Why invade when you can just cut off supplies of strategic supplies:
Tea
http://www.thejournal.ie/tea-rationing-ireland-world-war-2-2993690-Sep2016/
Tea
http://www.thejournal.ie/tea-rationing-ireland-world-war-2-2993690-Sep2016/
Why invade when you can just cut off supplies of strategic supplies:
Tea
http://www.thejournal.ie/tea-rationing-ireland-world-war-2-2993690-Sep2016/
A yes, Churchill made a plan to invade Ireland in 1940, he was urged to invade Ireland by Northern Ireland Prime Minister Lord Craigavon, AKA James Craig, a rock ribbed unionist, who believed that Eamon De Valera, the Irish prime minister, had fallen under Nazi sway and a crossborder invasion was needed to remove him and thus he urged Churchill to send British troops composed chiefly of Scottish and Welsh divisions to install a military governor for the whole of Ireland with his HQ in Dublin who would secure the valuable naval bases along the Irish coastline.During the Battle of the Atlantic some British military leaders resented Ireland's neutrality and wished to invade Ireland to take control of the Treaty Ports and protect Atlantic trading routes, and military plans were drawn up for it. What if they had gone ahead with the idea perhaps using the German-backed IRA campaign as a pretext for war?
And not just in the UK (where you'd see an upsurge in civil unrest, spontaneous sabotage et cetera, plus a fertile recruiting ground for German intelligence operations) but in the USA. There the Irish-American block was far more anti-Britain (and in support of strict US neutrality) than in Ireland itself. Assuming a pre-Pearl Harbour divergence, FDR would at least have to distance himself from supporting the UK and perhaps have to actively oppose the attack on Ireland.Absolute PR disaster. The British Government would be in effect invading its own Dominion (especially one with extremely close ties to the metropole) for a rational decision of said Dominion. And it would cause discontent among the significant amount of persons of Irish descent in the metropole itself.
I never mention Rhodesia, I've watched Yes Minister...And before anyone mentions Rhodesia, that one was an illegally-constituted government.
Indeed.Basically Churchill would be asked to resign if he approved such a boneheaded plan. The thing about plans like these is they're usually contingencies for something else - for example if the Nazis had somehow managed to invade Ireland, lined Dev and the Cabinet up and shot them. As it is there would be little salable justification for this operation, especially since the IRA campaign was explicitly, and violently opposed by the Irish Government itself!
Indeed.To be fair they did do that without the angry mobs. At this point what's left of the IRA isn't very popular.
And the attempted imposition of conscription, which did far more to change opinions.True, but at the same time, well, cowtowing to British demands to hand over patriots might not go well.
People didn't really like the idiots in the Easter Uprising, but some firing squads later, that changed real fast.
John Roche in January '40, Hyland and McKeown were killed in August.True, but they'd also killed Gardai at this point, no? Civil servants of a government which not only was widely considered the legitimate one by the overwhelming majority of Irish public opinion, but with strong nationalist credentials. If Dev handed them over instead of having them executed himself, at worst he'd get a fucking over at Question Time.
The Commonwealth isn't that important. The United States is.I think you vastly underestimate how Ireland staying out went down within the UK and Commonwealth, I don't think that there would be that much outrage, given that the assumption was that Ireland would make the ports available in a war when they were handed back
There was a very strong Irish-American block in 1940; one that could have ended FDR's ambitions for re-election. Farley, Flynn, Walsh, Kennedy, Hague, Pendergast, Murray et ceteraThink the US was ok with Iceland getting invaded, and in fact couldn't understand Ireland's choice and was against it at the time.
FDR makes angry noises and doesn't do a thing, or anything really significant. It might even reinforce his "non-intervention" spiel to the Public. At the same time he reassures Churchill of continued support through unofficial channels. Some things might be put on the back burner. And past the Election regular service resumes ... Destroyers for Bases happens on November 6th.There was a very strong Irish-American block in 1940; one that could have ended FDR's ambitions for re-election. Farley, Flynn, Walsh, Kennedy, Hague, Pendergast, Murray et cetera
And not just in the UK (where you'd see an upsurge in civil unrest, spontaneous sabotage et cetera, plus a fertile recruiting ground for German intelligence operations) but in the USA. There the Irish-American block was far more anti-Britain (and in support of strict US neutrality) than in Ireland itself. Assuming a pre-Pearl Harbour divergence, FDR would at least have to distance himself from supporting the UK and perhaps have to actively oppose the attack on Ireland.
I never mention Rhodesia, I've watched Yes Minister...
Indeed.
That's true, however the point I was replying to was in relation to the other Dominions reacting against a UK act given the "precedent" that it could create towards other Dominions. The reaction of the US is a separate external issue to that.The Commonwealth isn't that important. The United States is.
I have to seriously question the sanity of this plan.
The last troops had only been pulled off Dunkirk on June 3rd. While the situation was not quite as dire as some of the movies have made out, the British Army had been utterly decimated, had lost virtually all of its heavy equipment, including 45,000 soft skinned vehicle, ~850 anti-tank guns and 700 tanks of various types. There was enough equipment in the British Isles on June 5 1940 to fully equip two Commonwealth divisions, one of those was the Canadian 1st ID which was recently arrive in-country. Montgomery's 3rd ID has been part of the Dunkirk evacuation, it had rifles for all of its troops, but had virtually no trucks or other heavy equipment worth mentioning.
The British command, while not defeatist overall, DID seriously worry about a German cross Channel assault at a time when the British army was a force with firepower closer to 1880 than 1940 standards. To take HALF of the equipped Army forces on Britain and try to invade what was likely going to be a fairly unhappy Ireland would have been way beyond idiotic, it would have been criminal.
While I agree with your stance we are talking about a very fevered time in British history. The enemy was at the gates and the invasion was expected at any moment. There will have been plans for all kinds of bonkers eventualities.
IF it looked like Ireland was to join the Axis powers I think an invasion would be unavoidable. We could not have a base for enemy activity on both sides of our island with the possibility of cutting the SLOC with our American cousins.
Except the UK knew that wasn't going to happen either, at the same stage this was being considered they were also talking with Dublin about operations in case of Sea Lion, they knew an Axis Ireland wasn't going to happen.
My mother's parents her father in particular Irish background most of the family came over during the Potato Famine. My grandfather died in 1975 until the day he died he was pissed still at Ireland for having your cake and eat it too. He stated and I can't totally disagree that Ireland knew they were safe without having to put up much for their safety where we were sending our sons to Europe and they won't let us use their harbors. I understand like anything else is not black and white but I slightly agree with him but having said that every country has to do what they feel is best for them and as stated above they chose to a neutral and it helped the allies and more clandestine ways I was at a family reunions about 10 years ago some of the older members getting up in their 90's still is like Ireland for being neutral I have a feeling it was a pretty hot-button item in this country more so than you ever seen mention hardly even in the college history courses unless you're possibly majoring in Irish studies and I don't even know you would there.Again I think you are severely underestimating just how outright hostile Americans were to Irish neutrality. From 1940 on the newpapers tended to be full of editorials and letters condemning Ireland's refusal to give up the ports and/or join the war.
I like it. However it'd take a bordering-on-ASB improvement in German intelligence capabilities.Of course such an action would raise a lot of eyebrows and cause Britain various headaches - which is why London would need a bloody good reason to do it.
It almost seems like the goal of a German intelligence operation - spook the Brits into thinking German troops are going to use the Free State (willingly or not) to attack the UK. Montgomery and Co. seize the Treaty Ports and elsewhere is a lightning operation to 'pre-empt' the Germans, leaving minor benefits against the U-Boats, a PR disaster and a country to occupy.
Without a threat like that the rewards are just not worth it.
I have to seriously question the sanity of this plan.
The last troops had only been pulled off Dunkirk on June 3rd. While the situation was not quite as dire as some of the movies have made out, the British Army had been utterly decimated, had lost virtually all of its heavy equipment, including 45,000 soft skinned vehicle, ~850 anti-tank guns and 700 tanks of various types. There was enough equipment in the British Isles on June 5 1940 to fully equip two Commonwealth divisions, one of those was the Canadian 1st ID which was recently arrive in-country. Montgomery's 3rd ID has been part of the Dunkirk evacuation, it had rifles for all of its troops, but had virtually no trucks or other heavy equipment worth mentioning.
The British command, while not defeatist overall, DID seriously worry about a German cross Channel assault at a time when the British army was a force with firepower closer to 1880 than 1940 standards. To take HALF of the equipped Army forces on Britain and try to invade what was likely going to be a fairly unhappy Ireland would have been way beyond idiotic, it would have been criminal.
True, but they'd also killed Gardai at this point, no? Civil servants of a government which not only was widely considered the legitimate one by the overwhelming majority of Irish public opinion, but with strong nationalist credentials. If Dev handed them over instead of having them executed himself, at worst he'd get a fucking over at Question Time.
My mother's parents her father in particular Irish background most of the family came over during the Potato Famine. My grandfather died in 1975 until the day he died he was pissed still at Ireland for having your cake and eat it too. He stated and I can't totally disagree that Ireland knew they were safe without having to put up much for their safety where we were sending our sons to Europe and they won't let us use their harbors. I understand like anything else is not black and white but I slightly agree with him but having said that every country has to do what they feel is best for them and as stated above they chose to a neutral and it helped the allies and more clandestine ways I was at a family reunions about 10 years ago some of the older members getting up in their 90's still is like Ireland for being neutral I have a feeling it was a pretty hot-button item in this country more so than you ever seen mention hardly even in the college history courses unless you're possibly majoring in Irish studies and I don't even know you would there.