Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Government playing down Terror Threat in Ireland?

  • 19-08-2017 12:22PM
    #1
    Eimee90
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭


    Forgive my ignorance now but in light of what has happened to many European Cities why does Simon Coveney believe it's very unlikely Ireland could be targeted? I just find it unbelievable that a public figure could announce that to the wider public when ISIS don't seem to have any special criteria for whom they kill.

    I also read how Dublin City council were unsure about placing blockards in pedestrian parts of Dublin City as it is expensive and the money could be spent on integrating people instead.

    Are the lives of people here and tourists so worthless that it's too expensive to put measures in place should an extremist in a van decide to mow down people in Grafton street.

    Now as I said I'm probably missing something here and maybe we aren't a target but I feel like the government is displaying a "ah sure it twill be grand" attitude here.


«1345

Comments

  • #2
    Lyle Lanley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 637 ✭✭✭Lyle Lanley


    The big attacks have come in major cities and we don't have any major cities.


  • #3
    Barry Badrinath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,460 ✭✭✭Barry Badrinath


    Lyle Lanley wrote: »
    The big attacks have come in major cities and we don't have any major cities.

    LOL


  • #4
    jamesbere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,022 ✭✭✭jamesbere


    I highly doubt they believe everything is grand, but to be honest it doesn't help either to spread fear amongst the people by saying we could get attacked.

    I'd imagine they're taking it very seriously, but at end of the day we won't really know how to react until it actually happens.


  • #5
    timthumbni
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,845 ✭✭✭timthumbni


    Lyle Lanley wrote: »
    The big attacks have come in major cities and we don't have any major cities.

    Londonderry or doire is safe as houses then...


  • #6
    ShmuckRyan
    Site Banned Posts: 28 ✭ShmuckRyan


    Not worth it for them. It's be too dear to tax the van.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    jamesbere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,022 ✭✭✭jamesbere


    Lyle Lanley wrote: »
    The big attacks have come in major cities and we don't have any major cities.

    Athlone


  • #8
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,746 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Ah shur, it 'll be grand


  • #9
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Lyle Lanley wrote: »
    The big attacks have come in major cities and we don't have any major cities.

    Yeah that's it, if it has a population of less than 10 million, they're like nah, small time club. Dublin is highly visited in itself.

    Nice has less than 1 mill yet they were victim to a terrorist attack that was pretty devastating.


  • #10
    Widdershins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,633 ✭✭✭✭Widdershins


    If they are hesitating about installing barriers to stop attacks then yeah they are downplaying it and chancing peoples lives. They can already afford to ''integrate'' people by providing for them (whether they take that money from somewhere else is another question so how much more do they want to do to integrate them? Integration is something the person has to choose to do for themselves, mainly.


  • #11
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,199 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    This is ridiculous. The hubris of it all.

    Bollards should be put in at the top and bottom of Grafton Street, and the same in Henry/Mary/North Earl Street. I think pedestrians would be delighted to feel a bit safer.

    I think there are possibly bollards in some of those locations that can be lowered into the ground for deliveries, and raised at other times. I have rarely seen them in use, but I could be wrong.

    I realise it is impossible to barricade every street, but the major pedestrian thoroughfares that have potential vehicle access would be a great start. I doubt if anyone would object.

    As for integration, you cannot make anyone integrate, as another poster said, they have to want to, and most of them don't want to.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    There is of course a possibility that this could happen here, but the threat is low. The reality of the situation is If someone wants to carry out an attack with a vehicle there is very little that can be done to stop them once they are in the driving seat. We can't physically enclose the entire world with bollards, for example how do you protect people at a pedestrian crossing?

    The best way we could prevent such an attack (and other threats to national security) is by setting up a dedicated national intelligence service. It's better to catch these fellas before they can act. The Gardai and G2 military intelligence branch did an excellent job during the troubles, but the threat has now changed.

    By the by a failed asylum seeker from Africa drove a car down Henry Street 10-15 years ago injuring about 20 people.


  • #13
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    We can't physically enclose the entire world with bollards, for example how do you protect people at a pedestrian crossing?
    I know we can't bollard everywhere, but the main pedestrian areas where an attack would lead to a high level of casualties would be a good start.
    Right now if someone wants to drive a van/truck at full pelt up Grafton/Henry street there's little to stop them.
    It's about making us less of a target, especially considering we don't have an armed police force.
    Pedestrian crossings are different because people are on the lookout for traffic.


  • #14
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    By the by a failed asylum seeker from Africa drove a car down Henry Street 10-15 years ago injuring about 20 people.

    Around ten years ago, a Dualway coach driver went "postal" and rammed a load of cars on the Naas Road, killing one person. He was being pursued by armed Gardai at the time. It's one of those things that, if it's going to happen, it'll happen. No amount of Garda intelligence will prevent someone from deciding that they want to use a vehicle as a weapon.


