Register to Comment
Page 2 of 36 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 354
Like Tree189Likes
  1. #11
    Old Mr Grouser Old Mr Grouser is offline
    Old Mr Grouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    5,969

    A simple little spelling-test for you all.

    How many 'f's are there in 'money'?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #12
    PO'Neill PO'Neill is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,894

    Quote Originally Posted by sparky42 View Post
    Because it wasn't worth their time against a non state actor of relatively limited threat, an offensive action by a State is a completely different matter. The North is UK territory, attacking it would have been an Act of War that no NATO nation would have intervened against, (So not Suez but Falklands in international support). Nor does that change the core and most vital point, asking the Defence Forces to go against the British Army in such a military action was and would be a suicide mission that would achieve the square root of feck all.
    It was the longest conflict the Brits were involved with in the last century. In A. R. Oppenheimer's IRA: The Bombs and the Bullets: A History of Deadly Ingenuity, he estimates that the IRA carried out 19,000 explosions during the troubles. Along with maybe as many ambushes, gun battles etc, the IRA killed several hundred listed as civilians but that includes loyalists, informers, Brit agents, splinter groups etc. The mega explosions in London, Manchester etc he states were the largest bombing campaign of a European city since WW2. Some limited threat all right Napoleon.

    The British embassy is international law British territory, didn't see mighty Britannia invading Dublin when it was burned down in 1972. Likewise the Icelandic's burned down the Brit embassy and rammed British ships and fired at the British navy in the early 70's. International opinion was with Iceland, no British all out war on tiny Iceland of course !! Maybe if we had the Icelandic govt instead of the servile, pandering quislings of FF,FG, LP the situation would have been completely different

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #13
    Jezza15 Jezza15 is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    894

    Quote Originally Posted by PO'Neill View Post
    Yeah sure, just like the world support the Brits got in Suez in 1956 - and then couldn't get their asses out quick enough. Even the Brits learn the odd lesson. The Civil rights movement had international sympathy, especially in America, where one telephone call from Washington would have ended any British thoughts of all out attack of the Bogside, Newry and Dublin. If the Brits could have attacked as they pleased - then why didn't they do it when the IRA launched thousands of attacks from across the border throughout the troubles and escaped south again umpteenth times ?
    Based upon the classic Republican delusion that NI is the same as India, the Middle East or the rest of Ireland for that matter.

    A little difference- the majority of Northern Irish were ethnic Britons; from the elites to the gutter most people were British and happy about it. If that was the case in all those other places they would have panned out very differently.

    And it is beyond question that the British Governments held back in NI because of their determination to paint it as an internal issue within the UK, and to appear to have 'normal' relations with Dublin. The British military could have crushed the IRA if they had taken the same attitude towards 'collateral damage' as they did in places further away full of non-white foreign types.

    A civil rights campaign having international sympathy is not the same as a revolutionary nationalist campaign of violence. The NI Civil Rights campaign openly linked itself to Civil Rights in the USA. Well Black Americans were not campaigning to make the USA part of Africa and governed from Lagos, and make Americans a minority in their own nation.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #14
    petaljam petaljam is offline
    petaljam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    21,891

    Quote Originally Posted by sparky42 View Post
    Because it wasn't worth their time against a non state actor of relatively limited threat, an offensive action by a State is a completely different matter. The North is UK territory, attacking it would have been an Act of War that no NATO nation would have intervened against, (So not Suez but Falklands in international support). Nor does that change the core and most vital point, asking the Defence Forces to go against the British Army in such a military action was and would be a suicide mission that would achieve the square root of feck all.
    Nothing like the Falklands, where one section of the local population was not being chased out of their homes in pogroms facilitated by the local authorities.

    I've no idea whether the letter is accurate, nor am I sure whether in hindsight intervention would have led to a better outcome, but a lot of northern nationalists of my parents' generation never got over the feeling of abandonment and even betrayal by the southern government in those early days of the Troubles, and Jack Lynch announcing "We will not stand idly by" while doing exactly that epitomized that pretence of solidarity which, it turned out, was worth exactly nothing.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #15
    PO'Neill PO'Neill is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,894

    Quote Originally Posted by Jezza15 View Post
    Based upon the classic Republican delusion that NI is the same as India, the Middle East or the rest of Ireland for that matter.

    A little difference- the majority of Northern Irish were ethnic Britons; from the elites to the gutter most people were British and happy about it. If that was the case in all those other places they would have panned out very differently.

