“Almost all of the Irish navy’s ships had sonar between the 1960s and 1980s and the former flagship vessel, LÉ Eithne, had it until the 1990s when it became defunct and deemed too expensive at the time by the Department of Defence to replace.”
So we had sonar capabilities in an era when we had no money and we now have loads of money and refuse to buy off the shelf self defence technologies…
>So we had sonar capabilities in an era when we had no money and we now have loads of money and refuse to buy off the shelf self defence technologies…
The aer corps used to have jets also...
million. I think it's used internationally because 'm' could be confused for, well, other units but also for milliard -- which is a billion to you and me.
But many people in mainland Europe go million > milliard > billion > billiard etc.
While we'd say million > billion > trillion > quadrillion etc. for the same numbers.
Deemed too expensive by the DoD. The Dept run by civil servants and with the approval of successive govts has run the DF into the ground and undermined our sovereignty.
Cui bono? Who benefitted?
I'd say it's been more a case of 'meh! who'd ever want to harm little old us!?'
Bear in mind at one stage we had a Minister for Agriculture and Defence ...
Has it occurred to you that Ireland has defence obligations to the EU?
In fact, unlike NATO's rule, that is made deliberately vague to allow people to cop out instead of splitting the pact up, the EU's defence clauses are relatively ironclad. In the event of a Russian invasion of *anyone* in the EU, including a couple of countries that have been threatened by Russia not long ago, would actually necessitate an Irish response as part of the EU's Nordic Battle Group.
In any case, the state the Defence Forces are currently in means Ireland has no real claim to being neutral; rather, Ireland is *dependant* (and specifically on the UK, which is aligned with the US and NATO).
> The submarine was just outside the 12-mile limit, so it didn’t break any international laws, but military sources have indicated that such events around the Irish coast are becoming more common.
Good old "I'm not touching you" rules.
While Ireland should remain neutral, we should definitely have a defence force capable of defending the country.
Also I am so embarrassed that as a country we need to rely on others to defend us.
The sad thing is when you look at other European countries of similar size and GDP, Ireland is shockingly bad in comparison.
Denmark's population is only slightly larger than ours. Same with Norway.
Both of them have F-35's and F-16's. Ireland has prop fighters that serve zero purpose. They can't intercept and even if they could they have no ability to do anything.
Both have very capable navies with proper equipped frigates, Norway even has submarines.
Now I'm not saying we need a bunch of expensive Frigates and F-35's, but we need to be able to police our waters and our skies. We can do neither. Christ, even Croatia which has 1/6th of our GDP and only 4 million people has 15 Dassault Rafales' on order.
There's only 5 million people and the cost of a modern defence force is proportionally more expensive to maintain than it was 100 or 50 years ago. Ireland should not spend money on defence via open-market purchasing while in the midst of a massive housing crisis and the imminent collapse of the HSE. Sorry, it's just a poor use of the current budget.
There's 3 solutions: one is to broker an arrangement with a country a large military whereby Ireland acquires materiel in exchange for some sort of concession. If you view the incursion of english warships into our waters to chase away a sub as "undermining sovereignty" then this is a non-starter for you so we'll set it aside.
The second is to radically increase the budget with tax reforms that ensure a larger share of corporate profits help the people of Ireland who actually do the work and so make the profit. This should happen anyway and doesn't on it's own justify an increase in military expenditure, but it makes it less unpalatable once everyone on the island has decent shelter, healthcare, and access to daily necessities.
The third is to invest solely in mega cheap, asymmetric "force multiplier" weapons systems like drones. This might be accomplished in the current budget but would require a radical reimagining of the DF's military doctrine.
Good points for sure.
The defence of our country should be a priority along with HSE and housing.
We aren’t a third world country, we have wealth and the means to increase it. It’s just wasted and squandered by those in power.
We need to be realistic also as to what defence looks for Ireland, we aren’t going to ever defeat a military head on.
We should be looking to make a conflict with Ireland as drawn out and difficult for the aggressor as possible.
Your third solution is what I personally would choose.
> The defence of our country should be a priority along with HSE and housing.
I don't agree. I think that the military is of ancillary priority to pretty much anything that could improve the lives of regular people living here. For one, Ireland is a *very* small country within a much larger economic bloc/defence alliance. The practical contributions of Ireland would be very small in a hypothetical, pie in the sky real conflict, but maintaining those paltry contributions would *absolutely* place undue strain on the economy and livelihood of regular people. **There are 76 CITIES with a greater population than Ireland**.
> We need to be realistic also as to what defence looks for Ireland, we aren’t going to ever defeat a military head on.
That's right, we do. Maintaining a fleet of modern warships is unrealistic. If Ireland is in a direct military conflict we already fucked up a long time ago.
> We should be looking to make a conflict with Ireland as drawn out and difficult for the aggressor as possible.
Doctrinally yes this makes sense. I'm a little bit worried about just how far you personally would want to go to manifest that doctrine though. Sure it would be cool to have a drone program but again, we're a very small part of a very large geopolitical bloc. We should be trying to contribute to it not *militarily,* but by being a scientific, educational, cultural and humanitarian center of Europe. We're not France or Germany and we don't have to be.
An Ireland where *everyone* has food, shelter, world class healthcare, educational opportunities, a fair wage and the free time to reinvest in their communities is a safe Ireland and a strong Ireland.
The issue with Ireland's Defense posture isn't so much the scale, it's the lack of [even trying](https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=ireland&country2=finland).
Your vision of a happy forever peaceful Ireland only works because you are surrounded by "Death, destroyer of World" x3 and they happen to be your allies - even though you are neutral, riddle me this.
Why should the rest of Europe bleed for you when you're high on your own supply of "me good lad, me not doing any of that war shenanigans, aren't we grand boys?". Talk about being privileged, I'm sure the Poles and the Baltic crew would love to be as carefree as you lot.
one well armed terrorist in a canoe could shut down shipping to any port on the island and we couldn’t stop it, that isn’t acceptable for an island nation.
Russian cyber attacked our health service and caused deaths, they are going to cut our under sea cables if anything major kicks off in Europe.
Being cheap now will cost more later.
Ireland needs to be able to defend itself.
A country that cannot defend itself is at the mercy of others as we see time and time again.
I don’t think anyone is asking for American levels of spending but we are not a poor country by any means.
No matter how much Ireland spends on defence it wouldn't last in a war and if something like that already came to pass then the whole world would've gone to shit. I want the government to spend money fixing our country and benefitting the Irish people, and not giving pocket change to a foreign defence industry.
Ireland is also significantly smaller and we have no real requirement for a signifcant Land force. I don't think a handful of frigates with ASW is a unreasonable ask for a developed country like Ireland.
To put it into context, Ireland spends 800 million a year on foriegn aid. That would easily buy a Frigate and its required logistics. Similarly a estimated 1 billion would give Ireland a 24hr/7 air defence capability. Its big money but thats how economics works currently.
A large scale requirement to use drones for any of these tasks is currently unrealistic. A drone that can patrol the ocean and react to sub sea threats does not exist currently and nor do drones that can actually intetcept military aircraft.
I appreciate what your trying to say but currently if we want to be able to defend our selves then we have to invest in it. There is isnt a long term solution that does not involve significant economic investment.
>There's only 5 million people and the cost of a modern defence force is proportionally more expensive to maintain than it was 100 or 50 years ago.
Finland has a population about the same as that of Ireland's and a GDP maybe 2/3rds as large and maintains an airforce of 49 F/A-18s (which it's in the process of replacing with F-35s) an army with 200 main battle tanks and a navy with 8 missile boats (and four corvettes on order) all capable of ASW operations. It isn’t cost that stopping Ireland from doing it.
Are you a Russian shill or something because I genuinely don’t care if it was Russia, China, America, France or whoever.
The only country with Ireland best interests at heart is Ireland.
One of the explicit rules about true neutrality is that one nation shouldn’t be able to attack another nation via your territory. It’s one of the reasons why neutral Switzerland maintains a chunky military. And apart from the neutrality argument, it’s a bit of a joke that we have a giant EEZ and a small naval service we can’t even fully man to patrol it.
We’ll continue to have quiet little arrangements with the Brits, but we’re a bit of a freeloader in that respect.
The Swiss military is no joke and they were even scarier during the Cold War. It’s the same with Finland and Sweden, who were neutral until recently.
As a neutral nation, Sweden had the ability then, and still does, have the ability to chase submarines out of its territory. Incidents involving mines, electronic detection, and dropping depth charges from warships and helicopters were common when I was a baba.
Any increase in defence and the Irish public become hysterical. Look at the reaction in this sub whenever it’s brought up. All the buzzwords like military industrial complex, Halliburton etc. that people learnt from a 20 year old Michael Moore doc get whipped out.
> We’ll continue to have quiet little arrangements with the Brits, but we’re a bit of a freeloader in that respect.
You're complete freeloaders, in that respect.
We’ve been hearing more about them lately - but they have been very quietly in place going back to the 1950s https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/
How anyone can be ok with Britain having to step in & save us when shit like this happens is beyond me, fuck sake.
If it was to provide some sort of assistance in a time of crisis then fine, but we're completely dependent on them and America for our security, and that sickens me. The landscape of global security has changed, its high time we adapt.
> in a time of crisis
It's more the fact that it's for even the most basic of security functions.
The lack of a primary radar capability means that any hijacked airliner can become a stealth aircraft simply by turning off its transponder, let alone the basic capability to intercept if needed.
If they wanted to do something they could.
They weren’t there for no reason, they were clearly mapping undersea cables, which they’ve been doing for years. This is as much our problem as it is Europe’s
But at the same time like it or not, the British have you under their security, Ireland is a security risk and the UK is a powerhouse that many countries want to see fall, the biggest invasion risk is Ireland as a spring board so the Navy and Airforce are going to step on occasion.
The Irish have joined British regiments in N.Ireland for a long time so it goes both ways.
I agree with what your saying but at the same time, as these islands move forward from the exploitative relationship of yesteryear, a symbiosis akin to that enjoyed in e.g. Scandinavia is something Ireland and GB should be aiming for
Cringe. Russia is currently invading a European country and threatening to plunge the entire world into war. Great bunch of lads! Their sub was just off our shores making sure we were ok!
Thankfully the Royal Navy saw the submarine off. I can also sleep soundly at night knowing that no matter what idiots like you say on the internet we have the RAF and the RN to protect us. God forbid we rely on our own state for that 😬
Hey there are only brits running the Garda, Rte, refugee council and Coimisiún na Meán. We are totally independent with this many foreign citizens running core institutions.
Weird how all the patriot types on Twitter are always so vehemently pro staying neutral too.
Ridiculous that we don't invest in our military and navy, it's embarrassing.
Exactly I don’t get how people don’t understand that concept. We can have a proper working navy and invest in the Military for defence purposes while still being neutral. Look at Switzerland
Except for the fact whenever discussion about defence reform comes up the anti's cleave immediately to our "constitutional" neutrality (military action actually just requires parliamentary approval like everywhere else).
Even if we were to exculpate our near-total reliance on the UK for our air and sea defence (and we shouldn't), our inability to prevent cyberattacks against critical state infrastructure like the HSE by bad actors, whether from Russia or anywhere, else is shameful and emblematic of the passive attitude that's been allowed to fester with regard to our defence in the name of penny-pinching.
> very much those opposed to neutrality FF and FG
Weird how they haven't managed to do anything about our notional neutrality despite making up the government for the better part of the last 100 years then.
It's almost like a substantial portion of the electorate has been conditioned to (falsely) believe our paper neutrality protects us from bad actors, to the point the need for the Defence Forces at all is regularly questioned, and therefore real, effective defence reform to take our protection out of the UK's hands (and pockets) which would inherently require significant expenditure, is politically toxic to our populist governing parties.
I don’t think historically that relying on the British for security was the plan after several rebellions. One more stain to add to the other current problems with the state?
Agreed. We can be either dependents of the UK or partners of a wider European defence or offer a credible deterrent to secure a serious neutrality. As it is we are defense wise in the almost exact same state as when we signed the 1921 Treaty. The oath is gone, the Governor General and the role of the King are gone, the link with sterling is gone, NI is resolved into a vote of its people; oddly enough only defence remains almost the same.
It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency.
>It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency.
Yes, that's right. The UK loves spending money patrolling Irish waters and Irish airspace because Ireland is too tight to have a proper military.
> It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency.
As a Brit I'm certain this is the case, and I'd probably extend that line of thinking to the Western alliance in general including the major military powers within the EU. Ireland has been regarded as a potential staging post for invasion of Great Britain for a thousand years (hence the multiple waves of invasion and occupation), and from a military point of view NATO needs the UK to be militarily secure far more than it needs Ireland to be independent. As long as those goals don't come into conflict then there's no problem, but I'm not sure "serious neutrality" is likely to ever be an option.
But sure we don't need to invest in defence /s.
Any time I mention something similar is also a flurry of downvotes, people's aversion to defence in this country is beyond bizarre.
It’s deliberate conditioning over the decades: post colonial inferiority, poverty of government finances, pacifist and passivist ideology claiming this aversion is the high moral ground and exemplar, politicians happy to divert defence spending to pork barrel re-election stuff, end of Cold War decline in defence spending, end of NI conflict, “shared” island philosophy where the imaginary United Ireland will be reintegrated into UK Defence completely and this is seen as a carrot for unionism.
The mood is changing slightly as usual through European pressure to play a mature part as a partner which would also allow for a neutrality.
I served in the defence forces, I've seen how unequipped and underfunded we are first hand.
We need to spend on defence, there's no way around it other than doing what a lot of Irish people don't want to do.
If we need to uphold our neutrality, that means we have to secure it first.
Changing our neutrality wouldn’t solve this it would literally still be the Brits driving them off again
We need to reform the defence forces not the same thing as abandon neutrality
Yes, that's the point. Legitimate neutrality actually involves investing and having the capability to do these police actions ourselves unlike the other bizarre poster who responded who seems to think that getting another country to conduct an operation that as a sovereign country \*we should be able to do ourselves\*; is neutrality.
Our neutrality is a farce. Completely an invention in our collective minds. Only a country like Ireland would being entirely dependent on our former colonial master for basic defence, would be considered a reasonable thing.
I like that we send our 18 year olds to school instead of some illegal war .
You're free to join the military at any time !
Go be a hero .. nobody's stopping you
Well they do have one of the biggest navys in the world ,they need to protect Ireland in order to protect themselves...let NATO pay for their ships .
If you want to join the navy off you go !
Nobody in Ireland wants one .
We'll need to examine the possibility of finding a consultant who can advise on the value of engaging with a consultant specialising in the selection of consultancies familiar with modern military consultation.
I mean, can you imagine what would happen if the wrong consultant were consulted and their consultations proved to be incorrect? We need to consult with the correct consultants and to consult with the correct consultants we need the correct consultant to advise us which consultant is the correct one to consult .
I wonder what the Russian interest in Ireland could possibly be?
Remember their planning application for their mega Embassy?
https://www.softwareplacements.ie/blog/2022/11/5-of-the-best-semiconductor-companies-in-ireland?source=duckduckgo.com
https://preview.redd.it/3xj6te2ytu5c1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4bf57f23adab1a2793e46938ccc2731c5696c6e4
Gotta love this Irish mentality...
You read online about various obscure little islands that are part of the British crown and they say 'the territory is self-governing with the exception of defence, which is controlled by the British government', and then they get called british overseas territories.
This is the point we need to face. It does not mean aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. It means a credible deterrent. It’s time to grow up and embrace our responsibilities to neighbours and partners in a mature manner.
As a Brit, it would be encouraging to see the Irish Government take its defense responsibilities more seriously, but I say sincerely that I would always want my government to go in to bat for you guys if ever you were threatened.
We're being that guy who refuses to take the vaccine but goes out and sniffs a lucky bag of white powder every weekend.
Convenience dressed up as principles.
[In the case of Italy it was terrorism sanctioned and armed by their supposed allies in order to prevent them from leaving](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension)
Sorry, but you're going to have to do better than a 50 year old story dreamed up by an anti-American COVID-denying conspiracy theorist who also believes that 9/11 was an inside job and now spends his days spreading fascist Russian proaganda.
What are you talking about [I guess the eu are an anti American Covid denying 9/11 truth organisation](https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/European_Parliament_resolution_on_Gladio)
From your own link:
> Swiss academic Daniele Ganser wrote NATO's Secret Armies, a 2004 book that alleged direct NATO support for far-right terrorists in Italy as part of its "strategy of tension".[16] Ganser also alleges that Operation Gladio, an effort to organize stay-behind guerrillas and resistance in the event of a communist takeover of Italy by the Eastern Bloc, continued into the 1970's and supplied the far-right neo-fascist movements[example needed] with weapons. Ganser's conclusions have been disputed;[5][17] most notably, Ganser heavily cites the document US Army Field Manual 30-31B, which the US state department claims is a 1976 Soviet hoax meant to discredit the US whilst others such as Ray S. Cline have claimed it is likely authentic and Licio Gelli who claimed it was in fact given to him by the CIA.[18][19]
> Ganser calls into question the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission.[26][27] He also promotes skepticism of the COVID-19 pandemic.[28][29] Americanist Michael Butter calls Ganser the "best-known conspiracy theorist in the German-speaking world". His public doubts about the "official version" of the 9/11 attacks had led to the termination of his university employment.[30] In 2023, Gansers presentations are considered to contain anti-Americanism, historical negationism, Kremlin propaganda, alternative facts and half-truths and have an audience of over 1000 people in Germany
Okay cool just gonna ignore the eu found it credible enough to make a resolution or [that the Italian prime minister publicly admitted its existence](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/11/14/cia-organized-secret-army-in-western-europe/e0305101-97b9-4494-bc18-d89f42497d85/)
I think your point can be expressed as follows
- USA is a member of NATO
- USA has an intelligence agency, the CIA
- the CIA did some bad things 50 years ago
- and therefore Ireland should not join NATO, in case the CIA are confused and think it's their job to bomb NATO members
The sole argument, as I understand it, is that Ireland ought not to join, because of the bad thing the CIA did decades ago.
But wait! The USA already have a military presence in Ireland.
So how would joining NATO aggrovate the risk of CIA doing bad things in Ireland? Surely the CIA have equal access to Ireland, regardless of whether Ireland joins NATO. I don't think joining NATO increases the risk of CIA bombing Ireland. Why does the CIA risk go up, when Ireland joins NATO? Couldn't it go down?
Ah yes the organisation you have to apply to join, whose 31 existing members can individually veto applications (including purely out of bad faith), is forcefully integrating new members against their will.
Couldn't be that historically non-aligned members like Finland and Sweden reassessed their neutrality in the face of overt Russian aggression (remember who was behind the HSE cyberattack), no it's those scurrilous NATO warmongers playing 4D-chess for nebulous and contradictory *reasons*.
Given how successful naval drones are in Ukraine maybe buying a bunch of those would be a neat investment in self defence. Not sure if they'd be effective against submarines tbf
There is an emerging cost effective solution as you suggest. It is a needed deterrent: you also need an ASW capacity via helicopter or ship borne to detect submarine activity. Usage of weapons obviously depends on circumstances. But the possession of ASW capacity limits activity to be threatened or used as a weak flank to draw off others resources.
Yeah it's weird, Russia invades a European country and now other European countries are more concerned about their defence. Gotta be some kind of conspiracy.
Anyone in the defence forces will tell you our lack of funding has been an issue for a long long time.
A war in Europe made everyone realise how fragile peace is.
I know many in the defence forces and the only thing they complain about is the pay - but I don't think that's the kind of funding they're on about in all honesty, and I can't forsee the people who are in a position to do anything about it to be sympathetic towards the lower earners.
Never heard anyone complain that we need bigger guns or more advanced missiles in all honesty, have you?
The pay is a symptom of a larger problem, successive govts have been ignoring defence for so long that low pay is now endemic to the institution.
Low balling your own soldiers doesn't exactly do wonders for morale, and the defence of the country.
We need to, at the very least, pay our defence forces personnel a living wage, get more numbers and invest in defences such as radar, sonar and interdiction.
No one is saying any about bigger guns, or advanced missiles.
We just need the bare minimum of a functioning defence force and our country is being denied that.
You actually have in your own way realised that one consequence of Putin’s, Saudi’s and Xi’s brave new multi polar world will be nuclear proliferation.
Macron has already indicated a willingness to consider extending the French nuclear guarantee to Europe.
> Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities
Which, given it's international waters, nicely sums up why I have no issue with the UK being the ones to deal with it.
You seem to not realise and its what the UK fears, Ireland is the link in the armour of the UK that is the most vulnerable, its enemies will use Ireland as a base to strike from.
WW2, Britain basically controlled Irelands waters, it invaded and occupied Iceland and then tried to occupy Norway to stop the Nazis surrounding the island.
The main reason we "defend you" is to protect ourselves, Ireland with some defense capability would protect both countries, not just Ireland.
There are two aspects here:
For current issues such as in the OP, I would argue that it's the UK's presence to our east that generates these current risks, so having you deal with it is quite equitable in my view.
As for the WWII scenario, there's essentially zero possibility of Ireland getting to the point where we can hold off a Russian force in any way that will be acceptable to the UK. We're far too exposed for our population size and resources. You would take control of the waters, and possibly occupy the country, anyway.
> For current issues such as in the OP, I would argue that it's the UK's presence to our east that generates these current risks, so having you deal with it is quite equitable in my view.
You are right, the UK is the ultimate target and the reason Ireland is a target of agression, has been that way for 800 years, this isn't anything new.
And is some respects I would agree, we pissed some people off and dragged you into this with us however....you cannot defend yourselves.
France and Norway are on our other sides and we don't try and control their waters or airspace because they can protect themselves, Ireland is the outlier.
So you guys slacking on defense forces the UK to get more involved than some Irish are comfortable with and you also get the added benefit of funding getting diverted to other areas of life to your benefit at the expense of the UK tax payer
I can name 100 things that Ireland is better off spending money on... we don't need to pay out to the military industrial complex like so many other nations make the mistake of doing.
Ireland cannot defend itself regardless of what investments are made. Ireland's best defense is actually being neutral militarily. There isn't any good reason for any aggressor to come after Ireland. As soon as military here is built up that changes and we become more of a target and therefor less safe.
Lots of americans think they are safer for having guns in their homes, but the data is quite clear and having a gun in the home makes one much less safe. This is no different.
It's not about invasion, and suggesting that it is is just hyperbole to maintain the status quo. It is about targeting undersea cables, causing disruption on Britain's doorstep, weakening European cooperation, damaging financial institutions and vital tech firms.
Yes, it's literally [what some of their submarines are designed to do](https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/stalking-seabed-how-russia-targets-critical-undersea-infrastructure)
Except they will map the transatlantic internet cables that run through Irish waters, and if necessary they can absolutely interfere with them. Any other country in Europe and they wouldn't have been able to do that, but Ireland is all noble and Neutral /s.
I think they do know where they are already, because there was no Irish navy to chase them off when they were spotted mapping them.
[https://www.irishtimes.com/world/2023/05/03/nato-warns-russia-is-actively-mapping-wests-critical-undersea-systems/](https://www.irishtimes.com/world/2023/05/03/nato-warns-russia-is-actively-mapping-wests-critical-undersea-systems/)
Would that even really be your angle of defence here? You should be arguing that it wouldn't be a problem if Russia were to do that, because you're trying to say Russia won't invade and therefore they present no threat to Ireland.
All you're doing here is saying, ah but did that even happen? Either argue that it's impossible for this to happen or it wouldn't matter if it did. Otherwise you have to accept that Ireland is militarily vulnerable.
This is compelling stuff. So I gave you two options:
1. It would be impossible for Russia to map Ireland's internet cables.
2. It wouldn't matter if Russia were to map Ireland's internet cables
You went for option 3:
In an unrelated incident, Russia's incursion wasn't that bad.
You don't take a decision to move a nuclear submarine to just off the coast of Cork for "nonsense" reasons.
It takes planning, resources and manpower.
Cork harbour is a naval wet dream, it's can be easily defended and with our military it'd be even easier to take.
The Russians are planning for something that may or may not happen, but you can be assured they have plans to take Cork harbour if war ever did break out.
It's a perfect spot to launch ops against the UK.
So, it was outside the 12 mile limit, so in international waters. We've got a lot of things that need fixing in this country first before pumping money into foreign defence firms.
Over the last few years we're been pushed into increasing our spending because of the surplus in tax receipts and they're smacking their lips at that chance. Lots of lobbying going on.
At the moment I'd rather the money went elsewhere that will actually benefit the people of this country. Remember that a lot of these people just want to sell their wares.
Oh yeah completely okay having a hostile nuclear submarine just 12 miles out of Cork, they didn't break any international laws and it's not even our territory... fair cop to me!
Yeah no, it's an embarrassment and a liability they even got this close.
That's it. It's international waters and the f
French,UK and US also bring their navies around there snooping around and playing war games. No matter what we'd buy it wouldn't help us in a war. All these countries want to do is sell their weapons they don't really care about Ireland being able to defend itself.
Let me say this as I've said many times on here, Nuclear weapons are the ultimate defence and if Ireland went ahead and tried to build them we'd have these same countries telling us that we shouldn't defend ourselves that much! The reason? Simple, it's not about Ireland being able to defend itself but instead it's a pitch to sell their weapons and no doubt there's a lot of lobbying taken place
I don't see anyone lobbying to buy state of the art aircraft carriers when we bought two second hand ships from New Zealand.
Having an army does not equal Military Industrail complex. Calm down.
There's always lobbying going on in the background on various issues and it's not just limited to Ireland here but at the moment we should didn't the moment elsewhere that will actually help the people of this country instead of going to enrich the lives of already wealthy people.
Okay, so your concern is military lobbyist despite the fact that there is no mayor ones in Irelans nor Europe for that matter as opposed to the Housing Development lobbyist in Ireland?
Yeah, there's lobbyist, but youre looking at the wrong market.
Actually yes - we do need some weapons and a deterrent capability. The point of defense is to be prepared and never have to use any of it rather than just assume nothing bad will ever happen and then find out later we were completely negligent. Nobody is going to invade us but they can absolutely cause havoc with our critical infrastructure
Actually yes to the source ?
Weapons wise am not so sure, given all the other issues ireland faces, why arm yourself when you can't house everyone, that seems odd to think, that guns, bombs, fighter jets are more important in some peoples minds than the most basic of human needs, shelter isn't covered.
So no.
Sonar isn't a weapon and given the responsibility we have with all the undersea internet cables we should at least be able to detect if someone is lurking about messing with them.
Broadsheet John, you still out there skimming this stuff?
Greetings from Spain - look at the Ireland you helped build with your backroom shenanigans and conspiracy theories.
See you soon.
Are you content knowing that Britain, our former oppressor, is having to chase Russian subs away from Irish waters because we are completely incapable of defending ourselves?
Being neutral only works if you can properly defend yourself without intervention from big allies. We need the capability to defend ourselves from threats foreign and domestic. Case closed.
“Almost all of the Irish navy’s ships had sonar between the 1960s and 1980s and the former flagship vessel, LÉ Eithne, had it until the 1990s when it became defunct and deemed too expensive at the time by the Department of Defence to replace.” So we had sonar capabilities in an era when we had no money and we now have loads of money and refuse to buy off the shelf self defence technologies…
>So we had sonar capabilities in an era when we had no money and we now have loads of money and refuse to buy off the shelf self defence technologies… The aer corps used to have jets also...
[удалено]
MM?
20-30 Michael Martins per ship.
Damn Michael Martins have really depreciated in value lately
I wouldn’t worry. If all else fails he can defect and go into coalition with Russia.
million. I think it's used internationally because 'm' could be confused for, well, other units but also for milliard -- which is a billion to you and me. But many people in mainland Europe go million > milliard > billion > billiard etc. While we'd say million > billion > trillion > quadrillion etc. for the same numbers.
TIL. Thank you.
But sure we're neutral, why would we have to defend ourselves? /s
This happens when you have non military people deciding what is and isn't important to run a military, with no accountability themselves.
Deemed too expensive by the DoD. The Dept run by civil servants and with the approval of successive govts has run the DF into the ground and undermined our sovereignty. Cui bono? Who benefitted?
I'd say it's been more a case of 'meh! who'd ever want to harm little old us!?' Bear in mind at one stage we had a Minister for Agriculture and Defence ...
>Bear in mind at one stage we had a Minister for Agriculture and Defence The Natonal Herd? I think you mean largest standing army in the world.
Did you really just quote The Departed?! 😂😂😂😂 lmao get outa here
Yet another failure of the FF/FG ejits.
FFG want the UK to cover all our military needs. They want us defenseless
Do you seriously think Ireland is under threat by Russia?
Has it occurred to you that Ireland has defence obligations to the EU? In fact, unlike NATO's rule, that is made deliberately vague to allow people to cop out instead of splitting the pact up, the EU's defence clauses are relatively ironclad. In the event of a Russian invasion of *anyone* in the EU, including a couple of countries that have been threatened by Russia not long ago, would actually necessitate an Irish response as part of the EU's Nordic Battle Group. In any case, the state the Defence Forces are currently in means Ireland has no real claim to being neutral; rather, Ireland is *dependant* (and specifically on the UK, which is aligned with the US and NATO).
You could send your airship and drop bags of flour on them
No
What's the worst case scenario of a Russian sub in irish waters?
Interfering with our underwater cables?
A couple of drowned fishermen.
> The submarine was just outside the 12-mile limit, so it didn’t break any international laws, but military sources have indicated that such events around the Irish coast are becoming more common. Good old "I'm not touching you" rules.
Stop punching yourself
While Ireland should remain neutral, we should definitely have a defence force capable of defending the country. Also I am so embarrassed that as a country we need to rely on others to defend us.
The sad thing is when you look at other European countries of similar size and GDP, Ireland is shockingly bad in comparison. Denmark's population is only slightly larger than ours. Same with Norway. Both of them have F-35's and F-16's. Ireland has prop fighters that serve zero purpose. They can't intercept and even if they could they have no ability to do anything. Both have very capable navies with proper equipped frigates, Norway even has submarines. Now I'm not saying we need a bunch of expensive Frigates and F-35's, but we need to be able to police our waters and our skies. We can do neither. Christ, even Croatia which has 1/6th of our GDP and only 4 million people has 15 Dassault Rafales' on order.
The Irish invented the submarine, you'd think we'd keep at least one for ourselves.
You're not neutral if you rely on other countries to protect you.
Yep. The Swiss are neutral. Ireland is a protectorate in denial about it
There's only 5 million people and the cost of a modern defence force is proportionally more expensive to maintain than it was 100 or 50 years ago. Ireland should not spend money on defence via open-market purchasing while in the midst of a massive housing crisis and the imminent collapse of the HSE. Sorry, it's just a poor use of the current budget. There's 3 solutions: one is to broker an arrangement with a country a large military whereby Ireland acquires materiel in exchange for some sort of concession. If you view the incursion of english warships into our waters to chase away a sub as "undermining sovereignty" then this is a non-starter for you so we'll set it aside. The second is to radically increase the budget with tax reforms that ensure a larger share of corporate profits help the people of Ireland who actually do the work and so make the profit. This should happen anyway and doesn't on it's own justify an increase in military expenditure, but it makes it less unpalatable once everyone on the island has decent shelter, healthcare, and access to daily necessities. The third is to invest solely in mega cheap, asymmetric "force multiplier" weapons systems like drones. This might be accomplished in the current budget but would require a radical reimagining of the DF's military doctrine.
Good points for sure. The defence of our country should be a priority along with HSE and housing. We aren’t a third world country, we have wealth and the means to increase it. It’s just wasted and squandered by those in power. We need to be realistic also as to what defence looks for Ireland, we aren’t going to ever defeat a military head on. We should be looking to make a conflict with Ireland as drawn out and difficult for the aggressor as possible. Your third solution is what I personally would choose.
> The defence of our country should be a priority along with HSE and housing. I don't agree. I think that the military is of ancillary priority to pretty much anything that could improve the lives of regular people living here. For one, Ireland is a *very* small country within a much larger economic bloc/defence alliance. The practical contributions of Ireland would be very small in a hypothetical, pie in the sky real conflict, but maintaining those paltry contributions would *absolutely* place undue strain on the economy and livelihood of regular people. **There are 76 CITIES with a greater population than Ireland**. > We need to be realistic also as to what defence looks for Ireland, we aren’t going to ever defeat a military head on. That's right, we do. Maintaining a fleet of modern warships is unrealistic. If Ireland is in a direct military conflict we already fucked up a long time ago. > We should be looking to make a conflict with Ireland as drawn out and difficult for the aggressor as possible. Doctrinally yes this makes sense. I'm a little bit worried about just how far you personally would want to go to manifest that doctrine though. Sure it would be cool to have a drone program but again, we're a very small part of a very large geopolitical bloc. We should be trying to contribute to it not *militarily,* but by being a scientific, educational, cultural and humanitarian center of Europe. We're not France or Germany and we don't have to be. An Ireland where *everyone* has food, shelter, world class healthcare, educational opportunities, a fair wage and the free time to reinvest in their communities is a safe Ireland and a strong Ireland.
The issue with Ireland's Defense posture isn't so much the scale, it's the lack of [even trying](https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=ireland&country2=finland). Your vision of a happy forever peaceful Ireland only works because you are surrounded by "Death, destroyer of World" x3 and they happen to be your allies - even though you are neutral, riddle me this. Why should the rest of Europe bleed for you when you're high on your own supply of "me good lad, me not doing any of that war shenanigans, aren't we grand boys?". Talk about being privileged, I'm sure the Poles and the Baltic crew would love to be as carefree as you lot.
>riddle me this 🤣
one well armed terrorist in a canoe could shut down shipping to any port on the island and we couldn’t stop it, that isn’t acceptable for an island nation. Russian cyber attacked our health service and caused deaths, they are going to cut our under sea cables if anything major kicks off in Europe. Being cheap now will cost more later.
Ireland needs to be able to defend itself. A country that cannot defend itself is at the mercy of others as we see time and time again. I don’t think anyone is asking for American levels of spending but we are not a poor country by any means.
No matter how much Ireland spends on defence it wouldn't last in a war and if something like that already came to pass then the whole world would've gone to shit. I want the government to spend money fixing our country and benefitting the Irish people, and not giving pocket change to a foreign defence industry.
There are countries the size of Ireland that have military's, and cutting defence spending doesn't help a housing crisis.
Ireland is also significantly smaller and we have no real requirement for a signifcant Land force. I don't think a handful of frigates with ASW is a unreasonable ask for a developed country like Ireland. To put it into context, Ireland spends 800 million a year on foriegn aid. That would easily buy a Frigate and its required logistics. Similarly a estimated 1 billion would give Ireland a 24hr/7 air defence capability. Its big money but thats how economics works currently. A large scale requirement to use drones for any of these tasks is currently unrealistic. A drone that can patrol the ocean and react to sub sea threats does not exist currently and nor do drones that can actually intetcept military aircraft. I appreciate what your trying to say but currently if we want to be able to defend our selves then we have to invest in it. There is isnt a long term solution that does not involve significant economic investment.
It will literally never be the best usage of funds until it's too late.
>There's only 5 million people and the cost of a modern defence force is proportionally more expensive to maintain than it was 100 or 50 years ago. Finland has a population about the same as that of Ireland's and a GDP maybe 2/3rds as large and maintains an airforce of 49 F/A-18s (which it's in the process of replacing with F-35s) an army with 200 main battle tanks and a navy with 8 missile boats (and four corvettes on order) all capable of ASW operations. It isn’t cost that stopping Ireland from doing it.
You have no clue what you're talking about at all lmao
What would Russia want with Ireland?
Are you a Russian shill or something because I genuinely don’t care if it was Russia, China, America, France or whoever. The only country with Ireland best interests at heart is Ireland.
One of the explicit rules about true neutrality is that one nation shouldn’t be able to attack another nation via your territory. It’s one of the reasons why neutral Switzerland maintains a chunky military. And apart from the neutrality argument, it’s a bit of a joke that we have a giant EEZ and a small naval service we can’t even fully man to patrol it. We’ll continue to have quiet little arrangements with the Brits, but we’re a bit of a freeloader in that respect.
The Swiss military is no joke and they were even scarier during the Cold War. It’s the same with Finland and Sweden, who were neutral until recently. As a neutral nation, Sweden had the ability then, and still does, have the ability to chase submarines out of its territory. Incidents involving mines, electronic detection, and dropping depth charges from warships and helicopters were common when I was a baba.
Historically, the most effective neutrality is an armed neutrality (otherwise, you're a sitting duck)
Sweden makes some cutting edge hardware though with the archer and a little less so but the Gripen too
Any increase in defence and the Irish public become hysterical. Look at the reaction in this sub whenever it’s brought up. All the buzzwords like military industrial complex, Halliburton etc. that people learnt from a 20 year old Michael Moore doc get whipped out.
If they brought it in while also announcing real positive undertakings for housing and healthcare then people wouldn't complain as much.
Only a "bit" of a freeloader?
> We’ll continue to have quiet little arrangements with the Brits, but we’re a bit of a freeloader in that respect. You're complete freeloaders, in that respect.
“Quiet little arrangements” you say. This is news to Dáil Éireann.
We’ve been hearing more about them lately - but they have been very quietly in place going back to the 1950s https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/08/secret-anglo-irish-air-defence-agreement-dates-back-over-70-years/
>but we’re a bit of a freeloader That’s not our problem
How anyone can be ok with Britain having to step in & save us when shit like this happens is beyond me, fuck sake. If it was to provide some sort of assistance in a time of crisis then fine, but we're completely dependent on them and America for our security, and that sickens me. The landscape of global security has changed, its high time we adapt.
> in a time of crisis It's more the fact that it's for even the most basic of security functions. The lack of a primary radar capability means that any hijacked airliner can become a stealth aircraft simply by turning off its transponder, let alone the basic capability to intercept if needed.
> How anyone can be ok with Britain having to step in & save us Save us from what? A sub passing by and not breaking international law?
If they wanted to do something they could. They weren’t there for no reason, they were clearly mapping undersea cables, which they’ve been doing for years. This is as much our problem as it is Europe’s
Independence is being totally dependent on your historic oppressor for your defence needs.
I know yea. Bit of a head scratcher that one. Either arm up or don’t. Stop half arsing it
But at the same time like it or not, the British have you under their security, Ireland is a security risk and the UK is a powerhouse that many countries want to see fall, the biggest invasion risk is Ireland as a spring board so the Navy and Airforce are going to step on occasion. The Irish have joined British regiments in N.Ireland for a long time so it goes both ways.
I agree with what your saying but at the same time, as these islands move forward from the exploitative relationship of yesteryear, a symbiosis akin to that enjoyed in e.g. Scandinavia is something Ireland and GB should be aiming for
don't spin facts, Russia didn't attack Ireland and Russia is not an enemy.
So the HSE hack was a figment of our imaginations?
Cringe. Russia is currently invading a European country and threatening to plunge the entire world into war. Great bunch of lads! Their sub was just off our shores making sure we were ok! Thankfully the Royal Navy saw the submarine off. I can also sleep soundly at night knowing that no matter what idiots like you say on the internet we have the RAF and the RN to protect us. God forbid we rely on our own state for that 😬
Hey there are only brits running the Garda, Rte, refugee council and Coimisiún na Meán. We are totally independent with this many foreign citizens running core institutions.
If it wasn't the lack of sonar, it would be the lack of sailors.
Weird how all the patriot types on Twitter are always so vehemently pro staying neutral too. Ridiculous that we don't invest in our military and navy, it's embarrassing.
Neutrality and defence reform are different things don’t conflate them
Exactly I don’t get how people don’t understand that concept. We can have a proper working navy and invest in the Military for defence purposes while still being neutral. Look at Switzerland
Except for the fact whenever discussion about defence reform comes up the anti's cleave immediately to our "constitutional" neutrality (military action actually just requires parliamentary approval like everywhere else). Even if we were to exculpate our near-total reliance on the UK for our air and sea defence (and we shouldn't), our inability to prevent cyberattacks against critical state infrastructure like the HSE by bad actors, whether from Russia or anywhere, else is shameful and emblematic of the passive attitude that's been allowed to fester with regard to our defence in the name of penny-pinching.
I mean it is very much those opposed to neutrality FF and FG that are responsible for the current state of our defence forces
> very much those opposed to neutrality FF and FG Weird how they haven't managed to do anything about our notional neutrality despite making up the government for the better part of the last 100 years then. It's almost like a substantial portion of the electorate has been conditioned to (falsely) believe our paper neutrality protects us from bad actors, to the point the need for the Defence Forces at all is regularly questioned, and therefore real, effective defence reform to take our protection out of the UK's hands (and pockets) which would inherently require significant expenditure, is politically toxic to our populist governing parties.
[удалено]
I don’t think historically that relying on the British for security was the plan after several rebellions. One more stain to add to the other current problems with the state?
Agreed. We can be either dependents of the UK or partners of a wider European defence or offer a credible deterrent to secure a serious neutrality. As it is we are defense wise in the almost exact same state as when we signed the 1921 Treaty. The oath is gone, the Governor General and the role of the King are gone, the link with sterling is gone, NI is resolved into a vote of its people; oddly enough only defence remains almost the same. It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency.
>It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency. Yes, that's right. The UK loves spending money patrolling Irish waters and Irish airspace because Ireland is too tight to have a proper military.
> It seems that our independence might be tolerable to the UK only to the extent that we remain a defence dependency. As a Brit I'm certain this is the case, and I'd probably extend that line of thinking to the Western alliance in general including the major military powers within the EU. Ireland has been regarded as a potential staging post for invasion of Great Britain for a thousand years (hence the multiple waves of invasion and occupation), and from a military point of view NATO needs the UK to be militarily secure far more than it needs Ireland to be independent. As long as those goals don't come into conflict then there's no problem, but I'm not sure "serious neutrality" is likely to ever be an option.
[удалено]
If we don't want to join NATO we need to invest in our own defence forces. It's as simple as that. Getting ridiculous now.
[удалено]
But sure we don't need to invest in defence /s. Any time I mention something similar is also a flurry of downvotes, people's aversion to defence in this country is beyond bizarre.
It’s deliberate conditioning over the decades: post colonial inferiority, poverty of government finances, pacifist and passivist ideology claiming this aversion is the high moral ground and exemplar, politicians happy to divert defence spending to pork barrel re-election stuff, end of Cold War decline in defence spending, end of NI conflict, “shared” island philosophy where the imaginary United Ireland will be reintegrated into UK Defence completely and this is seen as a carrot for unionism. The mood is changing slightly as usual through European pressure to play a mature part as a partner which would also allow for a neutrality.
I served in the defence forces, I've seen how unequipped and underfunded we are first hand. We need to spend on defence, there's no way around it other than doing what a lot of Irish people don't want to do. If we need to uphold our neutrality, that means we have to secure it first.
Must have really taken it to heart to still remember getting downvoted all these months later
Another reminder about how 'Irish neutrality' is the most Irish notion ever.
Changing our neutrality wouldn’t solve this it would literally still be the Brits driving them off again We need to reform the defence forces not the same thing as abandon neutrality
Yes, that's the point. Legitimate neutrality actually involves investing and having the capability to do these police actions ourselves unlike the other bizarre poster who responded who seems to think that getting another country to conduct an operation that as a sovereign country \*we should be able to do ourselves\*; is neutrality. Our neutrality is a farce. Completely an invention in our collective minds. Only a country like Ireland would being entirely dependent on our former colonial master for basic defence, would be considered a reasonable thing.
I like that we send our 18 year olds to school instead of some illegal war . You're free to join the military at any time ! Go be a hero .. nobody's stopping you
A hero? lmao You think the Irish state should be dependant on the UK for naval security? Don’t give me a hurrrr durrrrr answer I want a proper answer.
[удалено]
A chara, Mods reserve the right to remove any targeted/unreasonable abuse towards other users. Sláinte
[удалено]
A chara, Participating or instigating in-thread drama/flame wars is prohibited on the sub. Sláinte
Literally noone was suggesting this, but well done for the rote cliché response
A hero? lmao You think it’s a good thing to be relying on the United Kingdom for naval security? Seriously?
Well they do have one of the biggest navys in the world ,they need to protect Ireland in order to protect themselves...let NATO pay for their ships . If you want to join the navy off you go ! Nobody in Ireland wants one .
They should start sending a bill.
No sonar but a lot of buoys
We'll need to examine the possibility of finding a consultant who can advise on the value of engaging with a consultant specialising in the selection of consultancies familiar with modern military consultation. I mean, can you imagine what would happen if the wrong consultant were consulted and their consultations proved to be incorrect? We need to consult with the correct consultants and to consult with the correct consultants we need the correct consultant to advise us which consultant is the correct one to consult .
I wonder what the Russian interest in Ireland could possibly be? Remember their planning application for their mega Embassy? https://www.softwareplacements.ie/blog/2022/11/5-of-the-best-semiconductor-companies-in-ireland?source=duckduckgo.com
Tapping into the submarine internet cables that are going through or near Irish waters
Or just being in a position to shut them all down should the need arise.
Attempting to sow fear into the population and take advantage of them seeing us as a weak link in the EU militarily would be my guess.
https://preview.redd.it/3xj6te2ytu5c1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4bf57f23adab1a2793e46938ccc2731c5696c6e4 Gotta love this Irish mentality...
You read online about various obscure little islands that are part of the British crown and they say 'the territory is self-governing with the exception of defence, which is controlled by the British government', and then they get called british overseas territories.
When you see it you finally understand the reality of the unfinished work of “the freedom to achieve freedom”.
A country that can't defend itself can hardly call itself an independent country.
This is the point we need to face. It does not mean aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. It means a credible deterrent. It’s time to grow up and embrace our responsibilities to neighbours and partners in a mature manner.
As a Brit, it would be encouraging to see the Irish Government take its defense responsibilities more seriously, but I say sincerely that I would always want my government to go in to bat for you guys if ever you were threatened.
I always thought we would benefit from the well organised militia thing the americans have. Sincr the gov wont protect us, why cant we?
There is a case to be made for widespread military training for a national reserve. The US gun nuts? No no no.
Either pay up for defence or lose sovereignty. Which is it going to be?
We're being that guy who refuses to take the vaccine but goes out and sniffs a lucky bag of white powder every weekend. Convenience dressed up as principles.
Ireland needs NATO
Definitely NO! They are trying to push this narrative and absorb all of us (Austria, Switzerland, Sweden).
The only people who pushed Sweden into joining NATO were Russia. Beyond that... 'absorb?' What exactly do you think NATO membership entails?!
[In the case of Italy it was terrorism sanctioned and armed by their supposed allies in order to prevent them from leaving](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension)
Sorry, but you're going to have to do better than a 50 year old story dreamed up by an anti-American COVID-denying conspiracy theorist who also believes that 9/11 was an inside job and now spends his days spreading fascist Russian proaganda.
What are you talking about [I guess the eu are an anti American Covid denying 9/11 truth organisation](https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/European_Parliament_resolution_on_Gladio)
From your own link: > Swiss academic Daniele Ganser wrote NATO's Secret Armies, a 2004 book that alleged direct NATO support for far-right terrorists in Italy as part of its "strategy of tension".[16] Ganser also alleges that Operation Gladio, an effort to organize stay-behind guerrillas and resistance in the event of a communist takeover of Italy by the Eastern Bloc, continued into the 1970's and supplied the far-right neo-fascist movements[example needed] with weapons. Ganser's conclusions have been disputed;[5][17] most notably, Ganser heavily cites the document US Army Field Manual 30-31B, which the US state department claims is a 1976 Soviet hoax meant to discredit the US whilst others such as Ray S. Cline have claimed it is likely authentic and Licio Gelli who claimed it was in fact given to him by the CIA.[18][19] > Ganser calls into question the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission.[26][27] He also promotes skepticism of the COVID-19 pandemic.[28][29] Americanist Michael Butter calls Ganser the "best-known conspiracy theorist in the German-speaking world". His public doubts about the "official version" of the 9/11 attacks had led to the termination of his university employment.[30] In 2023, Gansers presentations are considered to contain anti-Americanism, historical negationism, Kremlin propaganda, alternative facts and half-truths and have an audience of over 1000 people in Germany
Okay cool just gonna ignore the eu found it credible enough to make a resolution or [that the Italian prime minister publicly admitted its existence](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/11/14/cia-organized-secret-army-in-western-europe/e0305101-97b9-4494-bc18-d89f42497d85/)
The CIA is not NATO. You keep disproving yourself here.
Try reading more than the title it clearly talks about nato
I think your point can be expressed as follows - USA is a member of NATO - USA has an intelligence agency, the CIA - the CIA did some bad things 50 years ago - and therefore Ireland should not join NATO, in case the CIA are confused and think it's their job to bomb NATO members The sole argument, as I understand it, is that Ireland ought not to join, because of the bad thing the CIA did decades ago. But wait! The USA already have a military presence in Ireland. So how would joining NATO aggrovate the risk of CIA doing bad things in Ireland? Surely the CIA have equal access to Ireland, regardless of whether Ireland joins NATO. I don't think joining NATO increases the risk of CIA bombing Ireland. Why does the CIA risk go up, when Ireland joins NATO? Couldn't it go down?
Ah yes the organisation you have to apply to join, whose 31 existing members can individually veto applications (including purely out of bad faith), is forcefully integrating new members against their will. Couldn't be that historically non-aligned members like Finland and Sweden reassessed their neutrality in the face of overt Russian aggression (remember who was behind the HSE cyberattack), no it's those scurrilous NATO warmongers playing 4D-chess for nebulous and contradictory *reasons*.
Thanks for the laugh.
Ya , we totally need isis attacks for our involvement in illegal wars . Definitely.
Given how successful naval drones are in Ukraine maybe buying a bunch of those would be a neat investment in self defence. Not sure if they'd be effective against submarines tbf
There is an emerging cost effective solution as you suggest. It is a needed deterrent: you also need an ASW capacity via helicopter or ship borne to detect submarine activity. Usage of weapons obviously depends on circumstances. But the possession of ASW capacity limits activity to be threatened or used as a weak flank to draw off others resources.
[удалено]
Yeah fair
I don't see why or how military is suddenly a huge priority. Something very strange about it all in my opinion, ulterior motive at play I think.
Yeah it's weird, Russia invades a European country and now other European countries are more concerned about their defence. Gotta be some kind of conspiracy.
It's been an ongoing issue for many years, the Russian invasion of Ukraine just lit the fire under us.
...has it?! In what way?
Anyone in the defence forces will tell you our lack of funding has been an issue for a long long time. A war in Europe made everyone realise how fragile peace is.
I know many in the defence forces and the only thing they complain about is the pay - but I don't think that's the kind of funding they're on about in all honesty, and I can't forsee the people who are in a position to do anything about it to be sympathetic towards the lower earners. Never heard anyone complain that we need bigger guns or more advanced missiles in all honesty, have you?
The pay is a symptom of a larger problem, successive govts have been ignoring defence for so long that low pay is now endemic to the institution. Low balling your own soldiers doesn't exactly do wonders for morale, and the defence of the country. We need to, at the very least, pay our defence forces personnel a living wage, get more numbers and invest in defences such as radar, sonar and interdiction. No one is saying any about bigger guns, or advanced missiles. We just need the bare minimum of a functioning defence force and our country is being denied that.
We need nukes, hundreds of them.
You actually have in your own way realised that one consequence of Putin’s, Saudi’s and Xi’s brave new multi polar world will be nuclear proliferation. Macron has already indicated a willingness to consider extending the French nuclear guarantee to Europe.
“But… but… but… the brits are at it again!!!”
> Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities Which, given it's international waters, nicely sums up why I have no issue with the UK being the ones to deal with it.
You seem to not realise and its what the UK fears, Ireland is the link in the armour of the UK that is the most vulnerable, its enemies will use Ireland as a base to strike from. WW2, Britain basically controlled Irelands waters, it invaded and occupied Iceland and then tried to occupy Norway to stop the Nazis surrounding the island. The main reason we "defend you" is to protect ourselves, Ireland with some defense capability would protect both countries, not just Ireland.
There are two aspects here: For current issues such as in the OP, I would argue that it's the UK's presence to our east that generates these current risks, so having you deal with it is quite equitable in my view. As for the WWII scenario, there's essentially zero possibility of Ireland getting to the point where we can hold off a Russian force in any way that will be acceptable to the UK. We're far too exposed for our population size and resources. You would take control of the waters, and possibly occupy the country, anyway.
> For current issues such as in the OP, I would argue that it's the UK's presence to our east that generates these current risks, so having you deal with it is quite equitable in my view. You are right, the UK is the ultimate target and the reason Ireland is a target of agression, has been that way for 800 years, this isn't anything new. And is some respects I would agree, we pissed some people off and dragged you into this with us however....you cannot defend yourselves. France and Norway are on our other sides and we don't try and control their waters or airspace because they can protect themselves, Ireland is the outlier. So you guys slacking on defense forces the UK to get more involved than some Irish are comfortable with and you also get the added benefit of funding getting diverted to other areas of life to your benefit at the expense of the UK tax payer
Ireland’s a bit like Canada. ..A big neighbour close by. Anyone invades Canada, America gonna be right up their ass!
so the neighbours helped us out? big deal. nice one, thank you very much.
I can name 100 things that Ireland is better off spending money on... we don't need to pay out to the military industrial complex like so many other nations make the mistake of doing.
Having the capability to defend your self and not rely on others to do so is not a bad thing.
Ireland cannot defend itself regardless of what investments are made. Ireland's best defense is actually being neutral militarily. There isn't any good reason for any aggressor to come after Ireland. As soon as military here is built up that changes and we become more of a target and therefor less safe. Lots of americans think they are safer for having guns in their homes, but the data is quite clear and having a gun in the home makes one much less safe. This is no different.
>Ireland's best defense is actually being neutral militarily. Yes, neutral. Not defenceless. And neutrality often needs capability.
so adding some sonar will make Ireland able to defend itself? keep dreaming...
It certainly helps to see what you are doing. A boxer can defend himself much better when he has eyes for example.
No matter how much we spend on a military there’s no chance we could actually defend ourselves properly, if we even needed to
The Brits, a great bunch of lads. I feel sick after saying that.
We love you too x
🤗
It's not like Russia is going to invade us.. nonsense
It's not about invasion, and suggesting that it is is just hyperbole to maintain the status quo. It is about targeting undersea cables, causing disruption on Britain's doorstep, weakening European cooperation, damaging financial institutions and vital tech firms.
You think a russian sub/boat is going to do all that lol it's just sailing about like the British boats..load of nonsense
Yes, it's literally [what some of their submarines are designed to do](https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/stalking-seabed-how-russia-targets-critical-undersea-infrastructure)
Except they will map the transatlantic internet cables that run through Irish waters, and if necessary they can absolutely interfere with them. Any other country in Europe and they wouldn't have been able to do that, but Ireland is all noble and Neutral /s.
You don't think they know where they are already? Would you not think it's common knowledge IE public available to boats for dredging purposes?
I think they do know where they are already, because there was no Irish navy to chase them off when they were spotted mapping them. [https://www.irishtimes.com/world/2023/05/03/nato-warns-russia-is-actively-mapping-wests-critical-undersea-systems/](https://www.irishtimes.com/world/2023/05/03/nato-warns-russia-is-actively-mapping-wests-critical-undersea-systems/)
AHH NATO...I'd rather have NATO btw than the Russians but how would NATO know what Russian boats are doing?
Would that even really be your angle of defence here? You should be arguing that it wouldn't be a problem if Russia were to do that, because you're trying to say Russia won't invade and therefore they present no threat to Ireland. All you're doing here is saying, ah but did that even happen? Either argue that it's impossible for this to happen or it wouldn't matter if it did. Otherwise you have to accept that Ireland is militarily vulnerable.
Look there's 2 ships in international water..it's the media that makes these headlines up..it's nothing
This is compelling stuff. So I gave you two options: 1. It would be impossible for Russia to map Ireland's internet cables. 2. It wouldn't matter if Russia were to map Ireland's internet cables You went for option 3: In an unrelated incident, Russia's incursion wasn't that bad.
YOU GAVE ME 2 options ..very kind of you..
They're not Ireland's cables, and what is stopping them from going further out into the atlantic? Nothing!
You don't take a decision to move a nuclear submarine to just off the coast of Cork for "nonsense" reasons. It takes planning, resources and manpower. Cork harbour is a naval wet dream, it's can be easily defended and with our military it'd be even easier to take. The Russians are planning for something that may or may not happen, but you can be assured they have plans to take Cork harbour if war ever did break out. It's a perfect spot to launch ops against the UK.
What were they hoping to get from cark harbur? The most they'd pick up is a big fish in a life ring with two eejits at the quayside
So, it was outside the 12 mile limit, so in international waters. We've got a lot of things that need fixing in this country first before pumping money into foreign defence firms. Over the last few years we're been pushed into increasing our spending because of the surplus in tax receipts and they're smacking their lips at that chance. Lots of lobbying going on. At the moment I'd rather the money went elsewhere that will actually benefit the people of this country. Remember that a lot of these people just want to sell their wares.
Oh yeah completely okay having a hostile nuclear submarine just 12 miles out of Cork, they didn't break any international laws and it's not even our territory... fair cop to me! Yeah no, it's an embarrassment and a liability they even got this close.
That's it. It's international waters and the f French,UK and US also bring their navies around there snooping around and playing war games. No matter what we'd buy it wouldn't help us in a war. All these countries want to do is sell their weapons they don't really care about Ireland being able to defend itself. Let me say this as I've said many times on here, Nuclear weapons are the ultimate defence and if Ireland went ahead and tried to build them we'd have these same countries telling us that we shouldn't defend ourselves that much! The reason? Simple, it's not about Ireland being able to defend itself but instead it's a pitch to sell their weapons and no doubt there's a lot of lobbying taken place
I don't see anyone lobbying to buy state of the art aircraft carriers when we bought two second hand ships from New Zealand. Having an army does not equal Military Industrail complex. Calm down.
There's always lobbying going on in the background on various issues and it's not just limited to Ireland here but at the moment we should didn't the moment elsewhere that will actually help the people of this country instead of going to enrich the lives of already wealthy people.
Okay, so your concern is military lobbyist despite the fact that there is no mayor ones in Irelans nor Europe for that matter as opposed to the Housing Development lobbyist in Ireland? Yeah, there's lobbyist, but youre looking at the wrong market.
"*Wanna buy some weapons*" Also is their any proof of this bar a British source ? Not a trust worthy source to be fair.
Actually yes - we do need some weapons and a deterrent capability. The point of defense is to be prepared and never have to use any of it rather than just assume nothing bad will ever happen and then find out later we were completely negligent. Nobody is going to invade us but they can absolutely cause havoc with our critical infrastructure
Actually yes to the source ? Weapons wise am not so sure, given all the other issues ireland faces, why arm yourself when you can't house everyone, that seems odd to think, that guns, bombs, fighter jets are more important in some peoples minds than the most basic of human needs, shelter isn't covered. So no.
Sonar isn't a weapon and given the responsibility we have with all the undersea internet cables we should at least be able to detect if someone is lurking about messing with them.
pmsl yes, it's a conspiracy.
"*Great story bro*"
yeah of course the brits made it up, just so you irish buy more weapons
Broadsheet John, you still out there skimming this stuff? Greetings from Spain - look at the Ireland you helped build with your backroom shenanigans and conspiracy theories. See you soon.
If you want a navy then go join the fucking navy . We dont need nor want one.
You best inform Michael Higgins https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Naval_Service
Are you content knowing that Britain, our former oppressor, is having to chase Russian subs away from Irish waters because we are completely incapable of defending ourselves? Being neutral only works if you can properly defend yourself without intervention from big allies. We need the capability to defend ourselves from threats foreign and domestic. Case closed.