Home Rule vs Dominion Status

SirOrmondeWinter

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
3,556
They are a million mile away, no threat to Britain, They didn't have a corrupt and bigoted administration ruling over them for five hundred years. And they're Britain's little darings who did nothing wrong and have little to no history to speak off. And excuss us for our nasty war, but we to fought a nasty war, and nasty civil war that makes Ireland's look tame. I mean we didn't have three hundred million people telling the Brits to leave like India, and we didn't have Facebook and tweetter, to bring down a government like Egypt. So don't judge what Ireland had to go through to getting her Republic, after all, Britain could have givien her what she wanted, but all they care about was their damn empire.
Whoa!

I'm sure the Aussies/Kiwis and Canucks would be deeply unimpressed by that, just because it's not written down doesn't mean it isn't history. Does the US have 'little history to speak off?'. Ireland had a corrupt/bigoted administration but so did the rest of Britain And Europe. And the world. Just that the Irish Free State continued to have that after partition.

As you say they were no threat to Britain which Irish Nationalism WAS, hence the plantation in the first place. If Irish Nationalism wasn't a threat Irish Unionism and the rest of Britain would have no problem with it. Hence why Britain refused to 'give Ireland her republic' partly because it was a threat to the rest of the Empire but also because it cared about the Irish Unionists who would suffer under them.

Also it's not a question of one long continuous quest for a republic, had Charles 1st, James 2nd or Bonnie Prince Charlie succeeded they'd have been perfectly happy with a Catholic monarch and the link to the rest of the British Isles.

The ACW dwarfs Irelands troubles, between 1916-23 we probably lost only 2000 people or so which is less than one days wastage for Irish soldiers at Gallipoli or The Somme. But its' legacy of bitterness remains. They say when the elderly veterans re-enacted Pickett's charge on the 50th anniversary of Gettysberg their Union counterparts could not wait to rise up and greet them as fellow Americans. Yet Ireland's Troubles continue, a man murdered in Belfast just this week.
 
Jan 2013
335
And how 'unfree' do you really think Australia, Canada and New Zealand are?

What nasty war did they have to go through? plus a civil war (which was even worse-- but we must not talk about that much more comfortable to blame the nasty Brits and Black and Tans etc) to follow.
Yes and I would say Scotland is as far on (if not farther) than Eire is in their quest for independence. And this without the bloody trail that Irish republicanism left in its wake.
 

annelouise17

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,442
Amerikay
Whoa!

I'm sure the Aussies/Kiwis and Canucks would be deeply unimpressed by that, just because it's not written down doesn't mean it isn't history. Does the US have 'little history to speak off?'. Ireland had a corrupt/bigoted administration but so did the rest of Britain And Europe. And the world. Just that the Irish Free State continued to have that after partition.
This was aim at Kevinmeath because comparing Aussies.Kiwis and Canuck's Freedom to Ireland's was like comparing apples to oranges. And as for the corruption in Europe, you know what the French peasants did about that.
As you say they were no threat to Britain which Irish Nationalism WAS, hence the plantation in the first place. If Irish Nationalism wasn't a threat Irish Unionism and the rest of Britain would have no problem with it. Hence why Britain refused to 'give Ireland her republic' partly because it was a threat to the rest of the Empire but also because it cared about the Irish Unionists who would suffer under them.
Irish Nationalism WAS NOT a threat to Britain, just that they would be in direct competition with Britain, and the landlords and other rich people would be no longer in power. Irish Unionist would not have suffer under Irish Republic. Catholics and Protestant would be getting along. You have heard of the United Irishmen, haven you?
Also it's not a question of one long continuous quest for a republic, had Charles 1st, James 2nd or Bonnie Prince Charlie succeeded they'd have been perfectly happy with a Catholic monarch and the link to the rest of the British Isles.
But this didn't happen now did it. Just decades of corruption and bigotry.
and dividing Catholic and Protestants.
The ACW dwarfs Irelands troubles, between 1916-23 we probably lost only 2000 people or so which is less than one days wastage for Irish soldiers at Gallipoli or The Somme. But its' legacy of bitterness remains. They say when the elderly veterans re-enacted Pickett's charge on the 50th anniversary of Gettysberg their Union counterparts could not wait to rise up and greet them as fellow Americans. Yet Ireland's Troubles continue, a man murdered in Belfast just this week.
The ACW has been over for a long time, and the Republic is getting to the point they can take about theirs. As for Belfast, their problems are due to their corrupt and bigoted government they had since 1920, and there is hope for them to get over what was done to them.
 
Last edited:

SirOrmondeWinter

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
3,556
This was aim at Kevinmeath because comparing Aussies.Kiwis and Canuck's Freedom to Ireland's was like comparing apples to oranges. And as for the corruption in Europe, you know what the French peasants did about that.

Irish Nationalism WAS NOT a threat to Britain, just that they would be in direct competition with Britain, and the landlords and other rich people would be no longer in power. Irish Unionist would not have suffer under Irish Republic. Catholics and Protestant would be getting along. You have heard of the United Irishmen, haven you?

But this didn't happen now did it. Just decades of corruption and bigotry.
and dividing Catholic and Protestants.

The ACW has been over for a long time, and the Republic is getting to the point they can take about theirs. As for Belfast, their problems are due to their corrupt and bigoted government they had since 1920, and there is hope for them to get over what was done to them.
How exactly is Ireland different to Australia, Canada and New Zealand?

Yes and the French peasantry replaced corruption with terror. Ultimately both sides are wrong and Europe stumbled to the correct solution of gradual constitutional reform throughout the C19th.

Irish Nationalism WAS a threat to Britain as the events of both World Wars, the 1798 rising etc ably demonstrated and it certainly was a direct threat to Irish Unionists, denying their very right to exist. Landlords and rich people would still be in power (as events in the South over the last few years have proven) it's just they would be of a different culture/religion/ethnicity. I've heard of the United Irishmen and how they threw away their professed belief in equality and began the mass murder of Irish Protestants, turning their previous Presbyterian supporters against them. Wolfe Tone was simply Napoleon's stooge, Britain didn't need a revolution, it needed peaceful constitutional change as it eventually received through the Reform Act, Catholic Emancipation etc

The ACW certainly has been over for a long time (although you wouldn't know that when travelling through Georgia) but the events I spoke off were within living memory.

Still plenty of corruption and bigotry (more so in the South than the North by a long way as recent trials have proven), Catholics and Protestants were divided from each other by each other, no third party is to blame. The Northern Ireland administration was neither corrupt nor bigoted but under constant attack from Irish Republicans who were murdering their citizens in their thousands. Don't blame Irish Unionists for being human, blame Irish Nationalists for treating them inhumanly
 

annelouise17

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,442
Amerikay
How exactly is Ireland different to Australia, Canada and New Zealand?

Yes and the French peasantry replaced corruption with terror. Ultimately both sides are wrong and Europe stumbled to the correct solution of gradual constitutional reform throughout the C19th.

Irish Nationalism WAS a threat to Britain as the events of both World Wars, the 1798 rising etc ably demonstrated and it certainly was a direct threat to Irish Unionists, denying their very right to exist. Landlords and rich people would still be in power (as events in the South over the last few years have proven) it's just they would be of a different culture/religion/ethnicity. I've heard of the United Irishmen and how they threw away their professed belief in equality and began the mass murder of Irish Protestants, turning their previous Presbyterian supporters against them. Wolfe Tone was simply Napoleon's stooge, Britain didn't need a revolution, it needed peaceful constitutional change as it eventually received through the Reform Act, Catholic Emancipation etc

The ACW certainly has been over for a long time (although you wouldn't know that when travelling through Georgia) but the events I spoke off were within living memory.

Still plenty of corruption and bigotry (more so in the South than the North by a long way as recent trials have proven), Catholics and Protestants were divided from each other by each other, no third party is to blame. The Northern Ireland administration was neither corrupt nor bigoted but under constant attack from Irish Republicans who were murdering their citizens in their thousands. Don't blame Irish Unionists for being human, blame Irish Nationalists for treating them inhumanly
DeNial isn't just a river in Egypt.