Arms Trades

seanwalsh

Morpheus,

are you one of the members of this "defence force" you go on about?
If so neither your incoherent arguments or excuses for killing surprise me. You're the victim of sustained brainwashing - but there is help available if you want it. Plenty of former military like Ed Horgan have come to be stalwarts of the peace movement.

God go with you.

Morpheus

are you actually irish??

Morpheus,

are you one of the members of this "defence force" you go on about?
If so neither your incoherent arguments or excuses for killing surprise me. You're the victim of sustained brainwashing - but there is help available if you want it. Plenty of former military like Ed Horgan have come to be stalwarts of the peace movement.

God go with you.

You have used this statement to sidestep the questions i have asked you? provide me with evidence that we are child killers!!

in answer to your question, I come from a family who have served with our nations defence forces and I am currently being trained in the Reserve Defence Forces. I have never been brainwashed!!! :rolleyes:

The peace movement at least some of it anyway, has acknowledged the postitives our Army has brought to war torn countries.

Do you not agree that if someone doesnt stop two sides fighting and disarm them (under UN mandate of course) that we can hardly send people in to teach them peace? how do you teach peace without first having a stable situation to teach in? how do you protect the teachers? Does Ed think the irish military are baby killers?

Are you Irish? if so you know what defence force i talk about, the irish armed forces are called The "Irish Defence Forces" made up of a permanent defence force and reserve defence force (which supplied personel to the special olympics this year to help out).

Is this a troll or what!!

You're the victim of sustained brainwashing - but there is help available if you want it. Plenty of former military like Ed Horgan have come to be stalwarts of the peace movement.

Sean, you might like to think abt this a small bit. Soldiers tend to be the main people that wish for peace. They're the ones that have to go into combat, kill, and possibly die. You on the other hand can stay at home and condem them. (there will always some that get a kick out of killing or fighting, but for the most part the members of the Irish Df have families)

If theres any brainwashing going on, maybe you might be at the receiving end?

This might have been answered above in a more elequent way, If so sorry for putting my oar in (har har)

Having a country is like having a room with valuables. Putting a lock on the door is like having a military for a country. The big rooms stuffed full of valuables (like the US) have big locks that can't be opened by anyone bar the most determined, and even that would be after a lot of blood, sweat and tears. Smaller ones have smaller locks, as there isn't that much inside to interest a theif. The Irish door, would have just a padlock. Sure, just a guy with a crowbar could take it off, but it still stops idle passers-by from getting in.

The fact is, every single nation on this Earth has some sort of armed forces. If there was a Government out there who decided to act on the principle of no arms, then someone who has guns (not necessarily a government, a drug baron for example) would march in and take over. I know in some parts of the world this looks highly unlikely, but unrealistic expectations lead to previously unrealistic chances becoming viable. Now you don't want the US to fish everyone out of their problems, do you?

dloob

Well I guess seanwalsh is the same guy who runs abbeyshrule direct action
One of those commited anti war people.
You know murder machines, think of the children, direct action, it's not violence to use an axe on an aircraft.

I think they are the people who are brainwashed.
They go on about how if there were no armies we could all live in peace.
Maybe on their planet but I live on earth and if every county got rid of their armies warloards would have taken over within a week.

I guess they mean well but they seem to be under the illusion that if you talk to some one like saddam and tell him what he is doing is wrong he will say is "Oh Sorry I didn't know, I promise to be good in future and drink my milk. No more dictating for me."
Sorry but some times force is only thing that will work.
Do you think conflict resolution classes would have worked with Hitler in WW2?

btw I like the google ads on some of the abbyshrule forums Military Models and USAF surplus gear

Turkey

........And fourthly, ab initio training is why the Aer Corps aircraft don't tend to make it to the end of their design lives.

Another intresting comment, considering that the majority of Irish Air Corps [note correct spelling] more then exceed their design lives.

Victor

Originally posted by dloob
it's not violence to use an axe on an aircraft.

There is a big difference between using violence against things (in particular military things) and using it against people.

magick

We do need some fighter jets to defend our own airspace (the RAF is currently doing it for us)

never heard of this, is this true?!

Morpheus

Originally posted by Victor
There is a big difference between using violence against things (in particular military things) and using it against people.

There is also a big difference between an irish soldier using a Javelin missile on a Tank and using it against "innocent" children.

Getting back to the opening post by Sean Walsh ....
An axe can be used to kill innocent children, so how come your not on your soap box bemoaning the masses of hardware stores dealing in Arms Trading too??

Akrasia

Axes are not designed and sold specifically to be used as weapons.
Missiles are.

Thats the difference. you can kill somebody with your bare hands, doesnt mean everybody should have them amputated at birth

Morality is not detemined only by your actions but a great deal is down to intention. Of course you might not intend to kill somebody if you fire a missile at a schoolbus, but youd still be morally responsible because death would be a predictable consequence of your action.
When you invade a country for economic reasons it is a predictable consequence that people will die. Most people do not think it is acceptable to kill for money.

Having adequate weapons to protect Ireland from attackers is not morally wrong, but if you start to use those weapons to oppress refugees or to annex the channel islands then it beomes a serious problem.

Defending america's homeland is one thing defending americans economic interests is entirely something else

Morpheus

im sure your motives are well intentioned but the following statement does not ring true to my mind....

Axes are not designed and sold specifically to be used as weapons.

Fact is, ive a friend whos face is permanently scarred because someone forgot to point out to his attacker that Axes are not designed and sold specifically to be used as weapons.

Im sure the indians used their tomohawks for chopping down trees?

To use one of your own words, the Javelin missile is not designed "specifically" to be used to kill someone,

The missile is "specifically" designed to punture through a vehicles armour and explode causing catastrophic damage rendering heavily armoured vehciles unusable... in doing this it usually results in fatalities to the crew,

The guys making the weapon didnt design it saying, "lets make the javelin missile so that irish soldiers can kill innocent children with it" which is what the thread starter is implying, that by buying a weapon that arguably CAN be used to kill an innocent child, the irish army is a bunch of innocent baby killers.

Now my point was that an axe can also be used to kill an innocent baby. and its aslo the weapon of choice for these "people" (to be polite) to attack a plane with...
what if they had killed the pilot and crew by causing damage that wasnt picked up on inspection?? wouldnt they be innocent victims? No I hear you say and why?? because they are pilots flying a war machine.... much like, darn it, the crew of the tank the irish army just blew up with the javelin... isnt that a pity... im sure they will target innocent children, especially those ones carrying the AK47s... arent they called child soldiers??

not so innocent i think, they are forced to fight, but the point is, they will either kill you, or you will kill them... all objects have the potential to be used to kill innocents, you can stab someone with a pen and kill them.... go find out about the irish defence forces and what they do, then come back and defned that godforsaken muppet who implies we are innocent baby killers.

Akrasia

Having an axe to cut down wood is fine.
Having a javelin missile to defend yourself from being attacked by a tank is fine also.

Its very different if, because you are in posession of a axe, you go out trying to kill or injure people,
Similarly if you have a javelin missile system and you go out looking for tanks to blow up with it.

The airplanes that were parked in Shannon Airport were on their way to a theatre of war where they would be looking for targets to attack, or facilitating the use of offensive weapons. If they were sitting in an army Base In America in case somebody might attack America then its different to going to a theatre of illegal war where the targets are no threat to you until you deliberately try to kill them.

There were 3 attacks on Airplanes in Shannon. None of these attacks were ANY threat to human life. the first was when Eoin Dubsky used spraypaint on the windscreen of an airplane. Any pilot who wouldnt notice that damage shouldn't be flying planes in the first place, but even if that pilot was incredibly stupid, Eoin remained in the Hanger and CALLED THE POLICE to give himself up.

When Mary Kelly and the catholic workers damaged the planes with hammers and axes they also gave themselves up voluntarily to the airport authorities. there was no danger to any human life from their actions so it is not an arguement to claim otherwise.

