Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Ignore button is a lovely feat

Here, read this. Read it, especially Chapters 2-7 inc.

It was drawn up by, among others, the former Chief of Defence of the Kingdom of Norway, the former Director General of the EU Defence Staff and Director of Defence Planning for the Kingdom of Denmark, the Director of the Institute for Strategy at the Royal Danish Defence College and the former Chief of Staff of Óglaigh na hÉireann - the Irish Defence Forces.

They and their fellow Commission members have forgotten more about the strategic defence environment for small European coastal States in the 21st Century than you will ever know and had already debunked all of your spoofing and bullshyt before you ever uttered the words.

So read it, digest it, learn from it and please to be shutting up, ideally forever.

@delusiondestroyer

1. you did not address my question about why the strategic situation today is bdifferent from 1942, you said it was beneath you to answer, which of course means, you have no answer.
2. I did not say that no one would assist Ireland if it was invaded tomorrow, because it had not invested in its security. I made a more subtle point, which you clearly missed. I said that in a more dangerous world the US might consider changing its investment strategies in the light of Ireland not properly securing the environment within which they did business. A bit like I might not hire a unit in a business park if there was no night watchman on duty
3. I note you are refusing to take points from others, who have been no more condescending to you than you have to them.
4. And you clearly have no answer to the cogently argued points by Manic Moran.

Face it, to mix metaphors , your race is run, it is senior hurling now....

Oh I didn't wish to enter into a discussion with you, believe me, but I am pleased my previous comments directed at all your evident flaws hit home.

I ask you not, in any case, to read a word of my composition on the matter, but rather the final report of the expert Commission on the Defence Forces, whose considered conclusions would disabuse any unfortunate reader that the hokum you emit has any relevance to the conversation.

And it's spelled 'favour'.

Favor is the US English spelling of the word Favour, which pretty much every other English speaking country in the world uses. Is that a simple mistake on your part or has your doubling down on this point exposed you?

This document is the final word on the need conversation. Seeing as you don't like larbre I'll post it for you.

Lol, he's been scrambling through my 14+ years of threads and posts lads, rummaging around for an insult, have you ever heard anything more pathetic in your entire life?

A pathetic trolling fool who is happy now to be vomiting on about anything but the topic, for obvious reasons.

He may well have a sticky caps key, but that comes with the territory of being a paid up Russian social media troll who dwells in Mother's basement with a Kleenex Platinum Customer card always to hand.

But seriously, I do think its time this hijacking of the thread ended, it's boring and tiresome in what is a mostly a constructive and participative forum. Manic, over to you.

Usual from SF, and in fairness any opposition party in not putting a figure on it… But sure let’s go for 1%, we spent that before on defence without anything like the economy we have now, and I’m fairly sure 3+ billion Euros would fill a lot of gaps.

" Feel free to ask the exact question you would like the answer to.

"We have 7310 poorly equipped troops and no airforce and a tiny navy, doesn't get much weaker than that its been like that for years, and yet we are awash with foreign investment. Apple, Google and Facebook all disagree with your assessment of our security.

Just shows no one is relying on the Irish Defense forces, and no one is concerned about Ireland being randomly attacked anytime soon because if they were big multinationals like that would be pushing for increased security but they aren't.

The only ones concerned about these "major" defense issues are on this thread, the threat doesn't exist in reality."

Point 1. I asked yo a direct question, three times now, about why Ireland's security situation now is "entirely different" than in the 1940s. You have evaded this question, on one occasion suggesting the answer was so obvious that it was beneath you to address it. I suspect that is because there are some parallels between the situations which your anwser would actually draw attention to. Please make your argument that the situations are "entirely different" so we can evaluate it.

The army is NOT poorly equipped, actually! Small yes, but pro rata have actually quite a lot of heavy and sophisticated weaponry, in some areas exceeding many NATO forces, and if you actually read the CoDF you would be aware that most of the changes they are suggesting are to the size of the army not pro-rata its equipment levels. Your comments about the size and power of the Navy and air corps are broadly correct.

As I said in my last post the 90s and early 2000s, when the bulk of these firms arrived, was a uniquely stable time in European affairs. Whatever way you slice it and dice it the security situation in Europe has significantly deteriorated. We may differ on our assessment of how far that may go and where it may affect, but it is a fact to say we are not living in such stable geopolitical times as when most of these companies established in Ireland.The fact that there is concern at governmental level about Ireland's security situation and its vulnerability is shown by the fact that they a. commissioned the CODF and b. in the main accepted its conclusions, with some areas like jets for instance, no active decision made, in large part because the jet decision does not need to be made until other things are in place, like long range primary radar.

If you read the Irish papers you would be aware that this is now a significant talking point in Ireland. There have been nine articles in the Irish national newspapers this week on neutrality alone. Are you actually Irish, or have you only lives in Ireland for some of your life? Are you aware that this is a significant debate in Ireland at this time? You used a spelling (Favor) that is never used in Ireland and I noticed some other word forms, poor punctuation, etc which are not typical of Irish people. If you are not Irish you are probably not aware that the tanaiste (tthat is he deputy PM) has just announced a National Forum to sit in June to discuss Irish defence posture and neutrality. Hint, the government are doing this because they want to have a kind of democratic rubber stamp to significantly up defence spending and modify Ireland's definition of neutrality.

Tell you what. You claimed earlier that the "fact" that Ireland would not increase defence spending (your prediction), is proof you are right that Ireland has no threat level. Now leaving aside the really dodgy bit that something that hasnt' happened yet (namely Ireland decision on future defence spending) cannot be used to prove a point in the present (pretty typical of your approach to proof really), lets decide to meet here in, say six months. If Ireland has not made modifications to neutrality and there has been no increase in defence spending I will concede, if the opposite happens you will concede. Are you man enough to put your money (metaphorically) where your mouth is?

Genuine question. Are you part of the Irish Anti-War movement? IN all honestly when the IAWM and PANA were genuine neutralists and leftists I had more than a little sympathy with their views (although my own experience had taught me they were, in some ways a bit naive), but the suggestion from that idiot Mark Price that we should give over our defence to an aggressive imperialist power like the UK suggests to me that agent provocateurs are now influential in that movement (not directly accusing Price himself, reckon he is the old useful fool). I reckon the IAWM are being used to weaken Irish neutrality and independence, not strengthen it.