Wars and Conflicts permalink
cwgc.org
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Pol (U14578129) on Saturday, 7th August 2010
i feel that all irish men that died in both world wars need to have their correct nationality list on the cwgc website. all australians, new zealanders,men from india. as well as other nations. these are irishmen not british ,especially if they came from the republic if ireland.
-
Message 2
Posted by MB (U177470) on Saturday, 7th August 2010
They were British when they died.
Many Australians, Canadians etc are not identified as such.
A large number of WWI records are lost so it would be difficult if not impossible to identify anyway.
Not sure about WWI but in WWII many Irish servicemen served under aliases which would complicate matters even more. -
Message 3
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) ** on Saturday, 7th August 2010
The Irish that fought in both wars, did so as voluntary recruits and members of the British Army. There was no Irish Army in WWI or II. Unlike Australia, Canada, NZ etc, who each sent their own forces.
-
Message 4
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
especially if they came from the republic if ireland..."
As has been pointed out, this would be a practical impossibility for WW1 as the whole of Ireland was part of the UK, so separate nationality was not recorded. I have not looked, but it was different in WW2.
However, I think you will find few people this side of the Irish Sea who would not recognise the bravery of any soldier in either war. However, I am not so convinced that you will find a universally open attitude to Irish soldiers in British uniform in the Republic. There are those that would prefer to forget this particular link between the UK and Ireland. -
Message 5
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
I read somewhere that over 50,000 Irishmen served in the British forces in WW2, even though Eire was neutral, and 5 of the 6 VCs awarded to Irishmen were to Southerners. It is only now that their effors are being recognised in the Republic, or in the Catholic side of N. Ireland. We have even had Martin McGuinness acknowledge them, and memorial ceremonies for WWI dead have been held in many places.
Ironically, the only VC won by a Northerner was James Maguiness, a Catholic from West Belfast, who has at last been honoured as a hero in his native city. His portrait now adorns a gable wall - in Protestant East Belfast! -
Message 6
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
these are irishmen not britishÂ
The Commonwealth War Graves Commission website doesn’t say that they are ‘British’. In fact it doesn’t use the word ‘British’ at all. It uses the term ‘United Kingdom’.
Furthermore the website lists casualties by ‘nationality of the force served’ rather than by nationality of the individual as such. The use of the word ‘nationality’ here, however, is perhaps unhelpful and your point is valid Pol as ‘United Kingdom’ is not a nationality. That said - it’s difficult to know what other word to use. Maybe ‘realm’ or ‘dominion’ or ‘state’ might be better. -
Message 7
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
I read somewhere that over 50,000 Irishmen served in the British forces in WW2,Â
And plenty more kept British factories turning out essential war supplies.
Given the history between the UK and (then recently independent) Ireland, Ireland's contribution to WW2 is quite surprising. Despite some loud pro-German (really anti-British) noises, the Irish government proved very efficient at catching German downed airmen while allied servicemen (who legally should have been interned) always found their way back to Belfast.
German spies landed in Ireland almost invariably ended up with the British intelligence services, many on whom were turned to good effect. -
Message 8
Posted by JB on a slippery slope to the thin end ofdabiscuit (U13805036) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
There was no Irish Republic during WW1, and all Southern Irish who signed up for military service in the British Armed Forces for WW2 did so swearing an oath of loyalty to the king, which was just as well since the Free State was neutral.
And what do you do with the East Bengalis? Are they Indian, as they were at the time, or Pakistani as they were from 1947-71, or Bangladeshi as they would be today?
The odd one is Newfoundland, which during both world wars was not part of Canada. -
Message 9
Posted by rooster (U14062359) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
It matters not one jot which country these brave men hailed from. During the two great wars all of us on the allies side were fighting German expansionism and for the freedom of the world.
There is no need to state what nationality our fallen hero's were; I'm sure that where they are now there are no borders or petty national jealousies. -
Message 10
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 10th August 2010
The odd one is Newfoundland, which during both world wars was not part of Canada.Â
Good point JB.
