Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 15.40.15

I’ve kept out of the Brexit debate so far. I’ve lived in Britain for 52 years and have never known a more poisonous atmosphere than the current one.

When the British media, with the encouragement of the British Government, were attempting to whip up an anti-Irish frenzy and anti-Irish  sneers, masquerading as jokes were the currency of entertainers, I was not frightened, nor do I remember other Irish people who were. I never pretended to be other than Irish, Republican, or Catholic, nor said “Amen” to those Irish humbugs who excoriated my ethnicity or beliefs.

But I have many neighbours long settled in a multi-ethnic London suburb who are now worried for their own and their children’s security. These are my fellow Europeans with white faces, good jobs and thoroughly fluent English. They were completely unworried a couple of weeks ago.

I never swallowed the lie that the EU had brought peace to Europe. How could I? On Sunday 23 January 1972 Britain’s Prime Minister  Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Accession to the European Economic Community and Taoiseach Jack Lynch signed for Ireland in Brussels.

Exactly one week later the British Army deliberately murdered 14 Irish citizens in Derry. None of the murderers was apprehended, charged or punished. The officer leading the unit which pulled the triggers was awarded an Order of Chivalry (OBE) by his grateful sovereign before the victims were cold in their graves. And a vicious war continued in the area for another 25 years.

The former YUGOSLAVIA (cobbled together by the Great War’s instigators, Britain and France in 1919) fell apart  after  West Germany encouraged Croatian secession and enveloped the former state in violence lasting for years.

Members of the European Union have participated in aggressive wars without United Nations sanction and continue to do so, and they arm and train regimes which are tyrannical at home and barbarous abroad. European powers have armed and equipped opposing regimes, for exampleIran and Iraq. Though Russia poses no threat to Germany, France or Britain, or Poland, Latvia. Lithuania or Estonia, NATO, led and inspired by the United States, stages provocative exercises on Russia’s borders. Though pretending to oppose ISIS, EU countries deplore Russian support for the internationally recognised Syrian Government, the only body there which does not murder Christian or other minorities. The Europeans, under apparent American direction, arm and train disparate bodies of fanatics who are in rebellion against the internationally recognised Government.

I’m no great admirer of Vladimir Putin’s macho posturing, bareback riding etc. but he impresses me as a sane and highly intelligent man devoted to his country’s security and unity and not as a crazy adventurist. Rather more impressive than any administration or putative administration in these islands other than that of Nicola Sturgeon.



22 Responses to DON’T MENTION THE WARS by Donal Kennedy

  1. jessica June 30, 2016 at 3:10 pm #

    “I’ve kept out of the Brexit debate so far. I’ve lived in Britain for 52 years and have never known a more poisonous atmosphere than the current one.”

    I would expect the worst is yet to come Donal.

    The reforms Cameron was seeking were valid and perfectly reasonable.
    Working people were seeing foreign nationals coming over and getting cars and preferential treatment. We are only human.

    It was not unreasonable to expect a points based system to control who and how many people come in, the same rules working both ways to our islands.

    It was rejected out of hand by Germany not for what was best for business and trade as they claim, but because it was the fastest way to create a single state entity with a single army under their control.

    If they continue to object to negotiations over the border controls and access levels to the single market for the UK, they you can expect emotions to get very high and I would imagine many EU nationals will feel more than a little uncomfortable within the atmosphere that will create.

    The English people are not racists, they are a proud nation and will defend their way of life aggressively if necessary. No one knows their bad side better than the Irish but I would not swap them for a potential new enemy in Europe.

    It is all avoidable but I fully expect Germany will not give up on its mission to lead this single EU state, to extend its borders to have multiple fronts to both Russia and the middle east eventually linking up with Israel if it is allowed to continue.

    It would have control of one hell of am army with the costs even shared among the nations of the EU.

    You couldn’t have made it up

  2. Scott June 30, 2016 at 4:42 pm #

    Sorry Donal can agree at all with you.

    In the 70 odd years prior to the formation of the EEC (the forerunner to the EU), Germany, France, Britain and Italy fought between them 3 major wars. The Franco-Prussian, WWI and WW2. In the 70 odd years after the creation of the EEC these major nations have never fought against each other.

    Why? Because close economic and political integration has meant that these powerful nations no longer act as competitors but rather cooperate with each other. The wars you mentioned in the break up of Yugoslavia, happened outside of the EU so can hardly be blamed on it.

