[1917]

Bravo to the Irish, the British had no right to oppress the Catholics and Republicans who live in Ireland, though our ancestors were very much of a different age and believed that what they were doing was right and logical.

It is just a shame that the people of Ireland had to rise up to claim there right to self-determination and that the rest of the United Kingdom is slow to take up devolution.

[Irish_Lefty]

Of course the Irish have the right to self detrimination and they now have it all the Irish live in democratic societies where they can express there will by vote and they have. The easter rising was badly organised and show the ineptidtude of the Republicans at the time and they where going against the IVF line which was to support the war as many felt helping imperialist germany was wrong and that they could gain the British's favour.

[1917]

I must admit my knowledge of the Easter Rising leaves alot to be desired I mearly know that though they have self determination now (though Northern Ireland is a mute point) it is to our shame that it took so long for the Irish to get it, and that they had to fight for it too.

Though you say gain British favour?, why should they have wanted our favour?, after all the British had done to them, siding with Germany would have been quite legitamate.

Imperialistic Germany had nothing on Britian!, I think Blackadder said it best "The British Empire consists of three-quaters of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanginiqe, so we can hardly be entirely absolved on the Imperialistic front"

[Clann]

My opinion on Redmond stands Goon. It is my firm belief that instead of asking Britain for freedom as Redmond did, the rebels were right in insisting on it.

The easter rising was badly organised and show the ineptidtude of the Republicans at the time and they where going against the IVF line which was to support the war as many felt helping imperialist germany was wrong and that they could gain the British's favour.

How do you work that out? Holding off the greatest empire the world has known for a week on their own doorstep? Ineptitude? Don't be so silly.

[Irish_Lefty]

Inept they posted the meeting in a newspaper then cancelled it then called it back on which lead to hundreds of potential rebels not turning up. Plus they where short on weapons and men as well they should of attacked the Dublin race track where most of the officers where.

[The Immortal Goon]

My opinion on Redmond stands Goon. It is my firm belief that instead of asking Britain for freedom as Redmond did, the rebels were right in insisting on it.

History proves you right, but remember Redmond didn't have this history to look back to.

For him, he was looking back at Parnell and O'Connel, who both made great strides for Ireland through Parlimentry means, and after the Act of Parliment was put in to effect, it seemed reasonable at the time that parlimentry means would have continued to be useful.

However, as I said, history has proven you correct - when it comes to imperial capitalism as it stands, no amount of parlimentry agitation would have secured Ireland her freedom.

Just don't blame Redmond for trying; his failed efforts solidified the public behind the rebels, for they had no other course to take, and their resolve was stronger becuase they knew they had exhausted every other option - this, unwillingly albeit, is to Redmond's credit.

-TIG

[Spin]

How do you work that out? Holding off the greatest empire the world has known for a week on their own doorstep? Ineptitude? Don't be so silly.

While the greatest empire on earth was busy shipping troops to Dublin, which takes time. And don't forget, this was the year of the Somme, which took up an awful lot of British troops.

Imperialistic Germany had nothing on Britian!, I think Blackadder said it best "The British Empire consists of three-quaters of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanginiqe, so we can hardly be entirely absolved on the Imperialistic front"

The British were occupying 3/4 of the globe. Many of the colonials were fighting in Turkey. Germany had a larger population than the Uk. At the start of the war the BE had an army of 200 000 men. The German I bleieve was greater than 2 million.

[1917]

"The British were occupying 3/4 of the globe. Many of the colonials were fighting in Turkey. Germany had a larger population than the Uk. At the start of the war the BE had an army of 200 000 men. The German I bleieve was greater than 2 million"

Many of the colonials were fighting in Turkey, but we had plenty of colonies to draw troops from,
in total we had a greater population than Germany, a greater British population, not even counting all the myriad of Afriacan and Asian colonies, because areas such as Australia and New Zealand had only been occupied for a relatively small ammount of time, and so the occupants were still very tired to the home country.

The only problem is it took a great deal of time to mobilise.

Yes we had a smaller army, but it was highly trained and experienced from our imperialistic wars.

Also Germany was, at that moment in time, fighting Against Russia and were having to aid the crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Inevitably the Germans were hemmed in, and could'nt at the end of the day get in as many new troops or, most importantly fuels and food, which were simply not coming into Germany, and as the old saying goes "a civilisation is only three meals away from revolution"

So no matter how great logistically and great in experience they only had a chance of winning if they liquidated either Russia or France.

[Ombrageux]

Yes we had a smaller army, but it was highly trained and experienced from our imperialistic wars.

