"If we have to exterminate 10,000 republicans". The foundations of the state which stood idly by.

clonard marxist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
639
Website
www.irsp.ie
"If we have to exterminate 10,000 republicans". The foundations of the state which stood idly by.

‘During the Irish Civil War the National Army executed more Irishmen than the British had during the War of Independence.’ 77 Officially, 81 in reality.

In the aftermath of the sudden death of Arthur Griffith and the killing of Michael Collins, in August 1922, William T Cosgrave became chairman of the provisional government. Cosgrave and his colleagues remained wedded to a ruthless military and political strategy that ensured, by May 1923, a decisive win over the Republicans and the end of the Civil War. Cosgrave’s analysis was that ‘the executions have had a remarkable effect. It is a sad thing to say, but it is nevertheless the case’; he could also be chilling in his resolve: ‘I am not going to hesitate and if the country is to live and if we have to exterminate 10,000 republicans, the 3 millions of our people are bigger than the ten thousand.’

The Free State suspended executions and offered an amnesty in the hope that anti-treaty fighters would surrender. However, the war dragged for another two months and witnessed at least twenty more official executions.

Several Republican leaders narrowly avoided execution. Ernie O’Malley, captured on 4 November 1922, was not executed because he was too badly wounded when taken prisoner to face a court-martial and possibly because the Free State was hesitant about executing an undisputed hero of the recent struggle against the British. Liam Deasy, captured in January 1923 avoided execution by signing a surrender document calling on the anti-treaty forces to lay down their arms.

The Anti-Treaty side called a ceasefire on 30 April 1923 and ordered their men to ‘dump arms’, ending the war, on 24 May. Nevertheless, executions of Republican prisoners continued after this time. Four IRA men were executed in May after the ceasefire order and the final two executions took place on 20 November, months after the end of hostilities. It was not until November 1924 that a general amnesty was offered for any acts committed in the civil war.

In highlighting the severity of the Free State’s execution policy, however, it is important not to exaggerate its extent. The Free State took a total of over 12,000 Republicans prisoner during the war, of whom roughly 80, less than 1% were executed. How those who were executed were chosen from the others captured in arms is unclear, however many more men were sentenced to the death penalty than were actually shot. This was intended to act as a deterrent to anti-Treaty fighters in the field, who knew that their imprisoned comrades were likely to be executed if they kept up their armed campaign.

Perhaps this realism was also beginning to affect the republican self-declared ‘men of faith’. Dan Breen, who led an IRA column in Tipperary during the Civil war, told his fellow republicans: ‘in order to win this war you’ll need to kill 3 out of every 5 people in the country and it isn’t worth it.’
 


Dimples 77

Duplicate Account
Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
19,060
‘During the Irish Civil War the National Army executed more Irishmen than the British had during the War of Independence.’ 77 Officially, 81 in reality.

In the aftermath of the sudden death of Arthur Griffith and the killing of Michael Collins, in August 1922, William T Cosgrave became chairman of the provisional government. Cosgrave and his colleagues remained wedded to a ruthless military and political strategy that ensured, by May 1923, a decisive win over the Republicans and the end of the Civil War. Cosgrave’s analysis was that ‘the executions have had a remarkable effect. It is a sad thing to say, but it is nevertheless the case’; he could also be chilling in his resolve: ‘I am not going to hesitate and if the country is to live and if we have to exterminate 10,000 republicans, the 3 millions of our people are bigger than the ten thousand.’

The Free State suspended executions and offered an amnesty in the hope that anti-treaty fighters would surrender. However, the war dragged for another two months and witnessed at least twenty more official executions.

Several Republican leaders narrowly avoided execution. Ernie O’Malley, captured on 4 November 1922, was not executed because he was too badly wounded when taken prisoner to face a court-martial and possibly because the Free State was hesitant about executing an undisputed hero of the recent struggle against the British. Liam Deasy, captured in January 1923 avoided execution by signing a surrender document calling on the anti-treaty forces to lay down their arms.

The Anti-Treaty side called a ceasefire on 30 April 1923 and ordered their men to ‘dump arms’, ending the war, on 24 May. Nevertheless, executions of Republican prisoners continued after this time. Four IRA men were executed in May after the ceasefire order and the final two executions took place on 20 November, months after the end of hostilities. It was not until November 1924 that a general amnesty was offered for any acts committed in the civil war.

In highlighting the severity of the Free State’s execution policy, however, it is important not to exaggerate its extent. The Free State took a total of over 12,000 Republicans prisoner during the war, of whom roughly 80, less than 1% were executed. How those who were executed were chosen from the others captured in arms is unclear, however many more men were sentenced to the death penalty than were actually shot. This was intended to act as a deterrent to anti-Treaty fighters in the field, who knew that their imprisoned comrades were likely to be executed if they kept up their armed campaign.

Perhaps this realism was also beginning to affect the republican self-declared ‘men of faith’. Dan Breen, who led an IRA column in Tipperary during the Civil war, told his fellow republicans: ‘in order to win this war you’ll need to kill 3 out of every 5 people in the country and it isn’t worth it.’

Did you have some sort of a point there?

Is there a response that you are looking for?
 

Dimples 77

Duplicate Account
Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
19,060
Its in the history section, away and celebrate a murder or something and dont annoy me.
OK, so it's in the history section.

Did you have some sort of a point there?

Is there a response that you are looking for?
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
32,995
OP confirms Henry Ford's belief that " history is mainly bunk"
 

Toland

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
63,162
Website
www.aggressive-secularist.com
Yet inconveniently true for a state that pretends to abhor violence.
You fail to make the basic distinction between a country in a state of war and a country in a state of peace.

It is one of the fundamental distinctions made by western civilization, including by western democracies.

That's why the provisional IRA and their apologists, for example, made such a fuss about insisting that the Northern Ireland conflict constituted a war.
 

Kommunist

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
5,547
I think they made "such a fuss" because the legislation in the occupied six counties actively discriminated against almost half the population in almost every conceivable way and battered any sort of civil resistance that was put forward, including gunning them down.
 

Breanainn

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
2,900
I think they made "such a fuss" because the legislation in the occupied six counties actively discriminated against almost half the population in almost every conceivable way and battered any sort of civil resistance that was put forward, including gunning them down.
Except nationalists were never denied the democratic vote, and the civil rights demonstrations had achieved the recognition of the principle of power-sharing by the early Seventies, so the "war" ultimately accomplished nothing.
 

clonard marxist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
639
Website
www.irsp.ie
You fail to make the basic distinction between a country in a state of war and a country in a state of peace.

It is one of the fundamental distinctions made by western civilization, including by western democracies.

That's why the provisional IRA and their apologists, for example, made such a fuss about insisting that the Northern Ireland conflict constituted a war.
The Northern conflict was a state of war. The Free State stood idly by because it is not a real Republic but rather a corrupt satellite province of Britain, as evidenced by the murders of 81 republican prisoners in the first year of its establishment.
 

between the bridges

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
44,920
The Northern conflict was a state of war. The Free State stood idly by because it is not a real Republic but rather a corrupt satellite province of Britain, as evidenced by the murders of 81 republican prisoners in the first year of its establishment.
Moi did warn ye about thon mexicians...
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,467
The Northern conflict was a state of war. The Free State stood idly by because it is not a real Republic but rather a corrupt satellite province of Britain, as evidenced by the murders of 81 republican prisoners in the first year of its establishment.
Did it pretend to be a republic in the 1920s?

The one thing I'll add to your OP - the savagery of their Civil War, with internment and torture, multiple murders of prisoners etc to quash dissent validated the Northern Unionist refusal to join their state - as that violence and more would have been directed at Unionism.
 

clonard marxist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
639
Website
www.irsp.ie
Did it pretend to be a republic in the 1920s?

The one thing I'll add to your OP - the savagery of their Civil War, with internment and torture, multiple murders of prisoners etc to quash dissent validated the Northern Unionist refusal to join their state - as that violence and more would have been directed at Unionism.
Not really, when you consider how the Free State was armed and financed by Churchill in support of the the Orange state treaty. The executions and brutality occurred in support of Unionism.
 

Civic_critic2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
4,883
It's useful to remember that the Free State government imprisoned, executed, blew up and shot dead Irish people who did not agree to take an oath to an English king. That is what they were doing. On what basis can such an operation, conducted by those most closely aligned with the previous regime of military occupation, be considered a legitimate government of Ireland or the Irish? Or a republic?
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top