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

We were argueabley the most strategically placed neutral country in the world, to have both the UK and US wanting a base on our west coast. They nearly lost the Battle of the Atlantic and if they did, the war in Europe.

Grey is neutral, blue is Axis, Green allied.

Yet Britain when he was p.m. probably had reasonable race relations compared to other western countries at the time? Certainly was a lot better than the USA was then anyway. And better than us, after the Jewish pogroms in Limerick, and not letting in refugees? During WW2 Britain did not care what race, religion, ethnicity you were, millions fought from around the world.

Chirchill's right hand man was an Irishman. Would Dev have had an Englishman as right hand man?

Germany did not win.

Germany did not invade Ireland.

Now you are trying to divert to racial stuff and things that did not happen in Ireland as your arguments and claims repeatedly fail. Will you be quoting Bismark about Ireland or perhaps posting a few cartoons from Punch about the Irish in order to suggest that not only was Ireland's neutrality wrong but Ireland should never have fought for independence? Ireland decided to remain neutral in WW2. Had the War of Independence failed, Ireland would have been part of the UK and would not have been neutral in WW2. Would those two things have satisfied you?

Dev was the man who excused blatant racism. by going out of his way to express condolences for the worst racist in history, the man who killed 6 million in his camps because of race and who started a war that killed 70 to 80 million. No surprise there.

Considering that most posters were not alive in 1945, it would be very unlikely that de Valera was offering condolences on behalf of us all.

And Churchill's racism seems well documented no matter how you try to excuse it

What official offers of a United Ireland and on what terms? Can you provide the details of these official offers?

On another thread (or maybe even on this same thread) @Francis McM will twist and shout and insist that Britain always respects and cherishes the loyal NI Unionists😁
Here's Churchy bartering with them while they're dying in their 1000's for the motherland.

What a guy!

When Dev expressed condolences on behalf of the Irish people, he was not talking about you in 2026. You and the present generation are not that important.

• 
The New York Times, criticized de Valera's visit, suggesting that expressing grief for Hitler was morally outrageous and a misapplication of diplomatic protocol.
• The New York Herald Tribune denounced the gesture as “Neutrality gone mad,” framing it as a grotesque application of formalism in face of unprecedented moral horrors

Churchhill may have been a racist but was he as big a racist as Dev, given millions of people from around the world, of all races, were led by Churchill, whose right hand man was an Irishman? Set up a different thread for that if you want.

At the end of the day, practically no Jews were allowed in to Ireland before or during the war. In 1948 there were 100 Jewsalloed in for one year only on condition they left after one year and the Jewish community looked after them.

Quote "

"From 1933 when the German Legation in Dublin dismissed their Jewish secretary Mrs Simon, the Jewish community in Ireland knew of the impending dangers of Nazi power. The Irish government was aware of the raging antisemitism but like so many other countries, closed its doors to desperate refugees fleeing Nazi Europe. Appeals were made as early as 1933 by former Chief Rabbi Herzog and Robert Briscoe to the Taoiseach Éamon De Valera and the Chief Justice to grant entry to individuals but permission was denied".

"After the war, some German and Austrian Jews sought refuge in Ireland but most were not permitted to stay for long. The government eventually gave permission for 100 Jewish children survivors from Czechoslovakia to stay for one year. They were known as the "Clonyn Castle " children."

Government policy was to not allow anyone into the country who couldn't support themselves. We had massive unemployment of 70,000 with estimates of another 70-130,000 expected to return to Ireland after the war.

Of course this is another no context rant. As always there is more to the situation than @Francis McM wants to consider.

 On 6 July 1938, the pressing situation was that of overwhelmingly Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria and the need to find urgent solutions for their absorption as Adolf Hitler’s Nazi laws made them outcasts in their own countries. Ten days later, the Evian conference was over – with no meaningful outcome. Country after country stood up and expressed sympathy with the refugees, yet offered no significant practical help. The United States itself – represented not by Roosevelt or even an elected official but by a friend of the president called Myron C. Taylor – refused to increase the annual admission quota of 27,370 from Germany and Austria even before the meeting began.

…

Canada stated at Evian that they were only prepared to accept experienced agricultural workers. Britain made an exception for domestic servants, although one particularly picky official said he was “appalled to see the bad type of refugee presenting… so filthily dirty in their person and their clothing that they were utterly unfit to go inside a decent British home.”

Look back and learn: The Evian Conference, 1938

Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Honduras, and Panama stated that they wanted no traders or intellectuals, code words for Jews. Argentina said it had already accommodated enough immigrants from Central Europe. Canada cited its unemployment problem. Australia said that it had no “racial problems” and did not want to create any by bringing in Jewish refugees. Imperial countries such as Britain, France, and the Netherlands said that their tropical territories offered only limited prospects for European refugees. League of Nations High Commissioner Sir Neill Malcolm was openly hostile to the idea of a new refugee organization . . . The Washington Post headlined one story on the conference, “YES, BUT—.” It noted, “it has been a disappointment, if not altogether a surprise . . . that delegates take the floor to say, We feel sorry for the refugees and potential refugees but—.”

The Jewish Refugee Crisis and How the World Responded

Don't want to properly research an issue?? Here's a cartoon shure!

We had no practical way to help them, most of the country didn't even have electricity. Even though we were a poor nation we sent of £3,000,000 in aid to Europe at the time. It's easy to say take 100,000 refugees but what would we do with them? We had no facilities to house them or care for them, we had a poor health system, no employment for them, would they even want to come here? They would probably be better off returning to their bombed out own cities than stuck in a tent in the middle of a field with no water or electricity.

That's not an offer of a UI and it was refused because it wasn't and Dev didn't trust the British.

The actual offer is outlined in your link:

an immediate declaration accepting "the principle" of a united Ireland, 

The rest was wishy washy politicalspeak - 'going forward' 'in the pipeline' and guff that had no firm commitment or guarantees.
Boris, who models himself on Churchie, would echo the offer when he told Unionists decades later 'he'd rather be dead in a ditch than accept a Sea border', as we know, a wet week later he was suggesting it and his parliament voted massively in favour of it.

The "Official Irish Government records" did refer to Britains offer of a U.I. if we co-operated in saving Allied lives in the Atlantic. Over 1100 ships wre lost in 1940 alone.

The "Official Irish Government Records" did not include anything about the Concentration camps, or the plight of the Jews, or the millions of Nazi innocent victims, even though dozens of pages were devoted to what went on in Europe in the closing months of the year when they were liberated. It is as if they did not exist. Not surprising I suppose when Dev and his government did not even allow the media here to use the word Nazi,in case it would offend the poor dears.

Nobody said or suggsted we let in 100,000 but the fact remains "The Irish government was aware of the raging antisemitism but closed its doors to desperate refugees fleeing Nazi Europe."

Yes, I know we let in 100 Jewish children for a year in 1948 provided they only stay for a year and provided the Jewish community here looked after them for that year.