• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Get Irish Troops out of Afghanistan Now !


G

gimpy

just read the letter in today's Irish Times and can't believe we have troops in Afghanistan.

This makes a mockery of our Neutrality - if we have this so called Triple Lock then why has it not stopped Irish Troops taking sides in Afghanistan ?



Irish Times 21st August

The Irish Times - Letters

Madam, – Minister for Defence Willie O’Dea, has stated that he has received assurances concerning the safety of seven Irish troops serving with the Nato International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) force in Afghanistan (World News, August 19th). This statement seems more designed to protect Minister O’Dea in the event of one of these soldiers being seriously injured due to the increasing violence in Kabul. Asking Chief of Staff Lieut Gen Dermot Earley to provide these assurances puts him in an almost impossible situation. Amazingly the Department of Defence is quoted as stating that these Irish soldiers had been supplied with vehicles fitted with electronic devices that would help repel roadside bombs. Given that roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan have destroyed main battle tanks, this statement is incredible.

If it were true, then surely publicly revealing the existence of such an amazing device is a serious breach of security. I sincerely hope none of these soldiers will be injured. However the further statement by Mr O’Dea that these soldiers are playing “a small but significant” role in Isaf’s operations, particularly in the area of “technical expertise” concerning improvised explosive devices, arguably increases the risks to these soldiers. These explosive devices are the most effective weapon being used by the Afghan fighters in their efforts to expel foreign troops, including these Irish soldiers, and now Mr O’Dea is telling them that Irish troops are helping to defeat them. Someone should put a zip on Mr O’Dea’s moustache.

Conor Lally’s article (World News, August 19th) states: “Because the number of troops on the mission is so small Dáil approval is not needed to sanction their deployment”. So what about Ireland’s so-called “traditional policy of military neutrality” about to be protected by miraculous EU/Lisbon Treaty guarantees?

Where are the so-called “triple locks” on deployment of Irish troops overseas? How many troops must be deployed before Dáil approval is needed, 17, 70, or 700, and has the Attorney General been consulted?

Nato is a military alliance. Irish troops are participating as belligerents with a military alliance in a war in a foreign country. This is in clear breach of the Hague Convention (V) on neutrality. But then, the Irish Government has allowed more than one million armed US troops to pass through Shannon airport on their way to and from the Afghan and Iraq wars. Given the above, any Government minister who claims that Ireland is still a neutral state would be lying. What value then EU assurances on Irish neutrality? – Yours, etc,

Dr EDWARD HORGAN,

(Comdt Retired),

Newtown,

Castletroy,

Co Limerick.
 

cactusflower

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
1,285
Good letter. The legality and constitutionality of the legislation rushed through after 9/11re Shannon should be challenged.

Irrespective of legalities, we shouldn't be supporting these obscene wars and acts of robbery.

The drugs from Helmand are coming back here to wreak havoc with our young population.

What does the Labour Party say about this?
 

Dunlin3

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
3,182
Dr Horgan continually comes out with the same old anti NATO drivel. I think there is less than 10 members of the Irish defence forces in Afghanistan. These are in an advisory role to the best of my knowledge. He omits to tell us that NATO is operating in Afghanistan under a number of UN Security Council Resolutions. Irish troops were also in the former Yugoslavia under NATO command before the EU took over.
 

fergalr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
354
Ah listen, Ed Horgan told me two years ago that we should build the army's weapons etc at home rather than purchase them off other countries.

The Afghan missions has the approval of the UN. As does the the formerly NATO and now I believe predominately EU mission in Kosovo.
 

st333ve

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
2,104
They keep people in the dark about that war which is how their public like it.
If the British or American army are involved in something, its all flag waving and nonsence about 'heroes' inthe media.
Thankfully not everyone is buying the Daily Star version of this war.

The 'government' they're supporting in Afghanistan are no better than the Taliban.
Leaglising rape, and starvation against women and passing ridiculous inhuman laws against the population while these armies back them up.
Its ironic that in places like Africa these 'heroic' armies sat back while genocide took place, while claiming their war machine is for helping the civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Two places completely torn apart by their war against them.

They make no effort to resolve the conflict, instead they keep throwing more troops at them which is just prolonging the conflict.
 

fergalr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
354
Good letter. The legality and constitutionality of the legislation rushed through after 9/11re Shannon should be challenged.
Please do. In fact, please find me the article in the Constitution that defines the State as being militarily neutral.
 

TradCat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,992
“Because the number of troops on the mission is so small Dáil approval is not needed to sanction their deployment”
Isn't that interesting. That makes the triple-lock into a joke and proves what we all know anyway. The main parties understand that a military commitment is part of the price of EU membership and the opposition of the Irish people has to be overcome by stealth.

Now, I'm perfectly willing to support the fight against the Taliban savages and I don't support neutrality as a policy. We were neutral on Hitler and Stalin and I don't think that's much to be proud of. But let's debate it honestly and openly.
 

st333ve

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
2,104
The Afghan missions has the approval of the UN. As does the the formerly NATO and now I believe predominately EU mission in Kosovo.
So NATO is God?

Its ok to do whatever you like so long as thou holy NATO gives you the thumbs up?

Answer me this?

How many 'bad guys' do you think they'll have to kill in Afghanistan before they win?
How many people join insurgent forces after they kill a load of 'badguys', theyre family and everyone else in the surrounding village?

How is shooting and bombing the crap out of the place a solution to anything?
Why has the opium trade boomed in Afghanistan and where is all this stuff going to?
How can you claim to be fighting extremists while supporting them in government?
 

fergalr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
354
Would this have been particularly hard for other members of the forum to find before climbing on their high horses?

Defence Forces - Ireland and the United Nations

The conditions, under which the Defence Forces may participate on overseas peace support operations have been made very clear by the Government. In this regard, the conditions, which have been referred to as the “triple lock”, must be satisfied, i.e.,

* the operation must be authorized/mandated by the United Nations;
* it must be approved by the Government; and
* it must be approved by way of a resolution of Dáil Éireann, where the size of a Defence Forces contribution is more than twelve personnel.
The reason, of course, is that small numbers of observers or MPs are routinely sent to a variety of countries. Apart, perhaps, from personal arms, they're not a military force and don't require full Dail consent for their "deployment" - because that would be a time consuming waste of time.

Yeah, we're going to be hoodwinked into a European army. Twelve soldiers at a time.
 

Dunlin3

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
3,182
Isn't that interesting. That makes the triple-lock into a joke and proves what we all know anyway. The main parties understand that a military commitment is part of the price of EU membership and the opposition of the Irish people has to be overcome by stealth.
Sure they had two out of the three, Cabinet approval and a UN mandate. Wee Willy just thought to himself...sure that will do, we have a majority in the Dail anyway. No need to to bother Bertie and get him in for a vote!
 

fergalr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
354
Sure they had two out of the three, Cabinet approval and a UN mandate. Wee Willy just thought to himself...sure that will do, we have a majority in the Dail anyway. No need to to bother Bertie and get him in for a vote!
Feel free to check back at my post on the previous page with the Defence Forces authorisation procedure for deployment overseas. <sigh>
 

Eldritch

Active member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
180
"This makes a mockery of our Neutrality "

What neutrality? Thousands of Irishmen joined the allies and Dev and co. covertly aided the allies, Irish neutrality was a joke.
 

cactusflower

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
1,285
Ah listen, Ed Horgan told me two years ago that we should build the army's weapons etc at home rather than purchase them off other countries.

The Afghan missions has the approval of the UN. As does the the formerly NATO and now I believe predominately EU mission in Kosovo.
That old mantra doesn't justify anything. All the more reason to vote against Lisbon.
 

Dunlin3

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
3,182
Feel free to check back at my post on the previous page with the Defence Forces authorisation procedure for deployment overseas. <sigh>
Just read that, I knew there would be a sensible explanation somewhere. Thanks.
 

fergalr

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
354
Also, because evidently no-one else here knows how to type Defence Forces Homepage into Firefox, here's a map of our current commitments around the globe.

Apologies for it being a little large.

 

cactusflower

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
1,285
Would this have been particularly hard for other members of the forum to find before climbing on their high horses?

Defence Forces - Ireland and the United Nations



The reason, of course, is that small numbers of observers or MPs are routinely sent to a variety of countries. Apart, perhaps, from personal arms, they're not a military force and don't require full Dail consent for their "deployment" - because that would be a time consuming waste of time.

Yeah, we're going to be hoodwinked into a European army. Twelve soldiers at a time.
'

the operation must be authorized/mandated by the United Nations;
it must be approved by the Government; and
it must be approved by way of a resolution of Dáil Éireann, where the size of a Defence Forces contribution is more than twelve personnel.
A weasel approach, to try and make out that we are taking part, and not taking part at one and the same time.
 

code twinkle

Active member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
156
just read the letter in today's Irish Times and can't believe we have troops in Afghanistan.

This makes a mockery of our Neutrality - if we have this so called Triple Lock then why has it not stopped Irish Troops taking sides in Afghanistan ?



Irish Times 21st August

The Irish Times - Letters

Madam, – Minister for Defence Willie O’Dea, has stated that he has received assurances concerning the safety of seven Irish troops serving with the Nato International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) force in Afghanistan (World News, August 19th). This statement seems more designed to protect Minister O’Dea in the event of one of these soldiers being seriously injured due to the increasing violence in Kabul. Asking Chief of Staff Lieut Gen Dermot Earley to provide these assurances puts him in an almost impossible situation. Amazingly the Department of Defence is quoted as stating that these Irish soldiers had been supplied with vehicles fitted with electronic devices that would help repel roadside bombs. Given that roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan have destroyed main battle tanks, this statement is incredible.

If it were true, then surely publicly revealing the existence of such an amazing device is a serious breach of security. I sincerely hope none of these soldiers will be injured. However the further statement by Mr O’Dea that these soldiers are playing “a small but significant” role in Isaf’s operations, particularly in the area of “technical expertise” concerning improvised explosive devices, arguably increases the risks to these soldiers. These explosive devices are the most effective weapon being used by the Afghan fighters in their efforts to expel foreign troops, including these Irish soldiers, and now Mr O’Dea is telling them that Irish troops are helping to defeat them. Someone should put a zip on Mr O’Dea’s moustache.

Conor Lally’s article (World News, August 19th) states: “Because the number of troops on the mission is so small Dáil approval is not needed to sanction their deployment”. So what about Ireland’s so-called “traditional policy of military neutrality” about to be protected by miraculous EU/Lisbon Treaty guarantees?

Where are the so-called “triple locks” on deployment of Irish troops overseas? How many troops must be deployed before Dáil approval is needed, 17, 70, or 700, and has the Attorney General been consulted?

Nato is a military alliance. Irish troops are participating as belligerents with a military alliance in a war in a foreign country. This is in clear breach of the Hague Convention (V) on neutrality. But then, the Irish Government has allowed more than one million armed US troops to pass through Shannon airport on their way to and from the Afghan and Iraq wars. Given the above, any Government minister who claims that Ireland is still a neutral state would be lying. What value then EU assurances on Irish neutrality? – Yours, etc,

Dr EDWARD HORGAN,

(Comdt Retired),

Newtown,

Castletroy,

Co Limerick.
Agree with the sentiment but in actual fact now the ISAF force is a "multinational peacekeeping force...under a UN mandate but the soldiers [do] not wear blue berets." The ISAF was going in anyway and in fact AFAIK the UN mandate followed the decision to deploy - nonetheless once it has UN sanction, why the peacekeepers aren't wearing berets is another question, it obviously undermines the, IMO, charade that it is in fact a UN force. With such a grey legal position over this force, Horgan would appear to be correct in stating the triple lock is a load of bull.
 
Top