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

"The Wind That Shakes the Barley": Is accuracy important

13»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭Jackie laughlin


    A Dub in Glasgo,
    I was being charitable when I gave credance to the argument that the civil war was fought over the Oath. The terrible truth is that the Civil War was pointless. It certainly wasn't about partition or socialism. This could have been told in the movie and it would have made for greater accuracy as well as more sophisticated and poignant drama.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭csk


    vesp wrote:
    Relatively few civilians offered "shelter, information and support" to either the IRA or the PIRA. Some did certainly, but not the majority of the Irish people.
    Give us some credit.

    Vesp leave aside the Provisional IRA as they are utterly irrelevant.

    But Óglaigh na hÉireann simply could not have fought so successfully without the aid of the people. Indeed the successful war fought in the south would not have been possible.

    Micahel Collins successful intelligence war is the perfect example of how a lot of ordinary people offered shelter information and support. He had contacts as diverse as typists, postmen, deliverymen to actual Crown officials such as Ned Broy and Daivid Neligan. In fact one historian rightly points out that the greatest tribute paid to Collins was the fact that on his death he had literally hundreds of keys to different people's houses in his possession and that hundreds if not thousands more would have welcomed him in at the drop of a hat. Yes the man who the British labelled a terrorist and a bloodthristy savage, the same man who had a ten thousand pound reward on his head would have been glady welcomed into almost any house in the country! I wonder why?

    Also do not forget how most people recognised the Sinn Féin courts over the Crown courts including many Protestant Landlords.
    There were hundreds of thousands of veterans from WW1 and WW2 who returned home to Ireland. The majority of thir families and friends and communities were glad to see them again.

    Yes of course you are right they were welcomed back and indeed Ireland was glad to see them. Many had been fighting to free small Nations which included Ireland.Indeed many went on to fight with Óglaigh na hÉireann in the war against the British. Indeed Comandant-General Tom Barry was an ex-British Soldier who fought in Gallipoli. He, as we know, went on to become arguably the greates field commander of the War of Independence.
    The people who they helped liberate from the Nazi death camps and occupied Euriope were certainly glad of their help and glad to see them. However, you will always get a few bigots.

    Once again Vesp why are you bringing in the Nazis to a debate about IRISH HISTORY, if you want to debate about it start your own thread. Your obsession with them is bordering on the perverse at this stage.
    Now I know your only come back to this will be to offer some snide remark and attempt a ridiculous qualification along the lines of "not all people fought the British lol" "Nazis did this blah blah blah."

    You have nothing intelligent to offer and frankly your anti-Irish bigotry is tiresome, so you are going on the ignore list.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 437 ✭✭vesp


    you know full well why the UN was set up. even they have not got a clear definition of war.

    It is quite clear. The truth is that the terrorist actions of the IRA or any other terrorist group on this island never constituted a war, according to the UN.

    Nobody has answered the question / point posed a few post ago : Only 120,000 Irishmen volunteered for the British forces in 1939-1942 More than that were volunteers in British forces between 1916-1922. How many volunteers were in the IRA ?

    csk: You obviously are taking the piss wheen you claim an IRA man would have been "glady welcomed into almost any house in the country":D This is the same country where the rebels of 1916 were spat at and jeered after they surrendered. As you would - and did - say yourself, "you have nothing intelligent to offer and frankly your bigotry is tiresome, so you are going on the ignore list."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    many times vesp brings up the troubles and ww1 and ww2 (ok ww1 maybe relevant) when we refer to the 1916-1924 period as to justify his comments which have no basis or revelane to this period. when vesp makes an argument whether we agree or not but keeps it within the time frame of the topic, fine, great we can have a good debate. but comparing the 1916-1924 period with the troubles cant really work, hindsight makes it too easy and one forgets the real reasons that it happened. instead revisionists try to scorn our founding fathers because it lead to the way for what happened in recent times.it wrong to compare the period, as there were different reasons for their occurrance.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    vesp wrote:
    It is quite clear. The truth is that the terrorist actions of the IRA or any other terrorist group on this island never constituted a war, according to the UN.

    Nobody has answered the question / point posed a few post ago : Only 120,000 Irishmen volunteered for the British forces in 1939-1942 More than that were volunteers in British forces between 1916-1922. How many volunteers were in the IRA ?

    csk: You obviously are taking the piss wheen you claim an IRA man would have been "glady welcomed into almost any house in the country":D This is the same country where the rebels of 1916 were spat at and jeered after they surrendered. As you would - and did - say yourself, "you have nothing intelligent to offer and frankly your bigotry is tiresome, so you are going on the ignore list."

