Nazi memorabilia for sale in Dublin. Appropriate?

Jawgap

Bambi wrote: »

When barely a single politician in Ireland was in favour of siding with Britain (not the allies back in '39) and it would have probably triggered a small scale civil war?

The phrase "justification after the fact" springs to mind

Eh, that's not what the archives say. There were extensive contacts and planning at the highest levels from just before the war started. They even gave the politicians cool 'code' names for communication purposes. Dev was 'Wolf' and McKenna, the CoS was 'Hound.'

Dan Bryan head of G2 handled much the comms on our side. His interactions with the military attaché at the British Embassy are detailed through the archives - as well as the contacts the attaché had with various other members of the Irish political and security establishment.

gandalf

Bambi wrote: »

When barely a single politician in Ireland was in favour of siding with Britain (not the allies back in '39) and it would have probably triggered a small scale civil war?

The phrase "justification after the fact" springs to mind

Oh I agree they were naive if that's what they believed. One of the best things DeValera did was to keep Ireland as a country neutral during WW2 because siding with Britain would have rekindled the Civil War.

However there was two flavours of Neutrality. Full Neutrality for the Axis forces and Neutrality lite for the Allied forces.

Jawgap

Bambi wrote: »

Would you like to look up what "protection" means before scraping the barrel? We didnt get any protection from the allies becuase the germans did'nt target us, well except for that creamery down the south that might have been bombed accidentally on purpose for selling to the british army. You want a look at what german belligerence would have looked like for us reference Belfast and Derry not some Heinkel pilot mistaking the north strand for the UK.

Might also want to explain why our "allies" in Britain stopped exporting certain goods to us at the start of the war in the hope of coercing dev onto the allies side.

North Strand wasn't bombed?

I know it was an accident, but one theory was we were hit for sending aid to Belfast when they were blitzed - the Luftwaffe were aiming for Amiens Street Station because it was heavily used to send aid north, and receive refugees and casualties heading south.

Dyr

Jawgap wrote: »

Eh, that's not what the archives say. There were extensive contacts and planning at the highest levels from just before the war started. They even gave the politicians cool 'code' names for communication purposes. Dev was 'Wolf' and McKenna, the CoS was 'Hound.'

Dan Bryan head of G2 handled much the comms on our side. His interactions with the military attaché at the British Embassy are detailed through the archives - as well as the contacts the attaché had with various other members of the Irish political and security establishment.

Its what the dail record says, none of the parties came out in favour of involvement and it was the mood of the country too. I doubt anyone signed up for the free state army expecting to have a crack at the fascists. Of course they could have joined the international brigades if they were that eager and didnt mind the smack of a crozier..little interest though

There was always a plans for eventualities as to what would happen if ze germans landed here or the brits were being beaten back next door. From what I remember plan B included secret air bases for the RAF in the free state.

The brits were also trying to get the Americans onside for a potential occupation of the free state. The yanks were not supportive.

Dyr

Jawgap wrote: »

North Strand wasn't bombed?

I know it was an accident, but one theory was we were hit for sending aid to Belfast when they were blitzed - the Luftwaffe were aiming for Amiens Street Station because it was heavily used to send aid north, and receive refugees and casualties heading south.

It was and they nearly hit my old man and grandfather. Which technically would have been friendly fire given that he was in the IRA back then

In the grand scheme of things it was a shot across dev's bow if not purely an accident.

Bombing the creamery was obviously an act war though

Jawgap

Bambi wrote: »

Its what the dail record says, none of the parties came out in favour of involvement and it was the mood of the country too. I doubt anyone signed up for the free state army expecting to have a crack at the fascists. Of course they could have joined the international brigades if they were that eager and didnt mind the smack of a crozier..little interest though

There was always a plans for eventualities as to what would happen if ze germans landed here or the brits were being beaten back next door. From what I remember plan B included secret air bases for the RAF in the free state.

The brits were also trying to get the Americans onside for a potential occupation of the free state. The yanks were not supportive.

There's lots that go on behind the scenes. And let's face it, it wouldn't be the first time a politician said one thing in the Dail and did something else outside.

Yes, if the Germans had landed the plan was simple. The Irish Army would work to keep them south of the Limerick / Waterford Line, or contain any airborne landings north of that line. After 48 hours, the government would formally ask the British for assistance at which point 3 armoured columns would cross the border, escorted by Irish Army liaison officers and forces and move south.

The RAF would attack any German shipping heading for the coast but would only hit any invasion beaches after the 48 hour limit elapsed. Ultimately, the planned then called for a sector station at Baldonnel with satellites at Wexford and Shannon from which an Advanced Air Striking Force could operate. Gormanston was to be their maintenance and repair depot.

Why do you think the Brits let us buy so much of their kit?

Jawgap

Bambi wrote: »

It was and they nearly hit my old man and grandfather. Which technically would have been friendly fire given that he was in the IRA back then

In the grand scheme of things it was a shot across dev's bow if not purely an accident.

Bombing the creamery was obviously an act war though

Not the sinking of our ships?

Means Of Escape

If I had the Iron Cross of Hans Rudel I would not sell it despite its uniqueness and exceptional value.

I would have zero qualms about possessing it or loaning it to a museum for display.

There are some who would put a hammer to it because of its association with the Third Reich akin to those in ISIS wiping out priceless antiquities..

Mind boggling ignorance .

Dyr

Means Of Escape wrote: »

If I had the Iron Cross of Hans Rudel I would not sell it despite its uniqueness and exceptional value.

I would have zero qualms about possessing it or loaning it to a museum for display.

There are some who would put a hammer to it because of its association with the Third Reich akin to those in ISIS wiping out priceless antiquities..

Mind boggling ignorance .

If you had Rudels iron cross then you'd have a knights cross (with all the trimmings)

And a serious security bill I imagine

gandalf

Means Of Escape wrote: »

If I had the Iron Cross of Hans Rudel I would not sell it despite its uniqueness and exceptional value.

I would have zero qualms about possessing it or loaning it to a museum for display.

There are some who would put a hammer to it because of its association with the Third Reich akin to those in ISIS wiping out priceless antiquities..

Mind boggling ignorance .

Precisely. If you destroy these items then you are attempting to sweep history under the carpet. Why not allow them be displayed so people can research them and their meanings themselves. I think I know the shop the OP is talking about, it's in the Powerscourt centre and yes they have memorabilia for sale and some of it is Nazi.

Tony EH

StudentDad wrote: »

Officially we were 'neutral' in practice we were hardly that. We benefitted from the protection of UK/Commonwealth forces initially and US forces later on in the war. I know of people who went to fight in WWII against the Third Reich and were treated as traitors on their return. Whether they were members of the Irish Armed Forces or private citizens too many of them were treated badly by both official and unofficial Ireland. At the end of the hostilities after benefitting from the protection of Allied forces we then turn around and give a diplomatic slap in the face to those very forces who protected us by offering condolences on the death of Hitler. (A man who killed himself rather than face the consequences of his actions).


SD

I can tell you from familial experience that this is untrue.

My father was in the Royal Engineers during the war and transferred to the RAF at the end. When he came home to Ireland, in his RAF uniform, nothing was said to him by anyone, never mind being "treated badly" by Ireland. The worst he and most of the people he knew got was simply a lack of recognition, not that they cared for such things.

Pretty much the same thing happened to his father and that was in a time where taking the "Queens shilling" was even more frowned upon.

Although I've no doubt there was the odd fuckwit who thought they knew it all and couldn't wait to mouth off. But my dad's encounters with them were nothing to be worried about and were few and far between. The fact is few people really talked about the war. They were eager to put it behind them. Plus, in the 50's and 60's, half of Ireland was heading off to England for work. Nobody really gave a damn what lippy so and so's had to say about a conflict nobody cared that much about any longer.

Also, the condolences were to the nation, not really for Hitler. Ireland had no gripe with the German people in 1945.

Tony EH

StudentDad wrote: »

You honestly think a little thing like 'neutrality' would have stopped Hitler had he gotten past Allied forces? Nevermind the fact that UBoats sunk Irish shipping with impunity? Friends they were not.


SD

Hitler wanted nothing to do with Ireland. He didn't even want to bother with Britain. His main and only real military goal was Russia. Everything else was a byproduct of Britain and France declaring war on Germany.

The only definite cases I know of a U-boat deliberately sinking an Irish vessel (out of convoy) was in the case of the Leukos in March 1940, sunk by U-38. There's been no reason given as an explanation, as plenty of Irish Shipping went about their business free of engagement by German U-Boats and there are numerous occasions where the vessel was boarded and set on her way unmolested.

Another case was the Luimneach, which was boarded and the crew ordered to lifeboats with provisions, then she was sunk by gunfire by U-46.

The Irish Oak was sunk in 1943, as the Captain of U-607 couldn't find record of her in the shipping register. He ordered the crew off the boat and fire a torpedo, which eventually sunk her.

In those cases the U-Boat log stated that the vessel's markings had been noted. There were some other cases, but they were either in a convoy, which meant they were fair game, or the nature of the vessel was unknown.

So, Irish ships were not sunk "with impunity".

In fact the Germans went to great lengths to avoid such things, even though it was nigh on impossible.

Tony EH

gandalf wrote: »

They decided to join forces that were fighting with a truly dreadful regime. If I was around at that time I would like to think that I would have done the same.

The vast majority of men who went to Britain to join up did so largely for mercenary reasons. There was no glory seeking and any high minded post war concepts.

Joining the British Army meant the possibility of getting a trade, a good pension and a better life.

Few had any high ideals about fighting the Germans.

Tony EH

Jawgap wrote: »

North Strand wasn't bombed?

I know it was an accident, but one theory was we were hit for sending aid to Belfast when they were blitzed - the Luftwaffe were aiming for Amiens Street Station because it was heavily used to send aid north, and receive refugees and casualties heading south.

Almost definitely an accident. The crew probably thought they were hitting targets in the North.

As far as I recall, didn't Hitler send an apology to Ireland, some of which was written in bad Irish?

Certainly the British made a hulabaloo out of the whole thing and tried to use it as a reason for Ireland to join their cause. There's a Pathe news reel that blames the Irish for "sitting on the fence." As if joining Britain in the war would mean lesser bombing.

Wurzelbert

Tony EH wrote: »

Almost definitely an accident. The crew probably thought they were hitting targets in the North.

As far as I recall, didn't Hitler send an apology to Ireland, some of which was written in bad Irish?

Certainly the British made a hulabaloo out of the whole thing and tried to use it as a reason for Ireland to join their cause. There's a Pathe news reel that blames the Irish for "sitting on the fence." As if joining Britain in the war would mean lesser bombing.

the allied bombings of switzerland come to mind…likely errors, yet some open questions remain…

Palbear

padd b1975 wrote: »

Don't sell.

Don't buy.

Don't judge those that do.

I didn't.

Palbear

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Admire and value the craftsmanship of the weapon not the user .

Agreed.
That is one reason why I feel they should be in a museum not a shop.

Trading in Nazi goods creates desirability as does trade in any commodity.
That is simply market forces.
A downside is that this may enhance acceptability and legitimacy of a murderous regime.

To each their own.

Palbear

2011 wrote: »

Three pages of posts and one person agrees with me
I don't feel like such an old fart anymore :D

make that two people now.

(cue: the onslaught)

Eugene Norman

gandalf wrote: »

You are aware that a lot of those men joined the Irish Armed Forces in 1939 fully expecting Ireland to side with the allies only to see Ireland declare Neutrality and realise that they'd be used for manual labour for the duration of the "Emergancy".

They decided to join forces that were fighting with a truly dreadful regime. If I was around at that time I would like to think that I would have done the same.

They still deserted their posts as soldiers in an war/emergency.

Jawgap

Palbear wrote: »

Agreed.
That is one reason why I feel they should be in a museum not a shop.

Trading in Nazi goods creates desirability as does trade in any commodity.
That is simply market forces.
A downside is that this may enhance acceptability and legitimacy of a murderous regime.

To each their own.

Out of interest, what's your take on buying goods made companies who were up to their necks with the Nazi Party before and during WW2? Including those that profited from slave and conscripted labour?

Palbear

Jawgap wrote: »

Out of interest, what's your take on buying goods made companies who were up to their necks with the Nazi Party before and during WW2? Including those that profited from slave and conscripted labour?

Good question. I own two VW cars. A company that is Hitler's creation.

A friend of mine believes fervently that in the case of Germans, a leopard doesn't change its spots.

I disagree.

The world is a different place now. We are better educated. More inclusive.
I have German friends. They are good people. WW2 and The Holocaust was wrong but this is acknowledged by the Germans themselves as I evidenced visibly on a recent trip to Berlin.

hatrickpatrick

I genuinely don't understand people like the OP. As a cultural libertarian, I believe that free speech should extend to the sale of items. What argument is there against this?

Menas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I genuinely don't understand people like the OP. As a cultural libertarian, I believe that free speech should extend to the sale of items. What argument is there against this?

The argument is not really clear, despite so many posts in this thread.
Seems to be a mix of...
1) The items are evil!
2) Poor taste
3) Items will only be bought by new Nazis and we should ban them.
4) Profiteering from the war is bad.
5) Its an outrage and I am outraged.

Jawgap

Palbear wrote: »

Good question. I own two VW cars. A company that is Hitler's creation.

A friend of mine believes fervently that in the case of Germans, a leopard doesn't change its spots.

I disagree.

The world is a different place now. We are better educated. More inclusive.
I have German friends. They are good people. WW2 and The Holocaust was wrong but this is acknowledged by the Germans themselves as I evidenced visibly on a recent trip to Berlin.

I slightly agree with your friend - I think there is a tendency to want to dominate in the German 'DNA' - but that only expresses itself through wholly political means now.

Observing how they deal with the legacy of WW2, I find, is quite fascinating. When I lived there I visited the 'Documentation Center Nazi Party Rallying Grounds' just after it opened in Nuremberg. I remember still reflecting on what I saw for weeks afterwards - one of the most thought provoking museums I've ever visited.

Btw, I drive an Audi, and previously drove VWs - brilliant cars!

The Sun King

Jawgap wrote: »

I slightly agree with your friend - I think there is a tendency to want to dominate in the German 'DNA' - but that only expresses itself through wholly political means now.

Any other characteristics that are encoded into a people's DNA?

Heres a few you might agree with:

Big noses. A love of money.
A gift for mathematics.
A predisposition to thievery and child abandonment.
Terrorism.

I'll let you guess which belongs to which people. *rolls eyes*

Jawgap

The Sun King wrote: »

Any other characteristics that are encoded into a people's DNA?

Heres a few you might agree with:

Big noses. A love of money.
A gift for mathematics.
A predisposition to thievery and child abandonment.
Terrorism.

I'll let you guess which belongs to which people. *rolls eyes*

Oh dear.

It's a shame when people can't understand when something is being discussed figuratively :rolleyes:

Nice leap though.

The Sun King

Jawgap wrote: »

Oh dear.

It's a shame when people can't understand when something is being discussed figuratively :rolleyes:

Nice leap though.

Apologies, Doctor.

Share more findings from your research of genetics.

Pretty please!

Eugene Norman

The Sun King wrote: »

Apologies, Doctor.

Share more findings from your research of genetics.

Pretty please!

How is he supposed to argue against your strawmen? In saying the Germans tend to dominate - which I don't necessarily agree with – is a statement about culture not genetics.

Smiles35

The genetic smell of sweat.

The Sun King

Eugene Norman wrote: »

How is he supposed to argue against your strawmen? In saying the Germans tend to dominate - which I don't necessarily agree with – is a statement about culture not genetics.

Perhaps he might explain how the German will to dominate is entirely absent in the bedroom, leading to a thoroughly forgettable experience.

Perhaps I've given too much away in saying that...