Does the Irish army do much to defend Ireland?

IrishTrajan

Nodin wrote: »

Jokes at our expense, I'd say. Personally I wouldn't fancy slogging over the curragh with a flashlight trying to find them.=

Colour me surprised :rolleyes:

maudgonner

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We certainly don't need our air corp. A deal could be signed with the British or French to protect our airspace for a fee.

I'm pretty sure Dermot MacMurrough had similar reasoning.

IrishTrajan

Just as an aside, is it possible to have a poll put in the OP asking if people would like to see the DF maintained, increased or decreased in funding?

Iwasfrozen

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Just as an aside, is it possible to have a poll put in the OP asking if people would like to see the DF maintained, increased or decreased in funding?

This would be interesting.

KingBrian2

>

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We certainly don't need our air corp. A deal could be signed with the British or French to protect our airspace for a fee.

Yeah maybe as part of a European agreement or deal.:D

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

>


Yeah maybe as part of a European agreement or deal.:D

Yeah, if it cost less why not? the only country in danger of violating our airspace is Russia. The RAF or French Airforce are more than capable of escorting Russian planes out of our territory.

Topper Harley

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We certainly don't need our air corp. A deal could be signed with the British or French to protect our airspace for a fee.

I agree that we should get rid of all three branches of our Defence Forces and just depend on goodwill and happy thoughts to take care of everything.

KingBrian2

Topper Harley wrote: »

I agree that we should get rid of all three branches of our Defence Forces and just depend on goodwill and happy thoughts to take care of everything.

Your being sarcastic please tell me you are. :eek: Like giving keys of the hen house to the Fox.

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Your being sarcastic please tell me you are. :eek: Like giving keys of the hen house to the Fox.

At the moment the hen house has no door, no fence and is being guarded by a man with total amelia.

KingBrian2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

At the moment the hen house has no door, no fence and is being guarded by a man with total amelia.

The country is an Island with no NATO presence. We are not sure what to make of Europe and we have mixed relations with our nearest neighbour depending on who is in gvt were either bitter enemies or best of friends. We need a strong Defense Force amidst this period of turmoil. Plenty of terrorists emanating from across mainland Europe and the UK.

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The country is an Island with no NATO presence. We are not sure what to make of Europe and we have mixed relations with our nearest neighbour depending on who is in gvt were either bitter enemies or best of friends. We need a strong Defense Force amidst this period of turmoil. Plenty of terrorists emanating from across mainland Europe and the UK.

We don't have a strong defence force, we have no ability to create a defence force that can match the UK or France and anti terrorism is a police role.

Disgruntled Badger

I'm not sure we need a 'standing army'. I'd personally get rid of it and replace it with specialist divisions attached to the Guards, roles the army currently do, but with a lot of top heavy leadership as they are a separate body. Aside from specialists we've a lot of troops doing very little that impacts on society day to day. They could be better used as civil defence like the CRS in France trained to go up against the head-bangers with guns in our cities. As with most things in this country; it's not a lack of money but how it's spent.

KingBrian2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We don't have a strong defence force, we have no ability to create a defence force that can match the UK or France and anti terrorism is a police role.

Ah! I am glad you mention that because we don't need to be as good as those countries when it comes to counter terrorism we don't have the same threat level. We also can prevent the root causes of terrorism which is a lot more effectively. What is needed is a way of stopping the killers from using Ireland as a base to carry out attacks abroad and for that we need military style policing. These people won't go voluntarily. Their enemies of the state.

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Ah! I am glad you mention that because we don't need to be as good as those countries when it comes to counter terrorism we don't have the same threat level. We also can prevent the root causes of terrorism which is a lot more effectively. What is needed is a way of stopping the killers from using Ireland as a base to carry out attacks abroad and for that we need military style policing. These people won't go voluntarily. Their enemies of the state.

When I wrote "we have no ability to create a defence force that can match the UK or France" I meant military force. As anti terrorism is a police matter I'm not sure how this justifies the existence of an Irish standing military.

