Interesting articles

Hotblack Desiato

1) He is not his wife. Nobody elected her to anything, she is as entitled to her view as any of us. If somebody wants to publish that view, it makes no difference to anything.

The thing is, the average Joe or Jane isn't likely to get their hot take / brain fart plastered all over all of the newspapers in the country, and they're certainly not going to have it published on the President's official website. So this argument doesn't stand up I'm afraid. Like it or not, her actions reflect on Higgins' presidency and not in a good way.

RavenP

I aM specifically referring to his view on the chairperson, not his wider statement which is a bit woolly.

jonnybigwallet

I don't know why that fella got elected in the first place. I mean....for God's sake, he's supposed to be supreme commander of the Army, Navy, and Air Corps. When ya see him inspectin an honour guard sure he looks like a little leprechaun. Not the stuff Zelensky is made of! We need a man of more stature in the job. Somebody along the lines of Charles de Gaulle who can reflect the status of the nation a bit better.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120735514#Comment_120735514

His comment about her causes massive problems for him, regardless of any apology.

1) She got the Damehood for services to education, specifically working to gain better access for underprivileged kids to third level. This shows Michael D wasn't on top of his subject here and undermines the whole interjection.

2) The nature of his comments on some of the contributors, including The Chair, do not demonstrate the opinion of a person inclined to value open debate, or a fair hearing, or free speech generally. It's not a great look for someone with Michael D's long history in public discourse, principled stances etc. It makes him look petulant and closed minded.

Mind you, I have heard from a few sources close to the President's Office that he is becoming quite ornery and frustrated in his old age and now late into his second term. It may be that he is no longer able for both the demands and the limitations of this very busy but narrow role. Perhaps it would be better if he resigned and a place holder was installed by agreement of the Oireachtas until the election of 2025. Someone like Susan Denham or Catherine Day would be a fine choice.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736239#Comment_120736239

If he resigns we have a new election, just as we did when Mary Robinson went early.

Dohvolle

Yeah, placeholder not an option, election of his replacement must take place within 60 days of his departure from the role, the Presidential commission carries out the duties in the meantime.

sparky42

An article on Professor Richardson, wonder which part the President doesn’t approve of:

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/louise-richardson-who-the-president-said-was-a-dame-of-the-british-empire-is-anything-but-an-imperialist/a759918308.html

Larbre34

A President could be acclaimed by the main Parties, as in open nominations and refuse to facilitate anyone else bar an agreed candidate. But yes, it would be for 7 years.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736690#Comment_120736690

No chance in hell and frankly unnecessary and anti democratic tbh.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736745#Comment_120736745

It suited us in the 80s when nobody cared what Paddy Hillery got up to. He wanted to do a second term, the whole country said "whatever" as nobody had time for a costly pointless election.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736900#Comment_120736900

I didn’t mean someone going for a second term if they were already in office, I was talking about the idea that if Higgins stood down then someone would be just picked to replace him for a full term.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736745#Comment_120736745

It already happened eg 1974 and 1976 following death of Childers and resignation of O Dalaigh then Hillery served two terms never having to be elected by the public.

Cant see it happening now though.

Larbre34

It basically happened in 2004 too.

Mary McAleese was unopposed for a second term because the main parties wouldn't facilitate anyone else going forward. Dana tried a number of ways to get past them but failed.

If it meets the constitutional requirement the it isn't undemocratic.

But maybe the constitutional requirement is out of date. I certainly feel the 7 year term is a relic. 2 x 5 year terms is enough for any one person. Perhaps its time for the people to examine the whole Office, its parameters and its constitutional setting.

purplepanda

Lets face it the "neutralists" / anti NATO factions are continually trying to twist the national defence debate away from any modernisation & upgrade of Irelands fence capabilities to those of a modern western European nation such as envisioned in the Defence Committee report recommendations.

The above play lip service & some even claim that they agree with the findings of the above report, whilst others are even totally against Ireland's participation in an EU Defence force. Some also align themselves with those that want the capability of the Defence Forces undermined to the point of being totally unfit for any future role or even totally abolished.

Then we have those that call for full modernisation & upgrade of the national defence capability / the LOA 3 level option whilst being against NATO membership, I personally would accept this outcome, but only with a proper upgrade of Irish defence capability.

I do feel however that at least some of those of those calling for such a policy are just trying to split public opinion & once the NATO vs neutrality debate is finished they will align with those that don't believe in any any proper Defence funding modernisation & upgrades.

RavenP

@purplepanda I disagree to a considerable extent with what you have said. I personally favour LAO3+ with a flexible neutrality. Ireland is a proud independent nation and it must be strong, proud and independent. It should tack close to the west, at least as long as it is in the Irish peoples interest to do so (who knows what the future decades hence might be), but joining NATO would tie Ireland to states, like the US, and U.K. who, on occasion, can be no more moral in their foreign policy and use of military power than Russia, when we dispassionately look at it (look at the US armies own assessment of the number of civilian dead in the Iraq war if you do not believe me). Ireland should reserve the right to cooperate with these countries and organisations on a case by case basis, but should not bind itself in to collective decisions. The EU may be a different case, if only because Ireland will be able to build the common security and defence structures of the EU as it evolves. We shall see. But I do not think anyone arguing strongly for enhanced defence but continuing neutrality is arguing in bad faith.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120736185#Comment_120736185

So the primary requirement to be presidential material is to be tall? 🙄

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120738875#Comment_120738875

And that’s not even in the top ten of inane posts Jonny has made, don’t mind him.

jonnybigwallet

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120738875#Comment_120738875

I'm suggesting somebody who doesn't have the demeanour of a bleedin hobbit and whose views are not stuck in the 1950's. This fella should stick to writing poetry and knittin Aran sweaters. He simply ain't presidential at all! I have no more to say on this matter.

Larbre34

Makes a friggin change.

Hotblack Desiato

'stature', 'hobbit', then referencing perhaps the tallest Western president in history... 🙄

how is sizeism any better than racism?

Embarrassing posts tbh.

jonnybigwallet

Calling a spade a spade.

mupper2

We're drifting...

Larbre34

Jonny does enjoy drifting a thread with his inane bullscutter. A feckless troll of the highest order.

I very much disagree with Michael D's comments at the weekend, but I do respect him as a social advocate for his whole adult life. In other words, Jonny wouldn't be fit to lace his boots.

purplepanda

Thanks Raven P for your reply, I have no problems with many of your views & certainly agree with your opinion on LO3, I'm undecided about NATO, I believe modernisation & upgrade to the defence forces comparable to other western European nations with similar resources is actually the most important issue. I would much rather have LO3, than be in NATO with anything less.

As for NATO members they certainly can & do manage to keep out of being dragged into overseas conflicts & wars, nations such as German & France refused to participate in Gulf War Two & other nations such as Norway & Canada are prominent in United Nations peace keeping duties.

Would Ireland in NATO be more susceptible to UK & US pressure to participate in their military interventions? Possibly because of proximity, traditional cultural ties & trading relations to both those powers.

The issues I've mentioned above also apply to participation in a EU Defence Force, it also remains to be seen how the previously neutral, now NATO nations, Sweden & Finland approach this as Ireland was previously involved with those & others in military exercises. Some might even suggest EU Defence force future co-operation is undermined by most nations being in NATO.

The worst scenario is refusing to interact & co-operate with our neighbouring & regional nations in military matters. Especially when current military capabilities are totally understrength.

Grassy Knoll

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120742298#Comment_120742298

A lot of sense here - I agree Canada and Norway are two countries with proud peacekeeping / UN traditions that are also in NATO - I don’t see them at the aggressive end of the military spectrum and indeed both play important roles in furthering peace / humanitarian/ developmental internationally add to this the swedes and Finns now inside the NATO tent. This point should be widely articulated rather than some of the unchallenged rubbish being trotted out

Also we are members of the EU- IMHO joining has been the best thing we did since independence. We need to play our part in defending the organisation and assisting our fellow members who to a large extent who share our values and outlook - it is hypocritical and to an extent cowardice to say we support these but at zero risk to ourselves in terms of cost or on occasion life. If as I expect the Russians will in due course be sent packing and left smarting behind their border we could have decades of sniping and interference from them across the EU and elsewhere. We currently present as an undefended zone _easy pickings…

sparky42

Lads this talk about NATO is just taking the p!ss, it’s not on the table for discussion, even if the government parties decided to blow up their foreign policy (which they have made it clear they aren’t) NATO is not going to take on a basket case like us as things stand. The only people that are throwing up suggestions of NATO are the Left who either don’t want change at all, or who favour anti western positions.

I also see some suggestions that the Presidents dig at the Eastern European nations might be causing some diplomatic reaction for the government, who would have thought insulting them would have some fallout?

Larbre34

Its really been a 3-0 own-goal festival for the President.

I'm still bewildered at someone with such a grasp of language and nuance as he, and such experience in cabinet and in office as he, absolutely losing the run of himself in such a fashion. Did he get a bang on the head of late or something?

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120744013#Comment_120744013

Think he just couldn’t control himself when it comes to Foreign Policy and Defence, not with his politics.

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120723355#Comment_120723355

Without addressing any other concept here, I'd observe that national service/conscription need not produce a large volume of people. I believe there are some nations where they select only a small number of the eligible population each year. Enough to meet needs, selective enough to gain quality, but not more.

Larbre34

And that I agree with.

If I were introducing a national service model, I would say that all able-bodied men and women must serve an aggregate 2 years before the age of 30, but that the service need not be military. It could be charitable or community work, it could be working with disadvantaged groups, outreach to homeless people or to victims of domestic violence etc. It could be volunteer sports coaching or after school classes for those who might need some extra attention. It could be environmental or tidy Towns type work.

For a top drawer military reserve in Ireland, you wouldn't realistically need more than about 20,000 card carrying reservists in active participation at any one time.

But I feel the benefits of a culture and volunteerism and people from all different backgrounds meeting and working to a common goal, military or not, would be hugely beneficial to the advancement of the nation.