Is Irelands neutrality stance in WW2 unfairly criticized? (see Mod note 217)

And?

Germany rocked into Poland and and America watched on. They joined the war ONLY when they were attacked and THEIR interests were at stake. I.E. they suited themselves. So did we. We stayed neutral, avoided what we feared.

You forget - and probably did not know - that while the U.S. did not officially join World War 2 until after the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbour in Dec.1941, the U.S. knew that it would likely get dragged into the war in Europe and Asia for years before that, and was preparing for it. In 1940 for example, it introduced its first ever peace time draft, crucial for the build up to its entry in to the war. A bit like the British, who made major preparations for war in 1938.

By appeasing Hitler in September 1938, the UK gained another 12 months to prepare for war. Following the declaration of war in Sept 1939, the next six months were known as the 'phoney war' as little or no military action took place, giving Britain more time to prepare.

At least four times well before the Pearl Harbour attack , both the U.S. Navy and the Coast Guard engaged in combat with German forces, capturing a vessel, threatening U-boats, and lost 126 sailors. You have a lot to learn, both the U.S. and U.K. knew the war was coming before they entered it. Britain did not wait until it was attacked, they declared war after Poland was invaded. In case you think that was not worth it, think what the Nazis did to 3 million Jews in Poland alone.

Are are still not glad someone fought the Nazis, or do you still think we would have had nothing to fear from a German victory?

And we knew we could get dragged into it, or invaded by either of the belligerents.

I’d have been happier if those with the power and responsibility under the Treaty Of Versailles had not allowed the circumstances to exist for war to brwak out.
Do you hold them responsible or is it all about Dev and the Irish?

The Treaty of Versailles created the conditions for WW2. Ireland was actually excluded from it when an Irish delegation turned up.

The one thing that a lot of those who seem to think that Ireland should not have been neutral ignore is the fact that approximately 35,000 Irish soldiers died in WW1 (the war to end all wars). WW1 had an impact on Ireland and Ireland was in no position, militarily, to fight in WW2.

AI generated slop is not a substitute for knowledge. The penalties and conditions imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles created some of the conditions for WW2. In terms of confiscated territory, it was inevitable that a Germany that had recovered from WW1 would try to regain them.

It was also inevitable that Germany would try to circumvent various conditions including the restrictions on intelligence organisations (Abwehr being an example of what happened with that.).

Throughout the 1930s, Germany was rearming. It also had intelligence gathering operations including in Ireland and other countries.

The Spanish Civil War was a testbed for newly developed German equipment and tactics. It has also been argued that the policies of FDR in the 1930s with respect to restrictions Japanese fuel and oil supplies contributed to what happened in the Pacific. There were also restrictions on the numbers and types of warships that some countries could build. WW2 began in the Pacific and Asia a few years earlier than in Europe.

It was far more brutal than the subsequent war in Europe and much like some of the countries in Europe, the UK had become complacent. The Allies or would-be Allies (the US and UK) knew a lot about Japanese intentions in the months before Pearl Harbour as they had been cooperating on breaking Japanese diplomatic and naval encryption.

The US effectively knew that the Japanese were about to break off diplomatic relations before the Japanese diplomats did. The concept was to break off diplomatic relations with the US and to then deliver a devastating strike on Pearl Harbour and other places.

It did not happen quite like that. Another problem for the Japanese was that the strike on Pearl Harbour was not quite as devastating as they had hoped. The US aircraft carriers were not in port and, more importantly, the US fuel storate was not competely destroyed. Fuel had to be transported from the US mainland and losing all of the fuel storage would have been a very serious problem for the US fleet. Things didn't go quite as planned for the Japanese and that's another example of how unexpected events change history.

Hitler then declared war on the US. That seemed to have been a bit of a mistake. That was just in 1941. It would take almost another three years before there was a major invasion of mainland Europe from the UK (Overlord/D-Day).

The thing about wars and history is that they develop in unexpected ways. The French armed forces, on paper, were a match for the German forces. The problem was that the Germans had done someting innovative with their tanks and this changed a lot of the dynamics in Blitzkrieg. The Germans had installed radio equipment in tanks. This meant that they could coordinate attacks. The Germans also dealt with the Maginot line in a way that the French did not expect. The Maginot line epitomised the largely static military thinking of WW1. The Germans used paratroopers to seize some of it.

A lot of the German army still relied on horses and mules for transport at the time. At the time of Munich, the British army was still using supplies that were almost 20 years old and dating back to the WW1. Fighting a modern and well equipped army was a completely different thing to dropping a few bombs on some people in the UK's colonies. The British Expeditionary Force was pushed out of Europe in a matter of weeks with the French forces having collapsed due to pooer leadership. This is the context of events that surrounded Ireland's decisions on neutrality. It is all very well for you to talk about "we" and "us" and how Ireland should have joined the Allies in the conflict. The historical reality was that it was a highly complex situation and there are no easy answers.

