Thanks Thanks:  159
Likes Likes:  510
Dislikes Dislikes:  15
Page 3 of 25 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 608
  1. #51
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have to say I think whingeNot makes a valid point. There is definitely a case for giving the entire DF an increased capability in terms of itís ability to provide a conventional deterrent. The amount of times Iíve read that the roe of the Cavalry s ďreeceĒ and that itís there to identify and quantify enemy threats so that other elements in the DF can engage and destroy. What other elements? The heaviest vehicles we have are in the Cav so what are we proposing? Asking some other army to come along and get rid of the problem for us? Oops cant do that were neutral 

    There is definitely a case to be made to replace the scorps with something like a CV90 to probably double the amount of Mowagís increase Air defence capability (Land to air) and either scrap the Air Corps and sign a formal defence agreement with the RAF or else develop a nascent air to Air capability ourselves. 2 EPvís for the navy with a nascent antisubmarine capability isnít a bad idea either

    IN broader strategic terms I think all of you are missing some very fundamental potential changes to our strategic environment in the coming 10 years.

    1. UK decides in a referendum to leave the EU? What happens Scotland? What happens NI? What happens the UK itself? What in turn then happens to the EU? Itís not impossible to imagine a scenario where the UK breaks up, Scotland and NI vote to stay in the EU and England votes to leave. Do we then have a two tier Europe? Do e have to take NI into the republic? What happens the DF in such a scenario (name change for starters but also potential defence agreement with the UK? Remember if the UK pulls out of NI this Island becomes VERY strategically important all of a sudden.
    2. Given the confusion and turmoil such a scenario would create what attitude would Putin take to all of this? (And by the way was ANYONE predicting war in Ukraine and the annexation (yes that old word from the 30ís Ė annexation) of Crimea even 5 years ago?
    Itís clear Putin wishes to re-establish Russian hegemony in itís near western shphere. Itís also clear that Putin thinks (And is probably right) that he could do anything he likes short of using chemical biological or nuclear weapons and or drive the ď4th Guards tank ArmyĒ back into Warsaw before the west would do anything.
    3. Our DF is there to be expanded in case of an emergency. Lets make sure we have corporate knowledge of relevant systems so that there is something there to expand. Currenlty we are not close enough to where we need to be.

  2. Thanks Schmigs thanked for this post
    Likes Flamingo, ODIN liked this post
  3. #52
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Pure Hover View Post
    WhingeNot - your musings make for interesting reading and I do hope you submitted them for condideration during the WP process. Whether they'll be considered or even read is another matter entirely. Most commentators with a modicum of interest in our DF await the publication of the new WP with a sense of hopeful anticipation that it will provide a pathway or framework for the use and development of our forces for the next decade or so.
    Four years delay aside I don't have much confidence that we'll see the sort of lofty strategic document, most likely now quietly published Christmas week or so, that we all hope for. Essentially because those writing the document i.e. DOD policy branch don't have the necessary knowledge or strategic vision to complete the process. Give it to the SPO to complete a draft and then you'd see an altogether different document.

    The capabilities of our forces have been progressively and systematically eroded by a drive to reduce numbers. We now see ourselves with three major obstacles to clear before any real recovery can take place; 1. The lowest Defence spend per GDP in The EU. 2. The chronic low pay of a lot of our soldiers 3. The continuing increase in pension provision for mass retirements that must be paid for out of the Defence Vote

    Address these first and then get people who know what they're talking about to write a White Paper.
    This is the part of the problem

    The DoD's job is to advise the Minister (and by extension the Government) on Defence policy (eg finance, property, C&A, PfP, EU etc)

    It is the COS's job to advise the Minster on defence matters (ie the threat level, how many troops you need to do x, etc)

    The problem is the cross over and co-ordination of the issues. It is probably part of the reason the DF was historical run down.

  4. #53
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Banner View Post
    I have to say I think whingeNot makes a valid point. There is definitely a case for giving the entire DF an increased capability in terms of itís ability to provide a conventional deterrent. The amount of times Iíve read that the roe of the Cavalry s ďreeceĒ and that itís there to identify and quantify enemy threats so that other elements in the DF can engage and destroy. What other elements? The heaviest vehicles we have are in the Cav so what are we proposing? Asking some other army to come along and get rid of the problem for us? Oops cant do that were neutral 

    There is definitely a case to be made to replace the scorps with something like a CV90 to probably double the amount of Mowagís increase Air defence capability (Land to air) and either scrap the Air Corps and sign a formal defence agreement with the RAF or else develop a nascent air to Air capability ourselves. 2 EPvís for the navy with a nascent antisubmarine capability isnít a bad idea either

    IN broader strategic terms I think all of you are missing some very fundamental potential changes to our strategic environment in the coming 10 years.

    1. UK decides in a referendum to leave the EU? What happens Scotland? What happens NI? What happens the UK itself? What in turn then happens to the EU? Itís not impossible to imagine a scenario where the UK breaks up, Scotland and NI vote to stay in the EU and England votes to leave. Do we then have a two tier Europe? Do e have to take NI into the republic? What happens the DF in such a scenario (name change for starters but also potential defence agreement with the UK? Remember if the UK pulls out of NI this Island becomes VERY strategically important all of a sudden.
    2. Given the confusion and turmoil such a scenario would create what attitude would Putin take to all of this? (And by the way was ANYONE predicting war in Ukraine and the annexation (yes that old word from the 30ís Ė annexation) of Crimea even 5 years ago?
    Itís clear Putin wishes to re-establish Russian hegemony in itís near western shphere. Itís also clear that Putin thinks (And is probably right) that he could do anything he likes short of using chemical biological or nuclear weapons and or drive the ď4th Guards tank ArmyĒ back into Warsaw before the west would do anything.
    3. Our DF is there to be expanded in case of an emergency. Lets make sure we have corporate knowledge of relevant systems so that there is something there to expand. Currenlty we are not close enough to where we need to be.
    Personally, I think that is more the Cav's view of itself - ISTAR focused. Medium recce (well out ahead of the main body) is one of the primary roles of the Cav. However, it isn't the only one. http://www.military.ie/army/organisa...corps/cavalry/ The Cav is a Combat Support corps, they are there to support the infantry.

    International relations (and defence) are "excepted matters" for the NI Assembly -- iea get can't vote to stay in the EU

    The island is a strategic location now

  5. Thanks apod thanked for this post
  6. #54
    Major General ODIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,905
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Banner View Post
    I have to say I think whingeNot makes a valid point. There is definitely a case for giving the entire DF an increased capability in terms of itís ability to provide a conventional deterrent. The amount of times Iíve read that the roe of the Cavalry s ďreeceĒ and that itís there to identify and quantify enemy threats so that other elements in the DF can engage and destroy. What other elements? The heaviest vehicles we have are in the Cav so what are we proposing? Asking some other army to come along and get rid of the problem for us? Oops cant do that were neutral 

    There is definitely a case to be made to replace the scorps with something like a CV90 to probably double the amount of Mowagís increase Air defence capability (Land to air) and either scrap the Air Corps and sign a formal defence agreement with the RAF or else develop a nascent air to Air capability ourselves. 2 EPvís for the navy with a nascent antisubmarine capability isnít a bad idea either

    IN broader strategic terms I think all of you are missing some very fundamental potential changes to our strategic environment in the coming 10 years.

    1. UK decides in a referendum to leave the EU? What happens Scotland? What happens NI? What happens the UK itself? What in turn then happens to the EU? Itís not impossible to imagine a scenario where the UK breaks up, Scotland and NI vote to stay in the EU and England votes to leave. Do we then have a two tier Europe? Do e have to take NI into the republic? What happens the DF in such a scenario (name change for starters but also potential defence agreement with the UK? Remember if the UK pulls out of NI this Island becomes VERY strategically important all of a sudden.
    2. Given the confusion and turmoil such a scenario would create what attitude would Putin take to all of this? (And by the way was ANYONE predicting war in Ukraine and the annexation (yes that old word from the 30ís Ė annexation) of Crimea even 5 years ago?
    Itís clear Putin wishes to re-establish Russian hegemony in itís near western shphere. Itís also clear that Putin thinks (And is probably right) that he could do anything he likes short of using chemical biological or nuclear weapons and or drive the ď4th Guards tank ArmyĒ back into Warsaw before the west would do anything.
    3. Our DF is there to be expanded in case of an emergency. Lets make sure we have corporate knowledge of relevant systems so that there is something there to expand. Currenlty we are not close enough to where we need to be.
    What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

  7. Likes Shaqra, Turkey, DeV liked this post
  8. #55
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like
    "The island is a strategic location now"

    Yes Dev but currently the 6 northern counties of this island including a major international airport and a deepwater port are Soverign UK territory and a fully paid up leading member of NATO. If NI was to decide (in the context of a Uk decision to leave the EU) that it would be better off negotiating a more formal agreement with the republic what then? If NI was to leave NATO and the UK this island would suddenly become MASSIVELY strategically important.

