SAS Operating in Ireland (Republic of)

Fukuyama

Anyone ever hear about this?

I've been told countless times that the SAS were known to come down over the border to the Republic to Dublin and Limrick during The Troubles to pick up a few guys they wanted to 'talk to' or maybe just get rid of people.:eek:

I've also been told that a couple of times they were caught (once by an RDF patrol along the border and again by a garda), arrested and then quietly given a lift back up to the border and told to play nice...

Anyone any info on this? Is it true?

Cheers,
Dean.

Honest opinion

I seriosly Doubt thats true for one despite what people think there is quite a noticable presence of the Defence forces around the border a lot of a barracks are located there also as stupid and arrogant as the British Goverment is:p i don't think they would risk a MAJOR INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT by sending soldiers down to limerick and down south in general

JJJJNR

im sure wikileaks has something on it.. if it happened.

Fukuyama

Just to clarify on the first guy to reply they wern't exactly invading... Plain clothes SAS guys ... not in full combat gear etc ... :P


Also, I DO KNOW FOR DEFINITE that AGS used to send a couple of squad cars into derry (unmarked) and pick up some targets (IRA Mostly) and bring them back to the station in Donegal and say they arrested them in the south.

A Garda sergent was interviewed about in on RTE a while back,.

danbohan

Dean0088 wrote: »

Anyone ever hear about this?

I've been told countless times that the SAS were known to come down over the border to the Republic to Dublin and Limrick during The Troubles to pick up a few guys they wanted to 'talk to' or maybe just get rid of people.:eek:

I've also been told that a couple of times they were caught (once by an RDF patrol along the border and again by a garda), arrested and then quietly given a lift back up to the border and told to play nice...

Anyone any info on this? Is it true?

Cheers,
Dean.

yes its true their were at least 3 ocassions when the were brought back

terrible problems with the old map reading the sas .

punchdrunk

the boarder isn't a nice big yellow line painted across the country...
it isn't just the SAS,alot of farmers in the area seem to get lost when it comes to nipping out for cigarettes and petrol

Honest opinion

As much as i Hate that the border exists there are obvious signs that it does eg Mile/kilometers road sign English/Irish words fair democratic state/unfair gerrymander sectarian majority:D

goldie fish

Honest opinion wrote: »

As much as i Hate that the border exists there are obvious signs that it does eg Mile/kilometers road sign English/Irish words fair democratic state/unfair gerrymander sectarian majority:D

You have not been there then.

delta720

Honest opinion wrote: »

As much as i Hate that the border exists there are obvious signs that it does eg Mile/kilometers road sign English/Irish words fair democratic state/unfair gerrymander sectarian majority:D

Yeah when your going up the M1 now.

Up around the Omeath area, especially back in the day it'd be nearly impossible to tell. If you stay on some roads they take you back and forth across the border over a few miles.

Here's one example, (The Argus is the Dundalk area local paper.)

http://www.seamusludlow.com/argus030506.htm


Me Father has told me others of British Army lads being genuinely lost and being sent back the right way.

Aswell as lads that got 'lost' but were just told to **** off as the hassle caused over them being a few yards in the south wouldn't be worth arresting them over when they'll get sent home anyway.

Teangalad

it would be slightly naive to think that the sas or other British units were not operating in the Republic.I suspect there was a lot of incidents like the one above that the public is not privy to.

getz

the SAS and other british security forces do operate in the republic,with full blessing of the irish goverment,MI6 are also working alongside irish security,recently a irish minister was met at dublin airport by a goverment secutity officer who spoke with a british accent he was suprised and asked him why,he was then told they were a shortage of the irish lads,so they sent me,another cases are the british army officers who are in the republic training the irish army

Stovepipe

Hi there,
There were at least two well-known incidents when SAS or other covert units were caught, by Gardai and Army,going fully equipped, in the South. Both parties were detained so their arrest is in Army/Garda records and the incidents were fully reported by the media.Accidental crossings by Mil/Police of both sides have happened and still happen, although not so much these days.Deliberate crossing, well, that's another story:)
regards
Stovepipe

Holybejaysus

An armed SAS unit was indeed arrested after crossing the border into the Republic back in the 70's I think. They had their weapons confiscated and were charged and convicted in Dublin for not having firearms licences..

