Dublin march-past will romanticise IRA

#1
#3
While I can see why people would think it'll romanticise the IRA the real aim of the march is here...

Just as British politicians occasionally talk of reclaiming the Union flag from the BNP, so it is natural for Bertie Ahern, Ireland's prime minister, not to want to leave the most potent symbols of the foundation of his state to the IRA.
...and that's a very positve thing.

Tricam.
 
#4
This is only an issue because of the 'troubles' in the North. The IRA (IRB really) which took part in the 1916 Rising has nothing to do with the eejits who are running drugs in the North now. The original 'Freedom Fighters' have been romanticised for 90 years anyway in the lore of Eireann's history. Both sides of the original IRA who split to fight for the right to rule Ireland in the Civil War are now the two major political parties, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.

In my opinion, as a black Protestant Northerner (who has a bit of common sense) is that Ireland, as a sovereign nation, has the absolute right to celebrate what was the beginning of its independence - even if I don't agree with the history of it.
 
#5
What GDav said.

Look at the current Irish Army cap badge. Compare and contrast with the crowd of guerillas mucking around in the early 20th century. You will see that they are successors.

NTM
 
#6
I agree. One of the myths which the Stickies and PIRA (and others) tried to promote is that they were the natural successors to the original Dail Eireann - they weren't. That battle was fought in the South and the anti-treaty forces lost and a peace was established - a peace which exists to this day. Those who did NOT agree with the peace were the ones who tried to say they were in the right, despite the fact that both sides came to an agreement. That's why PIRA etc call themselves Oglaigh na Eireann (the army of Ireland) which is the official title of the Irish Army. They are trying to glorify their claim and assert their objective of "A United, Socialist Republic of Ireland". In other words, their prinicple aim was firstly to fight the British out of the North and unite the country then.................................!
(fill in dotted lines with your own guess).
 
#8
You've got it. The original revolution was led by intellectuals, romantics and the Gaelic league. Today's lot are nothing more than latchycoes - feckin corner boys. They worked on the Marxist principle that you firstly got the 'hearts and minds' which is why they assert that they 'defended' West Belfast during the sectarian riots of the 1960's. They don't tell you that they actually caused the riots in the first place by causing civil disturbance through the Civil Rights Movement which they formed for exactly that purpose.
 
#9
Didn't the Irish Army have IV or something on their buttons that meant Irish Volunteer from those times?

Obviously we aren't talking about the provos, continuity, true, real or any of the other A-Z crackpots that have cropped up. But the originals, or as they are sometimes refered to, theold IRA (not the stickies). Any organisation post 1922 (ie the Official IRA, then the provos) with that name is a paramilitary force and as such should not be compared to the Irish Army, or the IRA from 1919-1922.

Wikipedia for for info....

The Irish Defence Forces

Irish Republican Army (1919 - 1920)

From the wiki.
The Irish title Óglaigh na hÉireann, that had previously been used by both the Irish Volunteers and the IRA, was kept by the Defence Forces. Today this title is also claimed by the Provisional IRA and a number of smaller militant groups for the same reason. The Defence Forces strongly object to this usage


The Sun shape at the rear was a traditional emblem worn by Irish warriors.
The Star was added to balance the badge, and has no significance.
The Belt is a Irish Warrior belt, around which is written "Óglaigh na hÉireann" or in English "Volunteers of Ireland".
The FF stands for "Fianna Fail" (apologies for spelling) which I can't remember what it stands for.
Edit 2 to add. Fianna Fail translates literally as "Soldiers of Ireland" but is generally translated as "Soldiers of Destiny", have a feeling Destiny is in relation to the political party, the IDF uses "Soldiers of Ireland.

Basically be cast iron over who or what you are talking about or embarresing confusion may arise!!!!

Edit to fix links.
 
#10
GDav said:
I agree. One of the myths which the Stickies and PIRA (and others) tried to promote is that they were the natural successors to the original Dail Eireann - they weren't. That battle was fought in the South and the anti-treaty forces lost and a peace was established - a peace which exists to this day. Those who did NOT agree with the peace were the ones who tried to say they were in the right, despite the fact that both sides came to an agreement. That's why PIRA etc call themselves Oglaigh na Eireann (the army of Ireland) which is the official title of the Irish Army.
personally I don't think there is a 'true successor' to the IRB/Irish Volunteers/Irish Citizen Army of 1916 or the IRA of 1919-1922. The IRA split with the Treaty, and essentially ceased to exist, creating two new organisations (the Irregulars and the Free State Army) in my view. I think its pretty pathetic for Fianna Fail to go around claiming the Irish Defence Forces are the true Oglaigh na hEireann when Fianna Fail claimed the Irregulars and later the IRA were the true Oglaigh na hEireann up until World War Two - remember that DeValera legalised the IRA, in the 30s, allowing the IRA to exist as a legal organisation while the Irish Defence Forces remained the official armed forces of the state.

That said, as pathetic as I think the claim is, if the government don't claim the IDF is the true heir to the 'old' IRA, then morons will view the PIRA or CIRA as the true heir.
 
#12
GDav said:
They don't tell you that they actually caused the riots in the first place by causing civil disturbance through the Civil Rights Movement which they formed for exactly that purpose.
that's quite the claim. Are you saying you believe men like Gerry Fitt were in the IRA?
 
#13
LasVegas said:
GDav said:
I agree. One of the myths which the Stickies and PIRA (and others) tried to promote is that they were the natural successors to the original Dail Eireann - they weren't. That battle was fought in the South and the anti-treaty forces lost and a peace was established - a peace which exists to this day. Those who did NOT agree with the peace were the ones who tried to say they were in the right, despite the fact that both sides came to an agreement. That's why PIRA etc call themselves Oglaigh na Eireann (the army of Ireland) which is the official title of the Irish Army.
personally I don't think there is a 'true successor' to the IRB/Irish Volunteers/Irish Citizen Army of 1916 or the IRA of 1919-1922. The IRA split with the Treaty, and essentially ceased to exist, creating two new organisations (the Irregulars and the Free State Army) in my view. I think its pretty pathetic for Fianna Fail to go around claiming the Irish Defence Forces are the true Oglaigh na hEireann when Fianna Fail claimed the Irregulars and later the IRA were the true Oglaigh na hEireann up until World War Two - remember that DeValera legalised the IRA, in the 30s, allowing the IRA to exist as a legal organisation while the Irish Defence Forces remained the official armed forces of the state.

That said, as pathetic as I think the claim is, if the government don't claim the IDF is the true heir to the 'old' IRA, then morons will view the PIRA or CIRA as the true heir.
The two factions agreed to disagree after the civil war however and engaged in politics. Ergo the true successors of the IRB/IRA are those two political parties. From where I'm standing the title Oglaigh na Eireann must have been agreed in the Dal, therefore it is an official title, endorsed by both factions but with the mandate of the people who elected the TD's who voted on the title. It's democratically sound.

The probme with Ireland however is that there's always some smaller breakaway group which will tell you that the bigger groups have all got it wrong and that they (the smaller grouping) is right and you must follow them for they are the only true saviours of Ireland from the British and from themselves, yada yada yada.
 
#14
LasVegas said:
GDav said:
They don't tell you that they actually caused the riots in the first place by causing civil disturbance through the Civil Rights Movement which they formed for exactly that purpose.
that's quite the claim. Are you saying you believe men like Gerry Fitt were in the IRA?
It's not a claim my friend, it's historical fact, and while certainly not decrying a good man like Gerry Fitt there is no doubt these days that the Civil Rights Movement was formed by the Official IRA in conjunction with the Wolfe Tone society of Dublin for the express purpose of creating enough civil disturbance in the north to bring down the unionist government. Official IRA members and Wolfe Tone Society members were predominant in the founding members.

There should be enough material to be gleaned from the net to substantiate what I've written.
 
#16
GDav said:
In my opinion, as a black Protestant Northerner (who has a bit of common sense) is that Ireland, as a sovereign nation, has the absolute right to celebrate what was the beginning of its independence - even if I don't agree with the history of it.
Agree with you GDav, there are many things that you might not agree with but these are generally beyond our control, so you just have to live with it.

I was not a happy teddy when I drove past a Newry boneyard one Easter Sunday where many of the IRA big boys were celebrating the Easter Rising but as there were far more of them than there was of me, I decided wisely to continue with my journey and take out my anger on the neighbour's dog when I returned.
 
#17
Ah yes, the interminable question as to who (or what) are the legitimate armed forces of the Republic of Ireland. Well, if this 90th Anniversary achieves nothing else, then I do hope it clarifies that point.

Fianna Fáil - as the letters FF on the Irish Army capbadge denote - literally means 'Warriors (or soldiers) of Destiny' - this term is taken from the Ancient Irish warriors known as Na Fianna (from whence the term 'Fenian' derives incidentally), and their connection to the royal site at Tara (where the 'Liath Fáil' or Stone of Destiny stands). 'Óglaigh na hÉireann' means 'warriors of Ireland'. However, direct literal translations from Irish into English are a haphazard affair, as Old Irish in particular had many ways of describing the same thing, on top of which one must take into account the attempts of the Gaelic Revivalists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries to update the Irish language. It was a cynical move on the part of De Valera and other anti-Treatyites to call their new party in 1926 'Fianna Fáil' as they were hijacking the fragile heritage of the Free State Army.

Personally, I am of the opinion that the official comemoration of the 90th Anniversary of the Easter Rising is both politically unwise and inappropriate - it is also too soon after the event itself and the 'end' of the Troubles (said with tongue in cheek). It is clear that Ahern and the Government are scrambling to belatedly reposition themselves on the whole 1916 issue as they are scared witless of the prospect (or inevitability) of Sinn Féin's increasing political power in the Republic. In light of the fact that the offical comemoration is going ahead, it is good that this is going to be a Defence Forces affair. However, the Defence Forces have, I feel, too low a profile in public, and are too often portrayed as being solely a touchy-feely 'peacekeeping army', that I wonder if many observing this weekend's ceremonies will not overlook the Defence Forces and instead focus on the unspoken justification of what was done in 1916 and afterwards. I also find a good deal of the historical commentary on 1916 somewhat unsettling, as there would appear to be a certain amount of myth-weaving and airbrushing going on, not to mention the spurious retrospective justification of 1916 and its participants by reference to the Celtic Tiger. There is a real danger that the state and its citizens will forever be judged by the yardstick of 1916.
 
