www.ditl.org

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:50 pm**

Sionnach Glic wrote:Although, crazy as it may sound, the Irish government once considered invading the North back in the sixties. I was watching a "what if we'd done it" documentary last week on the planned invasion. It was pretty hilarious watching about a dozen different military experts contemplating all the different ways we'd get our arses handed to us.

I knew there used to be a bit of your constitution claiming sovereignty over the whole island, but I did know there were plans to invade.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 8:03 pm**

Yep, Jack Lynch, Taoiseach back in the late sixties, had the military draw up plans to seize a number of towns just north of the border. He thought that international support would favour the invading Irish forces since they were liberating occupied territory that should have been theirs all along, and putting an end to the violence in the North. He believed that the UN would step in and prevent Britain from launching a counter-attack against the invading forces, and would force Britain to hand over the remaining Irish territories.

Needless to say, what would have happened would be a hell of a lot different.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:07 pm**

I'll say. I'm no expert on the militaries of the mid Cold War, but off the top of my head we had four armoured divisions in Germany, some of all of which would certainly have been brought home, Ark Royal and Eagle to form carrier battle groups to hit the west cost and the V-bombers (still in their nuclear role, although I expect they could have been loaded with conventional munitions). Beyond that I don't know, but I think we can safely say that the result would probably have involved Chieftains rolling up O'Connell Street.

You've got me curious now - I'm off to SDN to ask questions.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:20 pm**

Hell, you could probably win with just the forces stationed in NI itself.

Ireland's military at that time had no tanks, a number of 1930's armoured cars, bolt action rifles, no airforce, no anti-tank weapons, a mere 10,000 poorly-trained troops led by generals who had no experience in actual warfare who'd been training their troops in early-WW2 era tactics, and our Navy consisted of a First World War era gunboat that the British had given us and a bunch of rubber rowboats.

So, yeah. Not much chance of success there. I once heard someone describe our military of that era as "a First World War army being trained in Second World War tactics", which was pretty accurate from what I've read.

I doubt Britain would even bother launching an invasion of the Republic. Simply running the Irish Army out of the North would be enough. That one act would be sufficient to cripple the military, as they'd be anhialated by air-strikes as soon as they abandoned the cities to retreat south. The Irish government would quickly surrender simply at the threat of an invasion, at which point the political and economic smackdowns begin.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:29 pm**

Sionnach Glic wrote:
What we're focused on more these days is~~economic reforms~~ bringing all of Europe together under one centralized government to control everything and rival the United States..

O wait ... you guys keep voting against that. I guess that's primarily France?

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:38 pm**

French government. From what I've heard, the French people weren't too pleased with it.

Fun fact: Ireland is the only country in the entire EU that gets to have its population actualy vote on this matter. As far as I know, everywhere else the governments just decided it. It's no wonder some countries threatened to expell us if we voted no a third time.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 12:49 am**

sunnyside wrote:I don't know about "president worship", but the pres does get their face splashed over the TV, websites, and newspapers a lot.

On the other hand our president ends up on European countries TV, websites, and newspapers a lot too. Poking over to the BBC Obama is on the homepage. Their own political figures are not.

I don't know what's considered a reputable news source over in Ireland. But it looks like politicians on both sides of the pond are staying off the front page of what google considers to be top rated(Irish Examiner).

Though apparently the Irish are still bombing each other.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingne ... 25595.html
I thought you guys had stopped doing that.

Back on subject, I think we pay a lot of attention to the president over here because the the massive changes they can and do cause at home and in the world. I don't know what's at stake when you're condiering candidates over in Ireland, but I imagine "Is this guy going to unilaterally launch a military assault on another nation" is not a concern of the constituants. And I could be wrong, but my impression is sweeping social changes aren't really so common over in the EU these days, so those aren't as much of a concern.

So due to their expected impact I'd think the care given to state leaders in many EU countries would be more on par with Governors in America, who are much less well known.

This is a bit of a tangent but fuck it. I find it bizarre because under the system we use (Westminster style) the PM has far more individual power and power over his party then the US President. If he wants legislation passed, he doesn't have to beg his own party ala the US, the party falls into line as long as he can keep them in and deliver the goods. He's also at far more risk then the US President, yours is in for four years guaranteed bar some exceptional events. Our PM can be booted at basically anytime provided the party loses a no confidence vote.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 1:37 am**

It was perfectly innocuous and a praiseworthy message no shit sherlock, we probably coulda told you that from the day it was announced. I like this quote from a parent later in the article

"They don't need to be told by the president what their responsibilities are. It's the parents' responsibility to teach them that, not the government,"

Yes, now if only more parents would own up to that responsibility then it wouldn't be necessary for the POTUS to step in.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:18 am**

Sonic Glitch wrote:Yes, now if only more parents would own up to that responsibility then it wouldn't be necessary for the POTUS to step in.

An excellent statement. I agree fully.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 1:08 pm**

Sionnach Glic wrote:French government. From what I've heard, the French people weren't too pleased with it.

Fun fact: Ireland is the only country in the entire EU that gets to have its population actualy vote on this matter. As far as I know, everywhere else the governments just decided it. It's no wonder some countries threatened to expell us if we voted no a third time.

Well we can't let democracy get in the way of progress.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:23 pm**

That's the European Spirit, Tyyr!

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:25 pm**

Ya know, every time I learn a bit more about the EU my regard for it drops a bit. And my opinion of it started out pretty fucking low to begin with.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:53 pm**

I've said it before and I'll say it again now: the EU should have remained the EEC. It should have been left as a purely economic organisation. It went downhill big time when it became a political organisation. And its recent campaign to become some sort of Europe-wide nation seriously pisses me off.

Though it was hilarious to hear the Germans getting pissed off over a sovereign nation exercising its own democratic rights to disagree with them.
Germans? Anti-democratic? Never!

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:59 pm**

I liked the idea of the EEC. Europe is so interconnected that smoothing out the economic side of things just made good sense. I agree that going to a fully political body was just a bad idea.

Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the EU in one form or another, such as the constitution, been struck down by the populace every time its put to a public vote?

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:12 pm**

Does anyone remember what happened waaaay back in 1991 when a then President Bush addressed America's school children?

That's right a Democratic outcry about the Pres. trying to "brainwash" our children with those infernal conservative values.

Heck investigations were launched, enquiries were thrust into the limelight.......and nothing was found.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

www.ditl.org

OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!

Re: OMGz Prez is gonna Brainwash our Kidz!!!!