Newfoundland is one of the few places which reverted from being an indepedent back to being a UK overseas territory. In the First World War it was an independent country but the Newfoundland Regiment served as an integral unit of the UK army and during the Second World War (as a UK overseas territory) Newfoundlanders were again integrated within the UK armed forces.
Somewhat bizarrely, however, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission lists the 'nationality' of the Newfoundland Regiment during the First World War as 'Canadian'. For example see the entry for Michael John Holland (Newfoundland Regiment) killed on the first day of the Battle of the Somme:
Newfoundlanders who served during the Second World War, however, are listed as 'United Kingdom'. See, for example, the entry for Kenneth Campbell Lane of the 166th (Newfoundland) Field Regiment killed in 1943 during the Tunisia Campaign:
Quite some scope for confusion there. One would have thought that the CWGC should at least have a separate listing for Newfoundland with regard to the First World War. -
Message 11
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Thursday, 12th August 2010
"...‘United Kingdom’ is not a nationality..."
Well, legally it is, actually.
Of course, you are referring to the problem of English/Welsh/Scots/Irish nations making up the UK.
But, in legal terms, no UK citizen has a nationality other than the UK. Being a Londoner all my life, I have atachments, in an emotional sense, to both England and the UK. But I am only a citizen of the UK. This is further complicated by common usage, that refers to this citizenship as 'British', not the awkard sounding 'UK citizen'.
As no record is kept of citizenship sub-divided into the constituent parts, re-registering the war dead in the way requested would be rather odd. For instance, an English couple in the 1880s could have a child whilst working in Ireland for a few years. Where would this child be re-registered if he fought and died in WW1 ? He might be rather offended at losing his English identity in retrospect. -
Message 12
Posted by MB (U177470) on Thursday, 12th August 2010
You often find the children of 19th Century British servicemen who were born in Ireland.
I would think many of the Loyalist community would object to their ancestors being changed from "British" to "Irish" in the records.
Just look through the records of WWI deaths, many just have name, rank, number, regiment with not even the age. -
Message 13
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Friday, 13th August 2010
I believe the great Duke of Wellington himself was born in Ireland.
Although he is reputed to have said that 'being born in a stable does not make one a horse'! -
Message 14
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 13th August 2010
That's disputed of course as it seems it first appears in a statement about him by Daniel O'Connell in a speech on 16 October 1843.
-
Message 15
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Friday, 13th August 2010
Must be true, then!
Sure we couldn't be after accusing the Great Dan himself of telling a porky, now, could we? -
Message 16
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 13th August 2010
Yes, but he wasn't claiming that Wellington said it, he used it to describe the Duke.
-
Message 17
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Saturday, 14th August 2010
‘United Kingdom’ is not a nationality Well, legally it is, actually.Â
Legally it is not.
The British Nationality Act 1981 denotes 'British Citizenship' for a 'British citizen'. Nowhere does it refer to 'United Kingdom nationality'.
But I am only a citizen of the UK. This is further complicated by common usage, that refers to this citizenship as 'British', not the awkard sounding 'UK citizen'.Â
This is true. The Act does also refer to 'a citizen of the United Kingdom'. Despite the title of the 'British Nationality Act 1981', however, the word 'nationality' is not used within body of the legislation (unless, that is, it is in reference to the title of previous Acts). This is perplexing and calls into question the name of the Act. Why, for example, is it called the 'British Nationality Act 1981' when it should really be called the 'British Citizenship Act 1981'? This is perplexing until one appreciates that the blurring of the distinction between the words 'nationality' and 'citizenship' is deliberate and, furthermore, is the whole point of the legislation. As far as the UK establishment are concerned the words 'citizenship' and 'nationality' (2 distinct concepts) are, nevertheless, to be presented as being interchangeable so as to literally confuse the public on these issues.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.