    ASk yourself this, would Briatin have left Ireland totally unmolested in WW2 had NI not been part of the UK? (I seriously doubt it)

    it is EXTREMELY likely there will be a referendum on UK membership of the EU in the next 5 years.
    It's EXTREMELY likely that a majority will vote to leave BUT Scotland and NI would vote to stay

    What happens then? Does the rest of the UK FORCE Scotland to leave the EU against it's will. What of NI? There are serious questions coming down the tracks that nobody can predict an answer to.

    WE might find ourselves part of a 32 county republic INSIDE the commonwealth and NATO (or perhaps with a bilateral defence arrangement with the UK) before we know it.

    the one thing I am very happy to predict is this, the status quo will not be acceptable over the course of the next 10 years.

    Things are gonna change - big time. Lets debate, look at all the issues have an open and frank discussion and be better prepared as a result.

    Oh and I suspect another massive elephant in the strategic room is climate change but that's a whole different story.

  9. #56
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    373
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    This is the part of the problem

    The DoD's job is to advise the Minister (and by extension the Government) on Defence policy (eg finance, property, C&A, PfP, EU etc)

    It is the COS's job to advise the Minster on defence matters (ie the threat level, how many troops you need to do x, etc)

    The problem is the cross over and co-ordination of the issues. It is probably part of the reason the DF was historical run down.
    DoD don't just advise the Minister on Defence policy, they set Defence Policy and largely ignore the inputs of the CoS. You hardly think the Minister is setting the agenda for the White Paper do you? The rest of the Gov't are largely clueless or disinterested when it comes to Defence and the DoD exploit this, relentlessly cutting numbers and resources at the whim of their only masters - Dept of Finance.

  10. Thanks apod thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  11. #57
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Banner View Post
    the one thing I am very happy to predict is this, the status quo will not be acceptable over the course of the next 10 years.

    Things are gonna change - big time. Lets debate, look at all the issues have an open and frank discussion and be better prepared as a result.
    The status quo is not acceptable now. It was not acceptable during the Cold War. It's a feint.

    Yet it has survived - and I don't see it going away, short of a major external military threat specifically targeting this state - or threatening the UK via our water/airspace.

    As long as neither of those eventualities occur, we'll carry on being "neutral", because it's the cheapest, politically expedient option; because the UK & US are happy enough to play along with it; and it comes with feck all responsibilities.

    I don't think there's any chance of NI leaving UK within 25 yrs, let alone 10. An EU referendum wont force the issue - I think you underestimate the ability of politicians to bend/compromise & adapt.

    If we woke up tomorrow and NI was part of a 32 county State - the imperative that would drive increased spending on Defense would be wholly internal & very very expensive. And you could forget Air Defence, CIWS for ships, ASW capability, MBT's, whatever.

    Regarding your point about WW2 - if partition hadn't happened & instead there was a healthy, independent 32 county state where Republican & Unionist were elected & proportionally represented in the DŠil - our relationship with Britain would have been fundamentally different & I think there would have been a very good chance that we'd have joined their war effort, if not from the get go - then after the first German raid on H&W etc.

    Anyway - yeah that's just my opinion, I think it's good to have a debate, it's good to outline the costs associated with different levels of defensive capabilities.

    Any significant leap will come at eye watering cost.

  12. #58
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,847
    Post Thanks / Like
    with regards to the issue of different constituant parts of the UK having different views on membership of the EU, Denmark provides an example: when Denmark joined it contained Greenland, which, just like the suburbs of Copenhagen became part of the EU. however Greenland, while remaining part of the Kingdom of Denmark, left the EU.

    it could be done, though i accept entirely that the UK is a rather more complex issue than Denmark/Greenland.