    again and again you use this. why did people in dublin hurl abuse, because many of the husbands were over in europe fighting in british armies and sending home money to the wifves. i made an attempt on how many ira volunteers there were in activitive service.see previous posts, i have to confirm the no, its pretty easy to get some access to militray records and the like. did the whole of dublin come out and spat and jeered at the volunteers, how many? jesus ye dubs are very fickle. sure didn't many dubs come out a jeer the british army in 1914 Howth gun running, where volunteers gave the army the run around and successfully got arms into howth.some army personnel get mad and then comes the bachaleor walk massacre!again my learned colleague, the attitude in dublin always differed to thaat in the country hence the phrase jackeens.

    you find a source were the defintion is clearly stated. in the numberorg trials there was no defintion. an implied and express defintion are two deferent things. as for the un, they have no application to what happened before their existence. i grant that you are correct post 1950 ireland. sure look who has a powerful seat in the un. usa and britain. considering their trap record recently they cant talk or lecture the rest of the world. prior to people like blair, damn all english politicans bar say carson and the two churchills, had any real clue about ireland, its culture or idealogy some hardly ever set foot on irish soil, without at least understanding the irish point of view there an attempt by the british on the irish question was always a british solution to an irish problem. so when you look at that, how the hell would you expect other members of the un to understand the irish situation.

    i suggest you read up on a book such as tom barry's to have an idea of the attitude of his communtiy, the level of support they had from the people and the strength of their forces.and it is an honest book as it does refer to the deaths of certain landlords.

    i ask you again, how come, it was ok for usa and french to do what they did to gain independence.or for malolm x to be celebrated for his opinions when revisionists then scorn the irish struggle of 1916-1924?lads write history as it happened and not make it up or changed things

    the strange fact is, that when you look at irish history, many things were achieved when force was used. you look at the war of independence, the british people and their king was appalled by the violence and they worked to bring it to an end, thus allowing politicans realise something had to give, they came together and talked it out. the same with the troubles.people realised that 40 years of blood shed was not worth it. blair comes in and brings all communities together and continue to talk politics. a revised government of ireland act 1920 was brought about (ie treaty some key changes in it) it may not have been altered were it not for the hindsight that the 1920 act was not workable in the 26 counties.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 437 ✭✭vesp



    you find a source were the defintion is clearly stated. in the numberorg trials there was no defintion. an implied and express defintion are two deferent things. as for the un, they have no application to what happened before their existence. i grant that you are correct post 1950 ireland. sure look who has a powerful seat in the un. usa and britain. considering their trap record recently they cant talk or lecture the rest of the world. prior to people like blair, damn all english politicans bar say carson and the two churchills, had any real clue about ireland, its culture or idealogy some hardly ever set foot on irish soil, without at least understanding the irish point of view there an attempt by the british on the irish question was always a british solution to an irish problem. so when you look at that, how the hell would you expect other members of the un to understand the irish situation.

    i suggest you read up on a book such as tom barry's to have an idea of the attitude of his communtiy, the level of support they had from the people and the strength of their forces.and it is an honest book as it does refer to the deaths of certain landlords.

    :rolleyes: What makes the book honest ? " it is an honest book as it does refer to the deaths of certain landlords."
    :rolleyes:

    Make excuses all you want about the "trap" records of the members of the "un" ; the truth is that the terrorist actions of the IRA or any other terrorist group on this island never constituted a war, according to the UN.


    N.B. Perhaps if those who indoctrinated you with your view of history had put as much effort in to teaching you spelling you would be better off.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    vesp wrote:
    :rolleyes: What makes the book honest ? " it is an honest book as it does refer to the deaths of certain landlords."
    :rolleyes:

    Make excuses all you want about the "trap" records of the members of the "un" ; the truth is that the terrorist actions of the IRA or any other terrorist group on this island never constituted a war, according to the UN.


    N.B. Perhaps if those who indoctrinated you with your view of history had put as much effort in to teaching you spelling you would be better off.

    ha i assure you my friend, the spellings are a mere cause of bad typing, but you point out pointless faults such as careless spelling to walk away from being challanged (snob).

    I agree with the your comment with regard to the ira of the present times.

    However, I ask you for your view, do you consider Ireland of 1916-1924 as not being a period of war, solely on the ground that the UN who were not in existence in this time, say so?

    I believe we are in agreement with the issue of the troubles, so at this point reference to it is irrelevant.

    I have attempted to define the defintion of war from credible sources, yet you, who raised the issue of the UN, have failed to produce THE UN defintion of war. Anticapating with much delight your futher nuggets of wisdom! And by the way old boy, would you care to point to a reference that states that at no time did the UN referred that the period of 1916-1924 Ireland did not constitute a war.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭Jackie laughlin


    Any chance of getting this back on subject matter?


  • Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭Jim Comic


    a play based on tom barry's book is on at the everyman soon

    http://www.everymanpalace.com/2011/03/guerilla-days-in-ireland/


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    No need to resurrect old thread.

    Closed.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement