Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Why Irish soldiers who fought Hitler hide their medals

I've just read this article about Irish soldiers, who fought for us in WWII, and their treatment by their own government when they returned after the war.

here

It is sad that the Eire government treated their citizens in this way; or is it? Let's look at the facts instead of the heart-rending slant the BBC is putting on this. They were already in the Eire army and deserted to go and fight for a side in the war that was not supported by their government, the same army [British], a few years earlier had wrecked havoc in that newly emerging nation. So, is it any wonder that the Eire government was not too happy with their desertion? What would we, the British, have done to a deserter at that time? A long time in a military prison would be the correct answer. These soldiers did not receive that barbaric treatment instead, they were 'sent to Coventry' by their own government in such a way that their government [who was a poor nation at that time] refused to allow them to take government backed jobs [which was meant for those who were loyal to their country] or government money. Personally, I think the Eire government did the right thing.
So, why didn't the British Government take care of them, seeing as they fought for us? The British army never has taken care of its own; up until recently, and even then it is atrocious the way we treat our heroes. Remember the way in which we have treated the Gurkhas, and still do? The BBC might have the decency to have a go at their own government instead of trying to blacken the name of their neighbour.
As an aside to this story there is the question of Scottish soldiers still fighting for the rUK. I think that this has already been answered by the SNP who have said that they will allow Scottish citizens [we will be citizens post-independence as opposed to being 'subjects'] to continue serving the rUK for as long as it takes. The question is: "Who is going to pay for the long term treatment of wounded Scottish soldiers when they are no longer fit to serve?" Can we expect the rUK to indefinitely pay for their treatment or will that burden fall upon the Scottish taxpayers? Keep in mind, when they are serving for the rUK then their taxes will be going to Westminster and not Holyrood. I begin to see the Eire point of view even more now.

6 comments:

  1. Gedguy

    'the SNP who have said that they will allow Scottish citizens'
    allow? allow? whats it to do with the snp what Scottish citizens decide to or not to do???

    The Scottish Parliament may have a view we do not not yet what that may be.

    Truth is the ultra nationalists will conduct a campaign of hate and vilification towards any Scot who would be traitorous enough to fight for the 'UNION' forces.
    which will probaly be very many young Scots. As the English forces will (although smaller than now)be a larger actual fighting force.
    As opposed to a snp creation of some handful of underequipped low morale irregulars.
    Carrying a large white flag and spending all there time guarding Alex Salmonds Tuck shop.


    . 'I begin to see the Eire point of view even more now.''

    The problem with that is there was/ is another point of view from the other side which led to the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

    Err! when some one in England (by far Scotlands biggest market) buy and trades with the Scottish peoples..It will helps to pay for most of the Scottish state in taxes collected by the Scottish Government.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Niko,

    "allow? allow?"

    And what do we get from Westminster? "Do as you are told and don't answer back"; that's what we get from Westminster. At least, in an independent Scotland we would vote on the issue.

    "will conduct a campaign of hate and vilification"

    You mean like the campaign that the supporters of independence are being subjected to by the Westminster media machine? I can assure you that if that were the case then I would stand up for the right for Scots to fight in anyone's army. My niece went off to the USA and signed up to serve in their army. I have no problem with that.

    "Carrying a large white flag"

    Now now Niko that's not nice insulting the saltire just because we don't want to be part of an illegal warmongering anglo-saxon regime.

    "the Troubles in Northern Ireland"

    Twice we had to risk our soldiers' lives to protect the catholics from being murdered.

    "trades with the Scottish peoples"

    Yes, England will probably be our biggest customer as well but that doesn't mean that we have to go to war for them when they whistle; like the UK does to the Americans when they whistle. I believe Denmark, along with many other countries including Eire, trade with the UK [and thus with the rUK] but I don't see the Danes running around daft trying to help fight British wars.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gedguy

    Westminster is a sovereign(sort of under EU rules) Parliament The Scottish Parliament would be 'IF' God forbid the biggest mistake ever was to befall Scotland.
    A sovereign (under EU rules) Parliament which would act for the Scottish peoples and not the snp.
    Your raising a single political party over and above the Scottish Parliament for all the Scottish peoples.........
    Is frightening

    ReplyDelete
  4. The sooner the "BBC" is laid out to rest the better. Perhaps a more fitting acronym might be "Biased Bleathers Charter" tamlabam

    ReplyDelete
  5. Niko,

    I know I'm winning the argument when you revert to puerile statements backed up by ridiculous pictures; keep it up.

    The problem that you have, and this applies to all unionists, is that you don't have one good argument why Scotland should stay in the union so you revert to trying to twist the image of a pro-Scottish political party into something that no one recognises as the party that you are trying to portray. It's a bit like the Labour party who pretend that they are for the working man but, in reality, are just using the 'working class' votes for their own power and then those self same voters are forgotten in the grand scheme of their twisted idea of democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tamlabam,

    In more ways than one I agree with you but I would keep the kernel of the BBC in Scotland but what I would most certainly do is rid the Scottish version of the BBC in Scotland, of all their inbuilt, inbred Unionist propaganda.
    I feel sorry for people like Brian Wilson of the BBC in Scotland who is their political editor. He would have to go even though he is an 'arab' and a fellow 'kettleboiler'.

    ReplyDelete