If being an unaligned country with a large army is no deterrent to Putin's ambitions is it time for ROI to join Nato?
Neighbourhood watch! 😂
Be very careful if you invite the yanks to watch over you... it's a bit like inviting a serial killer to babysit your kids.
Ukraine are essentially a de-facto NATO member right now. NATO are using their territory to fight a proxy war with Russia.
And where exactly has this taken Ukraine as a nation? To the brink of total destruction, that's where. The Ukrainians were so confident that they had the support of the yanks/NATO/the west, that they could stick 2 fingers up to their actual neighbour and do whatever they pleased. And it will go down in history as one of the costliest political misjudgements of modern times. Their nation is now in ruins... another grand western/NATO inspired mess!
The yanks are the sort of friend you don't want to invite into your house. You don't want them as your enemy, but you also don't want them to have the free run of your nation... because you know eventually they will trash the place!
We have the perfect balance right now. Our neutrality gives us this balance. And it's far too valuable an asset, to simply throw away because of some fantasy idea of the Russians invading our Island. We're not Ukraine, and in fact we are nothing remotely like Ukraine. Our circumstances and position in the world, are completely different to their's. People attempting to draw any parallels because of this conflict, are simply deluded opportunists looking to create a big stupid political bandwagon!
Rubbish. Lots of countries around the world joined the war against the Axis powers without being attacked first. For example South Africa declared war on Germany. South Africa made significant contributions to the Allied war effort. Some 135,000 white South Africans fought in the East and North African and Italian campaigns, and 70,000 Blacks and Coloureds served as labourers and transport drivers. Lots of other countries too.
Do not forget neutral counties like Denmark,Norway,Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg were all invaded by Nazi Germany, their minority groups sent to extermination camps etc.
Thankfully in this part of the world we always had the UK to shelter behind, like in WW2 and the Cold war. Whenever the Russians appear off the west coast our Taoiseach appeals to the British for help. we cannot track a submarine in a bath or a plane without transponders.
You say "no nation did much for them even when it was suggested that the concentration camps be liberated early it was decided that it was not important enough to divert resources from the war effort.". I think the Allies did all they could to liberate the concentration camps, paying in blood, sweat and tears. Britain nearly bankrupted itself and lost everything. It only finished paying the last of its WW2 loans to the US at the end of 2006. "The U.S. extended $4.34 billion in credit in 1945, allowing Britain to stave off bankruptcy after devoting almost all its resources to the war for half a decade. Since 1950 Britain has made payments on the debt, the final payment of which is worth $84 million, at the end of every year except six."
What did DeValera and out neutrality do for the Jews of Europe, to help liberate the neutral countries like Denmark,Norway,Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg which the Nazis invaded? Expressing condolences to the German ambassador on the death of Adolf Hitler did not go down too well around the world. Neutrality is a cop out.
We are non-aligned. Even in the 1930s De Valera wasn't neutral.
'de Valera intimated that Ireland might go to war with Italy in defence of Ethiopia under the covenant of the League of Nations. Had his advice been heeded, Italy would have been compelled to back down or Ireland would, as part the league, have gone to war against it.
Three years earlier he took a similar stand in relation to Japan’s attack on China after his government had inherited a seat on the council of the League of Nations. When the league met in September 1932 to discuss the Japanese invasion of Manchuria, it was the Irish Free State’s turn to assume the revolving presidency.
As president of the council, de Valera delivered the opening address to the assembly. His speech, which was supportive of the league’s aims, caused an international sensation.'
Wedo need to greatly improve our defence forces. At least be able to defende ourselves.
NATO may not be our destiny in the short term, but if it isn't, we had damn well better step up and provide a proper defence structure of our own territories and economic zone, cos no one else is going to do it for free anymore.
Sure they will, cause it has never been done for our benefit in the first place. We can't change geography, we are where we are on the European continent. You can argue the morals and principles of it back and forth, but the UK for example has no interest in allowing unmolested access to Irish airspace for their own selfish reasons.
Ironically, if anything, Iceland as a NATO member with no standing army are far, far more riding on others coattails for their defence.
Treason my hole.
And wars usually come looking for you whether you like it or not.
https://youtu.be/XsCgBXhrXf0
Ireland isn't neutral.
We are militarily non-aligned, not politically neutral, so not neutral. See?
Anyway, sounds like we'll be into a Citizens Assembly on this matter before too long, so we won't have long to wait to get these issues properly addressed and codified by a referendum of the people.
One thing is for sure, the Irish Fudge is no longer an option.
@ittakestwo I think a lot of west brits cant stand the fact Ireland is neutral and is the correct descion.
Stupid statement,
We're a nation governed by cowardice we hide behind a skirt while expecting everyone else will come to save us because we have allowed government after government to deminish our defense forces , decade after decade investment in defense has been non existent while quoting eu defense policies will protect us ,why spend our money when the Brits will protect our skies and waters.
It's embarrassing
We were neutral in ww2. We did not interfere with germany trying to change its borders so their invasion was unlikely. Any of the countries they did invade had an easy supply line from Germany. Ireland wouldn't have an easy supply line.
I think a lot of west brits cant stand the fact Ireland is neutral and is the correct descion.
Geography, nothing we can do about it. Anyway the most likely hostile force was and still is the UK itself.
They took some Jewish children in only for them to be treated as slaves and abused all the while, hosting Nazis in the mansion house,
Admit it, in WW2 our government sheltered behind the UK.
Wonder if anyone has ever looked at a map and noticed where Ireland is in relation to the UK, and any potential hostile forces.
