Niall, thanks for your rather complete explanation. However, apart from Peace keeping duties, what do they do that could not be done by a civil force under the auspices of the current civilian authorities?

well said Niall, im disgusted at the negative attitude being displayed toward the Defence Force, and the men and women who proudly serve our country.

Damocles, the “current civilian authorities” don’t know how to fly helicopters at night, defuse bombs, rescue people from jungle prisons, convey war criminals to trial, set up refugee camps in the middle of a desert or, to put it bluntly, kill people when necessary

I think you are confused by the phrase “peace keeping.” The UN doesn’t do “peace keeping” missions anymore and in any case, we’ve sent the army on more EU missions in the last few years

Chuck, You’ll have noticed that I suggested integrating the current members of the defence force into the bolstered civilian forces. It is likely that such people will take their skills with them and would be able to impart such skills to others. It may seem a stretch but it might just be possible.

The sane reasons cited so far for maintaining the Defence Forces separately to the Civilian Authorities are overseas duties such as peace keeping “missions” (currently around 500 personnel) and contributing to the Nordic EU battle group, mainly for bomb disposal. These overseas commitments do not warrant a particularly huge army.

Other reasons seem to be in case someone (who?) invades.

In general the reasons presented on this site don’t seem to justify the size of military expense for domestic use, nor for the volume of actual international commitment and in these recessionary times it’s important that expense be questioned.

Don’t get me wrong, Chuck, I have the greatest respect for anyone who is willing to put their life on the line so that I can sit here in this fluffy office with a phone glued to my ear, as long as it is fiscally justified.

Perhaps there are other reasons that haven’t been presented here.

Well said,Niall. you should contribute more often.

@Damocles….. EOD, ATCP,Border patrol ( no need for you to know why) airport security ( in civvies) security of vital installations, on call for the following a) bin strike b) bus strike c) floods d) ambulance strike e) road clearance f) dignitary security…. Recognised as the top army in the world in the role as the peace keeper, locals in all theatre of operations have acknowledged our professionalism and generosity. Yes that is probably not a lot to have on your CV but its what I have, I as a proud member for 24 years and if you only knew half of what happens , you may change your mind… As for that guy who lasted 3 years, there is no shame in not wanting to serve, not many guys are confident enough to walk around the shower in the nip, us with big balls , well some of us lasted and some…… Laters

Damocles, why is “missions” in quotation marks? Ive already told you that the army doesnt do peace-keeping missions, so I can only assume that you keep saying it because you think it sounds unworthy. Ask the people of east Timor, Liberia and Chad what they think.

And these “bolstered civilian forces” (whatever the hell that means), why on earth do you think they will be less expensive than soldiers?

When Queen Elizabeth and Pres Obama were here last year the state spent 35.88 million on security. Of which, Garda overtime was 28.42 million, and further Garda payroll costs were 4.57 million. That’s 94% of the total! That leaves 2 million (6%) on everything else, including any additional army pay, all the extra food, equipment and petrol that was used. (Irish Times)

How many times do you need it explained? Civilian authorities are much, much MORE expensive than soldiers, less adaptable and prone to striking?

I’ve presented other reasons above.

Would you be an English school teacher?

Why not cut the quangos and the military and all the waste etc, then cut the tax rate being paying by those on low wages. Best way to get the domestic economy going again is to put money back in peoples pockets.

Defend against what… ???

@Jeff – The floods

Chris, So you saying that we are spending €1.4bn on a force to help out if we have floods !.. isn’t that the job of civil defense? rarely do you see are troops getting their feet wet. Plus when they do they look for over time / expenses etc..

1st For 1.4bn we spend on our Toy Army could fix a lot of our flood defenses and not have floods in the 1st place & if the role of the DF is to protect us from floods or other natural events & act as stand by fire men etc, do they need the tanks, artillery gun’s, machine guns etc

The army in Ireland does nothing a expanded Gardai or civil defense, army reserve couldn’t do for a faction the money.

Would make more sense if we got rid of the army and put the money towards an air force and navay.

Jeff, I don’t think you understand money

Of every €1 the government spends goes on Defence. 26c goes on Health, 17c goes on Education and around 6c goes on Welfare.

Defence gets LESS THAN 1c. Which is roughly the same as what we give away in Foreign Aid. If we totally abolished the Dept of Defence and put their entire budget into Health (for example) no-one would even notice

Your (repeated) comments that we could just get this “expanded” Gardai to do the Army’s job for a fraction of the cost of just plain stupid. We don’t pay the army overtime and we certainly don’t pay them an allowance for carrying firearms! Even before all that, the basic salary of a Garda is far higher than the average salary in the army.

