Thanks Thanks:  34
Likes Likes:  92
Dislikes Dislikes:  7
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 154
  1. #76
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,590
    Post Thanks / Like
    Seriously, on the subject of submissions, while there must be several hundred years of military experience on this site, how do we make submissions, what is required? do we need to cost them?
    what level of detail is needed?
    The only thing I can think of is that the Air Corps should be prepared and equipped to carry out troop support, and possibly COIN and ISTAR along with the groundpounders on UN missions, apart from that probably blindingly obvious idea, I have no others.
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  2. #77
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    The green paper, when released, should clearly outline what submissions, if any, would be accepted and how.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  3. Thanks Turkey thanked for this post
  4. #78
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Giving that it is about to go to Cabinet (and it was supposed to be published last year) I would say the deadline for submissions is well passed

  5. #79
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like
    "I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by."
    Douglas Adams

  6. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  7. #80
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    broadly - and accepting that the financial crash wasn't factored into it - how closely did the last Defence White Paper inform/predict/shape what happened in Defence in the 13(?) years that followed it?

    was the 2000/2001 White Paper a genuine attempt to read the tea leaves and set the DF's posture, or was it a genuine attempt to look like it was reading the tea leaves and set the DF's posture with a veiw to shutting up those concerned about Irelands defence priorities and capabilities so FF could carry on with the parish pump?

  8. #81
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ropebag View Post
    broadly - and accepting that the financial crash wasn't factored into it - how closely did the last Defence White Paper inform/predict/shape what happened in Defence in the 13(?) years that followed it?

    was the 2000/2001 White Paper a genuine attempt to read the tea leaves and set the DF's posture, or was it a genuine attempt to look like it was reading the tea leaves and set the DF's posture with a veiw to shutting up those concerned about Irelands defence priorities and capabilities so FF could carry on with the parish pump?
    As I have said before, a quick look at those who made submissions tells a lot about how serious the Government of the time took the White Paper process.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  9. Thanks ropebag thanked for this post
  10. #82
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    was the 2000/2001 White Paper a genuine attempt to read the tea leaves and set the DF's posture, or was it a genuine attempt to look like it was reading the tea leaves and set the DF's posture with a veiw to shutting up those concerned about Irelands defence priorities and capabilities so FF could carry on with the parish pump?
    A bit of both. In some ways it codified and set out what was already happening, but it was very carefully couched and very vague. It also left huge areas of security and defence policy untouched because of political sensitivities. One could expect that this one will be different for two reasons, the first being that the ensuing 10 years have actually seen Irish and EU security policy evolve quite a bit - the DF have trained extensively with other EU countries outside of the UN structure (I say structure, but you know what I mean) and served abroad in a substantial way on EUFOR missions. So this is not new or scary, and so less likely to be scaremongered all to hell by SF or the Greens (remember them) as presaging conscription or an 'EU Army'. The heat has gone out of this debate, and so a rational discussion might actually be possible. There is also a far better prepared and equipped academic sector who are likely to be publicly supportive of what is in it, and to argue in favour of a realistic posture (Ben Tonra in UCD is always excellent on this stuff, but there are others too).

    That said, we should probably start a thread somewhere for loony reactions to the Green Paper. We could even have a drinking game, drink for every mention of conscription, an EU Army, Nuclear weapons in Abbeyshrule or DeV ...

  11. Thanks ropebag, pym, Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes sofa liked this post
  12. #83
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,127
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Aidan View Post

    That said, we should probably start a thread somewhere for loony reactions to the Green Paper. We could even have a drinking game, drink for every mention of conscription, an EU Army, Nuclear weapons in Abbeyshrule or DeV ...

    I'd argue that Bill Clinton got it right, when he said "its the economy stupid", thats what voters really care about.

    Neutrality as expounded by Fianna Fail/SF and Greens appeal to their core voters, but thats about it, and they vote for their party no matter what. To floating voters, its not an issue.

  13. #84
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    People are asking me why I'm not getting into this thread, so I will.

    [startcontribution] Give war a chance. [/endcontribution]
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  14. #85
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Valley of the Shadow of Death
    Posts
    3,160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
    But even if someone did have a go, and did manage to kill irish soldiers, it would hardly undermine the State - after all the British Army relatively recently lost two Sappers outside a Barracks in N.I. and the fabric of society didn't crumble overnight. And the same goes for more recent unfortunate events in London. A tragic waste of human life certainly, but capable of undermining the fabric of the State? Doubt it.
    I didn't say it would collapse the fabric of society, I said it would undermine public confidence in the nation's armed forces.

