The purpose of the Irish army?

[John.Worthing]

One of the arguments around the recent Lisbon Treaty Referendum was that of the notion of Irish neutrality. I've been scratching my head for about a week now and having created a bald spot as a consequence I'm wondering what is the purpose of the Irish army? If it is to be involved in humanitarian missions then as I understand it the possibility of fostering greater links with our EU partners was an intelligent move. Some will argue that there is a move towards old-style imperialism in the European Union. I think these people should be more worried about the economic imperialism that is taking place. The notion that the EU is some form of evil empire just waiting to emerge is laughable. However, coming back to the question at hand, can we claim there is any purpose in having an army of any kind if we do not fund it to defend our borders. Of course, it is highly unlikely that we would be attacked but if the purpose of the Irish army is purely defensive then we should be able to provide an actual defence because a token defence does not warrant any spending in my mind. If we are not to take part in humanitarian missions and if we are unable to defend this island against attack by potential invaders then surely we should do one of two things: enter into agreements with foreign states to form defensive alliances or hold a referendum to disband the Irish army as the waste of space that it is.

Personally, I favour the Irish army's participation in humanitarian missions, with those forces having the ability to effectively conduct peacemaking and peacebuilding missions. With brutal examples of the necessity of such forces from Rwanda and Darfur surely there is a point to having a strong army from a state that is not neutral when it comes to promoting humanitarian ideals.

[Bobert]

This is why we need a defence forum


But anyway.

I have no problem taking up arms to protect this country. But I will not agree to fight the battles of a foreign country unless a direct threat is posed to Ireland. That is my opinion.

[John.Worthing]

I've just entered this forum for the first time this evening. Not having found a Defence forum I thought that Foreign Affairs was the best place to put it. Though I imagine that there are many who believe it would be better employed in a Home Affairs section.

[stewiegriffin]

Well I can understand why military people would like to get to do what they were trained for and not just ponce about outside banks but at the end of the day we dont ,in my opinion need a large or "active" army. My ideal situation would be pure neutrality and a militia army .If folks want a real soldiering life maybe they should look abroad as many an Irish soldier has done before .

[irish_goat]

I think some sort of National Guard more focused on humanitarian and disaster relief would be a much better idea. We've no need for an army since no one is ever going to invade us and if anyone ever did we would have no hope of fending them off. I'd also prefer not to see any Irish soldier being responsible for the death of another human being.

It's nice to see we spend a lot less than most developed countries on defence though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

[Bobert]

I've just entered this forum for the first time this evening. Not having found a Defence forum I thought that Foreign Affairs was the best place to put it. Though I imagine that there are many who believe it would be better employed in a Home Affairs section.

Actuslly some would try and but it in justice. (Morons). But yeah, petition David Cochrane for a Defence Forum and we might get one.

Well I can understand why military people would like to get to do what they were trained for and not just ponce about outside banks but at the end of the day we dont ,in my opinion need a large or "active" army. My ideal situation would be pure neutrality and a militia army .If folks want a real soldiering life maybe they should look abroad as many a good Irish soldier has done before .

Nah, I can't see many Paddy's enlisting in the Chadian Army.

I think some sort of National Guard more focused on humanitarian and disaster relief would be a much better idea. We've no need for an army since no one is ever going to invade us and if anyone ever did we would have no hope of fending them off. I'd also prefer not to see any Irish soldier being responsible for the death of another human being.

It's nice to see we spend a lot less than most developed countries on defence though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures

Irish Army is amongst the finist trained in the world. And we do have a Civil Defence.

[CelloP]

Irish Army is amongst the finist trained in the world. And we do have a Civil Defence.

That's a load of hear-say crap.

The Irish army would be annihilated in a flash by any other country in Europe.

They've crap equipment, no jet fighter aircraft, a couple of jet-powered VIP planes and a couple of light civilian helicopters painted dark green with infra-red cameras on them. Woopee do.

[John.Worthing]

Well I can understand why military people would like to get to do what they were trained for and not just ponce about outside banks but at the end of the day we dont ,in my opinion need a large or "active" army. My ideal situation would be pure neutrality and a militia army .If folks want a real soldiering life maybe they should look abroad as many an Irish soldier has done before .

Does 'pure neutrality' not also imply an ability to defend oneself?

Also, I don't think that this issue if of an individual nature as you have pointed out that many Irish citizens have joined foreign armies and continue to do so. Do we not bear some responsibility to defend the ideals that we believe are common to humanity given the fact that we possess the ability to do so?

[John.Worthing]

Irish Army is amongst the finist trained in the world. And we do have a Civil Defence.

That's a load of hear-say crap.

The Irish army would be annihilated in a flash by any other country in Europe.

They've crap equipment, no jet fighter aircraft, a couple of jet-powered VIP planes and a couple of light civilian helicopters painted dark green with infra-red cameras on them. Woopee do.

I think he means that we would be able to continue on a war despite being overrun. The Irish were one of the main founders of guerrilla-type warfare.

On the serious side, we would of course be beaten very easily in a 'regular war'. I think the Irish forces have performed well abroad when called upon by the UN in the past but they can only continue to be useful if they receive the funding required to maintain that level of effectiveness.

[stewiegriffin]

Well I can understand why military people would like to get to do what they were trained for and not just ponce about outside banks but at the end of the day we dont ,in my opinion need a large or "active" army. My ideal situation would be pure neutrality and a militia army .If folks want a real soldiering life maybe they should look abroad as many an Irish soldier has done before .

Does 'pure neutrality' not also imply an ability to defend oneself?

Also, I don't think that this issue if of an individual nature as you have pointed out that many Irish citizens have joined foreign armies and continue to do so. Do we not bear some responsibility to defend the ideals that we believe are common to humanity given the fact that we possess the ability to do so?

Well yes to your first question, as much as is possible given our population and geography.
Im not sure what you mean by " these ideals WE believe are common to humanity" .