Does Ireland Need a Military?

SIRREX

goldie fish wrote: »

If they have told you they are in the ARW, then they aren't in the ARW.

The First rule of FIGHT CLUB? You don't talk about fight club!

wildfowler94

Skeewa wrote: »

Only because little girls like you got upset.... :D The reality is that the only "defence" that you have come back with is spell check!!!!!:D But don't worry ladies because your jobs aren't in danger because the government haven't the balls to put a stop to your cosy little country club.... ("to have peace you must prepare for war")... Pure genius and I bet they let him hold a weapon as well... Don't forget your orange crayons for work tomorrow!!!!!:D:D:D

May I ask where you work? cosy little country club? you'd soil yourself if you were to see the half of the stuff members of the DF have seen, I agree there is room for reform and improvements within the DF but that's up to our political masters in the Dail, you can shove them orange crayons where I am guessing you put everything else, I am sick of pencil pushers with no clue about life in the military or military affairs coming here and smearing the Defence Forces reputation, may I remind you that 24/7 365 since the foundation of the state the DF have serve this state unquestionably through some of its darkest hours and several members have giving their life's for the cause of international peace and to bring peace many people who have known nothing but war and turmoil and for what so they can have some jumped up little man sitting behind a computer bad mouth them. ill say this much, you come down and say the half of what you said to a few members and we will see who'd be bringing crayons to work.

Skeewa

goldie fish wrote: »

If they have told you they are in the ARW, then they aren't in the ARW.

I bet your a bloody bagger... Of course I know their in the ARW... I hate to burst your bubble but they don't walk around with their faces all blurred up... I have checked a few of the threads on this site and there seems to be a lot of nerds who play airsoft war games at the weekends... Explains where all the wanna be Rambo comments are coming from...

Leonidas BL

People talk about the waste of money the DF is, but the only waste of money I know of was building a hospital for pulling out babys like Skeewa who sits and talks to strangers online who have no trousers on...

goldie fish

Skeewa wrote: »

I bet your a bloody bagger... Of course I know their in the ARW... I hate to burst your bubble but they don't walk around with their faces all blurred up... I have checked a few of the threads on this site and there seems to be a lot of nerds who play airsoft war games at the weekends... Explains where all the wanna be Rambo comments are coming from...

You are a bitter little girl this morning.
Look if thats what they told you then I believe that they told you that..
Perhaps it would be easier for you to make a point without insulting everyone who disagrees with you?
What's a bagger?

Leonidas BL

goldie fish wrote: »

You are a bitter little girl this morning.
Look if thats what they told you then I believe that they told you that..
Perhaps it would be easier for you to make a point without insulting everyone who disagrees with you?
What's a bagger?

Id say he means you pack bags in a supermarket :rolleyes:

Zambia

Leonidas BL wrote: »

Id say he means you pack bags in a supermarket :rolleyes:

Whats wrong with packing bags in a supermarket?

goldie fish

Leonidas BL wrote: »

Id say he means you pack bags in a supermarket :rolleyes:

NEVER!
I was a trolley boy once, and they promised to promote me to bag.. then them pesky scouts came along and did it for charittee....

My ambitions of being a bagger, gone forever...

Manic Moran

Skeewa wrote: »

I bet your a bloody bagger... Of course I know their in the ARW... I hate to burst your bubble but they don't walk around with their faces all blurred up... I have checked a few of the threads on this site and there seems to be a lot of nerds who play airsoft war games at the weekends... Explains where all the wanna be Rambo comments are coming from...

Posts like this are not helpful. I'm going to be a wannabe Rambo Moderator. Infracted.

People talk about the waste of money the DF is, but the only waste of money I know of was building a hospital for pulling out babys like Skeewa who sits and talks to strangers online who have no trousers on...

These aren't helpful either.
Warned.

