BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 02:07 PM

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm how did all those fires start then

Fires where? In the middle of a built up area of a city in 1916 in the following buildings the Irish Times warehouse and Hoyte's Druggists and Oil Works. All of which contain highly flammable material, tell me Raggy were there any gas mains in this part of Dublin? Any coal fires? any coal fired boilers? I can think of many sources of ignition even if you cannot. But no none of these could possibly have started a fire it must have been "The Brits" using incendiary shells - utterly risible. Tell me Raggy what would an anti-submarine Patrol Boat be doing with incendiary shells? For what possible reason would she carry them or fire them? The Helga would have carried and fired AP or HE rounds. Oh another source of ignition Raggy is transfer of Kinetic Energy (Example: A Battle Class Destroyer was used as a target for an inert deadweight Sea Dart Missile, the ship was closed down as she would have been had she been at action stations with cameras and sensors placed in every compartment of the ship. This dead weight missile hit the main deck just below the bridge the fuel of course did start fires in easily identifiable locations, the transfer of kinetic energy however lifted the Operations Room deck to within 3 feet of the deckhead and it started fires throughout the ship). Solid AP shot would have the same effect and High Explosive rounds would start fires too.

Now then tell us all about these incendiary shells Raggy? What guns fired them and what were they used for? Absolutely no naval application and no Army application either for the conditions and circumstances that prevailed on the Western Front (All that mud and rain - just WTF are you going to set alight?) You mentioned Thermite which first appears to have been used in the Second World War NOT during the First World War.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 01:46 PM

"Tell me Jom do you know why in the British Isles we have Ordnance Survey Maps"
an you tell me why you insuist on talking down to people - you really don't know enough to do so?
You are among the first to shout when people are insulting yet you seem incapable of recognising it in yourself.
As I said, it must have been all those nasty man with rifles who destroyed all those buildings
Have you any source for your claims - you never put them up?
Doesn't matter which King it was - the devastation of Ireland and the killing of its people was ongoing for the centuries Ireland was occupied - right into the 20th century - though they managed to score a personal best with The Famine.
Now - try to remember your place in the pecking order of things.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 01:22 PM

Your "naval experience apparently makes you an "expert" on the type of weaponry available in 1916 - sure it does!!

Tell me Jom do you know why in the British Isles we have Ordnance Survey Maps? Can you tell us all about how they came into being in 1791?

To obtain what is known as the "Firing Solution" for any piece of artillery you have to know the position of the target, the elevation of the target and the gun platform respectively and the horizontal distance between gun and target. You then have to find a thing called "the error of the day" which takes into account humidity, temperature, wind speed and direction and barometric pressure all of which were perfectly capable of being measured then as they can be now. Now back in 1916:

Any OS map of Dublin City would give the position of any target
The tide tables for Dublin would give the height of the gun platform (In this case a moored ship) while the OS Map would give height above sea level as well as the horizontal range between the Helga and whatever building was being targeted. The ballistic characteristics of the gun are a known quantity and the competence of the gunnery team known (Their training after all would be to hit a moving target from their own moving ship - In the case we are talking about both target and ship are stationary making it even simpler) - as previously stated a simple matter of applied mathematics - no-one would have to be an expect to state the above, all it takes is common sense. As someone else pointed out the Patrol Ship Helga fired 40 shots over the period of the Rising - Again from personal experience a hand served 4.5" QF Gun with an experienced crew is capable of firing 24 rounds per minute, the Helga was fitted with a 3" QF Gun firing fixed ammunition so her rate of fire would have been even quicker. As far as knowledge of gunnery goes - yours would appear to be non-existent.

By 1917 the performance of each gun firing over a prolonged period was known so that as the barrels heated and the rifling wore down the elevation could be adjusted to ensure that the shells fired did not fall short.

By the way the Henry I was referring to was Henry II NOT Henry VIII. He gave permission for an expedition to be sent to Ireland to curb raids from Ireland on the British mainland. By force of arms which was the way disputes were settled in those times the Kings of Ireland swore an oath of fealty to Henry II. Note Kings plural so Ireland was not a united country in an attempt to establish a uniform peace a High King was elected this however was by no means successful.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 01:05 PM

Just give up, lads. It is important for some people to 'win'. Let them have their moment here in the full knowledge that such a victory is entirely hollow.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 12:50 PM

"Jim, my own son is married to a Southern Catholic girl, and their son is being brought up as a Catholic."
You mentioned them in relation to the sectarian marches whiuch you described as "pleasant days out" - I assumed that came from them, but if it was all your own work, fine.
Doedsn't make too much difference to your disparaging of the Irish people though - you said what yo said and you have yet to withdraw or apologise for it and explain it.
I presume your daughter-in- law ifds one of the deluded ones, or is she special?
You have answered none and you know it - you continue to ignore all the points and repeat your nonsense.
You have shot your bolt on this one Keith, you obviously have no intention of responding and are down to "I thought..." again an old tactic.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 12:29 PM

"First use of Thermite shells
2 July 1916. Thermite is an incendiary; thermite shells were designed to set a target ablaze, and were fired by field artillery. They were first used by the gunners of 30th Division, firing on Bernafay Wood on the Somme, on 2 July 1916."
http://www.1914-1918.net/firstsnlasts.htm

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 12:20 PM

Jim, my own son is married to a Southern Catholic girl, and their son is being brought up as a Catholic.

