Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

A Little Pony · 07-01-2017 11:43PM

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

the letter of condolence was despicable and the republican movement should absolutely hold its head in shame for what it did during that time, yet today a man who should have been executed as a traitor has a statue paid for by the National Graves association. Duplicitous bunch

If Ireland had declared war, the Luftwaffe would have targetted Ireland and its ports. The very small air force Ireland had would not have been able to cope and the RAF would have had to cover Irish air space as well (some things don't change) meaning their area of coverage would have gone from East Anglia all the way to Kerry.

De Valera followed correct diplomatic procedure at the time.

I am actually embarrassed for the Irish people 70+ years later that he did that.

FrancieBrady · 07-01-2017 11:54PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

I am actually embarrassed for the Irish people 70+ years later that he did that.

How embarrassed do you get about Maggie Thatcher and Mugabe or Pinochet or Ceausescu?

De Valera was many things and I am no fan, but to try and paint him as a supporter of Hitler because he fulfilled an act expected of any neutral country is patently juvenile debating tbh.

A Little Pony · 07-01-2017 11:59PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

I am actually embarrassed for the Irish people 70+ years later that he did that.

How embarrassed do you get about Maggie Thatcher and Mugabe or Pinochet or Ceausescu?

De Valera was many things and I am no fan, but to try and paint him as a supporter of Hitler because he fulfilled an act expected of any neutral country is patently juvenile debating tbh.

I don't buy into that, Hitler was not some ordinary politician, he was a groundbreaking revolutionary tyrant who murdered millions of Jews in the most horrific fashion. And De Valera said he was sorry about his death.

08-01-2017 12:17AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Who destabilised Libya? The people that decided to have a rebellion against their dictator. I thought as an Irishman you'd understand that.

Yeah, sure, Ireland does a lot of peacekeeping missons. They just have to borrow planes to get there and rely on other countries Air Forces to provide transport and air cover.

A rebellion which wouldn't have succeeded if it wasn't for Western military intervention. Also look how it turned out. The stupidity that was Iraq repeated. Overthrow a government but no subsequent plan to fill the resulting vacuum.

Fratton Fred · 08-01-2017 12:36AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A rebellion which wouldn't have succeeded if it wasn't for Western military intervention.

Really? They worked in Tunisia and Egypt.

Gaddafi had the military behind him though, so it probably would have ended up like Syria without western intervention.

FrancieBrady · 08-01-2017 12:39AM

A Little Pony wrote: »

I don't buy into that, Hitler was not some ordinary politician, he was a groundbreaking revolutionary tyrant who murdered millions of Jews in the most horrific fashion. And De Valera said he was sorry about his death.

Dev did not say 'he' was sorry. He offered diplomatic condolences from a neutral nation.
Retrospective embarrassment is almost as silly as ignoring more recent association with tyrants and dictators I.e. Maggie and her strange bedfellows.

08-01-2017 12:45AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Really? They worked in Tunisia and Egypt.

Gaddafi had the military behind him though, so it probably would have ended up like Syria without western intervention.

Yes really. Libya is a clusterf*ck that the West has cynically ditched and left to its own devices.

Junkyard Tom · 08-01-2017 12:46AM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Hitler was not some ordinary politician, he was a groundbreaking revolutionary tyrant who murdered millions

He learned a lot from considering how the British built thier sordid blood-soaked empire.

Fratton Fred · 08-01-2017 12:50AM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

He learned a lot from considering how the British built thier sordid blood-soaked empire.

Or any other empire, back to Roman times.

Still, it was good of him to pass that knowledge on to Sean and the bhoys.

Fratton Fred · 08-01-2017 12:50AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes really. Libya is a clusterf*ck that the West has cynically ditched and left to its own devices.

True.

Ken. · 08-01-2017 12:54AM

Mod- Get this back on topic or it will be locked. No more talk of Libya,Syria etc.

Junkyard Tom · 08-01-2017 01:04AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or any other empire, back to Roman times.

Yeah whatever, we didn't get colonized by Italy. Italy's soldiers weren't shooting children and colluding with mass murderers here up until relatively recently. Focus.

maryishere · 08-01-2017 01:54PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Yeah whatever, we didn't get colonized by Italy.

Correct. Countries such as Ethiopia got colonised by Italy. All European countries had colonies. So many people from Ireland went to help colonise elsewhere in the world. eg a third of the ruling administration in India was Irish. Did not matter to the locals there if the white man / soldier / officer / engineer / administrator / lawer was from Liverpool or Dublin.

maryishere · 08-01-2017 02:05PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I thought sending condolences on Churchill's death, given his career, a bit off too.

