scrap the army

[X-ray]

With the greatest respect, a chara, this is all fantasy. There is absolute continuity between the free state army of 1922 and of 2009. There was no disbanding of one and formation of another, nor was there any incorporation of one into another - like of the RUC into the PSNI. Where is the split you are talking about? What legal documents refer to it? A chara, no such split exists. The same is true of the gardai.

But the really important point, which has been quite openly refered to by the right wing posters on this thread, is that the function of the free state armed forces has not changed, i.e. as a special organisation of armed men for the subjugation of one class by another, i.e. for the subjugation of the landless workers by the landed elite.

Well the legal document that makes all the difference in my mind is the constitution. I may not agree with every line of it, but it represents the democratic will of the people of the 26 counties and extends the rights of citizenship to those in the 6. I would defend this document as without it will essentially have nothing. If this state was not formulated now as it was in 1922 I would have nothing to do with it.

The right wing posters as you put it are wrong to say the army is there to break strikes etc. It is there to do as it is told by a legally elected government, that government and army are limited by the peoples constitution in what they can legally do. The army serves the constitution and thus the people it represents.

What do you propose? that we scrap all of this and put in place an army and government that are not supported by the population?

[Cael]

Well the legal document that makes all the difference in my mind is the constitution. I may not agree with every line of it, but it represents the democratic will of the people of the 26 counties and extends the rights of citizenship to those in the 6. I would defend this document as without it will essentially have nothing. If this state was not formulated now as it was in 1922 I would have nothing to do with it.

The right wing posters as you put it are wrong to say the army is there to break strikes etc. It is there to do as it is told by a legally elected government, that government and army are limited by the peoples constitution in what they can legally do. The army serves the constitution and thus the people it represents.

What do you propose? that we scrap all of this and put in place an army and government that are not supported by the population?

But Devs constitution did not disband the free state army, or incorporate it into another army.

[fergalr]

But Devs constitution did not disband the free state army, or incorporate it into another army.

Armies are rarely established by constitutions. The American army and navy pre-date their constitution.

[lapsedmethodist]

W
But the really important point, which has been quite openly refered to by the right wing posters on this thread, is that the function of the free state armed forces has not changed, i.e. as a special organisation of armed men for the subjugation of one class by another, i.e. for the subjugation of the landless workers by the landed elite.

I must tell my son that he's out there subjugating landless workers.
He thinks he's on a different mission altogether.

BTW.. no offence and I'm not being nasty, but are you for real ? Or is all this a wind up?

[Cael]

I must tell my son that he's out there subjugating landless workers.
He thinks he's on a different mission altogether.

BTW.. no offence and I'm not being nasty, but are you for real ? Or is all this a wind up?

Im sure he will be left in no doubt about what he's being paid for in the not too distant future.