Poppy

19-10-2018 9:08am

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

I'm afraid I still don't care why they are there

you don't care because it doesn't fit in with you rather narrow mindset.

Don't wear a poppy, no one will care, but if you wear (or in your case actually sell) the Easter Lilly, you are in no position to preach to people about "Killers" now, are you?

I notice you conveniently ducked that point the last time I made it.

sbsquarepants · 19-10-2018 9:14am

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You’re making him sound like a hit man. He was, I can assure you, far from it.

You're the one who made him sound like a hit man, it was you yourself who said he only done it for the money!

Aegir wrote: »

How much can any one government do though? for anything major, specialist organisations are usually best placed to help people long term, especially if they are suffering from PTSD or life changing injuries, or supporting the families of soldiers killed whilst on active duty?

There always seems to be enough money to fund the war in the first place though doesn't there - just never enough to cover the damage it causes.

In fairness to the Brits they look after their soldiers better than most, but being the best of a very bad bunch isn't much to be proud of!

I'm not sure what age you are but it's very recently that Tony Blair stood up in parliament and told barefaced lies to involve Britain in a disastrous war in the middle east (at the behest of the equally dishonest George Bush), which has basically thrown the world into chaos (in years to come there is a real chance historians might view this as the starting point of WW3 -assuming there's any historians left after WW3!)

Between them, these pair killed millions of people for oil, but are they in the despot section of the history books along site Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin? Are they fúck, they're making millions giving after dinner speeches, pontificating about freedom and morality.

Let them take some of that oil money and pay the for the medical treatment of the unfortunate gobshítes who went and got themselves maimed for it.

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 9:34am

Aegir wrote: »

you don't care because it doesn't fit in with you rather narrow mindset.

I don't care because it's a foreign government, a foreign royal family and a foreign charitable organisation to raise funds for foreign soldiers. I equally don't care how the French, American, German or Rwandan governments provide for their ex soldiers.

Aegir wrote: »

Don't wear a poppy, no one will care, but if you wear (or in your case actually sell) the Easter Lilly, you are in no position to preach to people about "Killers" now, are you?

I notice you conveniently ducked that point the last time I made it.

I make no apologies for being a Republican who supported the IRA. The IRA didn't occupy six counties of England and subject a large portion of the population to long term discrimination and second class citizenship. The IRA weren't responsible for hundreds of years of oppression in a foreign country.

In my eyes (obviously you will disagree) the IRA fought a just war against the British army and the oppression of the British government. So I am proud to say that I wear an Easter lily and sold Easter lilies.

In no way do I see this as being the same as wearing a poppy and raising funds for the British army, who occupied this country and harassed, tortured and killed its people.

So, now I have answered the point you made. I must have missed it earlier as it was just one point amongst many that you have made that I totally disagree with.

Folkstonian · 19-10-2018 9:34am

Could somebody explain to me why the poppy causes such heated debate on this forum?

I ask because I don’t actually remember seeing a single person either wearing or selling the poppy in Dublin last autumn. Admittedly I wasn’t keeping an eye out for them but being English I’m sure I’d have noticed regardless.

I completely understand and sympathise with the historic sensitivities, but it’s only an issue here for the people that want it to be one.

FWIW when I’m in London I gladly donate to the RBL and wear the poppy because it’s got personal meaning to me, but I wouldn’t do so over here because I wouldn’t want to upset or offend anyone who sees it in a negative light

Edgware · 19-10-2018 9:42am

Folkstonian wrote: »

Could somebody explain to me why the poppy causes such heated debate on this forum?

I ask because I don’t actually remember seeing a single person either wearing or selling the poppy in Dublin last autumn. Admittedly I wasn’t keeping an eye out for them but being English I’m sure I’d have noticed regardless.

I completely understand and sympathise with the historic sensitivities, but it’s only an issue here for the people that want it to be one.

FWIW when I’m in London I gladly donate to the RBL and wear the poppy because it’s got personal meaning to me, but I wouldn’t do so over here because I wouldn’t want to upset or offend anyone who sees it in a negative light

Wharever we do we mustnt offend anyone

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 9:46am

Folkstonian wrote: »

Could somebody explain to me why the poppy causes such heated debate on this forum?

I ask because I don’t actually remember seeing a single person either wearing or selling the poppy in Dublin last autumn. Admittedly I wasn’t keeping an eye out for them but being English I’m sure I’d have noticed regardless.

I completely understand and sympathise with the historic sensitivities, but it’s only an issue here for the people that want it to be one.

FWIW when I’m in London I gladly donate to the RBL and wear the poppy because it’s got personal meaning to me, but I wouldn’t do so over here because I wouldn’t want to upset or offend anyone who sees it in a negative light

The fact that the British government still occupies six counties and still has an armed presence there goes hand in hand with the historical sensitivities.

I too think the relevance of the poppy is completely overplayed on boards, but that's what you get I suppose on these sort of sites. For my part, if I read something here that I strongly disagree with, I find it difficult to ignore it!

Until we have a united Ireland, I would imagine that there are many of us who would be annoyed or offended at the sight of the poppy on Irish streets. At a stretch, it could be compared to seeing pro-ISIS badges being worn on English streets.

Keyzer · 19-10-2018 9:49am

Not this ****e again...

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 10:04am

Keyzer wrote: »

Not this ****e again...

It's a little known fact that Boards would implode without this thread each year

AdrianLM · 19-10-2018 10:19am

Read a little history.
They may not have had the Nazi racial ideology,
but the Prussian militarist motivation to crush France was the same before,
during and after The GW.
Bad guys im anybody's book.
Repelling them was
entirely noble and just.

Yes and the Germans were the only ones who used gas (not) etc etc.

You seem to have totally missed the point I was making. The poppy is meant to "remember the dead of all wars" and I respect that. But I will not be wearing one as it would mean funding retired veterans, some of whom have committed murder on this very island and have not been held accountable for their actions.

sbsquarepants · 19-10-2018 10:19am

Slight aside - They are a lovely flower I have to say, I'm not what you'd call a gardener or flower enthusiast, but I'm going to get some for my garden come spring.
They remind me of my nanny - she loved them, I used to pick them for her when I was a kid!

19-10-2018 10:54am

sbsquarepants wrote: »

There always seems to be enough money to fund the war in the first place though doesn't there - just never enough to cover the damage it causes.

In fairness to the Brits they look after their soldiers better than most, but being the best of a very bad bunch isn't much to be proud of!

they do now and that is very much linked to your second point below. I'm old enough to remember the Falklands, Gulf War one, Bosnia, Kosovo and onwards by the way.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm not sure what age you are but it's very recently that Tony Blair stood up in parliament and told barefaced lies to involve Britain in a disastrous war in the middle east (at the behest of the equally dishonest George Bush), which has basically thrown the world into chaos (in years to come there is a real chance historians might view this as the starting point of WW3 -assuming there's any historians left after WW3!)

Between them, these pair killed millions of people for oil, but are they in the despot section of the history books along site Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin? Are they fúck, they're making millions giving after dinner speeches, pontificating about freedom and morality.

Let them take some of that oil money and pay the for the medical treatment of the unfortunate gobshítes who went and got themselves maimed for it.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. The country was taken to war on a lie and that is something that will never be forgotten. Because of this, there was pressure on the government to do more for ex services people and their families.

This followed up pretty quickly with Afghanistan, which whilst controversial with some, was a UN sanctioned operation and one which was supported pretty much universally (Even Ireland made a contribution after voting for it during its time as a UNSC member). This resulted in even more support for members of the military and their families, both in the field and off it. A lot of this pressure has come directly from the RBL putting pressure on the MOD and the government to do more and now military personnel are awarded compensation in line with civil compensation, which is a massive policy change.

I get the argument that the government should fund everything, but I am of the opinion that you can never do enough. Some injuries, physical and mental need specialist care and ongoing support that governments just aren't capable of providing, so it needs organisations like the RBL and Help for Heroes to provide this. It also allows individuals to help and show their support.

19-10-2018 10:58am

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

I make no apologies for being a Republican who supported the IRA. The IRA didn't occupy six counties of England and subject a large portion of the population to long term discrimination and second class citizenship. The IRA weren't responsible for hundreds of years of oppression in a foreign country.

In my eyes (obviously you will disagree) the IRA fought a just war against the British army and the oppression of the British government. So I am proud to say that I wear an Easter lily and sold Easter lilies.

In no way do I see this as being the same as wearing a poppy and raising funds for the British army, who occupied this country and harassed, tortured and killed its people.

but you see no irony in supporting an army that harassed, tortured and killed Irish people, or carried out some of the worst atrocities these islands have seen in the last 100 years?

wexie · 19-10-2018 11:08am

joe40 wrote: »

Now I know you're on a wind up

You should maybe have a good look at that username....a good long look.

And wonder if it was accidental or not....

and take those considerations into account when you're reading their posts...

Snickers Man · 19-10-2018 11:11am

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

What???

Read a little history.

I respectfully invite you to do the same.

Riddle me this: why was Britain suddenly at war with the Ottoman Empire in 1914? Who started that one and why? What were the outcomes in terms of lasting peace, prosperity and the advancement of civilisation?

When was Britain last at war with the Ottomans before 1914?
On whose side did Britain fight and against whom in the Crimea in 1854? (lots of Irishmen in that one too)
On whose side was Britain preparing to fight, and against whom, during the Balkan Crisis of the 1880s? The seemingly inevitable intervention was rendered moot when Britain's intended allies managed to beat the aggressors all by themselves?
Clue: look up the origin of the word "jingoism" which is a lasting vestige of that crisis in our vocabulary today.

Of course as an avid reader of history, you probably know all the answers to these questions already. But don't say "Berlin to Baghdad Railway". I'll only laugh at you.

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 11:51am

Aegir wrote: »

but you see no irony in supporting an army that harassed, tortured and killed Irish people, or carried out some of the worst atrocities these islands have seen in the last 100 years?

None whatsoever. Why would I? I supported one side in an armed conflict, and therefore do not believe that the opposing side should be supported. How is that ironic?

19-10-2018 11:59am

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

None whatsoever. Why would I? I supported one side in an armed conflict, and therefore do not believe that the opposing side should be supported. How is that ironic?

so harassment, torture and murder are ok, as long as it's your side doing it?

wexie · 19-10-2018 12:00pm

Aegir wrote: »

so harassment, torture and murder are ok, as long as it's your side doing it?

that's what makes the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter.

for most people it really is as simple as that unfortunately

Sunny Disposition · 19-10-2018 12:07pm

AdrianLM wrote: »

Agreed, Not a chance would I wear one. Anyone who knows their history wouldn't either. Where's the accountability for Bloody Sunday? Do I want to help supplement some paras pension fund who shot civilians in Derry? Not a chance.

This is the type of thing that needs to be put to those who advocate the Poppy and say we are immature for not embracing it.

AudreyHepburn · 19-10-2018 12:07pm

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

None whatsoever. Why would I? I supported one side in an armed conflict, and therefore do not believe that the opposing side should be supported. How is that ironic?

Because you oppose the British Army because you say they were violent thugs etc but the dogs on the street know the IRA are just as bad if not worse.

AudreyHepburn · 19-10-2018 12:08pm

wexie wrote: »

that's what makes the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter.

for most people it really is as simple as that unfortunately

I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would call the IRA freedom fighters.

indioblack · 19-10-2018 12:09pm

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

None whatsoever. Why would I? I supported one side in an armed conflict, and therefore do not believe that the opposing side should be supported. How is that ironic?

Not ironic. Just a bit confusing. Is this "armed conflict" historical or ongoing?
Your post suggests past and present tense.

Sunny Disposition · 19-10-2018 12:10pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Because you oppose the British Army because you say they were violent thugs etc but the dogs on the street know the IRA are just as bad if not worse.

I'd deplore the IRA, but I still don't see why anyone would want to top up the pensions of the guys who were responsible for Bloody Sunday/Ballymurphy etc and those who covered it up. It'd be as wrong as donating to a charity for the upkeep of former IRA men I believe.

murpho999 · 19-10-2018 12:12pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would call the IRA freedom fighters.

Have you ever asked that question in Northern Ireland?

Feisar · 19-10-2018 12:15pm

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don’t believe anyone in their right mind would call the IRA freedom fighters.

I can only suggest that had you been burned out of your home in the Bogside you might not call them terrorists.

AudreyHepburn · 19-10-2018 12:18pm

Feisar wrote: »

I can only suggest that had you been burned out of your home in the Bogside you might not call them terrorists.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

It’s not so much their aims that I have a problem with. It’s their barbaric methods.

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 12:21pm

Aegir wrote: »

so harassment, torture and murder are ok, as long as it's your side doing it?

Not OK at all. Unfortunately, there was an armed conflict at the time.

Are YOU saying it's OK to support harassment, torture and murder when it's committed by the British army, but not by Republicans?

wexie · 19-10-2018 12:22pm

Feisar wrote: »

I can only suggest that had you been burned out of your home in the Bogside you might not call them terrorists.

Wouldn't be too hard of an argument though that perhaps someone who's just been burnt out of their home might not be in their right mind no?

Like Audrey said the ends don't always justify all means.

EDIT : And Ragnar, before you start I do mean that just as generally as I put it

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 12:25pm

wexie wrote: »

that's what makes the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter.

for most people it really is as simple as that unfortunately

And unfortunately every single armed conflict has involved terrible cases of torture and death, committed by both sides. The difference between "Freedom Fighters" and "Terrorists" is very much a case of which particular side you support.

wexie · 19-10-2018 12:30pm

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

And unfortunately every single armed conflict has involved terrible cases of torture and death, committed by both sides. The difference between "Freedom Fighters" and "Terrorists" is very much a case of which particular side you support.

Oh absolutely I'm not arguing that at all, there are many many examples.

I always find it a bit bemusing to see though when freedom fighters start using the very same (or worse in some cases) tactics as they decry in their enemies.

Look it's all a very complicated and nuanced issue, I tend to stay out of these discussions on boards as I think they simply can't be held in a sensible, detached way and perhaps it may take a few more generations for that to ever be possible.

What I find most interesting about this whole poppy discussion is that I grew up in a country (Holland) where remembrance day was about the horrors of war and ALL of the fallen most notably the civilian victims.

Rather than just our guys and fuck everybody else. I think perhaps at some stage maybe the poppy started off as that but it seems to be a long way away

Ragnar Lothbrok · 19-10-2018 12:32pm

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

None whatsoever. Why would I? I supported one side in an armed conflict, and therefore do not believe that the opposing side should be supported. How is that ironic?

indioblack wrote: »

Not ironic. Just a bit confusing. Is this "armed conflict" historical or ongoing?
Your post suggests past and present tense.

Armed conflict = past tense, as in when the war was on, I supported the IRA

Do not believe that the opposing side should be supported = present tense as I don't believe Irish people should contribute to CURRENT fund raising for the British soldiers that took part in that conflict.

Does that clear it up for you?

Poppy

Comments