Forgotten Battle of the Irish Army, Siege of Jadotville (Congo) 1961

[mcdid]

As a member of the Irish defence forces I have always been interested in its history. Although only formed up in its present incarnation since the early 20's it still has amassed a rich history maily through its involment with the UN.
Being a neutral country obviously does not lend itself well to partaking in skirmishes, battles etc etc and i would never make any assumption that the Irish army is on a par with the Americans or the British etc in fighting experience as many people all over the net try to convince people of, amongst other things.

However the few times that the Irish army has gotten itself into situations that turn nasty it has aquitted itself very well and one such incident was at a place called Jadotville in the Congo in September 1961.
One company, namely 'A' Company 35th Battalion, where sent, without heavy weapons (due to transportation problems), to Jadotville to protect the local population and a number of Belgian colonists.
The Katangese gendarmerie, Belgian colonists and a sprinkling of mercenaries (including at least one irishman) attacked the irish positions as the Irish where attending mass and at their most vulnerable.

This led to 5 days of continuous battle in which the Irish soldiers held off a force of 3,000 to as many as 5,000 men armed with fouga jets (two operating from Ellizabethville) 81mm mortars, french 75mm howitzers and an assortment of other heavy weapons. The Irish had only their own personnal weaponss (Gustav SMG's, FN FAL's) and old vickers MG's.

The end result of the battle was that the Irish inflicted up to 300 KIA and up to 1000 WIA on the enemy for no KIA on their own side and 7 WIA. It was a remarkable feat of arms to inflict such casualties for seven wounded and outnumbered and outgunned as they where. In the end The men of A company had fixed Bayonets as they had run out of ammunition. Repeated attempts by a mixed force of british gurkas and irish infantry failed to break through to A company and ressuply attempts by air did not work. Seeing how hard his men had fought and the clear military victory they had accomplished Commadant Pat Quinlan felt he had no choice but to agree to cease-fire terms from the Katangese and surrender to avoid loss of life to his men.

The aftermath of this surrender renered a bit of embarrassement on the UN and when A company where finally released and returned home the Irish public threw rotting fruit etc at the troops who had fought so well. The Government and the Army quickly went about forgetting everything that had happened and the soldiers of A company and their commander Pat Quinlan where quietly allowed to fall into obscurity. Only last year (2009) where the veterans finaly remembered for their heroic actions and a monument was erected in their honour.

Anyway thats a very brief recall of how it went and i thought i would put it out there to the military.net community to see what you think. I for one am very proud of what they accomplished through force of arms and i know it is nowhere near what some other militaries have seen in terms of combat but i hope it might spark a bit of inerest for some.

I dont know how to link yet but Declan Power wrote a book titled Siege at Jadotville which is an excellent read on the subject and wikipedia has a page on it which having read over it is not too bad as far as wikipedia information goes!! A guy called Michael Whelan also wrote and self published his own book on the subject, again an excellent read but hard to obtain.
Any questions dont hesitate to ask.

Cheers

mcdid

[psb1]

and returned home the Irish public threw rotting fruit etc at the troops who had fought so well.

Why was that??

I knew a bit about this battle, amazing story. Thanks for posting. Did the Irish government equip the UN batt better than the rest of the Defence Forces? I was under the impression that most infantry of the period were still issued SMLEs. Interested to hear different....

[mcdid]

It was seen as a major embarrasment at the time and viewed as troops coming home in disgrace. The FN was only being introduced at the time and some 303's where also used. After this and a number of other battles and skirmishes at the time the FN became common place and the 303 was gradually phased from use into the reserves.

[HollywoodMarine]

We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey.

I appreciate you posting this, and making us aware of historical facts that aren't well known.

Slainte!

[B_706K]

An interesting read, thanks for posting! Might go do a bit of googling...

[goat89]

Fighting Irish indeed.
I had heard, FAINTLY, about this battle, but never knew the Irish suffered no KIA. Incredible.

[mcdid]

It was incredible and even more so the reception they got upon returning!
In the book by michael whelan he descibes one incident on day two if my memory serves me right, of a seargent who crawled up to an outhouse some two hundred meters away from the irish forward line and proceeded to storm it with his gustav smg and a bag of grenades. He killed or wounded eight enemy in the process and then returned to his own lines under fire where he set about repelling the next attack with his section.

This is just one incident which i remember off hand (i'd have to read the book again for details instead of making stats up) and there where loads of others. Amazing in the extreme that not one medal was awarded at the end of it all! A sad yet momentous week and there-after for our small defence force!

Thanks for the kind comments all.

mcdid

[WILD WEST]

I read a little about this,its a real shame that these brave men were treated like that and to be called cowards by some people just makes me sick.Commadant Pat Quinlan and his men should have been welcomed home as the Heroes that they are.

[HollywoodMarine]

He (Commadant Pat Quinlan) was forced to surrender only due to the failings of the UN leadership and preserved the lives of every one of the men he led into battle.

Pretty much answers it in bold.

[rgjbloke]

300 enemy KIA and up to 1000 enemy WIA for no KIA on their own side and 7 WIA. Those are the kind of figures that lable Units "Legendary". Great story. Thanks for posting.

[mcdid]

Absolutely WEST. But thats the thing thats sticks in my throat about the irish public at times. The defence forces has been there since the beginning of the state and indeed was instrumental in its set up you could say! Yet its a case of constant "out of sight out of mind" syndrome with the public. In part its the MoD's fault, but when you sit in some far flung country on UN duty with no news coverage of note back home to tell the public all the good that your doing then your normal joe just doesnt want to know. Yet when something is percieved as going wrong well then the band wagons gonna need new suspension!! Im sure its the same everywhere but we need all the good publicity we can get so we dont keep getting wacked with spending cuts every year!! Anyhow...rant over...phewwww:-)

[mcdid]

Cheers rgj. Wish the public and DoD thought the same. Very little esprit de corp. I envy you guys with your history tough/bet into you during training. It would be nice to have some military lineage in our units even if it is DF wide!

[mcdid]

The bit i find realy interesting is the fact that there was one maybe more Irish mercenaries fighting against the Irish! Mad!!

[WILD WEST]

I feel the same Mcdid, I served 13 years in the reserves and when thing go wrong ie. floods and snow thats when people want the defence forces.The people in the front line service should not be on the receiving end of the spending cuts..

[mcdid]

I know WEST. Madness. But how do you argue with hospitals and schools because you want more spending on defence?:roll: Anyway, interesting point to note is that the swedish pilot who flew in the water to the irish subsequently was forced to stay the course with the irish due to his heli going U/S. I cannot find any refernce to it but im sure he would not have sat idly by if there where other weapons lying around spare and fellow UN soldiers where under attack! Just conjecture but an interesting by note!

[mcdid]

"The Second Battle for the Tunnel Elisabethville, Congo.

On the morning of Saturday, l6th Dec. 1961 the Tunnel was stormed by Irish UN Troops in Elizabethville, one Irish Officer was killed and another Irish soldier died in the assault. The Achievement of the 36th Bn in capturing this vital communications link controlling the railway running north to Jadotville and the road to the Swedish and Irish Camps was undoubtedly, the outstanding feat of the renewed fighting in Elizabethville. It meant that the Katangans had no hope of bringing in re-enforcement's from the north by rail.

Following a Mortar Barrage, the Irish troops of A and B Coys launched their assault. B Coy were under Comdt Bill O'Callaghan (this Officer served in Ennis for over 12 years) The 36th Battalion were commanded by Lieut.Colonel Mick Hogan (this officer was a frequent visitor to Ennis before the l960s.) The Irish soldiers were going against two companies of Katangans, who were in the tunnel itself, firmly entrenched in both sides of it and also concealed in carriages of the train standing on the line. The tunnel was a complete bombproof shelter. An infantry assault was called for and the brunt of this assault was now to fall on the shoulders of the unseasoned troops of the 36th Bn., who found themselves pitched into a major battle almost before they found their feet in the Congo.

They went on towards their objective, knowing in their hearts that it would be death or glory for them on this grey, murky morning. They were young men and they were filled with that strange feeling of tension that comes just before the guns begin to blaze. Deep down they might wonder what was the purpose of it all, why they were fighting Katangans when there was no clash of ideologies as in the Korean War, no personal hatreds - why blood should flow in the quelching mud of that morning. And their hates, their loves and their fears were the same as the ordinary soldiers on any side in any war down the centuries. And like all good soldiers on any side in any battle they might ponder but they knew it was not for them to weigh the big issues but to take their commands without question and fight the battle unflinchingly.

They were in the open ground now and it was sodden, saturated ground. They sank low in it and even crawled on their bellies in it as they picked their way onwards. The driving rain had soaked them through to the skin but their eyes were narrowed and set on the strong point ahead and they forgot their discomfort and thought only of the victory that must be theirs.

The leading Platoon was now in full cry and did not falter even as they saw their leader (Lt.O'Riordan) fall mortally wounded. The drove the Katangans out of the railway carriages. The Katangans now re-grouped their forces and launched a counter attack but the Irish knew that the Tunnel was now theirs and they did not intend to relinquish it. They stood firm against all attacks."

Compliments of shadowspear.com

Another example of letting history fade from memory. I have very little info on this and this was the most substantiale piece i found. Its known about in the Df but details are hard to come by.
Once again an interesting read.

[WILD WEST]

Im sure he would have used one of the weapons to help.As Im sure any UN soldier would do given the same circumstances..

[Connaught Ranger]

A great read and of interest to those who are not so up to speed on Irish military history. However the way you refer here to
and old vickers MG's. might possibly be misinterpreted as the weapon being old stock, and while the basic weapon design was introduced in the pre WW1 period of 1912, to the British Army, Irish weapons I believe were sourced from the British for the Irish Defence Forces, there was nothing wrong with the weapons on service with the Irish in the Congo, as all weapons had to undergo the annual inspection by teams of Armorers in what ever Command Area the weapons were located in Ireland, the weapons in the Congo would have been regularly serviced as well by Irish Battalion Armorers.

(The Vicker's .303 Heavy Machine Gun remained in service with the British Army until 30 March 1968. Its last operational use was in the Radfan during the Aden Emergency.) And I believe it was still a standard weapon in the Congo of the UN Indian contingent & Gurkha contingent.

Connaught Ranger (ex 28th Bn, Finner Camp)

[cbreedon]

One company, namely 'A' Company 35th Battalion, where sent, without heavy weapons (due to transportation problems), to Jadotville to protect the local population and a number of Belgian colonists.
The Katangese gendarmerie, Belgian colonists and a sprinkling of mercenaries (including at least one irishman) attacked the irish positions as the Irish where attending mass and at their most vulnerable.
mcdid

Not too up on this conflict but why were the UN protecting Belgians and being attacked by them as well?

[Chiptox]

Not too up on this conflict but why were the UN protecting Belgians and being attacked by them as well?
They were peacekeepers. By protecting the peace they were protecting everyone. Or at least that was the thinking behing that statement.

Congo in the 1960's was not a simple or easy situation.

[JUNKHO]

They were peacekeepers. By protecting the peace they were protecting everyone. Or at least that was the thinking behing that statement.

Congo in the 1960's was not a simple or easy situation.

True....true...

As are many activities associated with military actions

[mcdid]

Hi chiptox, yep your right. The local population and indeed the belgian colonists where hostile to the irish company. Why? well the politics at the time did not lend themselves very well to the UN intervention to say the least. Needless to say it was one more worry the company did not need. Amongst other things the local belgians and indigenous population cut the towns water supply for the irish and where openly hostile to them! once again a sad account of how uninformed the UN intelligence and indeed the irsh intelligence was at the time, leaving the lads on the ground exposed in more ways than one.

Hi Connaught, Being reading your posts for a long time and fair play, you highlighted that about the vickers. I aint in any way that up to date on weapons history and realy appreciate the input. I did not mean that the weapons where old and therefore inneffective in any way (i think the results of the engagement speak for themselves) but was merely highlighting the fact that there was such a disparity between the two forces upon engagement. But again cheers for the input. I would hate to be misleading people on such a topic.

Cheers lads,

Mcdid (current 303sqn tech, rotary wing);-)

[Connaught Ranger]

Hi chiptox, yep your right. The local population and indeed the belgian colonists where hostile to the irish company. Why? well the politics at the time did not lend themselves very well to the UN intervention to say the least. Needless to say it was one more worry the company did not need. Amongst other things the local belgians and indigenous population cut the towns water supply for the irish and where openly hostile to them! once again a sad account of how uninformed the UN intelligence and indeed the irsh intelligence was at the time, leaving the lads on the ground exposed in more ways than one.

Hi Connaught, Being reading your posts for a long time and fair play, you highlighted that about the vickers. I aint in any way that up to date on weapons history and realy appreciate the input. I did not mean that the weapons where old and therefore inneffective in any way (i think the results of the engagement speak for themselves) but was merely highlighting the fact that there was such a disparity between the two forces upon engagement. But again cheers for the input. I would hate to be misleading people on such a topic.

