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

With Regards to the Afghan deployment poll - corrected version

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    cushtac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭cushtac


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    are they aware of it? ever bring it up in conversation any of you heroes out there?

    Who are you talking about? Hezbollah or the Chadians?

    Hezbollah are certainly aware of the use of Shannon, Hezbollah 'journalists' have been brought over here several times by those Irish groups opposed to the US use of Shannon. They are also the beneficiaries of Syrian & Iranian intelligence, who were in turn the beneficiaries of Soviet intelligence during the cold war.

    The Chadians have representatives in Europe and have access to the internet and international media, one of their spokesmen conducted interviews with the Irish Times via sat phone earlier in the year. I think it's reasonable to assume they know of the US use of Shannon.

    And who are you referring to as heroes?


  • Options
    #33
    iceage
    Registered Users Posts: 3,533 ✭✭✭iceage


    cushtac wrote: »
    I also find it interesting that you would describe a civilian airport as a legitimate target for terrorism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_March_2004_Madrid_train_bombings
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/6257194.stm

    Ring any bells? these are all classed as legitimate targets by terrorists. Hezzbollah and Chadians really are the least of our worries mate at this point in time.
    lostexpectation wrote: »
    are they aware of it? ever bring it up in conversation any of you heroes out there?

    Think lostexpectation was having a pop at me Cushtac for mentioning the place. By the way Lost, we've been talking about it for ages now, but the eye is off the ball I think as to who would be a serious threat. Apologies for stating the bloody obvious.


  • Options
    #34
    neilled
    Registered Users Posts: 1,232 ✭✭✭neilled


    Zuiderzee wrote: »
    Bollox - they were wise enough to get shot of all of that rubbish.
    A relatively small number of people from the Republic are in the UKs military.

    On that point it should be the Royal Ulster Guards and Royal Ulster Regiment or something more suitable like that.
    For example you dont have the Nepal regiment, you have the Ghurkas.
    The RIR are the linear decendents from the B Specials and UDR, a sectarian militia.

    Their nationality is considered Irish within the context of the United Kingdom which is made up of Great Britain (England Scotland and Wales) and Northern Ireland. This makes these two units the Royal Irish and Irish Guards. The fact that they can draw on recruits from south of the border is an added bonus as far as they are concerned.

    The direct descendants of the UDR were the home service battalions of the RIR who basically just took on a new capbadge and uniform in 1992 when they amalgamated with the Royal Irish Rangers. Whilst any of the Irish Regiments in the British Army containing loyalists is no surprise, armies recruit predominantly from the working class and that is the spiritual heartland of loyalism. Par for the course really. Anyway the UDR descendants got the axe a few years ago. The 1st and 2nd didn't seem to have a huge amount to do with them and neither did the TA who were deliberately badged the Royal Irish Rangers to differentiate them and generally speaking they weren't targeted as much during the troubles. I was browsing a loyalist forum a while back and noted that there was much wailing about "all this Irish Rangers stuff" or words to that effect, that the present RIR and TA didn't seem to care much about the UDR. Interesting stuff, its not quite as black and white you make out.


  • Options
    #35
    cushtac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭cushtac


    iceage wrote: »
    Ring any bells? these are all classed as legitimate targets by terrorists. Hezzbollah and Chadians really are the least of our worries mate at this point in time.

    I'm well aware they're targets, I just found it interesting that you'd class them as legitimate. It's not a word I would have used.


  • Options
    #36
    Duffers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 129 ✭✭Duffers


    iceage wrote: »
    4am....If I post at 4am I'm usually P!shed out of my head crosseyed and dyslexic!!

    Oh come on Duffers You have to admit that he does post well, even if it is a bit of a ramble, but some very insightful points. I do sense a dragging up of the Ireland/Britain drivel, I hope its not intended to inflame others here or cause the thread to get slammed by Mods, that would be an awful shame.

    As to the original post, things are definately afoot as far as withdrawal and redeployment of troops are concerned, the attention to AFG has definately taken a turn, and not just there, Pakistan is defo in the frame now.

    Sorry mate I just find it difficult to take people with such polarised views seriously.:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    ever bring it up in conversation any of you heroes out there?
    cushtac wrote: »
    Who are you talking about? Hezbollah or the Chadians?

    Hezbollah are certainly aware of the use of Shannon, Hezbollah 'journalists' have been brought over here several times by those Irish groups opposed to the US use of Shannon. They are also the beneficiaries of Syrian & Iranian intelligence, who were in turn the beneficiaries of Soviet intelligence during the cold war.

    The Chadians have representatives in Europe and have access to the internet and international media, one of their spokesmen conducted interviews with the Irish Times via sat phone earlier in the year. I think it's reasonable to assume they know of the US use of Shannon.

    And who are you referring to as heroes?

    so the answer is no.


  • Options
    #38
    iceage
    Registered Users Posts: 3,533 ✭✭✭iceage


    cushtac wrote: »
    I'm well aware they're targets, I just found it interesting that you'd class them as legitimate. It's not a word I would have used.


    Agreed. Gramatically correct, but defo an incorrect inferrance. A terrorist, which I hasten to add I am not, would class it as a legitimate target.

    I should have used the term logical, thanks Cushtac.


  • Options
    #39
    cushtac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭cushtac


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    so the answer is no.

    I still don't know who you're talking about, please be more clear in future. I have talked to friends who were on the last tour in Chad & they never mentioned anything about Shannon being mentioned to them.

    They did say the rebels are more interested in the French, perhaps we should pull out of the EU for fear of offending them?


  • Options
    #40
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    yes the the policy is keeps schtum about what were really about, and wave the friendly didelee i, oirish flag, as we've seen with people in the papers suggest chad is irish led mission.


  • Options
    #41
    cushtac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭cushtac


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    yes the the policy is keeps schtum about what were really about, and wave the friendly didelee i, oirish flag, as we've seen with people in the papers suggest chad is irish led mission.

    So what are we 'really' about?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement