the leb

lostexpectation

Mick86 wrote:

According to today's Independent we currently have 670 troops overseas. So the Dept has said we can send 200 to Lebanon if requested by the UN.

theres still talk that it will be nato misssion initially.

Mick86

lostexpectation wrote:

theres still talk that it will be nato misssion initially.

To be honest, I can't see NATO getting involved. And if it does will it be much good without US or British involvement. Neither of those two will be welcomed by Hezbollah anyway. I haven't much faith in the French (haven't won a war since Napoleon's day) and they are traditionally pro-Arab. The Italians are worse and the Spanish scuttled out of Iraq after the Madrid bombing so enough said there. That effectively leaves the Germans.

And what is this force going to do anyway. It'll be based in Lebanon so if it's there to combat Hezbollah, it will be living with the enemy and will be open to attack from them. Or will it be there to protect the Lebanese from the Israelis. That's already been tried and is a pretty tough job.

Fidelis

Mick86 wrote:

I haven't much faith in the French (haven't won a war since Napoleon's day)

Do you have any faith in the Irish then? Exactly what wars have we won as a country? Did the PDF get by on sheer 'luck' for 23 years?

And nice of you to just exclude one of the world's greatest military leaders from France's history

Mick86

Fidelis wrote:

Do you have any faith in the Irish then? Exactly what wars have we won as a country? Did the PDF get by on sheer 'luck' for 23 years?

And nice of you to just exclude one of the world's greatest military leaders from France's history

Ultimately Napoleon was a loser too.

Ireland as a country has never fought a war unless you count the War of Independence and Civil War (which I don't). Nor is Ireland in NATO, which is the force being suggested for peacekeeping/peace-enforcement in Lebanon. Our lack of war fighting experience has no bearing on France's war-losing experience.

The 23 years that the Irish battalion spent in Lebanon did not include much fighting. That's fair enough because you cannot keep the peace by waging war. I expect that in limited combat we would give a good account of ourselves.

Terry

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/07/30/story270046.html

Irish troops 'may aid Mideast peace efforts'
30/07/2006 - 15:15:07



More than 200 Irish troops could join an international peace-keeping force in the Middle East, it emerged today.

But Israel and Lebanon must commit to a ceasefire – and a political deal to underpin that ceasefire – before the safety of our military would be jeopardised, stressed Defence Minister Willie O’Dea.

“When we are deciding to send troops abroad, one of the principal considerations is for the safety of our troops, and it is an extremely dangerous place at the moment,” he said.

“We have had no requests to send troops to Lebanon as yet, but my own personal opinion is that we shouldn’t send any troops there in the absence of a ceasefire or some sort of political deal to underpin the ceasefire.

“It is one thing to have troops there performing humanitarian functions who were there already, but before sending out fresh troops safety considerations would be paramount.”

Mr O’Dea said he remains in close contact with the 17 Irish troops already serving in the Middle East, talking with their Commander and Chief of Staff on a daily basis.

There are currently no plans to withdraw those troops, he said, but added the situation is being reviewed daily.

“Morale is quite high there amongst the Irish troops,” he continued. “They are happy to be doing the humanitarian type work they are doing.”

Around 850 Irish troops can be committed abroad at any one time. There are currently 670 serving oversees – with around 375 of those in Liberia.

“We are in the process of withdrawing from Liberia and the last of those will be home by next May,” he said.

“If we got a request, we could commit a minimum of 200 troops, but we are a long way from that.


“In the event of a ceasefire we would be in a better position to give it consideration, but that’s not any guarantee we would be part of an international peace keeping force. We would have to consider various things.”

Mr O’Dea also condemned the shell attack earlier this week on a United Nations observation in southern Lebanon, which killed four men attached to UNIFIL.

“We were saved only because of roistering, only because our people weren’t there at the time,” he continued.

“We met the Israeli Ambassador during the week and he assured us that his people told him it wasn’t deliberate and I have to take his word for that.

“It may have been deliberate, but at the very minimum it was grossly reckless.”

The Taoiseach earlier condemned an Israeli airstrike on the Lebanese village of Qana in which up to 50 people were killed.

At least half of those who died were children.

“I am shocked and appalled at the news of the heavy loss of life in an Israeli airstrike on the village of Qana this morning,” said Bertie Ahern.

“Reports indicate that the dead include a large number of children. I recall sadly that the people of Qana suffered a similar tragedy in 1996.

“This event strongly underlines the clear message the Government has been giving out which is that an immediate ceasefire on all sides is urgently necessary.

“Military actions are only making a solution more difficult.”

He added that Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern will strongly represent Ireland’s views at an urgent meeting of EU foreign ministers to be held in Brussels on Tuesday.

lostexpectation

Mick86 wrote:

To be honest, I can't see NATO getting involved. And if it does will it be much good without US or British involvement. Neither of those two will be welcomed by Hezbollah anyway. I haven't much faith in the French (haven't won a war since Napoleon's day) and they are traditionally pro-Arab. The Italians are worse and the Spanish scuttled out of Iraq after the Madrid bombing so enough said there. That effectively leaves the Germans.

And what is this force going to do anyway. It'll be based in Lebanon so if it's there to combat Hezbollah, it will be living with the enemy and will be open to attack from them. Or will it be there to protect the Lebanese from the Israelis. That's already been tried and is a pretty tough job.

and the germans don't want to be pointing guns at jews.

that the thing its frankly too dangerous for UN peacekeepers, the Lebanese government will 'invite' nato there.

Mick86

lostexpectation wrote:

and the germans don't want to be pointing guns at jews.

that the thing its frankly too dangerous for UN peacekeepers, the Lebanese government will 'invite' nato there.

It'll be even more dangerous for NATO troops because they are allies of the US and might well be targeted by Hizballah. The danger, up to a point, should not really be a factor. We're talking about soldiers here and soldiering is a hazardous occupation. If you want a safe job, stack shelves in Tesco.

Any force won't be there to point guns at Jews. The US won't allow that. It's purpose would be to disarm Hizballah but I don't see that being acceptable to anyone in Lebanon now.

babybundy

Mick86 wrote:

hazardous occupation. If you want a safe job, stack shelves in Tesco.

.

that can be hazardous too tins of peas falling on your head