Bruce Arnold should be ashamed of himself…

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

unless you are my nuremberg inlaws who are still a little bitter about the flattening of the aldtsadt

Definitions of civility were somewhat liberal in the closing years of the war – I think Bomber Harris had particular
difficulties with the word. Mind you, I have a feeling that your in-laws from Nuremberg are probably not in a very strong position to pontificate on such issues – the German’s were not the world’s greatest appreciators of fine architecture between 1939 and 1945. Good job you didn’t marry a woman from Stalingrad – now there’s a tale of urban renewal for you.

@asdasd wrote:

While I have verbally smacked people on this board for saying that the Wide Street commision was British ( it was Anglo Irish, or just Irish), I think the British have a claim on Trinity which was a State project, not a City Project. The Queen of England, Ireland, and France ordered it built, and I assume paid for it.

This is an interesting argument, the logical consequences of which I suspect you probably have not thought through. In this case, the British state can claim rightful protectorship of a great number of public/state buildings in the Republic which – regardless of whoever actually physically built them – were initiated or funded in some way by the great British empire. Perhaps you could offer a list and we will see just how much of the Republic the British feel should be protected in the event of a war.

The natural extension of this argument is that every structure of merit built by a colonial or occupying power in another country should be registered on that former power’s list. In this case, can Italy lay protective claim to Hadrian’s Wall and can the German’s lay protective claim to the defensive structures along the coast of Normandy? I could go on with hundreds of international examples but I think the argument is clear. Of course, what one country may consider nothing more than a symbol of colonial oppression and may be quite happy to have obliterated, might have pride of place on the list of another country.

What you argue Asdasd would result in some extremely interesting international situations. The fact is, whatever happened in Ireland centuries ago happened is over. The British cannot legally lay protective claim to any object in the 26 counties at this moment in time, in the same way that some Celtic family on the continent cannot lay claim to some bronze brooch in the National Museum because their long-lost cousin twice removed decided to emigrate 3,000 years ago.

This is the type of patronising imperial logic that the British have applied to other colonial possessions, such as the Elgin Marbles, with the implicit suggestion that the rightful owners of the objects are incapable or unwilling to protect them. I would also argue that if this is indeed the case and the British have a right to include Trinners on their list, then give us back all of those valuable Celtic metalwork pieces in the British Museum that were stolen from Ireland – even the ‘stupid’ Irish can surely take care of a few bits of metal.

Yeah, time certainly has moved on. Like, where the heck are “the 26 counties”? Does PDLL mean the Republic of Ireland?

@Sue wrote:

Yeah, time certainly has moved on. Like, where the heck are “the 26 counties”? Does PDLL mean the Republic of Ireland?

I specified the 26 counties of the Irish Republic, as whether we like it or not, the British have some claim (legitimate or not) to the 6 counties of Northern Ireland. I was trying to avoid any ambiguity in the interests of a clearer argument. Regardless, many Irish people do still refer to the ’26 counties’ as an interchangeable name for the Republic of Ireland, unless Sue knows of another county lurking out that that has crept into the Republic unbeknownst to me.