No announcement yet.

Why did the Irish Fight for the Union?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 35th Tennessee View Post

    I do believe, in fact I'm dang sure of it, that I said a lot, not most. Two different meanings. But a lot of Irish did fight for the south, otherwise there would not have been any Irish Regt.'s in the C.S.A. A regiment is made up of about 1000 men, or 10 companies of 100 men each. That's a lot of irishmen, but not most of them. And their reasons for fighting for the south, from what I've read, was the reason that I said.
    Right, I didn't say that YOU said "most"-I said most. If you can come up with Southern Irish numbers beating what I quoted, then I will acknowledge that MOST Irish fought for the South....however, I don't believe you can. I know how many men make up a regiment, but 1 regiment doesn't equal 150,000....thus my quote. What happened originally was that Slug said was
    From the stories I have heard about how the Irish were treated by the British in Ireland, it wasn't very nice.
    That said, my personal opinion based on the limited, current knowledge I have on this subject is, I don't think the Irish in America, would be in the mood to fight for anyone who believed in human bondage.
    my emphasis added. Then you quoted him & said
    First off that is exactly why a lot of Irish fought for the south. They knew that it was wrong how the Federal Govt. was trying to tell states what they could or could not do. They knew what having a "monarchist" rule was like. By the way, the war was not started over slavery. Also, where do you suppose most of those slaves in the south were bought from? Northern markets maybe? Kinda odd to sell slaves to folks and then tell them they have to set them free and, oh by the way, they just lost their money!The North was just as responsible for slavery as the South.
    So from what you said in your first line, most of the Irish fought for the Confederacy because they believed in human bondage?! My response was a direct response to that statement, but let me go further: You also implied that the U.S. government was "monarchist"-Lincoln neither inherited the Presidency (he was elected fair & square like any other President) nor sought to establish himself as sole ruler of the U.S. If that was the case, why did he hold elections in 1864? Finally, I addressed your "claim" of Northern responsibility for the slave markets-something I did on 2 or 3 other threads where you made the claim. On NONE of these threads could you back up what you said about it.

    Much of what you say seems to be "politically" motivated in favor of the South. The OP was about the Irish fighting for the Union. I would say that most of the Irish who fought for the South fought for the same reason that most men in the South fought for the Confederacy-that is where their friends & family were located & they answered the call to arms. Many in the North fought for the same practical reasons-they were coming off the ships in the North & wanted a country to call their own, & they had friends & family there. The article points out the tremendous sacrifices that those Northern Irishmen made despite the prejudices of what was happening to them.
    The muffled drums sad roll has beat the soldier's last tatoo. No more on life's parade shall meet that brave and fallen few.


    • #17
      You're still saying I said most. I never said most and never implied most. I was just supporting my wording of a lot with the fact that a regiment, and there were several, is a lot of men. I never said there were more Irish in the CSA than the Union Army.
      You must know where you come from in order to know where you are going. Learn from the past.


      • #18
        I'm calling a truce. No more disagreeing with you. I'll post my opinions and you'll post yours. No more arguing. Who knows, you may teach me something anyway.

        You must know where you come from in order to know where you are going. Learn from the past.


        Latest Topics


        • casanova
          by casanova
          The Sowjet T-34 tank against a German Tiger tank in Berlin in the II World War in 1945. ...
          Yesterday, 23:41
        • casanova
          AW 169M
          by casanova
          The Austrian minister of defence Klaudia Tanner declared the buy of 18 Italian military helicopters of the type AW 169M for the Austrian army, the Bundesheer....
          Yesterday, 23:26
        • JBark
          What changed?
          by JBark
          There was a time not too long ago when this forum was full of discussion, multiple posts, votes and involved discussions on the best of the war, etc.,...
          Yesterday, 18:54