Nelson's Pillar

BalcombeSt4 · 10-03-2016 03:00AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

When they are Nazi collaborators, yes they should.

Were they really Nazi collaborators? Were they helping the Nazi's round up Jews or other minorities or were they people just taking advantage of the war to secure weapons like the Casemeant did in 1916? Take into consideration 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for the left-wing government in Spain against Franco's, Mussolini's & Hitler's forces while the 100's of the Blueshirts took the side of the fascists.

BalcombeSt4 · 10-03-2016 03:12AM

maryishere wrote: »

But you justify other republican bombings which put lives at risk?
It was a miracle nobody was killed or seriously injured when the bomb went off in Dublins main street and the street below was covered in rubble. No warning was given. The fellow who planted the bomb admits he deliberately went home and fell asleep until the next day. O'Connel street when the bomb went off could just have easily been another Enniskillen or Omagh, in human terms. If the bomb in Eniskillen and Omagh went off without the loss of life there, would you condone them then?

Its very confusing. You condone a bomb carelessly and recklessly left in Dublin, by the IRA or associated individuals, which destroyed a Dublin tourist attraction / viewing platform paid for by Dubliners by voluntary donations (inc some from the 400 Dubliners who worked with Nelson) , designed by an Irishman and built by Dubliners, and which miraculously did not kill or injure people on O'Connell st - and yet you pick and choose which bombings in N. Ireland you condone or do not condone?

It's a war. The British helped many end many Irish lives when they helped loyalists plant bombs in Dublin & other counties in the South. They were responisble for the biggest massacre of the troubles ffs, a massacre our government very worryingly didn't seem to give a **** about, probably because the British government was forcing them to drop it.

It's also the 40th anniversary this year of the Flagstaff Hill incident, when a 8 man SAS unit who were on a mission to kill a Repulican living in the South.. was captured by Gardai & the 26 county Army.

10-03-2016 06:36AM

Strazdas wrote: »

Republicans I assume? I'd still say that Irish republicans planting a bomb in the city centre of our capital was outrageous. They couldn't even claim they were bombing their British oppressors and came up with the lame excuse they were bombing a "symbol" of said oppression.

Unlike all those bombs planted in this city by the British state in Easter Week murdering men, women and children indiscriminately. No doubt the Irish Volunteers (or "IRA" as the historical illiterates would call them) with their handful of little guns were on the British Helga gunship and behind the British artillery responsible for this callous and utterly wanton mass bombing of Dublin in 1916.

British bombing of Dublin, 1916

10-03-2016 07:01AM

maryishere wrote: »

However you are failing to understand ... the bigger picture

The "bigger picture" is that France, Tsarist Russia, Azerbaijan, Outer Mongolia or anywhere else was not occupying Ireland. The British Empire was. A French invasion would have challenged British colonial rule and all its egregious sectarianism in Ireland, not us native Irish faoi chois. Vive la France.

10-03-2016 07:11AM

maryishere wrote: »

it was a very popular tourist attraction.

Judging by your posts, it was an even more popular symbol of British imperial supremacy in Ireland and elsewhere, the removal of which continues to cause ineffable pain to apologists for British imperialism.

10-03-2016 07:42AM

maryishere wrote: »

There were plenty of reports listed earlier by others. Did you not read them? However, I will give you a different one.

http://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/the-catholic-question-in-the-eighteenth-century-11/

Perhaps next time it would be wise to actually read what you purport to have read. You're telling us how awful the threat of a French invasion was, but your link to Bartlett is clear that the sole reason the native Irish got advances in the 1790s was precisely because the British were very afraid of Irish support for the French in the event of an invasion: "The British government was sufficiently alarmed at the possibility of an alliance between the Northern Dissenters, Irish Catholics and Dublin radicals that it urged that major concessions be made to the Catholics in order to head off this development."

Ooops.

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 09:19AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Perhaps next time it would be wise to actually read what you purport to have read. You're telling us how awful the threat of a French invasion was, but your link to Bartlett is clear that the sole reason the native Irish got advances in the 1790s was precisely because the British were very afraid of Irish support for the French in the event of an invasion: "The British government was sufficiently alarmed at the possibility of an alliance between the Northern Dissenters, Irish Catholics and Dublin radicals that it urged that major concessions be made to the Catholics in order to head off this development."

Ooops.

A very real threat I guess, seeing as Irish nationalists were willing to collaborate with the Nazis.

Have you found anything to back up your earlier claim by the way. We wouldn't want people thinking you are speaking rubbish.

whisky_galore · 10-03-2016 09:24AM

Deleted User wrote: »

You don't know what you're talking about. Russell went to the Russia first before Germany and was turned away, does that many him (and the IRA of the era) communists? Of course not, Russell was a militant and didn't give two ****s about ideology apart from Republican irredentism.

He very much subscribed to the classic Fenian idea of 'Englands difficulty was Irelands opportunity' and thats what led him to Germany not a subscription to Nazism. Also you have to contextualise it too, people didnt know the true extent of Nazism and what little information that did exist was dismissed by many as propaganda, I mean the Irish people had witnessed similar propaganda issued against the IRA just two decades previously.

In terms of ideological commitments to fascism, Ireland do have some linkage, not within the IRA but through the first President of Fine Gael, Eoin O Duffy who offered to raise a battalion of Irishmen for Nazi Germany.

O'Duffy was well connected with the European fascist movement and had visited Italy and Germany on many occasions as well as attending European Fascism conferences. He and his Blueshirts went to fight democracy in Spain alongside Hitler and Mussolini while their cause and the cause of fascism was championed in the Free State parliament by Fine Gael and in particular John Dillion.

Similarly our (soon to be former) Minister for Foreign Affairs father founded Ailtirí na hAiséirghe, the Irish anti-semitic party which encouraged the Free State to 'rout the jews out of Ireland'. He and the main membership body of the party later found their way to Fine Gael.

Any port in a storm...the faintest whiff of Nazism is hard to wash off though.

maryishere · 10-03-2016 09:51AM

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Take into consideration 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for the left-wing government in Spain against Franco's, Mussolini's & Hitler's forces while the 100's of the Blueshirts took the side of the fascists.

Any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces? DeVelera actually interned some IRA, and some IRA actually died in hunger strike here during "the emergency". Not taught that in your hatred of Britain, were you?
At the time about 100,000 Irish people quietly enlisted in the British forces and many more supported the allied war effort in other ways - joining their merchant navy, working in factories etc. That is well known and documented.

Now, any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces?

FTA69 · 10-03-2016 10:02AM

maryishere wrote: »

Any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces? DeVelera actually interned some IRA, and some IRA actually died in hunger strike here during "the emergency". Not taught that in your hatred of Britain, were you?
At the time about 100,000 Irish people quietly enlisted in the British forces and many more supported the allied war effort in other ways - joining their merchant navy, working in factories etc. That is well known and documented.

Now, any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces?

What are you on about? He said that Republicans fought against Mussolini's forces in Spain.

BalcombeSt4 · 10-03-2016 10:12AM

maryishere wrote: »

Any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces? DeVelera actually interned some IRA, and some IRA actually died in hunger strike here during "the emergency". Not taught that in your hatred of Britain, were you?
At the time about 100,000 Irish people quietly enlisted in the British forces and many more supported the allied war effort in other ways - joining their merchant navy, working in factories etc. That is well known and documented.

Now, any link showing how 100's of Republicans & IRA fought for Mussolini's & Hitler's forces?

Haha. It's a well known fact the IRA were at the front line during the battle of Stalingrad fighting of the Soviet hoards with their bare hands. And they fought back the Allies in 1943 so Mussolini still had a state in North Italy - the Italian Social Republic. The IRA were staunch Catholic Conservative, Left-Wing, Communists, Fascists,Nazi's in the 30's & 40's

FA Hayek · 10-03-2016 10:13AM

The Golden Miller wrote: »

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?

If that were true where did the money come to build it?

Nodin · 10-03-2016 10:27AM

maryishere wrote: »

But .................

Its very confusing. ////////////////?

No, it really isn't.

10-03-2016 11:01AM

Still waiting patiently to freds reply to nodins straightforward question of why he thinks the british empire was not glorious. I am genuinely curious what your reply is fred

steddyeddy · 10-03-2016 11:37AM

A French invasion was only bad for Britain. The French sent thousands of soldiers to aid in Irish rebellion.

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 11:46AM

droidman123 wrote: »

Still waiting patiently to freds reply to nodins straightforward question of why he thinks the british empire was not glorious. I am genuinely curious what your reply is fred

No empire was glorious. The reasons are pretty obvious.they generally involve taking over and subjugating people.

Now maybe you can get Nodin and Fauranach to answer their questions.

kingchess · 10-03-2016 11:46AM

droidman123 wrote: »

Still waiting patiently to freds reply to nodins straightforward question of why he thinks the british empire was not glorious. I am genuinely curious what your reply is fred

IT was GLORIOUS. for a start the sky was a deeper blue,the summers were longer , it only rained gently at night,everyone knew their place and there was plenty food and free drink for every one.

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 11:55AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

A French invasion was only bad for Britain. The French sent thousands of soldiers to aid in Irish rebellion.

If the rebellion had succeeded and Napoleon had a foothold in Ireland, he wouldn't have left.

Within a year, the Irish would be begging the British for help.

FA Hayek · 10-03-2016 12:09PM

riffmongous wrote: »

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

Unfortunately there was no record of who donated what but the consensus is that it was widespread. Regardless, there was no mandate to blow the pilar up despite all the foaming of the mouth rhetoric.

kingchess · 10-03-2016 12:13PM

Because being ruled by the French empire would be worse than being ruled by the British empire? And one thing you can be sure of-there would be a few posters on here defending the glory of our French overlords just as they defend the glory of our English overlords.

whisky_galore · 10-03-2016 12:15PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the rebellion had succeeded and Napoleon had a foothold in Ireland, he wouldn't have left.

Within a year, the Irish would be begging the British for help.

Perhaps, who knows? Foreign armies initially welcomed with open arms who got rid of hated colonial masters sometimes turned out as bad as or worse than what was there before, Japanese in Vietnam and Burma, Americans in the Philippines etc.

steddyeddy · 10-03-2016 12:17PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the rebellion had succeeded and Napoleon had a foothold in Ireland, he wouldn't have left.

Within a year, the Irish would be begging the British for help.

I don't see any evidence for that.

Nodin · 10-03-2016 12:25PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the rebellion had succeeded and Napoleon had a foothold in Ireland, he wouldn't have left.

Within a year, the Irish would be begging the British for help.

Why?

Nodin · 10-03-2016 12:26PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No empire was glorious. The reasons are pretty obvious.they generally involve taking over and subjugating people.
.

Then why the fuck would we want to memoralise that in modern life Fred?

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 12:38PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Perhaps, who knows? Foreign armies initially welcomed with open arms who got rid of hated colonial masters sometimes turned out as bad as or worse than what was there before, Japanese in Vietnam and Burma, Americans in the Philippines etc.

Yeah, it's counterfactual history, but the French empire were no better or worse than the British empire and their involvement in Irish rebellions was anything but altruistic.

There's no way of knowing what would have happened, but it is optimistic to think Ireland would have been better for it.

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 12:39PM

Nodin wrote: »

Then why the fuck would we want to memoralise that in modern life Fred?

Where is it being memorialised?

Nodin · 10-03-2016 12:41PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Where is it being memorialised?

Pull the other one Fred. You're telling me its viewed as a national shame across the water? Or that the fanboys here condemn it?

Fratton Fred · 10-03-2016 12:55PM

Nodin wrote: »

Pull the other one Fred. You're telling me its viewed as a national shame across the water? Or that the fanboys here condemn it?

It's viewed as part of history, which is what it is.

FA Hayek · 10-03-2016 01:19PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

A French invasion was only bad for Britain. The French sent thousands of soldiers to aid in Irish rebellion.

Would you say the same about a German invasion in 1940?

It is foolish to think if, and its a big if, that if the French liberated Ireland from Britain in 1798 that it would have just installed some sort of democratic Irish system of government and be on their merry way. 19th century French history tells us a very very different story. We just would have swapped one empire for another and life under Napoleon would have been much worse dare I say.

French history at this time was hugely violent.

10-03-2016 01:19PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Where is it being memorialised?

Well, theres a statue of Robert Clive in King Charles Street, Whitehall.

Nelson's Pillar

Comments