|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 10:18:03 GMT
its been explained ,and re explained to you on numerous occasions now sandy. You go away having been caught out , think what to write ,then come back spouting the same guff. Henry the second was king of England , and declared ireland as an English colony belonging to the English crown through right of conquest. Even if you dont accept that , we have other English invasions and colonising to look at via the Tudor reconquests under Henry the 8th. you are wriggling sandy , and resorting to telling lies in the process , lies I have highlighted earlier. every thread you involve yourself in ends the same way , repeating the same guff over and over as though you think you can keep telling the same lie time and again people will believe you through sheer boredom. You have tried all over the shop to explain what a colony is and then cannot accept that the English were colonised themselves and it was not the English that colonised Ireland it was the colonial power in England. Once we get to the Tudors etc I am not, have not and will not say Ireland was not a colony but it was also a colony of Scotland certainly in Ulster in the 17th century. You cannot lay it all at the door of the English. England re invaded ireland in the 16th century , and colonised it. Mary Tudor , queen of England and her Irish colony , began what we call the plantations . Of course , English colonists had been settling ireland as far back as the saxon era , when large amounts fled England to settle munster. there you go again. Making things up no one has said. Re read the thread , and try and understand what is being written to you , not what you think is being written. I said ireland was an English colony , and that is demonstrably correct , despite all your poor attempts at twisting and turning. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 28, 2024 11:41:59 GMT
You have tried all over the shop to explain what a colony is and then cannot accept that the English were colonised themselves and it was not the English that colonised Ireland it was the colonial power in England. Once we get to the Tudors etc I am not, have not and will not say Ireland was not a colony but it was also a colony of Scotland certainly in Ulster in the 17th century. You cannot lay it all at the door of the English. England re invaded ireland in the 16th century , and colonised it. Mary Tudor , queen of England and her Irish colony , began what we call the plantations . Of course , English colonists had been settling ireland as far back as the saxon era , when large amounts fled England to settle munster. there you go again. Making things up no one has said. Re read the thread , and try and understand what is being written to you , not what you think is being written. I said ireland was an English colony , and that is demonstrably correct , despite all your poor attempts at twisting and turning. I have tried to use your definitions all the way along. First off you said that Ireland was under English control for over 700 years which takes us back to the Norman Invasion. I have stated that that invasion was not an English invasion as it was an invasion by the then colonial power in England at that time which was Norman/Angevin and in conjunction with the Welsh. So now you have come to Tudor times and the reconquest of Ireland by Henry VIII who was actually from a Welsh Royal House which I have no real truck with as a fact however after 1603 the colonists were largely Scottish in origin certainly in Ulster so, in your definition, as it was a Scottish Crown doing the settling, that does not make Ireland an English colony it makes it clearly a British Colony. You cannot call Scotland a colony because there was no English settlement designed to colonise the region it was always under its own royal control. As an aside it is strange that England receives so much opprobrium from the actions of its Kings and Queens yet since Norman times there has never been an English Royal Family at the helm. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2024 12:20:51 GMT
Poor Thomas, he runs around the forum desperate to stoke up racism toward the English, whilst relying on a pack of lies and the forum's Marxists, and only to end up exposed as an uneducated and clueless snat.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 14:18:01 GMT
England re invaded ireland in the 16th century , and colonised it. Mary Tudor , queen of England and her Irish colony , began what we call the plantations . Of course , English colonists had been settling ireland as far back as the saxon era , when large amounts fled England to settle munster. there you go again. Making things up no one has said. Re read the thread , and try and understand what is being written to you , not what you think is being written. I said ireland was an English colony , and that is demonstrably correct , despite all your poor attempts at twisting and turning. I have tried to use your definitions all the way along. First off you said that Ireland was under English control for over 700 years which takes us back to the Norman Invasion. I did say that , and I stand by that. English king invaded tick. Majority of the army English ...tick. Irish forced to swear allegiance to the English crown.....tick. majority of the people who started colonising ireland from this time English ....tick. your answer? Blah blah blah Henry second and some of his knights spoke French.. dear god you are now blaming the welsh for the Tudor conquests of England? The royal house of every country in Europe are intertwined. The English as I said to you before hadn't had a native English family as monarchs since that wee guy who got his eye took out at Hastings. So are we then going to dismiss the past 1000 years of English history as the fault of foreigners? You take the meaning of the term desperate muck raker to new lows sandy. ...and the Scottish colonists , spoke largely the same Gaelic language as the Irish , mingled with them , and got on with them so well the English , British crown later had to pass laws banning those of Scottish Presbyterian descent from marrying Irish catholics , holding office in the army navy customs etc , William of orange forced a quarter of a million to flee Northern Ireland and head to America , and those same dissenting Presbyterians of Scottish descent rose in arms against the anglican landowning classes .Have you never heard of the protestant dissenters , or what anglican archbishop of armagh Hugh Boulter wrote to the then British prime minister , that when (Scottish descended) protestant , an (Irish ) papist unite , you can kiss goodbye to Englands rule in ireland forever? ireland was an English colony from arguably 1169 to 1603 , when it then can properly be argued it became a British colony. The basis of England/britians claim to rule ireland is of course the the treaty of Windsor in October 1175 , which to this day is what your King Charles claims his right to be king of the northern Irish under. so what are you talking about? so what is scotland then ? Its either a colony of England , hence why we are told we can't leave and must ask for westmsinter permission , or we are an equal partner in the union as you suggest in which case we have the right to dissolve the treaty of union .which is it? why do you think that is then sandy? you dont have to go back to the medieval period and Englands treatment of it colony to see the vast array of atrocities carried out on the Irish down through the centuries , at the diktat of the English elite in London. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 28, 2024 15:06:49 GMT
I have tried to use your definitions all the way along. First off you said that Ireland was under English control for over 700 years which takes us back to the Norman Invasion. I did say that , and I stand by that. English king invaded tick. Majority of the army English ...tick. Irish forced to swear allegiance to the English crown.....tick. majority of the people who started colonising ireland from this time English ....tick. your answer? Blah blah blah Henry second and some of his knights spoke French.. dear god you are now blaming the welsh for the Tudor conquests of England? The royal house of every country in Europe are intertwined. The English as I said to you before hadn't had a native English family as monarchs since that wee guy who got his eye took out at Hastings. So are we then going to dismiss the past 1000 years of English history as the fault of foreigners? You take the meaning of the term desperate muck raker to new lows sandy. ...and the Scottish colonists , spoke largely the same Gaelic language as the Irish , mingled with them , and got on with them so well the English , British crown later had to pass laws banning those of Scottish Presbyterian descent from marrying Irish catholics , holding office in the army navy customs etc , William of orange forced a quarter of a million to flee Northern Ireland and head to America , and those same dissenting Presbyterians of Scottish descent rose in arms against the anglican landowning classes .Have you never heard of the protestant dissenters , or what anglican archbishop of armagh Hugh Boulter wrote to the then British prime minister , that when (Scottish descended) protestant , an (Irish ) papist unite , you can kiss goodbye to Englands rule in ireland forever? ireland was an English colony from arguably 1169 to 1603 , when it then can properly be argued it became a British colony. The basis of England/britians claim to rule ireland is of course the the treaty of Windsor in October 1175 , which to this day is what your King Charles claims his right to be king of the northern Irish under. so what are you talking about? so what is scotland then ? Its either a colony of England , hence why we are told we can't leave and must ask for westmsinter permission , or we are an equal partner in the union as you suggest in which case we have the right to dissolve the treaty of union .which is it? why do you think that is then sandy? you dont have to go back to the medieval period and Englands treatment of it colony to see the vast array of atrocities carried out on the Irish down through the centuries , at the diktat of the English elite in London. Not quite. The colonial power in England invaded, tick. Majority of army not English, Tick. Norman/Angevin/Welsh. Anglo-Saxon names decidedly lacking from the invasion force. Strongbow was Welsh, the Archers were Welsh, the force in Ireland was Irish. Fitzstepehen was Welsh, De Prendergast was Welsh. I quote from www.ireland-information.com/articles/dermotmacmurrough-strongbow.htm"It is speculated that Henry II feared that Ireland might be used as a base by the Saxons to launch an offensive back into England in the wake of their defeat at Hastings in 1066. The subsequent domination of South Wales by the Normans was a result of the need to keep supply lines into Eastern Ireland open. Dermot MacMurrough has for centuries been blamed as the man who caused, or at least facilitated the invasion and subsequent subjugation of Ireland by outsiders. Recent revision of this history however, have been less critical