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 - now considered one of most vulnerable countries in the EU (defense wise)

12224262728

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,274 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    People that aren't already aware, should make themselves aware of this



  • Registered Users Posts: 355 ✭✭Redliketoast


    Nato forces are currently stockpiled close to the border of Ukraine. They are also taking part in missions close to Gaza. They also shot down drones heading for Israel. Its exactly like the cold war. To think Irish soldiers wouldnt be "forced" to take part in NATO missions, if we were part of NATO, is hugely ignorant.

    When Irish soldiers take part in UN missions they are merely there as peace keepers. Again, making statements likes yours shows a level of ignorance.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,083 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    None of these are NATO missions. You are conflating forces of NATO members with "NATO" as a whole. They can, and most frequently do, act completely autonomously from the body itself. NATO forces are not even "stockpiled" on the border of Ukraine, there is a relatively small NATO detachment on the NATO border which happens to be with Ukraine and has been for decades at this point.

    The parameters under which collective defence can be invoked are quite limited and indeed Article V has been invoked literally once and combat troops from only 4 NATO nations were present for the actual Afghan invasion prior to the UN mandated operation ISAF that Ireland took part in.

    Though by all means continuing accusing me of ignorance for not agreeing with the make-believe world you are dealing with.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    It's the stubborn anti-Nato attitude in the general Irish population and Irish politics which is the issue.

    The attitude is still "who would attack Ireland?".

    I'd say an island in the Atlantic is of strong strategic interest in any kind of global conflict.

    Sadly a majority of Irish still refuse to believe this.

    If one loves peace, one must sadly prepare for a war, this statement is true more than ever.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,850 ✭✭✭aidanodr


    @tinytobe RE "If one loves peace, one must sadly prepare for a war, this statement is true more than ever."

    My thing is being a neutral country does not divest that country of the responsibility to defend itself. I find this is the issue with the whole neutrality thing here. Neutral and defence are conflated when in fact they are two completely different things. A core policy of any government is to have in place a defence of its citizens & realm regardless of being neutral or not .. The Irish gov are completely reneging on their duties in this regard?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    It is sadly a discussion with very strong opposing sides.

    I personally could never make head or tail with the concept of neutrality nor did I ever see it as some form of identity.

    In order for Ireland to be really neutral, the country needs a strong arms and defense industry in the first place, which the country doesn't have, the country neither invests in military and defense as well.

    Sweden for instance was neutral for a long time, but had a strong military and defense industry, like Saab. Sweden also had a strong air force even during neutrality. Both Sweden and Finland abandoned neutrality for a very very good reason. Ireland doesn't even have an airforce.

    Switzerland still neutral also has a military and defense industry and a well trained army.

    Ireland was just lucky during the wars, and some, sadly a majority, just try to rely on that luck for the future. Ireland still tries to rely on the idea "who would attack us" and "we're so far away from Russia".

    Don't ever be fooled by an attitude like this.

    Russia knows this very well. In case of a major world conflict they would be interested in Ireland: The island is strategically located in the North Atlantic. The Irish would never expect and attack as well, they would stubbornly refuse that an attack would be possible at all, and they certainly wouldn't be prepared for it. All good reasons for a country like Russia.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,558 ✭✭✭Ardillaun




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    No matter how many times people post this sort of opinion, it wont change the basic reality that we simply cannot afford to defend ourselves against anybody who would attack us.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I am aware of that.

    Whether it's retaining neutrality or joining NATO, Ireland simply needs to do more. Especially Navy and the Irish Air Corps need a lot more funding, plus the government and the Irish public needs to realize Ireland is not beyond interest of a hostile force, the likes of Russia.

    Ireland just has been lucky in history, same as Portugal was lucky not being part of WW2.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    The money that you would spend could be better spent on other things, if we had a pile of sovereign wealth then by all means spend it, but we dont.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 131 ✭✭Lecter8319


    About 2% of our GDP should be invested in our arms force and defence annually. Trim some of the fat off the public, civil service and NGO's and we'd easily be able to achieve that. Its high time, we grew up and started taking care of our own defence and maybe even joined NATO. The world is a more dangerous place and each country has to take care of its own affairs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    It's possible that ( much hated ) NATO membership would be the only choice for Ireland then. Something like Iceland. They are in NATO as well, but don't have a military of their own, maybe just a coastal patrol or something like that. Or Slovenia which has out tasked the Italian air force for air defenses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,769 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Ireland is too small relative to potential aggressors to ever defend itself individually. It is only through a strong collective defence with other countries that Ireland can ever be credibly defended.

    If that does not imply NATO membership, then any suggestions for an alternative?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I am honestly very much in favour of Ireland joining NATO.

    However the majority of the Irish population and also politics doesn't see it that way.

    They think NATO is about the evil English.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭zerosquared


    Switzerland who now how lower gdp per capita than us spend 4 times more than us per person on defence, they don’t have sea access and literally surrounded by friendly NATO countries

    We can and should spend more on our defence, or give up the “neutrality” nonsense

    Only in Ireland do we tolerate a state that doesn’t do what states are meant to do, whether it’s defence or migration or housing or banking



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,209 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Making it not worth the cost/effort to subdue the country? Enough trained people with modern firearms and missiles in every ditch if it came to it along with a few items that would give warning and a bloody nose to the attacker.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Based on what? Have there been wargames that show that even with high levels on military spending Ireland is completely overrun, in a very short period of time, by ever nation in the world?

    If you want to take the "the money would be better spent elsewhere" attitude then we should only spend money on hospitals as there's nothing better than saving lives.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,827 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    What would we add to NATO?

    What would NATO add to Ireland

    The answer is nothing for both



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,827 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    Once they sort out the housing and the rest them they can think about defense

    The Swiss have a load of Nazi gold to look after, we have spuds



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,850 ✭✭✭aidanodr


    @zerosquared "Switzerland who now how lower gdp per capita than us spend 4 times more than us per person on defence"

    Erm i would increase that 4 times to near 19 times:

    The Swiss military plans to raise the ceiling on defence spending to 25.8 billion Swiss francs (€27 billion) between 2025 and 2028, up from 21.7 billion francs in the previous four-year period.

    And here is Ireland for similar period ( From WIKIPEDIA but also elsewhere in Irish media if you go look )

    In 2022, the defence sector budget was €1.1bn and in July of that year the Irish government announced plans to increase this to €1.5bn by 2028

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Forces_%28Ireland%29#:~:text=In%202022%2C%20the%20defence%20sector,increased%20from%209%2C500%20to%2011%2C500.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭zerosquared


    ouch, these guys understand neutrality and how to run a country



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭zerosquared


    On Pat Kenny on newstalk they have member of defence forces painting a very gloomy picture

    “Ireland could be taken over in hours”

    Be on their site in few hours



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,850 ✭✭✭aidanodr


    Yip listened in. It was Cathal Berry … the lone voice fighting a huge uphill battle when the Government have zero interest in this.

    All the texts during an after this piece were this sort of thing:

    • Who is going to attack us
    • Shur brits and france will be forced to look after us if we are attacked ( its there backdoor ) let our defense to them
    • waste of money
    • far more important stuff like housing and health to be funded

    I really despaired listening to that and felt real sorry for Cathal. Also wondered were these texts etc into show pretty much "bots", foreign agents who would want Ireland to be kept defenseless so its an option to invade as a strategic location if a Europe wide war broke out?



  • Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭highpitcheric


    You have to be capable of getting here first, and not be an ally. So the list is basically 1 country.

    We have the diplomatic, political and financial position to ensure that for the 1 possible enemy the juice wouldnt be worth the squeeze.

    EU is very very interested in ensuring our safety, as is UK for its own sake. And we even have the means to pay for pmcs to raise a little hell too.

    Ireland may have low stats, but its just so awkward due to seconday considerations. Ultimately if you look like youre winning the Brits just weigh in. And thats a guaranteed lose, cause the battlefield is on their doorstep.

    And thats after any EU response.

    And what would one even gain anyway.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    They are nearly half our size and nearly double our population?


    Only in Ireland would people suggest we spend more money on defending ourselves while we have a housing, health and immigration crisis.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 862 ✭✭✭65535


    A lot of comments here throwing around - 'We are Neutral' - 'We will never join NATO'

    OK - so the reality is - we are not neutral and never have been - we are however Militarily Non-Aligned -

    The USSR could land here in Shannon during the cold war - no where else.

    The USA now lands in Shannon on it's way to wars.

    We are actually in NATO - OK it's only the Partnership for Peace part - but we are still there.

    We have absolutely no need for a massive force against East or West - what we do actually need is a beefed up Navy and Air Force to combat the greater issue of Ireland being a gateway for Drug Importation !

    We also need a transport aircraft AND a floating hospital.

    If we need money to beef up those things then we need to grasp the nettle and Hire out Shannon to the US Air Force - similar to what Iceland does with Keflavik



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,315 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    Taking some islands from a mainly conscript and massively underfunded Argentinian army/navy is not the same as successfully invading and holding an country. A lot of their success had to do with the the US buying up/preventing Argentina from getting access to anti ship missiles as the only real chance Argentina had was to engage the British Task force at sea.

    Flying a few helicopters into a country is not the same as an invasion.

    They do, two new carriers that are barely at sea - again not a great example. The UK would struggle without assistance from the US.

    I have never said they were the only ones to ever do it, just they are the only ones who could currently effectively do it. You severely underestimate the logistics required to stage and maintain an invasion and also seemingly overestimate the Russian capabilities.

    As for Taiwan - if you do no understand the fundamentals no point in even starting on this topic.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Still factually incorrect no matter how much you backtrack....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    ... and the Argies managed to do pretty decent job of putting Iron bombs on ships....

    Untouchable they weren't.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Maybe they should leverage all that manpower into the military.



Advertisement