Sheeps wrote: » You are correct in that there would be a contradiction if you had a colonised nation fighting for an oppressive empire for the continued colonisation and oppression of the nation and it's people. If however you had those same colonised people fighting for the oppressive nation against a common enemy that paradox is no longer applicable. Irish soldiers fighting in Irish men in Irish regiments of the British army in World War 2 is a perfect example of this. It's no different to honouring the Irish who fought in World War 2 with the Americans or Canadians for that matter. World War 1 is also an example of this to a lesser extent, although you could undermine this point by the fact that there was an element of people going to war for glory which had arguably tied in with strengthening the British Empire. This however was also also the case on the German side, so there was still a common enemy and for this reason the logic same should apply.
Sound of Silence wrote: » By it's very definition, one could hardly consider the Rememberance Day celebrations as being a forum for inward looking criticism, as far as the British Military is concerned. Much like Republican memorials, there doesn't really seem to be any real qualification for who is being celebrated.
philologos wrote: » No but if you're going to claim that the British were solely oppressors that's simply just not true. The reality is that there were Irish people involved in this conflict. To ignore that seems to be deceit about history. If you're going to bring up the British part of the conflict, give us the whole story.
LordSutch wrote: » Just one word bothers me here, and that is the word 'celebrations', for if there is one thing about poppy day/remembrance sunday that stands out, its the fact that it most certainly is not a celebration, but rather a commemoration of the fallen/dead (with heads bowed and a somber tone). Maybe some peope do refer to the 11th as a celebration? but many is the time I personally have been close to tears at a remembrance service, such is the sadness & the realisation of how how many have died in awful conditions, and we commemorate their loss . . .http://www.crewsnest.vispa.com/remember.htm Thats just my personal view.
Lelantos wrote: » Your view of history seems to be 50 years long, can you please tell me when this island of ours was last completely "Irish owned"
pmcmahon wrote: » I always end up having the same argument with republican heads,trying to explain to them how there is no such thing as the Irish people as such as Ireland is just a combination of various invasions. If they hate the british they should hate the vikings equally.
BX 19 wrote: » Because an estimated 30,000 people died in WW1 from Ireland. Simple as. It's a symbol remembering those who died, and nothing more.
Sound of Silence wrote: » I've explained why it's a myopic view to suggest that the Poppy should be wholeheartedly accepted by everyone. The fact that the Northern Irish troubles are often shoe-horned into the debate clearly indicates that the Poppy remains a sensitive and charged topic for a number of people on this on this forum.
Sound of Silence wrote: » The entire topic seems politically charged and filled with a wry condescension. There's no way of escaping this, whenever Poppy advocates continue to consider those who generally don't concern themselves with the Remeberance, for whatever reason they might have, as being essentially immoral, non-progressive, and "narrow-minded", as you put so delicately. Such an attitude will never win any supporters.
Sound of Silence wrote: » By it's very definition, one could hardly consider the Rememberance Day celebrations as being a forum for inward looking criticism, as far as the British Military is concerned. Much like Republican memorials, there doesn't really seem to be any real qualification for who is being celebrated. For that reason, Nationalists will often distance themselves from what they would consider an all qualifying celebration of British Militarism. I imagine the same would apply with Southern Unionists when 2016 rolls around.
Feathers wrote: » I think it's a little ironic that you brought up people's sole idea of Irishness as being small-mindedly anti-British & how we should move away from that but at the same time, want me to justify my reasons for not wearing a poppy with reference to the IRA...
philologos wrote: » 2) If you make claims about the British doing X, Y or Z in Ireland. Then I expect you to be honest and claim that much of that violence came from the Irish side also.
philologos wrote: » I mean that it is nothing substantial to say that as Unionists / Loyalists could argue that the nationalists provoked them much as you've said the loyalists provoked the nationalists.
philologos wrote: » I honestly don't care if you partake in wearing it. I have issue with ignorant claims in respect to Irish people who would, and do honour the dead at war on November 11th by wearing a poppy.
The Northern Irish troubles come into it because the anti-poppy side tend to say look at what the British army did here, here and here. (Ignoring the fact that the poppy is worn internationally), the flipside is look at Irish violence against Britain both in the early 20th century, and in the late 20th century, and in Northern Ireland at present.
What do you think constitutes the Remembrance Day commemorations? Have you been to a Remembrance Day service in Ireland on the 11th of September? I have, and honestly, it was never a celebration of British militarism.
By the by, I take issue to you claiming this has anything to do with southern unionism. Many people who support a 26 county republic at least, remember the dead at war on the 11th of November. The poppy has nothing to do with unionism. Bringing in that topic is disingenuous.
philologos wrote: » 1) A lot of Irish people do phrase Irishness in terms of a rejection of what is British, some on this thread.
philologos wrote: » 2) If you make claims about the British doing X, Y or Z in Ireland. Then I expect you to be honest and claim that much of that violence came from the Irish side also. If I can't expect you to be honest, there's no point in discussing this and expecting an accurate, objective and fair assessment of the entire conflict.
philologos wrote: » 3) It's not about reasons to not wear it. Quite frankly, I couldn't give a toss whether you do or not. It's when you make a silly reference to the poppy somehow glorifying British violence in Ireland that I look into Irish instigated violence. If you don't want the topic to come up, don't claim the poppy glorifies British violence in Ireland.
I do not wear a poppy, as I don't want to support British occupations, historical or on-going, either financially or symbolically.
philologos wrote: » I honestly don't(.......) the Poppy.
Sound of Silence wrote: » As I've mentioned before, the fact that the issue of the troubles in Northern Ireland continues to raise it's head indicates that the topic remains politically charged. This is best evidenced in Northern Ireland, where the iconography of Remembrance has been hijacked by Unionists and Loyalists for their own political ends.
pumpkin.pie wrote: » Is there anywhere you can even buy them over here? I've never seen anyone in Galway with them and I'd certainly wear one.
Nodin wrote: » Would you care to answer the question I put to you earlier? Are you ok with the people involved with these conflicts and these incidents in particular receiving your cash?http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...lagers-coveruphttp://www.thenational.ae/news/world...ing-uk-apologyhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ore-atrocitieshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...detention-camp This is the third time I've had to ask.
Japer wrote: » Many millions of people have served in the armed forces. If it were not for the armed forces we would all be speaking german or russian by now. Picking out a few alleged wrongful incidents long ago is like pointing out a few criminals / law-brakers in the 300,000 odd strong public service and asking taxpayers are they happy to be giving them cash.
Nodin wrote: » "alleged wrongful incidents"? It was policy to deal with the Kenyans and Greeks that way. Or did they destroy those Foreign Office papers for the "lolz" Do you think those colonies were "alleged wrongful incidents" too? Somebody get a red marker and colour in all those places for the craic?
Sound of Silence wrote: » And what are these claims that I've made? My argument essentially boils down to the fact that no one should feel obligated to wear a poppy for fear of being considered "narrow-minded". You might not feel that you're confronting my own personal choice, but it's heavily implied.
Yes, and I'm sure you can understand that people's opinions are often formed by what they actually see and experience, rather than what we are asked to believe. The British Army did not endear themselves to the Nationalist Population, and as such they are often remembered with revulsion rather than celebration.
It's this immediate memory which is most lasting, and which ultimately colours peoples view of the Poppy. It's not terribly hard to understand.
And what exactly would you constitute as a celebration of Military service?
Unless the Royal British Legion is inherently pacifist, then I would imagine it would be entirely supportive of all it's British veterans, regardless of what conflict they happened to be involved in.
From watching the Remembrance Day commemoration on television, I'm led to believe that it's a sombre affair. What difference this is likely to make to my own personal views, I'm entirely unaware.
As I've mentioned before, the fact that the issue of the troubles in Northern Ireland continues to raise it's head indicates that the topic remains politically charged. This is best evidenced in Northern Ireland, where the iconography of Remembrance has been hijacked by Unionists and Loyalists for their own political ends.
GRMA wrote: » It's a British nationalist symbol. I'm not a west brit so I won't be wearing one. Don't forget it's not just about WW1, but even if it were I still wouldn't, the Irish were fighting for their freedom against the british at that time. Wearing a poppy is nothing less than spitting on their graves.
philologos wrote: » The republicans didn't much endear themselves to them or those who disagreed with them in Northern Ireland either. Not to mention a bomb campaign in central London, Guildford, Brighton and numerous other locations. The problem I have with your assessment is that it is one-sided and leaves much of the truth out.
philologos wrote: » You mean that one Easter during WW1 a small militant group started a revolt in Dublin city centre with the majority of the population there disapproving of it? Most if not all of the Irish push for independence / home rule was done in parliament in Westminster.
philologos wrote: » When people bang on about British violence in Ireland, its inevitable that Irish violence in Britain will be brought up. The facts are it was a conflict of two sides. I never said opposition to the 1916 Easter rising reflected opposition to a republic. That's why I mentioned the hard work that was done in parliament.
thecommietommy wrote: » After all it's for a foreign army, I don't see anyone wearing an emblem for the French, American, Spanish army. Ok some say it's for charity for injured British soldiers, but surely if they join up it's up to the British govt to properly look after them when they are injured and not pestering people expecting charity ?