There have been credible reports that Patriot missiles and Cluster bombs have been transported through Shannon airport. these (especially the cluster bombs) are specifically designed to maim and kill. Cluster bombs are an offensive weapon!

bonkey

Originally posted by Morphéus
Read my original post again...

You've edited it, so its hardly the original any more....

my intention was to show my anger at someone suggesting that too much money is being spent on the military...

Yes, I accept that. I never questioned that. I was commenting on the original manner in which you expressed that anger.

i didnt deny anyone freedom of speech, i simply said that i disliked certain types of activists, as im sure they dislike people like me, theyre entitled to, doesnt bother me, and im sure i dont bother them,

What you said was that you wanted to beat the crap out of them for using it the way they did.

You may have reworded the post (4 or 5 times by yoru own admission) since then after the reaction you saw to it, but thats hardly comforting.

Imagine if you had applied the same standards to your actions instead of your words : you'd beat the crap out of people 4 times to lessening degrees, before being happy that the fifth "iteration" of the process (which was not violent) was actually what you meant to do.

You'd then argue that criticism of the first beating was unjustified because of how you'd refined your approach by the fifth iteration.

So you'll excuse me if I don't go and edit my criticism to reflect your updated stance whenever you see that you took the previous stance too far.

The moral of the story??? I am ME, you are YOU, just dont expect me to agree with your views, as i dont expect you to agree with mine,

I don't expect you to agree with my views. I expect you to respect them, and threatening violence is not a sign of respect. It is a sign that you wish to physically oppose other people exercising their freedom to speech because you object to what they are saying.

You may have since edited the post, and now wish to argue that my criticism isn't valid, but I never criticised your edited post. I criticised your at-the-time-stated opinion that you wanted to beat the crap out of people for saying things that you didn't like.

As far as I can interpret something like that it means that you would take action because they have said these things.....which is exactly where my comment came from. You appeared to believe (based on what I was responding to, as opposed to what is there now) in free speech as long as it wasn't too disagreeable, and in beating up people who went beyond that.

Unless, of course, you don't see being beaten up as a result of saying something as an abrogation of free speech?

if i walk past your rally and give you the fingers, thats democracy,

And if you walk into my rally wielding a big stick and beating people up because they are at my rally, then it most certainly is not democracy....but thats exactly what you were suggesting you would like to do.

jc

Morpheus

Your free to pick up a stick and hit me back.

Yes bonkey, I re-worded my original post, probably a bad idea, however, i took quite a lot of offence to that muppet who originally posted that irish soldiers are effectively innocent baby killers, it made my blood boil.

The bloody hard work they do goes unrewarded, unnoticed and mostly unrecognised by a largely ignorant public quite a lot of the time, the rags in this country prefer to publicise things that go wrong with it than when things are right. Theyre quick to publish pieces about how underfunded the DF are and yet if they get new APCs to protect themselves in, or new missiles, they publish crap that gives someone like this a reason to express this kind of utter tripe.

Yes im sure that someone in the world has tried or succeeded in killing an innocent child with a javelin missile, my point is that you can bet it wont be the Irish army.

by the way.... heres my actual quote un-edited!!

youd better hope i never get a chance to attend one of your (or your associates and comrades rallies) because ill bring a big stick and show you what i think of "your type of" peace activists and anti war hippies...

I dont see where ive said i would beat someone with the stick... your jumping to conclusions again, just like the original poster, missile-innocent children-irish army = irish soldiers are killers of innocent children .

bonkey

Originally posted by Morphéus
Your free to pick up a stick and hit me back.

You have got to be joking me. You don't see physical violence being used as a method to "object" to something someone is saying as an abrogation of free speech? As long as the speaker can hit back, then all is fair?

Please.....you have got to be kidding me.

Yes bonkey, I re-worded my original post, probably a bad idea, however, i took quite a lot of offence to that muppet who originally posted that irish soldiers are effectively innocent baby killers, it made my blood boil.

I agree that the original position was ridiculous.

I've no problem with you rewording your post.

I find it funny, though, that you are trying to defend the original wording (which is what I was criticising) despite having edited it out because you decided in retrospect it was unacceptable.

I dont see where ive said i would beat someone with the stick... your jumping to conclusions again,

Yes, I am indeed inferring that you did not intend to bring a big stick in order to just use it as a walking aid or something else.

If you are bringing a big stick to "show what you feel", then I think its pretty obvious that the intention is to use it - or at least threaten the use of it.

I'll happily admit my inference was unjust if you can offer a credible alternate interpretation of why you'd be bringing a big stick to a rally of those who's opinion you detest in order to show how you feel.....especially since you have since reworded the language because you adimt that in your anger and disgust you went a step (or more?) too far.

just like the original poster, missile-innocent children-irish army = irish soldiers are killers of innocent children

No, the original poster did not show any statement by the Irish Army from which it could be reasonably inferred that they were going to kill innocent children. You made a statement where violence against those who's use of FoS offends you could reasonably be inferred.

So its not like the original poster at all.

jc

Nuttzz

In fairness this double talk could go on all year, The orginal poster said

Why is our government spending these vast sums of money on missiles that can be used to kill innocent children?

He is implying that the missiles can be used to kill children and these same missiles are in the hands of Irish troops. Put 2 + 2 together....

Incidential Morpheus you are been a bit of an toolbox, you were in a temper and posted what you would like to do to some people. Accept it, apologise for it (if you wish) and move on but dont deny you made the statement in the first place

Why is our government spending these vast sums of money on missiles that can be used to kill innocent children?

Just curious but are there any guilty children out there?

Akrasia

It depends on when you think responsibility emerges.

I would argue that conscripted soldiers are innocent victims also, conscripted child soldiers even more so

bonkey

Originally posted by Nuttzz
He is implying that the missiles can be used to kill children and these same missiles are in the hands of Irish troops. Put 2 + 2 together....

There is a distinction between saying/implying "those guys will do...." and "I will do....".

Unless, of course, our response on these boards to every single opinion offered should be "prove that you really think that" :rolleyes:

jc

Nuttzz

Originally posted by Nuttzz
In fairness this double talk could go on all year,

Morpheus

a bit of a toolbox?? more like a black and decker workbench...

look, lets get this straight, i posted as such, but i wouldnt actually bring a big stick to any rally, i dont carry sticks around, i dont actually own a big stick, i apologise for any inconvenience caused, if nothing it made a silly thread even funnier, nice to see that the people in shannon carry hatchets and axes tho, so a stick is probably the lesser of two evils!! The "you take a stick and beat me" WAS a joke, im glad youve got a sense of humour.

I wouldnt and never have, nor do i intend to, beat anyone to a pulp with a stick, i tried to straighten things out by re-editing my post, im passionate about ireland and our defence forces and our future as I see it, my point of view, my vision, my opinion, which im entitled to, lets get away from my bloody big stick post (ok we'll acknowledge that I was having a rainman moment when I typed it)

I disagree with the original poster.

enough said...., and please,
stop lecturing me about sticks.

by the way, i most recently demonstrated the power of living in a democracy by giving the fingers to a crusty trying to get me to sign a petition outside Dublin Castle, i gave him the fingers too. There wasnt a big stick in sight, but it felt good

Akrasia

wow you sound like such a pleasant person, taking such pleasure from insulting somebody

Morpheus

freedom of speech, he told me what he thought of the irish army etc, how they were supporting the evil dogs of the US, so i let him know what i thought of activists like him....

your avoiding the point of this thread by trying to flame me to death, it wont work, we can keep coming back taking pot shots at each other as long as you want, neither of us will ever be satisfied.

My point is that i still think that seamus was wrong to write what he did, I have my own opinions about the use of the US/UK military in Iraq and about the role shannon played.

slack

Originally posted by seanwalsh
http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.com/our_news/pressreleases/04pressrelease/010704_JAVELIN.htm

Why is our government spending these vast sums of money on missiles that can be used to kill innocent children?

It would be interesting to discover whether they'll be using "depleted uranium", as the Americans and British have been.

Victor

If you are dragging up old posts, you might actually be someway authoritive about it.

Originally posted by slack
It would be interesting to discover whether they'll be using "depleted uranium", as the Americans and British have been.

They don't.

They don't need to as missiles are used to attack the thinner top armour on a tank, whereas depleted uranium is used to directly attack the (thicker) sides.

slack

There's no need for that sort of tone. I'm not an expert on DU, but I've been campaigning against its use for a few years now. The missile in question was tested by British and American forces with warheads containing DU. I don't know what part of the tank or other target they were aiming for. I don't know exactly where the Irish soldiers will be standing when they fire one of these Javeline missiles, whether they will be above their target or at the same elevation as it. As I guess they don't know that either yet, if they have not ruled out using DU, they might instead rule it in "just in case".

arcadegame2004

Spending of 12.5 million euro is laughably small, miniscule even, compared to the Defence budgets of similarly small states as ourselves ,e.g. Sweden, Belgium, Denmark. Belgium has 99 F16s in its airforce for example.

We need in this country to delink politically the issues of neutrality and defence-capability. We are TOTALLY defenceless as a country. We rely entirely on the UK for our defence. Yet if the Govt had allowed the RAF to police our skies during the recent EU Enlargement-Summit, groups like PANA and other would-be neutrality advocates would have been up in arms, decrying supposedly loss of neutrality. We need to learn to be less paranoid as a nation about our neutrality. An ability to better defend ourself should be viewed as a duty of our national government, and indeed the duty of all national governments. It should not be seen as a sign of aggressive intent.

We ought to be able to at least defend EU-style meetings from possible terror-attacks. Our air-defences are pathetic. Our air-force is War World 2 technology. Come on now, let's come out of the military Stone-Age without it being always being viewed in a conspiratorial way.

Ajnag

To be honest, given Irelands stratigic geographical location such that It is an Ideal staging post for Attacking america from a threat comming from the european continent or an Invasion post for an american continental agressor, I feel that Ireland needs a large stockpile of short range low yield tactical nuclear weapons to deter any invasion attempts.It could be argued that being an eu member is protection enough on this front, however history has shown it not prudent to depend on others for defensive purposes.Times change, Nothing is certain.

Or put it this way, How else would you prevent invasion or maintain an insurgency with our current resources.

Would you see such a policy as neutral, I dont see why not.In fact neutral countrys with nuclear defenses allow neutrality without needing to resort to appeasment or passive acceptance of a cruel fate applied from external foe.Kinda like orwell's philosiphy of resistance agaist totalitarianism, as opposed to pacifism.


Think the pd's might go on a Imperialist neo economist war binge tho

slack

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Spending of 12.5 million euro is laughably small, miniscule even, compared to the Defence budgets of similarly small states as ourselves...

That's not the Irish military budget. Furthermore, the Dpt of Defence are paying above market price for the Steyr AUG, and could probably have shopped around for a better price on the anti-tank wares too. Needless to say, investing EUR 12.5m on human rights-centered conflict prevention projects would be far better value all round.

We are TOTALLY defenceless as a country. We rely entirely on the UK for our defence.

Erm, check the history books for about two minutes, or indeed any map of the 32 counties on this island, and I think you'll find that Ireland certainly doesn't rely on the UK for our defence.

We ought to be able to at least defend EU-style meetings from possible terror-attacks.

Defence Minister Michael Smith admitted in an RTE radio interview only a few weeks ago, after rattling off a list of weapons systems he was spending our public finances on, that there was really very little anyone could do military hardware-wise against attacks like the Madrid bombing. Indeed, even when he ordered the army into Shannon Airport, he made it emphatically clear that they were not there to protect anyone from a possible terrorist attack (they were put there to protect foreign fighters and gunrunners to Iraq). So military spending has nothing to do really with reducing the likelyhood of a terrorist attack.

[/QUOTE]

thejollyrodger

Smith warns over bomber plans - Smith

and

We have no real defence if we're attacked: Smith

and


Ireland not immune from terrorist attacks, says EU

or in general :-

IrishMilitaryOnline - News

seems to cover this stuff;)