Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Liam Mellows and the War of Independence

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member Éireann_Ascendant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    323
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Liam Mellows and the War of Independence

    Article on Liam Mellows and his role during the War of Independence as well as the Treaty split (fifth in series).

    Rebel Operative: Liam Mellows Against Britain, Against the Treaty, 1920-2 (Part V)

    As the IRA Director of Operations, Mellows' duties were concened with the purchase of weapons and their smuggling into Ireland, once courtesy of a furniture suite from America, loaded with guns. Notable achievements included the landing of guns from Germany in Waterford, in November 1922, and the use of Glasgow for similar shipments, via his IRB contacts.

    Working with his colleagues in the IRA GHQ was not always an easy time. Finances were the ultimate responsibility of the Minister for Defence, Cathal Brugha, who ran a tight ship, fiscally speaking, and would – so Mellows bemoaned – "sit all night with his mouth like a rat trap over half a crown if it went wrong."

    But his relationship with Michael Collins was particularly tense. According to a mutual friend:

    [Mellows] said he was interfering with his job as Director of Purchases by buying arms across the water and paying more for them than he was. He was buying them, he said, not to use them but to prevent him (Liam) from getting them.
    When the Treaty was signed in December 1921, Mellows took the side of those opposing it. At the Dáil debates, he cut a striking figure, as one eyewitness recalled: "With fair hair brushed back, rugged countenance lit up by profound conviction and a rather discordant voice vibrating with the intensity of his beliefs."

    His argument was that, as the Republic already existed, it could not subsequently be set aside, Treaty or no Treaty. It was a fact he urged his audience to accept. After all, "we are not afraid of the facts. The facts are that the Irish Republic exists. People are talking to-day of the will of the people when the people themselves have been stampeded."

    Those advocating the Treaty were not doing so on account of its merits. Instead, they "are in favour of the Treaty because they fear what is to happen if it be rejected. That is not the will of the people – that is the fear of the people."

    For some, Mellows' performance was the highlight of the debates. Nora Connolly, daughter of the Easter Rising martyr, thought the verbal display from her long-time friend so marvellous that surely no one would bring themselves to vote for the Treaty after that.

    But, of course, they did. And one detail Mellows neglected to mention in the Dáil was that he had been in discussion with a number of like-minded IRA officers, such as Liam Lynch, Rory O'Connor and Ernie O'Malley, who were determined to resist the Treaty, by force of arms if necessary.

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Union Jackeen Land
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    What would Mellows think of the Ireland of today?

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    North Korea
    Posts
    7,422
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Éireann_Ascendant View Post
    Article on Liam Mellows and his role during the War of Independence as well as the Treaty split (fifth in series).

    Rebel Operative: Liam Mellows Against Britain, Against the Treaty, 1920-2 (Part V)

    As the IRA Director of Operations, Mellows' duties were concened with the purchase of weapons and their smuggling into Ireland, once courtesy of a furniture suite from America, loaded with guns. Notable achievements included the landing of guns from Germany in Waterford, in November 1922, and the use of Glasgow for similar shipments, via his IRB contacts.

    Working with his colleagues in the IRA GHQ was not always an easy time. Finances were the ultimate responsibility of the Minister for Defence, Cathal Brugha, who ran a tight ship, fiscally speaking, and would – so Mellows bemoaned – "sit all night with his mouth like a rat trap over half a crown if it went wrong."

    But his relationship with Michael Collins was particularly tense. According to a mutual friend:



    When the Treaty was signed in December 1921, Mellows took the side of those opposing it. At the Dáil debates, he cut a striking figure, as one eyewitness recalled: "With fair hair brushed back, rugged countenance lit up by profound conviction and a rather discordant voice vibrating with the intensity of his beliefs."

    His argument was that, as the Republic already existed, it could not subsequently be set aside, Treaty or no Treaty. It was a fact he urged his audience to accept. After all, "we are not afraid of the facts. The facts are that the Irish Republic exists. People are talking to-day of the will of the people when the people themselves have been stampeded."

    Those advocating the Treaty were not doing so on account of its merits. Instead, they "are in favour of the Treaty because they fear what is to happen if it be rejected. That is not the will of the people – that is the fear of the people."

    For some, Mellows' performance was the highlight of the debates. Nora Connolly, daughter of the Easter Rising martyr, thought the verbal display from her long-time friend so marvellous that surely no one would bring themselves to vote for the Treaty after that.

    But, of course, they did. And one detail Mellows neglected to mention in the Dáil was that he had been in discussion with a number of like-minded IRA officers, such as Liam Lynch, Rory O'Connor and Ernie O'Malley, who were determined to resist the Treaty, by force of arms if necessary.
    During the Treaty Debate Mellows said to Sean Moylan " Many more will be dead before we achieve a Republic" He could see where the Debates were heading
    Someday, and that day may never come, I will call on you to do a service for me.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member Éireann_Ascendant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    323
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freewillie View Post
    During the Treaty Debate Mellows said to Sean Moylan " Many more will be dead before we achieve a Republic" He could see where the Debates were heading
    Said to Moylan just after the Truce in 1921, which turned out to be a remarkably prescient comment, though he was almost certainly assuming that any further war would still be against Britain, rather than a civil war.

