Irish in training for EU battlegroups.

Steyr

Irish in training for EU battlegroups.


The first group of Irish soldiers to participate in EU battlegroups are currently undergoing training for the new units.

Chief of Staff Lt Gen Dermot Earley said the battlegroups will be ready to serve at short notice in both peacekeeping and disaster situations around the world.

Most of the 100 Irish soldiers assigned to an EU battlegroup were shaping up for their new role at Kilworth Camp in Co Cork this afternoon.

They will undergo further training in Sweden before the battlegroup officially goes on standby in January.

Ireland is providing a sophisticated bomb disposal and mine clearance unit to the Nordic Battlegroup, which will be composed of 2,000 troops - mostly from Sweden, Estonia, Norway and Finland.

The standby battlegroups are being set up so that Europe can respond to disasters or emergencies at five days notice to trouble spots around the world.

They would stay for about three months - sometimes until a bigger peacekeeping force arrives.

Irish missions abroad will still need the approval of the Government and the UN.

The Minister for Defence, Willie O'Dea, said the new battlegroups are not a European army in any shape or form, insisting that Ireland's participation does not undermine Ireland's traditional neutrality

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0720/defence.html

purple'n'gold

I saw the interview with Lt Gen Dermot Earley on TV when they were showing the soldiers in training. He of course was very careful to trot out the governments silly “treble lock” nonsense. Of course he has to do this, but I suspect the man is not in total agreement with it. Why on earth should we have to wait for the United Nations to give us the nod to act? As members of the European Union and now part of their emergency response initiative we should be ready to act when the EU decides. I find this treble lock thing ridiculous. We are either part of the European battle group or we are not.

burnedfaceman

steyr, why do you feel the need to copy and post other peoples posts from irishmilitaryonline.com onto this forum. i have just counted six threads you have started here that originated elsewhere, one of which was mine.

testicle

burnedfaceman wrote:

steyr, why do you feel the need to copy and post other peoples posts from irishmilitaryonline.com onto this forum. i have just counted six threads you have started here that originated elsewhere, one of which was mine.

Some of them were originally his.

Steyr

burnedfaceman wrote:

steyr, why do you feel the need to copy and post other peoples posts from irishmilitaryonline.com onto this forum. i have just counted six threads you have started here that originated elsewhere, one of which was mine.

Because sweet fcuk all happens on these boards so seeing as nobody else bothers then why not besides its all from the NEWS sec of IMO so its NEWS and why not share it here, its not as if your going to do it now are you?

jmayo

Steyr wrote:

Irish in training for EU battlegroups.
Most of the 100 Irish soldiers assigned to an EU battlegroup were shaping up for their new role at Kilworth Camp in Co Cork this afternoon.

Ireland is providing a sophisticated bomb disposal and mine clearance unit to the Nordic Battlegroup, which will be composed of 2,000 troops - mostly from Sweden, Estonia, Norway and Finland.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0720/defence.html

Since when did we become a Nordic nation?
And why would we be joining a grouping that appears to include non-EU countries i.e. Norway. Is it somehting external to EU or something supposedly for EU countries from Northern Europe and if so how come Norway is there ?
These stories get stranger as time goes on.

ambasite

Steyr wrote:

100 Irish soldiers

[/url]

this is our contribution? :rolleyes:

cushtac

jmayo wrote:

Since when did we become a Nordic nation?
And why would we be joining a grouping that appears to include non-EU countries i.e. Norway. Is it somehting external to EU or something supposedly for EU countries from Northern Europe and if so how come Norway is there ?
These stories get stranger as time goes on.

I'd say we joined this battlegroup because it contains three nations we've had experience of working with in the past, two of which are also neutral.

cushtac

ambasite wrote:

this is our contribution? :rolleyes:

This will be in addition to the UN, EU and NATO-led mission contributions, which was 828 last year.

Hard Larry

jmayo wrote:

Since when did we become a Nordic nation?
And why would we be joining a grouping that appears to include non-EU countries i.e. Norway. Is it somehting external to EU or something supposedly for EU countries from Northern Europe and if so how come Norway is there ?
These stories get stranger as time goes on.

Its much easier to be in the Nordic Battlegroup as oppossed to a UK Battlegroup

Although a UK Battlegroup is more logistically feasible than sending troops to Scandanavia and crossing language barriers (yes I know they speak English too) but there is just not a hope in Hell thats this countries Government want to open up the cans of worms that would be a UK Battlegroup...from a political point of view it would be a PR Nightmare.

As for Norway being involved...more power to them...you should see their women in uniform

OS119

the EUBG scheme was very deliberately designed to be able - given its pre-formed and pre-manned structure - to be able to deploy before a UN mandated force could deploy - and even before such a force could be mandated - as a demonstration of the EU's status as a major power bloc.

EUBG's are not there to provide the UN with a pool of ready-made units, they are there as an alternative to the UN.

If Ireland conbtinues to insist that its contribution will not deploy unless and until a UNSC mandates them, regardless of the rest of the BG deploying, then Ireland will continue to be ignored on the big policy front. you will notice the Irelands contribution is very much in bolt-on module form, its a small, single purpose unit that, should a UNSC mandate not be either in place or on the cards, could be replaced very easily by another EOD Coy from pretty much any country partaking in the EUBG scheme - and for very good reason, Ireland would be utterly humiliated if an entire EUBG, in which it was supposed to play a central and complex part, was unable to deploy because the Irish contingent was unable to deploy because of a lack of UNSC mandate. similarly no other country is going to take the risk of its BG being left high and dry because the Irish are awaiting permission from the Chinese before they deploy.

Ireland gets the crumbs from the table not because of its size - it could easily provide the bulk of a BG and therefore its command - but because it's politically unreliable. while that situation remains no participant is going to consider going into real partnership with the Irish, and no Irish Govt would be prepared to face the derision of of its closest political and economic partners because it was unable to fullfil its political and military commitments to them because the Sudanese said no.

when Ireland acts like a sovereign power it will be treated like one, until then...

purple'n'gold

OS119 wrote:

the EUBG scheme was very deliberately designed to be able - given its pre-formed and pre-manned structure - to be able to deploy before a UN mandated force could deploy - and even before such a force could be mandated - as a demonstration of the EU's status as a major power bloc.

EUBG's are not there to provide the UN with a pool of ready-made units, they are there as an alternative to the UN.

If Ireland conbtinues to insist that its contribution will not deploy unless and until a UNSC mandates them, regardless of the rest of the BG deploying, then Ireland will continue to be ignored on the big policy front. you will notice the Irelands contribution is very much in bolt-on module form, its a small, single purpose unit that, should a UNSC mandate not be either in place or on the cards, could be replaced very easily by another EOD Coy from pretty much any country partaking in the EUBG scheme - and for very good reason, Ireland would be utterly humiliated if an entire EUBG, in which it was supposed to play a central and complex part, was unable to deploy because the Irish contingent was unable to deploy because of a lack of UNSC mandate. similarly no other country is going to take the risk of its BG being left high and dry because the Irish are awaiting permission from the Chinese before they deploy.

Ireland gets the crumbs from the table not because of its size - it could easily provide the bulk of a BG and therefore its command - but because it's politically unreliable. while that situation remains no participant is going to consider going into real partnership with the Irish, and no Irish Govt would be prepared to face the derision of of its closest political and economic partners because it was unable to fullfil its political and military commitments to them because the Sudanese said no.

when Ireland acts like a sovereign power it will be treated like one, until then...

Well said, and well done. My sentiments exactly.

O'Leprosy

Hard Larry wrote:

As for Norway being involved...more power to them...you should see their women in uniform

Nice one.

testicle

Hard Larry wrote:

As for Norway being involved...more power to them...you should see their women in uniform

I can assure you, they're even better looking out of them!