User talk:Red Hurley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Talk to me...don't be upset if I read and delete.
Contents |
[edit] Civil war in kilkeny
Hi RH,
Re the Irish civil war confrontation in Kilkenny in May 1922, I ca't find the reference in the Dail debate to 18 killed.
Michael Hopkinson says, "There was much firing but few casualties" (Green against Green, p. 75).
Niall Harrington in the Kerry Landings says that clashes between pro and tni treatyites before June 28 had left 8 dead and 49 wounded, (p23).
Could it have been 18 casualties in Kilkenny rather than 18 killed? Cheers.
Jdorney 16:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi JD,
That's why I said: "On 3 May the Dáil was informed 18 men had been killed in the fighting in Kilkenny" - not that it was true. The source of info was O'Hegarty who should have known, during the unusual crisis address by the officers to the Dáil (about page 368 I think)....
- "PRESIDENT GRIFFITH: It is now for the Committee to meet and discuss their procedure. I move now the adjournment of the House until 3 o'clock on Friday, when the Committee will report to the House. The remainder of the agenda, of course, will be unchanged.
- COMMANDANT O'HEGARTY: Before the House adjourns, Mr. Speaker, perhaps you will allow me again the privilege of speaking. If this Committee is going to do anything, there must be a truce between the two armies. I have a report now that there is heavy fighting going on in Kilkenny and that 18 have been killed. That is a good start—is it not? And people are sitting down here discussing whether they will compromise themselves by stopping it."
Notably the whole Dáil felt that it was credible at that time that 18 could have been killed; not that 18 were actually killed. Obviously a report had just been handed to him. Or it could have been a bluff on his part. But there it is on the Dáil record, and indeed if it was wrong it has never been corrected. Also "the two armies" - said by an army officer - says it all - i.e. "not our army and the dissidents in its ranks".
Quoting from Dáil pages is a bit cumbersome but if you search a page for keywords you will find the right place.
Your work on the page has been outstanding. My focus is on the Treaty to war period, Jan - June 1922, and I find that a lot of detail is missing from better-known history books. But I don't consider this to be WP:OR as it is in the official records. For balance, I'm planning to add Sean McEntee's comment that the Army Executive was superior to the Dáil, if it deserted the republic, as that neatly explains the exact sense of legality on the anti-treaty side. Then I'll leave it. Clearly the tragedy didn't start when the Four Courts was shelled.Red Hurley 11:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. The more one reads about it, the more you realise that it was brewing for quite a long time up to June 28.
I take your point about Kilkenny. And nice work yourself on the aricle.
I'd like to re-include the reference to Collins wanting to avert civil war. It is a point that is emphasised a lot in books about the period. He seems to have been giving the anti-treaty side arms and letting them take over barracks right up until the end of June 1922, against the advice of Griffith, O'Higgins and the British. Arguably his prevarication helped the crisis to build up to the pitch it did. Also, it seems that he was trying right up to the end to re-direct IRA attention to the North. It's by no means clear what the man was really up to, and now of course we'll never know for sure.
Jdorney 11:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes - I don't think he knew himself. By May 1922 it had got out of control of any one person. He did of course want to avert civil war. The economy was in ruins, the volunteers had no jobs to go to, nobody wanted to invest in Ireland until the political situation was clearer. A lesson, if ever needed, that military people have to stand aside when peace breaks out...Red Hurley 12:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] John Kelly
Thanks for the work on the article, but can you have a look at my comments on the talk page please? Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 12:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] United Irishmen
No problem, always glad to help. As for the anon's edits, I was not sure of the factual accuracy, but the lack of refs made me curious and suspicious. Feel free to revert. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding Flight of the Earls
I wanted to thank you for the fine work you have done on this article recently. It has been on my watchlist for quite some time, and I had every intention of having a go at it, but simply had not found the time. Now, I see I do not have to. It was a mess before you worked on it. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 17:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. As for the name, yeah... that's why I chose it! Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 00:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Partition of Ireland: Revision in 1998
The problem is that there was no revision to partition in 1998. Neither the Belfast agreement nor the 19th Ammendment changed it in any way. I suppose we could have something called "Constitutional acceptance". I'll try that. --Red King (talk) 12:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- That might be a problem to you and me, but not to majorities of the electorates in NI and here in the south.Red Hurley (talk) 06:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Articles
HI there!!! Thanks for creating the hospital article but please remember you must add references to confirm new articles and you should categorize them like I have added -e.g Category:Hospitals in Ireland. Happy editing and hope you enjoy being a wikipedian ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 09:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I intended to do so. You're quick!Red Hurley (talk) 09:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Edit summaries
. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
