[Mac]

How imperialist British scum can have any pride about what they did in Africa is well beyond me.

Why do I get the feeling your implicating the entire British Isles, past and present with that statement?

[QatzelOk]

Spin reminded us that:

Imperialism in the 19th centruy iwas not viewed the same way it is today.

Neither were racism, or rape. Which are both closely related to Imperialism.

Cunts, We Were
An Unbiased look at the History of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Jersey Isles and the Falklands and Gibraltar and... oh damn, we were good!
by Simon Finch and Evilyn Brady
McMillan Press, 2003

A must read!

[Rinty]

I think your points are bit irrelevant lefty and verging on a desperate attempt to turn the argument round to the one you like to have usuually about NI.

At Easter time it is appropriate for Clann to post a reminder of this event. Whether it went as planned, was supported by everyone or had the exact desired effect is irrelevant.

This was a momentous event in Irish and British history and was highly influential in subsequent events.

[Ishmael Hilal]

our ancestors believed that Ireland would be the staging ground for a invasion by catholics from the continent and as such they waged war on and conquered a soverign country with much brutality

When was Ireland ever a soverign country? I've always felt the english had a right to it myself (as an island of the british isles).

[fastspawn]

england doesn't own all the british isles. Great Britain is just one island in the British Isles (along with Ireland, Man, Channel and all the rest). And England is one country on that island (great Britain).

The Irish people have been sovereign for quite some time in their history, and are right now, sovereign, so i don't see why they should revert back.

[Clann]

What? Ireland is not a British isle! Ireland is Ireland it belongs to no one except the Irish.

[fastspawn]

Ireland is a part of the British Isles by defination. However that doesn't mean it isn't sovereign. What it means is that Great Britain, (one of the british isles) houses england, scotland and wales, and england by no means has the right to infringe upon the sovereignty of another isle. Much like the within the Carribean isles there lies many sovereign countries

edit: accidentally wrote is instead of isn't

[Ishmael Hilal]

What? Ireland is not a British isle! Ireland is Ireland it belongs to no one except the Irish.

And who might they be?

The Irish people have been sovereign for quite some time

Mabye you are right, but I was speaking in the context of pre 1922.

[fastspawn]

ishmael,

My history on Ireland is sketchy, but after a quick reference check, the Kingdom of Ireland was independant until 1800, where they voted to merge with great Britain to form the UK.

Before that, Ireland was a Kingdom and a Lordship and various point in their sovereignty. Usually the Monarchs of England had conjoined titles as Kings of Ireland. But monarchy in those days was less of a per country basis issue, then is now, after all English monarch also controlled large tracts in France.

[Ishmael Hilal]

Fast pawn I understand what you are saying, but that does not a soverign country make. No one recognised it as a soverign country, much the same as Corsica today, or Norway before they gained independance from Denmark.

[fastspawn]

THe King of England recognized it as a sovereign country prior to 1800, only when it merged then was it part of a union.
Prior to 1800 it had its own parliament.

[1917]

Ishmael Hilal, Are you saying that just because we are the biggest Island we have some kind of Manifest Destiny over all the others?.

The Irish, when we took them over, were Catholic, by and large, we, a alien Protestant power had no right to conquer them and systamatically persecute catholics.

Surely, by using your arguement, Spain should rule Portugal, because that is part of the IBERIAN peninsula, and Cuba (the largest Carribean Island) should rule the entirity of the Carribean?

The fact of the matter is all countries are soverign and the only way they can become part of another country is through some kind of consensus.

[Ishmael Hilal]

THe King of England recognized it as a sovereign country prior to 1800, only when it merged then was it part of a union.
Prior to 1800 it had its own parliament.

Indeed they did, but I would wager that Clann na Gael and the like's would say that it was illegitamite (and having a seperate parliment in no way meant they were a soverign nation). They also had their own church to, the church of ireland (this was not catholic).

Ishmael Hilal, Are you saying that just because we are the biggest Island we have some kind of Manifest Destiny over all the others?.

The Irish, when we took them over, were Catholic, by and large, we, a alien Protestant power had no right to conquer them and systamatically persecute catholics.

Manifest destiny? not at all, I just see it historically as part of britain and as much your island as 'thiers' (post '22 might be different). No right to conquer them you mention; this I dont understand, I dont know which particular time you are speaking of (1600's? 1100's?) in either case I would say you had every right. Remember we cant apply mondern day pseudo morals to events of those times.

[1917]

" "Manifest destiny? not at all "

Oh but yes!, Manifest Destiny, as I am sure you know, is when a group believes it is there right to rule a piece of land, normally defined by certain geographical boundaries. For the Americans they wanted a Empire that stretched from Ocean to Ocean, to the Nazi's a Reich that touched the Atlantic, the Desert, the Pole and the Urals.

Isn't it just the same for the English to want to rule the entirity of the Isles?, and let us look at one fact, it isn't the English Isles, but the BRITISH Isles, it is for all the diverse peoples who live here and not just one.

" in either case I would say you had every right. Remember we cant apply mondern day pseudo morals to events of those times "

I agree with the sentiment that morals do change over time, that is indeed a fact but let me pose you a question, did the Irish think we had every right to invade?, and would we have thought the French had every right to invade?, if the answer is yes then I concede my entire arguement, but if the answer is no then does'nt that tell us one thing?, that only the protagonists believed they had any right to annex the land and nobody else did.

So, are the morals of the English worth more than those of the Irish?, and indeed are the morals of the English worth more than the other two nations they annexed?.

[Ishmael Hilal]

did the Irish think we had every right to invade?

Some Irish (protestant) may well have.

and would we have thought the French had every right to invade?

What time perioid are you speaking of? 1066? I would not call these french. I think a lot of englishmen would have felt they had a right to invade (ofcourse not assuming for a second that they would not still fight the normans), as they had a claim (if highly dubious) to the english crown.

So, are the morals of the English worth more than those of the Irish?

If you are an Englishman (which I assume you are) I do find it surprising that you dont think your own morals are worth more than those of the Irish, as i'm sure if the roles were reversed most of the Irish would certainly view thier morals as being worth more.

I am not English but I find it sad to see people forsake thier own countries.

[1917]

"Some Irish (protestant) may well have"

Yes but that does'nt prove your point, SOME people would have, just as SOME people are rapists or SOME are murderers, the majority are'nt.

There were years of resistance to Norman rule, and there were many revolts, it's hardly a indication of alot of Englishmen thinking they had a right to attack, also the Normans used the French dialect for many centuries, while the peasentry used the anglo-saxon dialect, and so they were ruled, very much, by a alien group.

"If you are an Englishman (which I assume you are) I do find it surprising that you dont think your own morals are worth more than those of the Irish"

Oh yes, I am English, but firstly I am a Marxist, to me everyone should be treated with fairness and respect and just becaause my nation was once a great Empire tell me why I should view that as good?, tell me, also, why I should be happy we oppressed a free nation?.

What the Irish would or would not do is not the question here, it is what WE do, what the people of England do and did, do we embrace a Imperialistic past?, do we hold onto a English notion of manifest destiny that should have died a century ago or do we move on into a fair and just future?.

All morals are subjective, whatever we did in the past is just that, in the past, and manifest destiny belongs in that past, the only way I ever want Ireland to be joined to us again is through a commonwealth of equal nations, and that Ishmael Hilal is the opinion of a Englishman.