Was our neutrality during WWII a folly?

dttq

It’s one thing for large nations such as China throughout the centuries to declare itself isolated from world events, or industrial superpowers such as America to declare itself neutral during the first half of the 20th century. Both stances held water as both nations had large populations, large militaries, a large manufacturing base- all of which would instil some respect in potential imperial and superpower rivals to respect their position, as to rock the boat, would bring two large powers such as America and China out of their neutrality slumber. But what about smaller nations such as Ireland, with little in the way to defend it’s position of neutrality, both past and present?

Are we really to believe that by simply declaring ourselves neutral, as a small country during a war such as the Second World War, that our position would have been respected by larger and more powerful nations, giving that we were and always have been a key strategic location regarding defense. It seems to be that we would have been attacked and overrun either way by either the Germans, or the Americans/ British during WWII, had either seen us as a threat to their interests. Had the Americans/ British thought for a moment that the Germans would invade Ireland to use as a launch pad for an easier invasion into England, and hence cut off the entire Western Front, given that both Ireland and Britain would be under German occupation- then would have not have thought twice about ceasing the country until the war had ended.

Conversely, how can we really have expected that as a small country with no means of fighting back, that had Germany conquered Britain, that they would not have invaded Ireland, simply because we took a stance of neutrality- knowing full well that to not invade Ireland, would provide the Americans/ British with an outpost for attacking Germany and it’s newly conquered territories, including Britain to the east.

bodice ripper

yes

starbelgrade

It really doesn't matter what happened in WW2. We were always gonna end up being run by the Germans in the end.

eth0

We were neutral enough to prevent Hitler from declaring war on us and that's what matters. Everyone knew Hitler was a cunt so not really necessary to be 100% neutral and a few subtle digs at his regime like sending a few of his pilots to England after they crashed was the right thing to do.

namloc1980

We weren't alone during WW2, Portugal was also officially neutral but in reality it helped the Allies much like Ireland (although much of our assistance was kept secret). The only truly embarrassing episode of Ireland's "neutrality" during WW2 was Eamon De Valera and Douglas Hyde going to the German Embassy to express condolences on Hitler's death.

talla10

Ireland was too weak to declare war on Germany. We has a small poorly trained and equipped army, it was too soon for most the public and politians to be seen supporting Britain and all it would have done is get thousands more Irish men killed

latenia

It was the correct decision. We just would have had Dublin and Cork razed to the ground by bombers while cowering waiting for America to join in. Given that we were at war with Britain less than 20 years earlier and Irishmen were used disproportionately as cannon fodder against the same enemy on almost the same battlefields shortly before that I see no logical or moral reason for us to have sided with the allies. The Holocaust is often brought out as a stick to beat us with but that was never a causus belli at the time as the true horror only emerged afterwards.

AnonoBoy

Most sequels are folly to be honest whether you have a neutral opinion on them or not.

Toy Story 2 and Godfather 2 being the big exceptions of course.

getzls

latenia wrote: »

It was the correct decision. We just would have had Dublin and Cork razed to the ground by bombers .

Surely this is a cowards excuse?

Irelands shame.

sheesh

bodice ripper wrote: »

yes

no

Latchy

Either way , the Irish government and the Allies had a plan of action in place that should the republic ( or EIRE as it was referred to then by the British ) be invaded by the Nazis, the American and British forces would join up with the 500,000 strong Irish Army to try repel the invasion which probably would have involved fighting on several fronts .

Chuck Stone

We were neutral for the Allies.

Latchy

Chuck Stone wrote: »

We were neutral for the Allies.

Only because of a stubborn Eamon De Valera who infuriated Roosevelt and Churchill by this stance on neutrality ( although understandable knowing it had already took hundreds of years to get rid of the British ) and as we all know on the announcement of Hitlers death ,sent a letter of condolences to the German Embassy in Dublin.

jpm4

latenia wrote: »

It was the correct decision. We just would have had Dublin and Cork razed to the ground by bombers while cowering waiting for America to join in. Given that we were at war with Britain less than 20 years earlier and Irishmen were used disproportionately as cannon fodder against the same enemy on almost the same battlefields shortly before that I see no logical or moral reason for us to have sided with the allies. The Holocaust is often brought out as a stick to beat us with but that was never a causus belli at the time as the true horror only emerged afterwards.

Any substantial proof of that?

chughes

I'm not an apologist for DeValera but WW2 presented him with a huge dilemma. At the start of WW2 the Irish Free State was less than 20 years old and after taking so long to get Britain out of the the 26 counties part of the island of Ireland, he wasn't about to invite them back in again.

It's easy at this remove to condemn the policy of neutrality but DeValera's supporters would have pilloried him if he had agreed to the ports being used. Churchill even offered the 6 counties for the use of the ports and it's highly likely that Churchill would have reneged on this as the Unionists would have revolted. I think DeVelera knew Churchill well enough not to trust him one inch.

Many Irish people did join the British forces during WW2 so we did play some part in the war. My own father worked in the Clyde shipyards and in Harland & Wolfe repairing damages warships. The memorial gardens in Islandbridge are testament to the Irish people who fought and died in a number of conflicts including WW2.

One thing I would condemn DeVelera for, however, is offering condolences to the German ambassador on the death of Hitler. At that stage the concentration camps would have been public knowledge so to offer condolences on behalf of the Irish people is unforgivable.

Colmustard

We weren't really neutral. We were neutral on the side of the allies. We gave the British information about German uboats coming up our coast and vital weather information, which was a reason June 6th was picked for the Normandy landings. We also gave gave up our Airspace over Donegal so Aircraft could cut through to the Atlantic for the Atlantic war.

As a whole I think our neutrality was the correct policy we were only a fledgling nation. But did Dev really have to sign the book of condolences at the German embassy for Hitler..Dev forever the twaT in my eyes.

bodice ripper

sheesh wrote: »

no

I disagree!

Alias G

getzls wrote: »

Surely this is a cowards excuse?

Irelands shame.

No, it is an entirely logical stance. Why would Ireland willingly volunteer for its cities to be bombed out of recognition.

Milk & Honey

Latchy wrote: »

Either way , the Irish government and the Allies had a plan of action in place that should the republic ( or EIRE as it was referred to then by the British ) be invaded by the Nazis, the American and British forces would join up with the 500,000 strong Irish Army to try repel the invasion which probably would have involved fighting on several fronts .

The Irish Army was 43,000 strong in the war years. There were two plans drawn up. One was to repel a German invasion and the other was to repel a British invasion.

Colmustard

Milk & Honey wrote: »

The Irish Army was 43,000 strong in the war years. There were two plans drawn up. One was to repel a German invasion and the other was to repel a British invasion.

Yeah one was we surrender said in German, the other plan was we surrender said in English, they were good plans.

Wibbs

dttq wrote: »

Had the Americans/ British thought for a moment that the Germans would invade Ireland to use as a launch pad for an easier invasion into England, and hence cut off the entire Western Front,

Eh they would have thought about it and immediately dismissed. The Germans wouldn't have had a snowball in hell's hope of a successful invasion of Ireland before the UK and even then it would have been bloody difficult. The threat of that was near zero. There was a thumbnail sketch plan "operation green" IIRC, but it was underfunded, under informed and ultimately useless.

People forget that the German armed forces were based around and responsive to their army and that they were a (very good) land based force. Their air force bombers were mostly designed as artillery to support ground troops(compare this to the allies and heavy bombers designed on their own to win wars, yet they still had to send infantry mile by mile all the way to Berlin). The Stuka was literally a flying artillery piece(among other things) and a very accurate and successful one. One of the first armies to call in moving accurate air strikes as we know them today was the German. It was a tactical air force. Indeed the majority of those in the officer class in the early Luftwaffe were army officers.

Their navy outside of the U boats was largely tied up for most of the war and U boats wouldn't be worth jack shít for a seaborne invasion. They would likely have been in trouble just trying to cross the English channel even with full air superiority. They really weren't equipped for it. They'd have had to rely on their transports like JU 52's to drop paratroops, but without tanks and artillery? Game over. Trying to hit Ireland from mainland Europe? Not in the most feverish moments of Adolf blitzed on schnapps would that have been even suggested. So that right there is a non runner.

OurLadyofKnock

chughes wrote: »

I'm not an apologist for DeValera but WW2 presented him with a huge dilemma. At the start of WW2 the Irish Free State was less than 20 years old and after taking so long to get Britain out of the the 26 counties part of the island of Ireland, he wasn't about to invite them back in again.

It's easy at this remove to condemn the policy of neutrality but DeValera's supporters would have pilloried him if he had agreed to the ports being used. Churchill even offered the 6 counties for the use of the ports and it's highly likely that Churchill would have reneged on this as the Unionists would have revolted. I think DeVelera knew Churchill well enough not to trust him one inch.

Many Irish people did join the British forces during WW2 so we did play some part in the war. My own father worked in the Clyde shipyards and in Harland & Wolfe repairing damages warships. The memorial gardens in Islandbridge are testament to the Irish people who fought and died in a number of conflicts including WW2.

One thing I would condemn DeVelera for, however, is offering condolences to the German ambassador on the death of Hitler. At that stage the concentration camps would have been public knowledge so to offer condolences on behalf of the Irish people is unforgivable.

This post sums it up perfectly. Dev's Aspberger's like telegram isn't enough to condem an entire nation.

OurLadyofKnock

Colmustard wrote: »

Yeah one was we surrender said in German, the other plan was we surrender said in English, they were good plans.

Knowing Dev the defence plans would of been in Irish so nobody here would of been able to understand them.

Latchy

Milk & Honey wrote: »

The Irish Army was 43,000 strong in the war years. There were two plans drawn up. One was to repel a German invasion and the other was to repel a British invasion.

I think the plan I mentioned included co operation with the British for the German invasion scenario and yes , Dev had his son and a contingent of troops on the border to size up the situation but it doesn't take much brains to realize that the ''Brits invading the south to help repel the Germans '' scenario was the best option ...if only in the short term .

Wibbs

Colmustard wrote: »

Yeah one was we surrender said in German, the other plan was we surrender said in English, they were good plans.

Actualy not quite. One Irish commander whose name escapes who had taken part in and beaten famous generals on all sides in war games before the war, had figured the Germans would try to move up the Nore valley(again IIRC) and accordingly had a load of artillery pieces pointed at the place(apparently after the war it turned out that would have been the german plan). Plus the Irish army would have a load of men with some practice at a moving guerrilla war with the largest empire the world has ever seen so wouldn't have been pushovers. The Germans would have been on the ground, with little in the way of tanks etc, with no air support beyond the odd Condor which no doubt the Brits would have been only to happy to shoot out of the sky. Their supply lines would be intermittent or non existent. It would have been a suicide invasion.

Colmustard

Wibbs wrote: »

Actualy not quite. One Irish commander whose name escapes who had taken part in and beaten famous generals on all sides in war games before the war, had figured the Germans would try to move up the Nore valley(again IIRC) and accordingly had a load of artillery pieces pointed at the place(apparently after the war it turned out that would have been the german plan). Plus the Irish army would have a load of men with some practice at a moving guerrilla war with the largest empire the world has ever seen so wouldn't have been pushovers. The Germans would have been on the ground, with little in the way of tanks etc, with no air support beyond the odd Condor which no doubt the Brits would have been only to happy to shoot out of the sky. Their supply lines would be intermittent or non existent. It would have been a suicide invasion.

Not if they had already beaten the British. I take it they would not have invaded before they beat them. Which they didn't so us Irish should have a thank you Britain day for not capitulating to the Germans. As a bonus that day would piss off the Ra heads.

Pottler

"Yeah, them jerries were just lucky we were neutral, we'da kicked their a55es". Sounds like a barstool boast, at best. "Better off out of it", is about as good as you can really say.

OurLadyofKnock

The German plan to invade Ireland would of been disaster for them. They would of been all dead or in prisioner of war camps before they go to Carlow. Can't even see how they would of gotten the troops here after 1941.

The British invasion was a bluff by Churchill and Dev read it correctly.

There is a lot to be said for how Ireland protected its citizens in the war.

Latchy

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

There is a lot to be said for how Ireland protected its citizens in the war.

protected in the sense that Ireland wasn't invaded by anybody then but had the RAF lost the Battle of Britain and had the Normandy landings failed ,it's difficult to tell how a land war in Britain / Ireland would have panned out .

Milk & Honey

Latchy wrote: »

I think the plan I mentioned included co operation with the British for the German invasion scenario and yes , Dev had his son and a contingent of troops on the border to size up the situation but it doesn't take much brains to realize that the ''Brits invading the south to help repel the Germans '' scenario was the best option ...if only in the short term .

The Brits might have invaded even in the absence of a German invasion. In that case they were to be resisted.The First Division under Major-General MJ Costello with HQ in Cork was to attempt to repel a German invasion and the Second Division under Major-General Hugo MacNeill with HQ in Maynooth was to attempt to repel a British invasion.
Both plans were wildly optimistic given the number of troops and the equipment they were provided with.

Rigol

Were we going to send our 5th fleet and our cavalry divisions.
Nope, Dev played it perfectly.