I remember reading about the SAS operating in Ireland during the Troubles, apparently they were told to operate as though the border didn't exist. They were supposed to frequent a lot of the Republican pubs in Tralee back in the day, just propped up at the bar all day taking in the pub talk. That's probably where most IRA operations were foiled I would imagine.

They almost certainly kidnapped IRA men to bring them back across the border for arrest, but I find claims of executions in the South a bit fanciful tbh.

Steyr

So what were their Rules Of Engagement if they were caught and arrrested by The DF/AGS? Did they just surrender?

Steyr

http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_news/arts2006/jul13_sanctions_threatened_1976_arrests.php


Revealed — how British threatened harsh sanctions over SAS arrests

(Barry McCaffrey, Irish News)

The role of the SAS in Ireland during the Troubles remains shrouded in secrecy. But now official documents have revealed the lengths to which the British government was prepared to go to protect the shadowy military unit. Barry McCaffrey reports

AT 10.40pm on May 5 1976 SAS soldiers Illisoni Ligairi and John Lawson were stopped at an Irish army/Garda checkpoint on the Flagstaff Road between Newry and Omeath.

The SAS men, driving a Triumph 2000 and in civilian clothes, were armed with two Browning pistols and two Sterling submachine guns.

They claimed they had strayed 700 yards into the Republic after misreading a map. They admitted being soldiers but denied being SAS and said they were off-duty test-driving a car.

However, when arrested Ligairi said: "I cannot tell you the mission we were on."

Four hours later six more SAS men in two cars were arrested at the same checkpoint after also "misreading" their maps.

All six were heavily armed, the weaponry including a pump-action shotgun and a dagger. They refused to hand over their weapons until their cars were surrounded by Irish soldiers.

The next day all eight appeared at the Special Criminal Court in Dublin on charges of possession of fire-arms without certificates with intent to endanger life.

The charges carried a maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment.

Each man was released on £5,000 bail and allowed to leave the state.

The arrests came at a time when allegations of security force involvement in attacks in the Republic were at an all-time high.

Former British army intelligence officer Fred Holroyd would later claim that Captain Robert Nairac, who operated undercover, had admitted taking part in the murder of IRA man John Green at a farm in Castleblaney in the Republic in January 1975.

Confidential government papers now reveal that the SAS soldiers were questioned about three people found murdered in suspicious circumstances in the Republic at that time.

One of those was forestry worker Seamus Ludlow, whose body had been found near Dundalk four days before the SAS arrests.

The report recently published by Mr Justice Henry Barron confirms that the SAS soldiers were also questioned about the Dublin Monaghan bombings that killed 33 people in 1974.

However, the actions which the British government took to avoid its soldiers being imprisoned during the three weeks that followed their arrest can only now be revealed.

The new information is contained in previously unseen official British documents which had been kept from public view for 30 years.

In a telex message to the Foreign Office in London on May 7 British ambassador in Ireland Sir Arthur Galsworthy wrote: "One aspect of the defence that will need careful handling is the inclusion of a shotgun and what has been described as a dagger among the weapons carried.

"This was picked on by the minister for foreign affairs (Garret FitzGerald) and tends to be highlighted in the press here in an emotive way: And at some point we shall probably need to brief the defence lawyers very carefully about the use of these weapons.

"FitzGerald's understanding was that the DPP had felt compelled to institute court action because of the very unconventional nature of some of the weapons found (daggers and a sawn-off shotgun) and the fact that six of them were in civilian clothes; and the suspicions inevitably around the fact that the two groups had told different stories and that both differed from the preliminary account I had given to Keating (Irish Foreign Affairs official) that morning based on the information available to us at that time."

However, as it became clearer that the SAS men were now likely to stand trial attitudes in the British establishment hardened.

Confidential minutes of a May 12 meeting in London involving senior Foreign Office, Ministry of Defence and Northern Ireland Office officials, report Galsworthy as stating: "There was only one thing he could think of which would impress the Irish government.