  13. #59
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rather than us having to buy expensive mil equipment and arms etc perhaps other " likeminded" countries might store/depot same here on a foward stage basis,its there for them to use if there is a brew up or we can use it if needs be.

  14. #60
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Pure Hover View Post
    DoD don't just advise the Minister on Defence policy, they set Defence Policy and largely ignore the inputs of the CoS. You hardly think the Minister is setting the agenda for the White Paper do you? The rest of the Gov't are largely clueless or disinterested when it comes to Defence and the DoD exploit this, relentlessly cutting numbers and resources at the whim of their only masters - Dept of Finance.
    I agree but it has definitely improved since the 80s

  15. #61
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is conceivable currently that we would join NATO, there is too much opposition (look at Nice and Lisbon).

    To be honest, whatever about during the boom, I can't see a major of NI's population wanting to come into the Republic.

    As I previously said, the NI Assembly can't make the choice to remain in the EU.

  16. Likes Pure Hover liked this post
  17. #62
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is true that NI cant make the choice to remain as England makes up in the 80% of UK's population. But there is a chance that during the referendum on EU membership NI will vote to remain in. The SDLP SF Alliance support it the DUP cant make up there minds. Peter Robinson made a statement a while back that even that his party is euro-sceptic it would support EU membership. This saying back during the euro elections the DUP's only MEP Diane Dodds said she was Against. And of course the UUP/TUV are against.

    Its like Alex Salmond said people from Scotland have never voted for a Conservative government. The same can be said in NI in recent times anyway in the last two Westminster elections the conservatives' fielded candidates but failed.

    If the UK leaves you could see a rise in support in middle of the road northerners wanting to become part of the republic.

  18. #63
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    It is true that NI cant make the choice to remain as England makes up in the 80% of UK's population. But there is a chance that during the referendum on EU membership NI will vote to remain in. The SDLP SF Alliance support it the DUP cant make up there minds. Peter Robinson made a statement a while back that even that his party is euro-sceptic it would support EU membership. This saying back during the euro elections the DUP's only MEP Diane Dodds said she was Against. And of course the UUP/TUV are against.

    Its like Alex Salmond said people from Scotland have never voted for a Conservative government. The same can be said in NI in recent times anyway in the last two Westminster elections the conservatives' fielded candidates but failed.

    If the UK leaves you could see a rise in support in middle of the road northerners wanting to become part of the republic.
    NI would have to vote for independance first, before any vote on EU membership, as the devolved powers don't include foreign affairs

  19. #64
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    373
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    I agree but it has definitely improved since the 80s

    Doesn't say much about the 80's because it's pretty grim at the moment. You know it's a shame we can't have an open debate on what we want as our National Defence policy instead of what some bean counter thinks we want. I know submissions were invited from interested parties but in the last White Paper these were simply ignored. Maybe when the Draft White Paper is presented to our new Minister he will open up that sort of a debate. I certainly hope so.

    However the most likely scenario will be a quiet endorsement at a cabinet meeting and hey presto we have a new Defence Policy.

  20. #65
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    NI would have to vote for independance first, before any vote on EU membership, as the devolved powers don't include foreign affairs
    NI would not have to vote for Independence it would be voting to become part of the Republic of Ireland who would be an member of the EU. NI does actually have is own international relations through OFM-DFM.

  21. #66
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    The GP was published to discuss and debate

    Does anyone else foresee an other potentially likely conventional threat?

  22. #67
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    NI would not have to vote for Independence it would be voting to become part of the Republic of Ireland who would be an member of the EU. NI does actually have is own international relations through OFM-DFM.
    That's not what you stated in your previous post
    England, Wales, Scotland and NI don't have separate votes on EU membership, they vote as a single State (UK & NI)

    Same way as Munster doesn't vote to say no and does it own thing (although they would like to)

    Foreign affairs in NI has it's policy set by and Minister in Westminster (not Stormont)

  23. #68
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    What I stated in post#62 NI would be forced to leave the EU (An organisation it does very well out of) because of England making up over 80% of the UK. It could be the catalyst for people in NI that policy's made in Westminster are not suited to them. And they would be better off a part of the Republic of Ireland. This scenario would have a effect on the Defence forces as it may have to be involved in Counter-Insurgency operations most likely in built up areas.

    Westminster does set NI Foreign affairs but the point I was making is that the NI assembly does have its own International relations to support the powers that are devolved like Tourism Enterprise and Agriculture being the main ones.

  24. #69
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    It could be the catalyst for people in NI that policy's made in Westminster are not suited to them. And they would be better off a part of the Republic of Ireland.
    So they make one great hop from London policies to Dublin ones - completely skipping greater autonomy? Completely skipping all other other arrangements?

    Seriously?

  25. #70
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    So they make one great hop from London policies to Dublin ones - completely skipping greater autonomy? Completely skipping all other other arrangements?

    Seriously?
    Its only a Theory a rational type of abstract or generalised thinking. We will see soon in the new year if Westminster is willing to devolve more powers as Scotland was promised if it voted no in the independence referendum.

    But would people in the Republic not prefer that conclusion rather than a United Ireland purely based on Sectarian headcount.
    Last edited by Stevo768; 19th November 2014 at 21:30. Reason: Grammar

  26. #71
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,075
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    What I stated in post#62 NI would be forced to leave the EU (An organisation it does very well out of) because of England making up over 80% of the UK. It could be the catalyst for people in NI that policy's made in Westminster are not suited to them. And they would be better off a part of the Republic of Ireland. This scenario would have a effect on the Defence forces as it may have to be involved in Counter-Insurgency operations most likely in built up areas.

    Westminster does set NI Foreign affairs but the point I was making is that the NI assembly does have its own International relations to support the powers that are devolved like Tourism Enterprise and Agriculture being the main ones.
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    So they make one great hop from London policies to Dublin ones - completely skipping greater autonomy? Completely skipping all other other arrangements?

    Seriously?
    So you need a change of events:
    A) the UK (including NI) decide to leave the EU
    B) NI holds a referendum on becoming part of RoI
    C) They decide to join RoI

    You assume of course, that we would want them (and the highly possible Civil War that would follow) - it would cost more than it was worth

    And NI may be better off (the Irish taxpayer definitely would)

    Look up Schedule 2 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998

  27. #72
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes there are arguments that NI would be better of in the UK. Examples would be in Health and Education In the latter NI students come out on top UK wide. But everything I say here is purely a theory and we have to be respectful.

    But I don't think this is the thread to discuss this on.
    Last edited by Stevo768; 19th November 2014 at 21:47. Reason: Post Script

  28. Likes DeV liked this post
  29. #73
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,992
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    But would people in the Republic not prefer that conclusion rather than a United Ireland purely based on Sectarian headcount.
    Well I don't think it's about us, to be honest. It's about the people in the North and what they want. And I think they're far from wanting a United Ireland anytime soon - regardless of Britains relationship with the EU.

    Like I say, in my opinion - policies would bend and adapt a long way first. I think a very substantial proportion of the population of NI would prefer to be significantly worse off and remain part of the UK, than be part of a United Ireland.

    And if just 0.5% of that number were prepared to take up arms to stop a UI, it'd be totally unsustainable for us. Just look at the numbers the British army had deployed. And that leaves aside the policing, the intelligence agencies etc. etc.

    Actually, I'd like it if a few of the lads on IMO from the Unionist community, would pop in here and give us a dose of real talk

  30. Likes DeV liked this post
  31. #74
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hmm Interesting debate. I think the whole point is that the future relationship of NI to the UK and to the republic is uncertain. Remember (like it or not) that SF could well be in power both sides of the border soon enough and we could be looking at a 32 county referendum on a united Ireland shortly afterwards. It probably wouldnt get enough votes to pass but there is a clearly agreed path (as part of the Stormont Agreement) for NI to form part of a united Ireland.

    Anyway interesting article on wider European defence policy and strategic thinking. Some of this is relevant to the debate here.

    https://www.project-syndicate.org/co...fense-doctrine

  32. #75
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    529
    Post Thanks / Like
    Northern Ireland is an interesting kettle of fish. I think the most overlooked point in the republic is that the addition of those voters would significant change the political landscape in Ireland in a way we can't predict.
    Inn terms of defence policy...
    Historically, I believe our situation started with a civil service which, at independence, saw its role as keeping the new government in line with London. Added to a free state government the feared the army. Followed by a Fianna Gail government that had been at war with the army. Defence policy never had a chance.
    That attitude nearly cost us in the 40s, but we got away with it. So why spend on defence, the common thinking goes.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •