Are we a neutral country???

Bloody Drunkard

Are we a neutral country?

Ever since the days of Eamo Winson and Adolf we have been neutral because as a tiny country we have no place getting involved in world problems.

So what is Bertie playin at? Use of Shannon Airport & Qualified support for the war against Terrorism. That dosn't sound too neutral to me. I know some Irish and Irish Americans died and i know if Ireland itself was attacked I'd be off to kill some Arabs BUT THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT.

Stay Neutral Bertie! Or you'll regret it.

TwoShedsJackson

I like the way you automatically assume it would be Arabs that would attack us, if anyone did. Moron.

bonkey

Ireland is militarily neutral. That has been, and remains our stance, since the inception of the state, as far as I know.

We have rarely/never been politically neutral.

Bertie was interviewed about this a while ago, and was very explicit - we, as a nation, will support the fight against terrorism. We will not, however, sacrifice our militaristic neutrality in this respect.

Over the last few decades, Ireland has gone from a "moral supporter" to a "supporter" of various factions. Arguably, this makes us less neutral than we were. Of course, arguably, we have only ever paid lip-service to being neutral anyway.

If you see this current stance as "a betrayal of our neutrality", I would suggest that you examine any large conflict over the past seventy years, and ask yourself whether or not we were truly neutral.

We never really were neutral, and still arent. We just pretend to be quite well by not getting involved in the actual fighting.

jc

p.s. Castor - arent we supposed to be civil now? A moderator calling someone a moron in the first post isnt very civil.

Xterminator

I think that 'bloody drunkard's comments were farly moronic.

Ireland has not directly militarly intervened in wars, because of our neutrality.

We have however been very active politically. When w had the presidency of the EU for instance, we intervened between Israel and Palestine, diplomatically.

As a member of the UN we have voted on various resolutions which intervene in Iran, Former Yougoslavia etc. Indeed as a member of the security council, we will have huge influnce in this area.

So to lend our airspace, ports and diplomatic weight behind, but not militarily intervene, in the forthcoming conflict is I find consistant with the actions of our country.

I also believe it is morally correct. Terrorism does not respect neutrality, borders, innnocents etc. As our citizens in New York found out.
Thus pretending it is not our fight, is a very ostrich like view, (ie. head in the sand).

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last."
Winston Churchill

X

azezil

Anyone else think that the fact that Ireland is now head of the UN secuirty council puts stress on our neutrality claim?

bonkey

Wouldnt it be more accurate to say "anyone think that Ireland being on the UN Security Council in the first place puts stress on our neutrality claim" ???

As I've said...we are militarily neutral - nothing more. Our soldiers do not get brought into other people's conflicts.

jc

WhiteWashMan

Originally posted by Bloody Drunkard
Are we a neutral country?

.

um, yes

Ever since the days of Eamo Winson and Adolf we have been neutral because as a tiny country we have no place getting involved in world problems.

rrrrrrrrrrrright.
maybe we should take back the millions of pints of guinness we export every year, or the millions who left our shores over the last 200 years.
my point, irish people are all around the world. and therefore,
our viewpoint is around the world. hell, half the americans think theyre irish, the other half probably are. england is not much bigger than ireland. do they deserve to be in the world.

very narrow viewpoint. i can see you dont read the news much....

So what is Bertie playin at? Use of Shannon Airport & Qualified support for the war against Terrorism. That dosn't sound too neutral to me. I know some Irish and Irish Americans died and i know if Ireland itself was attacked I'd be off to kill some Arabs BUT THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT.

sorry, what nationality is terrorism? is it muslim?
is it islamic? is it afghani? or pakistani?
or is it irish?
yes, id consider the ira to be terrorists, and the uvf, and any other TLA youd like to mention. they are not nations, they are terrorists.
and you know the thing about not being a nation?????

it means neutrality has nothing to do with it.
understand?
if a terrorist has no nationality, which i dont consider any terrorist to have, then any nation can war with them, neutral or notherwise.
and dont throw arabs about like that.
i dont think they arabs would like it.
quick to blame.
who was it that caused the oklahoma bombing?
it was an american.
it was an american terrorist in america.
with no arab connections.
how many people have been killed in ireland and england due to the north. have they all had arab connections?
id doubt it very much.

stay Neutral Bertie! Or you'll regret

giving aid against a common cause does not mean you lose your neutrality. in this case, the aid is military orientated, however, the cause is well worth it. maybe theyll bomb the north and get rid of thaose bas7ards as well, on both sides......

