Raiders steal tanker from army barracks

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 02:15PM

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

Cody Pomeray · 28-05-2013 02:17PM

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

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

wexie · 28-05-2013 02:18PM

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?

CruelCoin · 28-05-2013 02:36PM

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?

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 02:39PM

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 · 28-05-2013 02:41PM

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??

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 03:07PM

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

CruelCoin · 28-05-2013 03:22PM

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.

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 03:26PM

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?

CruelCoin · 28-05-2013 03:33PM

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.

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 03:47PM

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.

Cody Pomeray · 28-05-2013 03:51PM

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 · 28-05-2013 03:52PM

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 · 28-05-2013 03:59PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:02PM

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

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 04:07PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:09PM

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...?

Cody Pomeray · 28-05-2013 04:17PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:22PM

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

CruelCoin · 28-05-2013 04:37PM

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.

Morpheus · 28-05-2013 04:41PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:43PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:46PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:47PM

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 · 28-05-2013 04:50PM

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.

Cody Pomeray · 28-05-2013 04:52PM

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.

If the barracks administration don't want the lorry then, insofar as they are even allowed to reject it, they need to make their concerns clear to Revenue.

I can imagine a few remotely credible justifications as to why the lorry might have got away, but nobody is seriously going to pull off this one. You might as well try blaming the prison service for the escape of a prisoner in Garda custody. Very silly.

laoch na mona · 28-05-2013 04:52PM

this is a joke how can a base be that easy to rob lets hope no dissidents want new guns

I'm all for armed forces, I even considered joining byt fúck how does **** like this happen. Thank good we never faced a real threat to the 26 counties (after ww2)

jugger0 · 28-05-2013 05:01PM

discus wrote: »

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.

We should have an army geared towards Guerrilla warfare not one which tries to fight conventionally... also a term of service for all Irish citizens should be implemented, imagine if every man on this island was given military training, any invader would be drowning in their own blood the longer they stayed here, also for all the people saying Europe will protect us.. come off it.. we should be able to defend ourselves instead of relying on others.

Cienciano · 28-05-2013 05:17PM

CruelCoin wrote: »

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.

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

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.

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

The DF always give me a giggle.

How much of our budget do you reckon we should put into the defence forces? Bearing in mind that a modern fighter get costs about 1 eight of out entire budget. A nuclear sub is about 3 times our entire budget.
Go on, tell us what services you would cut in order to get our army up to scratch. All in case someone "invades our island".

eire-kp · 28-05-2013 05:21PM

As someone who worked in various in a military barracks here on contract works yes security is a bit lax compared to bases I have worked on in the United States, particularly on bases located in more rural parts of the US which are not located a few miles from a border with another country and no paramilitary forces operating in the area:rolleyes:

Other points to note were the large number of late 30 to 40 year old army personal who would roll faster than could run.

Yes the army does suffer from spending cuts, I was nearly embarrassed to watching some engineers attempting to dig a trench with an extremely old Cat excavator that should have been sent for scrap a long time ago.
To be fair to the lads the other night though comments about a slow truck etc I'm quite sure under the circumstances speed limiter removed and absolutely abusing the truck involved to the last many here would be surprised off how quickly it could cover the few miles to the border.

The suggestions earlier about having a better trained army were not a bad idea. I know nothing about it but would 5000 men trained to the standards of the Rangers be possible and spend the balance saved on extra patrol craft to monitor the coastline?

Raiders steal tanker from army barracks

Comments