Raiders steal tanker from army barracks

Nope, I don't believe that either force deserves the derision that they receive,I do however fully expect to be slagged a bit by the others when something goes wrong and on the surface appears farcical. Slotting the whole army, navy, aer corps, over an incident like this is not on though. Yes its a wake up call, but if any of you have been in any barracks in a town around the country you can see the problems in security in evidence. Infrastructure needs investment, fencing, lighting, cameras, observation posts, all need to be constructed. most town barracks have houses or commercial premises practically backed onto their walls in some cases!

however regarding the gardai i believe they have the toughest job, they deal with the scum of the earth day in and day out, they don't have the luxury of being heavily armed for their own protection and they're treated pretty badly by govt too. thats for another thread though.

It was only meant in banter - this IS after hours is it not? And no real offence was intended towards the boys in blue. Sure in this case, instead of the army providing backup to the Gardai, someone in the barracks had to dial the local garda station and embarrassingly report a vehicle stolen... from THEIR barracks!

For example zoom on this location in google maps
53.329517,-6.272579
thats grove road flats in dublin and yes it overlooks cathal brugha barracks behind it.

ideally military barracks have an unbroken and protected external curtain wall surrounding them. Just from google maps you can see that thats not the case with many of our urban barracks in ireland, they are dependent on razor wire and barbed wire - both can be overcome by determined individuals. This is one part of what needs to be addressed. The human factor must be looked at, the current operating model of patrols and situational awareness around the barracks will be reviewed and if changes are needed they will happen.

yes, the chicken has flown the coup, but reactive becomes proactive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s4OSqrb2Ww

who the fug wrote: »

Originally Posted by charlemont
We seized a tanker, Oh boy we did.
We' ll put it on auction for a bid..
Behind the big high walls for safe keeping.
Didn't realise the boys were a creepin.
Over the walls they came a leaping.
Where is our tanker ?
Something is wrong
Have a look the fúcking thing is gone.
The gates of the barracks were a busted.
Leaving all the soldiers and the Gardaí a disgusted.

Two Tankers and they could have done a version of Convoy

:pac:

For anyone who doesn't know it this deserves its own clip

wexie

Morpheus wrote: »

Sure in this case, instead of the army providing backup to the Gardai, someone in the barracks had to dial the local garda station and embarrassingly report a vehicle stolen... from THEIR barracks!

Hadn't thought of that, imagine having to make this call....
I'd love to hear how that went down....

.....hang on a minute.....maybe it was all just an insurance scam and the truck is safely parked in another barracks?

wexie wrote: »

And while I appreciate all the points with regards to all the 'good stuff' being locked up and guarded properly, surely if people can manage to get inside undetected half the battle is already fought, and lost? In the grand scheme of things stealing a tanker truck is pretty benign, given recent events in London I can only imagine what more horrible things (suitably psychopathic) people could get upto once inside an army barracks.

If you can get into a base and drive out with a huge slow vehicle like this, then in the event of war, what would stop enemy troops sneaking in to blow up out ammunition depots?

CruelCoin wrote: »

If you can get into a base and drive out with a huge slow vehicle like this, then in the event of war, what would stop enemy troops sneaking in to blow up out ammunition depots?

Our imaginary neutrality and all those folks hugging trees in the barracks would form effective human shields!

TheDB

Morpheus wrote: »

Our imaginary neutrality and all those folks hugging trees in the barracks would form effective human shields!

Eh aren't you divulging too much of the Irish Army's opsec??

Hey, it wasn't me that told the enemy about our ammunition depots!!

Morpheus wrote: »

Hey, it wasn't me that told the enemy about our ammunition depots!!

Sowwy,

"Scuffs feet"

Not that it matters. Any half arsed invasion would rout our boys inside a week anyway.

whose fault is it that we have basically the guts of a single division worth of soldiers (including reserves)
20 odd aircraft (only 11 of which are armed)
A few batteries of artillery, air defence radar and guns and surface to air missiles
8 armed naval service vessels
and about 150 armoured vehicles in total?

Morpheus wrote: »

whose fault is it that we have basically the guts of a single division worth of soldiers (including reserves)

Yup, any force large enough to mount an invasion of the island and occupy it, would be default be many times larger than the size of our DF. Automatic loss.

Morpheus wrote: »

20 odd aircraft (only 11 of which are armed)

Are they the "effective in low altitude, ground attack only" ones?

Morpheus wrote: »

8 armed naval service vessels

Machine guns and pea shooters don't count.
If they can't patrol effectively for spanish fishermen, they won't cut it against a modern navy.

Morpheus wrote: »

and about 150 armoured vehicles in total?

APC's are technically armored, but we still have no tanks.

The DF always give me a giggle.

