Depends on whether it would be chapter 6 or 7 peacekeeping for whether or not our troops could fight back, even if it was chapter 7 fighting back would likely only result in missile strikes. The unfortunate truth is that gaza is as good as dead at this point and no peacekeeping force will be allowed inside
They probably are more likely to be attacked by Hamas in this case, because this whole thing is just Israel and the US getting other countries to help them take over Palestine, while Hamas will see them as an occupying force.
By the terms that frame this proposal and what it is supposed to complete..they would be far more likely to be attacked by Hamas.. but yes, Hamas are good guy's according to the brainwashed mob
Nobody said they're the good guys. Just that the Israelis are far worse.
There's levels. People say Putin is brutal and he is, he hasn't killed anywhere near the amount of women, children and journalists, doctors, bombed less hospitals, bombed less cancer wards.
Israel beat every Russian number in 2 years and Russia has been fighting Ukraine since 2014.
Has are absolutely not good guys, but I would hazard a guess Israeli troops would be far more likely to fire upon potential Irish troops in Gaza, especially considering they do it rather frequently in the relatively peaceful Lebanon.
Not much point - The Israelis will just do what they want (as usual) - then utterances from UN to say stop - then continue as normal.
Rocket lands in Gaza - OP (Outpost) reports it to Company HQ - They report it to Batallion HQ - they report it to their HQ which eventually get to UNHQ In New York - then it gets 'filed away'
On the ground people die - The UN is structured so that USA and others have a Veto which negates the whole concept of the UN in the first place.
Absolutely not. Let the US, UK and Germany put Thier troops in danger. They backed the killing of thousands of innocent men, women and children by backing Israel.
What a great stance to have, shout the loudest but when it actually comes to putting the money where our mouth is we just leave it too the bigger powers.
This isn't going to be a "peacekeeping force" it's going to be enforcing Israel and America's plans for Palestine with no input from Palestinians. It's just getting other countries to pay for and do the work Israel and the US want to do.
Hypothetically (and this isn't exactly a longshot), if Israel refuses to adhere to anything close to basic human rights or any respect to international law and operates with open contempt towards peacekeeping forces there, what do you will happen with Irish troops there?
You need to read the question again. It's not about money, it's about Irish boots on the ground. Let the countries who backed Israel put troops in the gun sight of an Israeli sniper 👍🏻
Israel wouldn't care who it kills in order to target an innocent Palestinian.
Why would you ask the ones who in your view facilitated the genocide to defend the ones who were on the receiving end of the genocide?
Surely they wouldn’t be the most neutral in defending the oppressed?
If we are a neutral country and we were all on about how horrific this situation is, it’s the literal perfect opportunity to deploy peacekeepers from a neutral country.
Also “putting your money where your mouth is”, is a fairly common saying it doesn’t literally mean spending money.
By this logic, you want the US and UK and Germany who you say are complict in the genocide of Gazans, to them have their troops in Gaza. Is that not incredibly flawed?
For inaccurate naming, Gaza Stabilisation Force is up there with Gaza Humanitarian Foundation - the "aid" distributors who shot dead 2,000 hungry people seeking aid.
Europe needs to keep our forces to protect against Russia.
A strong deterrent against Russia in Ukraine as part of a peace settlement could be 500,000 troops. That would require about 6,000 Irish troops, that's half our total forces.
6000 personnel is essentially our entire army, not half, and Europe has nowhere close to half a million *deployable* troops. Britain for example would struggle to maintain a presence of 10k troops in Ukraine, France maybe slightly more, Germany around the same etc. You're probably talking about 50-70k at the very max that Europe could deploy to Ukraine -Ireland in such a scenario would struggle to send even a battalion sized contingent of about 600. But there will not be a European force deployed to Ukraine after this war ends, I say that with 99% certainty.
there will not be a European force deployed to Ukraine after this war ends, I say that with 99% certainty.
Then Russia will repeat this all over again.
Britain for example would struggle to maintain a presence of 10k troops in Ukraine, France maybe slightly more, Germany around the same etc.
Russia is more belligerent now than the USSR was post-Khrushchev. Today's Russian army is of course smaller, yet it is slowly grinding through the second most powerful land army on the continent which has close to a million men under arms. A five figure deployment would be a capitulation by Europe to Russia.
I'm not denying that, but I'm just saying that Europe really isn't in a position to deploy enough of a contingent as would act as a deterrent. There is also seemingly very little to no will to do so, bar maybe the French. The coalition of the willing has already transitioned to a grouping offering financial and military aid, as opposed to still talking about actual deployments.
The US military had 213,000 troops in West Germany in 1990.
The British Army of the Rhine numbered 50,000.
The US has decided it no longer wishes to defend Europe and Trump is behaving in a Russophilic manner against Ukraine, so we cannot rely on US defensive assurances.
A deployment comparable to what was in West Germany seems most appropriate if we are to deter Russia. Allowing Russia to create a frozen conflict in Ukraine would devastate Ukraine economically.
