Huge Differences Between Young & Old . !
- Thread starter Evans Electric
- Start date
Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:
so the man has beliefs and acts upon them, anti-imperialism in Ireland, never heard of it before, but proper old school socialism. You can't say he's spineless like the current ham shagger!!
Now lets get something clear, I'm sure you will correct it for me Steps. We invaded Ireland around the time of Elizabeth the 1st, we then occupied and subjugated someones elses country for centuries until around 1920ish when Southern Ireland regained it's freedom minus the 6 counties of the North. So the government of Ireland as a whole, or in part, can be seen as basically illegal. The government therefore is illigitimate and to fight the occupation is fully justified. The IRA are therefore not terroists but freedom fighters. (NB I'm not trying to wind you up Steps, but right now I'm imagining you bouncing off the ceiling and spitting feathers).
Now lets also consider the UVF etc, which are also terroist groups in their own right, how many did they kill?. Interesting article on Newsnight last night about the IRAs senior enforcer, who turns out to be a British double agent who ordered the killing of many young southern Irish lads - expect another enquiry soon. The whole situation was plain vicious, killing on both sides was/is plain wrong. Dialogue eventually stopped most of it, and if Corbyn was in there trying to promote dialogue many years ago, the many has conviction and balls!
Out of interest Steps, do you consider Gandhi a terrorist, or the fight for the return of India to Indian rule justifed?
Now lets get something clear, I'm sure you will correct it for me Steps. We invaded Ireland around the time of Elizabeth the 1st, we then occupied and subjugated someones elses country for centuries until around 1920ish when Southern Ireland regained it's freedom minus the 6 counties of the North. So the government of Ireland as a whole, or in part, can be seen as basically illegal. The government therefore is illigitimate and to fight the occupation is fully justified. The IRA are therefore not terroists but freedom fighters. (NB I'm not trying to wind you up Steps, but right now I'm imagining you bouncing off the ceiling and spitting feathers).
Now lets also consider the UVF etc, which are also terroist groups in their own right, how many did they kill?. Interesting article on Newsnight last night about the IRAs senior enforcer, who turns out to be a British double agent who ordered the killing of many young southern Irish lads - expect another enquiry soon. The whole situation was plain vicious, killing on both sides was/is plain wrong. Dialogue eventually stopped most of it, and if Corbyn was in there trying to promote dialogue many years ago, the many has conviction and balls!
Out of interest Steps, do you consider Gandhi a terrorist, or the fight for the return of India to Indian rule justifed?
I'm on my way out, I'll do a better reply later,
But, point one, we didn't invade Ireland around Elizabeth 1 period.
It's a lot more complicated.
But, point one, we didn't invade Ireland around Elizabeth 1 period.
It's a lot more complicated.
it involves Blarney doesn't it? :^O
Now there in lies one BIG issue.
Not you Steps.
Who actually, UNDERSTANDS, what was the crux of the matter.
I know next to nothing about it all.
The one thing that I feel, and it may well be (probably is) wrong, is that the true cause was lost?
you could place the beginning of the modern issues started in 1517 , then the rise of warring Catholic factions/kings throughout Europe,
and finally culminating in the late 17th century in the United kingdom, as at that time the king of England was also the king of Wales Scotland and Ireland,
James 2nd was the king until he was gradually defeated and lost his monarchy, he made a last stand to regain the throne in Ireland,
so, when was Ireland not actually ruled by a British king?
when it was simply all clans? probably, how far back does one wish to go?
the simple fact is, before Ireland was under British rule it was never a self ruled country, merely cheiftains and clans,
or, someone can educate me a little better on this rather then simply say Ireland was occupied by the British.
and finally culminating in the late 17th century in the United kingdom, as at that time the king of England was also the king of Wales Scotland and Ireland,
James 2nd was the king until he was gradually defeated and lost his monarchy, he made a last stand to regain the throne in Ireland,
so, when was Ireland not actually ruled by a British king?
when it was simply all clans? probably, how far back does one wish to go?
the simple fact is, before Ireland was under British rule it was never a self ruled country, merely cheiftains and clans,
or, someone can educate me a little better on this rather then simply say Ireland was occupied by the British.
Steps,
You'll have to humour me on this, because I know nothing about it, and, would love to learn just a little.
OK, so James 2nd "united" Ireland under a single British Monarch.
Were they happy about that?
You'll have to humour me on this, because I know nothing about it, and, would love to learn just a little.
OK, so James 2nd "united" Ireland under a single British Monarch.
Were they happy about that?
not exactly sidewinder,
although he was king of all 4 countries, they were seen as 3 different thrones,
then in mid 17th century there was the war of the kingdoms thing, but thats more an english scots thing that messed things up a bit,
the UK only came about early 18th century, then Ireland officially joined early 19th century, although it had been ascended by the king who was the king of England, Scotland and Wales in 1688
its by no means straightforward,,,,,,
although he was king of all 4 countries, they were seen as 3 different thrones,
then in mid 17th century there was the war of the kingdoms thing, but thats more an english scots thing that messed things up a bit,
the UK only came about early 18th century, then Ireland officially joined early 19th century, although it had been ascended by the king who was the king of England, Scotland and Wales in 1688
its by no means straightforward,,,,,,
Some people still can't even accept EVEN NOW after a ton of evidence from both sides that there were some right evil buggers on both sides of the divide. That includes UDA UVF IRA INLA Real IRA and probably a good few more....There is evidence that murders were committed under the noses of the UK services weather we are talking MI5 or just the plain old army lads turing a blind eye....or even their own guns against the "enemy".
Lost in translation one might say. And you can see the same things happening all over the world even now as I stated earlier - bombs and bullets do the damage but it is words and the pen that finishes the job. Im thinking our funding of Osama, Gadaffi, Saddam even IS.....until the relationship turns sour (Or the buggers get all trained up and think sod you im off back to my own people). All terrorists who we have dealt with traded with supplied arms too - But again Corbyn must be worse because he is anti monarch and attended a few rallies.
As for me listening and reading propaganda over the irish recent history then I really have no answer if you think Irish Catholics were not treated as second class citizens by the people of power and influence. Weather it was jobs or prison sentences there was evidence that they were treated pretty dam poorly. I know a few ex army lads who quite openly talk of grabbing guys who they "believed" to be involved in the troubles - grabbing them off the street dragged up dark allies for a good hiding. The army guys were just getting their own back for the casualties that they were taking......and so it went on and on and on - Mix in the desire to control organised crime over there and some people motives being less than pure for any cause - Yep Ireland was never black and white, I would say more grey.
Lost in translation one might say. And you can see the same things happening all over the world even now as I stated earlier - bombs and bullets do the damage but it is words and the pen that finishes the job. Im thinking our funding of Osama, Gadaffi, Saddam even IS.....until the relationship turns sour (Or the buggers get all trained up and think sod you im off back to my own people). All terrorists who we have dealt with traded with supplied arms too - But again Corbyn must be worse because he is anti monarch and attended a few rallies.
As for me listening and reading propaganda over the irish recent history then I really have no answer if you think Irish Catholics were not treated as second class citizens by the people of power and influence. Weather it was jobs or prison sentences there was evidence that they were treated pretty dam poorly. I know a few ex army lads who quite openly talk of grabbing guys who they "believed" to be involved in the troubles - grabbing them off the street dragged up dark allies for a good hiding. The army guys were just getting their own back for the casualties that they were taking......and so it went on and on and on - Mix in the desire to control organised crime over there and some people motives being less than pure for any cause - Yep Ireland was never black and white, I would say more grey.
Just to add - we (The UK government) used to call Nelson Mandela a terrorist. Several tories including the current Speaker of the HOC called for him to be executed.
occupied and exploited.
It might have been 3 kingdoms previously, but they were 3 Irish Kingdoms (possibly with a large dose of Danish occupation thrown in). Has to be said the irish did have a bad habit of sailing across the sea to get involved in 'mainland affairs'. Whole history teaches us that war isn't the answer, and royalty are the cause of many deaths. Modern equivalent being large corporations......
throw another one into the mix,
most English arent native to their land either,
in exactly the same way very few irish are actually related to any celtic clan,
I'm an import, arent most people a mix from somewhere else?
so, who is actually a native of anywhere that they can really claim as theirs simply by being there first?
most English arent native to their land either,
in exactly the same way very few irish are actually related to any celtic clan,
I'm an import, arent most people a mix from somewhere else?
so, who is actually a native of anywhere that they can really claim as theirs simply by being there first?
Last edited by a moderator:
this is very true, as Liverpool Irish mixed with protestant something or other I have no idea what my background really is. I was born in England and that's about as far as it goes. This is why I would always argue the current population of an area of land (born to the area) should detrmine their nationality, so whilst Gibraltar should clearly be Spanish, it isn't and I would support it being kept British within reason. This is also the mistake that the IRA/ Sinn Fein made - if they wanted the 6 counties back, economic wealth and prosperity would work better than bombs and bullets every time. Hopefully, eventually full re-integration of the population may arise, but I can't see that happening for a few generations yet. Or it may just transcend that the majority population of NI wishes to remain British?
Ok, very easy mistake to make,
But,
Where do you get the six counties back bit,?
Those counties were never 'theirs' to begin with,
They are actually a part of Ulster, which has 9counties, one of the original 4 provinces of Ireland, with each province having its own chieftain, hence the earlier point I made about Ireland not being as one united country in history anyway.
But,
Where do you get the six counties back bit,?
Those counties were never 'theirs' to begin with,
They are actually a part of Ulster, which has 9counties, one of the original 4 provinces of Ireland, with each province having its own chieftain, hence the earlier point I made about Ireland not being as one united country in history anyway.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2009
- Messages
- 14,765
- Reaction score
- 955
So why not give the people of NI a referendum who they would like to be governed by, The UK, Eire, or truly independent?
always thought it was 6, but it's still 1 island, mind you so is England, Scotland and Wales.....
9 or 6, the province was taken under duress at the end of a pointy sword, then populated with immigrants (wasn't that mostly from Scotland?).
Lord Devon stills own large parts of the south I understand, so even there they got the country back but effectively not the land itself - confused dot com!
9 or 6, the province was taken under duress at the end of a pointy sword, then populated with immigrants (wasn't that mostly from Scotland?).
Lord Devon stills own large parts of the south I understand, so even there they got the country back but effectively not the land itself - confused dot com!
Last edited by a moderator:
Binky,
Do yof have any idea how the partition of 1922 was decided?
No offence,
But it really does seem you have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about.
And guess what,
It's still British.
Do yof have any idea how the partition of 1922 was decided?
No offence,
But it really does seem you have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about.
It's been done Dave,
And guess what,
It's still British.
Latest posts
-
Is taking a spur to a slightly lower level possible?- Latest: SPECIAL LOCATION
-
-
-