    Furthermore, while I don't want to get drawn any further into this, the stated incidents were cold blooded murder committed by cowards with a terrorist agenda. It was not an attack on armed soldiers in the execution of their duties to the State. There would be a significant difference between the two scenarios in terms of impact.

  15. #86
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    Furthermore, while I don't want to get drawn any further into this, the stated incidents were cold blooded murder committed by cowards with a terrorist agenda. It was not an attack on armed soldiers in the execution of their duties to the State
    In any likely scenario in this State the two are not mutually exclusive. Which is entirely the point.

    Again, not Iraq, not Northern Ireland.

  16. #87
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
    In any likely scenario in this State the two are not mutually exclusive. Which is entirely the point.

    Again, not Iraq, not Northern Ireland.
    its a not unreasonable viewpoint that if the DF were conducting 'deterant' operations - as the military presence on CIT is claimed to be - and they failed to deter, then tht would erode public confidence. obviously if some 'alphabet IRA' group had a go at a DF protected asset and they all got killed or captured with the DF being the very obvious winner in the engagement then that would be both a massive boost to the DF and massive downer for the paramilitaries. however, if it was less clear cut than that, or, God forbid, the paramilitary group won the engagement and fcuked off sharpish, then the DF's credibility would be in the dirt.

    when the DF do an ATCP mission they are not just protecting whatever asset they are assigned to, much more importantly they are protecting/establishing the States claim to be the singular power in the territory. if a DF escort were to be seriously attacked or even defeated the very obvious conclusion to draw is that the state is not the singular power in the territory.

    for me, that says that even if the int says that the specific threat to X asset does not justify it, the political risk justifies a mahoosive show of force that would deter anybody, and rip an enormous hole in anyone foolish enough not to be detered.

  17. Thanks SwiftandSure thanked for this post
    Likes Shaqra, RoyalGreenJacket liked this post
  18. #88
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    when the DF do an ATCP mission they are not just protecting whatever asset they are assigned to, much more importantly they are protecting/establishing the States claim to be the singular power in the territory. if a DF escort were to be seriously attacked or even defeated the very obvious conclusion to draw is that the state is not the singular power in the territory.
    Again, I think you are confusing this state with some flyblown developing world $hithole. In nearly 40 years of CIT, and not one serious attempt has been made on a at a CIT convoy (including long periods when paramilitaries were better motivated, equipped and resourced than now, and the DF was less well set up). And we're talking about the need for a 'massive show of force' now, on the streets of a western European country with a relatively low crime rate, in 2013? Seriously?

  19. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, The real Jack liked this post
  20. #89
    Commander in Chief RoyalGreenJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Home of the British Army
    Posts
    7,759
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
    Again, I think you are confusing this state with some flyblown developing world $hithole. In nearly 40 years of CIT, and not one serious attempt has been made on a at a CIT convoy (including long periods when paramilitaries were better motivated, equipped and resourced than now, and the DF was less well set up). And we're talking about the need for a 'massive show of force' now, on the streets of a western European country with a relatively low crime rate, in 2013? Seriously?
    are you seriously happy with a 'presence' and no real means for the soldiers to react if they are mobile - based on what has not happened?

    we had years of the Snatch being undefeated too however we still introduced Tavern - but that bubble soon bursts when the bad guys up their game.

    the ONH have never gone to war as a belligerent - does this mean it's soldiers aren't equipped for it? absolutely not.

    as far as i know we never had a soldier decapitated on Top Cover in Northern Ireland - but all of our vehicles had cheese-wire cutters anyhow - just incase they tried it one day.

    thankfully our commanders never thought "well - we've been alright until now, i'm sure we will be grand as we are"

    you cannot simply rest on your laurels hoping you never get bitten, because when you do - it will hurt.

    if there is a threat - you must be equipped to counter it. if you think you can counter it based on what is in service now (i.e. soft skinned Pajero's with no firing positions) - then it is clear there is no longer a threat.
    Last edited by RoyalGreenJacket; 26th June 2013 at 18:17.
    RGJ

    ...Once a Rifleman - Always a Rifleman... Celer et Audax

    The Rifles

  21. Likes danno liked this post
  22. #90
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    if there is a threat - you must be equipped to counter it. if you think you can counter it based on what is in service now (i.e. soft skinned Pajero's with no firing positions) - then it is clear there is no longer a threat.
    The specifics of what goes into a CIT will remain general, but (a) the suggestion that the DF have 'no means to react' is silly, and (b) the equipment used is tailored to the threat, as you suggest. And has been said already, the primary reason the DF still do it is that the Gardai don't have enough armed officers (and have never been asked to take CIT), not because there is a threat significant enough to need troops travelling in open topped armoured vehicles.

  23. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  24. #91
    Commander in Chief apod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ass in the grass.
    Posts
    5,308
    Post Thanks / Like
    MOD:Back on topic folks.The thread is starting to stray into iffy territory.
    Infantry Corps - An Lámh Comhrac


    "Let us be clear about three facts:First of all.All battles and all wars are won in the end by the Infantryman.Secondly the Infantryman bears the brunt of the fighting,his casualties are heavier and he suffers greater extremes of fatigue and discomfort than the other arms.Thirdly,the art of the Infantryman is less stereotyped and harder to acquire than that of any other arm".
    -- Field Marshall Earl Wavell.1948

  25. Thanks Aidan thanked for this post
  26. #92
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Valley of the Shadow of Death
    Posts
    3,160
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
    And we're talking about the need for a 'massive show of force' now, on the streets of a western European country with a relatively low crime rate, in 2013? Seriously?
    No my point is that the DF don't need to do CIT irrespective of how well equipped or not they are, it's a jobs for the boys scheme that ultimately is costing the taxpayer money (directly and indirectly) and DF time that could be better spent elsewhere within the Defence portfolio. So hopefully it'll be written off as part of the green/white paper.

  27. Likes RoyalGreenJacket, ropebag liked this post
  28. #93
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just an aside, as has been mentioned earlier in the thread, the PIRA had General Order 8, not to engage with the Irish Army. Do the current lot have similar concerns / restraints?
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

  29. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  30. #94
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    Just an aside, as has been mentioned earlier in the thread, the PIRA had General Order 8, not to engage with the Irish Army. Do the current lot have similar concerns / restraints?
    i rather doubt it - the current lot are the really, really, really desperate end of armed Republicanism, they are unlikely to hold to the niceties that PIRA believed appropriate. on top of that is that there is often a difference between the political theorist who writes the 'rules', and the utter moron the political theorist has convinced that an action liable to see him killed or in prison for life is a good idea.

    as another aside, if PIRA were so wedded to the idea of not engaging the DF, why would the DF, when carrying out their duties, need to be armed? surely if their mere presence is enough to get PIRA to cancel a robbery/attack/whatever, the 'escort' needs merely to be a single soldier, unarmed, sat in the passenger seat of the cash truck/whatever with his feet on the dashboard and catching up on some sleep?

    or are we not quite that confident in the idea that 'AlphabetIRA' will not engage the DF?

  31. #95
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,127
    Post Thanks / Like
    A possible ending of the “triple lock” mechanism before Irish Defence Forces participate in overseas missions may form part of a Green Paper on defence.

    The paper will be brought to Cabinet before the summer recess, and will include a review of the lock which requires UN, government and Dáil approval before Defence Force personnel become involved. After consultation a final White Paper on defence, forming the basis for policy over the next decade, will be published by June 2014.

    Minister of State for Defence Paul Kehoe told the Dáil “everyone’s views on the triple lock will be taken into consideration”.

    Fianna Fáil defence spokesman Seán Ó Fearghaíl had expressed concern over media reports at the weekend that the Government would examine the triple lock mechanism.

    Mr Ó Fearghaíl said Minister for Defence Alan Shatter had never explicitly called for neutrality to be abandoned but “his distaste for neutrality is manifest from virtually all his public utterances”.

    The Kildare South TD said “Fine Gael has previous history in this regard”, introducing legislation 10 years ago to remove the mechanism.

    Mr Kehoe said “nobody will be driving anything without the public and the Dáil being very much involved following the publication of the Green Paper”.

    A possible ending of the “triple lock” mechanism before Irish Defence Forces participate in overseas missions may form part of a Green Paper on defence.

