Is Harvard part of the American security establishment?
Was she employed by the US government or a US security agency?
She gave lectures!
It is utter misrepresentation to present that as being part of the 'American security establishment'.
Neutrality
- Thread starter Purple
- Start date
- Status
Was she employed by the US government or a US security agency?
She gave lectures!
It is utter misrepresentation to present that as being part of the 'American security establishment'.
East coast American Universities have a reputation as being bastions of conservative neoliberal thinking.
Sure just look at the faculty membership of Harvard where the overwhelming majority, nearly 1.5%, identify as conservative.
No, once you even talk to those people you are part of them. Are you seriously suggesting that a brilliant woman who spent her life studying and educating people would suddenly start giving lectures and informing people in power about what she has learned just because they asked her to? That's crazy talk.
He's brought his office into disrepute all by himself.
He's also done that all by himself.
Morality is not the preserve of the left.
What evidence do you base that belief on?
When did Dan O'Brien join the Government?
That's an opinion piece in a Newspaper. While I agree with it and find our current status cowardly, hypocritical and shameful neither I nor the author have any control over the current debate though I suspect that since he's a Jesuit priest and professor of philosophy he's secretly pro-war. He also lectures in Loyola University where they ask you what pronouns you would like people to use when talking to you. That shows how conservative they are.
Rite & Reason: Political without military support to an invaded neighbour is just gesture politics
Ireland continues to agonise over the moral ambiguity and political implications of neutrality amid the Russian invasion of Ukrainewww.irishtimes.com
That's nonsense.
Anyone? Really? Does that include the existing recipients who have asked that the word "Empire" be removed from the award?
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
I think we should forget personalities, including Michael D., who is for the time being, the President of Ireland.
While history serves as an indication, like shares – past performance is not a guarantee of future performance.
As an independent State, Ireland has responsibilities – one of which is defence in the here and now.
The thing about defence is that “threats” are not always predictable.
For instance, we now understand the need for cyber-security because we have already been attacked.
The world changes. Right now, there are many destabilising factors. Besides territorial wars, floods and droughts are undermining economic and political stabilities.
Isn’t it better to have some level of national preparedness and some level of support rather than to continue on a wing and a prayer?
While history serves as an indication, like shares – past performance is not a guarantee of future performance.
As an independent State, Ireland has responsibilities – one of which is defence in the here and now.
The thing about defence is that “threats” are not always predictable.
For instance, we now understand the need for cyber-security because we have already been attacked.
The world changes. Right now, there are many destabilising factors. Besides territorial wars, floods and droughts are undermining economic and political stabilities.
Isn’t it better to have some level of national preparedness and some level of support rather than to continue on a wing and a prayer?
I am saying that it frames the current government's approach to discussing our security/neutrality situation. I am saying that let us discuss these matters, but if the government choses a person who is an integral part of the US security establishment to chair the forum, lets not pretend the forum is operating in a vacuum.
This is true and should never be forgotten.
It is also true that it brought death and destruction to Vietnam, most of central America, maybe most tragically of all to Chile, and of course Iraq.
From the Marshall Plan to lying to the UN Security Council about non existent WMD, its not a good direction of travel. I think you need to keep some perspective on your American friends.
Our situation is not Finlands, Finland's policies may well be realistic for Finland, that does not make them realistic for us.
In fact I think this whole discussion could be reduced to that one point, we are not Finland.
I agree especially on the cybersecurity issue. I have made exactly this point previously in this thread.
I think we should and could build up our own cybersecurity defence capability. It is needed and it is realistic.
Why do people who think it is terrible that we allow the RAF to patrol our skies (a regrettable necessity in my opinion, one that is not worth billions trying probably unsuccessfully to fix) think we should enter a cybersecurity alliance with NATO or connected parties.
Time to get real indeed.
1 We are not Finland
2 We need a cybersecurity defence system
3 NATO (yes I know it was some NATO countries plus Australia rather than NATO proper) is as guilty of war crimes in Iraq as Russia in Ukraine. Lets not ally with them
Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
Yes, of course, but that would require us to act in an adult-like manner and take our responsibilities seriously. Unfortunately, our politicians prefer to live in pretend-land where neutrality masquerades as something positive and noble. Far from being lauded and admired internationally, it's seen as a bit of a joke.
Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
It isn't, and it shouldn't.
That must indeed go on the balance sheet. However, when you compare even the worst excesses of the US to those of communism (Soviet Union, China, Kymer Rouge, North Korea) they are not within an asses roar of equivalence.
Again, perspective, comparisons and context is important. Much more blatant lies are regularly told to the security council by Putin and China. On balance the US has been a force for good. On balance, Russia hasn't.
The details are different. Obviously. The principle is similar. We face threats. We need to defend ourselves. That's easier done in alliance with like minded democracies.
We should and we could. But it also makes sense to hook up with other countries facing similar threats.
I'm not one of those people. It's a pragmatic (although not ideal) solution that has worked well so far. It's a little bit feeble though, isn't it, that we yield responsibility for our national security to the will of another country. Which will, rightly of course, always prioritize its own interests over ours.
Nonsense. Russia's crimes vastly exceed NATOs. And NATO had a (disputable) UN mandate for Iraq. Russia has not even the slightest claim to a mandate for invading Ukraine.
But that hasn't happened so it shouldn't be a concern.
We face cybersecurity threats from our neighbours as well.
The American NSA and Denmark were spying on Germany, even tapping Angela Merkel's phone. I really doubt that both the US and UK are not spying on us. After all does Russia care that much about what we are up to.
Did any of them bring down a major government system, with consequences for the day to operations of provision of services in this country? Oh wait, no, that was Russian hackers.
Why does Russia have such a massive embassy here?
The US and UK do not pose a threat to us.
On Russian state TV, Ireland was threatened with nuclear attack.
Ireland condemns Russian TV for nuclear attack simulation
Russian state TV showed video of underwater missile and described possible destruction of Ireland and UK
www.theguardian.com
Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
We've moved on a long way from the world of "gentlemen don't read each others letters" I'm afraid. I've absolutely no doubt that our friends gather intelligence on us and each other. Tapping Merkel's phone was quite a rational action for the US, albeit a little naughty. After all, Merkel vetoed Ukraine's NATO application back in '08 and was quite the appeaser in her attitude to Russia. The US was rightly concerned about this, and subsequent events amply demonstrate the folly of her appeasement.
So while the US and UK probably do spy on us, we can reasonably expect that they won't launch cyber attacks on us, as a Russian group did to the HSE, and as Russia regularly does in the Baltics and other places. Nor is the US or the UK likely to attack our undersea infrastructural connectivity. Russia might not care much what we do, but if they see us as the soft and undefended underbelly of the EU, we might become a target of opportunity. The risk of a plausibly deniable attack that everybody knows to be coming from Russia is a standard Kremlin tactic. Think Salisbury poisoning attack, etc etc. Russia hates the EU; hates the very concept of European unity and would love to make the point that it can grievously hurt an EU memberstate with impunity. In that context, we're Bambi wandering innocently and somewhat detached from the herd. That's why we need to join the Neighborhood Watch.
In the 1851 Census he declared his birthplace as Ireland.
Attachments
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Yes. Some of our politicians obfuscate.
For instance, Ireland is responsible for its own airspace.
Do we wait for a civilian air crash before we do something about aircraft flying in our airspace with their transponders turned off?
Is that something that is on the “it will never happen” list?
Last May, Michael Martin, Tánaiste & Defence and Foreign Affairs Minister, denied that Ireland relies on an agreement with the British regarding airspace security and claimed reporting was inaccurate. He refused to explain further citing a policy to not comment on national security issues.
Leo Varadkar said in the Dáil that Ireland does depend on international partners to assist in national security measures.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
Let's get real. War crimes is the greatest nonsense. Has anybody fought a war without committing war crimes? (War of Independence?, Civil War?) Has anybody ever been convicted of war crimes, having not lost the war? We never hear of Ukraine's war crimes and they do have a wing of their army which is openly neo Nazi. Russia's "collateral" civilian deaths are measured in the dozens maybe hundreds, the allies killed 57,000 French civilians by blanket aerial bombardment in the liberation of France.
But let's get real. It is fine for high school and UNI debates to take the high moral ground but really our Presie has been on the planet long enough to know how self indulgent that is.
So, as I say, let's get real. One version of reality, which I am not totally opposed to, is that the only realistic threat that we can be prepared for or do anything significant about is internal - so keep enough in reserve to put down any IRA style insurrection.
More honourable would be to recognise that the geopolitical reality is that our way of life is under constant threat from Russia et al and we most certainly are very grateful that NATO is there to defend our whole way of life and really the fact that its members fight their wars as dirty as anyone else is an unfortunate reality. Of course, there are those who might prefer the Russain way of life to our own; Micky D was certainly in that camp in his youth.
Launching the war in Iraq was the inexcusable crime there.
Do you really think our way of life, here in Ireland, is under threat from Russia
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,596
No, because we are protected by NATO.
Imagine the looney tunes (Daly, Wallace, Boyd Barret, Higgins) had their way and the Western democracies unilaterally de-nuked. How long do you think Russia would tolerate a World order where the likes of Ireland has a GDP per capita 7 times greater than their own. Oh, we probably would never actually see Russian boots on our holy shamrock but the World order, particular economic, would be overturned by the nuclear armed autocrats.
Last edited:
It was inexcusable alright, as was the US invasion or Grenada, the Suez crisis, British involvement in Yamen in the 1950's and 60's, the oppression of pan-Arab nationalism from the 1920's onward which resulted in so much fundamentalism and oppression and in particular the support of the Wahabi's and not the Hashemites in the war over who controlled Arabia, the support of dictators and suppression of democracy in Africa during the Cold War... the list goes on.
That was then and this is now. The present day government of France and the USA and the UK isn't responsible for those things, no more than the present king of Belgium isn't responsible for the up to 10 million people his Great Great Grandfather killed in The Congo.
Right now we are living under the cloak of safety that the free democratic countries in NATO and the EU provide. We are living in their back yard rent free.
You better believe it is because we are part of the free world. More so now than at any point since the 1950's and China is a bigger threat than Russia. The free world is massively out numbered and will soon be economically out produced.
Democracy and individual freedom are historical blips and there's absolutely no reason that our way of life will survive the next 100 years.
We live in the European Union, the freest place in the world and the place where individuals have more rights and freedoms than any place ever in the history of the world. I think that's worth being willing to fight to protect but if the fight gets to our doorstep on this little island then it's already over.
Last edited:
:quality(70):focal(3918x1772:3928x1782)/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/irishtimes/4ZWDFRPZDBD3DB5LEUUWLWQAKQ.jpg)
President expresses surprise at scale of reaction to comments on foreign policy
Michael D Higgins urges greater transparency about decision-making on the part of bodies such as the ECB
MDH getting into a Biden-level gaffe here.
Seriously though, It just shows he doesn’t get it. It won’t get to this level but, worst case scenario here, comments like this undermine our participation in UNIFIL. What’s he doing talking about what soldiers do and don’t do or what their views are? They are the ones obliged to be neutral between two belligerents and these press reports are always trotted out by the pro-Israeli side when they want to undermine the UNIFIL or the DF’ role. Comments like these, from Irish officialdom, don’t go unnoticed over there. Unnecessary and shows he doesn’t give a damn about anyone but himself.
Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
Once again Higgins has proved himself to be a thundering disgrace. He has form here of course. He once managed to issue a statement on Holocaust Memorial Day which didn't contain the words "Jew" or "Jewish" and instead resorted to copious Higgins levels of general waffle. For Higgins and his fellow travellers, one Jewish state on a piece of land the size of Munster is one Jewish state too many.
Karl Marx was the son of Jewish parents but I suspect that Mick D and Marxie have similar views about Jews.
Marx once said that “The tradition of all past generations weighs like a mountain on the minds of the living.” Micky D has, as one of the greatest intellectuals and poets of his generation (according to one M. Higgins), has risen above that and can deliberate on the moral strengths and weaknesses of entire peoples with the wisdom of Solomon (that other Jew).
- Status