    “Though Russia poses no threat to Germany, France or Britain, or Poland, Latvia. Lithuania or Estonia, NATO, led and inspired by the United States, stages provocative exercises on Russia’s borders.”

    Really Russia presents no threat to Eastern Europe? Tell that to the people of the Crimea or the the Ukraine were Russia poses a major threat and has encouraged and is actively participating in a war in that country. Small nations such as the Baltic states, Poland and Lithuania have little to no chance of resisting Russian invasion without the help of NATO. This gives NATO every right to perform military exercises close to the Russian borders for three reasons. One to warn Russia against any further aggression through a show of strength. Two reassure NATO members of the willingness to protect them from Russia. Three to train and practice the logistics and organisational capacity of NATO to fight cohesively if necessary.

    Vladimir Putin is at heart an imperialist who wishes to restore the Russian empire to its former glory and has little regard for the rights and freedoms of his own citizens never mind any other nations. NATO my be the only thing that is stopping his expansion into former soviet countries.

    • Wolfe tone June 30, 2016 at 6:30 pm #

      Scott wise up. Putin wants to restore the Russian empire? Ffs he ain’t doing a good job then. All he has managed to do is try and prevent NATO/EU from bombing the shite out of Syria like they did in Libya. Oh wait, my mistake, I should’ve realised that it only matters that Europen nations aren’t killing EACH OTHER; outside of the EU it’s bomb away lads. It might be a teeny weeny bit racist but no matter just as long as Europeans aren’t racist to EACH OTHER. Are you in the Ministry of Peace by any chance? Dear oh dear.

      • Scott July 1, 2016 at 8:58 am #

        WT if Putin is not trying to expand Russian territory and influence, then why did he invade South Ossetia and annex the Crimea. He also funded, armed and even actively engaged Russian troops in supporting a pro Russian separatist movement in east Ukraine.

        The small Baltic states would also be vulnerable to him but what they have going for them is that they are members of the EU and NATO and not even Putin dares confront these powerful organisation.

        As for your comments of Russia stopping the bombing of the Syrian people, I think you need to look at it again. Russia is bombing the opponents of there Assad allies whether they are IS or non IS rebels. Russia is killing plenty of Syrians themselves WT

        The reason why Russia is bombing Syria in support of there Assad allies…to expand Russian influence, protect its ally and to keep its strategic port in the Mediterranean.

        • Wolfe tone July 1, 2016 at 12:10 pm #

          Scott, take the blinkers off. Crimea was a ‘gift’ to the Soviet Ukraine as a way of sharing a bond between the two countries. It’s primarily populated by people who view themselves as Russian. As is the eastern Ukraine region. Why would the Russian federation not protect its people? Check out the Odessa massacre.

          Which came first? Russia ‘invading’ Eastern European regions or NATO encroachment into Eastern Europe? If you seriously believe NATO is a organisation for peace then there’s really no point in discussing anything with you. We are always told by the establishments, of the concerns and fears of people/countries that they are friends with, perhaps we should try and listen to the concerns and rears of those the establishments are not friends with? They are not all head cases,fanatics and war mongers you know.

          As for Syria, well again you really have fallen for the BBC,CNN propaganda. In case you haven’t noticed it’s been mostly the US beating around the Middle East bringing their ‘democracy’ to those that don’t like them, not Russia. You will be telling me next that Israel is the only decent state in that region. Btw, I am sure the Libyan people are grateful for NATO/EU destroying their country but bringing them ‘democracy’. Ffs the Iraqi people to this day are claiming they were better off under saddam than what is in place now. Dear oh dear.

          • Scott July 2, 2016 at 1:47 am #

            Yep your completely right WT the Crimea was gifted to them and the way Russia chose to take that gift back was with masked soldiers and a rigged vote.

            Eastern Ukraine may have a significant Russia ethnic population but nonetheless it is still sovereign Ukraine territory that Russia chose to invade. There reckless arming of militants also led to the deaths of the airliner they shot down.

            Is NATO a source of peace? That is arguable, NATO is a defence alliance and the membership of NATO prevents larger nations such as Russia gobbling up smaller nations, as a attack on one NATO member is an attack on all. In this regard you could say they are a source of peace as they have protected smaller nations from larger aggressors, especially in Eastern Europe.

            Answer me this WT why shouldn’t NATO or the EU expand into Eastern Europe if that is the wishes of those sovereign nations in Eastern Europe such as the Ukraine or the Baltic states? Or are they Russian sphere of influence whether the people of those countries like it or not?

          • Wolfe tone July 2, 2016 at 10:24 am #

            ‘why shouldn’t NATO or the EU expand into Eastern Europe…’

            Therefore why shouldn’t Russia,China etc do likewise? Who is right who is wrong? Here was me thinking the UN was the ‘democratic’ way for countries to solve their differences? Btw, the people of Libya and Syria didn’t ask NATO or the EU to expand into their countries, neither did Iraq. And yet westerners still scratch their heads, when they occasionally remove it from the sand, and ponder why other peoples around the world have a bad opinion of them?

            In this part of the world, militant Irish republicans are constantly minded that a section of our people were hurt by them. A section of people have/had a fear of them. Republicans are minded to address those fears. Republicans in spite of how just their cause may have been are being lectured to address the fears of a section of our people. And yet when it comes to other people around the world those same lecturers don’t practice what they preach. They have yet to address the fears of Russian people who still believe that the west sought their demise during the Second World War. Hypocrisy. It seems it’s better to demonise those who for some reason or another are not fond of western policies.

            Btw, Russia didn’t invade Eastern Ukraine. There are thousands of people living in Ukraine who happen to view themselves as Russian. The bond between the two countries since ww2 allowed both countries armies to work together. So much so that Crimea for example had a permanent Russian military base there. When the CIA led fascist coup of Ukraine occurred the Russian people(who made their homes there) of eastern Ukraine were suitably frightened that the new regime would displace them or even kill them. Therefore they had no choice but to defend themselves. Their fears whether rational or irrational were further heightened when Ukrainian politicians were calling for that region to be nuked. It’s strange but some people in this island who lecture Irish republicans, would have the same view as the the Ukrainian based Russians- they should arm themselves to protect themselves from possible displacement or death from other people in the country they live.

          • Scott July 2, 2016 at 3:36 pm #

            Your chopping my sentences up and using them incorrectly WT. The full sentence was..

            “Answer me this WT why shouldn’t NATO or the EU expand into Eastern Europe if that is the wishes of those sovereign nations in Eastern Europe such as the Ukraine or the Baltic states?”

            If the people of Eastern Europe wish to be members of the EU and/or NATO then why shouldn’t they be if both NATO or The EU want them also. The reason they want to o be members of NATO especially is because they have already endured Russian/Soviet oppression for the best part of 100 years. NATO is there most concrete guarantee of security.

          • jessica July 2, 2016 at 7:25 pm #

            “Answer me this WT why shouldn’t NATO or the EU expand into Eastern Europe ”

            Because such colonisation and empire building ALWAYS leads to conflict.

          • Scott July 3, 2016 at 7:54 am #

            Again Jessica just like WT you are chopping up my sentence and using presenting it incorrectly.

            Here is the full sentence

            “Answer me this WT why shouldn’t NATO or the EU expand into Eastern Europe if that is the wishes of those sovereign nations in Eastern Europe such as the Ukraine or the Baltic states?”

            If the sovereign nations of Eastern Europe choose to join NATO or the EU, then it is neither colonisation or empire building. They choose to join it for there mutual benefit.

          • jessica July 3, 2016 at 1:46 pm #

            “If the sovereign nations of Eastern Europe choose to join NATO or the EU, then it is neither colonisation or empire building. They choose to join it for there mutual benefit.”

            Sorry Scott, but that is simply bunkum.

            Ukraine has a Russian population in the north as well as the gas pipeline which serves all of Europe and is an economic lifeline for Russia.

            The EU are playing very dangerous games and provoking Russia while preparing to take a second land border with Russia as well as their allies in the middle east through Turkey and the Baltic states which offer nothing else to the EU.

            I have no interest in Russia or any such colonialism, but I can see clearly what the EU is doing and they are preparing for war.

            I have already more or less made my choice to fight against the EU if that happens so bear in mind WW3 will not only be a world war on these fronts that the EU is creating but will be many many multiple civil wars within the EU also. As I said, it will make WW1 pale in comparison if it isn’t stopped.

          • Wolfe tone July 3, 2016 at 11:29 am #

            Scott, you are getting as bad as Gio by dodging any points I make. Whether smaller countries ‘want’ to join NATO/EU or not, the fact is there are other people in the world who have a fear of them 2 groups. They have had bad experiences from some of the countries that are members of these organisations. Ignoring their fears and concerns reinforces their fears. In case you hadn’t noticed Russia agreed to the break up of the Soviet Union. One of the beliefs to ensure that break up was an unwritten promise to Gorbachev that there would be no further NATO expansion in Europe. Alas that has proven to be a lie. Again, if we are to drag up past wars, and lord knows there’s plenty in Europe that do that, then we must address the fears and suspicions of Russian people from those past wars. Fundamentally they believe the west wanted to see their demise at the hands of the Nazis. So taking that narrative is it irrational of them to believe the west has still got it on for them?

            At the end of the day could you tell me what the UN is there for? Surely that is the more democratic and proper organisation to solve conflicts around the world?

            Perhaps Ireland should’ve approached the Soviet Union for their own protection all those years ago? I am sure your tune would change, although it should not as after all, as you have said already, why shouldn’t a country join an organisation for protection especially after enduring oppression for a hundred years; for example British oppression in Ireland?

          • Scott July 3, 2016 at 5:02 pm #

            WT sorry if I don’t answer all your points in our conversation but you often make several and to debate them all at once would take all day.

            I understand Russian history and there underlying fear of invasion through the North European plain were both Napoleon and Hitler attacked them. This is the reason why they so viciously controlled Eastern Europe during the USSR era by putting down uprisings in 1956 in Hungary and Poland, as well as a rising in Prague (can’t remember the year).

            The USSR and Warsaw Pact is gone now and what we have is smaller sovereign states bordering Russia. I assume you accept these states right for self determination and to run there affairs as they see fit?

            You worry about causing Russia insecurity by expanding NATO due to Russia’s history, but think about the history of these small countries neighbouring Russia. Imagine there insecurities and desperate search for security due to there history of Russian domination and oppression.

            If you accept that they are sovereign nations and have a right to run there own affairs and its there expressed wish to become members of either the EU or NATO then why should that be denied to them? Remember they seek to avoid Russian domination again and NATO especially is there best guarantee of that, as Article 5 of the NATO treaty states that a attack against one member is a attack against all.

            As for your comment of maybe Ireland should have approached the Soviet Union for protection. Well maybe they should have that’s for the ROI to decide as a sovereign nation. Two reasons I can see why they didn’t. Firstly I doubt the USSR would have wanted to as they aren’t of particular strategic advantage, plus they were more focused on holding there buffer zone in Eastern Europe. Second and most importantly I highly doubt Ireland would want to go communist.

          • Scott July 3, 2016 at 8:45 pm #


            There are ethnic Germans in Switzerland, but that doesn’t give Germany the right to invade. Either you accept the right of the Eastern European countries to choose there own future as sovereign nations or you believe that they fall under Russia’s sphere of influence and Russia can do what they like with them.

            A lot of the stuff I could write I’ve already responded to WT with so I won’t put it up here, but they are my reasons for why NATO and EU should accept the willing membership of the countries in question.

            I’m very surprised yourself and WT are supporting Russia so strongly. There’s is a goverment and society that tramples on many of the freedoms so important to me (free speech, freedom of press etc.). I would probably be arrested and jailed in Moscow for having this conversation in public.

            Theres is certainly not a system I would want to live under and I understand why the countries of Eastern Europe look to the EU and NATO to avoid that possibility.

            As for your constant assertions that WW3 is about to break out……………well I’m away out the back to build the bunker now Lol

          • jessica July 3, 2016 at 10:26 pm #

            The EU is currently destabilising the world and quite possibly there is evidence drip feeding out that the hand of the Americans and Israel is behind this change in direction within the EU.

            I absolutely detest communism and have no real interest in Russia. But I detest the Americans and how they are screwing up the world and I detest the Israeli state and their refusal to share the land with the peoples they displaced in the previous century.

            I should have known they were behind the change in direction within the EU.

            As for WW3. I really hope you are right to mock but the fault lines are becoming fairly visible Scott as is the hand of the real players behind it all.

            They want everyone to, like you support the EU super state, the EU army and by joining with the USA they would eventually be in a position to control the middle east by continuing the US policy of creating and arming groups like ISIS to destabilise the regions, encouraging wars to pay for their arms development while ever extending the land borders for when they have a sufficient sized army to invade, paid for by individual nations.

            The EU project started out a great thing, it helped nations grow their economies and encouraged better and fairer treatment of peoples and our environments, it encouraged cooperation between nations by sharing the wealth to keep everyone within a reasonable distance from the stronger nations and growing at a rate the economy could afford.

            For 20 years this has failed to work and it has been more interested in extending borders causing its economy to decline ever more steeply. Now it is on the verge of collapse and a new transatlantic trade agreement is to be the lifeline, but at the cost of becoming a single state with a single army under unified control of the EU and therefore also the US.

            If people like yourself don’t wake up to what is happening it will be too late.

            But I am saying I don’t believe it will play out the way the power heads expect it to.

            Brexit must be the first slap in the teeth to this US policy.

            I am saying that I would choose to fight against the EU and USA from within, not because I want Russia to win, but because I know who is really starting the conflict.

            I wouldn’t worry about the bunker, this war will have no frontier but will turn brother against brother, families will split and the battlefields will be on our streets. There will never be a united Europe army the way the US is calling for.

            It seems Europe has not learned a thing from the previous wars and is prepared to make the same mistakes all over again and then some.

        • giordanobruno July 1, 2016 at 12:59 pm #

          Whether Putin intends to go for the Baltic states or not is a matter of opinion. He may find other ways of doing it other than direct military intervention.
          However there is a tendency to avoid criticising him in some parts, as he is the enemy or at least not the friend of the west.
          So please don’t mention his adventurism or his bombings in Syria, or the palace he is building for himself, or his repression of dissent….we don’t want to know!

          • Wolfe tone July 1, 2016 at 6:32 pm #

            Yip Gio, again it’s what you don’t say that is revealing. Same old same old. Scott is the ministry of peace but you sure are the ministry of straight honest to goodness talking.

          • Scott July 2, 2016 at 1:36 am #

            WT what is the “ministry of peace” anyway? I haven’t a clue what you mean.

        • jessica July 1, 2016 at 4:39 pm #

          “The reason why Russia is bombing Syria in support of there Assad allies…to expand Russian influence, protect its ally and to keep its strategic port in the Mediterranean.”

          You mean, the same thing America and its allies are doing on the other side of that coin. I don’t support the EU expanding to have a second frontier to Russia has any bearing on their defiant actions either.

          These things are way beyond our control, if we could only be happy with our own little part of the world and stopped interfering and expanding into everyone else’s, perhaps peace would have a chance.

          • Scott July 2, 2016 at 1:32 am #

            Yes Jessica America and its allies play the same game in the world. That game is geopolitics.

            To think that countries will only worry about there own little corner of the world is slightly naive. The struggle for resources and strategic position will continue. I guess the choice is would you rather have a EU/NATO dominated Eastern Europe or a Russian one. My preference is the EU/NATO but each to there own.

          • jessica July 2, 2016 at 9:35 am #

            It is not geopolitics Scott, it is globalisation driven domination and controlling ambitions of the worlds resources and trade economics.

            As for choosing sides, they are as bad as one another.

            Once they start another war, I will decide then which side to take and who’s blood to spill. No war is justified so it will be most likely based not on what was right or wrong, but what is best for my own little nation.
            I support Irelands neutral stance in such matters and if we can keep ourselves to hell out of it that would be what we should do.

            Choosing sides already as you have done just means you are part of the problem does it not?

  3. Scott July 2, 2016 at 11:24 am #

    “Choosing sides already as you have done just means you are part of the problem does it not?”

    I don’t really accept your assessment that war is a certain Jessica.

    Increased globalisation in my opinion doesn’t lead to war. The closer nations are integrated and connected means that war is less likely as they will damage each other’s economy greatly and have more solidarity to cooperate than compete.

    I don’t think it’s possible to integrate and fully cooperate with all nations. Some nations are so culturally diffrent and have diffrent values which would make EU type integration impossible.

    The forms itself into “blocs” which help promote each nations safety and economic welfare.

    The bloc I support is the one that best reflects my views. Those views are democratic, liberal, free markets, freedom of speech and the rule of law. Those are best reflected in the EU and the Western trans Atlantic alliance.

    Remaining neutral is a noble idea but after the large stronger nations are gone, who will protect little Ireland from the victor of the war you assume is going to happen?