"This would be for [Her Majesty's Government] to suggest that all British security forces be withdrawn to a line, say, 10 miles from the border.

"The buffer zone thus created would become a no-man's land in which the terrorists could do what they would."

Seven days later Galsworthy reported that he had warned Mr FitzGerald of the "appalling consequences that would follow if the case resulted in prison sentences".

Revealing that he had met Irish minister for justice Patrick Cooney that morning to discuss the charges against the SAS men, Gals-worthy stated: "When I laid on thick what an appalling effect a prison sentence would have, Cooney said that this was about the last thing in the world he as minister for justice would want.

"As my time with Cooney was very limited (he had to leave for a government meeting) I was unable to probe him about his remark that the matter of the prosecution is now out of the government's hands and to explore with him whether the attorney general can in practice lean on the DPP, eg to drop the first charge."

However, the lengths which the British government was prepared to go to so as to ensure the SAS soldiers did not stand trial were revealed in a letter to TF Brenchley in the Cabinet Office, dated May 18, from senior Foreign Office official GW Harding.

"You will know that the prime minister has said that, if the SAS men facing trial in Dublin receive prison sentences, he will wish to consider what we can do to bring home our displeasure to the Irish government and that he has asked for a contingency plan to be prepared setting out possible courses of action in this event," Harding wrote.

"There is a considerable range of more or less drastic sanctions which could be taken against the Republic.

"They include an embargo on trade, a ban on remittance, withdrawal of social security benefits from Irish citizens, prohibition or limitation of Irish immigration and the ending of the voting rights of Irish citizens in this country."

Warning that the sanctions would be subject to the possibility of "retaliatory action", Harding wrote: "There are some more modest steps which might fit the contingency more appropriately.

"They include a sustained campaign in the media against Irish 'failures' in security matters (eg extradition), a suspension of ministerial and/or official contacts with the Irish on Northern Ireland matters and a refusal of training and other facilities to the Irish security forces."

He again warned that such measures would "put at risk our security cooperation with the Irish".

He concluded that Britain's response to the SAS men being jailed "must be both firm enough to satisfy public opinion in this country and yet tempered by the need to limit the consequent damage to North/South security co-operation.

"This may point to a short, sharp reprimand, rather than a more protracted rebuff."

However, in a hardening of positions, a senior MoD official wrote to the secretary of state, Merlyn Rees, on May 25 stating: "I feel it would be naive to believe that in effect a prison sentence would not be something approaching a death sentence.

"Given the extent to which the Irish believe their own propaganda, and the mythology surrounding the SAS in the Republic, I can see little chance that the soldiers, were they convicted and sentenced to imprisonment, would escape uninjured."

In an interesting reference to the fact that the British establishment was already fully aware of attacks on six Irishmen wrongly convicted of the Birmingham pub bombings the previous year, he wrote: "One has only to think of the incident in this country in which those responsible for the Birmingham bombing were assaulted by prison officers to realise how much more likely a similar, or probably more serious occurrence would be in this case.

"Obviously, we must give full weight to our relationship with the Republic of Ireland, but I cannot help feeling that the Foreign Office have been concentrating on this to the exclusion of common sense.

"This is not purely a matter of international relations; it could have serious domestic repercussions, and I am naturally inclined to attach greater significance to these, particularly in so far as they affect the army itself."

In one of the most serious incidents the Northern Ireland Office discussed an app-arent attempt to coerce the Republic's DPP into dropping the charges.

A confidential memo written by NIO officials, dated May 24, said the DPP "might be susceptible to covert persuasion by the Irish government but since he is newly appointed and this may be seen as a test case of his independence the chances are slight and certainly nil if there is any overt indication that he is giving way to political pressure.

"There should certainly be advantage in bringing the Irish government to seek to apply effective persuasion to the DPP but there is some risk that they might mishandle the matter."

Warning that it would be "counter productive" for the British to be publicly exposed to have pressured their Irish counterparts into "leaning on" the Republic's DPP, the NIO memo stated: "We must be extremely careful not to appear to be pressing the Irish government to influence the DPP.

"We should however, impress upon them that HMG is not prepared to run any risk of its soldiers going to jail for map reading errors particularly when their safety cannot be guaranteed.