Claiming that there was a moral reason is all very well over 80 years after these events. The reality is that the extent of the Holocaust was not known until after WW2.Most people were completely unaware of what was happening at the time. The Wannsee Conference didn't take place until January 1942 and that was where the decisions were made to industrialise mass murder. And yet many of those who complain about Ireland's neutrality in WW2 may never have heard of the Wannsee Conference. The Holocaust is just another "thing" to be used to push the simplistic revisionist agenda that Irish neutrality was wrong and that De Valera was a terrible leader.. If it wasn't the Holocaust, it would be some other event much like you have latched on to a Canadian cartoon and now the Battle Of The Atlantic without ever understanding what happened. It is all very well to try to blame others for decisions taken when you don't even know what affected those decisions.

Good post @jmcc.
Shows why people who are under researched and (not to put a tooth in it at this stage) indoctrinated are largely unfair in their criticism. Of course, like all involved, Ireland can be criticised but there is also praise for managing the period without the benefit of hindsight.

To try and rule out the Treaty Of Versailles as a huge contributory factor as to why another war happened, just because it doesn't suit the pro-British/Allies narrative, and then breathlessly excuse the same combatants because they were broke and tired from that post war period is just bizarre.

The agenda is clear.

Being neutral was Irelands only choice. How its view today is connected to how It's current neutrality is viewed. But that's off topic (mod introductions). But most people aren't really interested in WW2 in Ireland. It's really only people interested in military history or Irish history would have any interest in it.

So the OP premise about how Irish Neutrality was mostly wrong. It's not of interest to most people especially internationally. Being Neutral is viewed mostly as the right choice. It was the only choice in reality. It's there some truth to Ireland was not helpful as it could have been I would say yes. But it's subjective. Was it tainted by German associates certainty. Regardless of the reality that's the perception. Ireland was pro allies in reality. Even if politicians were lackluster.

Does any of it matter now ? Well that's a debate for another thread. (See mod instructions).

I am by no means expert in war history, but it seems to me no country strictly adhered to the Hague Convention On Neutrality.
Even Switzerland is accused of blurring the lines.

Like America we operated a Benevolent form of Neutrality, which was tilted towards one side.

Your insults combined with a rant of AI is no substitute for knowledge. At least I used my own words when I said "You cannot blame ALL of the Nazis, Japanese, Italian aggression on the treaty of Versailles. It was a world war. Japan, for example, lacked strategic mineral resources of its own." You fail to understand that. Of course it is partly to blame, but the nations who took part in the Treaty of Versailles done their best. Nobody thought it would lead to Germany killing 6 million Jews, expanding and invading much of Europe, controlling 6 million square km in Europe, North Africa and the Soviet Union, Japanese aggression and expansion in the far East etc. FrancieBrady blamed Britain for WW2. It is all very well him and you blaming others for decisions taken when you don't even know what affected those decisions, and when the government here in Ireland in the 1930s and 1940s ( not just the war year) done little or nothing to help victims of the war, either by helping in some small way the Allied war effort or by helping refugees etc.

To add insult to injury, how do you think the victims of WW2 and those who paid so dearly in the fight against the Axis would have thought of Dev, on behalf of the Irish people, expressing condolences for the man who caused it all? Even in Germany Hitler is not remember fondly.

Pretty much nothing happened in Ireland during the war.

I don't think the generation that lived through the Emergency would agree unless you sanitise war to military matters only.

War on the scale of WW2 was much more than military manoeuvres

Do you condemn your fellow Republicans ( lets face it, you are a SF supporter and have 70,000 posts arguing for them) like Sean Russell trying to co-operate with the Nazis so? Or do you still defend him knowing what the Nazis did in the war?

The cartoon from the media in Canada was an example that not everyone in Allied countries thought a lot of Dev or of Irish neutrality, to put it mildly, when there was a gap in mid Atlantic and we were denying use of all of our western seaboard to help. I know, because of knowing people who were on ships in the Atlantic at the time and who told me of the feelings and those of some of their comrades on those ships. And they thought less of Dev when he expressed condolences over Hitler, discriminated against Irish people returning home after the war etc.

but the nations who took part in the Treaty of Versailles done their best.

Completely and utterly wrong not to mention preposterous.
Go research properly and read the warnings from FDR and Churchill themselves. The Treaty of Versailles was ignored and British and US business was allowed assist the German re-armament which led directly to WW2

FDR in his 1937 Quarantine Speech:

''Those who cherish their freedom and recognize and respect the equal right of their neighbors to be free and live in peace, must work together for the triumph of law and moral principles in order that peace, justice, and confidence may prevail in the world. There must be a return to a belief in the pledged word, in the value of a signed treaty. There must be recognition of the fact that national morality is as vital as private morality. …''

Churchill (warning his PM and fellow MPs) in 1936

“Germany is arming fast, and no one can say she is not arming on a scale and at a rate which is formidable.”

'Did their best'????

There were still losses to Allied shipping crossing the Atlantic. The Battle of the Atlantic was the longest battle of the war. People also had memories of those lost. You have a lot to learn.

Roosevelt said in his 29 December 1940 “Arsenal of Democracy” speech: “Would Irish freedom be permitted as an amazing pet exception in an unfree world?”

Roosevelt's anger and scorn for Irish neutrality was as strong as Churchill’s. At leas in the year or two before Pearl harbour the U.S. prepared for war, increased their military etc.