Irish troops out of Shannon!

by Curious Fri Dec 17, 2004 01:59

I agree with everything said about the use of Shannon but what exactly are is appeal for? The title of the piece was "Appeal". If you put up an appeal there should be some clarity and concrete suggestions as to what you envisage in terms of concrete action. Strike? Mutiny? I'd be interested to see what the author of this piece thinks would be actually a realistic possibility.

by hmmm Fri Dec 17, 2004 02:49

i know its a leap of the imagination that is very different from the current situation so i dont mean to draw parallels, but, all those germans who said they were just following orders and got convicted of war crimes. There was no immediately available official channels or readily available legal precedents for them to take a stand. yet they were convicted. To take a stand is to make a statement, something soldiers arent trained to do. Something i dont believe our defence forces are able to do for whatever reason. People just do what they are told, our soldiers just follow orders, and the only time they will think about the consequences of their actions is if they are ever hauled up in front of a court, until then it is a moot point for them. orders is orders.

by hmm Fri Dec 17, 2004 02:56

the point of that is what we should possibly realistically expect from our soldiers and what to them is realistically possible. What are their options and how do those options change if they show enough bravery to speak out against what they are doing. should their be more non prejudical routes open to them? However like police i believe they have it in their head that all soldiers are mates and all the rest of us are the other. if only i had managed to make a coherent point first off, i do apologise, if its too late to be working its far to late to be thinking and working ;)

by isadore Fri Dec 17, 2004 04:13

the article is towards truth. what is missing is the seriousness of bushite terror. george w. bush is a war criminal as defined by the anti-fascist fighters. the nuremburg trials forbids soldiers to follow unjust orders of their superior officers. the united nations charter forbids members to launch aggressive wars between nations unless a nation is a threat-- bushs big lie was that iraq was a threat hence he invaded. it is now found that the invasion was illegal and bush lied to the worlds people. in fact the united nations was brought into being by the anti-fascist fighters seeking ways of eliminating wars and causing negotiation and democracy to settle disputes internationally. further the world court at the hague found the apartheid wall of israel illegal land grabbing and ordered all member states to dismantle it. the apartheid wall is considered an israeli war crime by the world court however it is fully backed by the bush administration. there is also a international war crimes tribunal that has found bush guilty of war crimes and that tribunal brought forth a vote in new york (aug. 25/04) of five hundred to zero that he is guilty. the five hundred members were from numerous countries and had video coverage of the horrific crimes committed and interviews with those suffering from the aggression. further he has declared pre-emptive war and unilateralism and impunity to be his new world order. that is identical with nazis germany. what it means is that if a nation opposes the american empire he can destroy and invade and no other nation can punish their troopers no matter what they do. he is going toward fascist globalization and all peoples ought to unite and oppose the u.s. imperialist troops. his grandfather, prescott bush was along with avril harriman the leading executives of the thysson company in america which headed the selling to nazis germany 50% of its pig iron and 45% of its explosives. thysson was the finance capitalist which most favoured the adolf hitler project in the early thirties in germany. it was not till oct. 1940 that bush had his company shut down by the trading with the enemy act, nearly one year after the u.s. was warring against nazis germany. the list of strategic war materials is long and decisive and can be found in the trading with the enemy act in washington d.c. in other words the anti-fascist soldiers were being killed by the fascists while bush was selling the fascists the materials to do so. nothing seems to change as the present bush is well known to have been part of america leading the arms race and selling to all sides as america has done for the last twenty-five years. they appear strong and though they are proven liers and killers the unaware propagandized peoples will some day realize just how big a war criminal he is and bring down his state terrorism for the good and well being of all. the peace process is oppposite to bush and involves closing the war machine manufactury forever on earth and against peoples and although there will be a lazer weapon to stop lifeless meteroites from hitting the living planet all present weapons aganst peoples ought to be dismantled. that will initiate the era of perpetual peace and harmony on earth with woman elected equally.

by Michael Mon Dec 20, 2004 16:07

Myself and others have brought up this point here before -- Irish soldiers should refuse to guard Shannon Airport for the Americans against Irish peace activists.

Someone commented above about the "just following orders" mentality in the military, and that's fair enough. However there are probably more soldiers than peace activists in the west facing fines, prison time and hardship for war resistance. Hundreds of British and US soldiers are refusing to go to Iraq, and folks from other "coalition" countries are resisting too.

Would the Irish soldiers at Shannon monitor a checkpoint in the West Bank so the Israeli colonists could pass through without a bother?

by J Tue Dec 21, 2004 22:08

The answer to your final question is yes they would, especially if they could cover their asses by wearing UN helmets.

Did they run checkpoints near South Armagh to facilitate the british army and help them capture members of the northern resitance? They facilitated extradition. They helped the State scab on bin and bus industrial disputes.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Soldiers are soldiers and people like Cmdt Ed Horgan are the rare exceptions not the norm (or even slightly close to it!). Actually I doubt if he would have refused to serve at Shannon during his time in the army. Soldiers follow orders. I'll bet he served on the border as a southern back-up for the Brits.

by Barry Wed Dec 22, 2004 02:45

Anyone who watched the excellent film documentary about the coup against Hugo Chavez will have been inspired by the small (tiny in fact) and extremely brave band of soldiers who remained loyal to their peoples constitution.

Their extremely heroic defence of their national sovereignty, against absolutely overwhelming odds, was absolutely crucial in persuading the rest of their comrades to act in defence of the peoples rights and wishes, and ultimately helped topple the US inspired usurpation of their constitution.

What inspired them to act so bravely was simple -people power. If enough Irish people were protesting at the flagrant insult to this countries sovereignty maybe things would be very different. Would free state troops attack a crowd which included their own neighbours and family members ?

The difference between here and Venezuela is mainly that the Venezuelan people demanded their constitution and sovereignty were respected, and told the US to f*** off out of it. People here just dont give a shit. Many now seem more interested in attacking Mary Kelly for talking to republicans for example and use that as an excuse to complain about protesting.

The political activities of the free-state army, as well as the gardai have often been absolutely treacherous and disgraceful. The law is being broken daily in Shannon and the free state govt and its security services are complicit in war crimes by acting as collaborators. Thats precisely what theyve done since the foundation of the state so no-one should be surprised.

However if enough Irish people got off their backsides and demanded their rights as citizens as well as their nation s sovereignty, independence and nationhood were respected by their own state then maybe the situation in Shannon would be different.

The states activities in Shannon are illegal. Dont be afraid to stand against criminality.

by Lt. Dan Fri Jan 14, 2005 03:51

Of course soliders follow orders, thats what they are there to do. Its called the chain of command and if it wasn't there there would vbe utter chaos. You people really really maake me sick, you sit here and bitch and protest about the Army doing their job. You, yes you CRUSTIES started this whole problem with your protests. American troops have been passing through Shannon for years now. They passed through on the road to the first Gulf War, as did American fighter jets.... I don't like Bush, I actually detest the man and find him very untrust worthy and dread the next 4 years. I'm just posting here to ask you to stop the bashing of the Irish Army, the way you people talk you'd think they(the army) are all black hearted trigger happy morons. They are some of the finest people in this country, they serve us, they carry the good will of the Irish nation to war torn places like Kosavo and Liberia. They are one of the best known Armies because of their humanitarian deeds. Before you bash them why don't you look at all the good they do.

by Michael Fri Jan 14, 2005 09:26

Lt. Dan, there's no need to call people names just cause you don't like what they're saying. If someone was "bashing" the Irish military, just copy+paste a quotation and then respond directly to it. Irish troops on missions abroad benefit when people respect the laws of war. It's a simple point, I think you'd agree.