I believe those RIC men were shown the same mercy shown to James Connolly in 1916.
Anybody spouting bollocks about the Geneva Coventions whilst discussing vessels of the british empire is on fairly thin ice.
4 Likes
More whataboutery.
If you want to say it’s an act of war, behave that way.
I never said it was an act of war, it was an act to provoke war, it worked.
1 Like
Tim, why don’t you research the fate of the Loughnane brothers from Beagh in south Galway before invoking the Geneva convention. An atrocity not just committed by Auxies but RIC members. Beaten unmercifully for hours, stabbed repeatedly by bayonets, fingers cut off, dragged for 6 miles tied to a truck, burned and finally shot and dumped in a bog. Have a look at the photos in this article, both were unrecognizable as they had no faces left.
2 Likes
Because Tim has his head buried in the sand .
Tim is still holding out for Home Rule.
2 Likes
It was an act to provoke a war? How does that work, you either declare one or you don’t. Provoking a war is the old tale about von Bismarck in 1870.
Fact: all account showed the locals disagreed with the action
Fact: they did not act in accordance with generally accepted behaviour as required by war
Your take here seems to be that it was what many think it was, that Dan Breen went out to kill to set things off. Morally speaking I do not see how this attack is worth celebrating. It was dirty and grubby, the Volunteers HQ even afterwards called it “tantamount to murder”. The Republican movement got on board afterwards because that’s what way the wind was blowing post the failed efforts in Versailles and the reaction to the First Dáil.
Where did I say that the British forces all acted correctly or right?
More whataboutery.
What local accounts?
Ffs. Like that myers cunt on new stalk the other night saying these lads hadn’t a mandate from the state to do that…
In Breen’s own words
…we took the action deliberately, having thought over the matter and talked it over between us. Treacy had stated to me that the only way of starting a war was to kill someone, and we wanted to start a war, so we intended to kill some of the police whom we looked upon as the foremost and most important branch of the enemy forces … The only regret that we had following the ambush was that there were only two policemen in it, instead of the six we had expected…
Fact: if the locals disagreed with the killings so much, why did they elect Dan Breen 4 years later?
2 Likes
The only problem Dan Breen had that day was that there were only two of the bastards there to shoot. They were Crown Forces, instruments of British rule. Legitimate targets. Whether they were finished off on the ground or not is irrelevant I’m afraid, the ambush achieved it’s aims.
4 Likes
Dan Breen 
3 Likes
You invoked the Geneva convention. How is it relevant when British forces and RIC not alone paid no attention to it, but acted like depraved animals? At least the RIC men in Soloheadbeg were killed quickly, rather than being savagely tortured for a day.
What you’re basically saying is those fighting for Irish independence should have abided by the Geneva convention while those on the other side were behaving like psychopaths.
2 Likes
The precedent was set by tying a wounded man to a chair and executing him by firing squad. Geneva Conventions my fucking hole.
3 Likes
He wasn’t on the ground, which seems to be a deal breaker
5 Likes
The people of North King Street know all about the Brits behavior during a war time scenario alright.
Or the two trade unionists murdered in Dublin by the RIC during a baton charge in 1913, or the countless families evicted by landlords assisted by the RIC, real pillars of society were the RIC.
1 Like
That’s not what was said.
I’ve heard different interpretations of what happened, including that it was an act of legitimate war. Well behave that way.
Again, the above is whataboutery.
What was the commemoration Tim?