Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

Gatling

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994574#Comment_118994574

We've more professional trained soldiers I think they can call up bigger reserves than us , but I get the feeling they would only last a few hours if the Russians start shooting

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994613#Comment_118994613

In June coveney is submitting his recommendations to the cabinet so I'm curious what he will ask for.

Yesterday he reported that he believes we will increase spending by 50%, which would be an additional 500 million.

That could buy quite a bit, wonder what they'd focus on first?

pixelburp

Like many I hadn't even heard of Transnistria up until recently, and only got around to goggling the place today: I hadn't realised what a thin strip of land it was along eastern Moldova. You'd wonder if it even has an uninterrupted north-south road, it's that thin. My brain had given it a default "country" shape, a random blob of land, not a piece of string.

Sorry, not am especially enlightened or expansive thought but just, I dunno, surprising to see something so apparently, cartographically unimpressive the cause of such headaches.

Gatling

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994625#Comment_118994625

I know we're going to be getting two new (second hand ) Naval patrol vessels ,I think medium lift helicopters has been mentioned and possibly better armoured vehicles ,

But It was Also recommended the branches ne renamed the to Army , Navy and airforce , rather than defense forces , naval services and aircorp

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994654#Comment_118994654

Those naval craft are the new Zealander ones right? They aren't combat vessels? More for Maritine policing i think.

I think they are looking at jets too from he has mentioned.

We'd really need to get control over our skies

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994670#Comment_118994670

A couple of primary radar systems would be the first thing we need. We are blind to any aircraft that has their transponder turned off - which an unfriendly aircraft would do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_radar

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994698#Comment_118994698

Agreed, but then how would we stop anything we see? The whole no one will attack us crap has cost us dearly

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994715#Comment_118994715

The first thing is to be able to see unfriendly aircraft (and ships). If they are invisible, no number of fighter jets can defend us.

We also need to defend ourselves from cyber attacks.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118994715#Comment_118994715

OT, but what has the cost been to us exactly?

Detritus70

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997398#Comment_118997398

I'm also puzzled, who attacked Ireland and what exactly were the costs?

Seriously, I don't know who would attack Ireland, if the Nazis didn't, the Russians certainly won't. In an all-out war they might launch nukes at the UK and no matter what army Ireland has, it won't help.

Ireland could do with a few more planes and boats to patrol it's relatively large sea territories, but it would be completely senseless for Ireland to build up a huge military force.

Literally no-one will attack Ireland, the only one who could possibly do it would be the Brits, but I don't see it happening.

Seriously, no-one blames Ireland for not spending enough on the military or not sending enough weapons to Ukraine. That's not the kind of country Ireland is. And it would be a senseless waste of money trying to turn it into a military powerhouse.

McGiver

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118993811#Comment_118993811

Yes and no.

If it's done as per international law (an int'l treaty) then it's possible.

NATO will not never ever intervene in Moldova, no way. Based on what? To what end? To get into post-Soviet frozen conflict?

McGiver

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118993917#Comment_118993917

That will never happen exactly because of Transnistria.

Both Moldova and Romania support unification but it wasn't done because of the frozen conflict and issues in Transnistria. Romania doesn't fancy taking on a problem with a toxic separatist area, absolutely not. The very reason why unification didn't happen and won't happen until Transnistria is sorted.

Also, even if Romania and Moldova wanted to do so then there's a NATO dimension on top... NATO wouldn't want to inherit this hotspot.

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997398#Comment_118997398

We are a sitting duck and the weaklink of Europe. We don't have the defences necessary to even try and repel something.

Years and neglect and underfunding the military has cost us as now there will need to be money pumped in at a quicker pace whereas if we had started decades ago, we wouldn't be in this sort of position.

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997603#Comment_118997603

A bit silly to think no one would ever attack us, if it happens then what? Go crying to others to help? Even if no one attacks us, surely we deserve to live in a country that can hopefully protect us in case something like that happens?

Detritus70

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997753#Comment_118997753

Who do you think is gonna attack? I'd struggle to think of anyone.

Sam Russell

Whatever happened to all those Molitov cocktails that the Ukrainians had ready for the Russians?

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998515#Comment_118998515

We don't need to think of anyone that will want to attack, I'm not sure you're getting my point.

When the Russians decide to enter our airspace and they do quite frequently, how do we stop that? When they decide to hold naval drills in our economic zone, how do we stop them? Arming yourself isn't just for an attack, it's to also secure your territory.

McGiver

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997603#Comment_118997603

OT.

Defence is a fundamental duty of the state. And the government needs to fulfil that duty.

Talking about "who would attack Ireland" and "waste of money" is ridiculous. It's like talking that "we don't need Garda because who would cause any trouble" or "who would need ambulance because who would collapse" so its all waste of money...

Defence is an essential service the government needs to carry out.

The reality is that the Irish gov (and population too 😎) are cheapskates and tightpurses.

This cheapskating masqueraded as pseudo-neutrality and some sort of a pseudo-pacifism is laughable.

You want to be neutral democratic country then you need to defend that status. That costs some. Just like Finland or Sweden. Example - 70+ Swedish Airforce JAS 39 Gripens kick arse, and even some NATO countries use it.

Edit: per capita Ireland should have 30+ fighter jets to match up with truly neutral Sweden or 50+ to match up with truly neutral Finland. Now given the size of the ROI territory, which is smaller I'd settle for 20+.

Edit 2:

Irish defence forces

€780 million (FY2020)

0.27% GDP (FY020)

Finnish defence forces

€5.8 billion (2022)

1.96% GDP (2022)

McGiver

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998515#Comment_118998515

Russia, China, Somali pirates, Iran, North Korea, the Wagner Group... Anyone...

Doesn't matter. Defence is defence. Especially if you are "neutral".

Now look at neutral Ukraine...

20silkcut

The ideology of Irish neutrality is redundant and meaningless, it was born of a completely different set of circumstances 80+ years ago and that suited us back then. It’s probably the only de Valera policy that progressive modern Ireland is wrapping itself in today.

The reality behind Irish neutrality is money no one wants to spend money on defence. It’s a selfish policy every bit as selfish as the Germans importing cheap Russian gas without obviously being as deeply damaging. Deep down People don’t want to be put out over this conflict . Increase in defence spending will probably mean cuts to other budgets and we can’t be having that.

And the posters above are right neutrality is meaningless if it can’t be enforced and defended. And we have a right to live in a country that can protect us to some degree.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998798#Comment_118998798

That's a fundamental truth, that neutrality comes with a cost and obligation. If we as a society don't want to foot the bill to have a genuine defensive capacity, then the Government should dispand the military entirely. Put the money into the police and fold duties for search and rescue, and coastal patrolling into them.

corkie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998524#Comment_118998524

Where they just theatrics ? Giving the populace something to do to make them feel useful?

Did Russian tanks even get close enough to cities (eg Kyiv) for people to use them?

And if they did would people be able to get close to a tank(or other military vehicles) to use them?

It is not like they would do any damage to a tank.

Molotov cocktail in modern warfare: Can it destroy tanks? The incendiary is unlikely to destroy modern-day tanks as even grenades barely damage them. However, the cocktails can be hurled at the tanks to potentially make them inoperable for a short period.

https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/ukrainians-develop-drone-that-drops-molotov-cocktails/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4DhpODGndo

olestoepoke

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998798#Comment_118998798

You wanna know what is ridiculous...comparing the need for a police force and ambulance service to a strong military force. Think about it.

olestoepoke

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998968#Comment_118998968

237bn in national debt, a failing health service, a generational housing crisis and refugees flooding in in their thousands and you want to make cuts in the budget to spend on our military that may or may not ever be needed, give over will ye.

bear1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118999197#Comment_118999197

So, how would you suggest the scenarios I have listed, and that actually happen, be taken care of?

county

Sam Russell

If we wished to join NATO we would need to commit to spending 2% of our GDP. Now our GDP is found in the fiction section so maybe we would get away with somewhat less.

An alternative would be to get primary radar at Shannon and Dublin. We would need to have some fighter capability, plus a stronger army but we would need anti-aircraft capability. We need ships as well, and naval personnel. We also should pay them well.

Any serious attack on the UK (by Russia, say) would use Shannon as a staging base. Of course, the UK would have a benefit in helping us out.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118999335#Comment_118999335

Incorrect and already dealt with in the thread. The 2 percent is a target, and only a handful of NATO members meet it. Some countries such as Iceland or Luxembourg would spend a similar amount as a percentage of GDP as Ireland on defence at present.

NATO can't go into the finance ministries of member countries and telling them to spend. And that's not what the 2 percent target is aimed at achieving.

eire4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998968#Comment_118998968

Very well said. The refusal to properly fund a legitimate defense force in Ireland is selfish and our so called military neutrality is a farce IMHO.

eire4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118999335#Comment_118999335

That is not correct. 2% of gdp spending in NATO is a goal not a requirement. Furthermore of the current 30 NATO members only 10 are at that level of defense spending. We used to spend about 1.5% of gdp in the early 80's and if we worked our way back to that level we would be very comparable to what current NATO members are spending on defense whether we were part of NATO or not. IMHO regardless of status in regardless to a military alliance we should be working our way back to spenindg 1.5% of gdp on defense.