#18
chocolate_frog said:
There was a fair bit of orchastration behind most of the riots in NI. Somebody had to do it. And where there is orchastrtion there is often preparation.
I think that's fair comment although I think the whole thing gathered enough momentum for ingrained suspicion and even hatred to give it enough momentum to keep going by itself. Suspicion and hatred are self perpetuating. Each wound, real or imagined by one faction against another, leads to an even deeper loathing.
 
#19
gallowglass said:
Ah yes, the interminable question as to who (or what) are the legitimate armed forces of the Republic of Ireland. Well, if this 90th Anniversary achieves nothing else, then I do hope it clarifies that point.

Fianna Fáil - as the letters FF on the Irish Army capbadge denote - literally means 'Warriors (or soldiers) of Destiny' - this term is taken from the Ancient Irish warriors known as Na Fianna (from whence the term 'Fenian' derives incidentally), and their connection to the royal site at Tara (where the 'Liath Fáil' or Stone of Destiny stands). 'Óglaigh na hÉireann' means 'warriors of Ireland'. However, direct literal translations from Irish into English are a haphazard affair, as Old Irish in particular had many ways of describing the same thing, on top of which one must take into account the attempts of the Gaelic Revivalists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries to update the Irish language. It was a cynical move on the part of De Valera and other anti-Treatyites to call their new party in 1926 'Fianna Fáil' as they were hijacking the fragile heritage of the Free State Army.

Personally, I am of the opinion that the official comemoration of the 90th Anniversary of the Easter Rising is both politically unwise and inappropriate - it is also too soon after the event itself and the 'end' of the Troubles (said with tongue in cheek). It is clear that Ahern and the Government are scrambling to belatedly reposition themselves on the whole 1916 issue as they are scared witless of the prospect (or inevitability) of Sinn Féin's increasing political power in the Republic. In light of the fact that the offical comemoration is going ahead, it is good that this is going to be a Defence Forces affair. However, the Defence Forces have, I feel, too low a profile in public, and are too often portrayed as being solely a touchy-feely 'peacekeeping army', that I wonder if many observing this weekend's ceremonies will not overlook the Defence Forces and instead focus on the unspoken justification of what was done in 1916 and afterwards. I also find a good deal of the historical commentary on 1916 somewhat unsettling, as there would appear to be a certain amount of myth-weaving and airbrushing going on, not to mention the spurious retrospective justification of 1916 and its participants by reference to the Celtic Tiger. There is a real danger that the state and its citizens will forever be judged by the yardstick of 1916.
Whether or not you agree with it or the reasons behind it, the people of Ireland have a right to their history and to commemorate something which (rightly or wrongly) is a definitive moment in the formation of the Irish Republic.

Certainly we can all challenge aspects of what has become the 'accepted' history of Eire but it has become valid truth for the vast majority of the population. To fail to address the marking of this occasion would, in my opinion, be political suicide for Uncle Bertie because he, and his party, would be seen as puppets of the British, and given the accepted history that would be unacceptable to the majority of the electorate.

It has to happen. Lets just hope the Dail has done enough to keep it a peaceful affair. It would be a shame to see the batons of the guards bouncing off the skulls of (perhaps drunk but nonetheless) Irish patriots who have been overcome by their fervour on the day and burn everything in sight which is suspected of being British.
 
#20
GDav said:
LasVegas said:
GDav said:
They don't tell you that they actually caused the riots in the first place by causing civil disturbance through the Civil Rights Movement which they formed for exactly that purpose.
that's quite the claim. Are you saying you believe men like Gerry Fitt were in the IRA?
It's not a claim my friend, it's historical fact, and while certainly not decrying a good man like Gerry Fitt there is no doubt these days that the Civil Rights Movement was formed by the Official IRA in conjunction with the Wolfe Tone society of Dublin for the express purpose of creating enough civil disturbance in the north to bring down the unionist government. Official IRA members and Wolfe Tone Society members were predominant in the founding members.

There should be enough material to be gleaned from the net to substantiate what I've written.
Is the "Civil Rights Movement" the same as the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association? Because that was founded at a public meeting in the International Hotel, Belfast, attended by all political parties in Northern Ireland, although the Ulster Unionist Party delegate Nelson Elder withdrew, apparantely over a dispute about capital punishment.

I believe all the IRAs have consistently denied being behind the civil rights movement when it first emerged, and freely admit that the IRA was in tatters at the time, after the Border Campaign/Operation Harvest was a total failure. Since only the IRA can confirm whether they had a secret plan to set up the NICRA to destabilise the state, I don't know how you can say its a "fact".
 

Latest Threads

New Posts