Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

You still laugh at 80085 on a calculator don’t you.

I have read all of your replies and you clearly have no knowledge of the topic nor do you have the intellectual ability to keep up the conversation regarding the subject, other than spouting random childish stuff to wind people up.

The only retort's to any of the points I've made are personal attacks or grammar corrections, when you are attacking the poster rather than the posts it says it all...its a bit ironic that you accuse me of not being able to participate in a conversation and then proceed to type that drivel.

Its not my fault pouring reality on yer little war fantasies and the good auld Irish fight to save Europe offends ye so badly and gets ye so salty.

No matter how much you attack me it wont change the fact that the Defense Forces are under funded to the point of being incapable of doing what they were set up to do and in this day and age are essentially redundant.

And if they were disbanded in the morning we'd still be as safe as houses because of where we are positioned, as a nation we have no modern day enemies and that's just reality you don't have to like it.

Ah you've changed your stick now, I see - a well funded defence force would put up quite a fight, wouldn't it? Well, that's a sure enough sign that we've had an effect.

It's you versus all of the other small, European countries I'm afraid, lad. And the Defence Forces planners. I think we all know who to trust here.

Yeah that is usually how it works, well funded armies tend to out perform under funded ones... shocker i know! but since we are never going to spend what it will take to make the Defense forces capable of fulfilling the war fantasies of those on here..we may aswell go the opposite way and downsize it and invest the money in other areas we are in a unique position that we could get away with no DF or atleast a bare bones one.

But anyway numbers dont lie and the bottom line states that they don't spend jack **** on the defense forces... why is that i wonder? hmmm i mean for something we apparently so desperately need according to some on here you'd think the Gov would be spending a lot more... but instead are paying soldiers such a **** wage that retaining experienced soldiers is next to impossible..

You’ve been threadbanned from other forums for reason. I’m not engaging with you.

But before I leave dialog with you. Regarding your magical number 10000 (ten thousand) We have 7,500 full-time members and are looking to recruit 3,000 or more, you can do the math and it magically gets you more than your made up figure. I won’t stop because I know what I’m talking about.

Im done speaking with you.

Best of luck

Sgt

I disagree I think our capacity for war would be very very low without massive investment...investment the defense force will never see.

Take your example of the f-15s say we do get them and then say a war does break out and Ireland is of interest and someone with the capability to attack it comes knockin what do you think will happen? The UK and the US will be there first and foremost because the reason it's of interest is because it's a platform from which to attack either.

So the F-15 s may aswell not even be there as they won't be needed regardless.

You really are a confused fellow.

They weren’t the only ones, the U.K. and US had plans “just in case” as well, just look at their actions regarding Iceland at the time. Legally speaking to be a neutral nation we should have the ability to prevent combatants from using our sea/airspace, or else other Powers can do what they want/need.

Defence underinvestment has always been a thing, but some seem to forget that we spent in terms of percentage more back before the 90s than will even under the new plan if it happens, and yet the nation managed then… If we had kept that level of spending the DF would be a totally different animal to what it is.

It will be interesting to see how the investment pans out as the recruitment seems to failing big time. It’s been noted today to that the replacement for LE Ethne hasn’t even gone to tender yet. It retired in 2014. Everything grossly inadequate regarding spend etc.

I truly hope that Visit to FIAT tattoo last week was to aid an RFI for aircraft. I know they don’t do that but hoping they are bending rules to get the ball rolling.

What was the great quote again was “we are militarily neutral but political not neutral” We’ve been swing that about for a long time now….

I think there was some kind agreement in place from 1948 where in the event of a war the US would be responsible for the air defense of the Republic of Ireland. And things don't get more neutral, if the air defenses are outsourced to the RAF. And Ireland's neutrality doesn't get any better if air defense is outsourced to other, notably NATO countries.

I honestly don't believe in neutrality. Neutrality is often just an excuse to under-fund the military and defense infrastructure in any country. Austria is the best example for that. Ireland can't be neutral, regardless what they write in papers, contracts, constitutions or other forms of agreements.

No country with maybe the exceptions of the US or Russia has to get military equipment from somewhere, buy it, import it. Ireland has a lot of military equipment from other NATO countries, France, Italy, etc.., Israel receives a lot of military equipment from the US, same as Switzerland. It's not only buying foreign military equipment but also having service and maintenance contracts in place, which makes one even less and less neutral.

In order for a country to be really neutral, a totally home grown military industry must exist.

Also, in the case of the Ukraine, you have to have a strong ally to support your cause, - otherwise it'll never work.

There was never such an agreement, Dev was trying to get a bilateral defence agreement at that time but that fell apart over Dublins demands that the US pick our side in regards to the North which was never going to happen. The U.K. handled things like SAR for much of the 20th century for us but there’s never been any formal agreement until the current one that nobody will even admit the details of.

As for neutrality, plenty of neutral nations invest in the defence industries, the notable local one would be Sweden of course, Austria was and is neutral as it was a demand from Russia post WW2 otherwise they would have ended up split like Germany, and even then they maintained a much larger defence industrial base throughout the Cold War (up to MBT manufacturing though not design) and even at their lowest point post CW still spent much more than us.

Our “neutrality” is like you say an excuse not to invest in the DF and a way for Dublin to avoid difficult decisions. As to getting another NATO nation to cover us, I imagine the response would be “GO F*ck yourselves”, every nation is ramping up spending and already has full commitments, nobody is going to volunteer to cover a nation that needs it because they are too cheap to provide it. The current missions like Iceland or Eastern Europe are for nations that can’t afford fighters, we aren’t on that list.

Go and read the Commission on Defence report before talking nonsense.

How about 2 or 3 then?

I think I've read it somewhere about a 1948 contract between the US and Ireland, but this contract was never enacted or used, but I never knew it was never passed. There would have been the question if the US ever had a permanent air force base on Irish soil, which also never happened.

I think this article basically sums it up:

Further below it reads:

Ireland is not totally defenceless from air threats. Following the 9/11 attacks, the government entered into a secret memorandum of understanding with the UK which would allow it to deploy Quick Reaction Force combat aircraft over Irish airspace in the event of an emergency.

The government has consistently refused to discuss this agreement or even confirm its existence and it has never been approved by the Oireachtas.

Nazi Germany did indeed have plans to invade Ireland. This fact is widely known among historians. The general plan was to "promis" and "motivate" the Irish with a united Ireland, the Nazis funding the IRA and driving the Brits out of the North, whilst allowing Nazi military presence in Ireland. The plan failed, for numerous reasons.

See also "Nazi Collaborators, the IRA" ( It's worth watching )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAL2273tNbc

Ireland as a country is from a military perspective of interest during a war, especially if it involves some kind of East-West conflict. The same applies for Iceland, or Newfoundland ( which wasn't part of Canada during WW2 and the Americans had bases there )

Yup a squadron of 10 to 12 doesn't mean much ..but

Neutrality counts for nothing... if another state thinks it's in it's interest to invade.

We're currently lucky in our geographic position ...it's not really in anyone intrest to invade us ..but if we ever need an airforce in a hurry (as opposed to an air corp ) it'll be hard to get one from an almost standing start ... So a squadron of some light fighter won't make us into some massive military force pushing our weight around - but it's a good start , it'd mean we could police our own eez , train with the Brits ,the french , the norweigans or the swedes ... Which makes it all the less likely that an air-force would be needed in anger ...