A bit off? It sent waves of revulsions around the world. Par for the course for Irish politicians though. No wonder so many in the world despised us, having sent their sons and brothers to fight Hitler and liberate the extermination camps. Not our proudest moment.

"Douglas Hyde, Ireland's president during the second world war, offered condolences to Germany's representative in Dublin over the death of Adolf Hitler, newly declassified records show.
Until now it was believed that Ireland's prime minister, Eamon de Valera, was the only leader to convey official condolences, a gesture criticised worldwide.

But the presidential record for 1938-1957, made public this week, sheds new light on one of the most embarrassing chapters in Irish history - its decision to maintain cordial relations with the Nazis even after news of the Holocaust emerged."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/dec/31/secondworldwar.ireland

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 05:43PM

Cool_CM wrote: »

My deeply misplaced high moral ground? :pac: I think that you may have jumped the gun a bit there.

As you may or may not be aware, the separation of Church and State is a concept and hardly a new one at that. It doesn't refer to any particular Church, rather the idea that Religion and the State should be independent from one another. This idea also gave us one of the longest words in the English language.

I personally think that religion should have no bearing on anybody's ability to hold any form of public office be it here, the UK or anywhere else. Seeing as you asked, though, given the fact that we know who was involved in the writing of the original Constitution and the fact that its 'special position' was removed in 1973, I would hazard a guess that the preamble was written with the Catholic Church in mind. And with that as the Preamble of our Constitution, though we have made great steps, we are still pretty far away from the separation of Church and State that FrancieBrady mentioned in his post.

Stop talking about Bunreacht na hEireann.

Your knowledge of the document and case law is extremely poor.! Social history is pathetic as well.

Case law,time and time again interpreted the preamble and the rest of the document in a way that actually went against many Catholic principles such as family planning.

The special recognition of the RC,such provision no longer in the article,was merely a statement of fact at the time. The country was Ferveantly Catholic,hundred joined the seminary each year and people were quicker to go to a priest before they went to a Garda or politican. Many expected priests to rare up to lecture on social issues . In no way was Article 44 used to ignored the religious views of others .Even Jews were specifically referred to in the old text.1937,a Eurooean Consitution referring to Jews!! Protestants were also ensured that the State would fund their educational needs -religious matters was defined as being included in education.The people may have rejected the Constitution if it was secular like the 1922 Constiution.There was little or no big issue with the RC place as that was already the status quo. Even with a secular provision,there was nothing in the document that had stopped the power of the RC,power that they had LONG BEFORE 1921!!!

Comparing today with 60 plus years ago and using todays standards when assessing and judging the past is moronic,espeically when one is so clueless as to the topic

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 05:46PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

I am actually embarrassed for the Irish people 70+ years later that he did that.

Very few remotely care about what you feel. Be embarrassed for yourself if you wish

Were you embarrassed when De Valera offered the same gesture to the US Ambassador on the death of the US President earlier ? Following procedures of a neutral country.

Like Germany,Ireland was "neutral" to the US

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 05:51PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

I don't buy into that, Hitler was not some ordinary politician, he was a groundbreaking revolutionary tyrant who murdered millions of Jews in the most horrific fashion. And De Valera said he was sorry about his death.

Stalin surely would have been just as bad. Groundbreaking ? Hardly, concentration camps and genocide of a particular group was old hat. Even British used those camps in Africa.

Why are Jews only referred? Do they have a hierarchy in the victims of Adolf ? Many others were killed by his boys

Not much was done by Britain or US until things got a bit late. Even Jews in the US were getting word about Germany before the war. Britain was not thinking of the jews when they declared war. Alas, US President wanted to do something but many Americans ,especially Irish Americans and German Americans were vocal against going to war.

FrancieBrady · 08-01-2017 05:52PM

Can anyone explain why we should look at anybody who joins a foreign army (given that a soldier is required to have allegiance to his/her government and monarchy if their is one) for career or financial reasons as anything other than a mercenary soldier?

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 05:56PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or any other empire, back to Roman times.

Still, it was good of him to pass that knowledge on to Sean and the bhoys.

