Taft2016
Verified User
No.
Are you saying De Valera was deploying a cheap diplomatic trick to jump onto the appealing and profitable Third Reich bandwagon of May 1945?
Ex-IRA commander Martin McGuinness WILL be a guest of the Queen at Windsor Castle
- Thread starter cancel2 2022
- Start date
No.
Are you saying De Valera was deploying a cheap diplomatic trick to jump onto the appealing and profitable Third Reich bandwagon of May 1945?
I'm shocked! A Michael Collins advocate is anti-De Valera?
Well, we all know who set Michael Collins up, and then had him murdered. What a scumbag the man Dev was! I remember how my bags were searched at customs - and it was books that bothered 'em, not condoms! They hated ideas back then!
cancel2 2022
Canceled
No.
Are you saying De Valera was deploying a cheap diplomatic trick to jump onto the appealing and profitable Third Reich bandwagon of May 1945?
We are saying that de Valera was a vile, cynical, corrupt and inept bastard who kept Ireland poor and controlled by lunatic priests and bishops because he didn't have a clue how to run a successful country. Ireland's best export was its young and talented who left in droves for England and America in the 50s onwards. Our Welsh friend, with whom I disagree with on most things, has it exactly right about Ireland. Holy shit one time they could lock you up for the possession of condoms or birth control pills. It wasn't that long ago that they left an Indian woman to die rather than give her an abortion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741
Last edited:
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Should condoms have bothered them, and would you have missed having any?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
What is it with you anyway? Do you think we exaggerate and distort the true situation back then? Why is that people who have never been to Ireland think they know more about it than those who lived through it all?
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Honestly, I just wanted to insert the jab about him not needing condoms. I guess the first part was for you, after all.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
For someone that considers himself to be a history scholar, you do seem to be swayed by emotional attachments rather than cold hard facts.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
HILARIOUSLY ironic.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
I am sorry Billy, but anybody that thinks de Valera was a great man is seriously deluded in my book.
Taft2016
Verified User
Why do you have to argue against strawmen that nobody uttered? Why do you have to resort to ad hominems like a liberal? Why do you have to drag the discussion down irrelevant tangents?
The discussion is about republicanism vs. loyalism.
If someone was on this forum insisting Mao Zedong was wonderful because this particular poster grew up in China during the Cultural Revolution, and that therefore he is an authority on the matter and the rest of us should just shut-the-fuck-up and listen to him, in spite all we know to the contrary....would that be a convincing argument?
And suppose the crux of his argument was that "we had never been to China" and all we amounted to was "plastic Chinamen drinking tea and watching kung fu movies." And then deflecting legitimate arguments with irrelevant anecdotes about Chiang Kai-Shek?
Sounds like a pretty stupid argument, doesn't it?
Does it happen to sound familiar at all?
