Ireland - now considered one of most vulnerable countries in the EU (defense wise)

Irish didn't have the same degree of contempt it appears.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24047026

Worth noting the Irish also fought on the side of Aborigines but agree 💯, allaying with the British in their colonial enterprise is a historical stain on us and would not want to repeat that mistake.

No to NATO from me anyway.

Worth noting as well, that IF the UK came to Ireland's assistance, it would not be considered an attack on a NATO country, so the UK would be doing so alone.

Be curious how you think Ireland could "assist" a Nato member.

I don't know the term for it either, I dont know if we pay the uk anything for the RAF activities. I think it's about economies of scale, the maintenance for a small fleet of planes for their limited potential use is probably not worth it. I think we should maintain a better navy though as an island nation.

But we have zero reason for joining Nato

Operation human shield.

Operation arrows cost money.

In a case such as Ukraine, outside countries have not provided it with any troops or direct military assistance to repel their invader. The Ukrainians are literally on their own on the battlefield - exactly like Ireland would be if it were attacked by another country.

All of which leads us back to the central question which is were Ireland to be attacked, how would we manage to defend ourselves long enough - on a short term basis - for anyone to get round to sending us military assistance, never mind how - on a medium/ long term basis - we would manage to defend ourselves for 2 years + in a grinding war like Ukraine?

The deployment in Afghanistan wasn’t a NATO mission, it was a UN sanctioned one. NATO led the mission simply because the vast majority of countries sending troops were part of NATO and therefore understood the control structure. None of the countries were obligated to provide troops in any way.

NATO is a purely defensive organization. The only time a member is obligated to provide assistance is under the “an attack on one is an attack on all” clause.

Who is the nation that is going to attack for two years though? It is fair enough to ask what is the point of spending money on conventional weapons for defense of an invasion when there is no chance in hell in the foreseeable future of us being invaded.

I would support putting money into the navy and cyber defences but our army size suits are current and future foreseeable needs.

The invasion was only the US, it wasn’t NATO backed at all.

ISAF was formed after the US had pulled out and the new regime was in charge. It was the new regime that asked the UNSC for assistance.

A destabilized UK, a Russia during a war on Europe or the UK. Better to be ready and not a soft touch, no body can really tell when such things could happen.

Ireland cannot protect itself. It cannot monitor or prevent any underwater ocean cables etc from being cut, or deliberately damaged. Its alarming that the country cannot account for what is in its airspace, lack of radar monitoring equipment having to relay on others - how has it got to this ? The lack of any investment, never mind continuous investment should worry people, but its always the same here, 'Ah sure it'll be grand' attitude. 24 years into the 21st century and lack of housing, rail and constant water boil notices as water system is not fit for purpose of population - failing to meet its EU minimum standards AND Ireland couldn't even justify why - ECJ found against Ireland recently . Lack of ANY accountability to anyone in local and national political arena. Being neutral doesn't mean that we can't invest in looking after ourselves. Switzerland does it very well. Before anyone says they are loaded - so are we (as a country). The Swiss are neutral, yet they have conscription, have an army, that can defend airspace that is capable of being monitored.

Our economy is reliant on too many things that can easily be disrupted internally and externally. The national Grid cant cope with the growth of data centres, pharma exports reduced forecast for the next few years. What I'd like to see are real steps - that are measurable and accountable.

The 'we are a small country' doesn't stack up anymore and more and more members of the EU are now looking deeper into the country for all sorts of reasons. But I guess the attitude of sure it will be grand will prevail.

Spending money on policing our airspace and our territorial waters is considered part of the 2% expenditure re NATO ‘rules’

Unfortunately I don't think voters buy into the idea that we will attacked by Russia any time soon so there is not a snowballs chance that voters would vote in a government that would even propose joining Nato.