And the Red Poppies Dance

[Tankie]

Most of these men did not go off to fight for the 'Brits', they went to fight for freedom, the promise of home rule and many other reasons. Irish independence would have been worth nothing if the dictators had of won the war!

Yes, they were brainwashed.

Britain couldn't tolerate the threat to her 'empire' of a rapidly rising unified Germany -- German industrial output exceed that of Britain's for the first time just before WWI, and Germany's maritime power, and mercantilie trading strength were also in the ascendent, all of which represented casus belli for the Brits, nothing more. Of course, they declared war on the pretext of an Archduke (Ferdinand) having been assassiinated in Sarajevo in the first instance), and to protect 'Small Nations', and how anyone could buy that line I'm not quite sure (since she had been denying self-determination to a small nation on her doorstep for over 700 years at that point, a small nation that had a tradtion, language and history much older than her own). Of course, idiots like Redmond didn't stop to think for a minute of the cruel irony, but it was pointed out to him at the time by Connolly, amongst others.

WWI led to WWII, in that such was the punitive nature of the reparations levied against Germany, and all Germans, in the aftermath of WWI, that the perfect conditions for the rise of an animal like Hitler were laid. And Hitler duly did rise, and WWII duly did follow.

So, those who fought for Britain in WWI were fighting to protect her 'empire', although I would accept that this was unwittingly so for 99% of those Irish who picked up arms on Britain's behalf, and for whatever exoneration they might have there is none for the political leaders, fools.

See, never mentioned the north once *.

* Only to point that out.

hmmm.. sounds like somebody else has been brain washed!!!!!!!!!

Someone should tell the rest of the world that they were fight for the British empire in WWI.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

hmmm.. sounds like somebody else has been brain washed!!!!!!!!!

Someone should tell the rest of the world that they were fight for the British empire in WWI.

OK then, you tell me exactly why the First World War started.

[Tankie]

hmmm.. sounds like somebody else has been brain washed!!!!!!!!!

Someone should tell the rest of the world that they were fight for the British empire in WWI.

OK then, you tell me exactly why the First World War started.

Your original post is that ridiculous I wouldnt bother having a discussion with you. I recommend reading a bit more on WWI though and maybe read a bit more about the Irish that gave their live for freedom in the name of Ireland in that war.

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Your original post is that ridiculous I wouldnt bother having a discussion with you. I recommend reading a bit more on WWI though and maybe read a bit more about the Irish that gave their live for freedom in the name of Ireland in that war.

Nice try, but you can't hide your woeful ignorance as easily as that. If my first post was so ridiculous it scarcely merited comment from you in the first instance 

The truth hurts.

[Gnevin]

Most of these men did not go off to fight for the 'Brits', they went to fight for freedom, the promise of home rule and many other reasons. Irish independence would have been worth nothing if the dictators had of won the war!

Yes, they were brainwashed.

Britain couldn't tolerate the threat to her 'empire' of a rapidly rising unified Germany -- German industrial output exceed that of Britain's for the first time just before WWI, and Germany's maritime power, and mercantilie trading strength were also in the ascendent, all of which represented casus belli for the Brits, nothing more. Of course, they declared war on the pretext of an Archduke (Ferdinand) having been assassiinated in Sarajevo in the first instance), and to protect 'Small Nations', and how anyone could buy that line I'm not quite sure (since she had been denying self-determination to a small nation on her doorstep for over 700 years at that point, a small nation that had a tradtion, language and history much older than her own). Of course, idiots like Redmond didn't stop to think for a minute of the cruel irony, but it was pointed out to him at the time by Connolly, amongst others.

WWI led to WWII, in that such was the punitive nature of the reparations levied against Germany, and all Germans, in the aftermath of WWI, that the perfect conditions for the rise of an animal like Hitler were laid. And Hitler duly did rise, and WWII duly did follow.

So, those who fought for Britain in WWI were fighting to protect her 'empire', although I would accept that this was unwittingly so for 99% of those Irish who picked up arms on Britain's behalf, and for whatever exoneration they might have there is none for the political leaders, fools.

See, never mentioned the north once *.

* Only to point that out.

Remember the heroes
how bravely they fought .
Think not of the fools who
Lead them to die.
Nor the leaders of empires
for whom war was but a game .
Remember they died and
fought and peace have you and I.

[Tankie]

Your original post is that ridiculous I wouldnt bother having a discussion with you. I recommend reading a bit more on WWI though and maybe read a bit more about the Irish that gave their live for freedom in the name of Ireland in that war.

Nice try, but you can't hide your woeful ignorance as easily as that. If my first post was so ridiculous it scarcely merited comment from you in the first instance 

The truth hurts.

So you say:

Yes, they were brainwashed.

Britain couldn't tolerate the threat to her 'empire' of a rapidly rising unified Germany -- German industrial output exceed that of Britain's for the first time just before WWI, and Germany's maritime power, and mercantilie trading strength were also in the ascendent, all of which represented casus belli for the Brits, nothing more. Of course, they declared war on the pretext of an Archduke (Ferdinand) having been assassiinated in Sarajevo in the first instance), and to protect 'Small Nations', and how anyone could buy that line I'm not quite sure (since she had been denying self-determination to a small nation on her doorstep for over 700 years at that point, a small nation that had a tradtion, language and history much older than her own). Of course, idiots like Redmond didn't stop to think for a minute of the cruel irony, but it was pointed out to him at the time by Connolly, amongst others.

WWI led to WWII, in that such was the punitive nature of the reparations levied against Germany, and all Germans, in the aftermath of WWI, that the perfect conditions for the rise of an animal like Hitler were laid. And Hitler duly did rise, and WWII duly did follow.

So, those who fought for Britain in WWI were fighting to protect her 'empire', although I would accept that this was unwittingly so for 99% of those Irish who picked up arms on Britain's behalf, and for whatever exoneration they might have there is none for the political leaders, fools.

The last line is what gets me most, are you telling me we should have hoped that the Allies lost the war?

Also do you have a link that states this is why the world went to war?

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

Your original post is that ridiculous I wouldnt bother having a discussion with you. I recommend reading a bit more on WWI though and maybe read a bit more about the Irish that gave their live for freedom in the name of Ireland in that war.

Nice try, but you can't hide your woeful ignorance as easily as that. If my first post was so ridiculous it scarcely merited comment from you in the first instance 

The truth hurts.

So you say:

Yes, they were brainwashed.

Britain couldn't tolerate the threat to her 'empire' of a rapidly rising unified Germany -- German industrial output exceed that of Britain's for the first time just before WWI, and Germany's maritime power, and mercantilie trading strength were also in the ascendent, all of which represented casus belli for the Brits, nothing more. Of course, they declared war on the pretext of an Archduke (Ferdinand) having been assassiinated in Sarajevo in the first instance), and to protect 'Small Nations', and how anyone could buy that line I'm not quite sure (since she had been denying self-determination to a small nation on her doorstep for over 700 years at that point, a small nation that had a tradtion, language and history much older than her own). Of course, idiots like Redmond didn't stop to think for a minute of the cruel irony, but it was pointed out to him at the time by Connolly, amongst others.

WWI led to WWII, in that such was the punitive nature of the reparations levied against Germany, and all Germans, in the aftermath of WWI, that the perfect conditions for the rise of an animal like Hitler were laid. And Hitler duly did rise, and WWII duly did follow.

So, those who fought for Britain in WWI were fighting to protect her 'empire', although I would accept that this was unwittingly so for 99% of those Irish who picked up arms on Britain's behalf, and for whatever exoneration they might have there is none for the political leaders, fools.

The last line is what gets me most, are you telling me we should have hoped that the Allies lost the war?

Also do you have a link that states this is why the world went to war?

Yes, and I also say that those who llifted arms thought they were doing the right thing. Well, if the Germans had won WWI, there never would have been a Hitler, Ireland would probably have been completely liberated, and 5 million Jews would not have been killed, not to mention the carnage of WWII.

How can you be so enthusiastic about the poppies and WWI (and WWII) when you don't know about the factors that led to the outbreak of that war?

[Tankie]

Your original post is that ridiculous I wouldnt bother having a discussion with you. I recommend reading a bit more on WWI though and maybe read a bit more about the Irish that gave their live for freedom in the name of Ireland in that war.

Nice try, but you can't hide your woeful ignorance as easily as that. If my first post was so ridiculous it scarcely merited comment from you in the first instance 

The truth hurts.

So you say:

Yes, they were brainwashed.

Britain couldn't tolerate the threat to her 'empire' of a rapidly rising unified Germany -- German industrial output exceed that of Britain's for the first time just before WWI, and Germany's maritime power, and mercantilie trading strength were also in the ascendent, all of which represented casus belli for the Brits, nothing more. Of course, they declared war on the pretext of an Archduke (Ferdinand) having been assassiinated in Sarajevo in the first instance), and to protect 'Small Nations', and how anyone could buy that line I'm not quite sure (since she had been denying self-determination to a small nation on her doorstep for over 700 years at that point, a small nation that had a tradtion, language and history much older than her own). Of course, idiots like Redmond didn't stop to think for a minute of the cruel irony, but it was pointed out to him at the time by Connolly, amongst others.

WWI led to WWII, in that such was the punitive nature of the reparations levied against Germany, and all Germans, in the aftermath of WWI, that the perfect conditions for the rise of an animal like Hitler were laid. And Hitler duly did rise, and WWII duly did follow.

So, those who fought for Britain in WWI were fighting to protect her 'empire', although I would accept that this was unwittingly so for 99% of those Irish who picked up arms on Britain's behalf, and for whatever exoneration they might have there is none for the political leaders, fools.

The last line is what gets me most, are you telling me we should have hoped that the Allies lost the war?

Also do you have a link that states this is why the world went to war?

Yes, and I also say that those who llifted arms thought they were doing the right thing. Well, if the Germans had won WWI, there never would have been a Hitler, Ireland would probably have been completely liberated, and 5 million Jews would not have been killed, not to mention the carnage of WWII.

How can you be so enthusiastic about the poppies and WWI (and WWII) when you don't know about the factors that led to the outbreak of that war?

So you wanted the Allies to lose in the hope Ireland may have been free but yet the rest of the world would not have been....... hmmmm

You really cannot say any of that line is true. There is no reason to believe that Ireland would have been left untouched as it was still part of britain and who is the say that there would not have been a second world war but this time started by the allies trying to take back their freedom.

[Pangurban]

Quote from: Pangurban on Today at 09:23:40 PM
For the record G.Nevin my Granfather fought at the Somme in the WW1 and was badly wounded, ending up as a POW. I had 2 uncles who served during WW2, one missing in action, never recovered. All three were there for economic reasons, as were a lot of Irishmen at the time. They had no delusion that they were advancing the cause of freedom or democracy, in Ireland or anywhere else. I respect the memory of all the Men who fought and fell, thats why i find it so objectionable that they are being used now as they were then, to advance other peoples agendas. The only cause worth advancing is peace not militarism. Buy a Poppy, not the propag

G.Nevin.
Well that an entirely different spin than your original comments.

No its not,i am making exactly the same point

[Tankie]

I removed the last topic! post here if you wish that the Allies lost the war.

[Canalman]

Tankie, the small batch of Irishmen who joined the British Army had no influence of note in winning WW2.
WW2 was won by the Soviet Union, former Yugoslavia and financed by  the economic might of the USA. Britian's role was peripheral in the visceral fiight to the end between Fascism and Communism on the Eastern Front. A bugbear of mine has always been the downplaying of "Yugoslavia's" role in the war which meant that at no stage did the Axis forces ever have more men fighting the British and Americans in France/Belgium/Holland than were fighting the Partisans there.

To say that by casting a non fawning eye on the role of the Irish in the British armed forces in WW2 means that you wanted an Axis victory is imo nuts and very drama queenish.

[Gnevin]

Tankie, the small batch of Irishmen who joined the British Army had no influence of note in winning WW2.
WW2 was won by the Soviet Union, former Yugoslavia and financed by  the economic might of the USA. Britian's role was peripheral in the visceral fiight to the end between Fascism and Communism on the Eastern Front. A bugbear of mine has always been the downplaying of "Yugoslavia's" role in the war which meant that at no stage did the Axis forces ever have more men fighting the British and Americans in France/Belgium/Holland than were fighting the Partisans there.

To say that by casting a non fawning eye on the role of the Irish in the British armed forces in WW2 means that you wanted an Axis victory is imo nuts and very drama queenish.

So Britian's War in Africa was peripheral  too the out come? Britian maintaining of a western front was peripheral  ? Britain acting a bridge head to act Europe had was peripheral  .Britians war in Asia was peripheral  ? Catch a grip would you

[red hander]

Nine out of 10 German soldiers killed during WWII died on the Eastern front ... Winston Churchill no more won the war than that dog who does the insurance ads ... in fact, if Hitler had not stopped the panzers for two days on the outskirts of Dunkirk what was already a humiliation for the british (which their typical revisionism turned into a glorious episode) would have ended in complete and utter defeat in 1940 ... the Soviet Union killed the most enemy troops and the Soviet Union suffered the highest number of casualties

[Gaoth Dobhair Abu]

Tankie, the small batch of Irishmen who joined the British Army had no influence of note in winning WW2.
WW2 was won by the Soviet Union, former Yugoslavia and financed by  the economic might of the USA. Britian's role was peripheral in the visceral fiight to the end between Fascism and Communism on the Eastern Front. A bugbear of mine has always been the downplaying of "Yugoslavia's" role in the war which meant that at no stage did the Axis forces ever have more men fighting the British and Americans in France/Belgium/Holland than were fighting the Partisans there.

To say that by casting a non fawning eye on the role of the Irish in the British armed forces in WW2 means that you wanted an Axis victory is imo nuts and very drama queenish.

So Britian's War in Africa was peripheral  too the out come? Britian maintaining of a western front was peripheral  ? Britain acting a bridge head to act Europe had was peripheral  .Britians war in Asia was peripheral  ? Catch a grip would you

North Africa, Asia, hmmmmm British colonies........ 

[Tankie]

Lads we are talking about WWI and to say any soldier didnt have an effect is wrong!