So the fact that the Irish were well and truly under the thumb and authority of the British government and had been for centuries allows their rebellions to be treated differently to those of a country only recently and incompletely conquered? Joseph Bonaparate's government was one of the bodies attempting to exercise authority over Spain - it was indeed not the only one but what does that mean for how they should treat the native population? If the Irish could establish and proclaim some form of their own government would that have given then specific rights and protections under international law? Does a people's right to fight for independence without fear of unmitigated reprisals cease after a certain period or under certain conditions? Where exactly does jus in bello end and jus post bellum and subsequent phases begin? These would appear to me to often be very fluid concepts to which international law can provide only guidelines - some no doubt made with good intentions, but others made for more self-serving reasons. If we're going to assess the reasons and possible justifications for actions we must look at a whole host of factors.

Regards,
Chris