Somebody explain why Russians believe Ukraine is part or Russia....

[jobhunter7]

I know it used to be part of the Russian Empire. But do they believe the same about Poland or Finland which were too? And what other former parts of the USSR do they believe to be still basically Russia.

To suggest that the UK, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland situation is in any way analogies to that between Ukraine and Russia is absurd.

Especially painting the UK as the aggressor, hypothetical or not. Only one of these three has planned an invasion they wisely decided not to carry out.

The Republic of Ireland planned to invade Northern Ireland in 1969. Their own invasion plan does have some similarities to that of Russia as does some of the language.

Had Lynch listened to the hardliners in his own party and invaded, the Irish Republic would have been painted as the aggressor, censured in the UN, isolated in Europe and Ireland's entry into the EEC put back for years.

Similar to what's happening to Russia today. The main difference is one of scale here.

Like the Russians, the Irish plan was to make no formal declaration of war on the UK and invade the border towns of Newry, Enniskillen and Londonderry.

Indeed, the Russians targeted a TV broadcasting tower in Kiev and the Irish army planned to target the BBC tower in Belfast.

Belfast airport, docks and main industries were also to be targeted. Similar to what Russia is doing in Ukraine.

The Irish fighter planes were also to be used.

And so on.

Like I said before, the main difference is one of scale. Whereas the Russians couldn't just walk into and steamroll the Ukrainian army, the almost 3,000 British Army soldiers stationed in Belfast, Newry and Londonderry would have easily been able to handle 8,113 Irish Defence Force strength.

Plus the RAF would have dealt with Irish aircraft in minutes.

It would have been a massacre for the Irish army. The Irish invasion document states:

"The Defence Forces have no capability of embarking on unilateral military operation of any kind . . . therefore any operations undertaken against Northern Ireland would be militarily unsound”.

And:

"“Sustained operations of this nature would demand the total commitment of the State . . . Should the operation miscarry, the consequences could be very grave for the State and the people it is intended to assist.”

No wonder the ROI never tried it. They also drew up a second invasion plan in 1986 in the event of a possible British withdrawal from Northern Ireland.

Same conclusion - Irish army would have been soundly defeated by the RUC and Ulster Defence Regiment.

Only the ROI has planned to invade a sovereign state. They had similar language to the Russians today and only changed their constitution in 1999 where before they laid to our land and our homes.

And no, the ROI wouldn't have been justified in invading Northern Ireland. It took them a long time to accept that Northern Ireland has a right to self-determination, but they eventually did it.

The Russians, on the other hand, refuse to accept Ukrainian self-determination.

No, it's not really ludicrous that the Republic of Ireland could be accused of illegally annexing Northern Ireland.

That's exactly what would have happened if they had actually decided to invade in 1969.

But the ROI was not "robbed" of territory either. The people of what is now Northern Ireland simply didn't want to leave the UK.

The people of what is now the Republic of Ireland eventually decided to leave the UK, but they had zero right in international law to demand Ulster also left.

Not only did the UK and the Collins Government agree to the Treaty that led to partition, but the Northern Ireland Parliament had a legal right to opt out of joining the Irish Free State which it did.

Collins picked a fight he couldn't win against the British Army. And then, ironically enough, he needed the help of the British Army to fight the Anti-Treaty IRA led by DeValera!

DeValera was also offered Northern Ireland by Churchill in exchange for the Republic of Ireland joining the war against Hitler. Wisely, he said no precisely because he knew they couldn't handle a load of angry Unionists.

Still, it didn't stop him laying a ridiculous claim to Northern Ireland in the 1937-1999 Irish Constitution. Putin's Russia uses similar lines of reasoning today in relation to Ukraine.

Speaking of the ROI's planned invasion, the Irish Government just called it Northern Ireland Operations.

Likewise, Putin's Russia doesn't call it an invasion. They call it Special Operations in Ukraine.

The Irish simply never had the firepower Putin's Russia has.....Irish rhetoric never did match reality.

That's an interesting post by @DownNative. I don't enough about history to comments on the details (it might be 100% fact, it might be total batshit stuff), but the point about a larger stronger aggressive military is the key.

In our history we invaded, conquered, exploited many many countries. It's what imperialists do, and you see that with Putin and Russian state now. Like us, they can do it, and they will.

With respect to demographics it seems like things are changing in Northern Ireland. Like a lot of English people, it's been a huge drain on our resources. If the majority want to leave...just go please :)

And Scotland too!

@CyclingUpHill

That's an interesting post by *@DownNative*. I don't enough about history to comments on the details (it might be 100% fact, it might be total batshit stuff), but the point about a larger stronger aggressive military is the key.

In our history we invaded, conquered, exploited many many countries. It's what imperialists do, and you see that with Putin and Russian state now. Like us, they can do it, and they will.

With respect to demographics it seems like things are changing in Northern Ireland. Like a lot of English people, it's been a huge drain on our resources. If the majority want to leave...just go please :)

It's actually factual and you can find some of this info as reported in Irish newspapers in 2009, for example.

The thing about military size is oversimplified and too many usually focus on that. The reason why 8,113 Irish soldiers couldn't never have beaten approximately 2,000 British Army soldiers is because the British ones had actual combat experience.

The Irish army would have not been able to handle the RUC and Ulster Defence Regiment for the same reasons - combat experience. Even though Northern Ireland would have been vulnerable in the event of an Irish invasion.

Experience can overcome numbers.

Demographics in Northern Ireland is not actually reading in the way you think. A simplified reading of is misleading- majority in Northern Ireland wish to remain in the UK.

Likewise, more English people want NI and Scotland to remain than they want either to leave.

Northern Ireland's subvention is smaller than Scotland's, but all parts of the UK is subsidised by the South East of England, i.e. London.

Same in most countries as well as in the EU.

I assume at some point there will be a vote in Northern Ireland, like there was in Scotland. And then a generation later, another vote. If you look the long term trends they'll both go. The sooner the better! And I really wish them all the best.

Scotland and Northern Ireland will then get the chance to be in the EU again as they voted last time, and get someone else to fund them!

btw, if you are a Down Native, parts of it a really beautiful and total underestimated and relatively unknown a vacation spot. I was there a few years ago for a wedding, and stayed for some cycling/hiking. Fantastic scenery!

"There may well be people in NI who don't really want to stay part of the UK but don't want to become part of Ireland either." ... luckily they live in a democracy and should be able to vote on that.

@YouSayYesISayNo said "In summary, all I wanted to point out that one country shouldn't just be allowed to take bits of another by invasion, citing "history" as a reason to justify their actions."

Personally I agree with you. But that is not what happens in reality. It was like that in the past, it is like that now, and it will be like that in the future. Stronger countries are in a position to exploit weaker ones, it is wrong, but they do.

The vast majority of people I know felt strongly against the Iraq invasion. We did it anyway, we (us, plus the US allies) knew we could since it was a total mismatch. We're too weak to tackle Russia, even though the vast majority of people feel what they are doing is wrong/evil.

They ‘eventually decided to leave the UK’ @DownNative? You talk as if Ireland was willingly under British rule up until that point and it was easy for us to not to be.

Easter rising anyone?

I think I recognise DownNative - there is a poster on here who regularly name changes and who has some... let's say interesting views on Ireland and what it means to be Irish.

I see no problem with @YouSayYesISayNo 's post (Irish, from ROI now in NI - indeed, I'm sitting in Co Down as I write this).

All these examples show that it’s one thing to invade a country and take control, it’s another to keep control.

Whatever the stories used to justify the invasion, any apparent power they held was an illusion.

Thanks @JenniferBarkley for the tip on DownNative. There's always a few of those :) It's what makes these forums amusing sometimes!

btw, I'm English, and don't have any great interest in Ireland, other than a few vacations in Northern Ireland (a very close friend/couple from the Ard peninsula, so been there many times)

@IvorCutler

They ‘eventually decided to leave the UK’ *@DownNative*? You talk as if Ireland was willingly under British rule up until that point and it was easy for us to not to be.

The last year's of the Union of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland were actually the best years.

Still, the south left us. We, on the other hand, didn't leave them.

There certainly wasn't anywhere close to a majority in favour of insurrection either.

@IvorCutler

Easter rising anyone?

The Easter Rising was an unpopular insurrection which a majority of people didn't support or take part in.

Let's not revise that one....

@JenniferBarkley

I think I recognise DownNative - there is a poster on here who regularly name changes and who has some... let's say interesting views on Ireland and what it means to be Irish.

I see no problem with @YouSayYesISayNo 's post (Irish, from ROI now in NI - indeed, I'm sitting in Co Down as I write this).

Nope, I'm a new poster here which I'm sure Mumsnet can verify.

Let's not let your post distract from the actual history I have previously quoted, shall we?

@CyclingUpHill

Thanks *@JenniferBarkley* for the tip on DownNative. There's always a few of those :) It's what makes these forums amusing sometimes!

I can assure you Jennifer is Bark-ley up the wrong tree there.

What's more significant is the lack of acknowledgement of the actual history of what I've previously stated. You can probably find the programme "What If Lynch Invaded?" On YouTube which was first broadcast in the Republic of Ireland in 2009.

The last year's of the Union of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland were actually the best years.

Still, the south left us. We, on the other hand, didn't leave them.

ROI seceded 100 years ago. You must be Mumsnet’s oldest poster.

@CyclingUpHill

I assume at some point there will be a vote in Northern Ireland, like there was in Scotland. And then a generation later, another vote. If you look the long term trends they'll both go. The sooner the better! And I really wish them all the best.

Scotland and Northern Ireland will then get the chance to be in the EU again as they voted last time, and get someone else to fund them!

It's possible, but by no means a given that there'll be a future referendum in Northern Ireland.

A careful reading of the GFA tells us it's actually pretty difficult to get one - Nationalism and Republicanism either didn't note the wording or they knew they didn't have the influence to get it changed.

If by longterm, you mean more Catholics equals increased demand for a border poll...that'd be incorrect. The trends indicate there's more than twice as many Catholic Unionists than there are Protestant Republicans.

Furthermore, the trends tell us that the Northern Irish identity will grow. There's already more identifying as Northern Irish than Irish in Northern Ireland. This is a POST-GFA trend most didn't see coming.

@DownNative, your post seems as if there is an underlying agenda you're trying to push, and I'm not bothered to read up on dysfunctional politics of Northern Ireland.

Time will tell.

@merrymouse

The last year's of the Union of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland were actually the best years.

Still, the south left us. We, on the other hand, didn't leave them.

ROI seceded 100 years ago. You must be Mumsnet’s oldest poster.

Indeed it did. Yet throughout most of that time the ROI has had very similar rhetoric to Russia.

As everyone has recently discovered, it's a short leap from rhetoric to planning an invasion. From there, an even shorter leap towards mounting an invasion.

The ROI stopped short of mounting one. Irish newspaper headline from 2009 - "Operation Armageddon would have been doomsday - for Irish aggressors".

There are SOME similarities to the Ukrainian situation. But it still remains that the hypothesis of the UK invading the ROI is ludicrous. It never planned one. But the ROI did.

[quote CyclingUpHill]@DownNative, your post seems as if there is an underlying agenda you're trying to push, and I'm not bothered to read up on dysfunctional politics of Northern Ireland.

Time will tell.[/quote]
Well, it's called discussing.

Quire interesting some would rather not know these pieces of history.