two atomic bombs to beat them

Gingko

getz wrote: »

not all the republicans are bad,i remember the one who reached down a manhole to defuse a bomb,so it would not go off and distrupt a football match between his favourite team derry city and benfica,what was his name ?dident he stand in ireland for president as far as fighting the japanese in the last war ,if you know your history [and you dont] the british were fighting the germany,italy and japan in three different continents at the same time,at one stage britain stood alone, on one side britain and the commonwealth,france the USA,the USSR china,[italy changed sides] the japanese on their own turf were a different kettle of fish,it took two atomic bombs to beat them

The ultimate act of Terrorism the world has ever witnessed!

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

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

So, according to your own definition, the British Army are a terrorist organisation.

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/victims/memorials/static/monuments/628.html

Carol Ann Kelly (aged 12) who was shot dead by a plastic bullet, fired by a British soldier, as she walked home from a local shop

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

What say you about this then?

According to the White House, America's 'War on Terrorism' makes "no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor terrorists. We are working to disrupt the flow of resources from states to terrorists while simultaneously end state sponsorship of terrorism."

Given that in her recent report, Nuala O'Loan found that the British security forces have supported, harboured and resourced terrorists* and that George Bush has said that "if you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist", should we now open the debate on whether we are going to allow Shannon to be used as a base for air strikes on London by the US Air Force?


first quote taken from -
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/nationalsecurity/index.html (two thirds of the way down the page)
* For examples see pages 133-138 of O'Loan's Report
second quote taken from near the start of
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060406-3.html

I'd say you were clutching at straws.

getz

No (I'm British/not Irish)

Gingko wrote: »

Hey old hippy, once again I agree with your general vibe! But and there is a but! Leave aside Irish history (conflict in north only ended 13/14 years ago) for a moment, the british and american forces are still unacceptable to many people across the globe. They are there to keep the same elite empowered? This world is certainly not a better place for them! They continue to exploit and divide lands and cultures.

You say your a hippy, surely you agree or at least see my point? republicans, freedom fighters or terrorists, whatever people see them as? They were born out of injustice, oppression and yes imperialism? If imperialism did not exist there would be no reaction? No doubt Mr fratton will disagree. The british and US forces work for the elite, anglo american bankers and corporations etc. These are the real enemy of the people everywhere!

We do have a future and it is renewable energy, wind, wave and solar power. Permaculture for communities and real democratic sustainable governance. Hopefully one day civilisation will reach enlightenment? Hopefully?

dident i meet you at woodstock in 69 ?you were high then

Fratton Fred

Gingko wrote: »

Thats a disgusting comment Fratton, and i doubt very much your a happy individual. Good luck!

Have you lost the plot?

ejmaztec

The extremes on the Poppy Thread get more fucking ridiculous with each passing year.

Fratton Fred

Tiocfaidh Armani wrote: »

When did that happen? Oh yeah, I know....

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/other/1976/murray76.htm

The IRA on the other hand did not DELIBERATELY murder children. It happened accidently in all conflicts, but the link above shows MURDER!

The BA's strategy in NI did not include targetting civilians. The IRA did.

When you plant a bomb in a shopping centre, it is terrorism.

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Have you lost the plot?

and you have lost the argument

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The BA's strategy in NI did not include targetting civilians. The IRA did.

When you plant a bomb in a shopping centre, it is terrorism.

i think you are thinking of a different organisation one which i agree they are terrorists

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The BA's strategy in NI did not include targetting civilians. The IRA did.

When you plant a bomb in a shopping centre, it is terrorism.

...and what about all the British bombs fired into civilian areas that kill children, are they ok cos they're "good bombs"?

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

So, according to your own definition, the British Army are a terrorist organisation.

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/victims/memorials/static/monuments/628.html

Carol Ann Kelly (aged 12) who was shot dead by a plastic bullet, fired by a British soldier, as she walked home from a local shop

If those soldiers were under orders to go out and shoot a 12 year old girl then yes, but I'm guessing they weren't.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'd say you were clutching at straws.

But it's not me saying that, it's Nuala O'Loan (who was an arm of the British establishment at the time) and Britain's great ally, the Americans.

Britain is, according to the American definition, a terrorist state.

ejmaztec

bobbysands81 wrote: »

...and what about all the British bombs fired into civilian areas that kill children, are they ok cos they're "good bombs"?

They're probably American bombs.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

...and what about all the British bombs fired into civilian areas that kill children, are they ok cos they're "good bombs"?

Aah, the mythical bombs in civilian areas.

You know they aren't acceptable Bob, and you also know they aren't terrorism.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

But it's not me saying that, it's Nuala O'Loan (who was an arm of the British establishment at the time) and Britain's great ally, the Americans.

Britain is, according to the American definition, a terrorist state.

Did either of them actually say it, or are you putting two and two together and getting five

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If those soldiers were under orders to go out and shoot a 12 year old girl then yes, but I'm guessing they weren't.

Surely if they weren't 'under orders' then it's murder and the soldier(s) in question should be tried as such?

Otherwise it's quite obvious that she was intentionally targetted.

laoch na mona

Fratton Fred wrote: »

they aren't terrorism.

wait when the british kill civilians its not terrorism

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Surely if they weren't 'under orders' then it's murder and the soldier(s) in question should be tried as such?

Otherwise it's quite obvious that she was intentionally targetted.

Possibly. Again it sounds like a court should decide that.

R P McMurphy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us37Bq4huXs

LordSutch

No (I'm Irish)

Pete Digger wrote: »

But it still doesn't address to me the fundamental disconnect. The money raised - this side of the water - may benefit solely Irish people, but the symbolism (and remembrance) is solely a glorification of fighting for another country's cause.

Nobody should be censured or abused for supporting a Poppy Appeal

My preference would still be for symbols and commemorations inclusive of all those Irish people who fought.

I'll start with the 'Gloification of fighting for another country's cause' comment. If you were in the know, you would be aware that the poppy is nothing to do with the glorification of . . . I don't know why you have come to this conclusion? because the poppy is a solemn symbol for the fallen, it is to remeber the dead, their relatives, and in our case (The Irish ones) the deep sadness of loss, and he futility of war! There is "no Glorification" as you put it, and if you were to attend a Remembrance service you would know this basic fact! I will finish by saying, it doesnt really matter what people think either way, my Irish family is steeped in the tradition of remembering on the 11th of the 11th, many Irish families are, and many more are not, each to their own, but it is a massive step in the right direction that I can now wear my poppy on the streets of Dublin without abuse, twenty years ago it would have been a brave man who would have worn one walking the streets . . . . .

PS; This thread is slowly getting derailed, away from the basic topic.

Dyr

getz wrote: »

of you know your history [and you dont] the british were fighting the germany,italy and japan in three different continents at the same time,at one stage britain stood alone

You left out Finland, Romania and Bulgaria.

bobbysands81

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Possibly. Again it sounds like a court should decide that.

...and why do you think the British terrorists didn't face a court?

getz

No (I'm British/not Irish)

Bambi wrote: »

You left out Finland, Romania and Bulgaria.

most countries in europe were involved,with the exception of swedon switzerland and ireland,if you want to know just where the irish president is on november 13 rememberance sunday,you may spot him at the ecumenical service in st patricks cathedral dublin ,