Should The Irish Arny Stay In Chad

twinytwo

There is alot of debate over the last few weeks about the UN deployment to chad....

Please read..
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/85125

Now as im sure the guy that wrote this does not no anything aboout the UN mandate or the reasons for the irish armys deployment.. Personallly I think that we are right to go as we cant just sit on the sidelines and do nothing...

OS119

the article is a tad hysterical - shock horror - and its value jugdements are a little off the ball, but it does contain a kernal of truth.

the Irish deployment to Chad (a 'heavy' deployment to a very nasty regional conflict where the west does have an agenda - a relatively benign one, but an agenda none the less - where other very powerful states/regional blocs also have agendas and vital interests, and serious fighting is likely) is, perhaps on a greater scale and intensity, but like the UNFIL2 deployment, an indication of Ireland begining to take its place as a first world state with a voice at the table and a stick under that table if its voice isn't heard.

After the 9/11 attacks the Irish government decided - to their great credit - to offer to assist the US and NATO in their war on AQ and the Taliban in Afghanistan, they saw that not only was there a political imperitive to be seen to be behind the US in those first dark days, but that the time had come for Ireland to stand up and be counted amongst those who would put their money where their mouth was. (not a value judgement saying everyone who went to A'stan was 'right' and everyone who didn't was 'wrong', rather that it had been noticed on a number of occasions that Ireland can be very vocal about demanding UN/EU 'peacekeeping' actions but not wildly keen on coughing up the cash to pay for a military capable of going on them to any great degree). the US and NATO were grateful for the sentiment, but declined the offer because Irelands forces weren't capable of securing an area and just getting on with it, they would have been utterly dependent on other coalition partners for battlefield mobility, logistics, CAS, ISTAR, armour and a thousand other things that just made the whole idea more trouble than it was worth.

as you can imagine this was more than a little humiliating for the Irish government, effectively being told that it couldn't send military forces to the most strategicly important conflict of the early 21st century because they couldn't look after themselves, let alone do anything useful.

the spending, the new doctrine are all products of a meeting at NATO HQ where Ireland was told that for all its words, it wasn't strong enough and couldn't play with the big boys.

it would be wrong to see the current force structure as the finished article, though it would be foolish to assume that the Iraqi debacle hasn't cooled Irish desire to able to play with the big boys when it sees fit. it would also be wrong to treat this all as testorone fueled nationalism, it isn't, its a realisation, both in Dublin and throughout Europe, that Ireland has had somewhat of a free ride when it comes to foriegn and security policy, and that free ride would no longer be tolerated by Irelands closest political and economic partners. this isn't a 'zero sum' situation where Ireland chose to change the status quo, rather that the staus quo was no longer acceptable to those who paid for it - both in blood and treasure - and that Ireland could make a choice: it could take up its place as a vocal and practicing member of Europe, with the costs that that involves, or it could sit at the back and shut the fcuk up, with the not inconsiderable costs that that involves.

so yes, Ireland should stay in Chad. it will probably help lots of people who otherwise would be in the brown stuff, it will help to turn Irelands DF's into a more experienced, capable force, and it will bolster Ireland political position within the EU - which brings benefits to Ireland directly.

helimachoptor

OS119, great post.

twinytwo

The way i see it if we leave with the current situation the way it is.. it opens the road to what will probally be genocide.. Considering we are probally one of the few countries that does not have an ulterior motive for being there i think it is better that Irish troops are there

OS119

twinytwo wrote: »

The way i see it if we leave with the current situation the way it is.. it opens the road to what will probally be genocide.. Considering we are probally one of the few countries that does not have an ulterior motive for being there i think it is better that Irish troops are there

you need to learn some cynicism my lad....

twinytwo

OS119 wrote: »

you need to learn some cynicism my lad....

So u think they have an ulterior motive then?

eroo

What are the controls placed on this EU force?Can they fire on rebels?OR do they have to take fire first? OR Can they fire on rebels seen to be harming innocents?

OS119

twinytwo wrote: »

So u think they have an ulterior motive then?

yes.

politically it is profitable for Ireland to take a significant role in a potentially dangerous 'peacekeeping' operation within an EU framework. theres no cash involved, its political points that can be used when some EU initiative comes along that Ireland has a strong veiw on. it also means that Ireland can say its fully booked in Chad rather than fend off questions about what it proposes to do in Afghanistan - which is much more dangerous.

militarily it is profitable to have relatively large deployments to conflict/semi-conflict zones, your soldiers become much more experienced and therefore capable, your officers gain 'unbuyable' experience in running large operations under the most stressfull conditions.

economicly it is profitable in the long-term to have oil producing areas under stable governance - it makes that oil less expensive to get from the ground to the refinery, as well as ensuring that more of it is pumped - which of course makes it less expensive again.

you have political capital in the bank, your army is harder and sharper than it would otherwise be, and the lifeblood of your economic system gets a bit cheaper - in the long term - those are very good motives for a state to involve itself in such a deployment.

sure you get to help lots of people as well, and thats always a good thing, but a good, reasonably demanding stint in Chad will significantly enhance the 'value' of the Irish state as well.

if none of those 'side effects' were to happen then no one would consider it - well, they might consider it, but upon looking at the potential bill they'd quickly stop considering it.

giving to charity makes us feel good about ourselves, if we didn't get that little buzz as we walk away from the beggar/collection box/chugger i wonder how many of us would still give?

Dub13

This more a Political topic but I think we can leave it here and see how it goes.

Riddle101

Irish people need to get away from this opinion that we should only look out for ourselves because that's exactly what other countries did when we were going through what Chad was during the Civil War and other things like that. We(The Irish) are better then that. We should show the world that we care and we should try to help bring peace to the world because god knows that this world is so f**ked up right now with Wars, Famine and Greed that no one seems to see that we are destroying it. At least with the irish being in Chad we are showing that we don;t just look out for ourselves but we're helping other as well. Like we always do

OS119

eroo wrote: »

What are the controls placed on this EU force?Can they fire on rebels?OR do they have to take fire first? OR Can they fire on rebels seen to be harming innocents?

staggeringly unlikely to be a 'kill one of you can' RoE, much more likely to be 'you may fire if fired upon - or if you believe you are about to be fired upon - or if you see another person (be they EUBG or civilian) either being attacked or about to be attacked'.

standard UN parameters will apply, target must be clearly defined, and you may only knowingly risk 'collateral' casualties in the gravest of life-threatening situations.

the judge of what is 'reasonable' in each circumstances is apparently the man on the No.11 Clapham omnibus.... or some idiot sat behind a desk in New York/Brussels who wouldn't know one end of an assault rifle from his arse, take your pick.

eroo

My question maybe sounded a bit gung-ho,my apologies!I was just wondering what restrictions were in place...as the last thing you'd want is DF not being able to fire on rebels who pose a threat to civilians etc.

http://military.ie/overseas/ops/africa/chad/index.htm#

pics of ARW in Chad

ChapOfDRyans

Riddle101 wrote: »

Irish people need to get away from this opinion that we should only look out for ourselves because that's exactly what other countries did when we were going through what Chad was during the Civil War and other things like that. We(The Irish) are better then that. We should show the world that we care and we should try to help bring peace to the world because god knows that this world is so f**ked up right now with Wars, Famine and Greed that no one seems to see that we are destroying it. At least with the irish being in Chad we are showing that we don;t just look out for ourselves but we're helping other as well. Like we always do

trying to be something were not just wont work.for us(the irish)to be protectors of world peace we would need a lot more machinery then we have and we aren't in it just to be nice all the reasons were stated above it gives some pull in the E.U as the time will come when we need to stand up and be counted

Riddle101

ChapOfDRyans wrote: »

trying to be something were not just wont work.for us(the irish)to be protectors of world peace we would need a lot more machinery then we have and we aren't in it just to be nice all the reasons were stated above it gives some pull in the E.U as the time will come when we need to stand up and be counted

But even so we're still doing some good in the world. We're not invading countries or starting wars on anyone we're just peace keeping. Maybe Ireland are looking for regonition but it's just so we're not looked down apon because of our size

Fratton Fred

Riddle101 wrote: »

But even so we're still doing some good in the world. We're not invading countries or starting wars on anyone we're just peace keeping. Maybe Ireland are looking for regonition but it's just so we're not looked down apon because of our size

I think size is irrelevant (:rolleyes:) it's more to do with wealth i would say. Yes Ireland is a relatively small country, but it is also one that likes to shout about how it is now one of the richest countries in the world. Being a wealthy country means you look after the less wealthy or lose brownie points from your peers.

twinytwo

OS119 wrote: »

it also means that Ireland can say its fully booked in Chad rather than fend off questions about what it proposes to do in Afghanistan - which is much more dangerous.

