Irish Army Planned to Attack Belfast

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
Irish army planned to attack Belfast - Local & National, News - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk

In the wake of Bloody Sunday. Interesting from a historical perspective. I was completely surprised by this, as I would've thought the idea unthinkable from the Republic's point of view (militarily speaking).

Had anyone heard of this before? Hard to imagine how such a thing would've ended. I suppose the strategy would've been to get international observers?
 


White Horse

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
7,012
I think the name "Exercise Armageddon" gives an indication that this was only a feasibility study and was only enviaged as an absolute last resort.
 

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
I think the name "Exercise Armageddon" gives an indication that this was only a feasibility study and was only enviaged as an absolute last resort.
I think the article makes that clear enough.. The interesting thing is that there was enough will to actually plan it; as I said in the original post, I thought the Republic's stance was that it could do nothing.
 
D

Deleted member 17573

Irish army planned to attack Belfast - Local & National, News - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk

In the wake of Bloody Sunday. Interesting from a historical perspective. I was completely surprised by this, as I would've thought the idea unthinkable from the Republic's point of view (militarily speaking).

Had anyone heard of this before? Hard to imagine how such a thing would've ended. I suppose the strategy would've been to get international observers?
Sounds more like contingency military planning without any serious political intent. Although as an impressionable 17 yr old in 1969 I was sure we were all going to be drafted - they´re was a kind of vague expectation that something like this might happen.
 

blackcastle86

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
16
The government probably asked a few Irish Army officers to make a feasibility study based on the puny military resources available.
There was never any serious possibility of Ireland intervening in Northern Ireland.
 

netron

Active member
Joined
May 27, 2009
Messages
225
The government probably asked a few Irish Army officers to make a feasibility study based on the puny military resources available.
There was never any serious possibility of Ireland intervening in Northern Ireland.
this is was discussed on newstalk this afternoon - the plan was a bone thrown by Lynch to the headbangers (Blaney, Haughey)

but also noted in the plan was the British response - which would be "punitive"

thats military jargon for "they would have bombed the sh!t out of the Republic"
 

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
this is was discussed on newstalk this afternoon - the plan was a bone thrown by Lynch to the headbangers (Blaney, Haughey)

but also noted in the plan was the British response - which would be "punitive"

thats military jargon for "they would have bombed the sh!t out of the Republic"
Without a doubt. Still, I wonder what the fallout would've been if the operation had gone through (which apparently was just planning based on the words of an Taoiseach). The UK would've been in the position of bombing a small, relative defenseless country, because they had moved in troops to protect people that same army had just murdered in the streets.

hard to imagine how that would've played in America, say. It wouldn't have looked good.
 
D

Deleted member 17573

Without a doubt. Still, I wonder what the fallout would've been if the operation had gone through (which apparently was just planning based on the words of an Taoiseach). The UK would've been in the position of bombing a small, relative defenseless country, because they had moved in troops to protect people that same army had just murdered in the streets.
hard to imagine how that would've played in America, say. It wouldn't have looked good.
A few more posts like this Ned and you´ll have us all believing it actually happened:confused:
 

netron

Active member
Joined
May 27, 2009
Messages
225
Without a doubt. Still, I wonder what the fallout would've been if the operation had gone through (which apparently was just planning based on the words of an Taoiseach). The UK would've been in the position of bombing a small, relative defenseless country, because they had moved in troops to protect people that same army had just murdered in the streets.

hard to imagine how that would've played in America, say. It wouldn't have looked good.
difficult to say - remember that this was 1969 and America was tied up in Vietnam...

i guess they would have stayed out of it...

HOWEVER - the Yanks were highly annoyed with Harold Wilson not agreeing to send British troops ( even the Aussies sent forces) , so this might have been an opportunity to slap the Brits around...
 

lapsedmethodist

Active member
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
143
What this demonstrates more than anything is the pathetic shambles
successive Irish governments have made of independence. The cute hoor
reliance on subversives to keep the pot boiling in the hope that the "failed state"
drops into their laps belies all the high-flown rhetoric.
 

Border-Rat

Active member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
263
Had they any honour they would've carried this out and after failing, continued with a guerilla war. Their special forces could've managed to train local populace to be deadly. Obviously, the conventional move would've failed. But so what? Even defeated armies counter-attack. The Germans did it in the Battle of Berlin and the Iraqi army did it in the Battle of Baghdad. Poor odds mean nothing in the face of responsibility.

It was their responsibility to intervene and they failed us.
 

blackcastle86

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
16
Even defeated armies counter-attack. The Germans did it in the Battle of Berlin and the Iraqi army did it in the Battle of Baghdad.
Er...to start with German Army was credible battle experienced fighting force. But against the overwhelming numbers of the Red Army they were encircled and completely destroyed. They inflict such incredible casualties on the Soviets in Berlin because the Russians simply threw masses of expendible conscripts at the Germans who cut them down but they could not hold back the roaring avalanche.

In the Battle of Baghdad, the Iraqi forces were fighting with obsolete T-55 and T-72 tanks, BMP armoured vehicles, civilian vehicles and from dug outs with AK-47's and RPG's hoping to hold back the US Army and USMC who were riding in Abrams tanks, Bradley vehicles, Stryker armoured vehicles and supported by massed artillery, helicopter gunships and overwhelming jet airpower.
If they did not simple throw away their uniforms and go home and hide, those that actually stood and fight were complete wiped out.
 

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
Er...to start with German Army was credible battle experienced fighting force. But against the overwhelming numbers of the Red Army they were encircled and completely destroyed. They inflict such incredible casualties on the Soviets in Berlin because the Russians simply threw masses of expendible conscripts at the Germans who cut them down but they could not hold back the roaring avalanche.

In the Battle of Baghdad, the Iraqi forces were fighting with obsolete T-55 and T-72 tanks, BMP armoured vehicles, civilian vehicles and from dug outs with AK-47's and RPG's hoping to hold back the US Army and USMC who were riding in Abrams tanks, Bradley vehicles, Stryker armoured vehicles and supported by massed artillery, helicopter gunships and overwhelming jet airpower.
If they did not simple throw away their uniforms and go home and hide, those that actually stood and fight were complete wiped out.
Not counting the ones that went underground and began training insurgents?
 

ergo2

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
14,049
THis was just a plan - defence forces everywhere prepare such plans i.e during WW2 the Germans had "Fall Gruene" - a plan for invasion of Ireland. It is said the British also had an invasion plan also/

It would have been suicidal both militarily and politically

BTW Lynch just said we will not stand by - word "idly" not used. this could have implied political rather than military action..
 

Border-Rat

Active member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
263
Er...to start with German Army was credible battle experienced fighting force. But against the overwhelming numbers of the Red Army they were encircled and completely destroyed. They inflict such incredible casualties on the Soviets in Berlin because the Russians simply threw masses of expendible conscripts at the Germans who cut them down but they could not hold back the roaring avalanche.

In the Battle of Baghdad, the Iraqi forces were fighting with obsolete T-55 and T-72 tanks, BMP armoured vehicles, civilian vehicles and from dug outs with AK-47's and RPG's hoping to hold back the US Army and USMC who were riding in Abrams tanks, Bradley vehicles, Stryker armoured vehicles and supported by massed artillery, helicopter gunships and overwhelming jet airpower.
If they did not simple throw away their uniforms and go home and hide, those that actually stood and fight were complete wiped out.
Are you braindead? Those were entirely my points. The Iraqi army did its duty even in the face of defeat, it counter-attacked. It then went on to fight an effective guerilla war. Thats what the free state army should've done.

Learn to read.
 

Border-Rat

Active member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
263
THis was just a plan - defence forces everywhere prepare such plans i.e during WW2 the Germans had "Fall Gruene" - a plan for invasion of Ireland. It is said the British also had an invasion plan also/

It would have been suicidal both militarily and politically

BTW Lynch just said we will not stand by - word "idly" not used. this could have implied political rather than military action..

It wouldn't have been suicidal militarily, it would've formally opened a Nationwide guerilla war led by Dublin. Thats what should've happened. Dublin should've officially sponsored the guerilla resistance. Had the British army charged them with state sponsored terrorism, they should've ignored it. The British army would then be faced with either invading Dublin or pulling out.

They would've pulled out because a 32 County guerrilla war would've been lost even quicker.
 
D

Deleted member 17573

Had they any honour they would've carried this out and after failing, continued with a guerilla war. Their special forces could've managed to train local populace to be deadly. Obviously, the conventional move would've failed. But so what? Even defeated armies counter-attack. The Germans did it in the Battle of Berlin and the Iraqi army did it in the Battle of Baghdad. Poor odds mean nothing in the face of responsibility.

It was their responsibility to intervene and they failed us.
You´ve been reading too many comic books - at least I hope that´s what´s behind your post. Otherwise what you are saying is remarkably similar to Hitler´s idea of total destruction of a people who had "failed" him - fight to the bitter end until we´re all dead. This is sick.
 

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
You´ve been reading too many comic books - at least I hope that´s what´s behind your post. Otherwise what you are saying is remarkably similar to Hitler´s idea of total destruction of a people who had "failed" him - fight to the bitter end until we´re all dead. This is sick.
Didn't take long to get Hitler in on this thread..
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top