If you are going to get educated,best done by the masters. Britain were wonderful tutors

Mr. teddywinkles · 08-01-2017 06:00PM

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Operation human shield

Reminds me of south park. operation get behind the darkies

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 06:09PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

the letter of condolence was despicable and the republican movement should absolutely hold its head in shame for what it did during that time, yet today a man who should have been executed as a traitor has a statue paid for by the National Graves association. Duplicitous bunch

If Ireland had declared war, the Luftwaffe would have targetted Ireland and its ports. The very small air force Ireland had would not have been able to cope and the RAF would have had to cover Irish air space as well (some things don't change) meaning their area of coverage would have gone from East Anglia all the way to Kerry.

1. Traitor to who? Fianna Fail had oppossed the Treaty as did Russell. Fianna Fail always waffled about a UI but knew it was impossible. Best try and reign contol on Sean and the IRA rather than call them traitors,since many in Fianna Fail would be consideres traitors to the IRB and later principles of 1916 . Why would Russell have been executed by the Irish State ? Amnesty was granted after the Civil War. Alas Dev did execute IRA men in the 1940s

2. Russell saw the Germans as a means to help the IRA gain back the North. Naive yes but no different to the old policy of the past. "my enemey's enemey is my friend"

3 Leftie and beloved Frank Ryan went off to Spain to fight fascists. Would have rotted in a Spanish jail were it not for Germans getting him out. Look at how he died

4 Letter of condolence was no different to the letter of condolence sent ro the US on the news of the death of the US President - despite him and Britian refusing to agree not to invade Ireland -despite allegedly being at war to peotect small nations

5 One of the reasons for a small air force and non existent navy,even if it had minded to build one was due to the terms of the 1921 Anglo Irish Treaty which prevented this! It was in Britain's interest to protect its own borders ! This meant making sure that Ireland (including their own Belfast) did not become a back door for Nazis . Reality is,Ireland did not declare war. Ireland did not allow Britain and the US to bully them. If my aunt had balls....

maryishere · 08-01-2017 06:11PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Can anyone explain why we should look at anybody who joins a foreign army (given that a soldier is required to have allegiance to his/her government and monarchy if their is one) for career or financial reasons as anything other than a mercenary soldier?

It has been explained to you already, hence why nobody but you refers to untrained people volunteering for British army as possible mercenaries.

"The word "mercenary" comes from the Latin "merces," which means "wages" or "fee." Thus, taken literally, a mercenary is any person who serves merely for wages. Although this definition could apply to many of us in the working world, it's most closely associated with the professional soldier, or someone who is hired by a political entity to fight in a conflict. That conflict could be a war, a coup attempt or a prohibition campaign designed to reduce illegal drug trade."

http://science.howstuffworks.com/mercenary1.htm

In addition, mercenaries are paid for service " usually more than ordinary armed forces" and would have "No allegiance to the country for which they fight". Given no British service men or women died on active duty in 2016, you still think it employs "mercenaries" from these islands as part of its regular army?

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 06:12PM

ken wrote: »

Mod- Get this back on topic or it will be locked. No more talk of Libya,Syria etc.

No more talk ? Eh, obviously,it has failed to occur to you that both of those theatres of war are very much areas that concern the British Army and politicans. Troops from the BA may well land there some day. It is very very very relevant! Your intervention is misguided and uncalled for

FrancieBrady · 08-01-2017 06:15PM

maryishere wrote: »

It has been explained to you already, hence why nobody but you refers to untrained people volunteering for British army as possible mercenaries.

"The word "mercenary" comes from the Latin "merces," which means "wages" or "fee." Thus, taken literally, a mercenary is any person who serves merely for wages. Although this definition could apply to many of us in the working world, it's most closely associated with the professional soldier, or someone who is hired by a political entity to fight in a conflict. That conflict could be a war, a coup attempt or a prohibition campaign designed to reduce illegal drug trade."

http://science.howstuffworks.com/mercenary1.htm

In addition, mercenaries are paid for service " usually more than ordinary armed forces" and would have "No allegiance to the country for which they fight". Given no British service men or women died on active duty in 2016, you still think it employs "mercenaries" from these islands as part of its regular army?

Well my view is they employ mercenaries from all over the world.
Britain had a full compliment of troops 'serving' in 2016, so I am not sure what your point at the end is.
Glad you agree on the mercenary definition.

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 06:15PM

maryishere wrote: »

A bit off? It sent waves of revulsions around the world. Par for the course for Irish politicians though. No wonder so many in the world despised us, having sent their sons and brothers to fight Hitler and liberate the extermination camps. Not our proudest moment.

"Douglas Hyde, Ireland's president during the second world war, offered condolences to Germany's representative in Dublin over the death of Adolf Hitler, newly declassified records show.
Until now it was believed that Ireland's prime minister, Eamon de Valera, was the only leader to convey official condolences, a gesture criticised worldwide.

But the presidential record for 1938-1957, made public this week, sheds new light on one of the most embarrassing chapters in Irish history - its decision to maintain cordial relations with the Nazis even after news of the Holocaust emerged."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/dec/31/secondworldwar.ireland

Cordial relations were also kept with the US too. Offered similar gestures to the US on the deaths of both war time presidents ,one of whom set off not just one but two nuclear bombs on civilians

Lt Dan · 08-01-2017 06:25PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

what a load of self righteous bollocks.

Ireland doesn't have an air force because it relies on the RAF. Who do you think it was that pulled the Irish citizens out of Libya when it all kicked off over there?

Who is it that has to escort commercial airlines over Irish airspace when they issue a distress call, or escort Russian bombers flying through Irish controlled airspace with out beacons on?

you really live in cloud cuckoo land sometimes.

Ireland does not have an air force because it does not need one. We ain't war mongers !

Ireland did not have one or a navy back in the 1940s because it had been barred by the Anglo Irish Treaty. We had and have more pressing issues to finance

As for self rigtheous bollocks, it was and is in the interst of Britain to keep and eye out on what goes on west of Hollyhead. 9 outta 10 times ,it ain't Ireland that is target No 1 by anyone who wants to cause problems!

You seriously delluded and stupid enough to suggest for one millisecond that Britain would tolerate or allow Ireland to give the Russians the right to roam through Irish airspace or just ignore them ? Ha ha ha .

maryishere · 08-01-2017 06:26PM

Lt Dan wrote: »

Cordial relations were also kept with the US too.

But neutral countries in Europe such as Switzerland and Sweden did not send condolences on the death of Hitler.
Eire was ridiculed from across the Atlantic. Paperers like the Herald Tribune entitled its editorial ‘Neutrality gone mad’ and commented:

"In this time of the breaking of nations when the stream of history becomes a rushing millrace, there is much to arrest the attention of the world. But, despite all preoccupation with greater events, there is still time for a glance and a gasp at the spectacle of the prime minister of Eire marching solemnly to the German legation to present his government’s condolences on the death of Adolf Hitler".

The Washington Post headlined its editorial ‘Moral myopia’. The paper did not question the ‘correctness’ of de Valera’s action. Concluding that the visit provided an indication of ‘why diplomatic usages have fallen into such disrepute’, it added:

The neutrality which these governments practised throughout the course of the war was dictated by expediency… Now, however, the war in Europe has been won; the neutrals need no longer fear Hitler or the Reich. Can it be that the moral myopia they imposed upon themselves in the face of danger has now blinded them to all ethical values? Or is it merely that a preoccupation with protocol has atrophied their emotions? In sober truth, there could be no real neutrality in this war… Even in death, Hitler forced a choice upon the neutral governments.

The depth of antagonism among certain Irish Americans may be gauged by the following letter from Angela D. Walsh of New York:

"Have you seen the motion pictures of the victims of German concentration camps, de Valera? Have you seen the crematoriums? Have you seen the bodies of little children murdered by Nazi hands? Have you seen the flourishing cabbages—cabbages for German food—flourishing because of the fertiliser, human remains of citizens from almost completely Catholic countries like Poland? These were citizens of a conquered country—and ÉIRE might easily have been a conquered country, neutrality or no neutrality. Have you seen the living dead, de Valera? Skin stretched over bone, and too weak to walk?"

maryishere · 08-01-2017 06:30PM

Lt Dan wrote: »

Ireland does not have an air force because it does not need one.

You still have not answered the question "Who is it that has to escort commercial airlines over Irish airspace when they issue a distress call"

Indeed you probably do not realise that for most of the past century we went begging to the British to rescue Irish sailors caught far offshore,off the coast of Ireland, out of the range of our little rescue services.

If we could afford to pay many of our politicians more than the British equivalents, and our President more than the President of America, then that says it all.

buried · 08-01-2017 06:33PM

The american authorities ignored plenty of horror and brutality in WWII themselves. They granted immunity to the butchers of Unit 731 and gave those f**king animals jobs in US state departments when the war was over. Read about that horror and hypocrisy

maryishere · 08-01-2017 06:39PM

buried wrote: »

The american authorities ignored plenty of horror and brutality in WWII themselves.

They fought the nation behind unit 731, instead of their sending condolences to the nation on the death of its leader. Big difference.

Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Comments