If being an unaligned country with a large army is no deterrent to Putin's ambitions is it time for ROI to join Nato?
No issue working with them and other governments who might come under attack Bob, just see zero reasons to join NATO. Same as I have no issue with allowing the UK to overfly to protect themselves.
Fantasy apocalypse scenario? do you genuinely believe the stuff you type... its so short sighted.
It does make me lol though. Those that hate the Brits are happy to live under their umbrella. And worse comes to worse they are the only Nation who could get boots on the ground ASAP. To send their sons to defend Ireland. I would not rely on the EU no pact. They would be calling the UN and Maybe asking NATO. The UK for all it's done, I think would come if called.
Ireland and the UK have Joint Defense Agreement
What makes me laugh louder is those who think they are 'protecting' us. They aren't, like they do politically, they are protecting themselves and looking after their own interests.
Look at xxxxxxl's post, he/she like others here are talking about a physical invasion.
Not only is Francie happy to live under their umbrella, but he is willing to let them invade our airspace anytime they want (would he allow the Russians do the same?) and he is happy to give them a veto over the use of our Armed Forces, yet somehow the British remain the root of all evil. Incredible stuff.
Poor blanch. It was he who set up the idea that I think the 'British are the root of all evil' and now can't figure out a way to get at my arguments. 😁😁 You have confused yourself!
My view of the British remains unchanged, they did here what colonists the world over did. They remain selfishly interested in themselves and their interests. Nothing wrong with that as long as it doesn't hurt or affect us. Then I have a problem with them.
We should have enough self pride and independence to do what is in our interests.
*5 world powers hold a veto at the UN. I don't think the British have ever blocked a peace mission we wanted to go on. Do you know different?
The gameplaying and trolling continues.
How long before this is claimed to be in return for the work of us Irish Putinbots? 😁
Yes but there is a difference here, your view is that RAF protecting Ireland is in fact protecting the UK.
How is Nato protecting the HSE or ESB from a cyber or hybrid attack contributing to the overall defence of Nato?
Also as part of Nato the baltic republic's are protecting Ireland from these attacks, if they were attacked, you would be happy to turn the other way and say nothing to do with me.
If there was no threat to them, the RAF would be doing diddly squat Bob. The Baltic states are protecting themselves, as they should.
We cannot help our geographical position, it has advantages and disadvantages and they mainly balance out although our separation from mainland Europe will probably damage us more than any fantasy Russian invasion will do, or a cyber attack due to Britain's Brexit.
We contribute in a valuable way to trying to keep the world a peaceful place, we don't 'sit back'. No amount of running us down as cowards is going to change that.
Why not try addressing the points I made -
You didnt answer the question.
For that fantasy to be even 10% accurate they would have to attack NATO anyway and it wouldn't matter if we were in it or not
What NATO country would Russia need to attack before attacking Ireland?
Yet you are ok with:
a) The UK having a veto over Irish Defence policy.
b) British Armed forces patrolling the Irish sky because you don't want a penny to be spent protecting our own airspace....?
:D
I'm actually a good metaphor for Ireland, we don't go looking for fights or play games that will end up in fights.
Yet you wanted Ireland to unilaterally invade the North regardless of what the UN would have said about it.
Maybe you don't go looking for fights in real life but play General Walter Mitty behind your desk.
Jesus.
Operating under the UN mandate is the best thing we have got. There are 5 world powers with a veto there. Nobody in politics here wants to get rid of the triple lock. I am ok with that.
I want us to properly fund our defence forces so they can protect us from the actual threats to us. I am ok allowing the UK to use our airspace to protect themselves.
PLEASE pay attention mark.
I did answer you bob.
The baltic states are protecting themselves, if we benefit because of were we are geographically then ok, we also suffer because of where we are...see point about Brexit.
Please elaborate on your point about cyber attacks as I am unsure of what you mean. I said previously I have no issue with NATO sharing info with us or vice versa. We already do so within the EU.
Thats utter nonsense, if Ireland requested help from the RAF or even the USAF id wager we would get help without hesitation, and im sure if either ever requested anything from Ireland it would be given, as much as a lot of people want to hold on to past grudges and hatred the worlds moving forward whether we like it or not.
We cant help our location but our time of free loading militarily is coming to an end you can be sure after all this craic with Russia, the EU will be looking for all members to beef up militarily and be ready the war in the Ukraine is changing the game.
Lets be real about our impact and peacekeeping missions aswell, we do like to pat ourselves on the back...
The cognitive dissonance on display here is mind-blowing in extent and depth.
You have told us that if the Irish Army had invaded a NATO member in 1969 at the height of the Cold War, that the UN would have come rushing to our rescue. Yet you somehow simultaneously accept that the UN could not have done so because the NATO member being invaded by that Irish Army had and has a veto on UN action. Even more mind-blowing, you are happy to have that NATO member invade our airspace anytime it wants and believe that it will immediately come to our aid if we are invaded, without us having any obligation to anyone. Finally, you want to enshrine a veto on the use of our military forces into our constitution for that NATO member you wanted to invade.
Our interests, overwhelmingly, are a stable and prosperous Europe. And Europe needs credible defence to guard that stability. From the Baltic to the Mediterranean to the Atlantic. That means NATO, not narrow nationalists staring at their shoelaces mumbling nonsense of the colonial era that is long in the past.
You're reflecting an inward, and completely selfish view on Republicanism that is more interested in spittle about 'them uns'. An internationalist knows that countries on the Eastern frontier need protecting, for their own sake first of all, but also for our sake.
Predicted response: a bleated "gameplaying".
I never spoke of anyone invading anyone.
It's you guys who want to make such a thing legal. Not me.
We have years of experience keeping conflict zones stable. We have something to offer.
We don't freeload. We spend quite a bit sending our forces around the world's conflict zones keeping the peace. We help out in other ways too because we are not politically neutral.
You do realise the aggressor in the conflict is a UN security council member? And has a veto on the deployment of our troops as our 'neutrality' is cobbled to together at present.
You have a completely duff and harebrained notion about all this.
"Gameplaying"
Of course I realise that. Not sure what your point is.
Your conception of our neutrality is one where at the stroke of a pen, a belligerent state like Russia can stop us from deploying peacekeeping troops because of how we currently construct our 'neutrality'.
And you think that's tickety boo.
That Baltic states aren't protecting themselves. They are protected by the sword and shield of NATO.
Ireland's peacekeeping missions are almost entirely bankrolled by the UN. Including pay for troops.
The largest contributer to the UN by a large margin of course is the USA.
Our peacekeeping is overwhelmingly sponsored by uncle Sam and other large countries like Japan.
I can hear Francie's brain go splat on the wall after exploding from reading this.
Boring reply. They both are at it and I want no part of it for Ireland.
Ah, the false moral equivalence that NATO is the same as Russia. The usual spiel from those with a soft spot for Putin.
Are you saying here that they don't cost us?
