Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

Nelson's Pillar

1…2324262829…38

Comments

  • #752
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    If you thought Britain engaging in WW2 meant 5 billion people would be wiped out, do you think that would be a good idea?


    The population of the world was only a couple of billion people in 1939 so your question does not make sense, and just highlights your lack of general knowledge.

    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Would you be here celebrating our great defenders of liberty then? Hypotheticals are great, aren't they?
    If anyone wiped out double the population of the earth in 1939 I would not be here now, and neither would you.

    Yes, hypotheticals are great. It was by a stroke of good luck nobody was killed in the republican bombing of Nelsons pillar in '66. Some supporters of that bombing of that Dublin tourist attraction / viewing platform also condone some other republican bombings in subsequent years. If people were killed by that bombing of the pillar would you still think it was a great idea?


  • #753
    The flying mouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭The flying mouse


    Strazdas wrote: »
    Why would they want it removed.....as an eyesore that was ruining the look of O'Connell Street or something? It seems to be the case that nearly every single person in Dublin climbed it's staircase at some point and looked out over Dublin from it's viewing platform. That doesn't sound anything like a city that was irritated or angered by it's presence.

    It was a british symbol of an english naval commander in the middle of a capital city in its infancy in independence and you cant see why it should be gone ? goodnight sir.


    Symbols are what unite and divide people. Symbols give us our identity, our self-image,
    our way of explaining ourselves to others. Symbols in turn determine the kinds of stories
    we tell; and the stories we tell determine the kind of history we make and remake.
    Mary Robinson, Inauguration speech as President of Ireland, December 3, 1990


  • #754
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    The population of the world was only a couple of billion people in 1939 so your question does not make sense, and just highlights your lack of general knowledge.



    If anyone wiped out double the population of the earth in 1939 I would not be here now, and neither would you.

    Yes, hypotheticals are great. It was by a stroke of good luck nobody was killed in the republican bombing of Nelsons pillar in '66. Some supporters of that bombing of that Dublin tourist attraction / viewing platform also condone some other republican bombings in subsequent years. If people were killed by that bombing of the pillar would you still think it was a great idea?

    So if that couple of billion were wiped out and a few weren't which included your family, would you still think them engaging was a great idea? Hypotheticals don't have to be completely accurate in numbers if the point still stands as it's all made up anyway.


  • #755
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    So if that couple of billion were wiped out and a few weren't which included your family,
    You ask that if the whole population of the earth was wiped out in 1939 , except for my family, do I think that would be a good idea? The answer is no.
    Now talk sense.

    If people were killed by that "no warning" bombing of the pillar would you still think it was a great idea?


  • #756
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    It seems like you're going to have to demonise the vast majority of the British political elite in the 1930s, and the tens of thousands of British imperialists/nationalists who volunteered to help the Nazis occupy the Sudetenland in 1938, if collaboration with Nazism is the qualification.

    I presume you have something to support your claims?


  • Advertisement
  • #757
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    You ask that if the whole population of the earth was wiped out in 1939 , except for my family, do I think that would be a good idea? The answer is no.
    Now talk sense.

    If people were killed by that "no warning" bombing of the pillar would you still think it was a great idea?

    No, I said which included your family, not except your family. The implication that many more were killed but not everyone. You see I was using hyperbole to emphasise a point, seeing as all your nonsense is made up hypotheticals anyway. Now what numbers were acceptable to die before you'd stop cheerleading the Empire?


  • #758
    Strazdas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,093 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    The flying mouse wrote: »
    It was a british symbol of an english naval commander in the middle of a capital city in its infancy in independence and you cant see why it should be gone ? goodnight sir.

    Which had been there for 150 years and was an established landmark in the city. And just how insecure would people have to be in their sense of Irishness to feel threatened by a monument that was a century and a half old?


  • #759
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    riffmongous wrote: »
    Hardly proof of a mandate, who did the money come from?

    Read my post again and read the words 'Voluntary' and 'People of Dublin' a few times.


  • #760
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Now what numbers were acceptable to die before you'd stop cheerleading the Empire?

    "cheerleading"?? I can see the good and bad - or at least I try to - in all aspects of history. I mentioned ones other than the British Empire such as the Spanish, French, Italian, Japanese, Chinese. Empires have been around for thousands of years. The "dastardly British" you hate did not invent it. The earliest known empire appeared in Egypt when King Narmer of the Upper Valley who conquered lower Valley circa 3000 BC and laid the foundations for the Old Kingdom. The 7th century saw the emergence of the Islamic Empire, also referred to as the Arab Empire. The Rashidun Caliphate expanded from the Arabian Peninsula and swiftly conquered the Persian Empire and much of the Byzantine Roman Empire. Its successor state, the Umayyad Caliphate, expanded across North Africa and into the Iberian Peninsula. By the beginning of the 8th century, the Umayyad Caliphate had become the largest empire in history, it would not be surpassed in size until the establishment of the Mongol Empire in the 13th century. In 750 the Caliphate clashed with the Tang China at Talas. By this time only these two Empires stretched between the Atlantic and the Pacific.