And then there’s the fact that they are a completely different organisation, with a different ethos and organisational culture who don’t know the first thing about green-field tactics, overseas operations, airborne operation, armour, cooking, nursing, dealing with natural disasters and home and abroad…. etc Where are these Gardai going to get all that knowledge and experience? What are we going to pay them with??

Now, “defend against what?” you say. Jeff, why does ANY country have an army? There are less than 10 countries on earth facing an imminent threat of invasion. Why do any of them have an army? No-one knows what the future holds and it’s best to have an army that you can expand should the need appear likely. You can’t make one from scratch. In the meantime, we have a subversive threat to deal with, vital installations to protect, a foreign policy to implement, seas to patrol, people to be rescued and public services that could strike at short notice. For less than 1c of every euro, Im happy we are covered. It’s certainly better value than I get for any of the other insurances I pay for!

Jeff, you know nothing.

Defence against your ignorance Jeff.
Cop on and stop Generalising with a load of blubbering saliva
The Irish Defence forces have my support ANYDAY!
They are great ambassadors overseas too.
The REAL Oglaigh na Eireann.

Chuck : A few points
1st: Insults only show how weak you case is
2nd: Iceland or Panama don’t have a standing Army, Why not ?
3rd: Never mentioned the Navy at least they do something & the Air Corp
4th: “a foreign policy to implement” are we not Neutral ?
5th: “subversive threat to deal with” I think the Gardai have that covered & Armies role in defending the boarder didn’t make a difference at all. In fact using the army to deal with a subversive threat is almost as bad as the threat, why not go all the way & but the army in charge.
6th: “vital installations to protect” such as ? what is the army guarding today ? like cash transits, No soldiers guard the airport/ports, IFSC etc are Google servers.
7th: “people to be rescued & cover for strikes” Really this is the reason to have a Standing Army… come on. With Tanks, Artillery & machine guns & a knowledge of “green-field tactics, overseas operations, airborne operation, armour” Perhaps we should have them focus on key Irish defense objectives & teach them about plumbing / garbage recycling which is more usefully to them than a knowledge of “Airborne Ops”

If you want to play soldiers go play paint ball. As for the 1c well look well after the cents & euros will take care of themselves. Also that figure doesn’t include the cost of public pension’s, compensation claims, value of state assets held/used by the army only “current” expenditure. If we do when the Russian etc decide to fight all the way though Europe before landing on Dollymount beach at which point i sure we can form a army by then so that someone from the army will be there to sign the surrender terms.

Hi Chuck,

Another way of looking at the cost of supporting the armed forces would be to say that it’s the equivalent of another 8-9 €100 household charges. Considering how much bother there was about that I’d say you’re a bit off saying that nobody would notice the money.

In fairness where do you start with the Gardai. I had to laugh when I heard that they were complaining about how there were no longer getting paid compensation for loss of overtime pay! Unbelievable! I think we can all agree that Garda overtime pay should be reformed.

I think you’d have a very tough time convincing anybody that there is a plausible case that Ireland will ever be invaded. As for the rest or arguments yeah some or all of those things could happen in the near future but they could all be met without a military.

Well Brian, can you explain to me why Canada, Brazil & Poland have armies? What about the Netherlands? For that matter, who is going to invade Britain? Nobody, I’ll wager. But we don’t know what the future holds.

This simplistic notion that armies are for invasions is ridiculous. If armies were only for fighting conventional wars then every army in the world would be rendered irrelevant by US military spending. But how often do invasions take place? Very, very rarely

The war-fighting done by armies these days tends to be asymmmetrical, which is why America’s money was never going to win the war in Vietnam, why the Soviets couldn’t win in Afghanistan, why the Taliban still exist (and why Ireland wasn’t invaded in 1941-43).

Armies are primarily engaged in non-conventional security (which we need far more than most) and aiding civilian powers. We tell them to do this all the time. Floods? Call the army. Snow? Call the army. Fires? Call the army. Bombs? Call the army. Strikes? Call the army. We are not unique. In recent weeks the British have have their army taking the place of check-in staff at airports. They used them to cover the fire-strike while they were simultaneously preparing for the Iraq war. The army is the catch-all, the governments safety net. When the state requires, the army serves – no matter what the job.

You want to tackle Garda overtime? You mean, abolish it completely? Have fun. When they all catch flu, you’ll be glad you have the army. They are the cheapest and most adaptable arm of the state and have never let this country down

Jeff : A few points
1st: You’re very precious for a man who has no problem insulting the entire army. Im saying you are ignorant. That’s not an insult, it’s a statement of fact.

2nd: We are not Panama or Iceland. Panama was governed by ruthless military dictators like Noriega. They are understandably a little sensitive to militaries but they DO maintain a small force and a militarised police force. They do not ask them to do the range of things we ask the army to do and, as I pointed out to you, police are more expensive than soldiers, not less. FYI, Panama only got rid of Noriega when they were invaded. Something you say is impossible. Similarly, Iceland allowed itself to become an American base for 50 years. You think that will go down well here? They also have para-militray police which, once again Jeff, are less adaptable and more expensive. Now, can you please explain every other country in the world having an army?

3rd: The army also “do something” as I’ve pointed out to you. Furthermore, the Navy and air corps are a part of the army. Which is why we have one Chief of Staff and not three.

4th: More ignorance. No, we are not neutral. And if we were, we’d have to spend more on defence, not less, like Sweden. And yes, we have a foreign policy (they two are not mutually exclusive) which hundreds of our soldiers are implementing right now, thousands of miles from home.

5th: This is just gibberish. How is the army “as bad” as the provos? If the Gardai deal with the subervsive threat so perfectly then why is the Smithwick tribunal taking place? If the Gardai dont need the army’s help then why was Private Paddy Kelly killed? Didn’t you see the papers today??

6th: Off the top of my head Portlaoise prison, the Central Bank, Govt Buildings, Airports (more ignorance on your part), 130,000sq miles of coast

By the way, cash is important

7th: They’ve already done a perfectly good job dealing with all those tasks when we’ve asked them. So why would we strip them of another capability to focus on something they can already do? Really, Jeff, you’re just floundering here. And then you list a load of things that only they can do…….as if that makes your point??

I don’t want to “play soldiers”. That’s why I didn’t join. But why don’t you go and tell the family of the aforementioned Private Kelly and the hundreds of other Irish soldiers killed on duty that they were just playing. Maybe tell the family of Pte Kevin Joyce, whose body was never found? Is he playing hide and seek, Jeff?

And then you are back to talking about invasions. Like a 10 year old.

Hi Chuck, sorry for the late reply.

I feel you’re going off topic, I don’t want to avoid points you feel are salient but I’m not about to write a paragraph on every country you’ve named so as to end up having this argument 5 times over, so with that in mind I’m just going to talk about Ireland. Fair enough?

So as to avoid going around in circles can we drop the “you never know what’s around the corner” line and lay out the top 3-5 (preferably 3 so that we have a narrow scope for debate) purposes of Ireland’s military. If these purposes are redundant or can all be provided by some national guard/combination of existing services at a fraction of the cost (less people and less hardware) then I feel that I’ll have made a strong case that the Irish defence force is a 1.4 billion a year luxury that we cannot afford.

Without wanting to put words in your mouth, it seems like you have conceded that Ireland’s military’s purpose is not for defence from invasion? So what we’re left with is an organisation whose responsibility is to act as a stopgap measure when other public services go on strike or there are natural disasters or defence from the IRA or whatever, is that more or less what you’re saying?

Fewer soldiers & more Gardai = better use of tax payers money.

Please enlighten me Richard, what service does the defence forces provide to the Irish people that is worth €1.4€ Billion a year (1.354 Billion in 2010 according to some wiki article). Fair enough they are engaged in peace keeping abroad, which is a worthwhile endeavour as is aid which is also being slashed I believe. But what do they actually do for the Irish people? That is more important then better hospitals/schools etc?

The “if you didn’t join then you can’t have an opinion” argument is pretty weak. Anyone who is paying tax in Ireland and it funding the defence forces is entitled to an opinion surely?

See above, Brian. I’ve enlightened you.

That’s right..!! They only took on or are in the process of taking on 600 recruits. And now rumour of letting 500 go??
Typical government, putting on a big show about giving us things with their right hand……. all the whole, sneakily taking it away with the left.

Infantry soldiering is a young mans game. You eed to have a reasonable turnover of people. Not everyone that joins can become a batallion Sgt Maj.

Jasus first time I’ve seen a hun on the journal ..

Patrick you wont pay the house hold charge, but yet you want the rest of us to pay the army for doing nothing.

Yasser I paid the household charge on the very first day. I always pay each and every tax on time.

Patrick, On your facebook profile you say you wont pay the household charge. Change it or you will look foolish.

Thanks Yasser I really only use facebook to play scrabble. I’m not very familiar with most of it.

Found out.

Yea sure disband the army and pay them redundancies then put them on the dole with the rest and pay them almost as much and in many cases more In mortgage interest supplement and all the other allowances they would be entitled to so they can all sit on their bums instead of providing an element of defence and bolster our international image. I know that many members of the defence forces are receiving FIS due to the mediocre pay and allowances they receive. I fail to see how sending them home to sign on will save the country a significant amount of money. If any at all.

David your having a laugh. Is runing around with the banks money every day good for Irelands image .Ps I have a job.

Inmyt koiu lkop @?tu.

I can tell you didn’t have the balls to serve you’re country… It’s usually only whingers like you who haven’t served in the military that have a go at belittling the defence forces….

How does sitting around all day serve my Country?, Nocturnal Paramedic ???????…

All the red thumbs are the boyos sitting around in the barracks drinking tax free

Exactly jeff…. If you think that every member of the defence forces is sitting around in a barracks doing feck all… You haven’t a clue… Its just a lazy generalisation on your part!!

What if the main emergency services go on strike because of further cuts? Who else can be relied on to fight fires, provide basic paramedic services, and provide security?

Thats not even taking into account all the bombs they defuse that could kill innocent people or helping people in flooding which seems to be becoming more frequent.

The role of the army is more varied than just shooting guns. They certainly aren’t sitting on their arses all day. For the size of our country, Ireland has a very well respected military internationally, not because they are “good craic” but because they are good at what they do.

King Olaf : The army in Ireland does nothing a expanded Gardai or Civil Defense, Army Reserve (part time) couldn’t do for a faction of the money.

@Jeff – I can’t disagree with what you are saying, it is possible and it could work. The problem is that because of the way our country is run, it would be impossible to implement such a change. First off you would have the public backlash at cutting that many jobs….there would be many government funded reports and then legal challenges….then after the years of downsizing, you would have to sell of the assets for far less than you paid for them….then there would be the training of all the other services to pick up the slack left from the army…..the money and time that would take. Its just not feasible to disband the army.

What happens in the distant future if the North because part of the Repubic again too? Thats not going to go down with out any trouble for sure.

Hey jeff pop down here to westmeath and have an ol face to face with an exer

Hi Chuck, sorry for the late reply.

I feel you’re going off topic, I don’t want to avoid points you feel are salient but I’m not about to write a paragraph on every country you’ve named so as to end up having this argument 5 times over, so with that in mind I’m just going to talk about Ireland. Fair enough?

So as to avoid going around in circles can we drop the “you never know what’s around the corner” line and lay out the top 3-5 (preferably 3 so that we have a narrow scope for debate) purposes of Ireland’s military. If these purposes are redundant or can all be provided by some national guard/combination of existing services at a fraction of the cost (less people and less hardware) then I feel that I’ll have made a strong case that the Irish defence force is a 1.4 billion a year luxury that we cannot afford.

Without wanting to put words in your mouth, it seems like you have conceded that Ireland’s military’s purpose is not for defence from invasion? So what we’re left with is an organisation whose responsibility is to act as a stopgap measure when other public services go on strike or there are natural disasters or defence from the IRA or whatever, is that more or less what you’re saying?

Sorry posted on the wrong thread….apologies

Johnny the Defence Forces could only do what they were asked during the floods and freeze. If the Civil Authorities asked for assistance they responded if they were not asked they could not respond. Also since when is income tax free regardless of where it was earned?

Johnny Your a 100 per cent correct, They only people in favour of the army is the members and their families.A while back I asked an Army corporal to recite the words of the national anthem in irish or english and guess what. He could not, That says it all.

Dhaiti – they get paid by our gov and the eu when on duty abroad, tax free. Why are the army allowed to sell alcohol tax free and pay no duty on it?

@ Johnny I was unaware such payments are tax free can’t think as to why they should be. As for not collecting duty on alcohol sold in the mess maybe it’s a throwback to the days of your or some such loophole as exists in airport duty free.

@ yesser, what part of the recruit syllabus is the national anthem covered in? And how does a soldiers ability to recite it make them any better at their job?

Go to lunch and get 29 red thumbs and no response. You’re a belligerent and spudless lot aren’t you?

How’s this for a question then, if they have little role apart from bomb disposal and the ceremonial then why not integrate them into the Garda?

Let those roles fall under the Garda and use them to plug the recruitment hole. We get more Guards on our streets and a safer happier country. You also save a bunch of money on back office.

Unless you think the Welsh are going to invade.

@damocles… There may not be an imminent threat to the nation but how do you what will happen in the future…?? The DF are an insurance policy better to have it there than not….

@nocturnal paramedic

If you’re not able to articulate what an insurance policy is for then 1.4 Billion is a pretty hefty price to pay for the policy? When other public services that are are providing must better value to the most vulnerable in society are crying out for extra funding.

If someone really wanted to invade Ireland I doubt that 20,000 personnel (including reserves) are likely to prove much of an issue.

Besides, NP, the suggestion was that the newly bolstered Garda would perform that role if the Welsh do decide to invade.

@ Brian… How am I not able to articulate what an insurance policy is…?? If we disband the army and a couple of years down the line a war/emergency of some kind takes place, who is going to keep the peace/defend the country?? The same people screaming for cuts now will be crying out for an army… Let’s face it the government are NEVER going to disband the army do there’s no point arguing about it! I’d rather spend 1.4 billion on an army every year than give it to bond holders….

Does that mean you would agree with arming the this new gardai force??

“you would agree with arming the this new gardai force?”

In the advent of an invasion, yes.

Right so let’s take your two scenarios where we might need an army.

1) invasion – Who the hell is going to invade us? The only country that could conceivably invade is the UK. That’s NEVER going to happen and besides unless we decide to spend a similar GDP % on our armed forces as north Korea do, we would be powerless to stop them.

2) natural disaster – 2 years ago we had the worst flooding in living memory something like 2-300 soldiers were deployed to lay out sandbags, I’m pretty sure a volunteer force could have handled that much?

Do you have any other dooms day scenarios in mind? You’re right the government will probably never dismantle the army…..but using you logic about half the debates on this website are a waste of time.

I don’t think anybody said the the 1.4 Billion would go to bond holders?

@ Brian… Never mind an invasion, what about civil unrest? What happens if there’s some sort of financial meltdown or a virus outbreak.. who is going to maintain civil obedience when there’s chaos and rioting in the streets? The gardai with there batons and pepper spray?? I don’t think so….

Civil unrest…….so now your main argument for having a military is too protect the government from the population? Well I’m pretty sure that the Greek police have a done a pretty good job keeping the protesters on the run this last while as did the British police during last years riots. Let’s see countries that needed a military in the last few years to put down civil unrest…….we have Syria, Egypt, Libya and Bahrain. Yep those countries were much better off with a military capable of suppressing civil unrest.

“The gardai with there [sic] batons and pepper spray?”

And “their moral authority as servants of the people.”

Is it possible that the army had a similar view about you?

Patrick, I hope every one looks at your facebook page.

Why are you obsessed with his facebook page?

And if you were only in the army for 3 years when the minimum general service is 5 years, wouldn’t that mean you were turfed out? Therefore giving you a reason to be so bitter…

Unless of course you had to leave through injury, in which case I apologise.

Yasser, I hardly ever look at my facebook page. I use it to play scrabble. My children and grandchildren play around with it but it is not something I would care about.

3 years. You were clearly rejected, fat or completely useless!? Yes? Clearly not no?
Yeah you failed your annual fitness test a lot in your 3 proxy years!

If you think its a shitty little country, feck off somewhere else then.

Tell us James….do you wear your hood up or down to your boardroom meetings? Hard sums obviously not your strong point either genius.

Maybe il let you polish my medals some day…. When us stop being a tit….

Mind you I probably would have joined maybe the US army if I had lived during ww2 honourable men fighting for honourable cause. What did ours do? Drank tea and persecuted those who recognised evil of nazi germany and fought it. In peace time it’s generally bottom of the barrel that join the army

I won’t even dignify that with a proper response…. You really must think a lot of yourself…

For your information most of the defence forces have a trade or third level qualification. You must be some kind of genius as shown from your understanding of the defence forces. Last recruitment saw 10000 people for 500 places.

By your understanding they only take the last 500 incase they pick the geniuses like you.

I did. But I shouldn’t have bothered.

Yeah I wouldn’t be able to because I’m a stupid ex-soldier….. I must have became a paramedic by collecting vouchers from a cornflake box…

Clown of the week award in the post James

If you were man enough serve in the army you might have a different view… You probably wouldn’t last a weekend in recruit training!!