The "Irish" exaggerate? According to you what was the "real" number?
Yes, indentured servitude of prisoners of war was common. The wholesale roundup of men, women and children that were sold into slavery in the Carribean and the New World was not. To deny that this happened is, yes, disingenuous.
"I would also remind people that any Cromwellian hate had its roots in the famous 1641 uprising, where the Irish Catholics slaughtered thousands of Protestant English and Scottish settlers, inc women and children."
So they had it coming. I see.
Apologies if I wasn’t clear, when I said Irish, I was referring to Irish Republicans/Nationalists. Yes, the figures have been exaggerated over the centuries at times for political effect and is till debated over even today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell#Debate_over_Cromwell.27s_effect_on_Ireland
I did not and will not suggest what he did was justified, my point was how people can use terrible incidents and abuse history for political aims.
As to slavery to the New World, as a Scot, I know exactly what Cromwell did, conservative estimates state he sent 10000 Scots to the colonies.
As to 1641, the contemporary sources clearly show that the 1641 killings were upmost on the Cromwellian mind, and that a great deal of the ruthlessness in 1649-50 can be traced back to it. I didn’t say or suggest that 1649-50 was justified by 1641. Nor would I.
(I would point out though that 1641 is of course ignored and/or even justified by Irish Republicans/Nationalists. And tends outside Ulster to be forgotten by the British and Irish public. It is little taught or not taught in history on the UK mainland, few books and TV/radio has been done on it, and its dosent have the public attention of other parts of Irish history. Cynics might say because it dosent fit the narrative of brutality towards the ‘native’ Irish)
You know I am not justifying anything, I am merely explaining why they happened. So please stop s*it-stirring and have a proper historical discussion with me on the issue.