De Valera declares was on Hitler

That's the occupation I was referring to. The Repeublic cut its nose off to spite its face. That and I don't think they realized how free spending Washington could be. They may have thought we'd be as cheese paring as London.

It should be noted though that Dev was hugely applauded for this stance here.
 
That's the occupation I was referring to. The Repeublic cut its nose off to spite its face. That and I don't think they realized how free spending Washington could be. They may have thought we'd be as cheese paring as London.

Cheese paring? You mean being a skinflint?

That's the trouble with an agricultural economy, which is pretty much what Eire had at the time. Until quite recently, Guinness and flogging dual citizen to those who wanted it was quite a big part of their economy.
 

Ak-84

Banned
I have always admired De Velera, he along with Collins was as responsible as any man for the 26 counties (yes I know he rejected the treaty initially), but I have to say his time in power was pretty bad for Ireland. The economic war ruined Irelands economy, the stance during WWII, pretty much isolated it diplomatically. I know that those policys were popular, but the hallmark of a leader is to take decisons which are beneficial not popular.
 
I have always admired De Velera, he along with Collins was as responsible as any man for the 26 counties (yes I know he rejected the treaty initially), but I have to say his time in power was pretty bad for Ireland. The economic war ruined Irelands economy, the stance during WWII, pretty much isolated it diplomatically. I know that those policys were popular, but the hallmark of a leader is to take decisons which are beneficial not popular.
Dev's problem was he was fighting the last war. I don't know how much the situation would have changed with all of the Kelleys and O'Tools coming in with American dollars to spend at the locals.
 
That's the occupation I was referring to. The Repeublic cut its nose off to spite its face. That and I don't think they realized how free spending Washington could be. They may have thought we'd be as cheese paring as London.

Well in that case...its a bit wrong.
There could be no 'rebuilding' done as there was no destruction by the British. Ireland was a dirt poor place on the arse end of Europe before it joined the UK just as it remained when it left (though by not quite such a margin at the end when compared to the rest of western europe).
Also occupation is a bit of a wrong term. Particularly by the English.
 
Well in that case...its a bit wrong.
There could be no 'rebuilding' done as there was no destruction by the British. Ireland was a dirt poor place on the arse end of Europe before it joined the UK just as it remained when it left (though by not quite such a margin at the end when compared to the rest of western europe).
Also occupation is a bit of a wrong term. Particularly by the English.
Leej, keep in mind Americans, even us non-RCC/non-Irish, tend to use Fenian terms in discussing Irish history. I agree the South was an agricultural ecnonomy long after the rest of Europe was well into the Industrial Revolution. But, wasn't London's policy to keep Catholic Ireland industrial England's grain basket? I see some parrallels to the development of American South.
 
Leej, keep in mind Americans, even us non-RCC/non-Irish, tend to use Fenian terms in discussing Irish history. I agree the South was an agricultural ecnonomy long after the rest of Europe was well into the Industrial Revolution. But, wasn't London's policy to keep Catholic Ireland industrial England's grain basket? I see some parrallels to the development of American South.

Not really, the UK wasn't a centrally planned economy.
Simply put Ireland just isn't very good land and nor does it have much in the way of resources. Ireland wasn't unique in being poor and agrarian (not that the whole of the island was that...) many regions in mainland Britain were the same.
The problem with Ireland IMO is that the UK placed such emphasis on capitalism and a free economy. A modern country in the same position of suddenly having Ireland (of the past) joining it would probally invest a lot in trying to develop it up. It just wasn't the way the UK worked though.
 
Not really, the UK wasn't a centrally planned economy.
Simply put Ireland just isn't very good land and nor does it have much in the way of resources. Ireland wasn't unique in being poor and agrarian (not that the whole of the island was that...) many regions in mainland Britain were the same.
The problem with Ireland IMO is that the UK placed such emphasis on capitalism and a free economy. A modern country in the same position of suddenly having Ireland (of the past) joining it would probally invest a lot in trying to develop it up. It just wasn't the way the UK worked though.
The US doesn't/didn't have a planned economy either. But, for multiple reasons (until say WW1) it was cheaper forex to ship wood to Northern furniture factories than it was to ship Southern made furniture North. My contention is the influx of American dollars into the Irish economy would have jump started it, especially the longer term money from the Marshall Plan. US forces would have been happy to build the modern infrastructure they needed. Who would they have paid? Where Would have the heavy equipment remained after the War? It wouldn't have been the Taffys or Cousin Jacks.
 
De Valera comes off the fence

I'm not sure it would have made all that great an impact in the Battle of the Atlantic as there was a base avaiable at Londonderry and airfield in Northern Ireland but it might have closed the air gap a bit.

It would have given a psychological boost to Britain

As it was a considerable number of Irishmen enlisted in the British Armed Forces anyway slightly more than enlisted from Northern Ireland. Once America became involved the Irish Americans started to ask what was keeping Eire out. The entry of Eire would have been an embarassment to a lot of the loyalists and may have resulted in conscription being extended to Northern Ireland. Leading Seamen Macguiness VC might have been acknowledged in his own community as a war hero instead of being an embarassment to both sides as a war hero from the Falls Road.

Eire may have being admitted to the UN sooner. The Soviet Union vetoed entry on grounds of Irish neutrality but didn't oppose Sweden. In practice it was De Valera's moving the resolution to expel Soviet Russia from the League of Nations for attacking Finland that was the real reason but neutrality was the excuse

In a post war world the loyalists would have had less sympathy and probably Eire would have remained in the Commonwealth. I am not sure a united Ireland would have come into existence but it would have been more likely
 
The US doesn't/didn't have a planned economy either. But, for multiple reasons (until say WW1) it was cheaper forex to ship wood to Northern furniture factories than it was to ship Southern made furniture North. My contention is the influx of American dollars into the Irish economy would have jump started it, especially the longer term money from the Marshall Plan. US forces would have been happy to build the modern infrastructure they needed. Who would they have paid? Where Would have the heavy equipment remained after the War? It wouldn't have been the Taffys or Cousin Jacks.

I don't disagree that Marshall money would have helped Ireland (Ireland missed a trick really in not joining up at the end of the war and trying to get the Irish American lobby to send some of that its way...), just that it was a intentional English decision to keep Ireland poor and agrarian.

As it was a considerable number of Irishmen enlisted in the British Armed Forces anyway slightly more than enlisted from Northern Ireland.
Indeed.
Of course a lot of Ulstermen did try to join up and were rejected due to being involved in vital war related work already whilst the southerners didn't have this problem but still. It really puts paid to the whole idea that all Ireland was just yearning to break free of the English yoke.
 

Ak-84

Banned
There was a lot of ill-will towards Ireland after the war on in both the UK and the US and A. Irish-American investment stopped pretty much, till the late 60's. Ireland had a better chance of being the first to the moon than getting a cent of Marshall Plan money.

Also the main reason for the Soviet Veto was because the US and UK winked at it.
 
Assuming Ireland enters the war with the expectation of gaining N. Ireland following it's conclusion. Or shortly after the USA's entry into the war.

How big could the Irish Military get?

I was thinking somewhere around 2 infantry divisions or so, a tank brigade later on in the war, a couple dozen destroyers/corvettes/maybe an escort carrier,and a few fighter and bomber squadrons.

Postwar this is pared down significantly, however Ireland maintains a much larger military and international voice than it did in OTL.
 

Ak-84

Banned
I really doubt the Irish Army would have a seperate command, most likely there would be Irish Battalions attached to British Army (OTL Eire was a dominion), perhaps the regiments disbanded in 1922 could be reraised. The 36th Divison of WWI fame fought WWII in Burma, perhaps there could have been a large contingent of Irish in it. After the Somme, there was no way anything above battlion and brigade level was going to be based on regional lines, the last thing you need is lopside casualtys.
 
I don't disagree that Marshall money would have helped Ireland (Ireland missed a trick really in not joining up at the end of the war and trying to get the Irish American lobby to send some of that its way...), just that it was a intentional English decision to keep Ireland poor and agrarian. SNIP
I'm not say it was offical Westminister policy no more than I'm saying US railroad shipping rates were official Washington policy. The US decisions were made more on Wall Street than on either end of Pennsyvania Avenue.
 
I really doubt the Irish Army would have a seperate command, most likely there would be Irish Battalions attached to British Army (OTL Eire was a dominion), perhaps the regiments disbanded in 1922 could be reraised. The 36th Divison of WWI fame fought WWII in Burma, perhaps there could have been a large contingent of Irish in it. After the Somme, there was no way anything above battlion and brigade level was going to be based on regional lines, the last thing you need is lopside casualtys.

Makes sense.
The trouble is the hardcore republicans.
Maybe they could be attached to the Canadians instead as a compromise between America and Britain.
It also helps boost the Canadians struggling numbers.
 
Top