Alan Shatter doing his job!!!

EURATS · 07-05-2013 9:47am #1

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/wwii-irish-troops-set-for-pardons-29248191.html

Nice to see Shatter making good use of his time.

What's next? Apologise for the War of Independence?

wolfpawnat · 07-05-2013 9:53am

EURATS wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/wwii-irish-troops-set-for-pardons-29248191.html

Nice to see Shatter making good use of his time.

What's next? Apologise for the War of Independence?

Wonder had we been invaded (as was planned) and we lost loads of civilians due to the lack of soldiers, would we be as forgiving? They abandoned us in a war, I see them as deserters personally.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 9:56am

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Wonder had we been invaded (as was planned) and we lost loads of civilians due to the lack of soldiers, would we be as forgiving? They abandoned us in a war, I see them as deserters personally.

100%. If they absconded from the British or US army they would also have been treated as such.

Banjo String · 07-05-2013 9:58am

Seeing as how 'the blue shirts' fought with the Nazis as allies alongside Franco, it would be hypocritical for shatter to say anything else tbh.

VinLieger · 07-05-2013 10:00am

I agree they needed to be punished as they disobeyed orders but the discrimination they suffered as far as not being able to get employment and being generally shunned was in my eyes slightly disgusting.
Maybe they shouldnt get a pardon but an apology for how they were treated is deffinitely in order.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 07-05-2013 10:01am

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Wonder had we been invaded (as was planned) and we lost loads of civilians due to the lack of soldiers, would we be as forgiving? They abandoned us in a war, I see them as deserters personally.

EURATS wrote: »

100%. If they absconded from the British or US army they would also have been treated as such.

Em... regardless of what banner they fought under, weren't tehy still preventing an invasion of Ireland? I mean, you can't abscond "into" a war...

wolfpawnat · 07-05-2013 10:07am

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Em... regardless of what banner they fought under, weren't tehy still preventing an invasion of Ireland? I mean, you can't abscond "into" a war...

They were in the Irish Army, who at the time were a neutral force. They abandoned their posts and countrymen to fight in a war we had yet to be involved in. There were plans by both Allies and the Axis powers to invade us and our ports as they were seen as a way to attack Britain from two sides. They left us in a weaker position against these invasions, had we been invaded, we stood some chance (albeit only a small one) of defending ourselves, they left us, meaning we were weaker. We are only lucky it did not get that far!

EURATS · 07-05-2013 10:11am

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Em... regardless of what banner they fought under, weren't tehy still preventing an invasion of Ireland? I mean, you can't abscond "into" a war...

They went AWOL from the army they enlisted in. Simple as. And there were consequences.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 10:18am

EURATS wrote: »

They went AWOL from the army they enlisted in. Simple as. And there were consequences.

...and those consequences went way beyond what would have been an appropriate punishment for their crime.

jhegarty · 07-05-2013 10:21am

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and those consequences went way beyond what would have been an appropriate punishment for their crime.

Isn't a quick firing squad the normal punishment for going AWOL at a time of war ?

Ash.J.Williams · 07-05-2013 10:23am

They left a corrupt bananna pretend country to go and fight in a war that was in our best interest..those men were heroes

EURATS · 07-05-2013 10:26am

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and those consequences went way beyond what would have been an appropriate punishment for their crime.

NO

EURATS · 07-05-2013 10:28am

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

They left a corrupt bananna pretend country

That's what it is now. Correct.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 10:29am

jhegarty wrote: »

Isn't a quick firing squad the normal punishment for going AWOL at a time of war ?

We weren't at war.

EURATS wrote: »

NO

Well reasoned. Do you feel that permanently destroying people's lives is such an appropriate punishment for desertion that it should be written into the code of military justice of every army?

Iwasfrozen · 07-05-2013 10:30am

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

They left a corrupt bananna pretend country to go and fight in a war that was in our best interest..those men were heroes

Our best interest was fighting for Nazi Germany? I've read some stupid posts in my time but this takes the biscuit...

keeponhurling · 07-05-2013 10:33am

Completely inappropriate to pardon these men IMO

Does this mean Irish soldiers can go AWOL whenever they like to get involved in foreign wars?
I really don't understand this guy Shatter sometimes

keeponhurling · 07-05-2013 10:37am

oscarBravo wrote: »

We weren't at war.

Well reasoned. Do you feel that permanently destroying people's lives is such an appropriate punishment for desertion that it should be written into the code of military justice of every army?

The article says that the deserters were "barred from state jobs, refused military pensions and faced with widespread discrimination."

If you go AWOL and get dismissed from the Army, do you think they should get a nice government job for their efforts? Surely they wouldn't have the neck to ask for a military? Both of these punishments sound reasonable.

So what is the discrimination that they suffered that is unjust?

Ash.J.Williams · 07-05-2013 10:45am

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Our best interest was fighting for Nazi Germany? I've read some stupid posts in my time but this takes the biscuit...

not sure which article you read

A pardon is due to be issued to thousands of Irish soldiers who joined the British Army to fight Nazi Germany

EURATS · 07-05-2013 10:52am

oscarBravo wrote: »

We weren't at war.

Well reasoned. Do you feel that permanently destroying people's lives is such an appropriate punishment for desertion that it should be written into the code of military justice of every army?

I do of course. The Irish government has NO qualms about ruining people's lives.

Chips Lovell · 07-05-2013 10:54am

If those who deserted hadn't been treated so harshly on their return, this may not still be an issue today. The state wasn't content to reprimand them, but made sure that it become as hard as possible to live here for the rest of their lives.

Indeed, it seems that the punishment meted out was less for desertion and more for joining the British army:

Containing each soldier’s last recorded address, date of birth, declared occupation prior to enlistment in the Defence Forces, and date of dismissal, it was circulated to all government departments and state-run bodies, to ensure that nobody who quit in such circumstances ever secured a state job. Given the climate of the time, it made most unemployable.

Soldiers who deserted but did not join the British army were treated differently: some were not even arrested, and their names were left off the list.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 11:02am

keeponhurling wrote: »

So what is the discrimination that they suffered that is unjust?

They were denied social welfare, and had their names widely circulated to discourage employers from giving them work. Their children grew up more or less permanently hungry.

If you feel this is an appropriate punishment for desertion, we don't have enough common ground for an intelligent conversation on the issue, frankly.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 11:05am

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Indeed, it seems that the punishment meted out was less for desertion and more for joining the British army:

It's hard to avoid the conclusion that the same reasoning prevails today, at least in some quarters. Which is pretty pathetic, considering even Sinn Féin appear to have supported the move to pardon them.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 11:14am

oscarBravo wrote: »

They were denied social welfare, and had their names widely circulated to discourage employers from giving them work. Their children grew up more or less permanently hungry.

If you feel this is an appropriate punishment for desertion, we don't have enough common ground for an intelligent conversation on the issue, frankly.

Maybe they should have asked the queen(US president..whatever) they swore allegiance to for some social welfare?

aman23 · 07-05-2013 11:18am

What about the bravery of Irish soldiers who fought with Nazi Germany? Alan, or is your amnesty one sided.

Chips Lovell · 07-05-2013 11:21am

EURATS wrote: »

Maybe they should have asked the queen(US president..whatever) they swore allegiance to for some social welfare?

Actually, efforts were made to take some of their British entitlements:

Widders also argues that the 1941 Children Act, which sent thousands of youngsters to industrial schools exposed by the Ryan report in recent years, was used with particular vindictiveness against the children of deserters from the Defence Forces. “The Irish government lobbied the British government to have the payment of family allowances, to which married Irish soldiers in the British Army were entitled, paid directly to the Irish State [for children held in care]. In effect, this helped finance incarceration,” he writes.

LordSutch · 07-05-2013 12:34pm

About bloody time those brave Irish men were pardoned (& honoured) for fighting against the Nazi's. Ireland must have been the only country on the planet with a twisted logic that dictated that the WWII heroes who fought the Nazi's were to be disgraced (instead of honoured).

What a sick government we had back then, and well done to Alan Shatter.

Cody Pomeray · 07-05-2013 12:44pm

LordSutch wrote: »

About bloody time those brave Irish men were pardoned (& honoured) for fighting against the Nazi's. Ireland must have been the only country on the planet with a twisted logic that dictated that the WWII heroes who fought the Nazi's were to be disgraced (instead of honoured).

The logic wasn't that it was a disgrace to fight the Nazis.

If it were, the Government would simply have punished everyone living in Ireland who had fought on the British side during WWII.

Clearly, this policy was aimed at those who deserted the Irish army when that army and this jurisdiction was extremely vulnerable to foreign invasion.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 12:59pm

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Clearly, this policy was aimed at those who deserted the Irish army when that army and this jurisdiction was extremely vulnerable to foreign invasion.

Exactly.

Nodin · 07-05-2013 1:01pm

EURATS wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/wwii-irish-troops-set-for-pardons-29248191.html

Nice to see Shatter making good use of his time.

What's next? Apologise for the War of Independence?

I'm not seeing the linkage.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 1:07pm

Nodin wrote: »

I'm not seeing the linkage.

Not sure why. Google "WWII Irish troops set for pardons"

VinLieger · 07-05-2013 1:13pm

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The logic wasn't that it was a disgrace to fight the Nazis.

If it were, the Government would simply have punished everyone living in Ireland who had fought on the British side during WWII.

Clearly, this policy was aimed at those who deserted the Irish army when that army and this jurisdiction was extremely vulnerable to foreign invasion.

Except it wasnt, those who went awol and didnt join the british army were left off the list circulated telling people not to employ them.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 1:14pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Except it wasnt, those who went awol and didnt join the british army were left off the list circulated telling people not to employ them.

U have the list?

Cody Pomeray · 07-05-2013 1:21pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Except it wasnt, those who went awol and didnt join the british army were left off the list circulated telling people not to employ them.

How many went AWOL and didn't emigrate or join other forces?

Nodin · 07-05-2013 1:24pm

EURATS wrote: »

Not sure why. Google "WWII Irish troops set for pardons"

Very amusing. I'm not seeing the linkage between the pardons and "What's next? Apologise for the War of Independence?

EURATS · 07-05-2013 1:27pm

Nodin wrote: »

Very amusing. I'm not seeing the linkage between the pardons and "What's next? Apologise for the War of Independence?

So? The point was they deserted the IDF and deserved their punishment.

karma_ · 07-05-2013 1:57pm

LordSutch wrote: »

About bloody time those brave Irish men were pardoned (& honoured) for fighting against the Nazi's. Ireland must have been the only country on the planet with a twisted logic that dictated that the WWII heroes who fought the Nazi's were to be disgraced (instead of honoured).

What a sick government we had back then, and well done to Alan Shatter.

These men broke an oath and deserted. It does not matter that they then fought against Nazis, they abandoned their state during a time of war. Was their treatment unfair by today's standards? Undoubtedly yes. However, even today if you desert the UK forces you face life imprisonment which by any standard is a harsher penalty.

Ash.J.Williams · 07-05-2013 2:00pm

the deserters did the right thing.

Nodin · 07-05-2013 2:08pm

EURATS wrote: »

So? The point was they deserted the IDF and deserved their punishment.

"So?"...why did you include the reference to the war of independence? What point were you trying to make? What relevance does it have to the issue of the pardons?

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 2:26pm

karma_ wrote: »

Was their treatment unfair by today's standards? Undoubtedly yes.

If you can point to a source that indicates that the standard punishment by a court martial for desertion at the time was social ostracism, please do.

However, even today if you desert the UK forces you face life imprisonment which by any standard is a harsher penalty.

