Since I was taught by CB's here in England back in the 60-'s to early 70's, I was made well aware of certainly the more recent British Irish history, though perhaps not with the message you might expect. I clearly remember aged about 14 when covering the Cromwell period a Brother telling us about Drogheda and him being quite adamant that it was the rules of warfare at that time, but it's only in later life I've become more aware of the pre-Cromwell era. (I've found the post Romano to pre-Norman era of Irish Chieftain raids on the British mainland fascinating. Antagonism on both sides goes back well over a 1400 years, possibly more)
On the issue of Irish neutrality in the 2nd WW, from a practical point I happen to think it was perfectly understandable and shouldn't really be questioned.
While manpower was available, Ireland was an economically poor country with meagre armed forces that would have had to be largely equipped by the Allies to be effective and that would have added to the burden of the Atlantic convoys.
I think a large amount of simmering antagonism towards the Irish Neutrality position was largely around their refusal to allow any use of Irish ports for British convoy escorts especially as the also neutral Portugese seemed to manage to find a way for their Azores to be employed by the Allies.
I suppose if it had have been the US requesting the Irish port facilities, it might have been different, but since the US navy rarely ventured in any strength over the mid point of the Atlantic except briefly for Torch and D Day as naturally it was somewhat preoccupied with the war in the Pacific, and what with the well known anglophobe US Admiral King in charge of Naval matters over in Washington and his determination to ensure the Pacific was a US Navy hegemony, that was unlikely ever to change.
I'm unsure if a request from the Canadian navy, an often overlooked and sadly now almost forgotten but actually substantial and vital force employed in Atlantic convoy protection, was ever made as that may possibly have been viewed more favourably in Ireland than any British one but I imagine the practicalites, the RN being the senior partner on Navy matters this side of the Atlantic, probably meant it was a non starter.
It's been mentioned before, but undoubtedly the single biggest mistake, the one that rankles to this day and I think we can likely all agree in hindsight that it was a seriously unwise move with little obvious merit, was the issuing by the Irish state of official condolences on news of Hitlers death.
By that late stage of the war, May 1945, the sheer scale of the death camps and genocide and the ever growing list of mind boggling criminal atrocities that had been performed by the Nazi regime and vassal states throughout the newly liberated occupied Europe had started to be clearly established and the evidence documented and it beggars belief that De Valera thought it Politically a wise move to ever consider putting his hand to it.
As to the what I would describe as regrettable post war Irish state and society treatment of Irish nationals who had enlisted and fought for the Allies, while I personally think it was churlish and somewhat mean in the light of how things turned out, the 2nd World War in Europe really was a fight against an evil creed, I recognise that it's a problem for Irish society alone to reflect on and come to terms with and not really for others to judge or decide.
To our shame here in Britain, in the post war era and to this day, far too many treated West Indies, West and East African, Indian subcontinent and Chinese Nationals with similar contempt and indifference to their in many cases absolutely invaluable contributions to the fight, not all of which were voluntary, here in Europe but also the Middle east and in the war in the Far East.
