Shameful Irish stood silent while the Holocaust happened says Irish Justice Minister

I'm confused. When I visited Saint Stephen's Green last year, I clearly saw (and took pictures of) a sculpture given to the Irish by the Germans to thank the Irish for their humanitarian efforts toward German children following WWII. Massive numbers of Irishmen fought in WWII, although most of them were in the British Army. As a country, I doubt very much if Ireland was in a position, financial particularly, to contribute much toward the fight against the Nazis. I, for one, can not blame them for their seeming neutrality...it kept the bombs from being dropped and presented a safe place for people in the war-torn countries to send their citizens, particularly children.

That wasn't my subject, crutlis...

stick to the subject at hand, squaddie

bunkerhill – So it’s a scholar you are now, and a history scholar at that…and here’s some of us thinking you were just a rabid Anglophobe, with an unhealthy fixation on the Brit royals…so as a ‘scholar’ you must be aware of the continuing small group of Brits who support the ending of the monarchy, and establishment of a republic…it includes House of Lords peers, MPs, and high-profile public figures…which begs the questions, ONE - why would you be surprised at a story such as the one you describe…TWO - what has it to do with anything here?

Along with being a lifetime History scholar I have always enjoyed mysteries, with the English writer Agatha Christie being one of my favorites. Actually Agatha had an American father and an English mother. Agatha was a brilliant writer often encompassing history and psychology into her writings. One psychological prediction she made early on is now coming to the forefront. She was always fair to the Irish and one of her books is based on an extraordinary premise. The book is about unhappy English "commoners" conspiring to build a German naval base on a coastal town in England. Can you imagine such a scenario being written about by an English legend? Unhappy English "commoners" conspiring to get rid of the royals. Look up Christie's work and read the book. Maybe then the people whinning about the lack of Irish involvement will wake up and smell the roses. All History is written by the idle castle dwellers, but in many cases truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

Again...stick to the subject in hand, Curtis...

Speaking of holding certain regimes to higher standards, what type of standard do you hold britain to in Kenya and India? How about in its behavior towards the Kurds or as the world's largest drug dealer? Maybe your are correct in defending britain's behavior because it should be judged in the context of being a brutal oligarchic terror state rather than a pluralistic democracy?

Stick to the subject in hand, Curtis...

Brit trolls like Dano would never accuse the british of standing silent (or, more accurately, hastening) during the famine, of course. He'd rather blame the victims.

What about FDR's refusal to take in refugee Jews before and during the war? Select ones were allowed in, e.g. Einstein, but the hoi polloi were denied. This is America's shame and needn't to have been.

ancavker - I already agreed that no nation did enough...and I would certainly hold Ireland to a higher standard than the Spanish and Portuguese dictatorships of the time...I would think most Irish people would expect that too...just as a higher standard is expected from Israel than some surrounding states...not that we always get it...but that's whole other debate, TG!!

Dan: Point taken.But it still does not change the fact that other countries did not do as much as they could for Jewish refugees, and two you do hold Ireland to a different standard vs. other countries.

The point is that the anglo-sphere had notice of the holocaust far in advance of the Irish government (let alone Irish people) and passed up opportunities to directly disrupt or stop it. The decision to go to war had nothing to do with the oppression of Jewish people or the holocaust but power politics (the US was obviously bombed before entering). Regarding ex-Nazis, the anglo-sphere took plenty in as scientific/military experts.

ancavker - are you confusing two different issues? I don't recall saying Ireland did not have a right to stay neutral...whether or not it was 'right' to do so, even after the USA joined, is for another debate. It was the help, or lack of it, to refugees that was the issue here...

Dan: This is exactly my point with you. It was perfectly fine in your estimation for those countries to stay neutral. And their reasons for staying neutral perfectly valid (assuming those were the reasons, and they appear to be rational and reasonable, so I would not argue with them). Yet Ireland stays neutral and her reasons are deemed by you not to be valid. So again you hold Ireland to a different standard than these other countries. And lets not forget Finland which openly collaborated with Nazi Germany for most of the war.