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

Interesting articles

Options
15456585960

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,613 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    My memory is a bit hazy but i think the state has land behind the circle K on that local road. Its actually a very good location for a base with access to the M50, Port Tunnell and Dublin airport but i cant see how helicopter operations would work with it that close to the flightpaths unless they have access by land only



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,838 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    I see.

    I wouldn't see a big issue with occasional helicopter movements, so long as the base has full ATC integration with the Airport. And I imagine that would be automatic.

    Of more concern would be any conflict with the base, in terms of electronic and noise and light interference from being located more or less directly under an approach path, where aircraft cross every few moments at less than one thousand feet.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,838 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    While 'Policy Exchange' are a bunch of Tory shills and assorted ultracon scum, including our own disgraced former diplomat, Ray Bassett, there is a strong tough love element here, which is valid.

    I'd also have a high level of respect for George Robertson as a Labour Sec Def and NATO Secretary Sec Gen.

    That said, if NATO nations want to see our Defences rapidly and robustly improved, I'd be asking for the kind of handouts and co-funding that NATO are offering the Eastern European nations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,300 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    If they do it, they won't be upfront with it. They know the political ramifications. However the general consensus arrived at from the Security and foreign policy conference last June, was that while we may not have to join NATO, we must star working with our NATO neighbours to deal with the urgent defence weaknesses. The Remaining EU Neutrals already do this.

    The key point though is absolutely correct.

    We never equipped to protect our territorial waters while proclaiming Neutrality during 1939-1945. There was plans to purchase WW1 Era Sub Chasers, but nothing came of it..

    In the Air, we actively let the RAF and RN carry our SAR offshore until the 1990s, and even then they continued to give us top cover with Nimrod, and help out with the longer range operations until the service was privatised. The Air Policing thing we all know about. We know Russia uses the EEZ for its manoeuvres, they were doing it long before the resurgence of their imperialistic notions. Countless expert groups, discussions and recommendations have pointed out our weakness in preventing this.

    But in the same way the fishing industry is mostly abandoned by government because it happens "out there" defence is out of sight, and only of concern when there is nobody for ceremonial, or no VIP aircraft to bring the minister or the president to that important international event.

    You can see there was big investment in equipment and uniforms in the years coming up to 2016. For the previous decade we got new helicopters, fixed wing trainers, armoured vehicles, motorcyclists uniforms... It seems that was so there would be lots of new kit to be shown off for the 1916 centenary parades.

    Nothing to do with actually protecting the state.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,838 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Lot of truth of that indeed.

    Celtic Tiger profligacy, rather than any properly strategic building of capacity and the single force structure.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,613 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I know similar articles below have being posted the last few days about the evil threats that countrys like China pose to us but its starting to get very long in the tooth with these articles. They might try and focus on sorting out there own armed forces before worring about us.

    The UK should google China and Ireland and they would notice that we rolled the red carpet out for the chinese only 2 weeks ago so we could sell them even more Beef and Dairy.

    The other important fact these lovely brexit folk should look up is the fact that irish troops never had to fight troops from Russia, China or Iran to leave this Country but we did have to fight the UK.




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,499 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    I have read the whole report. It's an interesting but peppered with dubious and wrong assertions at times.

    However, the underlying message is unfortunately correct regarding freeloading and the country not doing the bare minimum on our own security.



  • Registered Users Posts: 275 ✭✭Grassy Knoll


    Interesting radio interview with the Chief of Staff earlier today with Colm O’Mongain. He indicated the radar project, to have sea, air and maritime reach is 24-36 months off delivery, but described it as the biggest in the DF history. The issue of relying on the kindness of others came up and he acknowledged arrangements with the UK. He indicated any decision on intercept capability would be post 2030, but fairly made the point subtly that the manpower capability etc is so low we need to gradually build up the capacity to handle such investment. Certainly articles such as the above which ‘shame’ government into investing are to be welcomed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,300 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    I found it interesting where he pointed out that during the Celtic tiger, and as recently as 2012 there was deliberate decisions made to downsize the defence forces.