I thought I had answered all points relevant to the Rising.
Please say which you are referring to.

Rag,
The quote you gave was not me.
It was Lar Joye, curator of military history at the National Museum of Ireland.
I think he knows more than we do.
Then you can tell me about the Imperial War Museum which you have avoided.
What do you want to know?
then you can tell me about the Black & Tans which you have avoided,
No. This is about the rising.

then you can tell me about the incendiary shells that were used in 1915 using Thermite that you maintain were not used.

I did not say they were not used. I said it was disputed, and quoted three historians who said they were not.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 11:06 AM

Thanks Dick, A pretty good resume. I already know what a set of complete bastards the Black & Tans were. I am aware of their burn, plunder and murder approach to places like Clifden. Perhaps Keith will read the post you placed and consider for once the brutality of the British towards the Irish. He seems to think most of it is made up and that both groups rubbed along together quite well, all rather jolly.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 10:41 AM

"Irish, and have some lovely Irish people married into my family"
He forgot to mention that they are Northern Protestants who have described some of the Extremely belligerent Orange Marches as "a pleasant day out".
Only part of the information again, I'm afraid.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 10:16 AM

"the black and tans were not in existence at the time of the easter rising in 1916"
The Black and Tans were formed from soldiers who had found themselves unable to settle following WW1 - many of them had been traumatised by their experiences and in normal circumstances, would not have been considered fit for duty.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 10:04 AM

RAGGYTASH some info on the black and tans January 1920, the British government started advertising in British cities for men willing to "face a rough and dangerous task", helping to boost the ranks of the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) in policing an increasingly anti-British Ireland. There was no shortage of recruits, many of them First World War army veterans, and by November 1921 about 9,500 men had joined. This sudden influx of men led to a shortage of RIC uniforms, and the new recruits were issued with khaki army uniforms (usually only trousers) and dark green RIC or blue British police surplus tunics, caps and belts. This mixture gave rise to their nickname, the Black and Tans (in Irish, na Dúchrónaigh), from the name of a famous pack of foxhounds from Limerick, the Scarteen Black and Tans, whose colours were and are similar. The name stuck even after the men received full RIC uniforms.

The new recruits received three months' hurried training, and were rapidly posted to RIC barracks, mostly in Dublin, Munster and eastern Connacht. The first men arrived on 25 March 1920. The government also raised another unit, the Auxiliary Division of the constabulary, known as the Auxiliaries or Auxies. This group was made up of ex-army officers. The Black and Tans acted with the Auxiliaries in the government's attempts to break the IRA.

CONDUCT IN IRELAND
Members of the Black and Tans were paid the relatively good wage of 10 shillings a day plus full board and lodging. With minimal police training, their main role was to strengthen the military might of police posts, where they functioned as sentries, guards, escorts for government agents, reinforcement to the regular police, and crowd control, and mounted a determined counter-insurgency campaign. The Black and Tans and the Auxies became known as Tudor's Toughs after the police commander, Major-General Sir Henry Hugh Tudor. They were viewed by Republicans as an army of occupation because of these duties. They soon gained a reputation for brutality, as the RIC campaign against the IRA and Sinn Féin members was stepped up and police reprisals for IRA attacks were condoned by the government.

Constable Alexander Will, from Forfar in Scotland, was the first Black and Tan to die in the conflict, during an IRA attack on the RIC barracks in Rathmore, County Kerry, on 11 July 1920.

The Black and Tans were not subject to strict discipline in their early months in Ireland and as a result, the deaths of Black and Tans at the hands of the IRA in 1920 were often repaid with arbitrary reprisals against the civilian population. In the summer of 1920, the Black and Tans burned and sacked many small towns and villages in Ireland, beginning with Tuam in County Galway in July 1920 and also including Trim, Balbriggan, Thurles and Templemore amongst many others. In November 1920, the Tans "besieged" Tralee in revenge for the IRA abduction and killing of two local RIC men. They closed all the businesses in the town and let no food in for a week. In addition they shot dead three local people. On 14 November, the Tans abducted and murdered a Roman Catholic priest, Fr Michael Griffin, in Galway. His body was found in a bog in Barna a week later. Finally, the Black and Tans sacked Cork city, on the night of 11 December 1920, the centre of which was burned out.

In January 1921, the British Labour Commission produced a report on the situation in Ireland which was highly critical of the government's security policy. It said the government, in forming the Black and Tans, had "liberated forces which it is not at present able to dominate". However since 29 December 1920, the British government had sanctioned "official reprisals" in Ireland — usually meaning burning property of IRA men and their suspected sympathisers. Taken together with an increased emphasis on discipline in the RIC, this helped to curb the random atrocities the Black and Tans committed since March 1920 for the remainder of the war, if only because reprisals were now directed from above rather than being the result of a spontaneous desire for revenge. (see also Chronology of the Irish War of Independence).

However, many of the atrocities popularly attributed to the Black and Tans were probably committed by the far more brutal Auxiliary Division; some were committed by Irish RIC men. For instance, Tomás Mac Curtain, the mayor of Cork, was assassinated in March 1920 by local RIC men and the massacre of 13 civilians at Croke Park on Bloody Sunday was also carried out by the RIC although a small detachment of Auxiliaries were also present. Moreover, the regular British Army also committed atrocities, burning the towns of Mallow and Fermoy for example. However most Republicans did not make a distinction, and "Black and Tans" was often used as a catch-all term for all police and army groups.

The actions of the Black and Tans alienated public opinion in both Ireland and Britain. Their violent tactics encouraged both sides to move towards a peaceful resolution. Edward Wood MP, a future Foreign Secretary, rejected force and urged the British government to offer the Irish an offer "conceived on the most generous lines". Sir John Simon MP, another future Foreign Secretary, was also horrified at the tactics being used. Lionel Curtis, writing in the imperialist journal The Round Table, wrote: "If the British Commonwealth can only be preserved by such means, it would become a negation of the principle for which it has stood". The King, senior Anglican bishops, MPs from the Liberal and Labour parties, Oswald Mosley, Jan Smuts, the Trades Union Congress and parts of the press were increasingly critical of the actions of the Black and Tans. Mahatma Gandhi said of the British peace offer: "It is not fear of losing more lives that has compelled a reluctant offer from England but it is the shame of any further imposition of agony upon a people that loves liberty above everything else".

About 7,000 Black and Tans served in Ireland in 1920-22. More than one-third of them died or left the service before they were disbanded along with the rest of the RIC in 1922, an extremely high wastage rate, and well over half received government pensions. A total of 404 members of the Royal Irish Constabulary died in the conflict and more than 600 were wounded but it is not clear how many of these were pre-war RIC men and how many were Black and Tans or Auxiliaries.

Those who returned to civilian life sometimes had problems re-integrating. At least two former Black and Tans were hanged for murder in Britain and another wanted for murder committed suicide before the police could arrest him.

LEGACY
Due to the ferocity of the Tans' behaviour in Ireland and the atrocities committed, feelings continue to run high regarding their actions. "Black and Tan" or "Tan" remains a pejorative term for British in Ireland, and they are still despised by many in Ireland. One of the most famous Irish Republican songs is Dominic Behan's "Come out Ye Black and Tans." The Irish War of Independence is sometimes referred to as the "Tan War" or "Black-and-Tan War." This term was preferred by those who fought on the Anti-Treaty side in the Irish Civil War. The "Cogadh na Saoirse" medal, which was awarded to IRA Volunteers after 1941, bears a ribbon with two vertical stripes in black and tan.

QUOTE
If a police barracks is burned or if the barracks already occupied is not suitable, then the best house in the locality is to be commandeered, the occupants thrown into the gutter. Let them die there—the more the merrier.

Should the order ("Hands Up") not be immediately obeyed, shoot and shoot with effect. If the persons approaching (a patrol) carry their hands in their pockets, or are in any way suspicious-looking, shoot them down. You may make mistakes occasionally and innocent persons may be shot, but that cannot be helped, and you are bound to get the right parties some time. The more you shoot, the better I will like you, and I assure you no policeman will get into trouble for shooting any man.
—Lt. Col. Smyth, June 1920.
the black and tans were not in existence at the time of the easter rising in 1916

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 09:46 AM

"I think you underestimate people Jim"
As someone of Irish extraction who lived in London throughout 'The Troubles' - I think I do not, but there again, that is my personal experience, yours may be different - be happy to consider it if you put it up.
On several occasions I experienced the prejudice towards the Irish - the 'T'ick Paddy' image being among the most common.
It was beautifully summed up for me by a customer when she told me, "we have Irish neighbors so we always have to check under our car before we turn the engine on".
There's a wonderful book - may still be available, entitled, 'The Same Old Story', a history of prejudice towards the Irish - quite horrifying
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 09:13 AM

History does not have to be taught in schools in order for people to have a curiosity and a knowledge of it. I think you underestimate people Jim. I am not suggesting that everyone is an ardent student of history, Irish or otherwise but I do know that people who are genuinely interested in a subject read widely and thus inform themselves.
I thought you mentioned in an earlier post that you had read only one of his novels, hence my reluctance to give credence to your views of him. I must have misunderstood you.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 09:07 AM

"Most of the damage to Dublin's city centre was caused by fire, particularly at premises like the Irish Times warehouse and Hoyte's Druggists and Oil Works, rather than by shelling." Your quote Keith, so tell me how all these fires started.

Then you can tell me about the Imperial War Museum which you have avoided. then you can tell me about the Black & Tans which you have avoided, then you can tell me about the incendiary shells that were used in 1915 using Thermite that you maintain were not used.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 09:03 AM

" "the Vast majority" of people obtain historical knowledge"
It was never taught in British schools - may have been different in the U.S.
The subject is patently a dark area outside Ireland - what other sources are there?
The ignorance of Ireland was aptly demonstrated throughout the 'Troubles' in Britain - even the two magnificent series on our televisions largely skipped over the rising - the U.T.V. one not even that.
The British public's view of Ireland, from my experience in two cities (I don't count my native Liverpool) tends to be at the Bernard Manning level, generated by at least a century of hatred propaganda.
Have read most of Uris's novels, but mine is only an opinion, as is yours.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 08:51 AM

Jim , you missed the point. Also, I am left to wonder how you know how "the Vast majority" of people obtain historical knowledge. I am not sure who recognizes Uris as an "excellent" novelists, but I will take your unsubstantiated word for it. Many others, of course, would disagree. I would suggest that you read more than one of his books, then read some history and see where he goes off the rails a bit. You seem to have a very superficial knowledge of him. Do read him , then pass judgement.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 08:16 AM

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm how did all those fires start then, must have been pyromaniacs about eh Keith?

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 08:09 AM

You really are not going to respond to any of the points made, are you
Why should anybody take seriously a self-confessed disinterested ignoramous who believes that anybody who disagrees with him is a "gullible, propaganda-deluded moron?
Not this gp-dm certainly.
Come back when you have something Keith.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 07:59 AM

More on shells.
Michael Barry.
"The 'Helga' fired 24 rounds from its 12-pounder deck gun. These were high-explosive shells, i.e. which explode on impact. One account tells that the first shell hit the bridge.

At the same time, British Army gunners had moved an 18-pounder field gun from Trinity College. They set up by the south quays by Butt Bridge at Tara Street, and proceeded to shell Liberty Hall as well. They (army gunners)had only shrapnel shells. These did not contain high explosive and would have the effect of a glorified but high-velocity cannon-ball."

http://www.theirishstory.com/2016/03/24/the-helga-and-the-shelling-of-liberty-hall/#.VxthtfkrKt-

Author and historian Michael B. Barry studied in Trinity College, Dublin.
Michael has written several books including 'Victorian Dublin Revealed' and 'The Green Divide, an Illustrated History of the Irish Civil War'. His recent book 'Courage Boys, We are Winning, an Illustrated History of the 1916 Rising' is a best seller. It has been described in the press as the best illustrated book on the 1916 Rising, and has gone into reprint.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 07:38 AM

"No one seriously interested in history gets their knowledge of history from novels."
Joe never claimed to be seriously interested and is no different from the vast majority of British, or, I suspect, America people who read little o the subject but who are periferably interested in the subject and get their understanding from various sources, in America's case, quite often from personal family experiences.
As far as this topic is concerned, as I have pointed out, up to now there has been little published and readily available specifically dedicated to it - the case was true of the Famine up to the 150th anniversary of the event.
Uris is an excellent novelist and recognised as such - I would need a little more evidence that he was not a good historian - many novelists are because of their research into detail.
He uses Irish history as a background for storytelling, whereas "Peter De Rosa" uses a storytelling technique to recount actual historical events.
For about a century there was only one substantial work on the Great Irish Famine - written by an Englishwoman, yet there were numerous novels, many giving an extremely vivid picture of the time, which filled in the gap.
Liam O'Flahert's 'Famine' is probably the best of these and its effect was life-changing to many people - a novel.
Reading Uris is certainly not a "lazy way" or learning, especially when there was so little else, though it may be a silly way to try to become an expert, which Joe never claimed to be.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 07:17 AM

Jim, I love Ireland and all things Irish, and have some lovely Irish people married into my family.
Your accusation of racism is a disgusting personal attack.
Please just address what I actually say instead of making up lies about me as a person.

