The Guardian calls De Valera pro-German

A.Tomás

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
656
What were the sentiments of the gang that attacked Trinity College on VE Day 1945? I would say very much pro-German. Had Germany won the war, those lads would presumably have celebrated the misfortune of the British. There is no reason to believe that there weren't tens of thousands more like them. Some of them did head off to fight for Germany.

Francis Stuart may have been pro-Nazi and Lord Ha Ha certainly was. Whatever de Valera's real feelings, the book of condolances episode and allowing the German embassy remain open, at the very least reflected very poor judgement as to where Ireland's real interets lay in the final years of the war when the outcome was obvious.


Lord Ha Ha was a British supremacist, well known for supporting the black and tans in Cork and therefore British imperialism (well at that time anyway), claiming him as Irish is slightly more typical than laughable.



"What were the sentiments of the gang that attacked Trinity College on VE Day 1945?"

Presumably they took exception to their British jingoistic agenda:rolleyes:
 


White Horse

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
7,012
He says pro-German, not pro Nazi. I rarely find myself defending Dev, but the text clearly states pro-German and not pro-Nazi to the extent that he makes mention of the decidely the Pro-Nazi sympathies of the Churches of the aforementioned countries?

I doubt anyone with a lick of sense would believe Dev, even at his worse to be pro-Nazi or even close. Sadly however, there would be many in the UK who would believe this, they are, however, massively outnumbered by those who are unaware or totally indifferent to this.
Semantics.

In the context of the Second World War, pro German is pro Nazi.

I'm surprised with the Guardian, in their eyes Dev was a Catholic so there must be something wrong with him.
 

dalywise

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
811
I think you are referring to the group which included Charles Haughey? As I understand it, they reacted to the flying of the Union Jack by Trinity students - they tore down the flag and may have replaced it with the tricolour. I don't see how that can be construed as being pro-German.
They attacked a group that was celebrating the defeat of Germany. Maybe the flag got them going - symbols often set idiots' minds aflame. But I doubt the mob woudl have been so inflamed just by the flag: the thought of a British victory would have uopset them far more. I'm old enough to remember the Falklands war and the cheer that went up in a pub one night when it was announced that a British ship had been sunk. No thought was given to the people who went to the bottom of the sea. The pub was on the Argies' side. We are deluding ourselves if we think anti-British feeling was any less in 1945. And deluding ourselves if we think people didn't support Germany in the same way in WWII as so many people rooted for the Argies in 1982.
 

dalywise

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
811
Lord Ha Ha was a British supremacist, well known for supporting the black and tans in Cork and therefore British imperialism (well at that time anyway), claiming him as Irish is slightly more typical than laughable.



"What were the sentiments of the gang that attacked Trinity College on VE Day 1945?"

Presumably they took exception to their British jingoistic agenda:rolleyes:
The fact remains that he was Irish. Because he was a lunatic and fanatic, doesn't automatically rule him out of being Irish.
 

dónal na geallaí

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
617
Lord Ha Ha was a British supremacist, well known for supporting the black and tans in Cork and therefore British imperialism (well at that time anyway), claiming him as Irish is slightly more typical than laughable.



"What were the sentiments of the gang that attacked Trinity College on VE Day 1945?"

Presumably they took exception to their British jingoistic agenda:rolleyes:
William Joyce - aka Lord Haw Haw - was born in New York to an English mother and an Irish father.His family were British Empire Loyalists and had to leave Galway ( not Cork) on that account.Joyce was a member of the British Union of Fascists.I fail to see his relevance to this debate.

Ditto deValera.He sent his condolences to the German ambassador ,who was not a Nazi party man and had not spent World War Two trying to unseat his government.Unlike the USA and UK diplomatic corps.Besides the already mentioned assistance - especially foodstuffs but also the quick repatriation of Allied airmen and sailors.Sad that the Guardian should sink to the level of the Daily Wail..........
 

kerdasi amaq

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
4,706

splashy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
308
They attacked a group that was celebrating the defeat of Germany. Maybe the flag got them going - symbols often set idiots' minds aflame. But I doubt the mob woudl have been so inflamed just by the flag: the thought of a British victory would have uopset them far more. I'm old enough to remember the Falklands war and the cheer that went up in a pub one night when it was announced that a British ship had been sunk. No thought was given to the people who went to the bottom of the sea. The pub was on the Argies' side. We are deluding ourselves if we think anti-British feeling was any less in 1945. And deluding ourselves if we think people didn't support Germany in the same way in WWII as so many people rooted for the Argies in 1982.
You're falling into the same trap as the Guardian: being anti-British did not necessarily mean being pro-German.
The protesters objected to the Jack being raised above the Tricolour, not the Jack itself. In fact, their very attendance might even suggest that they had been celebrating with rest before the incident.

