Robert Ballagh - World War 1 expert?

I only caught the second half of the Forgotten War discussion on RTE1 last night but I couldn't help wondering why Robert Ballagh was included, even more so when he was clearly out of his depth discussing anything of detail.

I was even more surprised then to see him on TV3 straight after, is he basically the go-to anti-war person for any discussion programme on WW1?

It seemed odd in the first programme especially as he was the only non-historian there, I was a bit embarrassed for him. Could RTE not have found someone more qualified to speak on the topic or did they just want someone with an anti-historical viewpoint to say "war is bad, irish soldiers were imperialist lackeys...."

Yes, but he fits in well with the RTE and Irish Times agenda and I'm sure no reputable historian would be willing to trot out that drivel.

I saw that programme last night and again thopught he was out of his depth..
That said, RTE are doing some great shows on WW1.
I critisize RTE a lot but hats off to them on this.

The_Banker said:

I critisize RTE a lot but hats off to them on this.

Click to expand...

In fairness to them yes, they are. I do find it strange though that they give tiny extremist groups like the IAWM a platform.

Purple said:

Yes, but he fits in well with the RTE and Irish Times agenda and I'm sure no reputable historian would be willing to trot out that drivel.

Click to expand...

Now that is a bunch of people I would love to have a pint with.

I didn't see the programme, but was there any other anti-war spokesperson on it?

I heard the general point being made that we should commemorate the victims of war and not just the dead soldiers. That seemed reasonable to me.

Even if he was out of his depth on historical detail, was he offering a point of view different to the others?

Brendan

Brendan Burgess said:

I heard the general point being made that we should commemorate the victims of war and not just the dead soldiers. That seemed reasonable to me.

Brendan

Click to expand...

That's a fair point. I never really thought about it before.

Brendan Burgess said:

I heard the general point being made that we should commemorate the victims of war and not just the dead soldiers. That seemed reasonable to me.

Click to expand...

The IT piece spoke about how the commemoration should "Focus on" victims and not on soldiers. The soldiers who died were also victims, especially in the context of the First World War. He said that "It seems to me that all the generals and all the military people have been polishing up their buttons and their medals: medals that they got for killing people." He's referring to the generals but also 17 and 18 year olds from all sides being blown to bits a few hours after getting off the train at the nearest station. It's offensive to their memory, their suffering and the grief and suffering of their families.

If we want to reduce the chances of wars being fought we won't do it by caricaturing and vilifying everyone in uniform. We'll do it by understanding, trade and interdependence and striving for social and economic equality of opportunity.

I am not sure why it is offensive? They got medals for killing people. Ballagh is opposed to war. Sure the soldiers were victims, but it was they who were doing the killing.

Brendan

I have to say I'm feeling a bit uneasy about the widespread WW1 remembrance going on and the military aspect to it all.
The Brits are gone very American with their lauding of their military services over the past few years... 'Help for heroes' and the pressure now on everyone over there to wear poppies for a couple of weeks.

Now in Ireland all of a sudden, we're 'celebrating' Irish men dying under a foreign flag (I'm not arguing about the cause they fought for). We're almost 'normalising' it all, as though Ireland fought as an equal partner in the war.

Delboy said:

I have to say I'm feeling a bit uneasy about the widespread WW1 remembrance going on and the military aspect to it all.
The Brits are gone very American with their lauding of their military services over the past few years... 'Help for heroes' and the pressure now on everyone over there to wear poppies for a couple of weeks.

Now in Ireland all of a sudden, we're 'celebrating' Irish men dying under a foreign flag (I'm not arguing about the cause they fought for). We're almost 'normalising' it all, as though Ireland fought as an equal partner in the war.

Click to expand...

I would ever wear a Poppy as it also commemorates the Blank&Tan's and the soldiers who fought against us during the War of Independence.
I've no problem with the British celebrating their armed forces. I have no problem with us commemorating the Irish men who fought and died in the two World Wars.
I have a major problem with the way in which the current government, especially the Labour Party member, and most particularly our President, are acting so cravenly towards the British government and Royal Family. It's almost like a family member who knows they behaved badly looking to be accepted back into the fold.

Delboy said:

I have to say I'm feeling a bit uneasy about the widespread WW1 remembrance going on and the military aspect to it all.
The Brits are gone very American with their lauding of their military services over the past few years... 'Help for heroes' and the pressure now on everyone over there to wear poppies for a couple of weeks.

Now in Ireland all of a sudden, we're 'celebrating' Irish men dying under a foreign flag (I'm not arguing about the cause they fought for). We're almost 'normalising' it all, as though Ireland fought as an equal partner in the war.

Click to expand...

It wasn't a foreign flag at the time.

Have a look at the photo in the link taken of westmoreland street in 1919 and see what the locals thought at the time before revisionism took hold.

http://www.thejournal.ie/world-war-1-ireland-1563493-Jul2014/

I've no issue with an anti-war message being relayed, but it was in the context of this particular programme which was set up as a historical discussion of Irish men fighting in WW1 it just seemed odd to have someone with a one-note message being given time in what was an otherwise very interesting programme.

I did like his idea of the forget-me-not replacing the poppy though.

It was a foreign flag to most Irish people at the time...yes it may have been the flag of the people who ran the country, but it was still foreign

Delboy said:

It was a foreign flag to most Irish people at the time...yes it may have been the flag of the people who ran the country, but it was still foreign

Click to expand...

I'd be very surprised if that was the case. The majority wanted Home Rule in 1914 but I very much doubt the majority wanted Independence. Personally I'm very glad it happened but I think I would have been well in the minority back then.

Delboy said:

It was a foreign flag to most Irish people at the time...yes it may have been the flag of the people who ran the country, but it was still foreign

Click to expand...

It wasn't you're re-writing history.

Not re-writing history at all. I just believe that most people in Ireland did not regard the Union jack as their flag.
But I'm from rural Ireland, perhaps the larger cities were more split

Delboy said:

Not re-writing history at all. I just believe that most people in Ireland did not regard the Union jack as their flag.
But I'm from rural Ireland, perhaps the larger cities were more split

Click to expand...

Based on what evidence? I'm sorry but your belief doesn't trump history nor does it invent an urban-rural divide on the issue.

And where's your evidence to show that most Irish people were quiet content under the Crown in the early 1900's???

Where's this 'trump' you speak of?