The Irish men of 1916 did not die in vain, unlike those in WW1

For the past number of years, and with increasing intensity, as we approach the centenary of the 1916 Rising, many voices have turned into a veritable cacophony, eulogising the Irish men who fought for the Allied side in the imperial joust that was World War One.

This may be fair enough, in and of itself, but it seems beyond the capacity of many of those voices, as amply demonstrated in your editorial of August 5, to venerate those men without having a side swipe at the men of 1916.

Subtle digs mentioning “medieval blood sacrifice” suggest that the men of 1916 were psychopaths, but, at least, they achieved something, as opposed to the legions of men led to slaughter by John Redmond’s naive trust that the Home Rule Bill would be passed.

And even if the British Government were to face down militant unionism and an army ready to mutiny, what would Home Rule have given us, only a very limited form of local government power.

Without doubt, had we settled for Home Rule we would have been a full participant in the conflagration that was World War Two.

I am sure that the growing band of Redmondite revivalists would have loved for tens of thousands more Irish men to have been killed in that honourable struggle.

I wonder who really has the lust for blood sacrifice?

Cormac Cahill

32 Limetrees Road

Maryborough Estate

Douglas

Cork