I've heard that Haughey's claim to have lead the mob was only self-aggrandising and that he had no part in it. I've never read anything that convincingly demonstrated the identity of that person, so maybe there's truth in it.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
50,642
I agree with you, (didn't expect you to defend Dev).:p
I wasn't really defending him - just saying that he wasn't pro-Nazi. The condolences thing was a spectacular misjudgement on his part, and a big blot on his career.
 

A.Tomás

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
656
Trinity was essentially a British university back then, apparently they were playing the British national anthem after ceremonies until 1939...

...says a lot about those flag waving chaps.
 

Kevin Doyle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
11,017
It was a spectacular misjudgment, and more than that, it was simply the wrong thing to do. I suspect that Dev was trying to over-compensate for his tacit support of the Allies during the war. As I said in the OP, I'd expect the subtleties of Irish neutrality to go over the heads of the more right-wing elements of the British media, but I'm disappointed that the Guardian (a paper I used to read regularly but which has gone seriously downhill) fell into the same trap.
I agree, the efforts of ordinary Irish citizens in fighting the Nazis cannot be so casually erased because Dev engaged in a singular act of diplomatic stupidity. Close to 50,000 Irishmen fought on the side of the Allies

I would also argue that Ireland was not neutral during the war, especially when compared to Switzerland who enforced their neutrality with complete impartiality.

Even a quick glance of the The Cranborne report shows the Irish commitment to the British war effort and in my view exposes Irelands neutrality as something of a myth, neutral countries do not behave the way Ireland did during the war. Indeed if the Battle of Britain had gone the other, all pretence would have been dropped immediately and plans where in place for a joint resistance to Nazi occupation by both the British and Irish armed forces.
 

cry freedom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
2,338
As a child growing up in the late Fifties a remember reading dozens of articles in the Sunday papers [in particular the Sunday Press] recounting battles of the Second World War.
The sentiment which shone out of all these articles was completely anti British. Even when they won the Press would do its best to find an anti British and pro German angle.
I remember a book published some years ago about the sinking of the Lusitania during WW1 and my abiding memory is of the author turning all sorts of cartwheels to try to blame the British for the sinking as if the Royal Navy had commanded the submarine involved.
When it comes to considering anything British, a sizable part of the population of this country seem to loose their common sense compass
 

Kevin Doyle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
11,017
When it comes to considering anything British, a sizable part of the population of this country seem to loose their common sense compass
Rightly or wrongly that is an understandable residual sentiment from centuries of sometimes brutal occupation. There would have been entire generation at the outbreak of war with such brutality still somewhat fresh in their memories. To me that makes it all the more remarkable that the Irish government did all it could to support the British war effort short of declaring war on Germany.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,450
What about this pro-German, anti-Nazi German who was directly involved in WWII?

Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg





Seemed like a good egg all round.
I have wondered about him - true, he tried to kill Hitler. But from what I can see he only tried to Kill Hitler because Hitler had blown their war.

I agree with others who have made the distinction between the article saying pro-German and pro-Nazi. But I think it's "cute" writing rather than deliberately making the distinction - as the author mentions Spain , Croatia and Slovakia.
 

Kevin Doyle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
11,017
I have wondered about him - true, he tried to kill Hitler. But from what I can see he only tried to Kill Hitler because Hitler had blown their war.
No, he was disgusted with the Nazis, particularly the indiscrimate attrocities carried out by the SS and viewed them as the greater enemy of Germany.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,450
No, he was disgusted with the Nazis, particularly the indiscrimate attrocities carried out by the SS and viewed them as the greater enemy of Germany.
I have a different impression about that "conspiracy". From what I can see the German Army officer class really only lost confidence in Hitler when things went wrong on the Eastern Front. They may have had scruples about the way the war was "fought" and they were certainly less than pleased that an outsider disregarded their advice and seemed to be unbeatable - but was there serious opposition whil Germany was winning ?
 

splashy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
308
No, he was disgusted with the Nazis, particularly the indiscrimate attrocities carried out by the SS and viewed them as the greater enemy of Germany.
wikipedia said:
It is certain that in the early stages of the war, he still held the usual aristocratic beliefs typical of late imperial times.
Hardly a "good egg" all the same.
 


Most Replies

Top Bottom