Rag, the use of incendiary shells in Dublin is disputed.

"there were no incendiary shells used in Dublin in 1916 contrary to popular belief. "
http://conflictandthecity.ie/abstract/dublin-fire-brigade-rising-revolution-2/

"In the folklore of the Easter Rising, the Helga is said to have brought about the destruction of the city, raining incendiary shells down on the rebels from her fine vantage point on the River Liffey. In reality, there were no incendiary shells (they hadn't been utilised anywhere by April 1916), and the Helga fired only forty shells during the course of the rebellion. "
https://comeheretome.com/2016/03/30/the-day-the-helga-sank/

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 06:52 AM

"It was passed in April 1918 and would have taken months to implement."
It shows without doubt that the willingness to sacrifice Irish lives was always present and it most would not have taken months to implement - Ireland would have been subject to the emergency laws operating in wartime.
This it one tiny aspect of what I have just written and I have no intention of allowing you to divert this discussion from what I wrote.
I suggest that you might start with your racist contempt for the Irish people and why you appear to believe yourself to be more knowledgeable than they are on their own history - then we can nit-pick
Jim Carroll
.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 06:51 AM

No one seriously interested in history gets their knowledge of history from novels. " many people's knowledge of Ireland come from reading such novels" . On what basis do you make that claim Jim. and then there is your mention of bias in novels and suggesting that books could only be judged if one had actually read them. Fair point Jim, then you accuse Uris of being " more openly partisan in his novel on Israel , even though you have not read it. odd logic that.
I have tried ( twice deleted) to make the   point that there is a difference between popular narrative and history. historical novelists often deal only in popular narrative, Uris , and yes I have read him, does this,. Uris is neither a very good writer or a very good historian, so learning history from him is a dubious exercise at best and , at worst, an intellectually lazy way of attempting to acquire knowledge.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 06:41 AM

Britain attempted to introduce compulsory conscription in Ireland in 1918 - what part of that fact do you have a problem with?

It was passed in April 1918 and would have taken months to implement.
By June 1918 the tide had turned and American troops were pouring in so there was no need to conscript a single Irishman.
Casualties were very light in the final months of the war anyway.

Conscription for the rest of Britain was passed before the rising in March 1916, and Ireland was excluded.

The rising had no bearing on conscription in Ireland.
It would have been opposed in Ireland anyway.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 06:25 AM

"Nonsense Jim. Ireland was excluded from conscription before the rising."
Been here-done that Keith.
Britain attempted to introduce compulsory conscription in Ireland in 1918 - what part of that fact do you have a problem with?
Had Ireland not opposed British rule, there would have been no reason whatever that it should have been left out of the bloodbath - why should they have been left out while the rest of British youth was being slaughtered?
"The British parliament passed the act before the rising,"
And altered it in July 1916 to make the partition of the six counties permanent - it was originally intended that these counties (originally the whole of Ulster, but altered when it was realised that this would give the Catholics a majority in the North) would be partitioned until a year after the war ended.
Even the Parliamentary Irish rejected the re-written treaty - Redmond described it as "a betrayal"
The Republicans who took part in the Rising did so because they realised that Britain had no intention of ratifying any treaty that did not meet its own interests.
You have been given all this before, what part of this do you have problems with; if none, why are you raising it again and again and again.....?
Britain was finally forced to concede a form of Independence, at the threat of an alternative of "a signature or war", which lead to immediate Civil War in the 26 Counties, built in financial, political and land-owning injustice, inequality and hardship for the Catholic third of the six counties, and a near-century of unrest and bloodshed.
What problems do you have with any of this?
The Rising did not have the support of those in the immediately vicinity, (I told you this years ago), but there is no indication whatever of how the rest of Ireland felt - they were never asked.
It doesn't matter anyway - within a matter of months the Rebels had the complete support of the Irish people, a support which led to a full-scale war of independence which ended overall rule in Ireland by the wealthiest and most powerful Empire the world has known being kicked out ignominiously by poorly armed irregular fighters.
The Rising has since been considered the turning-point in Irish history by the Irish people as a whole.
You, who have stated you know nothing of Irish history and have never read a book on the subject, have taken onto yourself to describe the Irish people as a whole as gullible and misled in their beliefs and written-off that fully accepted Irish turning point with contempt - what does that make you Keith?
You said earlier that "we can finish this."
Your stated contempt for the Irish people and their knowledge of their own history wil never be "finished" until you withdraw your appalling statement or qualify it - it verges on racism to suggest that an entire nation is gullible enough to have been misled by propaganda on its own history and that you, with your declared ingnorance and disinterest, know more than they do.
If anything, your stated contempt has been written into the history of this forum in your own words.
"Fergie, where and when did Joe Offer ask you to deliver YOUR definitive History of Ireland in just a few paragraphs?"
And where did anybody ask you to sum up a over a millennium of Irish history in a couple of sentences, particularly in your as usual talking-down-to tone?
Your points might just be better made if they weren't delivers in such a contemptuous tone (in the new spirit of not insulting people, which you have regularly complained about)
To compare Henry VIII's forcible re-conquest of Ireland to the tribal movements of the Bronze Age is risible, to say the least.
If it was "legal" it was so because the laws of the day were made by a monarch who believed himself appointed by God and who took it on himself to torture and burn religious opponents in order to have his marriage annulled.
British rule has been maintained in Ireland ever since by force of arms, massacres and open oppression - all perfectly "legal" of course.
Your "naval experience apparently makes you an "expert" on the type of weaponry available in 1916 - sure it does!!
In which case, all the destruction that took place must have been caused by rifle fire - risibility appears to be your 'thing' today!
The Irish did not "collude" with the Germans - they took the weapons that the Germans offered - no collusion - no offer of support for Germany.
The Russian people did exactly the same at the time of their revolution.
If you don't know the facts of the situation, please don't hestate to ask.
Joe's point is far from "absolutely appalling" - many people's knowledge of Ireland come from reading such novels, most people's interests don't even stretch that far - your own arguments don't exactly leave much of an impression of study or understanding of the subject.
I assume that, by your description of those novels as "biased" you have read them yourself - or is this just another plucked-out-of-the-air conclusion?
Uris''s novel (only read the one) is actually fairly balanced as such writings go - he did a similar job on Israel, though there, he tended to be more openly partisan - no harm in that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 05:30 AM

Of course Keith, that's why incendiary rounds were used. Not that fire regards property you understand, it tends to burn indiscriminately.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 05:00 AM

Yes Rag.
The guns were fired directly, not just at the occupied buildings but at the actual windows the rebels fired from.

Jim,
Had Ireland not risen, Britain would have exercised its right to send
Irish youth to the front.

Nonsense Jim. Ireland was excluded from conscription before the rising.
No shortage of volunteers though.

The Home Rule was stamped to death by the Irish Parliamentarians because it had been altered - you have had the Lloyd George quote.
It was viciously attacked in Parliament by British Tories

More nonsense Jim.
The British parliament passed the act before the rising, and Ireland was quite content with it .
What happened after the rising was the fault of the rising.

The Rising did not have popular support.
The Home Rule Bill had already been passed.

You deny both but they are established, hard, historical facts.
What does that make you Jim?

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:44 AM

3. Would those figures have been achievable in 1916

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:41 AM

There is a difference between being indiscriminate and being accurate.

Can you tell us the percentage of your practise artillery firing was accurate:

1. from the first shot

2. overall.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:14 AM

"Artillery was used but was it indiscriminate? Any evidence"
The dozens of statements of eye witness evidence - the massive damage that was done, the weapons used - even the Gunboat Helga firing shells from the Liffey - these can only be used 'indiscriminately' in the hope they might hit their target."

Intelligence and reports from the Nationalists led Government Forces and Police present to believe that civilians had been evacuated. There was no clear way of identifying civilians from "Volunteers".

No heavy artillery was deployed no heavy artillery was used. Heaviest gun was the QF 12 pounder on the Helga which was 3" - had they wished to do so the British could have used a Dreadnought or Battle Cruiser with 15" guns to reduce Dublin to rubble, they didn't, the only artillery used were light field pieces and the devastation caused was to clear fields of fire.

This having been my "specialisation" while in the Navy I can tell you with 100% certainty that no naval gunfire is indiscriminate and no shot is fired in the vague hope that it MIGHT hit the target. Indirect naval gunfire is corrected by observers onto target and that is done very rapidly, in Dublin the rebels held an area under full observation by Government forces, each rebel strongpoint could be identified on any city map and from that information the gunnery officer on the Helga would have an initial range and bearing to target - it really is quite a simple exercise in applied mathematics Jom.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 04:01 AM

Fergie, that translates as my club is bigger than your shillelagh therefore I win.

It also nicely avoids having to mention all the repressive measures that were put into place over centuries of suppression to prevent the indigenous population from .... lets see ......... owning land, having an education, having a vote, speaking their own language, being able to practice law, even wearing green at one stage together with countless other restrictions, designed to for one purpose and one purpose only, to subjugate the people.

Therefore all the Irish population and all the Irish diaspora must be grossly misinformed and grossly mistaken to be celebrating the centenary of the 1916 rising.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 03:56 AM

"I've read quite a bit more about Irish history, mostly fiction. I suppose I've learned most of the history I know from novels, and I think that's not a bad thing." - Joe Offer,

You are right Joe it is not a bad thing - it is absolutely appalling. By what you state above you have read no history at all - instead you have read what undoubtedly are heavily biased STORIES about historical events - whale of a difference, particularly if you are then going to base any serious argument on what is fiction. If you are going to study any historical event you have to look at it from all perspectives, not just that of someone writing a work of fiction. You have to look at those events objectively, history has no romantic aspect.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Apr 16 - 03:39 AM

Fergie, where and when did Joe Offer ask you to deliver YOUR definitive History of Ireland in just a few paragraphs? Do you really expect it to accepted as the full story?

Let us have a few of your glaring omissions shall we?

Henry's expansion westwards into Ireland was no different and no less "legal" than the westward expansion of the Celts from central Europe - basically that was how things were done then - you fall into the trap of judging events and mores of a bygone age through 21st century perspectives. You omit to mention Irish raids on England and Wales, were these to be ignored? the "English" did not "invade" Ireland but lesser sons of Norman Knights did to carve out land for themselves - Nothing new in that for "Normans" who branched out from Normandy into the British Isles, down through Italy, on to Sicily and into the middle-east (Aleppo in Syria was a "Norman" city).

As to the various "Irish Rebellions" down through those 800 years if you look into them you will find that they were mainly instigated either by Spain or France who promised much but delivered little - The "Great" Chief O'Neill's rebellion was motivated by pure self-interest, its object was not to win freedom for Ireland but to deliver it to Spain as a colony with O'Neill in the position as Viceroy. Scotland was no different and there were far more Scottish Rebellions than Irish and they came much closer to success, again the foreign power promising "assistance" delivered little or nothing leaving the general population to suffer the consequences - rebellions when they happened tended to coincide with European Wars in which England or Great Britain was involved.

No mention of the collusion of the Nationalists and the Germans between 1914 and 1916, no mention of failed attempts to smuggle arms into Ireland to arm the nationalists in time of war - or should that have been ignored too?

The Royal Navy's intelligence branch by breaking German ciphers (Main reason why the Nationalists Gun running attempts failed) knew that something was about to happen in 1916 and had their advice been taken and had the leaders been arrested then the Easter Rising would never have happened.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 01:10 PM

"
I only argue two points"
WHAT?
Not again!!
You have argued every single aspect of this uprising up to the point of maing out that those celebrating it as gullible morons (racist to say the least)
The Home Rule was stamped to death by the Irish Parliamentarians because it had been altered - you have had the Lloyd George quote.
It was viciously attacked in Parliament by British Tories
It was not actually accepted by Britain until 1922 following a war of Independence and then in a deformed state.   
Each time you repeat this nonsense you confirm the stupidity of your case.
How do you no it had no support - did people carry out a survey to find what the country as a whole thought - where are your figures.
A few Dubliners around the GPO at the end of the Rising protested - many more assisted the rebels throughout the fighting, geiving them shelter and misleading the soldiers.
Many hundreds of Dubliners used the Rising to loot busnesses and shops in the vicinity - in fact the rebels attempted to stop this from happening.   
Within months of the Rising the people totally supported the Rising and mounted the Irish War of Independence.
How exactly do you suggest that the Rebels should have called for support for the Rising - a public ballot maybe?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:55 PM

!"To celebrate the Rising is to celebrate their anti-democratic elitism and bloodlust.""
The opinion of a Jesuit Priest - a minority of - what exactly?
Had Ireland not risen, Britain would have exercised its right to send
Irish youth to the front.
On the first day of the Somme, a matter of a few weeks of the rising, over 19000 young British men lost their lives and 8,000 were wounded - in one day.
Now that's what I call "bloodlust".
Fr Murphy's Church supported the war calling for "Irishmen to support Catholic Belgium".
Catholic Belgium was responsible for the deaths of 10 million Congolese and the amputation of hands of unnumbered plantation workers
Bloodlust or what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:53 PM

Jim, we can finish this.
I only argue two points.

The Rising did not have popular support.
The Home Rule Bill had already been passed.

You denied both but they are established, hard, historical facts.

Do you still deny them?
If not, we are done.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:43 PM

Murphy in Irish Times.

"Far more serious is the attempt of the Rising's leaders, without authority from the living Irish people (as opposed to the imaginary authority of the dead generations), to establish a new state and themselves as its government with power to start a war and execute citizens. That can't be laughed off.
Furthermore, the Rising is not like the Battle of Clontarf (1014), a 'dead' event with no contemporary political relevance: it is the template for the two-headed monster run by the IRA Army Council, and for its feral children, the Real and Continuity IRAs."

"To celebrate the Rising is to celebrate their anti-democratic elitism and bloodlust."

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:34 PM

Thanks Joe.