Bloody Drunkard

we should either remain politically neutral or we should join a military alliance . We should take the approach of Switzerland or Sweden. And Castor Troy I automatically assume that if anyone attacks us it will be the Arabs because who else would? The Americans? And you call me a Moran.


And Why didn't we have a day of mourning for the Omagh bomb victims or the 40,000 people who died in the Turkish Earthquake??? Because we want to suck up to the U.S.

gandalf

Bloody Drunkard I think Castors, WWmans and now my point is that maybe you should have said "Arab Terrorists" instead of just Arabs.

BTW imho the most likely source for a terrorist attack in the Republic are the loyalist terrorists in NI not the Arabs Terrorists !!!!

Yeah I asked the same question about the day of mourning, what about the Omagh bombing ? Bloody double standards from our weak Government again !!!

Gandalf.

Bloody Drunkard

Good Point

I should have said Arab Terroists and I apologize if I caused offence. Sad thing is the number of innocent Arabs who will die if America attack

chernobyl

do we have the ability to be anything other than neutral?

Digi_Tilmitt

Why the Hell are we allowing American's to use Shannon. We are Neutral, that means we do not take sides in Military Conflicts unless targeted ourselves. At this rate we will end up in that Capitalist Right-Wing Club called NATO.

Tis a disgrace...........

DadaKopf

What Digi_Timlitt said:
We are Neutral, that means we do not take sides in Military Conflicts unless targeted ourselves. At this rate we will end up in that Capitalist Right-Wing Club called NATO.

1] If that's the definition of neutral then Ireland is not neutral. Every country has to take a 'side' or stance on any significant military conflicts.

2] Ireland has observer status within Nato, we're in Europe, we're actually a c-a-p-i-t-a-l-i-s-t country in a capitalist continent but that doesn't mean we'll join Nato proper - or PfP. A European army? Well, that's just mutual defence isn't it, providing that's all it's used for and each country, at present, has a veto on military participation.

And here, shut up about Communism etc., you don't know what you're talking about.

Typedef

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan

sorry, what nationality is terrorism? is it muslim?
is it islamic? is it afghani? or pakistani?
or is it irish?

Ok so when is someone not a freedom fighter or a fighter of oppression, but instead is a "terrorist"? Was Padraig Pearse a terrorist for espousing a bloodbath to create martyrs to add momentum to the push for Irish independance or was he a national hero? Parts of Dublin were leveled during the rising so could this not be viewed as "terrorism", one man's milk and tea is another man's misery no?

Is it not abit easy to demonise people deemed to be terrorists, and thus placate any credence to ideological arguments that may underpin their violence? In the act of placating someone as a terrorist do we not make some sort of faceless inhuman enemy to be despised and hated, a kind of sub-human edifice where malevolent violence is the aim and not the effect of the terrorist?

-RaY-

IMO letting The americans land and refuel doesnt mean we are not neutral and ppl may say if we help the americans the terrorist will see us as a"threat" and bomb us to oblivion well what would stop terrorists from bombing Ireland ?If they had the mind to bomb the WTC and killed over 5000 innocent ppl would they even stop to think "Oh thats Ireland its a neutral country we cant bomb that its agaisnt our morales".Somehow i hardly think that the terrorist would ever concider that . I think we should just let the americans land their planes and refuel as is ireland really a neutral country since we send troop to peace keep in other countrys which in my opinion just makes matters worse.Sadly the terrorists wouldnt give a damn which country they will strike next

The thing is Bush quoted that "we will blow them into kingdom come" the thing is the afghanistans dont have very far to go as half of the country is mountains and the other half is a desert so what really is the point in bombing the place?So the situation now is very tricky for USA should we feed our nations blood thirsty need for revenge or should we do it diplomaticly and save thousands of innocent afghanistan ppl...tell ya 1 thing thered be a sh!t load of trouble if Bush bombed the wrong country:eek: