Fair Tribunals at Guantanamo? (Was: YANK CHILD ABUSERS :: another reason to kill americans abroad ???)

"Brett" wrote in message ...
"vince" wrote:
| "Brett" wrote in message
...
| "vince" wrote:
| | "Brett" wrote in message
...
| | "vince" wrote:
| | | Fred J. McCall wrote in message n
| | | :
| | | :However Ireland has been occupied and held since 1172 or
there
abouts the
| | | :south release in the 1920's
| | |
| | | I think that's wrong. I didn't think they actually took
over
Ireland
| | | until Liz I.
| | |
| | |
| | | The Military occupation of Ireland began under Strongbow and
Henry
II
| | | The Treaty of Windsor in 1175 recognized the military
conquest.
| | |
| | |
| | | http://www.rte.ie/culture/millennia/history/0711.html
| |
| | From your link: "Before Henry VIII came to power in 1509 the
English
had
| | little influence over Ireland. Henry feared that foreign or
domestic
| | enemies would use Ireland as a base for attacking him."
| |
| | Apples and oranges.
|
| No, your comment implied total control since the 12th Century, your
| reference says otherwise.
|
| My coomment was "The Military occupation of Ireland began under
| Strongbow and Henry II" Tehat is undoubtedly correct.

What part of "Before Henry VIII came to power in 1509 the English had
LITTLE INFLUENCE over Ireland" do you find difficult to understand. A
military occupation in the 12th Century does not imply that the control
was absolute or that the occupation was continuous for three centuries.
If you had bothered reading the rest of the history you presented as
evidence you would have found that a good number of the Irish appeared
to enjoy being part of the struggle for power in the British Isles and a
occupation British Army didn't spend three centuries putting down the
natives.

you clearl do not understand either the statement or Irish History.
In the 12th- 15c century "England" had relatively little influence.
That is becasue the military occupation was by anglo normans, but only
nominally in favor of England as opposed to themselves. it was
occupation by "English" but only nominally by England.

As teh BBC puts it

This is when the trouble became big trouble. For Diarmait promptly
went shopping for mercenaries among the nastiest and greediest
possible bunch of knights. These were the Anglo-Normans who, around
the 1160s, seemed to be on the losing end of the war against the Welsh
princes of Gwynedd. They had lost castles, land and peasants. They
were in an ugly mood and they were looking for somewhere to recoup
their losses. Enter Diarmait. Spread the word, the likes of Robert
fitzStephen and Richard fitzGilbert de Clare (known to his friends,
and especially to his many enemies, as 'Strongbow') must have said:
'Forget about Wales; forget about those unpleasantnesses in the
mountains and valleys. Come west young knights. Ireland will be a
piece of cake. It's said that the natives are primitive. But the
pastures are green. So what are you waiting for?'.

Within a year Diarmait had his throne back in Dublin. But he also now
had an army of Anglo-Normans who weren't about to go away now that the
job was done. In fact, from the beginning, Diarmait had known this. He
not only expected but wanted the likes of Strongbow to stick around,
lest his old enemies get ideas of booting him out again. Robert
fitzStephen was quite right when he told his followers that Diarmait
'loves our race; he is encouraging our race to come here and has
decided to settle them in this island and give them permanent
roots...'. And Diarmait even went to the trouble of marrying his
daughter to Strongbow to make sure that the alliance had staying
power.

Their agreement spelled out that if none of Diarmait's sons survived
(and one had been blinded, another been taken hostage, another was
illegitimate), then Strongbow could even inherit the throne of
Leinster himself! 'The Irish kings did homage to Henry as they would
to any High King...' At which point Henry II suddenly sat up and took
notice of what was going on in the west. He had meant to use
Diarmait's appeal to get a foothold in Ireland. What he had
inadvertently created was a monster: a colony of Anglo-Normans, who
answered to exactly the kind of jumped-up superbaron Henry was busy
sitting on in every other part of his enormous empire.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/state/n...asion_03.shtml

"The English identity which the settlers voiced with growing stridency
in the fourteenth century had older roots. The initial incursions into
Ireland had been by marcher knights and other freelances from south
Wales hired by Diarmait MacMurchadha, the King of Leinster. However,
the rapid intervention of Henry II ensured that from 1171, the main
beneficiaries of the conquests were men associated with the royal
court and military household, some of whom retained estates in England
and Wales. However unruly they might be in the Irish regions, they
held their lands from the crown and saw themselves as the king's
subjects. Royal power was sufficient to prevent the conquests from
developing into an unregulated scramble and to ensure that Ireland
remained politically tied to England."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/state/n...eland_03.shtml

So the bottom line was that it was a military occupation, not a
poltical fusion until much later. As a resutl "england" had little
influence but the occupiers were unquestionably Anglo Normans

Vince