"The full consequences for the political and security situation, north and south, must be spelled out to the Irish since, unless the direct embarrassment to them of their actions is clearly shown, they are unlikely to act to safeguard the UK interest alone."

Warning that the Irish government needed to be "disabused" of the belief that reducing the charges to a fine would be acceptable to the British, it stated: "If we fail to persuade the DPP to offer no evidence then we should immediately press the Irish government for the guarantee in advance of a free pardon by the president or at least full remission of penalties."

On May 24 briefing notes drawn up for secretary of state Merlyn Rees for a meeting with British prime minister James Callaghan and the Labour cabinet warned of the potential for loyalist violence if the charges against the SAS were not dropped: "In Northern Ireland it could provide the catalyst that would bring the loyalist groups together and create a situation of considerable instability.

"There could also be a strong and violent reaction by loyalist paramilitaries."

Calling for the British to resist any extradition request from the Irish if the SAS did not turn up for trial, it stated: "It would be possible to give the men immunity from this process by means of legislation in the shape of a one clause bill.

"Moreover the attempted use of such questionable powers by the army authorities to send soldiers back to face prison sentence would have such bad effect on discipline and morale as to render it unthinkable."

The notes state that in the event of the Republic's DPP pushing the case to trial "ways must be found of avoiding the men appearing in court at all, and that contingency plans should be drawn up to provide immunity from any warrants issued by the Republic for the men."

Eventually when the eight stood trial in March 1977 they were cleared of the charge of possession with intent to endanger life and were each fined £100 on the lesser charge.

Speaking after the court hearing British ambassador Robert Haydon said: "We are very satisfied that the men have been acquitted of any ill-intent in the Irish Republic.

"We imagine that the fine was more or less mandatory and the Ministry of Defence will pay."

A Foreign Office spokesman was quoted as saying it was "very satisfied" with the outcome.

The following year the Irish government agreed that the British army could fly into the Republic if in pursuit of gunmen.

However, present Co Louth Sinn Féin TD Arthur Morgan said the new information on the arrests and release of the SAS raised "fundamental questions" about the incident.

"At this time at least four people were murdered in mysterious circumstances in the border area, including Seamus Ludlow and Peter Clancy in Louth," he said.

"Nobody was ever charged with these killings, although loyalists or elements of the British state were always suspected."

Mr Morgan said that he was alarmed at the apparent attempts to secure cooperation from the Fine Gael-Labour Irish government of the time to influence the case.

"I believe that these revelations will be the tip of the iceberg," he said.

July 14, 2006

OS119

Steyr wrote: »

....Revealed — how British threatened harsh sanctions over SAS arrests....

all i read in that was internal discussions within the MoD, Foreign Office and Cabinet Office about the BG's possible options. i don't recall actually reading anything about the BG communicating any of that to the IG.

the only reported remarks from within the IG suggests the IG wanted this incident to go away as quickly and quietly as possible, they don't appear to have needed any 'help' in coming to this view - so Britain didn't 'threaten harsh sanctions' at all, the various departments had private, internal discussions about the various options available and the likely consequences of each, and subsequently found that they need to bring no pressure to bear on the IG to follow a particular course of action, because that was the course of action the IG had decided on all by itself.

a threat is only a threat if the other guy knows about it. we could argue that the IG may have had a pretty shrewd idea of the BG's likely view of this matter and the measures it might take both to head it off or show its displeasure if the heading off didn't work, but the article makes no suggestion that at any stage the UK said anything other than that there would be 'appalling consequences' were the men to be jailed.

and 'appalling consequences' is pretty vague, both in terms of seriousness and scope...

mgmt

I read the book "Stakeknife", about British Intelligence Forces in Northern Ireland.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stakeknife-Britains-Secret-Agents-Ireland/dp/0862788439

It mentions that the British Forces would often go 'plainclothes' across the border.

xflyer

Deliberate crossings? An ex British army acquaintence of mine made no secret of it. The ex IRA man in the room at the time confirmed it. It's an open secret anyway. The incident with the SAS crossing the border was something that escalated embarrassingly for everyone. If the original Gardai on the scene had any sense they would simply have redirected the SAS back across the border as was the usual thing.

As for heading well across the border to places like Kerry and Limerick, well that would be no surprise. I'm quite sure MI6 did it. Remember too that there were a few Irish serving in the SAS. They would have blended in inconspicuously in any pub in Ireland.

In terms of accidental crossings they were really common. I can count two occasions when I actually crossed into United Kingdom territory fully armed and in company. They were border patrols of my FCA unit, led by the PDF, I should add. On one occasion we were quite a long way across and were there for at least half an hour. Heaven knows what would have happened if we had encountered armed men of either persuasion!

Locust

Holybejaysus wrote: »

...They ... were charged and convicted in Dublin for not having firearms licences..

?
British Special forces appeared in court in Dublin on charges and were convicted - never heard that one before, i doubt that.

I'd also be pretty confident that the SAS don't misread maps too often!

OS119

Locust wrote: »

?
British Special forces appeared in court in Dublin on charges and were convicted - never heard that one before, i doubt that.

I'd also be pretty confident that the SAS don't misread maps too often!

its a matter of public record, it happened.

misreading maps that are not accurate to within less than a meter is actually pretty easy - it doesn't take much to put a line on a map in the wrong place when the line on the ground isn't obvious and goes all over the place. getting it wrong in practice even when the map is correct is just as easy - just think about how many times you've got lost in your car while trying to read a map, then think about how easy it would be to get lost when you're also spending most of your time making sure you aren't driving into an ambush.

Wolfe Tone

I think "misreading" was an excuse, they bloody well knew where they were.

bobbysands81

What would happen if you shot an SAS guy on one of their incursions into the Republic?

Would you be tried in the normal way or would their be any legal way out of it if you thought they were coming to "occupy"? I know this is far fetched in the extreme but just wondering?

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I think "misreading" was an excuse, they bloody well knew where they were.

50/50 I would guess.

But I don't see how an IRA supporter could criticise.

Fratton Fred

bobbysands81 wrote: »

What would happen if you shot an SAS guy on one of their incursions into the Republic?

Would you be tried in the normal way or would their be any legal way out of it if you thought they were coming to "occupy"? I know this is far fetched in the extreme but just wondering?

If they were in plain clothes you wouldn't have a leg to stand on, unless it was self defence.

Wolfe Tone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

50/50 I would guess.

But I don't see how an IRA supporter could criticise.

They are supposed to be the best in the world, they wouldnt get lost

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

They are supposed to be the best in the world, they wouldnt get lost

Have you read the previous posts?

Fratton Fred

I would hazard a guess that there was a certain amount of chancing it as well. There are a lot of areas around the border where a quick diversion into the north or south can save a much longer drive on your side of the border.

Victor

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

They are supposed to be the best in the world, they wouldnt get lost

Oh, really?

http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,645307,822536,3

Gneez

there's a chapter about this in the book bandit country, according to this book an armed SAS patrol was intercepted by the irish army while on its way through the south to 'pick up' some guy, they were taken into custody at gun point and were later politely returned to the north after spending some time in a southern police station on the border.

shaneybaby

OS119 wrote: »

its a matter of public record, it happened.

Any idea of a name or around when this happened? Really interested in this if you can, sound.

Holybejaysus

shaneybaby wrote: »

Any idea of a name or around when this happened? Really interested in this if you can, sound.

May 1976. I can't really find anything online about it, but it definitely happened.

Edit: Hold on, I have something here about it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504852/Who-errs-sins--SAS-wandered-Irish-border-caused-diplomatic-uproar.html

OS119

shaneybaby wrote: »

Any idea of a name or around when this happened? Really interested in this if you can, sound.

its in the OP - 1976.

team one were on a job, crossed the border in plain clothes and an unmarked car - met a Gardai checkpoint where they were searched, found to be in possession of weapons and arrested. a toolled up team two go looking for the now missing, and radio silent, team one and meet the same Gardai checkpoint where the same thing happens.

it was a fcuk up.

Avgas

That was the 70s. Things were bad. Flares. Glam rock. Map reading errors were common.
Then it was the 80s. Things were worse. What went on then is the question?

MI6 would have alway had people operating and coming and going on tourist trips around Ireland. My guess is after the Libyan arms shipments in the mid 1980s there was probably renewed 'tourism' to help locate same items.

You'd be very naive to think SAS people wouldn't cross the border, either in civvies or ghillied up to the nines. Covertness would be the name of the game...'not taking people out for a chat'. The Provos had forward stores bases a car drive away from the border....places where quartermasters could assemble gear and leave it for a crew.....these needed to be spotted/jarked......etc.

They would have at least tried it a few times. Not to mention overhead photo recce probably.....

Really what is the fuss....what would expect them to do?

Boo Hoo.

BuckJamesRogers

Avgas wrote: »

That was the 70s. Things were bad. Flares. Glam rock. Map reading errors were common.
Then it was the 80s. Things were worse. What went on then is the question?

MI6 would have alway had people operating and coming and going on tourist trips around Ireland. My guess is after the Libyan arms shipments in the mid 1980s there was probably renewed 'tourism' to help locate same items.

You'd be very naive to think SAS people wouldn't cross the border, either in civvies or ghillied up to the nines. Covertness would be the name of the game...'not taking people out for a chat'. The Provos had forward stores bases a car drive away from the border....places where quartermasters could assemble gear and leave it for a crew.....these needed to be spotted/jarked......etc.

They would have at least tried it a few times. Not to mention overhead photo recce probably.....

Really what is the fuss....what would expect them to do?

Boo Hoo.

That explains the Irish tourism boom in the 80's/90's then

goldie fish

bobbysands81 wrote: »

What would happen if you shot an SAS guy on one of their incursions into the Republic?

Would you be tried in the normal way or would their be any legal way out of it if you thought they were coming to "occupy"? I know this is far fetched in the extreme but just wondering?

You would be guilty of murder, if you killed them, attempted murder if not. End of.

Locust

OS119 wrote: »

its a matter of public record, it happened.

misreading maps that are not accurate to within less than a meter is actually pretty easy - it doesn't take much to put a line on a map in the wrong place when the line on the ground isn't obvious and goes all over the place. getting it wrong in practice even when the map is correct is just as easy - just think about how many times you've got lost in your car while trying to read a map, then think about how easy it would be to get lost when you're also spending most of your time making sure you aren't driving into an ambush.

Its easy to misread a map... but for 'the elite special forces' who are supposed to memorise routes and missions back to front and write the manuals on map reading - i doubt they misread a map in ireland of all places where there are towns and villages every five minutes down the road. We are a fairly well sign posted Island, not like 200 miles in the Iraqi desert.
It was an obvious excuse to be a few miles over the border looking into someones back garden or whatever.
Its the job of special forces soldiers to operate 'undetected.' likewise in the 70 - 80 - 90's it was very easy for them to monitor phonecalls/landlines in the south too, just a matter of having the equipment and accessing the metal eircom box at the end of the road.

Everyone associates the SAS in NI with killings and yes i know the shoot to kill policy and all that, yes people were shot and killed obviously - but intelligence gathering wasmuch moreso the day to day main role of those units.

muppet01

You can be sure that special forces cross the border if and when they feel like it , its what they are trained to do.
Also,we will never know the extent of it

charlemont

goldie fish wrote: »

You would be guilty of murder, if you killed them, attempted murder if not. End of.

A manslaughter plea would more than likely be accepted...

meathstevie

goldie fish wrote: »

You would be guilty of murder, if you killed them, attempted murder if not. End of.

In general, not related to Ireland or UK.

If you are a soldier or another armed member of a government service or a recognised belligerent party in identifiable uniform and openly armed it would be a legitimate act of war if there was an ongoing conflict under international law.

If you're a sneaky type in civilian clothes not carrying arms openly and out on your own bat you'd be simply trying to unlawfully kill someone.

OS119

charlemont wrote: »

A manslaughter plea would more than likely be accepted...

manslaughter is what happens when you unintentionally kill someone - if we have a bar brawl, i punch you, you fall backwards and hit your head hard enough to kill you on a kerbstone then i'm guilty of manslaughter because my actions lead to your death, but i'm not guilty of murder because i didn't intend to kill you or cause you serious injury.

justifiable homicide is what happens when i take physical action to stop you doing something that i believe will cause either me, or other people, serious harm or even death. the test is both whether the action i took was reasonable, given what i believed to be true at the time, and whether it was reasonable for me to believe what i believed at the time.

mgmt

Dean0088 wrote: »

Just to clarify on the first guy to reply they wern't exactly invading... Plain clothes SAS guys ... not in full combat gear etc ... :P


Also, I DO KNOW FOR DEFINITE that AGS used to send a couple of squad cars into derry (unmarked) and pick up some targets (IRA Mostly) and bring them back to the station in Donegal and say they arrested them in the south.

A Garda sergent was interviewed about in on RTE a while back,.

Unmarked Garda cars go through the North all the time on their way to Donegal or to liase with the PSNI. IIRC they require special permits.

don18

Dean0088 wrote: »

Anyone ever hear about this?

I've been told countless times that the SAS were known to come down over the border to the Republic to Dublin and Limrick during The Troubles to pick up a few guys they wanted to 'talk to' or maybe just get rid of people.:eek:

I've also been told that a couple of times they were caught (once by an RDF patrol along the border and again by a garda), arrested and then quietly given a lift back up to the border and told to play nice...

Anyone any info on this? Is it true?

Cheers,
Dean.

the rdf never done any thing during the troubles ...so that bit is not true..

concussion

The FCÁ did though.

stop

meathstevie wrote: »

In general, not related to Ireland or UK.

If you are a soldier or another armed member of a government service or a recognised belligerent party in identifiable uniform and openly armed it would be a legitimate act of war if there was an ongoing conflict under international law.

If you're a sneaky type in civilian clothes not carrying arms openly and out on your own bat you'd be simply trying to unlawfully kill someone.

But.... Red Dawn

don18

concussion wrote: »

The FCÁ did though.

dont think the fca would have been out on the roads thats a bit far fetched...fca in the 70s with WW2 equipment....and the pdf 25,000 strong back then dont think there be any need for them.....the fca still dont do any thing.

BuckJamesRogers

don18 wrote: »

dont think the fca would have been out on the roads thats a bit far fetched...fca in the 70s with WW2 equipment....and the pdf 25,000 strong back then dont think there be any need for them.....the fca still dont do any thing.

Well the fact that the FCÁ dont exist would make it hard for them to do anything

flas

i know for a fact the eru branch of the gardai carry out operations in the north these days. they are constantly working with and for the police service of northern ireland and will continue to do so in the future!

concussion

don18 wrote: »

dont think the fca would have been out on the roads thats a bit far fetched...fca in the 70s with WW2 equipment....and the pdf 25,000 strong back then dont think there be any need for them.....the fca still dont do any thing.

You might think otherwise, but many reservists served on the border and some were eventually absorbed into the PDF, maintaining their FCÁ rank.

don18

concussion wrote: »

You might think otherwise, but many reservists served on the border and some were eventually absorbed into the PDF, maintaining their FCÁ rank.

fair enough

Locust

flas wrote: »

i know for a fact the eru branch of the gardai carry out operations in the north these days. they are constantly working with and for the police service of northern ireland and will continue to do so in the future!

I doubt that. I'd say they cross train with PSNI? yeah. But armed gardai operating in the north? There'd be holy war. Why? Why when the PSNI's own version - the HMSU/SSU are light years ahead of the ERU in terms of experience and actual operations etc... Can't see ERU being authorised like that. Cross border? (i.e. you go on one side i'll go the other) but to operate 'across the border' is another thing altogether.

In my opinion

don18 wrote: »

dont think the fca would have been out on the roads thats a bit far fetched...fca in the 70s with WW2 equipment....and the pdf 25,000 strong back then dont think there be any need for them.....the fca still dont do any thing.

Yes they were and not just the lads on full time security either. In Western Command area Lads from 24th 19th and 17th Bns all had vital installations to guard in addition mobile patrols were done by FCÁ pers with 303 rifles(pre WW2 equipment)!