    Great that it's being said out loud at last.



  • Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭vswr


    Policy exchange report in full (was only put up yesterday to the public, 5th Feb).

    Link -> Policy Exchange - Closing the Back Door

    Obviously UK centric, and very scathing of Ireland, but, I felt it was well put together, and not really a lot Ireland could respond with, without leaning on the "who would attack us" defence.

    Lots of (biased) historic elements too, which were interesting.

    Also interesting on the Chinese and Iranian elements and their infiltration into education, makes sense about a course I did in the UK and we were advised that our info may be passed onto security services... there were a lot of Chinese on the course.

    69 pages total.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,430 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Times they are a changing, the world and even our next door neighbour isnt as stable as just a decade ago ,

    A large conventional navy and or airforce isnt really much good in protecting subsea cables and pipelines , as the uk discovered when they went off buying oils services vessels , even then what are they gonna do with that ?

    I still believe our best defence is our location , if that doesnt suit the UKs world view then tough - however long term our biggest threat ( aside from internal ) is always going to be the UK, so any deterent and co-operation should have that in mind,

    Is joining Nato in our interest ? Probably not , co-operating with them definitely is.

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭RavenP


    It is a truth rarely whispered, let alone stated boldly, but there is only one credible medium term risk to Irish sovereignty and it is our increasingly unstable and right leaning neighbour.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,300 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    It's a right leaning government, but the majority of the workforce are on the left. Unfortunately the right has denied them Single Transferable Vote, convincing them it will deny them their voice, when the opposite would be the case.

    That being the case though, it is unfortunate that we put the bulk of our Maritime and aviation defence in the hands of an isolationist unstable neighbour.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,838 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    If the British General Election were held tomorrow, the most recent poll of polls projects a Labour majority of 128.

    453 Labour seats and 197 shared across other 8 parties.

    I think this calamitous shift right in the Tory ranks is about to see them decimated. Hell, even if Labour did worse than their worst polling at this point, they'd win an overall majority, just not the landslide.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Interesting timing that we have finally started even talking about defence just when they have gone down the rabbit hole of f*cknuttery. Labour is going to spend their first term in office just trying to figure out how to try and fix things in the UK.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,613 ✭✭✭roadmaster




  • Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭vswr


    When was this? I thought the Defender was gone back to BN (was with them Nov 2023) .... or was it possibly just on the back of this incident it was sent over?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Stand by for the usual comments from the usual suspects, and a load of just stupid shite on Social Media:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/2024/02/09/ireland-enters-wide-ranging-agreement-with-nato-aimed-at-countering-russia-threats/



  • Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭vswr


    It was probably there all along, it's just formalised now, good move all the same.

    Looking forward to the:

    bUt RuSsIa HaVe No NeEd To AtTaCk Us PuTiN sAiD sO



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Its a step up from the previous PfP arrangements that I think have been in place up to now, but its been well flagged, but yeah its all "being mean to Russia"...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Ah sure, Pop Up Paul has spoken as well...🙄



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,022 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Too thick to know that the UK was fighting fascists when her beloved Russia was allied to them and supplying them with war materials.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Or the fact that the Soviet z Union was only able to stay in the war and win due to lend lease equipment and supplies.



  • Registered Users Posts: 223 ✭✭mupper2


    No fundamental issues with such agreements....some issues with classified clauses in those agreements.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,022 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    OPSEC

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭RavenP


    Role of Lend lease has been exaggerated in the USSR successes in the war. It did help plug a gap, but was always small compared to actual soviet military production, many estimate less than 10%. But whatever one might say positive about the USSR( and there were some) it is very difficult to say much positive about Putin’s Russia.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,022 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Plug a gap my hole

    They got literally thousands of tanks, guns, fighters. Khruschev admitted they could not have defeated the Nazis without Lend-Lease.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,300 ✭✭✭Dohvolle




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,880 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I think while its a good thing for us to be there, I don't imagine our stance on many issues is going to be well received.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2024/0216/1432633-munich-security-conference/



Advertisement