Israel attacks aid ship

[Betsy Og]

If it was just one or two or even a few hundred that would be one thing but Irish people have a long history of siding with the oppressor when the opportunity arose. From the Irish who fought to keep slavery in the USA to those who murdered their way around the colonies.

I'm sure we've a long history of fighting with the underdog too (did you not see braveheart ) e.g. Irish who crossed over and fought with the Mexicans in Texas. The point is that we, as a State, or even in any meaningfully collective way, have never backed the cause of colonialism so why should the State now unnecessarily and unfairly assume a mantle of shame for the actions of other states (or actions by some individual Irish people).

We play our part through the UN, why should we be a lacky for the US under the guise of NATO?

So you’re cool with the Chinese and Russians having a veto over when and where we send our troops but you don’t think we should work with the UK, Germany, France, Holland, Belgium and our other EU neighbours?
I've no difficulty joining an EU Rapid Response Force etc., as long as we retain the right to consider if what we are are being asked to do is morally justifiable, e.g. to get back to the original thread, I wouldnt have sent the Irish rangers to storm one of the aid ships.

They did indeed fear a Soviet invasion, and with get good reason. They feared it so much that they landed the biggest amphibious invasion force in history in Normandy in 1944 to stop the Russians occupying Western Europe... or do you really think that D-Day was about stopping the already defeated Germans??? I was labouring under that apparent mis-apprehension. They then went into Korea to stop the totalitarian Chinese. & Chile when it suited them, econmoically. The Cold War was far more than a bluffing game. The fact that it didn’t turn into a hot war in Europe (unlike the millions it killed in Africa and South East Asia) doesn’t diminish that.

Yes, we sold beef to the Libyans and we campaigned at EU level to stop trade embargoes against them even when they were the training ground for every second nutcase from the Provo’s to the budding Al-Qaida. OK - that wasnt our finest hour
[/QUOTE]

Overall my point is that I think you are going to great lengths to assume or infer guilt on the nation such that we shoud be rendered speechless - even though you obviously think we should be more active, more squeaky clean etc. etc.

Re "them doing the dirty work we wont do" - you'll note that, from the outset I've said I've no problem with states killing terrorists or aggressive armies etc, its the unnecessarily engaging apparent civilians on aid ships, & covert or even overt operations for your own greed that I have a difficulty with.

 

[Purple]

From Ian O'Doherty in todays Indo

"Because make no mistake, hatred for Israel far outweighs any love for the people of Gaza for many of these activists, who tend to be a rag bag collection of fundamentalists, extremists and ill-informed do-gooders who know that in the current climate it is far easier and socially acceptable to be seen as being on the Palestinian side than it is to be on the Israeli one.

In fact, this sense of moral and intellectual confusion was perfectly illustrated at the anti-Israeli march outside their embassy earlier this week.

Pictured at the front of the demo, a bunch of people brandishing the Hamas flag.

And then, just behind them, was a flag from the Labour party's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered membership.

So, let's get this straight -- a bunch of LBGT rights activists are happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with the party which has branded homosexuality a moral perversion which can only be dealt with by execution?

How far out of whack does your moral compass have to be before you go marching, as a gay person, beside people who openly declare that they want you dead?"

 

[Sunny]

Come on Purple, your arguments are good enough that you don't have to resort to quoting a muppet like Ian O'Doherty! The guy is an idiot of the highest order. You might as well have used Brendan O'Connor!

 

[Purple]

Betsy Og, my point is that we are no better than any other state morally. The fact that we didn't have the means or opportunity to act badly as a state doesn't diminish that and when Irish people have had the opportunity to side with the oppressor they have do so in their droves. Why we think our economic and military weakness gives us the right to pontificate at those who do the heavy lifting that we can't do is beyond me.

It's a big dangerous world full of aggressive and hostile states. Because we are located in Western Europe and are therefore lucky enough to bask in the peace and security that our neighbours provide some Irish people think that the rest of the world would be the same if only everyone was nice to each other. These people are, in my opinion, at the very least naive and as worst dangerously stupid.

The road to hell is paved with good intensions and littered with the corpses of well meaning fools.

 

[Purple]

Come on Purple, your arguments are good enough that you don't have to resort to quoting a muppet like Ian O'Doherty! The guy is an idiot of the highest order. You might as well have used Brendan O'Connor!

Thanks, but do you disgaree with his point; "So, let's get this straight -- a bunch of LBGT rights activists are happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with the party which has branded homosexuality a moral perversion which can only be dealt with by execution?"

 

[mathepac]

From Ian O'Doherty in todays Indo...

Those few words bestow on the article in question all the gravitas and credibility it deserves. Filed [broken link removed]

I understand that in appreciation of his role as a serious journalist he's in line for promotion to here.

 

[Sunny]

Thanks, but do you disgaree with his point; "So, let's get this straight -- a bunch of LBGT rights activists are happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with the party which has branded homosexuality a moral perversion which can only be dealt with by execution?"

No, these marches always attract weirdos who haven't got a clue what they are marching for. Same with every protest march I have ever seen.

I disagree with him about hating Israel and loving Gaza. I neither love nor hate either of them. Just because I disagree with alot of Israels actions and policies doesn't mean I hate them. There are plenty of people who live in Israel who disagree with the road they are going down. Doesn't mean I don't recognise the all good in Israel or that I hate them. Just because I am not Jewish and live In Ireland doesn't mean I don't have a right to voice an opinion without bing called a Israel hating, Hamas loving, terrorist sympathiser. Just as people here who support Israel no matter what are arab hating, zionist warmongers.

 

[Purple]

No, these marches always attract weirdos who haven't got a clue what they are marching for. Same with every protest march I have ever seen.

I disagree with him about hating Israel and loving Gaza. I neither love nor hate either of them. Just because I disagree with alot of Israels actions and policies doesn't mean I hate them. There are plenty of people who live in Israel who disagree with the road they are going down. Doesn't mean I don't recognise the all good in Israel or that I hate them. Just because I am not Jewish and live In Ireland doesn't mean I don't have a right to voice an opinion without bing called a Israel hating, Hamas loving, terrorist sympathiser. Just as people here who support Israel no matter what are arab hating, zionist warmongers.

I agree with all of that.

 

[mathepac]

During the height of the colonial era we were part of the UK and Irish men went to the colonies in their droves to crack heads and stamp on the natives. Look at the role of Michael O'Dwyer (a Tipperary man) and Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer (Indian born of Irish stock, educated in Cork) in the Jallianwala Bagh massacre (the bit in the film “Gandhi” when the British Army opened fire with machine guns on a civilian crowd).

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of examples of Irish men committing the most horrendous acts all over Africa and India. ....

It is true that hundreds of thousands of Irishmen have served as the cannon fodder of imperialist Britain down the centuries, but how many of these unfortunate young men would have preferred to remain at home tending farms, raising families, working at a trade or teaching school?

The reality for a lot of them was they either took the king's shilling or starved and have their families starve. They were the dis-enfranchised majority, slaves in their native country (no vote, no property, no livestock, no religion, no land, no education, no language, no prospects) who in order to survive, joined the British army.

 

[csirl]

It is true that hundreds of thousands of Irishmen have served as the cannon fodder of imperialist Britain down the centuries, but how many of these unfortunate young men would have preferred to remain at home tending farms, raising families, working at a trade or teaching school?

The reality for a lot of them was they either took the king's shilling or starved and have their families starve. They were the dis-enfranchised majority, slaves in their native country (no vote, no property, no livestock, no religion, no land, no education, no language, no prospects) who in order to survive, joined the British army.

+1. The famine and its consequences (i.e. displacement, poverty etc.) - which lasted into the first couple of decades of the 20th century - produced a lot of recruits for the British. Irish regiments were used as canon fodder in the Boar War and First World War.

 

[mathepac]

... Look at the role of Michael O'Dwyer (a Tipperary man) and Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer (Indian born of Irish stock, educated in Cork) in the Jallianwala Bagh massacre (the bit in the film “Gandhi” when the British Army opened fire with machine guns on a civilian crowd)...

This seems to have been a tactic generally employed by the British and its directly employed terrorist squads, including the Black & Tans and Auxiliaries and not an isolated army incident attributable to O'Dwyer or Dyer (Anglicised form of O'Dwyer).

The British murder squads (a combination of RIC and Auxiliaries) entered Croke Park on 21/11/1920 and murdered 14 unarmed civilians, including Michael Hogan, a Tipperary footballer, (the bit in the film “Michael Collins” when the British terrorists opened fire on a civilian crowd). Later that night three unarmed prisoners who were being tortured in custody were shot dead by their British torturers.

So it seems that in 1919-1920, in both India and Ireland, the British colonists had a generalised shoot to kill policy in place, which their terrorist police and army employees used to murder unarmed civilians.

 

[Purple]

It is true that hundreds of thousands of Irishmen have served as the cannon fodder of imperialist Britain down the centuries, but how many of these unfortunate young men would have preferred to remain at home tending farms, raising families, working at a trade or teaching school?

The reality for a lot of them was they either took the king's shilling or starved and have their families starve. They were the dis-enfranchised majority, slaves in their native country (no vote, no property, no livestock, no religion, no land, no education, no language, no prospects) who in order to survive, joined the British army.

The same can be said for many young men across England Scotland and Wales. Remember that there was a potato famine in England at the same time as our one, most particularly in Cornwall. It is the people at the top who made the decisions and many of them were Irish. The notion that poverty exonerates the Irish poor and the same poverty doesn't exonerate the English poor is misty eyed nonsense.

 

[Purple]

This seems to have been a tactic generally employed by the British and its directly employed terrorist squads, including the Black & Tans and Auxiliaries and not an isolated army incident attributable to O'Dwyer or Dyer (Anglicised form of O'Dwyer).

The British murder squads (a combination of RIC and Auxiliaries) entered Croke Park on 21/11/1920 and murdered 14 unarmed civilians, including Michael Hogan, a Tipperary footballer, (the bit in the film “Michael Collins” when the British terrorists opened fire on a civilian crowd). Later that night three unarmed prisoners who were being tortured in custody were shot dead by their British torturers.

My great Uncle fought in the civil war. He was one of the men who occupied the Four Courts and started the whole thing off. He had been shot twice during the war of independence. He used to tell stories about how the younger guys (like him) would vomit and sometimes cry when British soldiers were being tortured to death. He also spoke of the way they tried to strike terror into informants by killing them in front of their families.
Oh, and most of the RIC were Irish.

So it seems that in 1919-1920, in both India and Ireland, the British colonists had a generalised shoot to kill policy in place, which their terrorist police and army employees used to murder unarmed civilians.

Yep, just like everyone else. In fact the Brits were about the best of them. But them again for most people in Ireland at the time being British and being Irish was just about the same thing.


I'm proud of being Irish and living in a republic but this guff that we are somehow more noble and morally entitled than Britain or anyone else is sickening.

 

[starlite68]

QUOTE=mathepac;1047801]


I'm proud of being Irish and living in a republic but this guff that we are somehow more noble and morally entitled than Britain or anyone else is sickening.

we did not take over any other country by force or enslave their people!
Thats what makes us more morally entitled.

 

[Purple]

we did not take over any other country by force or enslave their people!
Thats what makes us more morally entitled.

Yes we did. We were part of the UK during the high point of the colonial era from 1860 to 1910. The fact that we are now an independent country doesn't mean that we get to ignore that. The Brits and the French haven’t colonised anyone since the 1920's either. Does that mean that they get to ignore their own history?
The Belgians haven’t colonised anyone since their King did so in the 1880’s. Does that mean they get to ignore the hundreds of thousands of Congolese that were butchered and starved by Belgians there up ‘till nearly 1920?


Our holier than thou attitude is just another form of Jingoism.

 

[Ruam]

Yes we did. We were part of the UK during the high point of the colonial era from 1860 to 1910. The fact that we are now an independent country doesn't mean that we get to ignore that. The Brits and the French haven’t colonised anyone since the 1920's either. Does that mean that they get to ignore their own history?
The Belgians haven’t colonised anyone since their King did so in the 1880’s. Does that mean they get to ignore the hundreds of thousands of Congolese that were butchered and starved by Belgians there up ‘till nearly 1920?


Our holier than thou attitude is just another form of Jingoism.

The British have not colonised anyone since the 1920s? What about Iraq, Afganistan, the Suez crisis, British support for the apartheid regime?

What about the Franch's involvement in the genocide in Rwanda?

The rich countries of the world, and I include Ireland in this, have continued to colonise the third world to this day ensuring that they stay poor and subservient to western countries.

 

[mathepac]

... Our holier than thou attitude is just another form of Jingoism.

That is the most utterly ridiculous position I've ever heard anyone adopt.

Between the act of union in 1800 and our winning the war of independence 120+ years later, do you have any idea how many armed insurrections, popular non-armed uprisings, protests and political agitations there were in order to try to boot the Brits out and achieve self-determination for what had been referred to as the Kingdom of Ireland prior to 1800?

Extrapolating from your position, black South Africans were responsible for apartheid because some of them worked for the Afrikaaner establishment as civil servants. End of term report-card for Walter Sisulu, Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Tutu: "Must try harder for independence other-wise guilty of self-oppression. Obviously National Party members. Ongoing colonisation in other parts of the world is also their fault".

 

[z104]

There was no Famine in Ireland in the 1840's. To suggest that it was a Famine leads people to believe that there was a shortage of food in the country. There was no shortage of Food in Ireland in the 1840's. There was an abundance of food in the 1840's.
There was however a Genocide in Ireland in the 1840's by the inaction of government(British) to distribute this abundance of food to the people who had none.

Almost a Final solution.

 

[Purple]

That is the most utterly ridiculous position I've ever heard anyone adopt.

Between the act of union in 1800 and our winning the war of independence 120+ years later, do you have any idea how many armed insurrections, popular non-armed uprisings, protests and political agitations there were in order to try to boot the Brits out and achieve self-determination for what had been referred to as the Kingdom of Ireland prior to 1800?

The short answer is yes, I do. Do you have any idea how much popular support most of them had? Do you know who the people were who cheered at the execution of Wolfe Tone?
By the 1880's the establishment in Ireland was, for the most part, in favour of the union. It is those in power that set policy be that in Ireland or England.

My point is simply that many, many Irish people, of both low and high birth, were in favour of colonialism and saw nothing wrong with the actions of the European colonial powers. Tens of thousands of us were active participants.
When the Irish Nationalist Party did oppose the government in the House of Commons it was for political gain as much as any pangs of conscience.

We are not a morally superior race. We are just like everyone else; willing to act in ways that disadvantage others when it is to our own benefit. The record of the few Irish people who were in positions of power, positions to influence events, through the colonial era shows that.

To suggest otherwise is jingoistic and hypocritical.

There is a long history of inter-tribal oppression in Southern Africa. Just about all of the slaves sold to American and European traders were caught and sold on by Africans; they were doing it for hundreds of years before that selling men women and children to each other and to Arab traders. Even a man like Stanley, a vile amoral egotist who saw nothing wrong with opening fire on civilians, was appalled by the barbarity and cannibalism that he saw less than a hundred and fifty years ago.

No people, be they oppressed or oppressors, is any different at their core. The only difference is circumstance and opportunity.

 

[z104]

What about the Irish slaves that were sold to work in plantations in Barbados.. Who sold them?