Countries and their ashamed history

AlgarveBlu said:
nope, pineapple
Click to expand...
gun-db-shotgun.gif

" Ex-chef"
 
KS55 said:
A perfect example of a partial history. Tell us about the actions of the Irish aristocrats, particularly in the H of Lords (which was still dominant at the time and gave rise to the Parliament Act) when the Irish home rule bills were introduced. They were not short of food during the potato famine when Ireland was still a net exporter of food. (But the people of NW England and most of the aristocrats‘ employees went hungry). Sectarianism in the 20th century owed as much to de Valera as any other cause.

What you say is largely true but if you cherry pick the parts that suit you, you will not learn the lessons.
Click to expand...
De Valera was as much part of the problem in the 20th century Ireland in my view.
And yes what I wrote most definitely is partial history. (Although I’m guessing what you mean by partial is not the same as I do here. )

And Necessarily so I would say, unless you want to turn this thread into solely, relationships between Ireland and Britain.

My reply was to the Cromwell issue raised. Whatever the history at the time, he was neither the start nor the end of it. I even included reference to the Portadown massacre of 1641.
I think that is as impartial an account of Cromwell’s motivation as you’ll get from any Irishman.

That is the point I made. De Valera is as much a product of what went before and a consequence of him coming to power was long felt afterwards in Ireland North and South.
Depending on your political allegiances in the Republic I would say you would get varying opinions on De Valera down through the decades, but personally I don’t tend to go with the theory of him being the Republican hero Fianna Fáil would espouse.
We got a republic in his image rather than the socialist one many fought for, both Protestant and Catholic.
I would accept that we hadn’t a pot to piss in after independence and the handing over of the educational and nursing/health systems to the clergy may well have been an unfortunate necessity, but none the less we as a nation only truly threw off the consequences of our independent history in the 21st century.
I believe we have and still are evolving or maturing, while I’m still to be convinced about parts of the North which are thankfully a minority now. And don’t read into that something that’s not there.
I’m talking of the old mindset whether Catholic or Protestant, Royalist or Republican.
 
Last edited:
The laws of war, such as they were, gave very limited protection to civilians until relatively recently.

Reading up on what Wellington's army did to Badajoz, Spain is useful. The Spanish civilians were supposedly our allies at the time. It really wasn't pretty, but it was in accord with what was allowed when a town was taken by storm. There were similar examples in Britain during the Civil War. King Charles I himself did one at Leicester and Montrose, fighting for the royalists in Scotland, did something similar in Aberdeen. In fact, there was even a minor massacre just locally, at Bolton, under Prince Rupert and the Earl of Derby. Strangely enough, these royalist massacres are rarely mentioned, as is the case of the butchery of unarmed Parliamentarians in Barthomley Church in Cheshire.
 
BrianW said:
The laws of war, such as they were, gave very limited protection to civilians until relatively recently.

Reading up on what Wellington's army did to Badajoz, Spain is useful. The Spanish civilians were supposedly our allies at the time. It really wasn't pretty, but it was in accord with what was allowed when a town was taken by storm. There were similar examples in Britain during the Civil War. King Charles I himself did one at Leicester and Montrose, fighting for the royalists in Scotland, did something similar in Aberdeen. In fact, there was even a minor massacre just locally, at Bolton, under Prince Rupert and the Earl of Derby. Strangely enough, these royalist massacres are rarely mentioned, as is the case of the butchery of unarmed Parliamentarians in Barthomley Church in Cheshire.
Click to expand...
History claims Richard 1 executed up to 3,000 civilian hostages, men, women & children, after the siege at Acre during the 3rd crusade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.