`
And why exactly would the irish govermnent or army get involved in a ****hole that was created by the americans...I mean peacekeeping is one thing.. but thats a war america is big and bold enough to look after itself.

twinytwo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I think size is irrelevant (:rolleyes:) it's more to do with wealth i would say. Yes Ireland is a relatively small country, but it is also one that likes to shout about how it is now one of the richest countries in the world. Being a wealthy country means you look after the less wealthy or lose brownie points from your peers.

Ireland has been involved in peacekeeping long before it ever came into these riches

ChapOfDRyans

Riddle101 wrote: »

But even so we're still doing some good in the world. We're not invading countries or starting wars on anyone we're just peace keeping. Maybe Ireland are looking for regonition but it's just so we're not looked down apon because of our size

i no were doing good and all that but to me i think thats just an added bonus and size doesnt matter its the effectiveness of our DF while out in chad that counts

twinytwo

eroo wrote: »

What are the controls placed on this EU force?Can they fire on rebels?OR do they have to take fire first? OR Can they fire on rebels seen to be harming innocents?

My take is that can only defend themselves or civilians...

Fratton Fred

twinytwo wrote: »

Ireland has been involved in peacekeeping long before it ever came into these riches

isn't this peace enforcement rather than keeping?

Peace keeping would be Cyprus which must be terrible:D

This is probably the most hostile area the PDF has been to for 40 years

Fratton Fred

twinytwo wrote: »

`
And why exactly would the irish govermnent or army get involved in a ****hole that was created by the americans...I mean peacekeeping is one thing.. but thats a war america is big and bold enough to look after itself.

winning the war and winning the peace there are two different things. Afghanistan will go on for a very long time and is a very imprortant war to resolve, if it can be.

There were Human rights abuses in Afghanistan of the very highest order and also training grounds for some very nasty people. Afghanistan being taken back by the Taliban would cause the rest of the world more problems than sorting it out will cause, so it should not just come down to the Americans...or the British and Canadians for that matter.

OS119

twinytwo wrote: »

`
And why exactly would the irish govermnent or army get involved in a ****hole that was created by the americans...I mean peacekeeping is one thing.. but thats a war america is big and bold enough to look after itself.

the PDF already has a presence in A'stan, and has had for donkeys years.

its tiny, and its probably more about making sure the Irish flag is on the ISAF website than it is about providng a vital componant that no other contributor could send, but it - and the previous offer of much more - indicates that the IG is fully aware of how important some form of coherant, friendly government is in A'stan to the Irish and wider EU interest.

pretty much every - no, i stand corrected - every member of the EU has forces in A'stan, from big contributions from the UK at 7,500 and the Germans at 3,800 to much smaller 'niche' contributions from smaller EU countries. Canada is threatening to pull its troops out of Helmand and Kandahar because it doesn't get much European support, were it to do so the French, Germans and British would have little choice but to take over the Canadian TAOR's - and that would mean a number of countries within the EU being asked to cough up and replace the German and French troops in the relatvely benign North and West.

were such a catastrophe to occur, 'no' would not be the correct answer.

Dinter

I wasn't sure whether to post in this thread on Chad or in the other one, so apologies if inappropriate. Anyway I was talking to a relative of mine who's going abroad soon and he was very sarcastic about the lack of materiel they've being issued wit. Ultimately he reckons it's going to cause no end of problems and possibly even deaths.

Now I would never run down the DF for their commitment or enthusiasm. Both are much in evidence on this site. However in all fairness can the Irish detachment function properly without a budget appropriate for their size?

As an example he was telling me about an anti armour missile that can be fired from a jeep and the ARW were trying to requisition 200 but received something like two. I can't remember what they're called I'm afraid.

Just looking for other people's perspective.

Oilrig

Dub13... a military deployment and the underlying politics cannot be separated, I think OS119 has explained the undercurrents excellently.

Dinter, standard gripe, I listened to the US guys in Iraq moaning about their kit in '03, I doubt any army has ever deployed happy.

As to the thread subject, I say yes, see out the mission as planned.

Riddle101

Dinter wrote: »

I wasn't sure whether to post in this thread on Chad or in the other one, so apologies if inappropriate. Anyway I was talking to a relative of mine who's going abroad soon and he was very sarcastic about the lack of materiel they've being issued wit. Ultimately he reckons it's going to cause no end of problems and possibly even deaths.

Now I would never run down the DF for their commitment or enthusiasm. Both are much in evidence on this site. However in all fairness can the Irish detachment function properly without a budget appropriate for their size?

As an example he was telling me about an anti armour missile that can be fired from a jeep and the ARW were trying to requisition 200 but received something like two. I can't remember what they're called I'm afraid.

Just looking for other people's perspective.

Unfortunately the Irish Government dosen't like to spend on teh Army so i would say that's why they were lacking in supplies. Also i'm pretty sure the ARW have brought some other anti-tank or Vehicle weapons with them so i wouldn'y say they'd have too much of a problem

Dub13

Oilrig wrote: »

Dub13... a military deployment and the underlying politics cannot be separated.

I know they cant but it was meant as a mild mod warning to keep some relevance to this forum and not to go completely Political.

twinytwo

Riddle101 wrote: »

Unfortunately the Irish Government dosen't like to spend on teh Army so i would say that's why they were lacking in supplies. Also i'm pretty sure the ARW have brought some other anti-tank or Vehicle weapons with them so i wouldn'y say they'd have too much of a problem

Im sure they brought their javelins... bit what is the point in sending the troops into a shihole if they are underequipped... granted i know they would never get everything they asked for but is not better to be safe than sorry

eroo

twinytwo wrote: »

Im sure they brought their javelins... bit what is the point in sending the troops into a shihole if they are underequipped... granted i know they would never get everything they asked for but is not better to be safe than sorry

Why do you keep referring to Chad as a ****hole?

twinytwo

eroo wrote: »

Why do you keep referring to Chad as a ****hole?

Well how would u refer to it.... so many countries have their fingers in the pot.. thats exactly what it is.. im refering to the situation not the country.

Chuck U Farley

twinytwo wrote: »

`
And why exactly would the irish govermnent or army get involved in a ****hole that was created by the americans...I mean peacekeeping is one thing.. but thats a war america is big and bold enough to look after itself.

[FONT=&quot]I have to disagree with that statement, It’s easy to say that the U.S. is “big and bold enough to look after itself” but the fact is someone’s son has to go and fight. There are a lot of 2nd & 3rd Irish deployed in Afghanistan wearing the U.S. uniform. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If Ireland was attacked by a terrorist group tomorrow and when the dust settled the evidence pointed to a group with political and funding ties to for example Afghanistan Ireland and it’s allies would have a duty to take the fight to their doorstep. Afghanistan has in the last year seen its most violent period since the fall of 2001, thus increasing the pressure on the U.S. and its allies in NATO to beef up their military contingents to avoid the country falling again to the radical Islamists.

[/FONT]

eroo

twinytwo wrote: »

Well how would u refer to it.... so many countries have their fingers in the pot.. thats exactly what it is.. im refering to the situation not the country.

Well you should make that clearer mate.NI was bad once,but it wasn't a ****hole,same with Chad.As well as that,making comments like that won't help the region and I'm sure DF personnel going over don't see it as a ****hole,bad situation yes.

eroo

eroo wrote: »

Well you should make that clearer mate.NI was bad once,but it wasn't a ****hole,same with Chad.As well as that,making comments like that won't help the region and I'm sure DF personnel going over don't see it as a ****hole,bad situation yes.

With all due respect Eroo, call a spade a spade. The country is one of the poorest in the world, with low life expectency and has a genocide going on at its doorstep. It's a dump.

@twinytwo, to call A-stan "Americas war" would be somewhat naive. ISAF has many large European militaries in the force that have been previously mentioned. The issue of whether Ireland should get involved is a different discussion.