    The paper will be brought to Cabinet before the summer recess, and will include a review of the lock which requires UN, government and Dáil approval before Defence Force personnel become involved. After consultation a final White Paper on defence, forming the basis for policy over the next decade, will be published by June 2014.

    Minister of State for Defence Paul Kehoe told the Dáil “everyone’s views on the triple lock will be taken into consideration”.

    Fianna Fáil defence spokesman Seán Ó Fearghaíl had expressed concern over media reports at the weekend that the Government would examine the triple lock mechanism.

    Mr Ó Fearghaíl said Minister for Defence Alan Shatter had never explicitly called for neutrality to be abandoned but “his distaste for neutrality is manifest from virtually all his public utterances”.

    The Kildare South TD said “Fine Gael has previous history in this regard”, introducing legislation 10 years ago to remove the mechanism.

    Mr Kehoe said “nobody will be driving anything without the public and the Dáil being very much involved following the publication of the Green Paper”.

    A possible ending of the “triple lock” mechanism before Irish Defence Forces participate in overseas missions may form part of a Green Paper on defence.

    The paper will be brought to Cabinet before the summer recess, and will include a review of the lock which requires UN, government and Dáil approval before Defence Force personnel become involved. After consultation a final White Paper on defence, forming the basis for policy over the next decade, will be published by June 2014.

    Minister of State for Defence Paul Kehoe told the Dáil “everyone’s views on the triple lock will be taken into consideration”.

    Fianna Fáil defence spokesman Seán Ó Fearghaíl had expressed concern over media reports at the weekend that the Government would examine the triple lock mechanism.

    Mr Ó Fearghaíl said Minister for Defence Alan Shatter had never explicitly called for neutrality to be abandoned but “his distaste for neutrality is manifest from virtually all his public utterances”.

    The Kildare South TD said “Fine Gael has previous history in this regard”, introducing legislation 10 years ago to remove the mechanism.

    Mr Kehoe said “nobody will be driving anything without the public and the Dáil being very much involved following the publication of the Green Paper”.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/polit...aper-1.1443847

  32. #96
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SwiftandSure View Post
    No my point is that the DF don't need to do CIT irrespective of how well equipped or not they are, it's a jobs for the boys scheme that ultimately is costing the taxpayer money (directly and indirectly) and DF time that could be better spent elsewhere within the Defence portfolio. So hopefully it'll be written off as part of the green/white paper.
    The DF doesn't decide to do an ATCP operation (be it CIT or something else). It has to be requested by a senior Garda. It is the Gardai that decide if they need DF support, not the other way around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    Just an aside, as has been mentioned earlier in the thread, the PIRA had General Order 8, not to engage with the Irish Army. Do the current lot have similar concerns / restraints?
    It wasn't just not to engage the Irish army, it was also the GS. Any it never stopped them!

    There was/is also a lot more terrorist / criminal groups around than the PIRA.

  33. #97
    Commander in Chief apod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ass in the grass.
    Posts
    5,308
    Post Thanks / Like
    MOD:Final warning.Get back on topic and drop the CIT discussion.Points will accrue to those who ignore this.
    Last edited by apod; 27th June 2013 at 14:25.
    Infantry Corps - An Lámh Comhrac


    "Let us be clear about three facts:First of all.All battles and all wars are won in the end by the Infantryman.Secondly the Infantryman bears the brunt of the fighting,his casualties are heavier and he suffers greater extremes of fatigue and discomfort than the other arms.Thirdly,the art of the Infantryman is less stereotyped and harder to acquire than that of any other arm".
    -- Field Marshall Earl Wavell.1948

  34. #98
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like
    Can someone tell me who we are neutral against?

  35. #99
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by expat01 View Post
    Can someone tell me who we are neutral against?
    We are non-aligned (eg not in NATO)

    Non-belligerent (ie we don't take sides in war)

  36. #100
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like
    The idea that are non-aligned is such farcical nonsense that the Soviet Union wouldn't let us join the UN.
    Non belligerent in which war? Like the UK and Germany were in Vietnam? We were belligerents in the Congolese civil war.
    Finland wasn't neutral. It was too scared of Russia to join NATO, but not about to stop preparing for the next Russian invasion. Austria was neutral by declaration of the allies. Switzerland is Neutral.
    Ireland wouldnt agree to join the military alliance we expressly and openly relied on protect us. That made us Holland and Belgium. We deserved what they got.

  37. Likes sofa liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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