Record numbers of free staters flock to join British Army

[anglocelt39]

5000 switched uniforms = 5000 deserted the army they took a vow to and joined another army. 5000 were instructed by their government to remain neutral and they disobeyed and took a side. When they returned they were to be punished by having their pension removed - what did they expect, to be welcomed as heroes. This is a totally different issue than your average joe on the street heading off to join the british army. These men were deserters and as Hardy said, the british army and german army dealt with such people in a much more brutal fashion than dev did. Saying that, i see no reason that any outstanding  "action" against these men should continue (and i seriously doubt anyone is too bothered about chasing them for their crimes today). However, I certainly don't think their actions should be glorified. I would be interested to know why it was they did what they did so for that reason I may try and tune in.

Just because what they did broke the law does not mean it wasn't the morally correct thing to do. Would you criticize a German soldier for switching sides?

Arrah sure the poor aul nazi's were only following orders

The german army were committing war crimes and were the aggressor in the war, I think in this instance a deserter would be morally correct to leave. The Irish army were neutral and were on tender hooks because they didn't know whether Ireland might be invaded by the brits or the germans or both. These men swore an oath to protect ireland. What if as british solidiers they were instructed to invade ireland? Comparing these men to deserters of the german army is wrong

Maybe these men thought it was morally correct to fight the aggressor who was committing these war crimes and who would no doubt have threatened to do the same in Ireland given the opportunity. Maybe these men thought the best way of defending their country was to abandon the army which was doing nothing and to join one which was actively trying to halt the aggressor. Who knows what these men thought. They weren't given the opportunity in a court, civil or military, to state their case.

Perhaps or perhaps they just wanted to go around the world shooting people for a bit of craic. Maybe we will find out on the radio show why they did what they did - if of course they are honest about their reasoning. Still doesn't change the fact they deserted their own army and were simply punished for doing so.

I'm sure any of these people who might still be with us today would eternally regret not having somebody of such moral certainty as yourself  around at the time to point out to them the error of their ways. On a related topic one of the most powerful plays I have ever seen is "Boy Soldier" which revolves around the story of the youngest recorded casualty in WW1, John Condon from Ballybricken in Waterford. Watching young lads who were persuaded to don the British Army uniform to "defend small nations" come to the realisation of what awaited them as they were going home to a forever changed Island was very troubling. Should be a compulsory element of any history course dealing with that period.

[muppet]

I'm sure any of these people who might still be with us today would eternally regret not having somebody of such moral certainty as yourself  around at the time to point out to them the error of their ways. On a related topic one of the most powerful plays I have ever seen is "Boy Soldier" which revolves around the story of the youngest recorded casualty in WW1, John Condon from Ballybricken in Waterford. Watching young lads who were persuaded to don the British Army uniform to "defend small nations" come to the realisation of what awaited them as they were going home to a forever changed Island was very troubling. Should be a compulsory element of any history course dealing with that period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connaught_Rangers

[Main Street]

Just seen a further report on this by John Waite on TV.

Apparently in some cases, Dev's Government took their children from them and placed them in State institutions*.

Perhaps they should have shot the children, too?


* - And we all know what many of those were like...

Maybe you can provide a direct link to that claim as that's not how I read the story.
AFAIA, some children were committed to state institutions as a direct result of the circumstance arising from the breadwinner deserting the army. They were not committed as part of a punitive state punishment.

Also afaia the deserters were barred from any state assistance for a period of 7 years.

Desertion from an army in a period of a declared national emergency was and is a serious matter.
However these soldiers did not desert from cowardice. A full pardon implies the Irish government was wrong to find them guilty of desertion. I might agree with a half pardon.

[mylestheslasher]

5000 switched uniforms = 5000 deserted the army they took a vow to and joined another army. 5000 were instructed by their government to remain neutral and they disobeyed and took a side. When they returned they were to be punished by having their pension removed - what did they expect, to be welcomed as heroes. This is a totally different issue than your average joe on the street heading off to join the british army. These men were deserters and as Hardy said, the british army and german army dealt with such people in a much more brutal fashion than dev did. Saying that, i see no reason that any outstanding  "action" against these men should continue (and i seriously doubt anyone is too bothered about chasing them for their crimes today). However, I certainly don't think their actions should be glorified. I would be interested to know why it was they did what they did so for that reason I may try and tune in.

Just because what they did broke the law does not mean it wasn't the morally correct thing to do. Would you criticize a German soldier for switching sides?

Arrah sure the poor aul nazi's were only following orders

The german army were committing war crimes and were the aggressor in the war, I think in this instance a deserter would be morally correct to leave. The Irish army were neutral and were on tender hooks because they didn't know whether Ireland might be invaded by the brits or the germans or both. These men swore an oath to protect ireland. What if as british solidiers they were instructed to invade ireland? Comparing these men to deserters of the german army is wrong

Maybe these men thought it was morally correct to fight the aggressor who was committing these war crimes and who would no doubt have threatened to do the same in Ireland given the opportunity. Maybe these men thought the best way of defending their country was to abandon the army which was doing nothing and to join one which was actively trying to halt the aggressor. Who knows what these men thought. They weren't given the opportunity in a court, civil or military, to state their case.

Perhaps or perhaps they just wanted to go around the world shooting people for a bit of craic. Maybe we will find out on the radio show why they did what they did - if of course they are honest about their reasoning. Still doesn't change the fact they deserted their own army and were simply punished for doing so.

I'm sure any of these people who might still be with us today would eternally regret not having somebody of such moral certainty as yourself  around at the time to point out to them the error of their ways. On a related topic one of the most powerful plays I have ever seen is "Boy Soldier" which revolves around the story of the youngest recorded casualty in WW1, John Condon from Ballybricken in Waterford. Watching young lads who were persuaded to don the British Army uniform to "defend small nations" come to the realisation of what awaited them as they were going home to a forever changed Island was very troubling. Should be a compulsory element of any history course dealing with that period.

The play is not related - sorry, no matter how sad it is (and I don't doubt it is sad). Your first line is just an attack on me and not a rebutal of what I am saying. I find myself in agreement with Main Street on the topic at hand.

I also found Muppets link to the Connaught Rangers to be interesting, how these irish soldiers turned their guns against the fellow irishman in 1916 and then how the British dealt with them when they refused to "solidier" in protest of Britains role in Ireland later.

[Myles Na G.]

5000 switched uniforms = 5000 deserted the army they took a vow to and joined another army. 5000 were instructed by their government to remain neutral and they disobeyed and took a side. When they returned they were to be punished by having their pension removed - what did they expect, to be welcomed as heroes. This is a totally different issue than your average joe on the street heading off to join the british army. These men were deserters and as Hardy said, the british army and german army dealt with such people in a much more brutal fashion than dev did. Saying that, i see no reason that any outstanding  "action" against these men should continue (and i seriously doubt anyone is too bothered about chasing them for their crimes today). However, I certainly don't think their actions should be glorified. I would be interested to know why it was they did what they did so for that reason I may try and tune in.

Just because what they did broke the law does not mean it wasn't the morally correct thing to do. Would you criticize a German soldier for switching sides?

Arrah sure the poor aul nazi's were only following orders

The german army were committing war crimes and were the aggressor in the war, I think in this instance a deserter would be morally correct to leave. The Irish army were neutral and were on tender hooks because they didn't know whether Ireland might be invaded by the brits or the germans or both. These men swore an oath to protect ireland. What if as british solidiers they were instructed to invade ireland? Comparing these men to deserters of the german army is wrong

Maybe these men thought it was morally correct to fight the aggressor who was committing these war crimes and who would no doubt have threatened to do the same in Ireland given the opportunity. Maybe these men thought the best way of defending their country was to abandon the army which was doing nothing and to join one which was actively trying to halt the aggressor. Who knows what these men thought. They weren't given the opportunity in a court, civil or military, to state their case.

Perhaps or perhaps they just wanted to go around the world shooting people for a bit of craic. Maybe we will find out on the radio show why they did what they did - if of course they are honest about their reasoning. Still doesn't change the fact they deserted their own army and were simply punished for doing so.

I'm sure any of these people who might still be with us today would eternally regret not having somebody of such moral certainty as yourself  around at the time to point out to them the error of their ways. On a related topic one of the most powerful plays I have ever seen is "Boy Soldier" which revolves around the story of the youngest recorded casualty in WW1, John Condon from Ballybricken in Waterford. Watching young lads who were persuaded to don the British Army uniform to "defend small nations" come to the realisation of what awaited them as they were going home to a forever changed Island was very troubling. Should be a compulsory element of any history course dealing with that period.

The play is not related - sorry, no matter how sad it is (and I don't doubt it is sad). Your first line is just an attack on me and not a rebutal of what I am saying. I find myself in agreement with Main Street on the topic at hand.

I also found Muppets link to the Connaught Rangers to be interesting, how these irish soldiers turned their guns against the fellow irishman in 1916 and then how the British dealt with them when they refused to "solidier" in protest of Britains role in Ireland later.

The same could be asked of any generation of Irish republicans.

[anglocelt39]

5000 switched uniforms = 5000 deserted the army they took a vow to and joined another army. 5000 were instructed by their government to remain neutral and they disobeyed and took a side. When they returned they were to be punished by having their pension removed - what did they expect, to be welcomed as heroes. This is a totally different issue than your average joe on the street heading off to join the british army. These men were deserters and as Hardy said, the british army and german army dealt with such people in a much more brutal fashion than dev did. Saying that, i see no reason that any outstanding  "action" against these men should continue (and i seriously doubt anyone is too bothered about chasing them for their crimes today). However, I certainly don't think their actions should be glorified. I would be interested to know why it was they did what they did so for that reason I may try and tune in.

Just because what they did broke the law does not mean it wasn't the morally correct thing to do. Would you criticize a German soldier for switching sides?

Arrah sure the poor aul nazi's were only following orders

The german army were committing war crimes and were the aggressor in the war, I think in this instance a deserter would be morally correct to leave. The Irish army were neutral and were on tender hooks because they didn't know whether Ireland might be invaded by the brits or the germans or both. These men swore an oath to protect ireland. What if as british solidiers they were instructed to invade ireland? Comparing these men to deserters of the german army is wrong

Maybe these men thought it was morally correct to fight the aggressor who was committing these war crimes and who would no doubt have threatened to do the same in Ireland given the opportunity. Maybe these men thought the best way of defending their country was to abandon the army which was doing nothing and to join one which was actively trying to halt the aggressor. Who knows what these men thought. They weren't given the opportunity in a court, civil or military, to state their case.

Perhaps or perhaps they just wanted to go around the world shooting people for a bit of craic. Maybe we will find out on the radio show why they did what they did - if of course they are honest about their reasoning. Still doesn't change the fact they deserted their own army and were simply punished for doing so.

I'm sure any of these people who might still be with us today would eternally regret not having somebody of such moral certainty as yourself  around at the time to point out to them the error of their ways. On a related topic one of the most powerful plays I have ever seen is "Boy Soldier" which revolves around the story of the youngest recorded casualty in WW1, John Condon from Ballybricken in Waterford. Watching young lads who were persuaded to don the British Army uniform to "defend small nations" come to the realisation of what awaited them as they were going home to a forever changed Island was very troubling. Should be a compulsory element of any history course dealing with that period.

The play is not related - sorry, no matter how sad it is (and I don't doubt it is sad). Your first line is just an attack on me and not a rebutal of what I am saying. I find myself in agreement with Main Street on the topic at hand.

I also found Muppets link to the Connaught Rangers to be interesting, how these irish soldiers turned their guns against the fellow irishman in 1916 and then how the British dealt with them when they refused to "solidier" in protest of Britains role in Ireland later.

The play I speak of Myles explores the many and complex reasons as to why young Irishmen went off to fight in World War One. This Thread deals with why, 20 years later, Irishmen went off to fight in world war two despite being involved in the army of a neutral state. So yes indeed how could the two be related, as you said yourself 24 hours ago on this thread Myles you have a small bit of boning up to do on the subject. Your "argument" to date seems to amount to nothing more than a parrot like recitation of certain undisputed facts i.e. they were deemed to be deserters and were punished accordingly. What posters here seem to be trying to get their heads around is the fairness or otherwise of the treatment afforded to these people by the Irish Government. Where my eyes were opened by Boy Solider was that for every 10 Soldiers, there were five different reasons for being involved and none of them were, to paraphrase your own words...."going around shooting at people for the craic". I'm not sure any relation of those people reading this thread will thank you for that type of facile analysis.

[mylestheslasher]

I better go see this play then I'll know all there is to know on the matter. Cheers.

[thejuice]

I think much is being made about Irish people fighting for Britain in World War 2 for their own point scoring purposes.

Facism in Europe had many supporters across the contient and in these islands.

Now lets not forget those Irishmen who stood with the Jews on Cable Street to fight Oswald Mosley who was being aided by the London police. Lets not forget those Irishmen who went to Spain to fight Franco.

Lets not forget those members of the police, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein who stood up to the Blueshirts in Dublin when they treatened violence. Who knows how things might have turned out on these islands had O'Duffy or Mosley got into power.

The fact is, plenty of Irish people were willing to stand-up and fight against facism on many different fronts but perhaps fighting in the uniform of a much maligned enemy was a step too far for many but not all.

What galls me more than anything was the Irish Catholic establishment giving O'Duffy the blessing, and indeed sections of the Irish media, to head to Spain to assist Franco. Devs neautrality is much easier to understand than that.

I think a memorial if there needs to be one, should remembered as those Irishmen who took it upon themselves to fight facism on its many fronts and not just those who did so in a British uniform, especially since there are those who like to use their memory to beat their own political drum.

[sheamy]

I think much is being made about Irish people fighting for Britain in World War 2 for their own point scoring purposes.

Facism in Europe had many supporters across the contient and in these islands.

Now lets not forget those Irishmen who stood with the Jews on Cable Street to fight Oswald Mosley who was being aided by the London police. Lets not forget those Irishmen who went to Spain to fight Franco.

Lets not forget those members of the police, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein who stood up to the Blueshirts in Dublin when they treatened violence. Who knows how things might have turned out on these islands had O'Duffy or Mosley got into power.

The fact is, plenty of Irish people were willing to stand-up and fight against facism on many different fronts but perhaps fighting in the uniform of a much maligned enemy was a step too far for many but not all.

What galls me more than anything was the Irish Catholic establishment giving O'Duffy the blessing, and indeed sections of the Irish media, to head to Spain to assist Franco. Devs neautrality is much easier to understand than that.

I think a memorial if there needs to be one, should remembered as those Irishmen who took it upon themselves to fight facism on its many fronts and not just those who did so in a British uniform, especially since there are those who like to use their memory to beat their own political drum.

excellent post. Viva la quinta Brigada.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

I think much is being made about Irish people fighting for Britain in World War 2 for their own point scoring purposes.

Facism in Europe had many supporters across the contient and in these islands.

Now lets not forget those Irishmen who stood with the Jews on Cable Street to fight Oswald Mosley who was being aided by the London police. Lets not forget those Irishmen who went to Spain to fight Franco.

Lets not forget those members of the police, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein who stood up to the Blueshirts in Dublin when they treatened violence. Who knows how things might have turned out on these islands had O'Duffy or Mosley got into power.

The fact is, plenty of Irish people were willing to stand-up and fight against facism on many different fronts but perhaps fighting in the uniform of a much maligned enemy was a step too far for many but not all.

What galls me more than anything was the Irish Catholic establishment giving O'Duffy the blessing, and indeed sections of the Irish media, to head to Spain to assist Franco. Devs neautrality is much easier to understand than that.

I think a memorial if there needs to be one, should remembered as those Irishmen who took it upon themselves to fight facism on its many fronts and not just those who did so in a British uniform, especially since there are those who like to use their memory to beat their own political drum.

excellent post. Viva la quinta Brigada.

Lets not forget while evil and wrong as the The Army Comrades Association/National Guard was, its was set up originaly because De Valera would not allow the Gardaí or Irish Army to protect F.F.'s political rivals from I.R.A. attacks and punishment beatings on party meetings other than those of Fianna Fáil. The same I.R.A. he interned when it suited him.

[SuperMac]

I just did a quick Google there to see if I could find the actual numbers taking the shilling and swearing the oath. In doing so I came across a Tribune article from December which says there was 85 last year and 8 the year before. Anyone want to suggest how the Indo got their 'estimate' of 4k? Looks like "Sir" Tony is playing at recruitment sergeant - and that's another **** who should be stripped of his citizenship.

Yes, once again Dr Sir Tony O'Reilly's comics are doing their bit for queen and country. As for the 4K Irish citizens joining the Brits, well such a round number is pulled out of some comic writer's ar$e. And of those ' Irish citizens ' joining the Brits, the vast majority of them are plastic Paddy's born in England and taking out irish citizenship as they may deem it useful when appying for visa's etc in some country's.

[Applesisapples]

Good to see them recognised at last. The Irish did alot in WW2. Didn't know they were punished for doing it.

Indeed.

Cavanman helped soften up Rommel for Monty you know.

Himself of solid Ulster stock:
Montgomery was born in Kennington, London, in 1887, the fourth child of nine, to an Anglo-Irish Anglican priest, the Revd Henry Montgomery, and Maud Montgomery (née Farrar). Henry Montgomery, at the time the Vicar of St Mark's, Kennington, was the second son of the noted Indian administrator, Sir Robert Montgomery, who died a month after Bernard's birth. Bernard's mother Maud was the daughter of the well-known preacher Frederic William Farrar, and was 18 years younger than her husband. After the death of Sir Robert Montgomery, Henry inherited the Montgomery ancestral estate of New Park at Moville, a town on the Inishowen Peninsula of north County Donegal in the North-west of UlsterIreland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Montgomery,_1st_Viscount_Montgomery_of_Alamein

Donegal is 26 county territory lest you forget.

There is one thing joining the armed forces of another country, but deserting your own army to join another army, well that is treason as far as I am concerned.

I have a question for you E.G., in relative terms a similar % of British would come to 50,000. If 50,000 British soldiers had deserted to join the army of neutral Ireland, do you really think they would be treated with any common courtesy on the Island of Britain or among the Unionist community of Ireland's North-East? I would be pretty sure they would be still unforgiven.

It's still in the Fu**ing North West of Ulster...That isn't changed by your pathetic little squabble over something that happened in the last century.

[Maguire01]

It appears that Sinn Féin will back the pardon, according to The Times.

[mylestheslasher]

It appears that Sinn Féin will back the pardon, according to The Times.

Are you saying you agree with them? That would be a first. Me, i would giving no pardon and apparently I am a shinner.

[muppet]

It appears that Sinn Féin will back the pardon, according to The Times.

Are you saying you agree with them? That would be a first. Me, i would giving no pardon and apparently I am a shinner.

You are a Manolo Marxist!