Originally Posted by stacker1

No but they could have done something after Crystal night or the invasion of Czechoslovakia or the numerous other things the Nazis did. Instead they sat on their arses until Poland. So no they didnt care. They (the west)also ignored the Soviets efforts at murdering anyone that posed a threat to their power, they also ignored what some nazis did because once again it was in the interest of the west.

What about the BEF?
The Cold War?
What would you have done?
How does this make Irishmen who fought as Heroes into traitors?

Originally Posted by stacker1

They were heroes to the British why should they be heroes to the Irish? They deserted their country.

They are heroes to all free people, they honoured their conscience and they did not desert their moral duty.

Originally Posted by stacker1

How do you know? Do the British (today) join up to look for weapons of mass destruction? Or even to fight the good fight against evil? Why would the majority of people do it 70 years ago? There could be many factors, pay, loyalty to the crown (not all southern Irish wanted to be republican), being a punchy Irish fucker, etc

The only thing I'm saying with certainty to this specific point is that they were heroes and that they did not desert their conscience. How do you know they didn't?

Originally Posted by stacker1

No it doesnt, the Americans (and to a certain extent the Brits) stretched international rules to breaking point to invade another state. It cost the lives of many innocent Iraqis.
Someone quite important in the UN said similar
BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Iraq war illegal, says Annan
And because some people thought about their morals they went to jail for it.

Annan is NOT and never was the UN, he was as entitled to his own opinion as any other free thinking person. He too owes a debt of gratitude to the Irish heroes and their likes - otherwise he too might not have been around... he certainly would not have had powerful political freedom.

Originally Posted by stacker1

Are innocent people dying in the world due to their leaders? Yes or no?

Yes, How does this make the Irish Heroes into traitors?

Originally Posted by stacker1

Are the British goverment turning a blind eye to some of them?

Not usually... they tend to have diplomatic pressure... or are you suggesting sending our Forces out to deal with every single atrocity on earth... how would that work?

Originally Posted by stacker1

If the answer is yes to both questions then by using your argument for the Irish. We should desert and help them rather than stand by and do nothing.

Again I completely disagree with your analogy. How does it work that because the Irish Heroes followed their conscience... thus means that if we don't volunteer to jump into every argument on earth that we are somehow deserting?
Every situation is different and every situation should be judged on its specific merits. These heroes made a good call and they are now being recognised for that fact.

Originally Posted by stacker1

Yes I am sure. In 1939 the goverment of Ireland only concern should have been for Ireland, not the UK, not fighting nasty people, not getting involved in wars that the vast majority of its citizens didnt want to get involved in.

That's one version of events... there are many others... possibly the government of the day believed the Nazis had something for them...

Originally Posted by stacker1

And if the UK had invaded Ireland would they have shot at their countrymen?

No, they would have been far too busy dealing with Peter Pan.

Originally Posted by stacker1

They werent state heroes. Ireland (as a state) had nothing to do with WW2.

I don't believe for one minute that you really believe that!

Originally Posted by stacker1

If someone today deserted the British to fight the Burmese military junta would they be expect to be called British heroes?

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it is.

Originally Posted by StickyEnd

In the UK's interest is one way to put it. Essential for the UK's survival is another. Do you think we could have won the war in the Atlantic if Germany had captured Iceland? Possibly, but I seriously doubt it.

Im not doubting why the UK did it. I'm just saying we will invade a neutral country when we want to, then try to take the moral highground when other countries might get a bit nervy about it.
The UK didnt give a toss about the rights of Iceland when it was in its own interest did it?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

What about the BEF?
The Cold War?
What would you have done?
How does this make Irishmen who fought as Heroes into traitors?

The BEF was in reaction to Germany going into Poland, 6 years before that we did nothing.
The Cold war? Our interests were threatened just as much as those on mainland Europe, Did we invade the the red curtain to free our so called wartime allies from the soviets? No we didnt.
They fought as heroes for the Brits not for the Irish.
What would I have done when? The only time I would commit the UK to a war is when its in our interest. I couldnt give a fuck about minorities, One British soldiers life isnt worth a thousand of theirs.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

They are heroes to all free people, they honoured their conscience and they did not desert their moral duty.