The air corps are particularly useless and their function could be replaced by the UK or France in exchange for a fee.

pablomakaveli

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The air corps are particularly useless and their function could be replaced by the UK or France in exchange for a fee.

You keep mentioning this but how viable do you think that is?

If this was a good idea you'd think more smaller countries would be doing this but they're not. There are countries smaller and poorer than our that still maintain their own airforce.

France arent an option because their too far away to scramble jets and get them here quickly if that ever was required.

The UK arent necessarily going to agree. And if they do it wont be cheap. Running Typhoons isnt cheap and they'd probably want more on top of that to justify the hassle of covering our airspace as well as ours.

It's more cost effective for us to guard our own airspace.

Iwasfrozen

pablomakaveli wrote: »

You keep mentioning this but how viable do you think that is?

If this was a good idea you'd think more smaller countries would be doing this but they're not. There are countries smaller and poorer than our that still maintain their own airforce.

France arent an option because their too far away to scramble jets and get them here quickly if that ever was required.

The UK arent necessarily going to agree. And if they do it wont be cheap. Running Typhoons isnt cheap and they'd probably want more on top of that to justify the hassle of covering our airspace as well as ours.

It's more cost effective for us to guard our own airspace.

The British already protect our airspace, they'd be doing the same thing for a fee.

The fee doesn't need to be cheap, just less than the entire air corps budget to be worthwhile, and possibly even more considering the much better protection the RAF or French Airforce could offer over the Irish air corps.

ED E

pablomakaveli wrote: »

It's more cost effective for us to guard our own airspace.

I'd love to see figures to back that up.

There's an economy of scale that we just can't reach.

KingBrian2

>

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The British already protect our airspace, they'd be doing the same thing for a fee.

The fee doesn't need to be cheap, just less than the entire air corps budget to be worthwhile, and possibly even more considering the much better protection the RAF or French Airforce could offer over the Irish air corps.

Something like that is not worth the cost. Irish air force for Irish air space. The RAF have no business controlling our air space. They should not be doing so as is. I know we have a plenty of persons such as yourself that are eager to strip the DF and AF of its role. We should be expanding not dismantling the forces in light of the increasing threats. Leaving ourselves totally defenseless and for the Irish army is not worth spending on talk about selling out your armed forces. We send them around the world and bring them home only to write them off as Veterans. Keep the DF & AF as powerful defense forces against potential threats.

Pugzilla

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Keep the DF & AF as powerful defense forces against potential threats.

As it stands, they can't defend us against anything except terrorists. Almost every country in Europe could roll over us with ease. Any anti-terroism duties should just be transferred to the Gardai. Give them a heavily armed unit to deal with this threat. Air corp air ambulance service should be transferred to the existing civilian service. The Navy is the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role (enforcing fishery policies and countering smuggling).

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

>

Something like that is not worth the cost. Irish air force for Irish air space. The RAF have no business controlling our air space. They should not be doing so as is. I know we have a plenty of persons such as yourself that are eager to strip the DF and AF of its role. We should be expanding not dismantling the forces in light of the increasing threats. Leaving ourselves totally defenseless and for the Irish army is not worth spending on talk about selling out your armed forces. We send them around the world and bring them home only to write them off as Veterans. Keep the DF & AF as powerful defense forces against potential threats.

What threats? As I've said anti terrorism is a police role. The RAF or French Airforce could protect our airspace at a fraction of the cost given their economies of scale and much more effectively too as they have jet fighters.

The rest of your post is just jingoism and not worth responding to. "Irish air force for Irish air space. The RAF have no business controlling our air space." Says who?

Topper Harley

Pugzilla wrote: »

Air corp air ambulance service should be transferred to the existing civilian service. The Navy is the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role (enforcing fishery policies and countering smuggling).

You do know that the Air Corps also has a significant and increasing role in fishery protection and countering smuggling?

As for transferring the air ambulance service to a civilian service, I'm sure plenty of Air Corps personnel would love this. With this increased demand on a civilian service who do you think they would hire to fill this role? My guess is, they would get the highly trained and professional people who were recently relieved of their duties of doing that job. Of course, when those people bring their skills to a private sector in need of them, they'll be paid quite a bit more than they were in the Defence Forces. And of course, a private company will be charging enough to ensure that they make some profit too.

Topper Harley

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The rest of your post is just jingoism and not worth responding to. "Irish air force for Irish air space. The RAF have no business controlling our air space." Says who?

The International Civil Aviation Organisation has something to say about sovereignty of airspace. Article 1 of the Paris Convention 1919 says each contracting party recognises that every Power has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above their territory. Ireland is currently a contracting party by the way.

And while we're handing over the airspace over our country, let's just get the British Army to reoccupy our lands and protect us from our European neighbours. All we'd have to do in exchange is pay our taxes to the UK and swear allegiance to the Queen.

AbusesToilets

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What threats? As I've said anti terrorism is a police role. The RAF or French Airforce could protect our airspace at a fraction of the cost given their economies of scale and much more effectively too as they have jet fighters.

The rest of your post is just jingoism and not worth responding to. "Irish air force for Irish air space. The RAF have no business controlling our air space." Says who?

Perhaps you can enlighten us on realistic times for registering inbound threats and subsequently scrambling interceptors from Britain or France. Who is going to control and direct these aircraft, how would they do so and what would their ROE be?

The defense budget is a disgrace, the Government has a duty to provide a military capable of defending the county and it continues to fail miserably. The DF does an admirable job given the deplorable support it gets.

Iwasfrozen

Topper Harley wrote: »

The International Civil Aviation Organisation has something to say about sovereignty of airspace. Article 1 of the Paris Convention 1919 says each contracting party recognises that every Power has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above their territory. Ireland is currently a contracting party by the way.

And while we're handing over the airspace over our country, let's just get the British Army to reoccupy our lands and protect us from our European neighbours. All we'd have to do in exchange is pay our taxes to the UK and swear allegiance to the Queen.

Contracting out defence is in no way a breech of sovereignty and is in fact a confirmation of the contractors sovereignty that the airspace is theirs exclusively to contract.

Try another angle.

KingBrian2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Contracting out defence is in no way a breech of sovereignty and is in fact a confirmation of the contractors sovereignty that the airspace is theirs exclusively to contract.

Try another angle.

Outsourcing of our DF to foreign powers that's what it is.

Iwasfrozen

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Outsourcing of our DF to foreign powers that's what it is.

Yes, outsourcing the air corps. Obviously we would need to see what rates Britain or France could offer but given the costs for them would be minimal it's likely to be much lower than our air corps budget with access to better technologies giving a better, more efficient service.

KingBrian2

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes, outsourcing the air corps. Obviously we would need to see what rates Britain or France could offer but given the costs for them would be minimal it's likely to be much lower than our air corps budget with access to better technologies giving a better, more efficient service.

I don't agree that should be done. Many others would share this view.

Topper Harley

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Try another angle.

The rest of my post that you quoted.

Stojkovic

expectationlost wrote: »

the Russians didn't invade our airspace last year.

Year before was it ?

Edit - no it was Feb 2015 which Im sure was last year.

pickarooney

We'd probably end up like Costa Rica. Pineapples and fried chicken everywhere.

beach_walker

They seem to do a good job on a (comparatively) small budget. The international goodwill is probably worth it alone but tbh an army/defence-force seem like the kind of thing its better to have and not need, rather than t'other way round.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Pugzilla wrote: »

As it stands, they can't defend us against anything except terrorists. Almost every country in Europe could roll over us with ease. Any anti-terroism duties should just be transferred to the Gardai. Give them a heavily armed unit to deal with this threat. Air corp air ambulance service should be transferred to the existing civilian service. The Navy is the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role (enforcing fishery policies and countering smuggling).

There's absolutely no logic behind your idea. Your suggestions have zero reasoning behing them. Nowhere have you said why these suggestions should be taken up. If you knew what you were talking about you would already know that there is an anti terrorist unit in the Gardai. Do you want to hand them .50 calibre machine guns? For what exactly? What "threat" is present that requires a second anti terrorist unit to be "heavily armed" (whatever the hell that means).

Why would any European country be bothered invading or attacking us? Your posts are written as fact, when the opposite is true. There's no fact in them whatsoever, there's only ifs, buts and maybes backed up by fear.

By your logic we should transfer the role of the Navy to the RNLI, just give them a large arsenal of powerful artillery and away they go. Problems solved.

Elemonator

They do A LOT more than people realise, with a smaller budget than the Guards. Madness really.

expectationlost

Stojkovic wrote: »

Year before was it ?

Edit - no it was Feb 2015 which Im sure was last year.

the Russians didn't invade our airspace last year (or the year before), how many times to I to repeat this fact.

beach_walker

expectationlost wrote: »

the Russians didn't invade our airspace last year (or the year before), how many times to I to repeat this fact.

Correct. They just flew nuclear bombers with their transponders turned off through Irish controlled airspace, thankfully not causing any accidents with civilian flights. Hardly the act of a friendly nation tbh.

BoJack Horseman

beach_walker wrote: »

Hardly the act of a friendly nation tbh.

What is a nuclear armed, practice run between friends!?

Benevolent & peace loving that is!

cajonlardo

Surprised the amount of people who don't know anything at all about the Defense Forces.
Historically most Irish Families had someone serving and thus got an idea of the ethos, service and pride.

People who imagine that you can have a quasi para military or semi Civvy company perform military roles just do not have an idea of what goes into training a soldier. If you attempted to treat a civvy in the same manner as an army recruit the best you could hope for is to be in front of a judge.

I've come to the conclusion that it is a waste of time debating this. Unless someone has an idea of what Duty, Service, Honour and Military Experience entails then you are wasting your time.

Contract out services?
Why not go the whole way and hire mercenaries?
Who do you complain to when the hired help fail - the Business Standards authourity?
Will your hired gun stand and fight when push comes to shove?

In a thread on farming or litigation, for instances, I would have no credibility. I am in no way qualified in those fields. I believe many posters here are too ignorant of this subject for their opinions to be taken seriously ( but that won't stop them, empty pots and all that...)

josephryan1989

A police force is primarily involved in enforcing laws and investigating crime. They are only armed and trained with those arms to meet the threat of armed criminals. They could never be capable of fighting a war.

Historically this state has faced armed rebellion, terrorism and potential invasion. To meet that threat you need to have a force drilled in weapons and tactics and that requires a full time volunteer military to be on standby to perform that mission while our reserve defense forces can assist them. Also there are tens of thousands more ex-members who could be armed in an emergency situation.

Pugzilla

Sabrina Calm Clergy wrote: »

There's absolutely no logic behind your idea. Your suggestions have zero reasoning behing them. Nowhere have you said why these suggestions should be taken up. If you knew what you were talking about you would already know that there is an anti terrorist unit in the Gardai. Do you want to hand them .50 calibre machine guns? For what exactly? What "threat" is present that requires a second anti terrorist unit to be "heavily armed" (whatever the hell that means).

Why would any European country be bothered invading or attacking us? Your posts are written as fact, when the opposite is true. There's no fact in them whatsoever, there's only ifs, buts and maybes backed up by fear.

By your logic we should transfer the role of the Navy to the RNLI, just give them a large arsenal of powerful artillery and away they go. Problems solved.

Pseudo-intellectualism at its laughable worst. You have no comprehension ability. Read my post again and get back to me.

Jimoslimos

beach_walker wrote: »

Correct. They just flew nuclear bombers with their transponders turned off through Irish controlled airspace, thankfully not causing any accidents with civilian flights. Hardly the act of a friendly nation tbh.

There's a difference between sovereign and controlled airspace.

Anyway I doubt Russia could give a flying fcuk what the Irish government or the civil aviation authority thought, the entire exercise was designed to probe NATO response times. Silly games we should not and realistically cannot be a part of.

These threads always seem to be split between the Walter Mitty military fantasists who'd have us spending the entire GDP on nuclear subs and those who would disband the entire army.

A small corp of highly trained and skilled soldiers is all we need, with reserves available for large scale domestic disasters/unrest. We're never going to get involved in traditional nation vs nation wars and if we do we'd be destroyed by pretty much every European nation - no matter how many fighter jets we have.

josephryan1989

Jimoslimos wrote: »

There's a difference between sovereign and controlled airspace.

Anyway I doubt Russia could give a flying fcuk what the Irish government or the civil aviation authority thought, the entire exercise was designed to probe NATO response times. Silly games we should not and realistically cannot be a part of.

These threads always seem to be split between the Walter Mitty military fantasists who'd have us spending the entire GDP on nuclear subs and those who would disband the entire army.

A small corp of highly trained and skilled soldiers is all we need, with reserves available for large scale domestic disasters/unrest. We're never going to get involved in traditional nation vs nation wars and if we do we'd be destroyed by pretty much every European nation - no matter how many fighter jets we have.

Precisely.

A battalion of the Irish Defence Forces is all we can send at any one time on UN duty internationally and they perform that duty well.

A few scenarios - however unlikely - justify the existence of our defense forces.

1. Prisoners taking control of a prison and organizing a mass break out.

2. Armed criminals seizing control of a neighborhood.

3. Armed Irish republican terrorists seizing the centre of Dublin.

The only force that would be suitable to take on something like that would be our professional defense forces.

KingBrian2

Jimoslimos wrote: »

There's a difference between sovereign and controlled airspace.

Anyway I doubt Russia could give a flying fcuk what the Irish government or the civil aviation authority thought, the entire exercise was designed to probe NATO response times. Silly games we should not and realistically cannot be a part of.

These threads always seem to be split between the Walter Mitty military fantasists who'd have us spending the entire GDP on nuclear subs and those who would disband the entire army.

A small corp of highly trained and skilled soldiers is all we need, with reserves available for large scale domestic disasters/unrest. We're never going to get involved in traditional nation vs nation wars and if we do we'd be destroyed by pretty much every European nation - no matter how many fighter jets we have.

The Russians are not are enemies but to be cautious we need a DF that can monitor our airspace. The Dublin to London travel area is one of the business routes in the world. Having our Airforce on standby is very important for this state and the average Irish citizen.

On the continent the French, Germans, Polish and others share technology as they are NATO members and have common borders to defend against we don't. Be it terrorists, Russians, Iranians, Syrians North Koreans, Turks or Saudi's a common alliance is necessary which is why they have far greater integration of military forces. The Germans even allow the French to conduct military maneuvers.

Iwasfrozen

cajonlardo wrote: »

Surprised the amount of people who don't know anything at all about the Defense Forces.
Historically most Irish Families had someone serving and thus got an idea of the ethos, service and pride.

People who imagine that you can have a quasi para military or semi Civvy company perform military roles just do not have an idea of what goes into training a soldier. If you attempted to treat a civvy in the same manner as an army recruit the best you could hope for is to be in front of a judge.

I've come to the conclusion that it is a waste of time debating this. Unless someone has an idea of what Duty, Service, Honour and Military Experience entails then you are wasting your time.

Contract out services?
Why not go the whole way and hire mercenaries?
Who do you complain to when the hired help fail - the Business Standards authourity?
Will your hired gun stand and fight when push comes to shove?

In a thread on farming or litigation, for instances, I would have no credibility. I am in no way qualified in those fields. I believe many posters here are too ignorant of this subject for their opinions to be taken seriously ( but that won't stop them, empty pots and all that...)

A contracted air force doesn't have to fight "if push comes to shove." Our geographic location between the UK, France and the US makes a war by a foreign military on Irish soil impossible.

All a contracted air force needs to do is monitor our airspace and escort out any breech. No need for antiquitated ideas like "honor" there.

Iwasfrozen

josephryan1989 wrote: »

Precisely.

A battalion of the Irish Defence Forces is all we can send at any one time on UN duty internationally and they perform that duty well.

A few scenarios - however unlikely - justify the existence of our defense forces.

1. Prisoners taking control of a prison and organizing a mass break out.

2. Armed criminals seizing control of a neighborhood.

3. Armed Irish republican terrorists seizing the centre of Dublin.

The only force that would be suitable to take on something like that would be our professional defense forces.

All three of those examples are a police matter. Could you imagine the US sending soldiers to handle a orison break? They would use trained orison guards. Similarly anti terrorism is strictly a police matter.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Pugzilla wrote: »

Pseudo-intellectualism at its laughable worst. You have no comprehension ability. Read my post again and get back to me.

There's nothing to comprehend, there's no reasoning in your posts whatsoever. You just say disband the army or hand over their roles to the Gardai, but give absolutely no reason behind the suggestion. Every single post you have on the matter follows the same strategy.

You say "The Navy is the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role (enforcing fishery policies and countering smuggling)." but give absolutely no examples as to why. Why is it the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role?

You haven't been able to back up your suggestions of moving the anti terrorist tasks (which are a part of the ARW), to the Gardai (which also has an anti terrorist unit). It makes no logical sense to make such a move.

You just have an unfound disdain for the DF as a whole and you completely lack any understanding of the roles of the DF in Irish society. There has been numerous examples given by several posters of what the DF do backed up by reasoning on why these roles should be kept within the DF. You just ignore them and drone on about getting rid of the DF, without any reason or logic...

Stojkovic

expectationlost wrote: »

the Russians didn't invade our airspace last year (or the year before), how many times to I to repeat this fact.

I dont know, until you believe it ?

Pugzilla

Sabrina Calm Clergy wrote: »

There's nothing to comprehend, there's no reasoning in your posts whatsoever. You just say disband the army or hand over their roles to the Gardai, but give absolutely no reason behind the suggestion. Every single post you have on the matter follows the same strategy.

You say "The Navy is the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role (enforcing fishery policies and countering smuggling)." but give absolutely no examples as to why. Why is it the only part of the DF that has any meaningful role?

You haven't been able to back up your suggestions of moving the anti terrorist tasks (which are a part of the ARW), to the Gardai (which also has an anti terrorist unit). It makes no logical sense to make such a move.

You just have an unfound disdain for the DF as a whole and you completely lack any understanding of the roles of the DF in Irish society. There has been numerous examples given by several posters of what the DF do backed up by reasoning on why these roles should be kept within the DF. You just ignore them and drone on about getting rid of the DF, without any reason or logic...

Let me guess, you're another DF lackey.... Hope you enjoy carrying sandbags.

pablomakaveli

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

All three of those examples are a police matter. Could you imagine the US sending soldiers to handle a orison break? They would use trained orison guards. Similarly anti terrorism is strictly a police matter.

Not necessarily. Look at the US where the National Guard were used during the 60's and 70's to deal with protestors. Something the Army in Ireland train for is dealing with rioters.

josephryan1989

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

All three of those examples are a police matter. Could you imagine the US sending soldiers to handle a orison break? They would use trained orison guards. Similarly anti terrorism is strictly a police matter.

The US government used the New York National Guard to take back Attica Prison. The Irish Army is already used to guard our high security prison in Portlaoise from an armed assault or from an inmate uprising and break out.

Worldwide there have been incidents where heavily armed criminal gangs have taken over neighborhoods and outgunned police and the government sent in troops with heavier firepower to take out the gangs. Some Dublin gangs have some serious hardware and in a nightmare scenario could easily take over an entire neighborhood and take on the Gardaí in a firefight.
To defeat them the Army would have to go in with an infantry assault.

If a group of armed republicans armed with grenades, rifles, machine guns, and rocket launchers barricaded themselves into a government building after seizing it, the Gardaí would be no match for them.
The Irish Army trains for urban fighting and would have to go in with artillery and armored vehicles to drive them out.

That's why we have an Army - for worse case scenarios.

The Army exists organized into battalions and subdivided into companies and platoons to be used a maneuverable fighting units in the event of armed conflict and the break down of law and order. They train to take back rural and urban territory against armed resistance. The Gardaí are not a combat force. They investigate crimes and enforce the law. They aren't a war fighting organization like the Army.

Stojkovic

Better to have an army and not need one than need an army and not have one !!!