NTM

Leonidas BL

Zambia wrote: »

Leonidas BL wrote: »

Id say he means you pack bags in a supermarket :rolleyes:

Whats wrong with packing bags in a supermarket?

better axe him that

Skeewa

Leonidas BL wrote: »

better axe him that

so Leonidas your saying that your not wearing any trousers?????? Sums you up!!!! The question was do we need a military and the answer is NO!!!!! and could it be replaced with a more cost effective and more efficient body i.e. a paramilitary police force and the answer is YES!!!! I have not heard one intelligent argument for keeping the DF... "What if" defence is no defence at all.... To be honest I'm getting bored of you airsoft nerds.... The reality is your crap and you know it!!!!:D:D So long bitches!!!!!:D:D

syklops

Skeewa wrote: »

so Leonidas your saying that your not wearing any trousers?????? Sums you up!!!! The question was do we need a military and the answer is NO!!!!! and could it be replaced with a more cost effective and more efficient body i.e. a paramilitary police force and the answer is YES!!!! I have not heard one intelligent argument for keeping the DF... "What if" defence is no defence at all.... To be honest I'm getting bored of you airsoft nerds.... The reality is your crap and you know it!!!!:D:D So long bitches!!!!!:D:D

Added to ignore list. There is no point trying to engage with someone like this.

goldie fish

syklops wrote: »

Added to ignore list. There is no point trying to engage with someone like this.

+1

Morpheus

+1

IGNORE = SKEEWA

and suddenly the world became a more peaceful place....

OS119

Morphéus wrote: »

+1

IGNORE = SKEEWA

and suddenly the world became a more peaceful place....

he's gone thank fcuk.

perhaps what would move this thread onwards would be for people who oppose this 'abolish the Army' idea to put forward why they think that, what realistic current/future threats they believe the Army can fend off, and what realistic current/furure threats they think may appear that the Army/DF might have a problem with, and how to rectify those defficiencies.

one of the reasons that this issue has got so far is that the DF, and those who support it in its current giuse, have completely failed to engage the strategic issues seriously and provide logical, coherant answers to the questions people are asking, and its all just degenerated into bar fights about this or that allowance - and they have, imv, lost the arguments because they've ceded the substantive territory to the other side.

syklops

Alright I'll bite.

The threat of Republican/loyalist violence. Admittedly, things have quietened down, but things could flare up very quickly, and so I think it is prudent to have some men with guns around the place just in case.

Leonidas BL

syklops wrote: »

Alright I'll bite.

The threat of Republican/loyalist violence. Admittedly, things have quietened down, but things could flare up very quickly, and so I think it is prudent to have some men with guns around the place just in case.

Yes and the fact that the DF will always respond in emergencys or natural disasters like flooding on a moments notice.

trendyvicar

syklops wrote: »

Alright I'll bite.

The threat of Republican/loyalist violence. Admittedly, things have quietened down, but things could flare up very quickly, and so I think it is prudent to have some men with guns around the place just in case.

So that they can add to the carnage.

syklops

trendyvicar wrote: »

So that they can add to the carnage.

Care to elaborate?

Bagenal

In my opinion no DF = greater threat from the likes of CIRA & their associates. There is also the possibility of criminal gangs becoming so powerful that the civil authorities would not be able to deal with them. The argurment of having a beefed up Garda force is fine but if they were to be armed/trained/equipped to the same levels of the DF then I fail to see where the savings are + the fact that members of An Garda Siochanna are paid overtime & other allowances that members of the DF are'nt entitled to.
Also I suspect there would need to be major leglislative & possibly constitutional changes needed to transfer the role of the DF to other forces.

trendyvicar

syklops wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

Just being facetious.

Dissident Republicans are no threat to The Irish State or it's people for the simple reason they want Republican opinion to swing behind them, not turn against them. Off course, they may well be looking to obtain arms, explosives, and cash, but a well organised police backed by the right powers can cope with this. They are Northern Ireland's problem, not The Republic's.

Loyalists are absolutely no threat to The Republic at the moment and would only become a problem if there was any move towards Irish unity. In such a case, the level of the threat would depend on the nature of NI society at that time. If NI society had developed towards a normal integrated community then a close border poll would lead to Irish unity with low levels of conflict (if any) - easily handled by an expanded police force. If, on the other hand, NI society remained polarised, then any border poll would require at least 70% support to break Loyalist resolve and ease a united Ireland with minimal trouble (akin to dissident violence now). This scenario could also be handled by an expanded and well trained police. A united Ireland opposed by a good majority of Unionists would inevitably lead to a replay of 'the troubles' in reverse and would require 80 000 Irish soldiers and police for about twenty years (declining to about half that number). Obviously, any Irish Government indulging in such a policy would need certifying, but stranger things have happened.

OS119

Bagenal wrote: »

In my opinion no DF = greater threat from the likes of CIRA & their associates. There is also the possibility of criminal gangs becoming so powerful that the civil authorities would not be able to deal with them. The argurment of having a beefed up Garda force is fine but if they were to be armed/trained/equipped to the same levels of the DF then I fail to see where the savings are + the fact that members of An Garda Siochanna are paid overtime & other allowances that members of the DF are'nt entitled to.
Also I suspect there would need to be major leglislative & possibly constitutional changes needed to transfer the role of the DF to other forces.

i'm not sure why - the ERU use firearms, and when the Army deploy in an ATCA role they do so in support of the Gardai - so how would not using soldiers and just using more armed Gardai possibly be a constitutional issue?

when people - sane people - talk about scrapping the Army and recruiting Gardai instead, they don't mean on a 1:1 basis, simply because only a small proportion of the Army is employed in a law enforcement/support role at any one time - so if you scrap 8,500 soldiers, you don't need to replace them with 8,500 new Gards, you just need to replace those working on law enforcement and support tasks on a 1:1 basis. i suggested a figure in the region of 1000 to 1500, all of whom would be trained to AFO/SFO level - if you take shift patterns, leave etc into account you could safely bet on having 100 to 150 of these armed Gardai available at any one time, with a surge capacity somewhere in the 400 - 800 region.

deterance is an issue, but imv more of a cosmetic one than a real one - simply because i can't imagine that at any stage the state would sanction the use of the heavy weapons for which one keeps an Army, rather than a civil police force, against terrorist/insurgent groups - and i imagine that those groups have come to the same veiw.

Bagenal

On the news at RTE tele at 1 today the Army fire service is on standby in Roscommon because of a dispute between the council & firefighters. I do realise that they will be only called upon if the fire services of neighbouring counties cannot cope or if there is a major incident. I'm sure the people of Roscommon would be glad of their help if they are needed which it wont hopefully. Who would provide the cover in similar situations if there was no Defence Forces? If the answer is to be the Civil Defence then why are they not doing it in Roscommon?

OS119

Bagenal wrote: »

...Who would provide the cover in similar situations if there was no Defence Forces? ....

the same commercially available firefighting companies who get hired whenever the FBU in the UK go on strike?

who would you rather turned up when your house is on fire - a bunch of trained firefighters with modern firefighting equipment who are wearing a slighty different uniform to the ones you normally see, or half a dozen infantry soldiers with buckets?

Bagenal

..........or half a dozen infantry soldiers with buckets?

I would suggest you do some research. I hope you dont take offence, none is intended.

OS119

Bagenal wrote: »

I would suggest you do some research. I hope you dont take offence, none is intended.

i've had the misfortune of doing the task - OP FRESCO in 2002 - we were able to deploy a very small force of professional/trained firefighters, some with modern equipment and some that had been stolen from a WW2 museum, but 80+% of the FRESCO force was completely untrained (we could point hoses, and knew not to put water on electrical or liquid fuel fires, but that was it) blokes in Landy's and 4 tonners with water hoses, exstinguishers and buckets.

you would not have wanted us to turn up at a housefire, because you'd be fcuked.

its quite possible that the DF could professionally cover one small towns firefighting needs, but not for long, and not without impacting on other capabilities - like shipboard firefighting, or cover at Baldonnell.

Avgas

Where you've brought this OS119 is interesting.....the obvious threat and the one we may be able to handle is INTERNAL........in fact well over half of all wars fought since WW2 have been internal (albeit some with Cold War external meddling).

So the hard nosed reason any state needs an army is internal security threats which are of a nature, intensity and purpose which is beyond the scope of civilian police, armed or unarmed.

In fact, for most low-intensity counter-terror work the DF is more or less irrelevant.......it can be handled by detectives in various states of armed preparedness. The most effective weapons remain 50 euro notes, cameras, recording devices and informers. Pirhanas and AUGs are more or less pointless for defeating the COKEs...who (and their like) remain SERIOUS THREATS THAT SHOULD NOT BE EVERY UNDERESTIMATED...especially now.

The logic of the DF is for a 'nightmare scenario' where wider civil order has broken down or an open insurgency might be attempted-both now seem about as realistic as the plots on RTE's Fair City. But who knows what awaits us?

In Scotland they seem likely to have a referendum in 2014 or 2015. The ballot may ask voters if they want full independence or just more devolution (or both). The sensible money is on the latter being passed not the former. But you never know, and in the long term, if Scotland were to leave the UK what spillover effects would that have on Northern Ireland? Maybe none, but maybe the collapse of the entire UK (constitutionally I mean) could have very negative and sudden effects.....leading NI protestants to get very scared and very aggressive....it would make for an interesting marching season no?

A lot of maybes (and its the EU and the Euozone that look set to bust, much less the UK)...but that sort of scenario is why you would be paying to have a capacity to mobilize a significant quantity of infantry..........assuming the UN or EU would turn up is wishful thinking.

It is also an argument for taking our reserves seriously, and not has been suggested elsewhere disbanding them.

OS119

Avgas, i have more than a little sympathy for that argument, and the logic is obvious for all to see.

my issue is not with the principle, but more with the implementation: if we accept that the DF (the Army really, but anyway...) is there for the 'doomsday' scenario - a 'Troubles 2.0' with some switching of the characters - then we should ask whether it is either organised for such a task, or equipped for it, trained for it or manned for it.

we could ask about the DF's preparedness for an IED onslought.

we could ask about the DF's mobility.

we could ask about the DF's ISTAR capability and institutional attitudes.

we could ask about the wisdom of having a force designed to combat widespeard civil unrest/terrorism/insurgency living in its own homes in the community.

we could ask about the DF's - and Gardai and civil governments - intelligence gathering capabilities.

we could ask about other peoples experiences in this matter, find out what kind of resources they had to use to attempt to put a lid on the situation - and contrast that with the resouces available to this 'doomsday' force.

we could ask about the DF being used day-to-day in a ATCA/Law Enforcement role, and wonder who will fill in for them when the Army is mobilised to fight an insurgency.

you can see where i'm going with this - my view is that the DF is so far from being the force that could deal with the doomsday scenario that its both a waste of time having it in its current role, and dangerous in that those outside the DF community (politicians particularly) are basing their decisions on having a safety net that in truth won't stretch anything like far enough and has big holes in it.

blowing in the wind

No we don't need a Defence Forces! (Joke) - Let symphatetic Ireland unfree, celtic shirt wearers protect our beautiful island!

Etiopia has an army for god's sake!
Every country needs some sort of defence - Let it be good or bad, It's prime and that's they way it is!

The work that our defence forces does (I served for 10 years) is simply courageous and done with great passion and pride both at home and oversea's..
This is the long debated topic, that some bitter (i'd imagine) person want's to have a crack at the easy target within the public sector, Ie, The Defence Forces.

We have one of the best trained and best equipped (for it's size and operations) defence forces in the world, so i don't see why we can't just respect them and live with the fact that this beautiful island has had armies since and before Strongbow's entry!

There is also only one Army in this country and that is óghlaigh Na Eireann (Irish Defence Forces!)

Avgas

From OS119: Avgas, i have more than a little sympathy for that argument, and the logic is obvious for all to see.

my issue is not with the principle, but more with the implementation: if we accept that the DF (the Army really, but anyway...) is there for the 'doomsday' scenario - a 'Troubles 2.0' with some switching of the characters - then we should ask whether it is either organised for such a task, or equipped for it, trained for it or manned for it.

we could ask about the DF's preparedness for an IED onslought.


I'll just engage with the above seeing as you brought it up.

You need to be more specific. Do you mean IEDs overseas in places like the Leb, Chad, etc.? which should now be accepted as a risk in any expeditionary context whether bog standard UN observation or actual full-on peace-enforcing which in theory we could be involved in....

Or do you mean culvert bombs along the A34 Clones road?

As regards domestic possible ‘doomsday’ scenarios the risk from IEDs on metalled roads which is the norm throughout NI and Ireland (although sometimes it does not feel like that), is much less, and the scope to employ the tactic is systematically reduced...true there are those bloody culverts......but the recce and intel job becomes easier.....one reason why the Portuguese spent so much time and money building roads in Mozambique in the 1960s.......the IED threat is not at all new........

I think where in the past observers might have got away with Pajero/Landrover solutions.......something like the RG32M will have to be made available for that........as routine....

But also a proper capability level 4 protection is needed...so a proper heavier MRAP should be invested in or else the Pirhana’s modified to meet NATO level 4 protection [I don’t know how viable that is...cost/technically possible...]

I think because the IED plague is such an important trend money should be set aside to build up over a decade or about-a force of at least two dozen (24-30) level 4 protected vehicles...which would provide the nucleus of a reasonably protected convoy system........

If we were serious we would also empower a variety of units to begin experiments with modifying existing or older vehicles to deliver another 2-3 dozen improvised MRAPs which might realistically meet the NATO level 2-3 standards.as part of a fleet for a domestic contingency.....these could be modified existing trucks...for example might the ACMAT VLRA trucks now used for towing artillery not be better employed as modified desert suitable yellow-pack MRAPs?;)

......also I’ve made the point that tracked vehicles while not better protected from mines than MRAPs do enjoy an ability to go off road much more systematically and easily...and thus you can ...if you rigorously use GPS/GIS terrain mapping and recording...you can use them as an asset to avoid likely ambush sites and repeat routes.......

.....so what are the handful of BV206s doing deployed in a rather notional air defence role and what of the glorious Scorpions...I’ve posted before about how these could be customized as paddy carriers...which is how they used them in the Falklands...we should and could keep a small pool of tracked vehicles for deployment......where their off road abilities could well save lives if used properly......

There is a signals role here as well. We need to get into the world of jammers...[maybe we have?].....and that can be partly done through relatively low cost improvs...which could be a pet project for the Field CIS coys.....give them a small budget and see what madness they concoct......after all this is how the IEDs bombers would do it...Google it and then experiment a bit......also things like mechanical rollers can be improvised in-house with fairly small amounts of money.........

The air corps has a huge potential role here as well. In order to provide some level of convoy protection, overwatch, and related aerial anti-IED we urgently need some kind of UAV......something bigger than the Orbiter....but something cheap and cheerful enough......failing that there could be a study on modifying the PC-9M for some type of line-scanning road monitoring capability? If that fails get some low cost aircraft and begin using these as support types.....we need to begin planning for an air corps that can go overseas to support the army in anything like Chad or Liberia, if the threat or context makes it sensible...for cost reasons these will have to be either UAVs or low cost aircraft.......or existing types used in new ways to justify their existence.......

SEE: http://www2.l-3com.com/wescam/pdf/media/idr_sept2010%20reprint-2pp.pdf

Finally as many of you will know, the US have the bespoke organization JIEDDO..https://www.jieddo.dod.mil/
.......which is designed to provide leadership and break log-jams....why do we not have an identifiable structure like this...however small.... that does a much humbler and cheaper version of what they do?....There should be a small unit clearly identified and responsible for working on all aspects of the IED threat.....[or is there?]...we may not have the money to throw at fancy MRAP programmes but we can be organized and say....build on HUMINT strengths which we may have......it should also be something that is progressing outside the prep for Battalions going overseas for PK.....anti-IED needs to be mainstreamed........

A usual rant.