Easter commerations

[spider]

All a bit ironic, because until Michael Stone made his attack at Milltown, there was an unwritten rule up North that cemeteries were off-limits. Guess this twat didn't get the memo.

Not quite correct, the vermin in question was following a well trodden tradition of disrupting churches / cemeteries / acts of remembrance.

For example in 1987 the IRA planted a bomb at the entrance to Roselawn cemetery, in an attempt to murder those attending the funeral of Reserve Constable Peter Nesbitt, himself killed in an explosion three days earlier.

I can also personally remember as a schoolchild a VIIED being discovered in a local churchyard; PIRA had fired shots in the area and the bomb was intended to kill Police doing the follow-up. Can't remember the exact date but I'm guessing mid-80's.

The 1987 Enniskillen Remembrance Day bombing and the failed attack on the same day at Tullyhommon were also of course attacks on those gathering to remember the war dead.

And then there was that old favourite PIRA / INLA tactic of murdering people after they had just left church on a Sunday morning.

[sofa]

One of whom was my granduncle who as a "Redmond Volunteer" was killed by the Germans during the battle fighting for "The freedom of small nations"(I think not) The whole thing was a Colonial/Imperial contest and nothing else. The soldiers were cannon fodder and to ignore that aspect of WW1 seems to me to be slightly perverse.

Yes they were cannon fodder, yes they were pawns used by the Norman French masters in Britain. But they were humans and each had a Mother. Nobody is paying respects to the empire, just remembering the poor block who had there life cut short due to something we were involved in. Some may even being born and breed in the liberties and slapped on the back in the pub when they announced to there mates they were joining the "army".
different times Different attitudes. None of us were around at the time, none of us know what uniform we would have being wearing on the day it kicked off.

[GoneToTheCanner]

the IRA seemed to have a particular talent for targeting easy victims, churchgoers, dog handlers, reservists,judges, prison staff, etc.....didn't want to face real targets who fought back.

[na grohmiti]

I enjoyed watching a young officer from a German warship reading a lesson at the Battle of Jutland Commemoration in the UK yesterday.
Germany, a country whose bombs and bullets killed far more innocent people far more recently than the event being commemorated, yet her and her colleagues were welcomed.

[hptmurphy]

And the British think 1916 was an act of treason against the legally constituted government during a time of war: a view held by the majority of Dubliners at the time.

But in 1916 , it was that and not only was it unique to Dublin.. the merchants that fed the british army from the whole of Ireland belied it to be the same as did the Redmondites, as did my relations who fought in that war, both of which survived . but one lost his arm.

100 years later we can look back with the benefit of hindsight and debate it inside out, ultimately decisions were made that have shaped Ireland to this, right wrong or indifferent.

there are enough people trying to re write history to their own political gain without people trying to tarnish the memory of those who lost their lives on both sides. If the state and The DF see fit to remember them in this fashion, having served I understand the sentiment .

Once its done properly, and it has , there is no issue.

[DeV]

But in 1916 , it was that and not only was it unique to Dublin.. the merchants that fed the british army from the whole of Ireland belied it to be the same as did the Redmondites, as did my relations who fought in that war, both of which survived . but one lost his arm.

100 years later we can look back with the benefit of hindsight and debate it inside out, ultimately decisions were made that have shaped Ireland to this, right wrong or indifferent.

there are enough people trying to re write history to their own political gain without people trying to tarnish the memory of those who lost their lives on both sides. If the state and The DF see fit to remember them in this fashion, having served I understand the sentiment .

Once its done properly, and it has , there is no issue.

+1
Disliked by accident

[Galloglass]

hptmurphy "But in 1916 , it was that " (Treason)

Htp.....I agree with remembering the fallen and most of your post with the exception of the bit I've left above....
It's always "Treason" to challenge a colonial power. When was it ever not? It's not a description I would use myself.

[hptmurphy]

It's always "Treason" to challenge a colonial power. When was it ever not? It's not a description I would use myself.

Its nothing against then group in question, indeed treason is very subjective, but if you look at it clinically and without taking sides, men who were subjects, indeed citizens of the Empire of Great Britain and Ireland, the description to include Ireland, is the key.

Being part of that Empire, even by choice or against the will of some of the citizenery and bear in mind by 1916 these men were possibly 9 generations removed from being non subjects, made them subject to the definition of treason.

Given it was war time when the Rising took place , treason in war time had very limited outcome, just look at those convicted of Treason in WW2, most were executed. It was that verdict that should have been expected. The fact they were shot as soldiers instead of hung as criminals is ponderous and in fact gives credence to their bearing as soldiers.

Again its history, its how I read it to be based on other events. The what ifs of Home Rule have been debated, again we will never know and each has ideas on the subject.

The celebrations of independence will be something similar no doubt, but the big quandry is how the Civil War will be feted.

[popeye]

I do not have a problem with the UK , have done LO for RN ships but I still feel that we should not have had this love fest for those who we killed in an act of independence.
I don't care who served where its about time we just remember our own.
I have a big problem with the national day as well to answer a previous question, we should remember our own losses not those who fought for someone else.

[expat01]

I can understand your sentiment, and it is shared by, for example, many Ulster unionists. But I don't share it. Like it or not (I don't) we were part of the UK up to independence. Even were we not, Irish men who died in WW1 were our losses. Ask their mothers. Irishmen who died fighting for Britain in WW2 were also, unlike WW 1, effectively serving Ireland's best interests, we just had a government which was too short sighted to understand that.

[hptmurphy]

I don't care who served where its about time we just remember our own.
I have a big problem with the national day as well to answer a previous question,

But we do celebrate our own in a few ways...where the problem?

[hptmurphy]

Like it or not (I don't) we were part of the UK up to independence.

Thats the very key of the issue,that the begrudgers want to keep over looking and use it as an excuse not be inclusive in the comemerations.

Once people can understand the concept that we were part of the empire they will perhaps move on. The first Irishmen to soldier for the empire didn't do so the week before the rising, nor did they finish at the end of. We have had Irishmen in the British Armed forces for hundreds of years, nearly as long as the Brits have had recognised armies and still do, why should we think any less of an Irish man who died in Afghanistan in the 21st century than the Irishman who died there in the 19th century?

They are still Irishmen .

[na grohmiti]

A fact that many chose to ignore, is that the British army soldier, during the time of the empires expansion in the 18th and 19th century, mas made up to a large extent, of men born on the Ireland of Ireland. The "British soldier" responsible for many of the actions of the crown that made for many a rebel song, did so with an Irish accent.
More men of Ireland in 1916 were wearing the uniform of the British army than that of the Irish Volunteers or ICA.

And that is an undeniable fact.

[Galloglass]

Interesting debate....Essentially it's a philosophical question. To accept a colonists retrospective "legal" narrative on his "ruling" you is an individual choice......but not one I agree with no matter how long established or propagated.
People should only be governed by consent......As Irish people were never asked there is no consent (there is just history) To fight Apartheid was treason, to kill the Tsar was treason. Telling the truth about illegality in governments worldwide is treason.
Trying to imply that Ireland was a "colonial" power as part of the "UK" from 1801 is simply more doublethink ....The very Act of Union was a colonial takeover of a country whose parliament was getting "uppitty".

[Flamingo]

There were a lot of people living on the island of Ireland in 1916 (and not just in Ulster) who were quite happy for Ireland to remain part of the British Empire and United Kingdom for socio-economic as well as political and ideological reasons, even if Home Rule was given for internal matters.

The past is another country, but I do find it strange that somebody who was in favour of Irish Independence but not from Ireland can now be considered an Irish patriot, but somebody who had family roots in Ireland for hundreds of years but did not wish Ireland to leave the UK / British Empire was somehow not Irish.

Lots of people now have Irish passports - are they Irish?