Cheers lads,

Mcdid (current 303sqn tech, rotary wing);-)

The United Nations as an international organization in regards to Armed Peacekeeping is built upon a fractured (some will say flawed concept) however from its inception until now, there appears to be no other way to utilize a International United Military Force for Peace-keeping, Peace-enforcing roles.

From the very early days the organization relied upon deployed unarmed military officers from its member states being sent to Palestine and Kashmir as independent international witnesses to observe and report on conflicts, this type of venture is one side of the "peace-keeping" and the alternative example of the other side being the UN involvement in the Korean War.)

The United Nations Emergency Force (U.N.E.F.) together with the deployment of U.N. unarmed observers became a blueprint for the United Nations approach to containing other potentially destabilizing conflicts.

The Republic of Ireland was not a member of the United Nations until December of 1955 and had no contribution to the early U.N. Observer Missions, however they did send officers in 1958 as U.N.M.O's. (unarmed U.N. Military Observers) to participate in the U.N. Observer mission in Lebanon (U.N.O.G.I.L.), this was to be a proving ground and steep learning curve for the Irish State, its Civil Service and Defence Forces, following this Irish Officers were deployed with U.N.T.S.O. in the Middle-East, this too was an unarmed military observer mission.

On the 30th of June 1960 the Republic of Congo gained its independence from Belgium in within days erupted into violence. Belgium sent troops to restore order and protect their nationals living there, without the approval of the new Congolese Government, who in turn sought military assistance from the United Nations, which was sanctioned by the U.N.S.C. (United Nations Security Council) on July 14th 1960. The advance elements of what was to become O.N.U.C. were deployed to the Congo on the 16th of July 1960.

First the Irish were asked to provide officers for the new force, then a formal request was submitted for an infantry battalion, this was later increased to two battalions, a total of 1,200 men, Ireland responded promptly and on the request was acceded on the 19th of July 1960 with the advance elements reporting to the Congo on the 22nd of July 1960.

As U.N.T.S.O. was always the immediate available pool of trained military personnel it was called upon to provide Major General von Horn to act as force commander, he in turn sought the assistance of Colonel McCarthy from U.N.T.S.O. to act has his Chief-of-Staff, interviews with McCarthy's former UNOGIL comrades suggest the McCarthy's experience in establishing UNOGIL and his ability to get things done in a mixed international military staff were the attributes that made him ideally suited to the unprecedented task facing the ONUC's force commander.

Colonel McCathy became the Irish link to three UN missions: U.N.O.G.I.L, U.N.T.S.O. and now O.N.U.C., he gave himself completely to the demands of his extensive duties in O.N.U.C. headquarters at Leopoldville, and during the performance of those duties he tragically died in a car accident on the 27th of October 1960. Following a commendation by Major General von Horn to the Irish military authorities, he was posthumously awarded the Irish Distinguished Service Medal, Second Class. He was the first Irish Defence Force officer to give his life in the performance of United Nations Peace-keeping Missions.

(McCarthy's death preceded by ten days the tragedy of the Niemba Ambush, when nine Irish soldiers lost their lives, and was understandably overlooked in the scale of the catastrophe.)

Although U.N. troops were speedily deployed to the Congo, landing there only two days after the UN Resolution was passed, they were no means a cohesive force.As a basic military force in the field ONUC was not just unwieldy, it basically did not function, due to some of the special rules the Secretary-General developed for the mission, but which in turn seriously curtailed the scope of the entire operation:

The U.N. force was to be under the exclusive command of the Secretary-General, responsible only to the Security Council.

It could not take orders from the host government and had to be separate and distinct from the activities of any national authorities .

The U.N. could not become a party to internal conflicts. U.N. troops could not be used to enforce any specific political situation.

The U.N. force was supposed to have freedom of movement throughout the Congo.

U.N. troops could use force only in self-defense and could not exercise any initiative in the use of armed force.

The composition of the force would be decided by the Secretary-General, although the views of the host country would be considered.

National units in the U.N. force would take orders only from the U.N. and not from their home governments.

Also difficulty lay in the erratic personality of Congolese Prime-Minister Patrice Lumumba, in 1960 there was little doubt he was under the influence of Communist advisers, the prime minister showed little interest in cooperating with the U.N. in its efforts to restore order and deal with secessionist province of Katanga where President Moise Tshombe with the aide of Belgian military officers and civilian advisers has established an oasis of relative tranquility.

On one hand Tshombe resolutely refused to admit U.N. troops while his opposite number Lumumba demanded that the U.N. expel the Belgians from Katanga and force Tshombe to end his secessionist activities.

Documents compiled by Canadian staff officers at the time show that while the Congo government invited the U.N. to come into their country in order to establish law and order and restore economic life, the Prime minister and some of his colleagues quickly became antagonistic to white troops (in particular and to the U.N. force in general, which comprised of members from 30 countries.)

The Canadians stated that it was becoming very obvious with each passing day that a police state was in the making and the pressure from the U.N. was the only deterrent.

To fully understand the magnitude of what the Irish Army was being asked to do one has to understand the state of the Irish Army in the late 1950's, in the immortal words of Noel Carey who served as a Lieutenant and platoon commander, the Irish Army was "run down, lacked financing and direction, and its mission was not clearly defined."

Military duties consisted of ceremonial drill and a very limited Aid to the Civil Power in the context of the IRA border Campaign which was beginning at the time, Carey recalled that he spent a three-month period on the border where his soldiers were carrying out essential duties such as setting up roadblocks and patrolling with the Gardai (Police) the work was interesting and demanding but once in the barracks the boredom was worse than ever. "Sport was a very important to me and kept me motivated," he said, "however, there was a distinct lack of adventure in the army at this time."

Back in the Congo it was clear there was an intense need for an international force to restore law and order but in his subsequent book on peace-keeping experiences; "Soldiering for Peace, von Horn confirmed all of his difficulties as senior leader of the O.N.U.C. military leadership, particularly the poor facilities and lack of communications, and the fact that the ONUC military leadership was hamstrung by the O.N.U.C. civilian leadership who insisted on taking operational decisions, which they were very ill-equipped to make.

A further problem facing the O.N.U.C. was the State of Martial law which was declared in August with demands that all U.N. personnel, civil and military carry I.D. and produce it on demand of the Congolese authorities,which seriously impeded the conduct of O.N.U.C. operations.