Derrick, I was including the civil war.
Earlier today (4.01AM) I acknowledged that the rising had "only" killed hundreds.
I said, "The rising achieved nothing, killed hundreds of innocent civilians, and led to the deaths of a couple of thousand more in the civil war."

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:25 PM

Keith has frequently quoted Fr. Seamus Murphy, S.J. I found an interesting article by Murphy in the Irish Times. It's worth a read:

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/the-rising-of-easter-1916-is-live-and-politically-radioactive-1.2492815

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,Derrick
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 12:14 PM

"The Rising achieved nothing but thousands of unnecessary Irish deaths."

The death toll was hundreds rather than thousands,the majority civilians many of whom were killed by army fire.
The figures come from Wikipedia link below

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rising


Almost 500 people were killed in the Easter Rising. About 54% were civilians, 30% were British military and police, and 16% were Irish rebels. More than 2,600 were wounded. Many of the civilians were killed as a result of the British using artillery and heavy machine guns, or mistaking civilians for rebels. Others were caught in the crossfire in a crowded city. The shelling and the fires it caused left parts of inner city Dublin in ruins.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rising

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 10:43 AM

"Those views are reasoned and supported by all the historical facts."

Absolutely, Professor! - and also supported by all historians (live ones, that is) whose books are available in regular bookshops & etc & etc........

It don't never change, do it?   ;>)

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 09:11 AM

the many reasons Irish (and British) people enlisted

I quoted historians who researched their actual motivation.

the devastating photographs of indiscriminate shelling

There are no such photographs.
The shells were fired directly at the occupied buildings, and at the actual windows from where the rebels were firing.
See the pictures I provided of the Liberty building and YMCA.

Lar Joye, curator of military history at the National Museum of Ireland,
"Most of the damage to Dublin's city centre was caused by fire, particularly at premises like the Irish Times warehouse and Hoyte's Druggists and Oil Works, rather than by shelling."
http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/tss-helga-ii/

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 08:26 AM

If Ireland would have got Home Rule without Easter Week - why didn't they get it -

They would have. It was already agreed but there was the small matter of WW1 that had to be dealt with first.

FACT.
The Home Rule Act was already passed.
FACT.
Home Rule was assured
FACT.
The Rising had almost no popular support.


The Rising achieved nothing but thousands of unnecessary Irish deaths.

your 'fact' have been torn to shreds over and over again

If that is true, identify a single one.
My case is just that the rising was unnecessary because home rule was already assured, and the people did not support it.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 07:18 AM

Sorry Mike - didn't mean to snap
Troublesome priest, and all that
Jim CaRROLL

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:41 AM

What can you do Mike - silence doesn't seem to work
I get a pit pissed off with triumphalism with no basis.
Sorry - I suppose it's much easier to snipe from the sidelines.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:31 AM

"This one, as they say, could run & run.......!"
No it can't Mike · 0317 AM

....

Oh? seems to me to be having a pretty good go, Jim...!

≈M≈

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:19 AM

"I notice that you still can not identify a single one of my FACTS that you challenge, or produce a single one of your own"
For ***** sake Keith - your 'fact' have been torn to shreds over and over again
The changes and about-turns of the Home Rule Bill - the many reasons Irish (and British) people enlisted - the devastating photographs of indiscriminate shelling - the behavour of the British towards opponents (you won't even respond to the Tans, the fact that the land wars continued till after independence.....
You have ignored all this and continue to chant 'I won' in parrot fashion
Your priest may or may not be a jingoist, but he represents a minority opinion here in Ireland ad it is what it is - an opinion, nothing more.
Your insulting behavior towards the Irish people as a whole and your refusal to either qualify or withdraw those insults marks your case out for what it is - sheer archaic jingoism.
If Ireland would have got Home Rule without Easter Week - why didn't they get it - why was there a civil war and a near century of persecution forced n the Northern Catholics - why wasn't Independence implemented immediately after the war and the six counties added a year later, as the signed treaty stated - none of this took place and still haven't beer ratified?
Now will you go away?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 06:04 AM

Jim, opening sentence of Dave's Article

Dave's Article??? The article has bugger all to do with me. All I did was provided a clicky to a link to an article that Jim had already provided a link for. That is an historic fact that can be proved by many eminent people...

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 05:53 AM

Your FACTS are cut and pastes from the Internet. Selective at least.

Essays and articles by historians who know more than all of us together.

I notice that you still can not identify a single one of my FACTS that you challenge, or produce a single one of your own.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 22 Apr 16 - 05:00 AM

"Those views are reasoned and supported by all the historical facts."

You are not in possession of ALL the historical facts. Your FACTS are cut and pastes from the Internet. Selective at least. When, and only when, you have read extensively on Irish history from 1170 to the present day will you be in a position to make such a statement.

I too am out of here.