nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Was Collins going to continue the war in the North?

masti123

It seems to be a very grey area in Irish history, while the IRA in the South opposed the Treaty, i've heard numerous times the IRA in Ulster supported Collins as he was arming them and had a plan to continue the war up North. Is this true? If so, why didn't the Free Staters continue with the plan?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Junkyard Tom

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Arthur Griffith's account is very different and he was actually there, so I'd take his version over Tom Barry's.

Michael Collins later claimed that at the last minute Lloyd George threatened the Irish delegates with a renewal of, "terrible and immediate war"

wikipedia.org

I guess Michael Collins was a liar too because the British with their long history of murderous colonial treachery couldn't possibly have threatened anyone with war because their intentions were just and good. You just won't hear a bad word about the British Fred will you?

Funny.

Fratton Fred

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Not by the Free State.

Not what by the free state?

Fratton Fred

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I guess Michael Collins was a liar too because the British with their long history of murderous colonial treachery couldn't possibly have threatened anyone with war because their intentions were just and good. You just won't hear a bad word about the British Fred will you?

Funny.

FFS, from the same Wikipedia article:

but this was not mentioned as a threat in the Irish memorandum about the close of negotiations, but as a personal remark made by Lloyd George to Robert Barton, and merely a reflection of the reality of any military truce.[14] Barton noted that:

At one time he [Lloyd George] particularly addressed himself to me and said very solemnly that those who were not for peace must take full responsibility for the war that would immediately follow refusal by any Delegate to sign the Articles of Agreement.

And if you read the debate in the Dail, Barton clearly states this was in relation to the North

But I guess our resident shinnerbot won't accept that because the collective says otherwise.

Junkyard Tom

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But I guess our resident shinnerbot won't accept that because the collective says otherwise.

Ahh now we see the mask slip. Anyone who is in any way critical of the British is a mindless 'shinnerbot'. What does that make you? You're a British Nationalist of the highest order - you just won't hear a bad word about Britain or the British.

In fact you're such an avowed British Nationalist that you have a hard time accepting that the Irish are a different people to the British and indeed would like to see Ireland back under British administration.

Funny.

Fratton Fred

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Ahh now we see the mask slip. Anyone who is in any way critical of the British is a mindless 'shinnerbot'. What does that make you? You're a British Nationalist of the highest order - you just won't hear a bad word about Britain or the British.

In fact you're such an avowed British Nationalist that you have a hard time accepting that the Irish are a different people to the British and indeed would like to see Ireland back under British administration.

Funny.

Oooh, you lost the argument so resort to the good old ad hominem.

That's pretty pathetic tbh

Junkyard Tom

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Oooh, you lost the argument

Na-na-n-na-naa you lost the argument? How mature of you.

so resort to the good old ad hominem.

You don't understand ad hominem.

Describing me as a 'shinnerbot' is ad hominem. Highlighting views you actually hold is not ad-hom.

Chrissybhoy

newacc2015 wrote: »

Honestly we dodged a bullet. If we got NI like it currently is. This country would be a mess. NI is such a burden on the UK economically. It is literally a banana republic. About a third of its workforce is public sector workers. Its industry is quite small compared to the south

We would achieve nothing if we have NI as part of our Dail. At times they make Alabama seem progressive and liberal

It wasn't then tho England kept hold of the north because economically it was massive for them especially Belfast port.

Collins was probably our greatest soldier and our weakest politician. Should never been sent across to deal with the likes of Lloyd George

flas

RobertKK wrote: »

Why did he sign away the six counties if he wanted them all along?

He didn't sign them away, dev had already gone to meetings previous to the ones Collins had gone to in London and was told in no uncertain terms that's what was happening..for those first meetings dev deliberately left Collins and them at home and brought his own men with him, and then tried to save face by sending Collins to do the signing... Collins had a weird sort of relationship with dev where he thought he was his better, better educated, from better stock etc. It was a time when the class system was still very much alive so felt duty bound to go and do dev's bidding when all indications were he knew that's all they would get

Banjoxed

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Please don't lump everyone in the north into one group. When you say 'they' what you mean is Unionist politicians generally and the DUP in particular.

Some of them haven't moved on from 1690 never mind having to deal with 21st Century issues.

The SDLP with the exception of Clare Hanna, who abstained, voted against allowing abortion in cases of fatal fetal abnormality, so, yup, Alabama.

Nodin

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Was (...................)account.

Indeed. The entire notion of the British state going to war and suppressing a rebellion is a nonsense. It's outside British notions of justice and fair play.

[Deleted User]

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The civil war wasn't about the partition of Ireland, it was about swearing an oath of allegiance to the king.

De Velera wanted to be king himself (which is why he created a presidency with pretty much the exact same powers) of a Catholic state with comely maidens dancing at the crossroads. The last thing he wanted was half a million devout prods getting in the way.

Collins was a far far better man than De Velera and his death is one of the worst things to happen to this state since independence.

Lots of complete and utter nonsense there caused by a complete mangling of history.

The most objectionable being the confusion of one of Dev's objections to the Treaty with the cause of the Civil War.

The Civil War commenced when O'Connor and Mellows took the Four Courts. Mellows spoke of poverty and colonisation, the betrayal of the Republic etc. It wasn't just about an oath, the Treaty was considered a fundamental betrayal. Your summary referring to Dev wanting to be king and prods and dancing and "my guy was better than your guy"...it's car crash stuff.

[Deleted User]

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The civil war wasn't about the partition of Ireland, it was about swearing an oath of allegiance to the king.

De Velera wanted to be king himself (which is why he created a presidency with pretty much the exact same powers) of a Catholic state with comely maidens dancing at the crossroads. The last thing he wanted was half a million devout prods getting in the way.

Collins was a far far better man than De Velera and his death is one of the worst things to happen to this state since independence.

'Tis strange to see a man like yourself praising an Irish Republican who despised English culture and aspired for a revival of Gaelic life and ways.

KingBrian2

Dev and Collins might have patched up had Collins not being killed during the civil war. Cosgrave is held personally responsible for the atrocities that followed and the state that was created. From the Free Staters point of view they were much aggrieved by his death and Griffith's that followed and to make the deeds more difficult were the irregulars attempts to make the country ungovernable and the fragile state moribund.

KomradeBishop

Not suggesting any kind of CT, but it's a bit weird the way the details surrounding Collins death are not very well documented. We have the stories of the supposed (and no reason to doubt...) witnesses and all, about what happened, but some of the details are kind of sketchy and not well fleshed out.

In addition, things like when Collins was allegedly responsible for attacking the Four Courts, leading to 1000 years of Irish historical records being blown up due to a secondary explosion from artillery fire - the historical documentation/details surrounding that specific event, seem to be similarly sketchy.

Arsemageddon

KomradeBishop wrote: »

In addition, things like when Collins was allegedly responsible for attacking the Four Courts, leading to 1000 years of Irish historical records being blown up due to a secondary explosion from artillery fire - the historical documentation/details surrounding that specific event, seem to be similarly sketchy.

The anti-treaty side occupied the Four Courts from mid-April to late June 1923 when the civil war began .During that time they planted explosives in the Public Records Office containing the chancery scrolls and in the land registry office. Their plan was to set off the explosives to act as a distraction if they were attacked and had to escape. There is a copy of an order from Oscar Traynor (Head of the anti-treaty IRA in Dublin) in the Military Archive which ordered the Four Courts Garrison to set off the explosives if attacked.

Prior to the outbreak of hostilities Eoin MacNeill (professor of Medieval Irish History at UCD, Gaelic Leaguer and former head of the Irish Volunteers) repeatedly pleaded with the commander of the Four Courts garrison Rory O'Connor to move the records to a safe place, O'Connor refused.

Whether or not the fires caused by the shelling caused the explosion or whether it was detonated deliberately is moot, the Anti-treaty side had planned to destroy the records and didn't move them to safety in the 3 months they occupied the Four Courts.

It was an act of cultural vandalism every bit as ignorant as those of ISIS or the Taliban blowing up the Banyam Buddhas.

failinis

PC Lackey wrote: »

I hear it costs them 10 billion pounds annually.

And proud of it

Arsemageddon

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The
De Velera wanted to be king himself (which is why he created a presidency with pretty much the exact same powers) of a Catholic state with comely maidens dancing at the crossroads. The last thing he wanted was half a million devout prods getting in the way.
.

This post is breathtakingly ignorant.

Like it or nor DeValera was the democratically elected leader of the country in the 1930s. The constitution he introduced in 1937 is a brilliant document which guaranteed that Ireland would not become a dictatorship by introducing a president whose role it was to intervene should the government attempt to introduce fundamentally undemocratic legislation

In a similar vein it guaranteed the independence of the judiciary (that's why we had to have a referendum on judge pay a few years ago) and the free assembly of the Dail and Seanad.

Bearing in mind that in the 1930s the Nazis created their dictatorship through legal means, Mussolini was in power in Italy, Stalin was in the Soviet Union, the Spanish Civil War was raging and numerous other smaller European were dictatorships - our constitution was the exact opposite of what you claim. It meant that no single individual could dominate the state and made Ireland an independent republic in all but name.

DeValera might have been a bit of a prick, but on this score your wrong.

dresden8

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Collins was a far far better man than De Velera and his death is one of the worst things to happen to this state since independence.

Collins started the civil war on the orders of Churchill. Dying young does wonders for your reputation.

KingBrian2

dresden8 wrote: »

Collins started the civil war on the orders of Churchill. Dying young does wonders for your reputation.

He would have ended it if his life was not cut short by anti treaty forces.