    Anyway, your question "If you thought Britain engaging in WW2 meant 5 billion people would be wiped out..." does not make sense as the population of the world then was only a few billion. You cannot blame Britain in WW2 for wanting to wipe out the world. Unless you are seriously indoctrinated, you cannot continue to blame Britain for everything.


  • #761
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    That's the best answer you got? So a few unionists/loyal British subjects fund a statue and all of a sudden it representative of the majority Irish Catholic population of Dublin/Ireland and has a mandate to be there? Since when does voluntary funding from a certain demograph equal a mandate? So if we go and find a few neo-nazi sympathisers in Dublin who will voluntarily pay for a statue of Hitler then that means there's a mandate to erect a statue of him in Dublin?

    Now I'll ask again, seeing as you brought mandates into this, where was there a mandate from the people to put it up?

    Sectarian post is Sectarian.
    The mandate is obvious, you just don't like the historical facts or the answer.


  • Advertisement
  • #762
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    "cheerleading"?? I can see the good and bad - or at least I try to - in all aspects of history. I mentioned ones other than the British Empire such as the Spanish, French, Italian, Japanese, Chinese. Empires have been around for thousands of years. The "dastardly British" you hate did not invent it. The earliest known empire appeared in Egypt when King Narmer of the Upper Valley who conquered lower Valley circa 3000 BC and laid the foundations for the Old Kingdom. The 7th century saw the emergence of the Islamic Empire, also referred to as the Arab Empire. The Rashidun Caliphate expanded from the Arabian Peninsula and swiftly conquered the Persian Empire and much of the Byzantine Roman Empire. Its successor state, the Umayyad Caliphate, expanded across North Africa and into the Iberian Peninsula. By the beginning of the 8th century, the Umayyad Caliphate had become the largest empire in history, it would not be surpassed in size until the establishment of the Mongol Empire in the 13th century. In 750 the Caliphate clashed with the Tang China at Talas. By this time only these two Empires stretched between the Atlantic and the Pacific.

    Anyway, you question "If you thought Britain engaging in WW2 meant 5 billion people would be wiped out..." does not make sense as the population of the world then was only a few billion. You cannot blame Britain in WW2 for wanting to wipe out the world. I know you are seriously indoctrinated, but you cannot continue to blame Britain for everything.

    So because there was several empires then that makes Britain's recently murderous past acceptable? Where do I blame Britain for everything? You see I don't because unlike you I can be objective. All your posts really show is a defense of anything you perceive as "British". Maybe you'll notice I only jump in to provide balance to your regular misrepresentations and bias

    Anyway, where's the cut off point in the number of deaths that make Britain's engagement in WW2 acceptable?


  • #763
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Sectarian post is Sectarian.
    The mandate is obvious, you just don't like the historical facts or the answer.

    Considering you've provided 0 facts. Where is this elusive mandate? If we can get a certain demographic in Dublin to fund a statue of Hitler then it has a mandate to be there ye?


  • #764
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Nodin wrote: »
    Suppose aliens invaded. Suppose the post stopped. Suppose cats develop opposable thumbs.

    Well we all know that bombs planted in city and town centres are always always harmless! Sure whats was the harm to plant a bomb in an urban centre with no warning!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
    I am surprised that people just won't come out with support for the Omagh bombing the way some have been talking.


  • #765
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Considering you've provided 0 facts. Where is this elusive mandate? If we can get a certain demographic in Dublin to fund a statue of Hitler then it has a mandate to be there ye?

    No, because it would not getting planning permission and there would be widespread opposition to it. No such wide spread opposition was recored at the time to the pillar. You can of course try get these facts of opposition yourself...
    oh and please no more sectarian nonsense.


  • #766
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    No, because it would not getting planning permission and there would be widespread opposition to it. No such wide spread opposition was recored at the time to the pillar. You can of course try get these facts of opposition yourself...
    oh and please no more sectarian nonsense.

    Ok, so obtaining planning permission off a sectarian government who were put in place to represent only 10% of the population is all that's needed for a mandate then?

    Here's a fact, they couldn't even gather enough money from their voluntary fund to build it. Maybe this shows there was a mandate to not have it at all?


  • #767
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    .....Britain's recently murderous past acceptable?

    Britain is a democracy, and indeed one where a very large number of Irish people has emigrated to and found a better life than in Ireland. What "recently murderous past" are you talking about, and what country are you comparing it to?
    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Anyway, where's the cut off point in the number of deaths that make Britain's engagement in WW2 acceptable?
    deaths of who? Nazi, Japanese or other Axis combatants? Whatever number it
    took until they surrendered as the nations were at war and war is war. The 135,000 British / Australian/ allied troops ( including some Irishmen) captured in Singapore / Malaysia were guests of the Japanese Empire and not exactly treated very well. Useful extermination, some would call it.


  • #768
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Where is this elusive mandate? If we can get a certain demographic in Dublin to fund a statue of Hitler then it has a mandate to be there ye?

    Was there a certain demographic in Dublin to fund the statue to your hero Sean Russell, the IRA Irishman who callaborated with the Nazis?


  • #769
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    Britain is a democracy, and indeed one where a very large number of Irish people has emigrated to and found a better life than in Ireland. What "recently murderous past" are you talking about, and what country are you comparing it to?


    deaths of who? Nazi, Japanese or other Axis combatants? Whatever number it
    took until they surrendered as the nations were at war and war is war. The 135,000 British / Australian/ allied troops ( including some Irishmen) captured in Singapore / Malaysia were guests of the Japanese Empire and not exactly treated very well. Useful extermination, some would call it.

    About as recent as the pIRA. Even more so when we factor in the middle-east. What do you think? So what if Irish people emigrated there? Why were they forced to emigrate in the first place? The least England could do.

    Deaths of who? Forget it. You can't even follow the hypothetical logic you brought in


  • #770
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    Was there a certain demographic in Dublin to fund the statue to your hero Sean Russell, the IRA Irishman who callaborated with the Nazis?

    Nope, but I'm not the one who brought mandates into this Arlene. I couldn't care what statue has a mandate or not, I'm just debating the point on someone else's deluded logic. Try to keep up


  • #771
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    About as recent at the pIRA.

    You seriously think the UK, a nation of approx 65 million people , has a "recently murderous past" because of its response to the PIRA ? Seriously? You are aware that the PIRA / INLA etc killed far more than the British forces? And for most of the troubles, more people were killed in car accidents than in violence?

    I suppose seeing as you support no warning bombings, I should not be surprised.

    Do you support the republicans who placed the Le Mon bomb too?


  • Advertisement
  • #772
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Read my post again and read the words 'Voluntary' and 'People of Dublin' a few times.
    Great, so I'm assuming you have access to the list of donors and can tell us how many people contributed and how much? Please post here so we can see how large the mandate was


  • #773
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Nope, but I'm not the one who brought mandates into this Arlene.

    Arlene? Thats just childish. I am not Arlene and did not call you names.


  • #774
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    You seriously think the UK, a nation of approx 65 million people , has a "recently murderous past" because of its response to the PIRA ? Seriously? You are aware that the PIRA / INLA etc killed far more than the British forces? And for most of the troubles, more people were killed in car accidents than in violence?

    I suppose seeing as you support no warning bombings, I should not be surprised.

    It's response to the IRA or the sectarian state it upheld which created the pIRA? Your perspective is always to look at it from Britain's point of view yet I'm the biased one? Want to tell us about the Glananne gang? The MRF? UDR? The supplying of weapons and intelligence to loyalist paramilitaries. You're right though, Britain were the good guys all along. You miss the show on state collusion last summer on RTE?


  • #775
    Strazdas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,093 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Well we all know that bombs planted in city and town centres are always always harmless! Sure whats was the harm to plant a bomb in an urban centre with no warning!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
    I am surprised that people just won't come out with support for the Omagh bombing the way some have been talking.

    Not to mention the fact that whatever way it was dressed up, the blowing up of the Pillar amounted to the IRA bombing Dublin city centre. It was not an attack on British imperialism but an assault on our capital city.

    There is nothing that can ever justify the IRA planting bombs in our cities (and we all know the sinister direction this phenomenon eventually headed to eg. the British ambassador and a young female assistant being blown up in Dublin ten years later and then the Mountbatten murders).


  • #776
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    Arlene? Thats just childish.

    You're right. Sorry Ruth Patterson. Didn't mean to offend you. Arlene is far too moderate for your liking


  • #777
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Strazdas wrote: »
    Not to mention the fact that whatever way it was dressed up, the blowing up of the Pillar amounted to the IRA bombing Dublin city centre. It was not an attack on British imperialism but an assault on our capital city.

    There is nothing that can ever justify the IRA planting bombs in our cities (and we all know the sinister direction this phenomenon eventually headed to eg. the British ambassador and a young female assistant being blown up in Dublin ten years later and then the Mountbatten murders).
    It was not blown up by the IRA


  • #778
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    You're right. Sorry Ruth Patterson. Didn't mean to offend you. Arlene is far too moderate for your liking
    And I am not Ruth Patterson either.


  • #779
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,785 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    maryishere wrote: »
    And I am not Ruth Patterson either.

    Could have fooled me. She to moderate too?


  • #780
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Anyone supplied any details about the democratic aspect of the placement of the statue yet? I suspect like all colonialism it may be representative of a foreign power imposing its culture on a smaller country's culture (well duh).

    Nelson didn't represent the Irish. He was a great man in a lot of ways and was supportive of equal pay for his workers but he's not part of our culture.

    Cue the craic smoker saying 500 Irish men (out of several million) worked under him.


  • Advertisement
  • #781
    maryishere
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,549 ✭✭✭maryishere


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    You're right though, Britain were the good guys all along.

    I never said that, it is not and never was perfect. No country or nation ever was.

    But I would put more trust in their system of governance than one ran by the IRA, and I would not condone no warning bomb attacks, unlike you.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement