Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland's defensive frailty exposed by Russian exercise

Options
1235725

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,075 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    For all the fellas advocating 0 military spending, do you like having:

    Self-governance

    and everything derived from that?

    Because without some form of military you might as well not have that. We didnt earn our independence from Britain through negotiation and stern words, it was violence. Like it or not, violence underpins all authority in this world. If you dont pay your taxes, you risk violence from the state (force used to imprison). If a nation cannot defend itself militarily, it will be replaced by one that can. We have been lucky up to now that we've never been in a position where our sovereignty was at risk due to our geographical isolation, but in the future there will come a time when that is at risk.

    Best of luck advocating for more healthcare or special needs funding when a foreign army takes over, I'm sure they'll take your scathing criticisms of their military spending on board.



  • Registered Users Posts: 971 ✭✭✭bob mcbob


    I am pretty certain that critic infrastructure is well protected.

    I am interested why you think it is in the US, UK or EU (French mostly) national interest to protect Irish infrastructure? When the Irish have no interest in doing it for themselves?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,075 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    ah here, wind turbines as defence spending?

    if anyone wanted to take out the irish grid, it only takes a few substations in key locations to cripple the whole thing. Especially given the lead times on replacement parts - between that and a few key pylons etc youd make quick work of it.

    Wind turbines are not defence spending, nor are they "grid resilience" against attack.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    we can't defend ourselves at all, yet no one invaded in 100 years

    we still haven't quite won that independence in case you missed that

    we are such a **** hole not even the romans who ffing loved invading places could be bothered their holes

    There is no luck involved



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,669 ✭✭✭elefant


    But Ireland already can't defend itself militarily and is no danger of either losing self-governance and everything derived from it, or being replaced by another nation. It's a fair leap to say the time 'will come' when any of that will happen.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    and the ones looking for a military state are more George Bush than John McCain



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,075 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    As I said, we've been lucky enough up to now that nobody has invaded - we had neither resources nor posed a threat. The moment someone decides to invade, we have already lost, since we cannot defend ourselves.

    The level of relative peace in the world in the past few decades is an aberration, an anomaly. Nuclear weapons may act as a deterrent of sorts, but its now looking increasingly like war will break out at some point in the future. It mightnt be in our lifetimes, but we could well be an easy target in the future - if we dont have the defence infrastructure in place already at that point, then its too late and our independence is as good as gone.

    The Swiss have mandatory service for a reason - you aren't truly neutral unless you can defend yourself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 693 ✭✭✭cheezums


    We don't have the money required to assemble an army that could defend against an invasion of any country except for possibly a primitive tribal spear fishing micro nation. So any spend in that direction is utterly pointless and serves only to give armchair internet generals more to fantasise about in preposterous fictional situations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,275 ✭✭✭CruelSummer


    It's absolutely shocking what we pay our army personnel, many of whom are involved in delicate peacekeeping missions. This is a good career option in other countries. Our 'jet' situation is a joke and as for the navy...we don't have one essentially. I've always hoped we've a secret deal with the US in return for them using Shannon - one better hope we do...Russia has been exposing this for many years with their fly bys of Irish airspace in which British planes are scrambled to intercept. Germany seems to be a NATO passenger hoping to do a deal with the Russian's behind the scenes to protect the gas pipelines. So if no US backup, we're left to the mercy of the U.K. and France - both of whom have a colourful history of only helping out nations where they can gain something from them in return.

    The hard left will be out saying we shouldn't waste money on this...the Russia - China alliance is something we should all fear.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,837 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Si vis pacem, para bellum.


    People are also obsessed with thinking that a proper defense structure is purely about combat.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,837 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    No but there are practical, real life uses rather than a theoretical military invasion.


    A good Navy but a smaller army might be worth looking at.


    That's something needed for a long time here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    100 YEARS, before that 800 years and they are still there


    what timeframes are you looking at, 1000 or 2000 years or what?


    who would invade and we have a chance of repelling? Lichtenstein? Somali pirates


    If france or germany or italy wanted they could roll over the swiss in a week, dont kid yourself


    If the americans stop backing Israel the same other than a maybe threat of nuclear retaliation which well we are years away from here



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,075 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The idea that we need a military to rival the US or Russia is absurd.

    A military deterrent is whats needed - to make it so expensive and slow as to not be worth it. Right now if Russia started landing troops here, they could quite literally take the whole country in a day. I mean, what is there to fight against? The Irish defence forces are so understaffed and underfunded as to be virtually non-existing if faced with any kind of threat.

    Our defence capability is so bad as to actually be an incentive for someone to invade, because they'd probably gain more troops from converts than theyd lose fighting the Irish "Defence" forces.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭joseywhales


    If we are worried about sovereignty there are two effective things we can do:


    Energy independence which looks like nuclear power.

    Focus defence spending on training a population of partizan resistance fighting and guerrilla warfare, we aren't going to stop any invasions but we need to make occupancy extremely expensive. For example a plan for quick deployment of mines in all major ports would be a good start. Having a secondary encrypted communications network for organizing resistance, also good bang for your buck.

    However, even if we had spend 80% gdp on defence, the Russian would still be running excercises off the coast.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,837 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Think the Swiss have 500k trained reserves. Fighting would be in very hard conditions.


    They have arms caches, food etc stashed in every town and village.


    There is a reason why it has only been invaded once in a thousand years


    Germany due to it's policy of no investment in infrastructure can't even move it's tanks around the country as so many bridges are in such a State of decay.


    The Swiss would just have to target fax machines.


    German underspending is a serious issue for all of Europe, not just it's military.


    Having internet in Berlin where you can open Gmail might be nice as well. A big ask in Germany.



  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭MarkEadie


    The Swiss would get obliterated yes. It's common sense. It's insane to think Ireland would have any chance of defending itself in a war no matter what is spent on military over the next few decades. The only chance is a strong alliance with countries that actually have got millitary power. If Russia wants to do anything in Irish waters there is nothing Ireland can do and the best course of action is to just let them get on with it. If they decide to do more next week, again the best option is to do nothing. Telling them that it's not welcome only makes you look even weaker than you are. The only thing that would have any effect on Russia doing that would be if the US or UK put their ships in the area and told Russia not to do anything. In that situation you would probably see Russia do it anyway and the US/UK doing nothing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,075 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    A lot of their essential infrastructure (roads, bridges etc) were and possibly still are mined, so they can be destroyed to prevent the advance of any potential invasion.

    They also have means of distributing weapons and ammunition throughout the country at short notice if the need arose. They take their neutral status seriously, and back it up with a defence ability to make anyone think twice before an invasion. Obviously the terrain helps too, but thats no reason not to even attempt to defend ourselves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    I do feel some sympathy for this argument but at the end of the day the country is now rich enough to do both if it wants to. The known decades long problems in the health service are not about lack of money to fund it any more I think.

    There are likely some "walter mitty" types who would love to see Ireland spending billions & having a fleet of advanced fighters and ships to beat the band etc + would use what is going on at present to argue for it, but what the moderate pro-people in terms of increasing military spending here seem to be looking for to start with is basic. It is not advanced. It think it is still far less than what all other members of the EU with our population size and wealth have.

    We are EU members and there was in fact a "mutual defense" clause in the last EU treaty. Now we're probably never going to prevent the likes of Russia or another other large military from doing as they wish with their navy in the Irish EEZ without outside help. However I would argue we do need to take some very basic level of responsibility, being able to monitor and in case of the sea/EEZ, patrol the areas we are supposedly in charge of.

    As well as the military radar issue I've seen mentioned in the media there's a very large amount of sea (extended EEZ) I think which we went and sought our "rights" to (as regards fishing, resources etc.) at one stage. Afair from what I have read we don't have enough ships or aircraft/drones etc. to know what is happening out there unless we are told by friends who want to fill us in. We can't and do not do that minimum level of effort for ourselves, even though we are "neutral" (but not really of course - see our relationship with the US and our EU membership). We are also not quite the insignificant & poverty stricken backwater below notice of the ilk of Russia that we once were.

    As others have said if we really just don't want to spend anything, getting rid of the military and Defence dept. + 1 minister salary altogether, being more honest with the other EU members (and UN, and even ourselves I suppose) + replacing whole shebang with a mixture of the guards, civil defense and a coast guard might be better at this stage and probably cost effective.

    (minor edits...)

    Post edited by fly_agaric on


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,191 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    If you think this is an either/or conversation, for a Country as wealthy as this one and with such vast resources to be protected as this one, you're absolutely miles off the mark.

    If we trebled our defence spending tomorrow, to €2.4 billion, in an economy growing at 5%, it wouldn't be a pebble on the window of the colossal €50 Billion+ spent between Health and Social Protection. Any delays in those services you listed out are for systemic and organisational culture reasons, not for lack of budgetary funding. And the proof of that is the relative lack of progress in many treatment areas despite money being fired at them for donkeys years.

    In any case, any spending we make on Defence, up to 30% comes back in taxes from service personnel, so wages heavy is that Department.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter



    it hasnt been invaded because its not worth invading, unless you cant get enough skiing in austria france italy or germany

    Why would you invade here? For the bogs?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,837 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    You have a fierce black outlook, the whole thing is fierce black.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,758 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Indeed. It's almost as embarrassing as the British aircraft carrier with no aircraft to operate from it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    that extra 1.5 billion, for that we could have say 10 euro fighters and no one to fly them, whats the next move



  • Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭Shao Kahn


    The best defense against the Russian bear, is to play dead.

    Let them flex their muscles. Nothing burger of a story.

    "Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives, and it puts itself into our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." (John Wayne)



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    i'm sure you could rent a dinghy over in dingle and have a go at them yourself if you feel so aggrieved



  • Posts: 533 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The Swiss are in an extremely awkward spot, historically, and have been stuck in the middle of a risk of land invasion for centuries bordering, Germany during its crazy periods, Napoleonic France, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Italy under Mussolini, being a stones throw from the iron Curtain too.

    We’re an island in the Atlantic that’s hard to reach and our only fights have been with Britain which is more akin to a nasty divorce than a constant threat of invasion.

    You can see why the Swiss developed big defences. Same with Sweden, Finland etc who all are too close to Russia to be relaxed.

    Ireland doesn’t need huge military spending, but I would agree what we have at the moment is a joke. At the very least we should have good primary radar and some proper abilities to carry out marine surveillance etc even for just boring, civilian safety reasons that’s important

    EU defence is also inadequate and far over reliant on the US. Given how crazy America got over the last presidential term, you’d never know what might happen with that policy. I think the post wwii world order is fizzling out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 803 ✭✭✭Relax brah


    As a “neutral country,” we need to stay out of this.

    We are not a member of nato, we have no evidence/technology to prove that Russian military have been using our waters/airspace.

    Next thing we’ll be allowing US fighter planes to stop in Shannon again, which would make us fair game.

    Stay out of it I say.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,191 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    There are more than a few posters here being deliberately obtuse and trying to characterise this as a black and white scenario.

    No, we do not need to build a war fighting capability of 100,000 troops, 40 ships, 100 fighters, missiles in the air, at sea and on land.

    What we do need, as a sovereign State with valuable resources (and a very sensitive ocean ecosystem by the way) is a defensive capability to be able to send out 2 or 3 frigates with anti-ship missile technology, to the limit of our EEZ, assisted by a couple of Maritime Patrol Planes and protected on high by a couple of fighters in combat air patrol configuration; to be able to say to any foreign Navy carrying out unnecessary and undesirable exercises in our back yard, 'no thanks, not today mate'.

    Incidentally, this need has already been acknowledged. The two Maritime Patrol Aircraft due to be delivered here next year will be the first anti-submarine capability the Defence Forces have ever had.

    © Airbus Defence & Space



  • Posts: 0 Bobby Shy Swinger


    I mean just based on this reply you’re the child in this case.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter



    so these should be on standby for the once in say 20 year occurrence

    What resources will they be protecting the rest of the time?

    Lots of dreaming goes on



Advertisement