Adolf Hitler: the IRA's part in his downfall:

ireland2004

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
316
watch-this-drive said:
padraig said:
woodie said:
I'd seen that article and it shed light for me on the IRA's links with and attitude to Nazi Germany.

The key point is that while there were many in 1940s Ireland who were pro-German and anti-semitic, the IRA was the only organisation that sought and actively worked to bring about a Nazi invasion. Had this happened, there's no doubt that they would have fully collaborated, including in the Nazi extermination of the Jews, and they would probably have ended up as the main components of an Irish SS division on the Eastern Front.
Interesting viewpoint, if you choose to ignore the fact that it was the IRA that faught against the only pro-nazi group in Ireland at that time, the Blue Shirts.
What makes you believe the Blue Shirts were pro-Nazi?
"....the Hitler shirts were succesful in Germany and the Blueshirts will be succeful in Ireland"

:wink:
 


Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
73
pogo said:
Extremely interesting and comprehensive article discussing the attitudes of the IRA towards Nazi Germany:

www.historyireland.com/magazine/features/13.3FeatA.html
pogo, do you think Britain's involvement in World War II was about liberating the Jews?

In another thread, you stated that you had no problem with the RAF squadrons that murdered tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Cologne and Dresden in blanket bombings. Yet one of your favourite past times is to express your revulsion at all and sundry IRA actions on this site.

Care to square the circle....
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
Cormac Donaghey said:
pogo, do you think Britain's involvement in World War II was about liberating the Jews?
No.

It must however be remembered that Hitler always had the greatest respect for Britain, and in Mein Kampf had written about an alliance between the two 'Aryan' nations.

There is no good reason to suppose Britain entered the war for self-preservation as Hitler had no intention of attacking Britain.

It is a little strange that the IRA wanted an alliance with the Nazis, who regarded you as being their racial inferiors.

Still each to his own, I suppose.

I'll find a good quote to back this up.

In another thread, you stated that you had no problem with the RAF squadrons that murdered tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Cologne and Dresden in blanket bombings. Yet one of your favourite past times is to express your revulsion at all and sundry IRA actions on this site.

Care to square the circle....
I had answered this point at length, but unfortunately accidentally deleted most of my reply.

I don't know much about the bombing of Cologne, but can quote reasons for the bombing of Dresden, taken from a book I'm reading at the moment .......

'Microcosm, Portrait of a Central European City, Norman Davies'

Dresden had served as the primary base for reinforcing the Silesian front. As a result, it stood high on the list of bombing requests that Moscow made to the Western Allies. On the eve of the Yalta Conference, an air raid there was perceived as a necessary demonstration of Inter-Allied co-operation. The outcome was to be Operation Thunderclap - the saturation bombing of Dresden.
It would appear that Dresden was bombed for purely military reasons.

How does this compare with IRA bombings, such as the Shankill bomb, which we have discussed.

The RAF bombings were a part of 'total war' against a genocidal enemy responsible for the deaths of perhaps 20 million people.

It is also significant that air attacks on cities were not initiated by the RAF.

By contrast the Shankill bomb was the result of one sectarian idiot attempting to kill another sectarian idiot, in a pointless orgy of communal hatred.

I don't think the two bombings have that much in common .........
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
73
pogo said:
It would appear that Dresden was bombed for purely military reasons.

How does this compare with IRA bombings, such as the Shankill bomb, which we have discussed.


Good point the bombing of Dresden was a random blanket bombing of a whole city resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.

The bombing of Shankhill was clearly intended to Kill the leadership of the UDA. The bomb exploded prematurely taking the live of one of the IRA volunteers planting it and nine innocent civilians.

No comparison.
 

ireland2004

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
316
By contrast the Shankill bomb was the result of one sectarian idiot attempting to kill another sectarian idiot, in a pointless orgy of communal hatred.
If it was a "pointless orgy of communal hatred" (and you can go to your favourite book, Sutton to look at the figures) then why did the IRA kill over 1,000 members of the British Security Forces and only 40 (Im not sure of the sum - but I have no doubt that you are) Loyalist paramilitaries?
 

woodie

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
33
Not one SF supporter here has dealt with the substance of this thread - the IRA's links with the Nazis in WW2, as objectively detailed by Brian Hanley in History Ireland:

www.historyireland.com/magazine/features/13.3FeatA.html

Instead they've sought to smear the author or divert attention.

Supports of a political party should be able to look back on their party's history and say that it took positions it shouldn't have - some prominent members of the Labour Party supported Franco in the 1930s (e.g. Michael Keyes, TD in Limerick) - I think that was wrong.

Has no SF supporter the political courage to objectively reassess the IRA's links with the Nazis and to conclude that Sean Russell should not be commemorated?
 

redbhoy

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
4
Maybe Hitler was right and Sean Russell was correct in supporting him. All up for debate and down to personal opinion at the end of it all!
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
redbhoy said:
Maybe Hitler was right and Sean Russell was correct in supporting him.
As no Shinner has appeared on this thread to correct the above observation, and as the MEP Mary Lou-McDonald spoke in a commemoration of this Irish Quisling, I presume this must be the SF position in this matter.
 

Risteard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
456
pogo said:
this Irish Quisling
How dare you refer to Russell as a Quisling. Russell didn't have the benefit of hindsight, and his motivations were genuine.
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
Risteard said:
pogo said:
this Irish Quisling
How dare you refer to Russell as a Quisling. Russell didn't have the benefit of hindsight, and his motivations were genuine.
Did Quisling have the benefit of hindsight?

Might his motivations have been genuine?
 

Risteard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
456
If you want to get into semantics, then one fact is that Russell was not aiding an occupying power - no part of Ireland was at any stage occupied by Nazi Germany.
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
Risteard said:
If you want to get into semantics, then one fact is that Russell was not aiding an occupying power - no part of Ireland was at any stage occupied by Nazi Germany.
Russell was an unsuccessful Quisling, having died in the middle of a mission to emulate the Norwegian Nazi puppet.

I don't believe this failure to excuse the immorality of the enterprise.
 

Risteard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
456
Russell was not trying to achieve the Nazi occupation of Ireland.
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
Risteard said:
Russell was not trying to achieve the Nazi occupation of Ireland.
In that case please explain this statement made in 1940 by the IRA command:

If German forces should land in Ireland, they will land as friends and liberators of the Irish people.
 

pogo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
435
Website
stags.pl
cain1798 said:
woodie said:
Had this happened, there's no doubt that they would have fully collaborated, including in the Nazi extermination of the Jews, and they would probably have ended up as the main components of an Irish SS division on the Eastern Front.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh mercy, this is a classic for the cut and paste file.

Woodie, you're a gem.
Presumably cain is expressing scepticism here?

Which is a little odd considering the Republican icon, Frank Ryan, who accompanied and possibly poisoned Russell, did actually attempt to recruit an Irish division from British POWs interned in Germany at the behest of his Nazi masters.

Might it be that the great cain is as unfamiliar with events circa 1940 as he has been shown to be concerning those in 1798.
 

ireland2004

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
316
Pogo said:
By contrast the Shankill bomb was the result of one sectarian idiot attempting to kill another sectarian idiot, in a pointless orgy of communal hatred.

If it was a "pointless orgy of communal hatred" (and you can go to your favourite book, Sutton to look at the figures) then why did the IRA kill over 1,000 members of the British Security Forces and only 40 (Im not sure of the sum - but I have no doubt that you are) Loyalist paramilitaries?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top