Hardly an ad hominem to point out that someone has an angle.As has been pointed out upthread, if there is any dramatisation about the story, you can thank RTÉ and the rest of the world media for it.
Do they still sell Andrews Liver Salts btw? Some good ol' ad hominem posters could benefit
I take it you don't believe that the EU should be active in protecting people.EU warships are beginning anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia.
RTÉ News: EU naval operation to counter piracy
We are told there is no such thing as an EU Army.
So who is driving the boats? Or have the silly media got it all wrong again?
Just under two hours after this thread was opened, and we are claiming no credit for this, RTÉ deleted the opening line of their report quoted above, and replaced it with this:
The EU has agreed to launch an anti-piracy naval operation off the coast of Somalia involving ships and aircraft from several nations.
Whatever prompted that editorial move, the use of the term 'EU warships' in connection with this expedition is widespread in the international media. See also here
EU Warships - Google search
So is there such a thing as the EU Marines? Sweet Enola Gay. Ireland has opted out of the miliatry alliance. This was the same EU military alliance that intervened in Serbia-Bosnia war.When they are Marines?
That was NATO under a UN madate. Not an EU army. Not all members of NATO are in Europe (I refer to Turkey) and neither are all European nations in NATO.So is there such a thing as the EU Marines? Sweet Enola Gay. Ireland has opted out of the miliatry alliance. This was the same EU military alliance that intervened in Serbia-Bosnia war.
I suppose people think that the EU should not have intervened there either, and just let people kill themselves.
That was NATO under a UN madate. Not an EU army. Not all members of NATO are in Europe (I refer to Turkey) and neither are all European nations in NATO.
So in short, you are in favour of us not doing our part in countries such as Chad and Kosovo?Ireland has opted out of the military alliance? Give us a break.
Our government is determined to try again to sign us up for one.
Dr Karen Devine has examined the strategy in depth:
''Perceptions of the incompatibility of active neutrality and the trajectory of the development of the ESDP explain why parties in government are accused of fudging the issue of neutrality: they are playing what political scientists call "a two-level game".
In this "game", parties in government attend to the "supra-state" level of the European Council and the demands from the larger member states such as France, Germany, Spain and the UK to achieve a maximalist EU defence policy agenda, and at the same time, face another set of largely incompatible demands from the "sub-state" level, stemming from the public's active neutrality policy preferences.
Having agreed to the supra-state level demands of ESDP, seen in the binding mutual security and defence commitments contained in the Lisbon Treaty, parties in government try to convince the sub-state constituency of public opinion that their neutrality agenda has been safeguarded through a combined strategy of minimising discussion of ESDP and reformulating concepts of military neutrality, in order to avoid punishment at the polls and to ensure EU treaty referendum amendments are passed''.
While ESDP structures and capabilities are sketched in the Lisbon Treaty, the circumstances under which they will be used and against whom would be decided in the future by the European Council; in the absence of any democratic controls, ESDP is a leap too far into the unknown for many voters. Compared with the neutral traditions of Ireland, Austria, Sweden and Finland that go back decades or centuries, and are part of people's national identities, ESDP is a very recent policy conceived by a handful of elites in the absence of a European identity that is seen as necessary for its acceptance, legitimacy and success.
Henry Kissinger once observed: "No foreign policy - no matter how ingenious - has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none."
His insight illustrates the problems faced by advocates of the Lisbon Treaty's Common Security and Defence Policy that overrides, rather than accommodates, the foreign policies of neutral states.
Protecting neutrality in a militarised EU - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 27, 2008