    And it is beyond question that the British Governments held back in NI because of their determination to paint it as an internal issue within the UK, and to appear to have 'normal' relations with Dublin. The British military could have crushed the IRA if they had taken the same attitude towards 'collateral damage' as they did in places further away full of non-white foreign types.

    A civil rights campaign having international sympathy is not the same as a revolutionary nationalist campaign of violence. The NI Civil Rights campaign openly linked itself to Civil Rights in the USA. Well Black Americans were not campaigning to make the USA part of Africa and governed from Lagos, and make Americans a minority in their own nation.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #16
    Finbar10 Finbar10 is offline
    Finbar10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,820

    After a quick google search, it does seem that the writer of this letter "Declan Foley of Berwick, Australia" has written at least one similar letter to the paper with a similar narrative before.

    Here's part of one on "Operation Armageddon" from 2009:
    Madam, – Perhaps John T O’Neill, Col, retired (September 10th), could illuminate the public about the meeting of senior army officers held in Mullingar Army Barracks 40 years ago, shortly after all Irish Army personnel were ordered by the government of the day back to their respective barracks. This meeting was halted by the Special Branch of the Garda Síochána armed with Uzis. In the following weeks a number of high-ranking officers took early retirement.

    Special Branch intelligence were of the opinion the meeting was to organise a coup d’etat because of the refusal of the Lynch government to take back “The North”. When, if ever, Harold Wilson’s complete papers are released, will the people of Ireland and the UK realise how close to slaughter Ireland came in 1969?
    My history of this period is a bit sketchy. Is this guy's overall narrative generally unbelievable and running counter to established events, or is it potentially plausible (and might conceivably fit in with what happened) but with no real hard evidence except for his statements?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #17
    sparky42 sparky42 is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,159

    Quote Originally Posted by petaljam View Post
    Nothing like the Falklands, where one section of the local population was not being chased out of their homes in pogroms facilitated by the local authorities.

    I've no idea whether the letter is accurate, nor am I sure whether in hindsight intervention would have led to a better outcome, but a lot of northern nationalists of my parents' generation never got over the feeling of abandonment and even betrayal by the southern government in those early days of the Troubles, and Jack Lynch announcing "We will not stand idly by" while doing exactly that epitomized that pretence of solidarity which, it turned out, was worth exactly nothing.
    The Falklands was a situation where an internationally recognised British Territory was invaded by another nation, an attack by the Republic into the North would have been the exact same situation internationally, and would have been viewed as such by the UK's military partners.

    More over what exactly do you or anyone else propose? The Defence Forces wouldn't achieve anything (other than dying) going against the British Army in any combat situation, suggesting otherwise again is divorced from reality.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #18
    Old Mr Grouser Old Mr Grouser is offline
    Old Mr Grouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    5,969

    Quote Originally Posted by sparky42 View Post
    ... such a military action was and would be a suicide mission that would achieve the square root of feck all.
    Also there'd be all the Sanctions and Embagoes.

    Irish agriculture would have lost its British market.

    The Bank of England would have blocked Irish accounts.

    The ferries would have been shut down.

    British airports would have been closed to Irish flights.

    Irish people wishing to enter Britain would have needed hard-to-obtain visas; yes, even householders returning from a holiday.

    etc, etc.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #19
    PO'Neill PO'Neill is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,894

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Mr Grouser View Post
    Also there'd be all the Sanctions and Embagoes.

    Irish agriculture would have lost its British market.

    The Bank of England would have blocked Irish accounts.

    The ferries would have been shut down.

    British airports would have been closed to Irish flights.

    Irish people wishing to enter Britain would have needed hard-to-obtain visas; yes, even householders returning from a holiday.

    etc, etc.
    The Brits were hoping to join the EEC, not a hope were they going to act like colonial bully's against another European nation. Hence checkout the Cod War with tiny Iceland to see their real power in the world and in fact were facing economic bankruptcy having to be bailed out by the IMF (several decades before our wee one). Besides one telephone call from Washington would have them changing their tune instantly.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #20
    Old Mr Grouser Old Mr Grouser is offline
    Old Mr Grouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    5,969

    Quote Originally Posted by PO'Neill View Post
    The Brits were hoping to join the EEC ...
    And those countries, with the various 'food mountains' that they had at the time, would have been delighted to replace Ireland as food-suppliers.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 2 of 36 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment