Poppy

Odhinn · 09-11-2018 8:02am

Folkstonian wrote: »

What is so terrible about showing acknowledgement and gratitude for soldiers serving now or in recent conflicts? Do you support the work of the Irish defence forces in peacekeeping roles? Nobody tries to deny who the RBL poppy appeal supports btw, it’s on their website.

.....because they were colonial wars, a great many of them.

judeboy101 · 09-11-2018 8:12am

Mairead McGuinness wearing a poppy on QT but Jordan Peterson not wearing one. Says it all really.

Odhinn · 09-11-2018 8:26am

Folkstonian wrote: »

You come across as such a rather troubled person, with each of your beautifully constructive missives absolutely bristling with anger.

You now appear to have labelled each and every man who served in the British expeditionary forces in four devastating years of war as a ‘thug’.

So many millions of human stories of heroism, sacrifice, terrible loss, skill, endurance, humour, bravery, misery, boredom, excitement fear, ingenuity, etc, but you can do no more than to label all those men as ‘thugs’.

....................

Yep, heroism and sacrifice allright. Not by the Brits though.

"In what has been described by the historian Caroline Elkins as Britain's own "Gulag", Africans resisting white settlers were roasted alive in addition to being hanged to death. Barack Obama's own grandfather had pins pushed into his fingers and his testicles squeezed between metal rods."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/08/britain-imperial-myth-repackaging-fantasy?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Fresh evidence of brutal treatment meted out by British forces to opponents of colonial rule in the 1950s has been revealed in secret files showing how they attacked and killed with impunity in Cyprus, where their victims included a blind man and a 17-year-old youth.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jul/27/brutality-british-forces-1950s-cyprus
"The "elimination of ranking terrorists" was a repeated theme in secret monthly reports on casualty figures circulated by the director of intelligence in British-controlled Malaya during the 1950s."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/18/colonial-office-eliminations-malayan-insurgency

That's just a small sample, but it gets the idea across I think.

Road-Hog · 09-11-2018 8:27am

lawred2 wrote: »

yerra ffs anyone who believes that is seriously fooling themselves.

WWII was ultimately settled by the USSR and the US. And the turning point of the war was Germany's folly into the USSR. Stalingrad alone cost the USSR 1.1m soldiers in deaths and casualties.

But it was the 27000 Irish people...

One only has to look at the number of USAF bases in the UK to understand who really 'won' the war.

Total ‘poppy-cock’ alright......never heard such a claim before......it’s a bit like the romantic idea that is pedaled about the Irish ‘building’ America and UK in the 50’s & 60’s.

FrancieBrady · 09-11-2018 9:19am

Folkstonian wrote: »

so as to draw out an angry response that you would surely see as a moral victory.

That's kinda what those with a predilection for war and an immoral arms industry do, is it not?

bnt · 09-11-2018 9:38am

There will be a Remembrance ceremony on Sunday 11/11 at the Irish National War Memorial Gardens, with two minutes' silence at 11:00 sharp. I expect to see a lot of people there, even members of the government. The silence will be observed.

The Rape of Lucretia · 09-11-2018 11:04am

Road-Hog wrote: »

Total ‘poppy-cock’ alright......never heard such a claim before......it’s a bit like the romantic idea that is pedaled about the Irish ‘building’ America and UK in the 50’s & 60’s.

Britain courageously stood alone against the threat of the Nazi jackboot when invasion looked certain and long before the US and USSR were entangled. It could have done a deal with Mr. Hitler, but stood up to be counted in the darkest hour, whilst other, Ireland included, cowardly looked the other way or said doing nothing was honourable.

citytillidie · 09-11-2018 11:23am

bubblypop wrote: »

Remember Ireland was part of the United Kingdom at the time of the First World War. So Irish fighting under the British were fighting under the ruler at the time.

I hope you know the difference between the UK and Great Britain, Ireland can not and never have been part of Britain considering it is a completely different Island.

FrancieBrady · 09-11-2018 11:27am

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Britain courageously stood alone against the threat of the Nazi jackboot when invasion looked certain and long before the US and USSR were entangled. It could have done a deal with Mr. Hitler, but stood up to be counted in the darkest hour, whilst other, Ireland included, cowardly looked the other way or said doing nothing was honourable.

Anyone who looks at the actual history of the war through the 'heroic' glasses of British propaganda is suspect.

Without wanting to go off topic, the defence of Britain was a lot more complicated than a nation of shopkeepers and Sunday boaters standing tall against the mighty Germans.

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 11:28am

citytillidie wrote: »

I hope you know the difference between the UK and Great Britain, Ireland can not and never have been part of Britain considering it is a completely different Island.

But it was part of the United Kingdom which is what the poster said. You are arguing with something that wasn't said.

Danzy · 09-11-2018 11:52am

Most people here will only know it is remembrance day because of it being shown on the news.

The few who are interested will go to a memorial If they can find one near by, for most people there isn't and there isn't the interest to organize one.

blanch152 · 09-11-2018 11:57am

citytillidie wrote: »

I hope you know the difference between the UK and Great Britain, Ireland can not and never have been part of Britain considering it is a completely different Island.

The island of Ireland as an independent united entity has never existed.

Ireland was united by the British. Before that, it was a group of independent squabbling chieftains.

Geographically, Ireland is one of the British Isles.

Those are simple facts.

zapitastas · 09-11-2018 12:02pm

blanch152 wrote: »

The island of Ireland as an independent united entity has never existed.

Ireland was united by the British. Before that, it was a group of independent squabbling chieftains.

Geographically, Ireland is one of the British Isles.

Those are simple facts.

Ireland is part of the North Atlantic Archipelago. The Irish government refuses to use the term British Isles. Anyone doing so is using a disputed term to antoganise

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:14pm

zapitastas wrote: »

Ireland is part of the North Atlantic Archipelago. The Irish government refuses to use the term British Isles. Anyone doing so is using a disputed term to antoganise

Or using it because it is a geographical term that has been in use since before we were born.

zapitastas · 09-11-2018 12:17pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Or using it because it is a geographical term that has been in use since before we were born.

It was a geographical term that was coined for political purposes. That is why the Irish government object to its usage and the British government also refrain from using it. It is only used now in the snide way the previous poster used it

weldoninhio · 09-11-2018 12:22pm

Danzy wrote: »

Most people here will only know it is remembrance day because of it being shown on the news.

The few who are interested will go to a memorial If they can find one near by, for most people there isn't and there isn't the interest to organize one.

Commemoration of the soup takers. Ireland must be the only case of an entire country having Stockholm Syndrome.

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:29pm

zapitastas wrote: »

It was a geographical term that was coined for political purposes. That is why the Irish government object to its usage and the British government also refrain from using it. It is only used now in the snide way the previous poster used it

Geographically, Ireland is one of the British Isles.

I dont see anything snide about that.

zapitastas · 09-11-2018 12:34pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I dont see anything snide about that.

In the context in which it was said it was certainly implying ownership which is exactly why the term is unacceptable and is not in use anymore

citytillidie · 09-11-2018 12:35pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

But it was part of the United Kingdom which is what the poster said. You are arguing with something that wasn't said.

United Kingdom is what? United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland - Ireland is separate and they were not British they were still Irish

lawred2 · 09-11-2018 12:38pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Geographically, Ireland is one of the British Isles.

I don't see anything snide about that.

It's a disputed term. Our own government does not accept its usage. And advocates the use of British and Irish Isles.

I'm not sure what you mean by

Geographically, Ireland is one of the British Isles.

As if the subject of geography was something laid down on tablets by some higher being before man learned to read.

Geopolitical place names change all the time.

British Isles is not an accepted term any longer if the intention is to include the island of Ireland.

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:42pm

citytillidie wrote: »

United Kingdom is what? United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland - Ireland is separate and they were not British they were still Irish

and again you are arguing against something that wasn't said.

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:43pm

lawred2 wrote: »

It's a disputed term. Our own government does not accept its usage. And advocates the use of British and Irish Isles.

I'm not sure what you mean by

As if the subject of geography was something laid down on tablets by some higher being before man learned to read.

Geopolitical place names change all the time.

British Isles is not an accepted term any longer if the intention is to include the island of Ireland.

accepted by who, exactly? under what authority?

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:43pm

zapitastas wrote: »

In the context in which it was said it was certainly implying ownership which is exactly why the term is unacceptable and is not in use anymore

the implication was only in your head.

lawred2 · 09-11-2018 12:44pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

accepted by who, exactly? under what authority?

Did you mean "not accepted"?

Listen - feel free to call it whatever you want - but don't be surprised when someone queries your use of it.

This state officially refuses to recognize the term. And many Irish people would be of that viewpoint. But you're free to do what you want.

ohnonotgmail · 09-11-2018 12:45pm

lawred2 wrote: »

Did you mean "not accepted"?

whatever. you know what i meant.

lawred2 · 09-11-2018 12:46pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

whatever. you know what i meant.

cool

Danzy · 09-11-2018 1:59pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Or using it because it is a geographical term that has been in use since before we were born.

Interestingly enough it is no longer used in map or atlases.

Nick Griffin kicked up a right stink, twas 15 years ago if i recall correctly.

zapitastas · 09-11-2018 2:27pm

Danzy wrote: »

Interestingly enough it is no longer used in map or atlases.

Nick Griffin kicked up a right stink, twas 15 years ago if i recall correctly.

Indeed and it is really only nick Griffin and his ilk that still use it

The Rape of Lucretia · 09-11-2018 8:13pm

zapitastas wrote: »

Ireland is part of the North Atlantic Archipelago. The Irish government refuses to use the term British Isles. Anyone doing so is using a disputed term to antoganise

Nobody ever uses that crazy made up term, which exists only because of Irish infantile sensibilities about calling them what everybody else the world over, and normal Irish people not still sporting an anti-British chip on their shoulder - the British Isles. Ireland is on the British Isles. Get over it.

Spook_ie · 09-11-2018 10:00pm

Try googling North Atlantic Archipelago.

klaaaz · 09-11-2018 11:07pm

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Nobody ever uses that crazy made up term, which exists only because of Irish infantile sensibilities about calling them what everybody else the world over, and normal Irish people not still sporting an anti-British chip on their shoulder - the British Isles. Ireland is on the British Isles. Get over it.

Ireland ain't British. British and loyalist people like yourself who have infantile sensibilities and an anti-Irish chip on their shoulder should recognise that the British Empire hold over Ireland and the world is dead. Ireland is part of the Irish Isles, Get over it

RandomName2 · 09-11-2018 11:34pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Ireland ain't British. British and loyalist people like yourself who have infantile sensibilities and an anti-Irish chip on their shoulder should recognise that the British Empire hold over Ireland and the world is dead. Ireland is part of the Irish Isles, Get over it

Oh rly?

I think you'll find that the British Celts colonized Ireland, and Brittonic languages had a significant hold over all of the Brit.. I mean Irish Isles

.. prior to later European immigration of people like the Normans.

Ultra-nationalists do like to invent their own history though, as well as being fairly jingoistic, so you are playing the right tune.

For the other parochial folk here trying their best to sound like they have a chip the size of a bus on their shoulder, try using a dictionary.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/british-isles
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/british_isles
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/British%20Isles
https://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/British%20Isles/forced

If you want to sound a bit less like an ultra-nationalist, and a little less ignorant, you could always try the 'Pretanic Isles' instead if the specific reference to Welsh people triggers you so much ('Welsh', of course, being the Old English word for 'Briton').

Ipso · 09-11-2018 11:37pm

Welsh wasn't an old word for Britain. it derives from a word from foreigner (like Corwall, Gaul, Gall, Wallonia).

klaaaz · 09-11-2018 11:43pm

RandomName2 wrote: »

Oh rly?

I think you'll find that the British Celts colonized Ireland, and Brittonic languages had a significant hold over all of the Brit.. I mean Irish Isles .. prior to later European immigration of people like the Normans.

Ultra-nationalists do like to invent their own history though, as well as being fairly jingoistic, so you are playing the right tune.

For the other parochial folk here trying their best to sound like they have a chip the size of a bus on their shoulder, try using a dictionary.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/british-isles
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/british_isles
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/British%20Isles
https://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/British%20Isles/forced

If you want to sound a bit less like an ultra-nationalist, and a little less ignorant, you could always try the 'Pretanic Isles' instead if the specific reference to Welsh people triggers you so much ('Welsh', of course, being the Old English word for 'Briton').

Oh really, yes! The Celts were not British, they originated from elsewhere! The British Isles term was invented by the British imperialist John Dee, an ultra-British nationalist and colonialist at the time of the conquest of Ireland. You quote British dictionary sites, your British Empire is dead.

What is wrong with the term Irish Isles instead?

The Rape of Lucretia · 09-11-2018 11:48pm

klaaaz wrote: »

What is wrong with the term Irish Isles instead?

That there is no such thing ?
People will think you mean a few rocks of Kerry.

klaaaz · 09-11-2018 11:55pm

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

That there is no such thing ?
People will think you mean a few rocks of Kerry.

I had asked you about the term Irish Isles. There are plenty of islands around Ireland hence the quality term Irish Isles.

RandomName2 · 10-11-2018 12:15am

klaaaz wrote: »

Oh really, yes! The Celts were not British, they originated from elsewhere!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Britons

They originated from Europe. What, do you think they came from the moon?

klaaaz wrote: »

You quote British dictionary sites, your British Empire is dead.

Why am I debating with this sort of fellow? It's like having a conversation with a skinhead.

klaaaz wrote: »

What is wrong with the term Irish Isles instead?

Because it isn't common use or with historical precedence; because Ireland is the name of a country as well as a landmass; because it is confusing as there are islands owned by Ireland, but you are talking about Great Britain as being one of the Irish islands; because doing so would simply to appease regressive nationalists, because colonization of Great Britain post-Ice Age did not affect the island of Ireland in the same way as previous migrations had done.

Ipso wrote: »

Welsh wasn't an old word for Britain. it derives from a word from foreigner (like Corwall, Gaul, Gall, Wallonia).

What was the foreigner in question?

Old English Wielisc, Wylisc (West Saxon), Welisc, Wælisc (Anglian and Kentish) "foreign; British (not Anglo-Saxon).

As a noun, "the Britons," also "the Welsh language," both from Old English.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/welsh

And from wikipedia

The Old English-speaking Anglo-Saxons came to use the term Wælisc when referring to the Britons in particular

Do people actually bother researching at all, or are they so confident in their infallibility?

klaaaz · 10-11-2018 12:23am

RandomName2 wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Britons

They originated from Europe. What, do you think they came from the moon?

You had stated that the Celts were British when they were not, they had originated from Europe and migrated from there to these islands.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Why am I debating with this sort of fellow? It's like having a conversation with a skinhead.

This is like having a conversation with a DUP follower.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Because it isn't common use or with historical precedence; because Ireland is the name of a country as well as a landmass; because it is confusing as there are islands owned by Ireland, but you are talking about Great Britain as being one of the Irish islands; because doing so would simply to appease regressive nationalists, because colonization of Great Britain post-Ice Age did not affect the island of Ireland in the same way as previous migrations had done.

Britain conquered and colonised Ireland against the Irish people's wishes, a few million Irish died in the process.
Your superior British colonial attitude which is a regressive British nationalist stance is right up there with the DUP and their fellow little Englanders whose history invented the term British Isles against the wishes of the people of Ireland when they conquered Ireland

RandomName2 · 10-11-2018 12:42am

klaaaz wrote: »

You had stated that the Celts were British when they were not, they had originated from Europe and migrated from there to these islands.

Generally the term Briton and Celt can be interchangeable, although we have at least one ancient Roman writer who distinguished between the two. The term Celt is itself subject to significant debate seeing as they spanned a vast area but had no written history, so pinning down the exact bounds of Celts is quite difficult. However, I'm not expecting an academically rigorous assessment by yourself on the matter, so using broad strokes here is appropriate, I believe.

klaaaz wrote: »

This is like having a conversation with a DUP follower.

Staying on message, I like that. DUP as the alien outsider though? I'd have thought you'd have gone for a scapegoat that was a bit closer to home.

klaaaz wrote: »

Britain conquered and colonised Ireland against the Irish people's wishes, a few million Irish died in the process.

Which one, Brittany or Great Britain?

Answer is, of course, neither! I think you're thinking of the Normans or the English, depending on what century your head is in. I'm skeptical of your number, seeing as that would probably be greater than the population of the Island during either period.

klaaaz wrote: »

Your superior British colonial attitude

My attitude is superior because you are behaving like a doofus. I'm embarrassed in a fellow Irish person behaving in such a fashion. Getting triggered by the term British Isles? It is literally just a name and has nothing to do with the British colonial Empire which you seem to think it is derived from.

klaaaz wrote: »

The British Isles term was invented by the British imperialist John Dee

The first written record we have of the term in English is by John Dee. That doesn't mean he invented it!

The Rape of Lucretia · 10-11-2018 12:42am

klaaaz wrote: »

little Englanders, whose history invented the term British Isles against the wishes of the people of Ireland when they conquered Ireland

To be fair, there are many contemporary accounts from that era, that it was the naming of the British Isles that caused they Irish most concern as they were being invaded.

Junkyard Tom · 10-11-2018 2:53am

They'd better honour the dead of WWI by holding to account a system that sent them to their deaths.

Most of the men who went to war for the honour of the murderous British empire had no vote, many lived in squalor, so much for noble intentions.

Ipso · 10-11-2018 5:02am

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

They'd better honour the dead of WWI by holding to account a system that sent them to their deaths.

Most of the men who went to war for the honour of the murderous British empire had no vote, many lived in squalor, so much for noble intentions.

Yeah, but they had to help poor Belgium.

Spook_ie · 10-11-2018 5:40am

klaaaz wrote: »

I had asked you about the term Irish Isles. There are plenty of islands around Ireland hence the quality term Irish Isles.

You mean the Irish Isles that are part of the British Isles?

Graces7 · 10-11-2018 8:08am

May I thank for the reminders of what tomorrow is? Out here I tend to not notice.. Will be at cyber ceremonies tomorrow. My father physically survived the last war but was very damaged in so many ways.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 10-11-2018 9:23am

Graces7 wrote: »

May I thank for the reminders of what tomorrow is? Out here I tend to not notice.. Will be at cyber ceremonies tomorrow. My father physically survived the last war but was very damaged in so many ways.

I'm on duty tomorrow myself, this time at home. But 100 years ago my great Grandfather was also on duty, fighting in France.

He survived the war.

RandomName2 · 10-11-2018 11:00am

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

They'd better honour the dead of WWI by holding to account a system that sent them to their deaths.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Besides which, there are plenty here who are using that merely as an excuse, and revel in the deaths of those taking the King's shilling, regardless of their reasons, backgrounds, or race.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Most of the men who went to war for the honour of the murderous British empire had no vote, many lived in squalor, so much for noble intentions.

Who is saying the UK had noble intent? They were looking to maintain the balance of power, which has some moral fiber to it, but they weren't doing it for moral reasons. Some of the elite in Westminster I'm sure were moved by Belgium and Serbia, but ultimately the hard nosed decisions were based upon what was deemed most expedient for maintaining the empire's strength: and a Germany with control of the continent was not that, apparently.

This self-serving position was nothing particularly different from most of the empires' motives. France alone was predominantly motivated by revenge, and I'm not certain that's much better.

10-11-2018 4:05pm

Fookin hell, even QE2 is getting criticised for not having hers. Apparently she only wears one on the Remembrance weekend itself. If everybody followed her example there would be less of this prolonged in your face poppy b*ll*xology going on IMO.

https://twitter.com/Daily_Star/status/1060200315792883712

Franz Von Peppercorn · 10-11-2018 4:09pm

It’s funny isn’t it. The British pride themselves on not being militaristic. Yet for two weeks they are more militaristic than the yanks.

Remember the US student who wanted to take down the picture of the whites on the wall in her university? They were WWI soldiers

It didn’t end very well got her anyway but if she did it in the last few weeks she would have been deported immediately. Or lynched.

Then they forget about it and become PC again.

yabadabado · 10-11-2018 4:10pm

martinedwards wrote: »

Huge numbers of Irish born served in both wars.

So you are another person who doesn't know what the poppy represents.

Jimbob1977 · 10-11-2018 4:15pm

My grand-uncle died at the Battle of Cambrai. He's buried in a World War One cemetery.

I found this out two years ago.

He was forced out of his job and into the army.

Apparently it wasn't spoken about in the family as his brothers were Old IRA in West Cork.

He was fighting for an Empire that treated him like a second class citizen.... and continued their dominance of a small country for another three years.

Sacrificed to settle a dispute between royal cousins.

Poppy

Comments