The govt concept of what firepower and the numbers thereof required for an effective DF to be fully capable for comparable violent aggression with a belligerent always gives ME a giggle. the men and women who serve without complaint, rarely do.

Morpheus wrote: »

Our imaginary neutrality...

The state has a traditional policy of neutrality and there is no reason to indicate any departure from that policy, as guided by the principles and declarations set out in Article 29.1 - 29.3 of Bunreacht na h-Eireann, expanded upon in Horgan v Ireland (2003).

In that case, it was argued by An Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Transport, the Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General of Ireland (Defendants) that whilst Ireland does not consider itself neutral under the strict Hague Convention V (1907) sense, that there exists both a more modern and nuanced form of neutrality. This was the argument raised by the Government of Ireland.

Probably best to take their word for it.

Dr Turk Turkelton

Morpheus wrote: »

whose fault is it that we have basically the guts of a single division worth of soldiers (including reserves)
20 odd aircrafonly 11 of which are armed)
A few batteries of artillery, air defence radar and guns and surface to air missiles
8 armed naval service vessels
and about 150 armoured vehicles in total?

So to get back on topic even with all this firepower our army couldn't babysit a tanker from a few paramilitary criminals?

flutered

CruelCoin wrote: »

Sowwy,

"Scuffs feet"

Not that it matters. Any half arsed invasion would rout our boys inside a week anyway.

you are a bit optimistic op, i recon a max of 3 days.

OCorcrainn

Thank f**k this country doesn't have nukes, if we did we'd all be screwed.

Thankfully, due to our Imaginary Neutrality (Hague convention, you cant pick and choose with neutrality, you either are or arent neutral), or as its more widely known, Foreign Policy of non involvement on a case by case basis under the triple lock agreement (see? case by case) , we could depend on our EU allies (EU battlegroups of which we are a part) and most likely the USA through our NATO PFP partnership to step in and aid us... then theres all that oil were finding off the coast too...

the_syco

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

How would a bunch of unarmed pen pushers mind the tanker?Thats why we have an armed forces.

Would've thought Dublin, and not right-next-to-Norn-Iron would've been a better idea?

CruelCoin wrote: »

APC's are technically armored, but we still have no tanks.

Did we lose the Scorpions?

=-=

Would've thought Dundalk would've had better security, since it and the Ballyshannon barracks are fairly close to the NI border counties...?

Morpheus wrote: »

Thankfully, due to our Imaginary Neutrality (Hague convention, you cant pick and choose with neutrality

Of course you can.
That was the legal basis for the Government's defence in Horgan v Ireland, whereby the government asserted its authority to implement neutrality as it saw fit, whereby the Government's definition does not fit with the Hague Convention's definition - the ruling in that case indicates that the Government is under no obligation to submit to the Hague's definition of neutrality, due to the greater authority of the domestic Government over Irish affairs, especially in deciding when we are or are not neutral.

Dyr

Morpheus wrote: »

The govt concept of what firepower and the numbers thereof required for an effective DF to be fully capable for comparable violent aggression with a belligerent always gives ME a giggle. the men and women who serve without complaint, rarely do.

Youse will probably hold out long enough for the assorted ministers to hop a plane to the states/france/nearest safe zone, that's all they ask for.

The army was always geared to protect the government of the day from those naughty internal security threats, not to protect the state from outside invasion

the_syco wrote: »

Did we lose the Scorpions?

Its so cute! Widdums.

Seriously, little to no sloping armour, weak armour, a (at max) 90mm gun that was surpassed in the 1960's.....

Its an armored reconnaissance vehicle, not a tank.

which is why we have invested in anti aircraft (bofors 40mm and RBS 70, upgraded giraffe radars), anti tank (javelin, 84s) and heavy artillery (105mm guns and 120mm mortars), 76mm oto malera... in case the subversives get tanks ships and aircraft....

scorpion has a 76mm gun and is a recce vehicle providing fire support for recce units

Burdock

The personnel in a barracks at that time of night are not there to watch a tanker, they're there to guard the armoury and other vital installations.

The tanker should have been disabled IMO.

RATM

Bambi wrote: »

Is there an Irish army version of that form where you can claim compo for hurt feelings?

yeah, its called the High Court

discus

flutered wrote: »

you are a bit optimistic op, i recon a max of 3 days.

You understate the ability of how Irish people can fight, the proof of which can be seen all the way through the past few hundred years.

TheDB

Burdock wrote: »

The personnel in a barracks at that time of night are not there to watch a tanker, they're there to guard the armoury and other vital installations.

The tanker should have been disabled IMO.

That seems like a very circular existence.

The Defence Forces purpose is to protect the state and to provide assistance to the civil authories upon request. In this case they were supposed to back up the Gardaí by keeping evidence that was stolen by dissident republicans.