I don't and shouldn't admit any such thing. We are located to the West of the UK and we can't do anything about that. No country joined the war against the Axis powers until it was attacked even the USA! As for helping the Jews etc. no nation did much for them even when it was suggested that the concentration camps be liberated early it was decided that it was not important enough to divert resources from the war effort.
In WW1, if someone did not go to the defence of little Catholic Belgium which Germany invaded, where would it have all stopped?
In WW2 our government did not exactly do much to help the 6 million victims of the holocaust (Jews, gypsies, handicapped, communists etc). I am aware a large 5 figure number of Irish people did volunteer and serve in UK forces, and many more emigrated to help their war effort.
I suppose in the Cold war we let other do the effort. An independent voice is all very well but other independent voices in ww2 were invaded by the Nazi forces for example. Denmark and Norway on 9 April 1940—then Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. Neutrality did do them or their Jewish citizens much good. Admit it, in WW2 our government sheltered behind the UK.
I agree that we need to improve our defences but i don't agree that we sheltered behind the UK in WW2 or the cold war. We were involved in WWI and that didn't work out too well for us. We also were resonably well prepared and willing to defend ourselves against any invader during WW2 enough to deter potential agressor i.e. it would not be worth it. We maintained an independent voice during the cold war as befits our position and history.
I suppose the other concern is interference with the undersea cables going across the Atlantic from Ireland, carrying EU data ?
I think at the moment if Russian jets without transponders were or are detected off the west coast of Ireland, for example, it is the UK who detects them and intercepts them?
I suppose we can shelter behind the UK, same as we did in WW2 and the Cold war. I suppose our usual policy is let them pay the money and put in the blood, sweat and tears.
I can imagine a foreign military arriving here and the first information will come from RTEs crimecall looking for information on little green men seen around the country
"We will not speculate on how serious a cyberattack would have to be in order to trigger a collective response. Any response could include diplomatic and economic sanctions, cyber measures, or even conventional forces, depending on the nature of the attack," the official said.
Such a vague comment from an unnamed official just isn't going to count for anything.
A chemical weapons attack on the soil of a NATO member "could" trigger article 5 yet it didn't stop Russia in Salisbury...
Again, I'm not ideologically opposed to joining NATO but the idea that it would have stopped the HSE cyber attack is utter nonsense. Russia have glibly murdered people on NATO soil with chemical weapons, interfered in elections and referenda on NATO soil constantly. It is not some panacea.
Energy security and Cyber security fall under the hybrid warfare umbrella within NATO, who since 2016 have made them elements which could invoke Article 5... This is what the UK, Norway and France referred to..
Bombs didn't rain down over the election because the US didn't invoke it.
It wasn't Russia because numerous Polish and Ukrainian Politian's have slipped up on it saying it wasn't Russia and implying who it was... The German's didn't kick up a fuss about it, and the fact nothing can move in the Baltic sea since Feb 2022 without some sort of NATO surveillance is quite telling who the direction of blame can be pointed towards.
Why would they when we can't offer anything in return,
Nothing
Anyone would think that Ireland never has any communication with Uk/US/EU security services. For the likes of the threats that are realistically an issue for Ireland they are already in communication with the relevant services in other countries.
Nordstream wasn't the Russian's though
Says who? We don't know who it was and the Russians remain a plausible belligerent.
An attack on data lines going into Ireland is as much an attack on the UK as it is on Ireland. Again, NATO membership seems irrelevant in the calculation of a response.
Where have they been clear on this? The US have already decided that the russians interfered in the 2016 election and there are no bombs raining on Moscow because of it
28 /30 military intelligence gathering commands , combined with various federal laws enforcement agencies working together,are a powerful intelligence community,
We are on our own, we can't detect aircraft, Naval vessels, ships or boats ,let alone detect and deter any kind of sabotage or attack on vital infrastructure.
Permission to track and survey potential enemy assets in and around Irish territory along with shared intelligence on said assets...
The most likely invader is still the UK (very unlikely at present but who knows). Russia is even more unlikely but in certain circumstances they could land and seize certain assets of use to them (perhaps for a short time) in a war. We should have a certain capability to deter and make such events very costly to any aggressor.
Nordstream wasn't the Russian's though and the UK and Norway have been very vocal that any attack on North Sea oil and gas infrastructure, along with UK and France mentioning comms infrastructure is a basis for triggering article 5.
Yes.
How does being in NATO help with detection?
It still helps to have the ability to detect and deter such attacks ,
Rather than burying our heads in the sand and saying don't worry the Brits will save us ...
Being a NATO member won't do anything to protect from that kind of attack. Neither will having a navy, jets or the threat of nuclear weapons in response.
Those kind of attacks are done remotely, or by being undetected or having plausible deny ability of whoever carrys it out and every country is vulnerable to such attacks.
There is nothing stopping anyone doing such actions in Ireland, getting diplomatic immunity in the Russian embassy and all that could be done is dismissal of diplomats and an increase of EU sanctions..
Well, apart from getting caught before getting to the Russian embassy. Nonetheless, there was zero talk of e.g. the Nordstream explosion triggering Article 5 if it was shown to be Russia who did it. I don't think there is any chance sabotage would start a war.
What people are overlooking is the saboteur aspect ... while not troops and artillery ... Ireland is hugely vulnerable to destructive saboteur actions, which have mostly been kept at bay in Europe due to the majority of nations being in NATO and destructive saboteur actions being seen as a potential trigger for article 5 (now including comms infrastructure).
With a lack of coastal and aerial monitoring and protection, there is nothing stopping nefarious actors entering Ireland through non-standard means.
Ireland is a very soft target, and Russian likes soft targets.
