Originally posted by ancientmariner
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
manning levels, the future.
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
I note a recent dail committee questioned the junior minister with responsibility for defence on the need for supplementary estimates at the years end to fund an increase in pension funds, in spite of the surplus returned from the pay subject being returned to the exchequer.
Basically amongst the things in the DoD that isn't fit for purpose is the actual defence budget. They give back some, while begging for more.
We can barely maintain capability to deal with foreseen activities. Unforeseen activities however would see occupants in Newbridge break out in a sweat and reach for the valium. The department is not fit for purpose.
I glanced at articles highlighting the contributions to the DF Review from the NS and clearly there is nothing inaccurate in what is put forward. Mention even of how the NZ Navy have invested in a second hand offshore support ship to deal with the subsea threat, which they also identified.
Meanwhile we build ships with the bare minimum of sub surface sensors.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
I can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?
By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...'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
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Flamingo View PostI can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?
By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Flamingo View PostI can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?
By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...
The real problem is this capital ceiling. I am unsure what purpose it serves other than to stop the DF from getting any notions.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThe perennial Defence Review 2019 has come and gone and there was an input by a Naval Lieutenant in the SIGINT/Fibre/ Cyber area. In general a watchful Defence Organisation needs to SEE all of it's defence area, it needs to detect and classify, and have assets to intercept targets or traffic of all known natures. Leaving out getting a unit ready for UN deployment or a single ship mission, do we have any ready capability to deal with now! Can we equip a hot mission. The answer lies in the fact that Defence Force budgets have been passed through a fiscal sieve and the loose change returned to the exchequer at the end of the year. We get academics to Review history and how well we did but much, much more is needed.
The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostJust reading the published Defence review which confirms we know nothing about defence and a lot about neutrality. There is a commitment to continue with the MRV but the MCM element hinged around the replacement of the Peacocks has been put back on the shelf. This means when the MRV arrives we will be a 7 ship navy. The spend up to 2025 is estimated at E540m and I presume that is the new Pilatus aircraft, MPA's, and the MRV. In the mantime we revert to 6 ships.
The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostWe should not be expecting anything this century as the DoD are focused on "22nd Century Military".It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
It was a new age...It was the end of history.
It was the year everything changed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostJust reading the published Defence review which confirms we know nothing about defence and a lot about neutrality. There is a commitment to continue with the MRV but the MCM element hinged around the replacement of the Peacocks has been put back on the shelf. This means when the MRV arrives we will be a 7 ship navy. The spend up to 2025 is estimated at E540m and I presume that is the new Pilatus aircraft, MPA's, and the MRV. In the mantime we revert to 6 ships.
The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.
Defence and Security are very low on the DoD priorities.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Has it hit the stage yet where there are more Civil Servants in the DoD than there are serving? It must be getting close.'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
Comment
-
Originally posted by Flamingo View PostHas it hit the stage yet where there are more Civil Servants in the DoD than there are serving? It must be getting close.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostWith smaller numbers we need more bang at Battalion and Brigade level. At Brigade level at least 3 x 155mm tracked gun, Multi hyper sonic anti-air missile system. Then at battalion level 6 light guns L118 with APS sighting, Rapier missiles , in addition to usual support weapons, and of course towing vehicles for the light guns.
Comment
-
We were very proud of holding the high moral ground being the first in the world to ban smoking in pubs and getting rid of plastic bags.
Wouldn't we be a shining light in the world to be the first to ban our armed forces.
Don't laugh the nancy boys are in charge.Last edited by sofa; 18 December 2019, 23:03.
Comment
-
Originally posted by sofa View PostWe were very proud of holding the high moral ground being the first in the world to ban smoking in pubs and getting rid of plastic bags.
Don't laugh the nancy boys are in charge.
Comment
Comment