of his actions. It is likely that the island would have eventually been dominated by its larger neighbour even without Dermot MacMurroughs prompting. The unwillingness of the Gaelic Chiefs to form a Kingship with defined rights of succession certainly made invasion and domination easier. It was also not uncommon of the times for Gaelic Chiefs to seek help from foreigners in combatting their local enemies. Despite this more generous interpretation of his actions, it will always be Dermot MacMurroughs lust for power, bringing the English into Ireland, for which he will be most remembered." The Treaty of Windsor was where Irish chiefs accepted Henry II overlordship. Tick. They accepted colonial power from a colonial power. The fact that that colonial power has progressed uninterrupted through the years does not remove its origins. You have the right to dissolve the Treaty but that is subject to a plebiscite which has been held. Would you prefer it was unilateral? A Scottish Parliament dissolved itself many years ago and the new devolution terms retain the right to hold a plebiscite with Westminster within which Scots have equal representation. That right has been granted within the last decade and the plebiscite retained the status quo so no colonial status. The Scottish Colonists got on so well that the Irish Catholics massacred many of them in 1641. You want me to say it is all England but it was a British Crown that ruled Ireland and atrocities were not limited to the British. It was not the British that piked fellow Irishmen into the river below the Wexford Bridge. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 15:31:50 GMT
I did say that , and I stand by that. English king invaded tick. Majority of the army English ...tick. Irish forced to swear allegiance to the English crown.....tick. majority of the people who started colonising ireland from this time English ....tick. your answer? Blah blah blah Henry second and some of his knights spoke French.. dear god you are now blaming the welsh for the Tudor conquests of England? The royal house of every country in Europe are intertwined. The English as I said to you before hadn't had a native English family as monarchs since that wee guy who got his eye took out at Hastings. So are we then going to dismiss the past 1000 years of English history as the fault of foreigners? You take the meaning of the term desperate muck raker to new lows sandy. ...and the Scottish colonists , spoke largely the same Gaelic language as the Irish , mingled with them , and got on with them so well the English , British crown later had to pass laws banning those of Scottish Presbyterian descent from marrying Irish catholics , holding office in the army navy customs etc , William of orange forced a quarter of a million to flee Northern Ireland and head to America , and those same dissenting Presbyterians of Scottish descent rose in arms against the anglican landowning classes .Have you never heard of the protestant dissenters , or what anglican archbishop of armagh Hugh Boulter wrote to the then British prime minister , that when (Scottish descended) protestant , an (Irish ) papist unite , you can kiss goodbye to Englands rule in ireland forever? ireland was an English colony from arguably 1169 to 1603 , when it then can properly be argued it became a British colony. The basis of England/britians claim to rule ireland is of course the the treaty of Windsor in October 1175 , which to this day is what your King Charles claims his right to be king of the northern Irish under. so what are you talking about? so what is scotland then ? Its either a colony of England , hence why we are told we can't leave and must ask for westmsinter permission , or we are an equal partner in the union as you suggest in which case we have the right to dissolve the treaty of union .which is it? why do you think that is then sandy? you dont have to go back to the medieval period and Englands treatment of it colony to see the vast array of atrocities carried out on the Irish down through the centuries , at the diktat of the English elite in London. Not quite. The colonial power in England invaded, tick. Majority of army not English, Tick. Norman/Angevin/Welsh. Anglo-Saxon names decidedly lacking from the invasion force. Strongbow was Welsh, the Archers were Welsh, the force in Ireland was Irish. Fitzstepehen was Welsh, De Prendergast was Welsh. You aren't being consistent in your lame arguments. You tell me the invasion of ireland in the 12 th century was French (or Norman blah blah blah) because the leaders of the English army were angevins who happened to own land in England. Now you tell me the Norman French who owned lands in Wales weren't French , but welsh?  The initial invasion was by strongbow , to Leinster , but that was followed up by the larger English conquest under Henry. ahh so the English invasion of ireland and subsequent colonising is all the fault of ....the .then English?  Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat? ah , so the English invasion conquest and colonising was simply a natural event that was bound to happen anyway?  rubbish. Whoever wrote this certainly didnt understand how Celtic law , succession and rule worked. They did. They accepted it with knives held to their throats , another shotgun marriage. Conquests and empires all down throw the ages are full of shotgun marriages to justify the actions of the oppressor. they fought back over the centuries , and by the 16th century had reduced English overlordship to the Dublin pale. So what are you talking about? ten years ago. You can't keep saying you can hold a referendum , but not just now forever. No past result can bind future parliament for eternity. The British even accept by law in Northern Ireland they can hold a new plebiscite on indy every seven years . rubbish. We had one seventh the population of the new British state , but we didnt get one seventh the representation. English mps have blocked scot indy refs all the way back to 1714 , when the first one was proposed by lord sea field. Scotland voted to stay in the uk that ws in the eu , and the uk no longer is in the eu , so the status qoe wasn't maintained . what happened? I dont care what you say. Im firm in my mind to what I believe , and what I have read about who is to blame. Most empire get the colonists , and supporters , to police the colony. Thus it ever was........ |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 15:45:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 15:49:56 GMT
Ireland was England’s first colony. We lived as part of the English, and then British, Empire for over 700 years
Jane Ohlmeyer is Erasmus Smith’s Professor of Modern History (1762) at Trinity College Dublin and Chair of the Irish Research Council. Starting on January 22nd, 2021 she will deliver the James Ford Lectures at the University of Oxford on Ireland, Empire, and the Early Modern World
www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-has-yet-to-come-to-terms-with-its-imperial-past-1.4444146
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 28, 2024 17:00:57 GMT
Not quite. The colonial power in England invaded, tick. Majority of army not English, Tick. Norman/Angevin/Welsh. Anglo-Saxon names decidedly lacking from the invasion force. Strongbow was Welsh, the Archers were Welsh, the force in Ireland was Irish. Fitzstepehen was Welsh, De Prendergast was Welsh. You aren't being consistent in your lame arguments. You tell me the invasion of ireland in the 12 th century was French (or Norman blah blah blah) because the leaders of the English army were angevins who happened to own land in England. Now you tell me the Norman French who owned lands in Wales weren't French , but welsh? The initial invasion was by strongbow , to Leinster , but that was followed up by the larger English conquest under Henry. ahh so the English invasion of ireland and subsequent colonising is all the fault of ....the .then English? Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat? ah , so the English invasion conquest and colonising was simply a natural event that was bound to happen anyway? rubbish. Whoever wrote this certainly didnt understand how Celtic law , succession and rule worked. They did. They accepted it with knives held to their throats , another shotgun marriage. Conquests and empires all down throw the ages are full of shotgun marriages to justify the actions of the oppressor. they fought back over the centuries , and by the 16th century had reduced English overlordship to the Dublin pale. So what are you talking about? ten years ago. You can't keep saying you can hold a referendum , but not just now forever. No past result can bind future parliament for eternity. The British even accept by law in Northern Ireland they can hold a new plebiscite on indy every seven years . rubbish. We had one seventh the population of the new British state , but we didnt get one seventh the representation. English mps have blocked scot indy refs all the way back to 1714 , when the first one was proposed by lord sea field. Scotland voted to stay in the uk that ws in the eu , and the uk no longer is in the eu , so the status qoe wasn't maintained . what happened? I dont care what you say. Im firm in my mind to what I believe , and what I have read about who is to blame. Most empire get the colonists , and supporters , to police the colony. Thus it ever was........ My 'lame' arguments are based on the clear history quoted in many places. The invasion force in 1170 is called many things but it is not English (Anglo-Saxon). If the Welsh overlords are also Norman/Angevin then that is what they are Norman/Angevin but certainly not English I took pains to quote Irish sources where I could so your not understanding comment should be addressed to those sources one being Ireland information which I assume is not an English information site. Most treaties are signed by winners and losers and under duress if they do not wish to sign then they do not but they felt it was in their best interests to sign, so they did. Treaties are the basis of legality. The Scottish Colonists were massacred, what happened, the Irish objected to the way the Scottish colony was being imposed on them and their lands by a British King. I know you do not care what I say but that is the nature of debate. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 17:12:16 GMT
You aren't being consistent in your lame arguments. You tell me the invasion of ireland in the 12 th century was French (or Norman blah blah blah) because the leaders of the English army were angevins who happened to own land in England. Now you tell me the Norman French who owned lands in Wales weren't French , but welsh? The initial invasion was by strongbow , to Leinster , but that was followed up by the larger English conquest under Henry. ahh so the English invasion of ireland and subsequent colonising is all the fault of ....the .then English? Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat? ah , so the English invasion conquest and colonising was simply a natural event that was bound to happen anyway? rubbish. Whoever wrote this certainly didnt understand how Celtic law , succession and rule worked. They did. They accepted it with knives held to their throats , another shotgun marriage. Conquests and empires all down throw the ages are full of shotgun marriages to justify the actions of the oppressor. they fought back over the centuries , and by the 16th century had reduced English overlordship to the Dublin pale. So what are you talking about? ten years ago. You can't keep saying you can hold a referendum , but not just now forever. No past result can bind future parliament for eternity. The British even accept by law in Northern Ireland they can hold a new plebiscite on indy every seven years . rubbish. We had one seventh the population of the new British state , but we didnt get one seventh the representation. English mps have blocked scot indy refs all the way back to 1714 , when the first one was proposed by lord sea field. Scotland voted to stay in the uk that ws in the eu , and the uk no longer is in the eu , so the status qoe wasn't maintained . what happened? I dont care what you say. Im firm in my mind to what I believe , and what I have read about who is to blame. Most empire get the colonists , and supporters , to police the colony. Thus it ever was........ My 'lame' arguments are based on the clear history quoted in many places. . ive replied to those lame arguments , given you numerous sources backing up my Ireland was an English , then British colony , and still you waffle on trying to play last wordism. Your historical sources are sadly lacking , and almost read like a ladybird book of history , and dont even understand the basics of Irish Gaelic culture pre feudalism , and how lack of centralisation doesn't mean they were inferior or begging to be colonised. with the usual semantic arguments , the thread reads like another sandy borefest. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 17:14:01 GMT
You aren't being consistent in your lame arguments. You tell me the invasion of ireland in the 12 th century was French (or Norman blah blah blah) because the leaders of the English army were angevins who happened to own land in England. Now you tell me the Norman French who owned lands in Wales weren't French , but welsh? The initial invasion was by strongbow , to Leinster , but that was followed up by the larger English conquest under Henry. ahh so the English invasion of ireland and subsequent colonising is all the fault of ....the .then English? Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat? ah , so the English invasion conquest and colonising was simply a natural event that was bound to happen anyway? rubbish. Whoever wrote this certainly didnt understand how Celtic law , succession and rule worked. They did. They accepted it with knives held to their throats , another shotgun marriage. Conquests and empires all down throw the ages are full of shotgun marriages to justify the actions of the oppressor. they fought back over the centuries , and by the 16th century had reduced English overlordship to the Dublin pale. So what are you talking about? ten years ago. You can't keep saying you can hold a referendum , but not just now forever. No past result can bind future parliament for eternity. The British even accept by law in Northern Ireland they can hold a new plebiscite on indy every seven years . rubbish. We had one seventh the population of the new British state , but we didnt get one seventh the representation. English mps have blocked scot indy refs all the way back to 1714 , when the first one was proposed by lord sea field. Scotland voted to stay in the uk that ws in the eu , and the uk no longer is in the eu , so the status qoe wasn't maintained . what happened? I dont care what you say. Im firm in my mind to what I believe , and what I have read about who is to blame. Most empire get the colonists , and supporters , to police the colony. Thus it ever was........ Most treaties are signed by winners and losers and under duress if they do not wish to sign then they do not but they felt it was in their best interests to sign, so they did. Treaties are the basis of legality. . sure and according to the English Conservative Party , there isn't a treaty in existence that one or both signatories to cannot withdraw from . the Irish did , and so will we... |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 17:16:46 GMT
You aren't being consistent in your lame arguments. You tell me the invasion of ireland in the 12 th century was French (or Norman blah blah blah) because the leaders of the English army were angevins who happened to own land in England. Now you tell me the Norman French who owned lands in Wales weren't French , but welsh? The initial invasion was by strongbow , to Leinster , but that was followed up by the larger English conquest under Henry. ahh so the English invasion of ireland and subsequent colonising is all the fault of ....the .then English? Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat? ah , so the English invasion conquest and colonising was simply a natural event that was bound to happen anyway? rubbish. Whoever wrote this certainly didnt understand how Celtic law , succession and rule worked. They did. They accepted it with knives held to their throats , another shotgun marriage. Conquests and empires all down throw the ages are full of shotgun marriages to justify the actions of the oppressor. they fought back over the centuries , and by the 16th century had reduced English overlordship to the Dublin pale. So what are you talking about? ten years ago. You can't keep saying you can hold a referendum , but not just now forever. No past result can bind future parliament for eternity. The British even accept by law in Northern Ireland they can hold a new plebiscite on indy every seven years . rubbish. We had one seventh the population of the new British state , but we didnt get one seventh the representation. English mps have blocked scot indy refs all the way back to 1714 , when the first one was proposed by lord sea field. Scotland voted to stay in the uk that ws in the eu , and the uk no longer is in the eu , so the status qoe wasn't maintained . what happened? I dont care what you say. Im firm in my mind to what I believe , and what I have read about who is to blame. Most empire get the colonists , and supporters , to police the colony. Thus it ever was........ The Scottish Colonists were massacred, what happened, the Irish objected to the way the Scottish colony was being imposed on them and their lands by a British King. I know you do not care what I say but that is the nature of debate. rubbish. The vast majority of colonists who were massacred were English , not Scottish , and the deaths of Scots being sent to plant Ireland doesn't in any way detract from my earlier point that the Scottish and Irish got on so well together that the British had to stop them marrying and intermingling. That's why you had former IRA commanders with southern Scottish surnames like ivor Bell , Of planter descent , and of course former Sinn Fein leader gerry Adams , again of Scots descent. Do keep up sandy. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 28, 2024 21:09:57 GMT
My 'lame' arguments are based on the clear history quoted in many places. . ive replied to those lame arguments , given you numerous sources backing up my Ireland was an English , then British colony , and still you waffle on trying to play last wordism. Your historical sources are sadly lacking , and almost read like a ladybird book of history , and dont even understand the basics of Irish Gaelic culture pre feudalism , and how lack of centralisation doesn't mean they were inferior or begging to be colonised. with the usual semantic arguments , the thread reads like another sandy borefest. Semantics is what is used to hate and blame the English for the ills of the world. We each supply sources which again are opinions and they were not my words they were Irish words. English are the Anglo-Saxons, why would you believe they are anything else, the state and crown may have been England but at the time the English were vassals to a colonial state and were clearly colonised by said state yet here we are over 800 years later placing it all on 'the English'. No one said the Irish were inferior but they were beaten and did make peace which is what history is about. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 28, 2024 21:16:36 GMT
ive replied to those lame arguments , given you numerous sources backing up my Ireland was an English , then British colony , and still you waffle on trying to play last wordism. Your historical sources are sadly lacking , and almost read like a ladybird book of history , and dont even understand the basics of Irish Gaelic culture pre feudalism , and how lack of centralisation doesn't mean they were inferior or begging to be colonised. with the usual semantic arguments , the thread reads like another sandy borefest. Semantics is what is used to hate and blame the English for the ills of the world. We each supply sources which again are opinions and they were not my words they were Irish words. English are the Anglo-Saxons, why would you believe they are anything else, the state and crown may have been England but at the time the English were vassals to a colonial state and were clearly colonised by said state yet here we are over 800 years later placing it all on 'the English'. No one said the Irish were inferior but they were beaten and did make peace which is what history is about. ah sandy is back playing last wordism. I claimed Ireland was an English colony , and after post after post of utter piffle , semantic arguments , and blaming everyone bar England for Englands first colony , you still can't prove me wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jan 28, 2024 21:31:48 GMT
The Scottish Colonists were massacred, what happened, the Irish objected to the way the Scottish colony was being imposed on them and their lands by a British King. I know you do not care what I say but that is the nature of debate. rubbish. The vast majority of colonists who were massacred were English , not Scottish , and the deaths of Scots being sent to plant Ireland doesn't in any way detract from my earlier point that the Scottish and Irish got on so well together that the British had to stop them marrying and intermingling. That's why you had former IRA commanders with southern Scottish surnames like ivor Bell , Of planter descent , and of course former Sinn Fein leader gerry Adams , again of Scots descent. Do keep up sandy. Do you have a link to the numbers. Ulster Scots history places the numbers as 60% scots and some say it was about 75%, whatever is true the Scots settlers were the majority. The history of Ireland and allegiances is a complicated business and is deeply rooted in religion and once again the heroes on the Wexford Bridge did not pike British, Scots or English or Welsh into the river but fellow Irish who happened to be Protestant. You are over simplifying a very complicated business and of course back to the it is all the fault of the English |
|
Christ is there anyone who hasn't been blamed by you except the perpetrators? How many saxons were in ireland at this stage and how did they pose a threat?