My understanding is that the maximum penalty while not at war is two years and a dishonourable discharge. Again, if you have a source that indicates differently, please share it.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 2:44pm

Nodin wrote: »

"So?"...why did you include the reference to the war of independence? What point were you trying to make? What relevance does it have to the issue of the pardons?

Because of Irish politicians' habit of being spineless and apologist towards people who have wronged us.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 2:47pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you can point to a source that indicates that the standard punishment by a court martial for desertion at the time was social ostracism, please do. My understanding is that the maximum penalty while not at war is two years and a dishonourable discharge. Again, if you have a source that indicates differently, please share it.

The world was at war at the time. So your point has no relevance.

skimpydoo · 07-05-2013 2:50pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Our best interest was fighting for Nazi Germany? I've read some stupid posts in my time but this takes the biscuit...

You are getting the wrong end of the stick. He was talking about them fighting against the Nazi's which was the right thing to do.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 2:56pm

EURATS wrote: »

The world was at war at the time. So your point has no relevance.

Ireland was not at war at the time.

EURATS · 07-05-2013 3:03pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Ireland was not at war at the time.

Correct. It was called the emergency here. And what we needed was our defence forces jumping ship and then expecting to waltz back in and be treated like heroes and be supported by the state.

oscarBravo · 07-05-2013 3:04pm

EURATS wrote: »

Correct. It was called the emergency here. And what we needed was our defence forces jumping ship and then expecting to waltz back in and be treated like heroes

Oh look, a straw man.

Did you have anything other than bile and logical fallacies to contribute?

Nodin · 07-05-2013 3:17pm

EURATS wrote: »

Because of Irish politicians' habit of being spineless and apologist towards people who have wronged us.

...strikes me as rather a bizarre issue to drag into it.

However - these men went off to fight the Nazis. Thats not a bad thing, nor is it "wrong". They were singled out for special treatment, which was unfair. Thus an apology and pardons are fitting.

karma_ · 07-05-2013 3:20pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you can point to a source that indicates that the standard punishment by a court martial for desertion at the time was social ostracism, please do.

I am not saying this treatment was acceptable. However I believe the penalties imposed about losing relevant pay, pensions and being excluded from state work is a fair penalty for desertion.

My understanding is that the maximum penalty while not at war is two years and a dishonourable discharge. Again, if you have a source that indicates differently, please share it.

The armed forces bill has this - *[or of life if he intends to avoid a "relevant service" or was under orders when he deserted]*

Hunterbiker · 07-05-2013 3:22pm

karma_ wrote: »

I am not saying this treatment was acceptable. However I believe the penalties imposed about losing relevant pay, pensions and being excluded from state work is a fair penalty for desertion.

The armed forces bill has this - *[or of life if he intends to avoid a "relevant service" or was under orders when he deserted]*

But this wasn't applied 'fairly' in that deserters who didn't serve for The Allies and just deserted didn't go on the list.

That's the crux of the matter - they were singled out...

Nodin · 07-05-2013 3:24pm

karma_ wrote: »

I am not saying this treatment was acceptable. However I believe the penalties imposed about losing relevant pay, pensions and being excluded from state work is a fair penalty for desertion.

...that was as penalty used exclusively against those who joined the British forces to fight the nazis, afaik.

Cody Pomeray · 07-05-2013 3:25pm

Hunterbiker wrote: »

But this wasn't applied 'fairly' in that deserters who didn't serve for The Allies and just deserted didn't go on the list.

That's the crux of the matter - they were singled out...

How many deserted and didn't join the British army at this time?

EURATS · 07-05-2013 3:26pm

Nodin wrote: »

...strikes me as rather a bizarre issue to drag into it.

However - these men went off to fight the Nazis. Thats not a bad thing, nor is it "wrong". They were singled out for special treatment, which was unfair. Thus an apology and pardons are fitting.

Nothing bizarre about it.

They were wrong in so far as they deserted the IDF and therefore deserved the consequences. If those consequences were too harsh...then that's a different matter.

Alan Shatter doing his job!!!

Comments