The O.N.U.C. force had expanded into a very large establishment, but lacked serious cohesion and know-how and with no practical authority: "for weeks, civilians, officers and other ranks have been pouring in from all over the world; people who have little in common and who are tied by strings which prevent or restrict their use.

This rapid expansion of HQ ONUC, seemingly without any plan, has resulted in the most effort being directed at their own administration to the detriment of the 18,000 troops spread over a territory in size (905,000 square miles) but without an adequate means of communications, this situation, together with an almost total lack of telephonic communications between offices and an impossible accommodation set up has caused intolerable delay, confusion and frustration right from the start and the end is not yet in sight." as noted by the Canadians.In late 1960 General von Horn had fallen into ill-health and had to withdraw more and more from operational decision making, in December von Horn returned to the U.N.T.S.O. mission the new O.N.U.C. force commander was appointed to take his place, General Sean McKeown from Ireland.

When McKeown arrived he had to accept a number of people on his staff who were there to purely satisfy political demands and agendas and while there were some Canadians, a few Irish, and a number of wll-regarded Indian officers, there were also a number of others whose military education and poor English language skills made for very difficult communications, there were also a number of others who privately (behind his back) questioned General McKeown's judgment by citing his lack of previous war service.

Up to date intelligence is a vital tool to planning military operations the lack of which prevents any military commander from having a realistic estimate of the situation out on the ground. this touches on a sensitive subject because while individual countries supporting the UN operation did maintain where possible under very difficult circumstances intelligence networks, the UN itself did not!

Hammarskjold actually referred to this on one occasion at a meeting of the Congo Advisory Committee, he admitted that this was a serious handicap but justified the situation on the grounds that the UN must have clean hands, which in all reality frequently resulted in bloodied peacekeepers and butchered civilians and many UN personnel, both military and civilian, despaired of such international innocence, and trivial manner in which such an important military function was treated.

The late Connor Cruise O'Brien recalled that;
"We infringed the 'clean hands' policy to the extent of employing in Elisabethville, one Greek ex-policeman with an imperfect knowledge of French who was already - as we later found out from captured documents - known at the H.Q. of Tshombe's Gendarmerie by the proud title of "Chief of the United Nations Intelligence Services in Katanga." The rest of the said service consisting of a few Baluba houseboys who, sometimes for money but more often out of sheer political zeal, would bring scraps of information, usually alarmist gossip, from time to time."Reply in progress, to be continued. . . .

Connaught Ranger.

[Proudgrandson]

That would make for a very good film.

[mcdid]

The film rights to Siege at Jadotville have been sold
15/6/2010
Related book: Siege at Jadotville - limited edition hardback (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/book.html?bid=114&title=Siege at Jadotville - limited edition hardback&no_cache=1)

We are pleased to announce that we have sold the film rights to Siege at Jadotville: the Irish Army's Forgotten Battle, by Declan Power, to the Cannibal Corportion Limited. Prepartory work on the proposed film has already begun with the Irish Film Board allocating €50,000 in funding to develop a script. An American based scriptwriter is expected to be assigned to the project in the coming weeks.
The book tells the story of how A Company, 35th Irish Infantry Battalion, fought a week long siege, outnumbered 15 to 1, while protecting the town of Jadotville in the Congo in 1961 as part of a United Nations mission.
Richie Smyth, a spokesman for Cannibal Corportion Limited, said the story was one that needed to be told and was confident of bringing the project to fruition. "The book has all the key ingrediants for a great film. It's a story that needs to be told," he said.
Declan Power, the book's author, said he was delighted at the deal, which was negotiated by Jean Harrington of Maverick House. News of the film deal was reported in the Irish Independent and the Daily Mail's Irish edition yesterday morning.

From the maverick house publishers website.
Good news!! Apparently the film will be produced for around 6 million euro.

[Connaught Ranger]

The film rights to Siege at Jadotville have been sold
15/6/2010
Related book: Siege at Jadotville - limited edition hardback (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/book.html?bid=114&title=Siege%20at%20Jadotville%20-%20limited%20edition%20hardback&no_cache=1)

We are pleased to announce that we have sold the film rights to Siege at Jadotville: the Irish Army's Forgotten Battle, by Declan Power, to the Cannibal Corportion Limited. Prepartory work on the proposed film has already begun with the Irish Film Board allocating €50,000 in funding to develop a script. An American based scriptwriter is expected to be assigned to the project in the coming weeks.
The book tells the story of how A Company, 35th Irish Infantry Battalion, fought a week long siege, outnumbered 15 to 1, while protecting the town of Jadotville in the Congo in 1961 as part of a United Nations mission.
Richie Smyth, a spokesman for Cannibal Corportion Limited, said the story was one that needed to be told and was confident of bringing the project to fruition. "The book has all the key ingrediants for a great film. It's a story that needs to be told," he said.
Declan Power, the book's author, said he was delighted at the deal, which was negotiated by Jean Harrington of Maverick House. News of the film deal was reported in the Irish Independent and the Daily Mail's Irish edition yesterday morning.

From the maverick house publishers website.
Good news!! Apparently the film will be produced for around 6 million euro.

But seeing as how a cough. . . . . "yank" will be doing the screen writing it will probably be 99% fantasy and the 1% fact will be its set in the Congo. p-)

Why they could not get an Irish script writer is beyond me.

Connaught Ranger.

[mcdid]

My thoughts exactly. We had several people in the Don a few months back from the irish film board who where surveying the hangers to see if it was feasible to make them look like they where back in 1961(the outside that is:)). Dont know what the DoD's official stance on allowing the Don to be used is though, but even with a 'yank' doing the screen writing i hope there will be a lot of input from the DF to keep the film planted in some sort of near reality and not let it go off the deep end alla Michael Collins!!!!!!:roll:

[futurepilot2004]

i hope there will be a lot of input from the DF to keep the film planted in some sort of near reality and not let it go off the deep end alla Michael Collins!!!!!!:roll:

wait Michael Collins wasnt completely factual??? Im shocked :D.
Share your view though, hopefully it will be accurate.

With regards to the Don being used, it and Air Corps aircraft have been used in film before ie "The devils own" and "In the name of the father". Air Corp craft were repainted in BA and RAF colours for both films.

[mcdid]

Ok where do i start?:grin:
More misplaced emphasis than anything but for instance, the war against Great Britian from 1919-1921 was fought on a broader scale than the movie depicts. The movie leads you to believe that The Troubles took place almost exclusively within Dublin. Also, the movie paints Michael Collins as solely responsible for the Treaty of 1921. Arthur Griffith,who appears only in a few scenes was the lead man on the trip over. In one of the scenes, he is in the Dail defending the treaty and, apparently, its bearer, Michael Collins. In reality, Griffith was defending himself as well. Nevertheless, I'm sure the dramatic import was historically the same - Michael Collins felt responsible for his part in bringing on the Irish Civil War.
Anyhow lets not get bogged down with that :grin:

About the Don being used in movies before you are dead on. I hope your right and the same attitudes prevail as before.

By the by having a Casa try and pass off for a Herc...fail:cantbeli:

[futurepilot2004]

Ok where do i start?:grin:
More misplaced emphasis than anything but for instance, the war against Great Britian from 1919-1921 was fought on a broader scale than the movie depicts. The movie leads you to believe that The Troubles took place almost exclusively within Dublin. Also, the movie paints Michael Collins as solely responsible for the Treaty of 1921. Arthur Griffith,who appears only in a few scenes was the lead man on the trip over. In one of the scenes, he is in the Dail defending the treaty and, apparently, its bearer, Michael Collins. In reality, Griffith was defending himself as well. Nevertheless, I'm sure the dramatic import was historically the same - Michael Collins felt responsible for his part in bringing on the Irish Civil War.
Anyhow lets not get bogged down with that :grin:
:
I was being sarcastic hence the smiley. Sorry for making you write all that :)

[baboon6]

Ok where do i start?:grin:
More misplaced emphasis than anything but for instance, the war against Great Britian from 1919-1921 was fought on a broader scale than the movie depicts. The movie leads you to believe that The Troubles took place almost exclusively within Dublin. Also, the movie paints Michael Collins as solely responsible for the Treaty of 1921. Arthur Griffith,who appears only in a few scenes was the lead man on the trip over. In one of the scenes, he is in the Dail defending the treaty and, apparently, its bearer, Michael Collins. In reality, Griffith was defending himself as well. Nevertheless, I'm sure the dramatic import was historically the same - Michael Collins felt responsible for his part in bringing on the Irish Civil War.
Anyhow lets not get bogged down with that :grin:



What did you guys think of The Wind That Shakes The Barley? I watched it on TV here the other night?

[Connaught Ranger]

The "Wind that shakes the Barley" is in reality a poor representation of facts and hardly touches upon the Irish Defence Force as its based on what happened before the creation of the Irish Free State and the subsequent Irish Civil War which featured a far different force than those to which this topic is about namely the Irish Defence Force on U.N. Duty in the Congo in 1960.

Back on topic:-

Some comments with regards Jadotville; Commandant Pat Quinlan the "A" Company, 35th Irish Bn. Commander and his men had fought their enemy to a stand-still and only agreed to a cease-fire after four days of action, agreeing to a cease fire the Irish had offered much and taken little, not even getting the water they had been promised from their opponents when agreeing to the cease fire, however they did have the pleasure of secretly removing all the firing mechanisms from their small arms and Vickers machine guns, before secretly burying them in the field latrines and dirt in and around their fighting positions.

Commandant Pat Quinlan decision to hold and fight had initially been formulated around the promise of UN Jets providing Air support, the initial talk of which swayed negotiations in his favour, but when the U.N. Jets did not appear in the skies of Jadotville his bargaining advantage was heavily diminished. A show of air support would have made all the difference for the Commander and men of "A" Company.

Its also clear that neither the O.N.U.C civil or military staff back at their H.Q. understood the serious situation on the ground and facing "A" Company at Jadotville, poor communications monitoring meant the subsequent surrender of "A" Company came as a nasty surprise to them.

International Newspaper reports of the Irish surrender were quite respectful of the Irish troops actions, with Peter Younghusband of the Daily Mail writing "these justly proud Irishmen are now VIPs, Very Important Prisoners of Katanga"., in writing this Younghusband brought to light two main points, (a) that "A" Company had fulfilled to the utmost their military duty and had nothing whatsoever to be ashamed of, with their actions.

(b) even though their capture was a big asset to the Katangans as leverage to force the UN military operations to a halt given the propaganda value they could show the entire world how the supposed bully boys of Tshombe treated prisoners of war.

The reality highlighted, in fact, was the Irish soldiers were not at fault by their actions, but the flawed system implemented upon the deployment of O.N.U.C., (despite the warnings being spoken by those on the ground about the implementation of U.N. General Secretary's policies.) surely was.

Reaction amongst the rest of the Irish battalion in regards "A" Companys surrender began to manifest, for when "A" Company members returned to duty, from their brief stay in captivity, former Lieutenant Carey was to recall; "after a honeymoon of a week, a well-earned rest, and being re-supplied with weapons, a certain animosity began to develop between some members of the battalion and "A" Company because of the surrender."

The Irish Times Journalist, Cathal O' Shannon "there was a palpable sense of shame" within the Irish contingent after Jadotville. This can be attributed to the Irish Army's inexperience with international and peace-keeping duties, some people deemed that the Irish had dropped the ball, with an Independent T.D. (Irish Parliament member) and former Irish Military officer, Jack McQuillan in 1960 to claim their was a blood lust mentality in the country and that the "A" Company men involved in Jadotville, would surely have been recognized as heroes, if they had died.

Was the "A" Company Commander guilty of any wrong doing, only if one considers that he was outsmarted by the Katangan's offer of a ceasefire, and after his warning about U.N. airpower proved to be an empty threat, and that there was a clear lack of direction in the orders he did receive from his chain of command which only caused to cloud the situation on the ground still further.

It showed also that there was even then considerable ineptitude with the U.N. leadership (a problem that seems to have rared its ugly head on other U.N. missions and the flaw that I referred to at the beginig of my first post in this thread.) and that there were many others within the Administration and U.N.O.C. chain of command who bore much responsibility for their inept handling in regards to taking the right decisions with regards supporting their troops on the ground when faced with the sharp end of the stick.

Connaught Ranger.

[Breerman]

I have a hard time to see anything dishonorable in the Irish surrender. They did well.

This was as I understand it at the first stage of the military intervention and rather small-scale both in manpower and equipment (our guys lacked every type of heavy equipment, no armored vehicles, no mortars, no carl-gustavs). The besieged Irish as well as the Irish, Swedes, and Gurkhas who tried to relieve them were faced with a better equipped force many times their size (some say up to 5 000), and to that the Katangese Air Force.

Things changed after this and Katanga was defeated. It was a very complex conflict, with changing rules, sides, diplomacy. Some of our guys were eaten by cannibals, just crazy. It was a first of it's kind for UN and the people in New York went nuts when the first offensive operations were carried out (on own initiative). Says a lot...

A movie would be very nice.

[mcdid]

I was being sarcastic hence the smiley. Sorry for making you write all that :-)

No bother lad. Sure its just an excuse to berate stupid americanised films that i couldnt pass up:grin:


Breerman

I have a hard time to see anything dishonorable in the Irish surrender. They did well.

This was as I understand it at the first stage of the military intervention and rather small-scale both in manpower and equipment (our guys lacked every type of heavy equipment, no armored vehicles, no mortars, no carl-gustavs). The besieged Irish as well as the Irish, Swedes, and Gurkhas who tried to relieve them were faced with a better equipped force many times their size (some say up to 5 000), and to that the Katangese Air Force.

Things changed after this and Katanga was defeated. It was a very complex conflict, with changing rules, sides, diplomacy. Some of our guys were eaten by cannibals, just crazy. It was a first of it's kind for UN and the people in New York went nuts when the first offensive operations were carried out (on own initiative). Says a lot...

A movie would be very nice.


They aquitted themselves well for the severe disparity in quantity and quality of equipment alright.

Im open to correction but i distinctly remember reading that several members fought with their SMG's, namely the Gustav, as we had no others at the time and we definitely used 60mm mortars for counter battery fire and initial bombardments on advancing waves of Katangese!

[futurepilot2004]

Im open to correction but i distinctly remember reading that several members fought with their SMG's, namely the Gustav, as we had no others at the time and we definitely used 60mm mortars for counter battery fire and initial bombardments on advancing waves of Katangese!

"The Irish Army in Congo" by David O`Donoghue has loads of interviews with soldiers who served.
From memory, can check when I get home, gustavs were used and before being handed over after the surrender were disabled by Irish amourers so they couldnt be used again.

[Connaught Ranger]

I have a hard time to see anything dishonorable in the Irish surrender. They did well.

This was as I understand it at the first stage of the military intervention and rather small-scale both in manpower and equipment (our guys lacked every type of heavy equipment, no armored vehicles, no mortars, no carl-gustavs). The besieged Irish as well as the Irish, Swedes, and Gurkhas who tried to relieve them were faced with a better equipped force many times their size (some say up to 5 000), and to that the Katangese Air Force.

Things changed after this and Katanga was defeated. It was a very complex conflict, with changing rules, sides, diplomacy. Some of our guys were eaten by cannibals, just crazy. It was a first of it's kind for UN and the people in New York went nuts when the first offensive operations were carried out (on own initiative). Says a lot...

A movie would be very nice.

Just a little clarification if I may, when the words "Carl Gustaf " are mentioned in connection to the Irish Military, most people tend to think first of the Swedish made 9mm sub-machine gun carried by Irish Officers, N.C.O.'s, Drivers, APC Crew, Signaler's.

When referring to the Carl Gustaf Anti Tank weapon, its usually refereed by the Irish military simply as the "84" (reference to its 84mm size of the projectile.)

I was qualified on the "84" in my time in the Irish Army and the 9mm sub-machine gun.

The Swedes had 8 Karosseri Pansar SKPF APC's in the Congo

129730129731
some of which they lent to the Irish, until the Irish were able to get some Ford Mk. VI's over from Ireland.

(On the 12th of May 1964 the Irish Army handed over to the Congolese Army at Kolwezi Airport the following 6 Ford Mk VI's.

ZD 1759, ZD 1763, ZD 1765, ZD 1766, ZD 1771, ZD 1775 . All were in running order.)

129728
Picture Source:- Sgt John(chubby)Griffin.

The Irish U.N. contingent also had access to 6 US Supplied M113's one to be seen in the picture.
to the rear the Ford A.P.C.'s.

Connaught Ranger.

[Connaught Ranger]

As late as October 2009 the events of the NIEMBA AMBUSH in the Congo involving Irish soldiers were still causing ripples in the news.


Ex-soldier in Congo ambush case resolves action.

A RETIRED Irish soldier who survived an ambush in the Congo almost 50 years ago in which eight of his peacekeeping colleagues were killed has resolved his High Court action over a 2006 report prepared for the Minister for Defence into the events.

Tom Kenny, with an address in Ballyfermot, Dublin, who with Joe Fitzpatrick survived the ambush at Niemba on November 8th, 1960, has for many years claimed his good name was impugned because of the Army’s allegedly incorrect history of the incident, which occurred when he was just 18.

Arising from these complaints, the Minister for Defence asked the Army to revisit the matter and, following an investigation of several months by Col Thomas Behan, a report was presented to the Minister in November 2006. As a result, Minister Willie O’Dea apologised to Mr Kenny and Mr Fitzpatrick over certain references made to them in the initial Army investigation. But Mr Kenny objected to a reference to him in the 2006 report concerning his accounts of the ambush. He also brought defamation proceedings.

Under terms of settlement agreed between the sides, the reference complained of is to be withdrawn. Mr Justice John Hedigan said it was clear to him Mr Kenny and his comrades in Niemba continue to be held in the highest esteem by this country as a result of this tragic affair. The judge said he remembered the events vividly as a young boy as he attended the funerals of “these heroic soldiers”. Mr Kenny was a colleague of heroic soldiers who, he believed, were the first peacekeepers to lose their lives for world peace. “They are all due the highest credit. They are a credit to their country.”

The judge also noted a recommendation in the November 2006 report was that Mr Kenny receive official recognition that he survived a horrific encounter with hostile forces and had displayed courage, fortitude and tenacity in order to survive until rescued. That was the highest praise one can imagine for somebody who went through what Mr Kenny and his colleagues experienced.

Outside court, Mr Kenny said: “They said I was suffering in my mind that I could not live with the idea of thinking that somebody died to save my life. That has been withdrawn now because it wasn’t true. Nobody died to save my life.”
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...256900220.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1017/1224256900220.html)

[Breerman]

Just a little clarification if I may, when the words "Carl Gustaf " are mentioned in connection to the Irish Military, most people tend to think first of the Swedish made 9mm sub-machine gun carried by Irish Officers, N.C.O.'s, Drivers, APC Crew, Signaler's.

When referring to the Carl Gustaf Anti Tank weapon, its usually refereed by the Irish military simply as the "84" (reference to its 84mm size of the projectile.)
Ok I was referring to the 84mm support weapon.


The Swedes had 8 Karosseri Pansar SKPF APC's in the Congo
Yes, but not the first battalion! It was actually part of the battalion that was placed in Gaza and formed and flewn to Congo with just a few days notice. They lacked all the heavy equipment that a regular Swedish Infantry Battalion had at the time.


No bother lad. Sure its just an excuse to berate stupid americanised films that i couldnt pass up:grin:



They aquitted themselves well for the severe disparity in quantity and quality of equipment alright.

Im open to correction but i distinctly remember reading that several members fought with their SMG's, namely the Gustav, as we had no others at the time and we definitely used 60mm mortars for counter battery fire and initial bombardments on advancing waves of Katangese!
Nice to hear from someone who was there. See above for the name confusion. The SMG is called K-pist m/45 here and became known as "Swedish K" by Americans in Vietnam.

[Breerman]

Correction about the armored cars. They are mentioned in this article about soldiers who were awarded medals in 2009, 48 year after the battle.

Translation by Google translate

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vt.se%2Fmera%2Fartikel.aspx%3Farticleid%3D5132568&sl=sv&tl=en

Edit: Found the official page. The years were mixed up in the information I first read. The KP cars arrived in May 1961.

http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/Internationella-insatser/Utlandsstyrkan/Truppinsatser/ONUC--Kongo/

[mcdid]

"The Irish Army in Congo" by David O`Donoghue has loads of interviews with soldiers who served.
From memory, can check when I get home, gustavs were used and before being handed over after the surrender were disabled by Irish amourers so they couldnt be used again.

When i first read about the irish taking the working parts out of their weapons and burying them before handing them over i had to smile. I could only imagine their frustrations mixed with perverse delight at doing this final action before walking into captivity!


Ok I was referring to the 84mm support weapon.

Ahh, my fault. didnt even think of the 84!


The Swedes had 8 Karosseri Pansar SKPF APC's in the Congo

Attachment 129730 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=129730)Attachment 129731 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=129731)

That is one weird looking APC!!

[Connaught Ranger]

Congo: the Army's bloody coming of age


CARL O'BRIEN Chief Reporter

On Friday, the Irish Army commemorates the 50th anniversary of deploying troops to the Congo. They were ill-equipped, inexperienced and unprepared for the catastrophic battles they would face

THEY BOARDED the giant US cargo plane at Baldonnel giddy with excitement. The archbishop blessed them and the minister for defence said a few grave words. With crowds of well-wishers and press photographers gathered on the tarmac, many felt like movie stars.

“As far as we were concerned we were just going on a big adventure,” says Fintan Morrissey, then an 18-year-old private from Mountrath, Co Laois. “We hadn’t a clue where the Congo was or what was going on there.”

“I was just coming off the children’s allowance, really,” says Joe Mallon of Newbridge, another young recruit. “They were looking for volunteers, and I jumped at the chance; it was the excitement of going somewhere.”

It was July 1960. The Army was setting off on its first major overseas mission since the foundation of the State, providing an armed peacekeeping force in newly independent Congo. It was marked by a mixture of pride, optimism and excitement. Four years later the mood was very different. Twenty-six coffins had arrived home. The troops had been woefully underprepared and ill equipped for entering what was, in effect, a war zone.

The mission was regarded officially as a success, and there were moments of triumph. But the deaths and needless logistical mistakes cast a shadow over the Army for decades.

Getting the troops ready had been a rushed job. Ireland, which had joined the UN only five years earlier, responded enthusiastically to an urgent call for peacekeeping troops from UN headquarters in New York. The Army had just a few days to form a battalion, the 32nd, of almost 700 men; a second battalion, the 33rd, followed a month later.

“The mission evolved from a peacekeeping one initially to what would nowadays be called peace enforcing,” says Dr David O’Donoghue, author of The Irish Army in the Congo 1960-64 (published by the Irish Academic Press). “The Congo had descended into chaos and civil war.”

The first hint of a problem was the Army’s uniform. Troops were wearing the traditional “bull’s wool” uniform and hobnail boots, which were totally impractical for the tropical climate. It also turned out that nobody spoke French, Swahili or Lingala, forcing the Army to borrow interpreters from the Swedish army and to hire locals.

Guns were also an issue. Most privates were issued with bolt-action Lee Enfield rifles, despite evidence that some local groups were equipped with much more advanced weapons.

But perhaps the biggest pitfall was the density of troops; the Army was patrolling an area several times the size of Ireland. The lack of advanced radio technology meant it was difficult to patrol with strong numbers or to stay in contact with headquarters. “I don’t like to run down the Army, but we weren’t well trained,” says Fintan Morrissey. “I don’t think we realised the danger we were in at the time.”

The biggest reality check came just four months into the mission. The Niemba massacre. in which nine troops died, was regarded not as a humiliating defeat but as the bravest of battles. Crowds not seen since the funerals of Charles Stewart Parnell and Michael Collins lined the streets of the capital as the coffins returned home.

It also added to the national lexicon a new term of abuse, “Baluba”, referring to the tribe that mounted the attack. They were reviled at the time, but many people now feel they were simply protecting their homeland from attack. The tribe was being slaughtered by troops loyal to the breakaway mineral-rich province of Katanga, which is now widely seen as a puppet state for Belgium and powerful mining companies.

Cathal O’Shannon, who reported from the Congo for The Irish Times , wrote later that the Baluba tribe was “driven by sheer desperation to band together and fight”. “As far as they were concerned, the [Irish troops] were white men; they were moving Baluba road-blocks. That was enough. That doesn’t excuse or belittle the ambush.”

Many of the problems facing the Army were eventually addressed, and they received tropical uniforms, patrolled in bigger numbers and adopted a much more cautious approach to dealing with local tribes.See more info and a Series of photos on webpage

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...274876336.html (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2010/0717/1224274876336.html)

130018

NOTE:_- The medal that is featured in the story pictures is totally unofficial and was awarded in response to Mr. Fitzpatrick mounting a personal campaign for recognition of his experience during the ambush.

Connaught Ranger.

[mcdid]

Thanks for the post Connaught. Great to see the times doing a lenghty piece about the Congo. Im on the Guard of Honour on Friday myself and hope to get chatting with a few of the Vets afterwards. Brave men one in all.

[Connaught Ranger]

Interestingly enough, I met an Irish soldier during my service in the Irish Army who had the unusual distinction of not only serving in the Congo at that time, but afterward "cut his stick" (absented himself without leave) and joined the British Army ending up in the S.A.S. Regiment and seeing service in some hot-spots*, he then surrendered himself to the Irish Authorities, was up on charges of being an Illegal Absentee, (Under Irish Defence Force Regulations, the charge of Desertion can only be used if there are witnesses who can swear to the fact that soldier "so-and-so" stated in public "I am leaving the army and not coming back.") he pleaded guilty to the charge of being absent without leave, fined, and returned to serve in my battalion, about two years later he left the Irish Army having completed his time, in all one very interesting guy, and a very switched on soldier, and it was a pleasure to serve with him on many border patrols.

Connaught Ranger.

* one night after a few beers he produced a shoe-box full of pictures to back up his stories.

[mcdid]

Wow interesting man indeed. He seems to have got all he wanted out of his life in that regard!
A friend of mine im Baldonnel talks about his father who had served with the British army many moons ago in Aiden. He had some interesting photos too and apparently some shrapnel marks on his back to boot! He later joined the irish army where he finished up as a CQ in town.
Myself and my friend want him to write a book as his stories are well worth telling but im affraid he is of the temperment of letting the past lie which is understandable if the memories are not good ones for him!
There are many an Irish man, so it seems that have done similar stuff! If i had a euro for everytime ive heard people say that such and such father of joe blogs served with the Brits here and there or with the Irish army somewhere i'd be rich! It seems alot of us have itchy feet!!
I remember a quote or rather vaugely to the tune of, "the irish travel to the sound of war/guns, like salmon do to spawn" or along those lines...open to correction. Seems apt i think

[section commander]

The bit i find realy interesting is the fact that there was one maybe more Irish mercenaries fighting against the Irish! Mad!!

Well as the old joke goes "How do you find an Irish man? Look for the nearest fight!" But on a more serious note, it is unfair that these men came home and were called cowards.I remember when I joined the old FCA some 10 odd years ago, even then, that battle was seen as an embarrassment to the defence forces.

[Connaught Ranger]

Remembering lost soldier who gave his life for peace.


Sunday Independent

By JEROME REILLY

Sunday September 12 2010

Trooper Pat Mullins from Kilbehenny on the Cork-Limerick border was killed sometime around September 14, 1961, when his patrol was ambushed in the city of Elisabethville in the Congo's breakaway Katanga province.

Nearly 50 years on, he is still listed by the Irish Defence Forces as "Missing in Action", but he remains a potent symbol of Ireland's commitment to peacekeeping on behalf of the United Nations.

Now, a remarkable new book, written by journalist and author Ralph Riegel and Congo veteran John O'Mahony, tells the remarkable tale of the Elisabetheville ambush and the confusion and contradiction about how Trooper Mullins lost his life.

Pat Mullins was just 18-years-old when he was killed after a gun battle in which he heroically tried to protect a dying colleague. The new book, Missing in Action -- The 50-year Search for Ireland's Missing Soldier, goes some way to explaining what happened.

The Irish patrol drove right into a carefully planned trap set by Katangan mercenaries.

Tpr Mullins and his friend, Cpl Michael Nolan, were knocked unconscious by a Katangan anti-tank rocket.

Cpl Nolan suffered serious shrapnel injuries and, when Tpr Mullins regained consciousness over an hour later, it is believed he managed to re-start the armoured car and drive it in a desperate bid to get to the medics.

He never made it back to the sanctuary of the Irish base, dying following a gun battle in which he single-handedly held off an entire Katangan platoon. There is a strong possibility that he was killed after running out of ammunition.

Cpl Nolan's body was later recovered from a graveyard outside Elisabethville. But no trace of Pat Mullins's body was ever found.

Together with Private Kevin Joyce from Galway, who was kidnapped and killed in the Lebanon in 1981, they are the only Irish soldiers to remain Missing in Action from Ireland's UN missions.

- JEROME REILLY

Sunday Independent

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...e-2334627.html (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/remembering-lost-soldier-who-gave-his-life-for-peace-2334627.html)

May he + Rest In Peace +

Never Forgotten.

[mcdid]

Nearly 50 years on, he is still listed by the Irish Defence Forces as "Missing in Action", but he remains a potent symbol of Ireland's commitment to peacekeeping on behalf of the United Nations.

Its hard not to be extremely proud and sadened at the sacrifices that the two lads made aswell as all who have fallen whilst serving at home and abroad.

Rest in peace to them all.

May the road rise up to meet them.

[Connaught Ranger]

Its hard not to be extremely proud and sadened at the sacrifices that the two lads made as well as all who have fallen whilst serving at home and abroad.

Rest in peace to them all.

May the road rise up to meet them.

Not wishing to decry the service and commitment of those men and women at home and abroad, in the Irish Defence Forces, I think since the end of the Irish Civil War period only one Irish Defence Force soldier can be actually recorded as being killed on active duty in Ireland. (I stand open to be corrected if any members passed away due to hostile action in Ireland during the Emergency period of WW2) the soldier I refer to Private Patrick Kelly, aged 35, and father of four children, was shot and killed by the I.R.A. during the search for Mr. Don Tidey's and his kidnappers on 16 December 1983.

Private Kelly was also a United Nations veteran with service in Cyprus and Lebanon.

May he + Rest In Peace +

[mcdid]

To my knowledge you are correct but I did not mean it in that context. To me anyone serving in uniform and killed on duty during exercises etc constitutes a sacrifice whilst serving.

Regards
mcdid

[BAF]

Thanks for posting this story. I wonder why the Belgian colonists attackted the Irish troops. I'm ashamed that my countrymen did such a thing.

I'll read some more about this, it has gotten me curious.

[mcdid]

Hey BAF. Theres no need to be ashamed of your countrymen for the actions of a few so many years ago. Basically the breakaway region of Katanga was mineral and resource rich and Belgian industrial companies which mined the resources of copper, gold and uranium had a vested interest in continuing that enterprise. So when the UN entered the scene they where precieved as heralding an end so to speak of those companies interests in the resources that abounded the region.
Aswell as this the Belgian colonists by and large did not like the fact that the Congo was being granted independance and again they seen the UN as the enforcers of that policy.
All in all it was a horrible mess of a situation.

[BAF]

yeah, horrible it sure was. The Congo is a dark page in my nations history. Those Irish soldiers are real heroes and i'm glad they got out alive.

Thanks for youre post mcdid.

[mcdid]

No bother at all BAF. Thanks for posting mate.

[JUNKHO]

+ Rest in Peace +
+ Suaimhneas síoraí dá anam +


Irish Soldiers -
Trooper Mullins
CPL Nolan
PVT Joyce
PVT Kelly