The Irish were already free, after WW2 there were a large amount of people in the east of Europe who were not free but no one went to war for them.
They did desert their army though and so should be punished by their country.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

The only thing I'm saying with certainty to this specific point is that they were heroes and that they did not desert their conscience. How do you know they didn't?

I don't, I just look at human nature, no one really gives a shit about the bad things that happen in world unless it directly affects them.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Annan is NOT and never was the UN, he was as entitled to his own opinion as any other free thinking person. He too owes a debt of gratitude to the Irish heroes and their likes - otherwise he too might not have been around... he certainly would not have had powerful political freedom.

Oh I think the Annan was quite important in the UN, I'd also say the fact a hell of lot of other countries stay out of it means the UN wasnt really onboard, but hey play about with the law and it okay to have the deaths of thousand of innocent Iraqis.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Yes, How does this make the Irish Heroes into traitors?

How many times do I have to say this, they were traitors to the Irish state. You might not like that fact but it is still a fact, you do not desert a legal army that has not forced you to join and join an army that may invade your country and expect to not be thought of as a traitor.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Not usually... they tend to have diplomatic pressure... or are you suggesting sending our Forces out to deal with every single atrocity on earth... how would that work?

Possible the same way you think Ireland shouldnt have stayed out of ww2 while 5000 of its citizens deserted. And yes we do turn a blind eye in the majority of cases, we'rd rather have their money than care about their citizens.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Again I completely disagree with your analogy. How does it work that because the Irish Heroes followed their conscience... thus means that if we don't volunteer to jump into every argument on earth that we are somehow deserting?
Every situation is different and every situation should be judged on its specific merits. These heroes made a good call and they are now being recognised for that fact.

Lets say everyone of the Irish did fight the good fight because of the Nazi way of thinking (I disagree but we'll go with that argument). I am saying the British army today should be thinking the same. Every country commiting crimes against its citizens that our goverment is ignoring should get every British soldier thinking about his conscience and deserting to help those people, only I dont think they would get much sympathy when they got back.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

That's one version of events... there are many others... possibly the government of the day believed the Nazis had something for them...

Maybe, maybe not, but they still work for the Ireland, not the UK

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

No, they would have been far too busy dealing with Peter Pan.

Are you trying to say it wouldnt happen if it was in the British interest to do so? You just want to dismiss Iceland and the problem of the Irish ports?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

I don't believe for one minute that you really believe that!.

I do believe that. The Irish had a very bitter split from the UK, some innocent people were murdered, the British goverment employed some very underhand tricks and yet less than 20 years later some of their soldiers deserted to fight for the Brits (who may have posed a threat to Ireland). To right I think they werent heroes to the Irish people.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it is.

Why? What are the British govenrment doing about that country? Next to fuck all. Their people were virtual slaves and yet we stand by and do nothing. Surely someone looking at their moral conscience, knows this wrong and should do something about it? Unless of course its wrong to desert the British army for moral reason but not the Irish army when they are helping the Brits?

Not that almost any of this has any reflection whatsoever on the issue of if or not the Irish Heroes deserve recognition for their bravery. But....

The BEF was formed in 1938 when Hitler declared an interest in taking the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. You said that the British didn't care... I'm not going on some misbelief in my understanding of human nature, I'm pointing to evidence of actual fact.

Originally Posted by stacker1

No but they could have done something after Crystal night or the invasion of Czechoslovakia or the numerous other things the Nazis did. Instead they sat on their arses until Poland. So no they didnt care.

Originally Posted by stacker1

The BEF was in reaction to Germany going into Poland, 6 years before that we did nothing.

No it was not. See above.

Originally Posted by stacker1

The Irish were already free

No-one has said they weren't - other than you seem to think the Irish Heroes should have been punished for standing by their moral conscience. A moral conscience which turned out to have been right in every respect.

Originally Posted by stacker1

after WW2 there were a large amount of people in the east of Europe who were not free but no one went to war for them.

This does not in anyway make any difference to the rights of the Irish War Heroes. They still remain heroes who stood by their moral conscience.

Originally Posted by stacker1

They did desert their army though and so should be punished by their country.

In reality, had Ireland been at war with another country or force then there might be some validity in this. However, in a time when Ireland was not at war, then the word desert or deserter is bankrupt. They did not desert their country because their own intellect and moral barometer told them they were doing the right thing... call it hindsight - but they turned out to be correct on that. Perhaps they felt they were lions led by donkeys... who knows - they still did the right thing.

Originally Posted by stacker1

They fought as heroes for the Brits not for the Irish.

I disagree and would like you to explain how you know this. Seems loosely based on your self belief in your ability to weigh up human nature... which I think is in the main completely misguided.

Originally Posted by stacker1

Oh I think the Annan was quite important in the UN

You'd be wrong there... he represented only his own views. Had he been representing the USA then you would be right. But one person's views in the UN hold no real power and the person with the least weight in that fight is the Secretary.

Originally Posted by stacker1

How many times do I have to say this, they were traitors to the Irish state. You might not like that fact but it is still a fact

Seems to me that you are getting confused between a technicality and doing the right thing. Technically they went AWOL from their units. To call them traitors to their country when they were off fighting the Nazis is perverse. They were and are now being recognised by that state as Heroes. I'm surprised that you can't get your head around that.

There was never any risk that Britain might invade Ireland at that time. Not least because Churchill was doing his level best to involve our American cousins in the bigger party, that would have gone completely tits north had we invaded Ireland. There is not credibility in your argument - hence Peter Pan.. pie in the sky, fantastic nonsense.

Originally Posted by stacker1

Lets say everyone of the Irish did fight the good fight because of the Nazi way of thinking (I disagree but we'll go with that argument). I am saying the British army today should be thinking the same.

Why and how?

Originally Posted by stacker1

Every country commiting crimes against its citizens that our goverment is ignoring should get every British soldier thinking about his conscience and deserting to help those people, only I dont think they would get much sympathy when they got back.

Why and how does this detract in any way what the Irish Heroes did in heroically fighting the Nazis?

Originally Posted by stacker1

Are you trying to say it wouldnt happen if it was in the British interest to do so? You just want to dismiss Iceland and the problem of the Irish ports?

Well, our interests is why we have an armed forces... however, there is as explained by my Churchill bit above - no logic to this point you keep making. We needed the septics onside - not against us. So in essence I am saying that would NOT have happened and because it was not in our interests. Please ----- no more Peter Pan's what if'sssss again... it bogs down the argument with pointless fantasy. The reality is what did happen - not what if this or that had happened.

Originally Posted by stacker1

Why? What are the British govenrment doing about that country? Next to fuck all. Their people were virtual slaves and yet we stand by and do nothing. Surely someone looking at their moral conscience, knows this wrong and should do something about it? Unless of course its wrong to desert the British army for moral reason but not the Irish army when they are helping the Brits?

I said it was a ridiculous comparison. The reason for saying it is a ridiculous comparison is because of several reasons. First and foremost, our Armed Forces are not doing fek all, they are indeed quite busy (as I am sure you are only too aware). There is no army to join to fight the Burmese Junta, so they cannot join... there is no parallel comparison - thus rendering the whole comparison completely ridiculous.

That said, my own personal take on what is happening in Burma is it's an atrocity that could actually be dealt with, if we could just get the Annan type wets out of the UN. We might also fall out with France in the process but fuck them too.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Not that almost any of this has nay reflection whatsoever on the issue of if or not the Irish Heroes deserve recognition for their bravery. But....

The BEF was formed in 1938 when Hitler declared an interest in the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. You said that the British didn't care... I'm not going on some misbelief in my understanding of human nature, I'm pointing to evidence of actual fact.

Formed and did fuck all, until poland. Therefor the British didn’t give a toss about the Czechs or indeed the Jews getting a shoeing.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

No it was not. See above.

The BEF didn’t do anything until Poland.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

No-one has said they weren't - other than you seem to think the Irish Heroes should have been punished for standing by their moral conscience. A moral conscience which turned out to have been right in every respect.

To right I think deserters should be punished, Who cares about their moral conscience, The last I looked, it doesn’t say anywhere you can desert if you feel like it.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

This does not in anyway make any difference to the rights of the Irish War Heroes. They still remain heroes who stood by their moral conscience.

It does because it shows maybe people arent interested in fighting for freedom for other people.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

In reality, had Ireland been at war with another country or force then there might be some validity in this. However, in a time when Ireland was not at war, then they the word desert or deserter is bankrupt. They did not desert their country because their own intellect and moral barometer told them they were doing the right thing... call it hindsight - but they turned out to be correct on that. Perhaps they felt they were lions led by donkeys... who knows - they still did the right thing.

In reality if you leave your country and join another that in less than 20 years previous killed some of your innocent citizens you have indeed deserted.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

I disagree and would like you to explain how you know this. Seems loosely based on your self belief in your ability to weigh up human nature... which I think is in the main completely misguided.

Actually if you read the link I put up earlier about one of the deserters, in his own words he said about 60% wanted the Nazi to win, he doesn’t mention the other 40% but I suspect most didn’t care either way, much like we don’t care today about various conflicts in the world. Why would they be heroes to a country they deserted to fight for a country that had split from Ireland on less than good terms against a another country that was no direct threat to Ireland?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

You'd be wrong there... he represented only his own views. Had he been representing the USA then you would be right. But one persons views in the UN hold no real power and the person with the least weight in that fight is the Secretary

Are you really trying to say the Iraq war was just and fair? And that the USA and the UK in no way avoided putting it to the vote as they knew the security council would never go for it? You don’t think that is immoral?
You might want to read what the majority of the security council thought of the invasion.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Seems to me that you are getting confused between a technicality and doing the right thing. Technically they went AWOL from their units. To call them traitors to their country when they were off fighting the Nazis is perverse. They were and are now being recognised by that state as Heroes. I'm surprised that you can't get your head around that.

No they deserted, AWOL just means you are late, cant be arsed coming back, desertion mean they knew they were going to leave. Its not perverse to call them traitors because that’s exactly what they were. Their moral belief plays no part in it. There loyalty was to the Irish state, not the British.
They may get a pardon but I wonder if they will be called heroes?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

There was never any risk that Britain might invade Ireland at that time. Not least because Churchill was doing his level best to involve our American cousins in the bigger party, that would have gone completely tits north has we invaded Ireland. There is not credibility in your argument - hence Peter Pan.. pie in the sky, fantastic nonsense.

Two things, First, the yanks stayed out of the war until they were attacked (yet another shining example of morals)
Second, Monty himself said he made plans to take the ports and the Churchill site say there was a plan to invade. So how does that equate to “no risk”?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Why and how?

Why? Because you are saying the Irish all joined up on the basis of their moral, surely are great British army has the same kind of morals?

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Why and how does this detract in any way what the Irish Heroes did in heroically fighting the Nazis?

Because its exactly the same for the Irish in 1940. Why the fuck should they treat people who deserted to the British as Heroes? WW2 had nothing to do with them.
I wouldn’t treat a Brit who fought as FFL in Algeria as a hero. Because that war had nothing to do with the UK.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

Well, our interests is why we have an armed forces... however, there is as explained by my Churchill bit above - no logic to this point you keep making. We needed the septics onside - not against us. So in essence I am saying that would NOT have happened and because it was not in our interests. Please ----- no more Peter Pan's what if'sssss again... it bogs down the argument with pointless fantasy. The reality is what did happen - not what if this or that had happened.

And once again I’ll point out the Churchill site itself said there was a plan to invade if needed, were they having a fantasy? Are the Irish supposed to ignore it because it didn’t happen?
We never did and probably never would have got the yanks onside if the pearl harbour didn’t happen and Hitler then declared war on them.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

I said it was a ridiculous comparison. The reason for saying it is a ridiculous comparison is because of several reasons. First and foremost, our Armed Forces are not doing fek all, they are indeed quite busy (as I am sure you are only too aware). There is not army to join to fight the Burmese Junta, so they cannot join... there is no parallel comparison - thus rendering the whole comparison completely ridiculous.

Not that busy they are cutting 20000 of us over the next few years. There are plenty of others to help if you don’t like the Burmese. I understand the Syrians might want some help amonst others. The British have stood by for years letting people slaughter each other.

Originally Posted by BanjoBill

That said, my own personal take on what is happening in Burma is it's an atrocity that could actually be dealt with, if we could just get the Annan type wets out of the UN. We might also fall out with France in the process but fuck them too.

Dealt with how? By risking British soldiers? Because if that is what you are suggesting, fuck that. Its not our problem.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

As for risking British Soldiers. Nope, as said... our peeps are already busy enough. But sanctions against French oil companies wouldn't harm. Just remember... avoid "Total" and you are already doing your bit.