    During the build-up to the Civil War in early 1922, Mellows, as well as the rest of the IRA Executive, seems to have been naive to the possibility of open war breaking out, to the point that when it did, and they received word that the Free State forces were on the way to attack them in the Four Courts, they hadn't any contingency plans or defence strategies in place.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    4,717
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Éireann_Ascendant View Post
    Said to Moylan just after the Truce in 1921, which turned out to be a remarkably prescient comment, though he was almost certainly assuming that any further war would still be against Britain, rather than a civil war.

    During the build-up to the Civil War in early 1922, Mellows, as well as the rest of the IRA Executive, seems to have been naive to the possibility of open war breaking out, to the point that when it did, and they received word that the Free State forces were on the way to attack them in the Four Courts, they hadn't any contingency plans or defence strategies in place.
    Maybe that was because on one day, both the Irish Republican Army and the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) were planning to attack the enemy British army in the north - but on the next day, the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) were attacking the Irish Republican Army with the help of the enemy British army in the south.

    See, when you have your fellow Irishmen saying one thing and doing the opposite, it creates all kinds of trouble.

    Mulcahy was a particularly duplicitous Free State lying SOB.


    Last edited by Talk Back; 6th January 2019 at 02:42 PM.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member Éireann_Ascendant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    323
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Talk Back View Post
    Maybe that was because on one day, both the Irish Republican Army and the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) were planning to attack the enemy British army in the north - but on the next day, the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) were attacking the Irish Republican Army with the help of the enemy British army in the south.

    See, when you have your fellow Irishmen telling one thing and doing the opposite, it creates all kinds of trouble.

    Mulcahy was a particularly duplicitous Free State lying SOB.


    Indeed, who could have thought that the Free State would respond so poorly to armed men openly defying its authority and that of the Dáil, taking over buildings in the middle of the capital, being involved in shoot-outs in some places, threatening to drag the country back into a war with Britain, etc?

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    4,717
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Éireann_Ascendant View Post
    Indeed, who could have thought that the Free State would respond so poorly to armed men openly defying its authority and that of the Dáil, taking over buildings in the middle of the capital, being involved in shoot-outs in some places, threatening to drag the country back into a war with Britain, etc?
    The Free State army had no problem defying the authority of Dail Eireann and suppressing it on the 28th of June 1922. Isn't that right hypocrite??? What authority did the the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) have exactly???

    The Free State army was set up as a rival army to Óglaigh na hÉireann under the terms of the articles of agreement for the treaty - making its first public appearance on the 31st of Jan 1922. They took an oath to a foreign king. The renegade Free State army were clearly Crown Forces. Mulcahy had lied 3 times on the 10th of Jan 1922 in Dail Eireann, when he said the army would remain the army of the 32 county Irish Republic. MOTION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT Houses of the Oireachtas

    The Irish Republican Army were the lawful and legitimate army of the Irish Republic. The renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles) were obviously not the army of the Irish Republic - the clue for the clueless such as yourself is that the traitors waged an illegal war against the Irish Republic.

    The Irish Republican Army had every right to take up positions in the Four Courts to defend the Irish Republic - in fact it was their duty. They took an Oath of Allegiance (as did Dáil Éireann) to the Irish Republic.

    The oath to the Irish Republic:- “ I, A.B., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I do not and shall not yield a voluntary support to any pretended Government ('Southern Ireland' provisional government), authority or power within Ireland hostile and inimical thereto, and I do further swear (or affirm) that to the best of my knowledge and ability I will support and defend the Irish Republic and the Government of the Irish Republic, which is Dáil Eireann, against all enemies, foreign (British army) and domestic (Free State army), and I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, so help me, God.”

    Last edited by Talk Back; 6th January 2019 at 02:55 PM.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member Oliver Cromwell McIvor's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Leinster
    Posts
    2,788
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Ah here this is taking the piss. This guy keeps opening new threads on Mellows.

    What the phukk is the fascination with that guy?
    "“Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. Islam in a man is like rabies in a Dog."

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oliver Cromwell McIvor View Post
    Ah here this is taking the piss. This guy keeps opening new threads on Mellows.

    What the phukk is the fascination with that guy?
    If you go to "View Forum Threads" on his/her profile, you'll see that he/she has started several threads on various topics from the 'revolutionary period' of Irish history. They usually come in a number of parts and are linked to his/her blog. It is clear that a good deal of effort goes into each one and that is exactly what you would hope for in the history forum. They are a credit to him/her and it would be great if there were more such threads. It's only a pity that they don't generate more interesting discussion (and I hold my own hands up for that).
    They should be encouraged, not disparaged.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •