Talk:Bombing of Dublin in World War II

"Irish Republic"

The Irish Republic, inasmuch as it ever existed, was long gone by the Second World War. Yet the Republic of Ireland only came about in 1949. What should we rename these sections too? "Earlier German bombings of the Irish Free State/Ireland/Éire"? I'm pretty sure the Irish Free State ceased to exist in 1937 and Ireland, while legally completely correct, doesn't solve the problem that the heading is obviously trying to avoid, namely to make clear that Northern Ireland is not included. Although I dislike Éire when used in English, it might be the best solution. Any thoughts?--Dub8lad1 14:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, the term is anachronistic, but "Ireland" is problematic as part of it was not neutral and part of it was. I could live with Éire unless one wanted to venture a non-titular but descriptive "Southern Ireland" not my preference. Carlossuarez46 00:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• • I'll replace with Éire, which may sound stilted but is terminologically accurate and distinguishing, where "Republic of Ireland" is anachronistic, although in nearly any history class entitled "United States History" the syllabus starts well before 1789, or 1776 for that matter, and often before 1492, and no-one really raises a stink about the course's title. Carlossuarez46 21:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

the deal with the US when the Irish Pine & Irish Oak were chartered was with the Irish Republic (and not RoI) ClemMcGann (talk) 21:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I have removed references to Éire in this article since A) it is not the English language name for the state of Ireland and this article is in the English language, and B) it is clear from the context of the text that Ireland refers to the state and not the island. Qwerta369 (talk) 12:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Blackout

I would have thought there was no blackout in the south of Ireland during WW2. And, if so, surely the Luftwaffe would be able to tell that they were not over a UK town. PatGallacher (talk) 16:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

they could easily have missed britain for that same reason86.42.168.94 (talk) 03:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The anti-aircraft batteries fired before the bombs were dropped. it is possible that they dropped their bombs to loose weight and gain height to escape ClemMcGann (talk) 11:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Dublin was well lit up and so, even if the Germans were lost, they must have known they were over a neutral city. We'll never know what Frank Ryan thought of the bombings.86.46.206.117 (talk) 14:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Have you read this? [1] "Please forgive me for this mistake which was beyond our control," Heinrich told reporter Micheal Holmes. "There was no wrongdoing on our side. Everybody was upset, not only the members of the [German] air force, but politically as well." ClemMcGann (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting but, as the man said, "he would say that, wouldn't he?". By 1941 the Luftwaffe had plenty of experience of bombing neutral and enemy targets; blacked out targets and lit-up targets. So lit up was Dublin that the Northern Irish feared it was helping guide bombers to Belfast.86.46.210.139 (talk) 15:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't buy the claim that bombers found Dublin and then followed the railway tracks to Belfast. Belfast Lough was the easiest way to locate Belfast. when Belfast was bombed the railways escaped. hence all the refugees in amiens st (now Connelly) the only mean of communication left was the railway telegraph - the request for Dublin fire brigades was sent on the railway telegraph ClemMcGann (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

If you read the Irish Dept of Defence report dated July 1941, it says that the Luftwaffe followed the lights up the coast. I am not saying who is right, or wrong, just that they had a different take and all sources should be included. Fair enough that you don't buy it, but the Dept who were there at the time (and had hundreds of spotters along our coasts) would have disagreed with you. The source I added yesterday is on google books. There was no blackout, yet the article didn't mention this with a relevant quote until the other day. I thought that was what wikipedia is about?86.43.188.119 (talk) 09:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The blackout was just to neon and trade lights. Perhaps the absence of a black-out should have been mentioned. However Ireland was neutral and therefore a blackout would be unusual

I'm unsure as to which "report dated July 1941" you refer to. However German planes did travel along the coast despite Goring's order to stay clear of Irish territory. We know that because Irish spotters radioed that information to GHQ in Dublin in the full knowledge that British intelligence were listening in. Just following the lit coast would not really assist the Germans find Belfast. Its a long way from the border. Brian Barton's claim was that they followed the railway tracks. If so why was the railway intact and way was the railway telegraph, which runs along the track to only means of communication to survive? ClemMcGann (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

"The bombing of Dublin on the night of May 30th, 1941, may well have been an unforeseen and unintended result of our interference with "Y". [The German bomber guidance system.]

Winston Churchill, The Second World War, Volume II, Their Finest Hour, 1949, Cassell, London. page 344 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.82.102 (talk) 22:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Standing alone question

". By July 1940 the United Kingdom stood alone against" Taken from the article. Neutral Point of View question here as New Zealand, Canada, and Australia among others had troops based in the UK. The UK would have been the sole european country in the theatre which is a different matter entirely. 86.44.71.5 (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bombing of Dublin in World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100811004504/http://www.dublincity.ie:80/RecreationandCulture/libraries/Heritage%20and%20History/Dublin%20City%20Archives/Collections%20Post%201840/Pages/donore_bombing_archives.aspx to http://www.dublincity.ie/RecreationandCulture/libraries/Heritage%20and%20History/Dublin%20City%20Archives/Collections%20Post%201840/Pages/donore_bombing_archives.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Does article need to be renamed?

The section Timeline of German bombings of the Irish state is really out of scope for the article name Bombing of Dublin in World War II. One solution would be rename the article sometime like say German air attacks on the Irish state in World War 2 (or Republic of Ireland / Emergency etc).. The bombing of Dublin would be a subsection. This would also cover the Blackrock Island incident of august 20th 1940 (which perhaps could be better majored here with a see reference from that page. If done a redirect from the original name would be prudent. These are my thoughts anyway.

Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:01, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

£522,800 in 2024)

"In 1943, the German government paid £9000 in compensation. (£522,800 in 2024)"

Given that both countries now use the Euro shouldnt this figure be given in this currency ? 109.144.221.170 (talk) 21:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Reaction

Can anything be said about the Irish reaction to the bombings? Presumably the government protested to Germany? McPhail (talk) 12:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)