  • #15
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    I know we can't bollard everywhere, but the main pedestrian areas where an attack would lead to a high level of casualties would be a good start.
    Right now if someone wants to drive a van/truck at full pelt up Grafton/Henry street there's little to stop them.
    It's about making us less of a target, especially considering we don't have an armed police force.
    Pedestrian crossings are different because people are on the lookout for traffic.

    During the Troubles pretty much every town of significant size had checkpoints, bollards, concrete obstacles, cameras, soldiers and armed police protecting town centres. All this did was push attacks to different locations.

    Having armed police makes little difference, it didn't help in Spain, France, Germany, Sweden or Belgium.

    Your argument about pedestrian crossings is ridiculous.


  • #16
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,654 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Finland thought the risk there was low too. It can happen anywhere these days. All our mosques are not moderate.

    At a very minimum places like Grafton street should be protected.


  • #17
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,654 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    Having armed police makes little difference, it didn't help in Spain, France, Germany, Sweden or Belgium.

    It made a huge difference. The attacks only ended when the police shot the offenders. The death totals would have been much worse.


  • #18
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It made a huge difference. The attacks only ended when the police shot the offenders. The death totals would have been much worse.

    It made no difference at the Bataclan - they had to wait for a SWAT team to storm the building.

    It made no difference with suicide bombers in London, Brussels and Paris.

    In Spain the five fellas who were shot dead had run into a checkpoint set up hours after the main attack. The main suspect was able to run from the scene at Las Ramblas, ditto the fella who carried out the Xmas market attack in Berlin.

    It made no difference in Norway when Anders Brehvik Behring went full retard.

    We certainly need to have more well trained armed Gardaí on patrol, not only for a potential Jihadi attack but also to deal with the insanely high level of gun crime perpetrated by Irish criminal gangs.


  • #19
    branie2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,372 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    Hopefully, it won't come to that.


  • #20
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,199 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Remember the Christmas market attack in Berlin?

    If there had been concrete bollards there, it would not have happened.


  • #21
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,199 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Finland thought the risk there was low too. It can happen anywhere these days. All our mosques are not moderate.

    At a very minimum places like Grafton street should be protected.

    And Henry/Mary/North Earl Street. All lives matter here whether Northside or Southside :cool:


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    During the Troubles pretty much every town of significant size had checkpoints, bollards, concrete obstacles, cameras, soldiers and armed police protecting town centres. All this did was push attacks to different locations.
    Yes but the issue in the North was bombings.
    Here the issue is ramming attacks in pedestrianised areas.
    We've very few of these, they should be relatively easy to secure.
    Having armed police makes little difference, it didn't help in Spain, France, Germany, Sweden or Belgium.
    It made a difference in Nice.
    And in the event of another van/truck attack it's the one thing that could actually stop it.
    Your argument about pedestrian crossings is ridiculous.
    It's not, people expect traffic at pedestrian crossing, they don't in pedestrians areas.
    Hence why crossings aren't a real concern.


  • #23
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    There is nothing to stop a person reading this to go into their kitchen, grab a knife and run onto the street stabbing people. There is nothing to stop a person getting into their car and driving it into a crowd of people leaving the local gaa club game. There is nothing to stop someone deliberating instigating a pile up on a motorway. I could go on. Fact is our modern society requires a certain element of everyday risks.

    Most of these attacks envisioned are completely unpreventable but the risk to any specific individual reading this is incredibly low. Risks always need to be quantified and managed appropriately. No point in spending millions into security theatrics when you could spend that same millions improving the quality of lives and saving many more of your citizens in the process. To take a simple example. A new A&E in Dublin would save way more lives than some blockards on a streets aimed to protect a potential terrorist attack. Because, quite simply, you cannot put them everywhere pedestrians will congregate. The only reason they exist in many places is because people's irrational fear and perception of risk which is why this method of terrorism is proving so popular.

    Personally I would be pissed if the Government wasted money on such facetious security measures and barriers. By all means protect the critical infrastructure buildings beyond that any expenditure is money very poorly spent imo. The are simply far too many other things in our society that should take a higher priority when it comes to public spending.


  • #24
    dev100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 999 ✭✭✭dev100


    Is it the IRA who said " we've only to be lucky once and you've to be lucky all the the time.

    Basically if or when it happens here our government will become reactive to the after fact. Certain precautions should be taken to protect pedestrianised streets so fort. But as one poster pointed out we can safeguard certain high risk target, these terrorists will find an easier less well guarded targets.

    You will be told we are at low risk. I believe that's bullology to the highest degree , that's just to keep the population quiet. More needs to be done in being proactive .


  • #25
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    Yes but the issue in the North was bombings.
    Here the issue is ramming attacks in pedestrianised areas.
    We've very few of these, they should be relatively easy to secure.

    It made a difference in Nice.
    And in the event of another van/truck attack it's the one thing that could actually stop it.

    It's not, people expect traffic at pedestrian crossing, they don't in pedestrians areas.
    Hence why crossings aren't a real concern.

    You have missed my point entirely. There is practically nothing you can do to stop someone in a vehicle if they want to run people over. Mad as it may sound pedestrians are not confined solely to pedestrian areas.

    The attacker in Nice was killed when his vehicle became so badly damaged it could no longer move.


  • #26
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,304 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    You have missed my point entirely. There is practically nothing you can do to stop someone in a vehicle if they want to run people over. Mad as it may sound pedestrians are not confined solely to pedestrian areas.
    No I understand your point, so much so that I acknowledged it in my first post.
    Again I'm not suggesting we place bollards at the side of every path.
    I'm suggesting putting in some kind of defenses on about four pedestrianised streets in Dublin.
    Nothing terribly expensive or elaborate.
    What makes resistance to this thought further more bizarre is that one of those streets has already had a vehicle ramming attack happen on it.
    The attacker in Nice was killed when his vehicle became so badly damaged it could no longer move.
    He was shot dead by two policemen, he couldn't continue the attack as happened in London.


  • #27
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,654 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    It made no difference at the Bataclan - they had to wait for a SWAT team to storm the building.

    It made no difference with suicide bombers in London, Brussels and Paris.

    In Spain the five fellas who were shot dead had run into a checkpoint set up hours after the main attack. The main suspect was able to run from the scene at Las Ramblas, ditto the fella who carried out the Xmas market attack in Berlin.

    It made no difference in Norway when Anders Brehvik Behring went full retard.

    We certainly need to have more well trained armed Gardaí on patrol, not only for a potential Jihadi attack but also to deal with the insanely high level of gun crime perpetrated by Irish criminal gangs.

    It stopped the Nice attack, the second spanish attack, the knife attacks in London... Thats a lot of lives saved.


  • #28
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,094 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Didn't some amadán compatriot of Pamela Izevbekhai decide to get in a car and drive down Henry Street some years ago ramming into a slew of people. Yes, indeed.

    It could easily happen here on a much larger scale, especially with those brainwashed pre-medieval primitives in the Islamic world. Our glorious free market keep-business-costs-down-by-allowing-in-large-numbers-of-immigrants-to-compete-with-local- workers-and-thus-lower-wages rightwing political ideology is going to upend this society something fierce. No matter how much the media, the pseudo-intellectual prostitutes of the business and political class, dress the economic motivation up positively in human rights and anti-racism terms. The entire policy is happening, and these people are being let in here, for economic reasons.

    Free market capitalism and its needs is firmly the new unquestioned dogma of Irish society. This is Ireland's new fundamentalism, ostensibly more sophisticated than the religious fundamentalism of the Islamic nuts - but watch how it uses violence, media and so much else to crush challenges to the "free market". Our whole society is changing entirely because of its needs and increased immigration has nothing to do with something as naive as a belief in the dignity of all humans. As long as the plebs are convinced to blame the "leftwing" for it, the same business interests will continue to laugh their way to their offshore bank accounts. Meanwhile the rich get much richer and inequality is greater in OECD countries now than at any time since before WWII.

    Divided we stand: why inequality keeps rising in OECD countries


  • #29
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    No I understand your point, so much so that I acknowledged it in my first post.
    Again I'm not suggesting we place bollards at the side of every path.
    I'm suggesting putting in some kind of defenses on about four pedestrianised streets in Dublin.>Nothing terribly expensive or elaborate.
    What makes resistance to this thought further more bizarre is that one of those streets has already had a vehicle ramming attack happen on it.

    Again you miss the fvcking point that an attack (should it even occur) would just happen somewhere where there are no bollards. Along the Quays, Dame Street, O'Connell Street, O'Connell Bridge, Talbot Street, at Croke Park after a game, Marlay Park after a concert etc. etc.
    He was shot dead by two policemen, he couldn't continue the attack as
    happened in London

    The cops could only shoot him when his vehicle became stationary. There were cops all along the prom in Nice that night. They couldn't do a thing until the truck came to a stop.


  • #30
    Arsemageddon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Arsemageddon


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It stopped the Nice attack, the second spanish attack, the knife attacks in London... Thats a lot of lives saved.

    eh, we already have armed Gardaí.

    We went through 25 years of the troubles when there was an actual threat to the security of the state and bombs were going off in Dublin without arming the Gardaí, so I don't see why we need to now when the actual risk is very low.

    Maybe you kids are just too young to remember what the 70s, 80s and 90s in this country


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,199 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Arsemageddon wrote: »
    eh, we already have armed Garda

    We went through 25 years of the troubles when there was an actual threat to the security of the state and bombs were going off in Dublin without arming the Gardaso I don't see why we need to now when the actual risk is very low.

    Maybe you kids are just too young to remember what the 70s, 80s and 90s in this country

    The risk APPEARS to be low, in the estimation of the Government. That is not to say it will not happen at any time soon.

    What is wrong with putting a barrier at the top and bottom of the pedestrianised streets for a start?

    But Oh no, someone from the Veggie Party said it would be better to spend the money on integrating them.

    They won't integrate. So there's more of our taxpayer money spent on wishy washy integration projects and community centres, because some lefty liberal doesn't want some bollards installed to protect the majority.

    Feck sake.


Advertisement
Advertisement