I'm not sure if training on Zulu and Bengali spears is going to help you against German machine guns

[fastspawn]

roarke's drift dumbteen.

and the quote about the sasauge factory was from blackadder and should be taken in jest. Britain held a quarter of the world, and most of german's possessions were in africa.

[Spin]

roarke's drift dumbteen.

That was a battle between Brits and Zulus...with spears...

And it was over 30 years before.

Many of the colonials were fighting in Turkey, but we had plenty of colonies to draw troops from,
in total we had a greater population than Germany, a greater British population, not even counting all the myriad of Afriacan and Asian colonies,

Well, we were occupying India, which provided 3 divisions I think to the war, and Africans were never thought of as being advanced enough to fight alongside British troops. Incidentally, the British had started to withdaw from their African possesions.

Also Germany was, at that moment in time, fighting Against Russia and were having to aid the crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Russia was not much of a power at the time. Austro Hungary still had some strength and the Ottoman empire wasn't doing too badly.

The Germans also had better trenches and marginaly better tactics than us.

[1917]

Fastspawn is correct, it was a blackadder quote, though suprising accurate!.

The Zulu were fearsome warriors, and though you are all quite right in saying that it does'nt compare to machine guns (as our great grandparents found out at the Somme and Paschendale) it was still better than sending in "green" conscripts!.

I would say 3 divisions is better than none? :P, and having the resources of the Empire to draw on was quite useful in so much as even having ports and trade-roots, and also a higher degree of wealth to buy weaponry off the Americans gave us a tactical advantage.

Though Russia was'nt a major power it still sapped away German strength, and it is a old addage that the nation that fights a war on two sides is beaten.

[Spin]

Funny, because Ruddia was fighting on a single front. Germany fought throughout the war on two and did rather better than Russia.

The Zulu were fearsome warriors, and though you are all quite right in saying that it does'nt compare to machine guns

And had one victory. After Isantlwana the zulus got their asses handed to them.



This was started by some stupid boast that the rebels held out for a week against the Empire.

[Clann]

And had one victory. After Isantlwana the zulus got their asses handed to them.

Spears aren't that good against machine guns and artillery. How imperialist British scum can have any pride about what they did in Africa is well beyond me.

The rebels held out for a week against the greatest empire the world has known. They asserted their right to national self-determination in arms and although they were defeated they awoke the revolutionary spirit in Ireland and it wasn't long before that empire called for a truce. The British got their asses handed to them one might say (Crossbarry and Kilmichael for example).

I love the way you use the term "we" for British imperialist victories, very quaint.

[Spin]

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

The Zulu war was forced on the British government by the Cape colony.

And Africa was less about building an empire and more about stoping others from doing so. It was kind of like the Cold War in many ways.

The rebels held out for a week against the greatest empire the world has known.

More like waited about for a week for British troops to arrive.

I love the way you use the term "we" for British imperialist victories, very quaint.

A victory is a victory. Imperialism was not the evil then that it is today.

[Clann]

A victory is a victory. Imperialism was not the evil then that it is today.

What the fuck?

[Stygian]

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

How the catholic Irish can have any pride in rising up and shooting britain in the back during a war is beyond me to.

[The Immortal Goon]

It was hardly "In the back" as there was still a territorial occupation force left to keep the Irish in check. This remained despite Redmond's pleas to replace it with the National Volunteers.

However, as the English insisted on keeping an all English occupation force in Ireland, and near forcing Irish citizens to take the occupation force's place in France instead of the obvious solution of allowing the Irish to gaurd Ireland while the English fought the English war - the English got what the deserved. Again, Redmond represented the vast majority of Ireland at the time and was asking for effective ways in which to help England. When England, and in particulor Lord Kitchener, continued to ignore the IPP, the result was exactly as the IPP had warned. Big surprise.

-TIG

[Spin]

What the fuck?

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

[1917]

I don't see how the occupation of Ireland can in any way be defended?, 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,
though our ancestors may have had legitamate fears such a paranoid and indifferent rule by the English, subjegating a soverign catholic people to a alien protestant one can never be defended.

Imperialism was seen as something different by our ancestors (as Mr Spin points out) they believed it to be a benevolent force for good.

But whatever they believed it to be does not disguise what it was, without listing all the atrocities committed in the name of "enlightenment" let us see a dictionary definition of Imperialism:

a policy of extending your rule over foreign countries
a political orientation that advocates imperial interests
any instance of aggressive extension of authority

Any of that sound benevolent and good?.