Normally, and morally, yes.
Practically and realistically, absolutely not.
Perhaps if Netanyahu is deposed and a non-lunatic Israeli government is elected then there’s some hope for Gaza and we should be part if helping keep it safe… but that’s not going to happen.
We’d just be sending Irish troops into harms way to be “accidentally” killed by the IDF when they decide they need to put the boot into the Palestinians some more.
To ad to this, and regardless of your opinion on Israel-Palestine, the idea that either side would actually observe any sort of „peacekeeping“ is highly unlikely. Just look at how (un)successful the mission in the Lebanon was. Consistent exchanges between Hesbollah and the IDF, despite UN presence.
Any effective peacekeeping would involve actual military engagement with both sides, and I can’t see many in Ireland having the appetite (or training) for that…
Israel needs to face serious consequences for what they've been doing since they were created. They should not be treated as a legitimate nation because they aren't one. Israel needs to be completely cut off from the civilized world and anyone who has served in the IDF needs to be treated as the criminals they are.
Are we ready for Netenyahu to bomb Irish troops and Europe do nothing about it?
They've done it before
Yup, in Lebanon? I think they'd be worse inside Gaza.
Lots of accidents, lots of they crossed invisible security lines scenarios.
Terrible idea, they wouldn't be able to fight back either.
Depends on whether it would be chapter 6 or 7 peacekeeping for whether or not our troops could fight back, even if it was chapter 7 fighting back would likely only result in missile strikes. The unfortunate truth is that gaza is as good as dead at this point and no peacekeeping force will be allowed inside
More likely to be attacked by Hamas
History says otherwise.
Must be mad to completely lose the narrative.
There's no decent people left defending the Israelis. It's only grifters and monsters backing this.
They probably are more likely to be attacked by Hamas in this case, because this whole thing is just Israel and the US getting other countries to help them take over Palestine, while Hamas will see them as an occupying force.
Defending Israel?
By the terms that frame this proposal and what it is supposed to complete..they would be far more likely to be attacked by Hamas.. but yes, Hamas are good guy's according to the brainwashed mob
Nobody said they're the good guys. Just that the Israelis are far worse.
There's levels. People say Putin is brutal and he is, he hasn't killed anywhere near the amount of women, children and journalists, doctors, bombed less hospitals, bombed less cancer wards.
Israel beat every Russian number in 2 years and Russia has been fighting Ukraine since 2014.
Has are absolutely not good guys, but I would hazard a guess Israeli troops would be far more likely to fire upon potential Irish troops in Gaza, especially considering they do it rather frequently in the relatively peaceful Lebanon.
The IDF will control Gaza. No point sending token forces to do their dirty work.
This would be my concern. We wouldn’t be contributing to a just peace, but further cementing a colonialist land grab.
Not much point - The Israelis will just do what they want (as usual) - then utterances from UN to say stop - then continue as normal.
Rocket lands in Gaza - OP (Outpost) reports it to Company HQ - They report it to Batallion HQ - they report it to their HQ which eventually get to UNHQ In New York - then it gets 'filed away'
On the ground people die - The UN is structured so that USA and others have a Veto which negates the whole concept of the UN in the first place.
For what purpose?
By definition - there's no such thing as peacekeeping outside of the UN.
Well we let Hezbollah shoot at them and do fuck all only a month ago and did fuck all about it so I can’t see much changing.
No its not our problem leave it to Egypt, Jordan,Saudi ect
Absolutely not. Let the US, UK and Germany put Thier troops in danger. They backed the killing of thousands of innocent men, women and children by backing Israel.
What a great stance to have, shout the loudest but when it actually comes to putting the money where our mouth is we just leave it too the bigger powers.
So instead of objecting to Israel's actions, we should enforce them?
Are you saying peacekeeping forces just shouldn’t be there? Or should irish troops be there to support Hamas or something?
I'm saying what I said.
This isn't going to be a "peacekeeping force" it's going to be enforcing Israel and America's plans for Palestine with no input from Palestinians. It's just getting other countries to pay for and do the work Israel and the US want to do.
Didnt Hamas agree to the deal? Isnt that why there was a deal in the first place?
Idk what deal you mean, they definitely haven't accepted this.
Hypothetically (and this isn't exactly a longshot), if Israel refuses to adhere to anything close to basic human rights or any respect to international law and operates with open contempt towards peacekeeping forces there, what do you will happen with Irish troops there?
You need to read the question again. It's not about money, it's about Irish boots on the ground. Let the countries who backed Israel put troops in the gun sight of an Israeli sniper 👍🏻 Israel wouldn't care who it kills in order to target an innocent Palestinian.
Why would you ask the ones who in your view facilitated the genocide to defend the ones who were on the receiving end of the genocide?
Surely they wouldn’t be the most neutral in defending the oppressed?
If we are a neutral country and we were all on about how horrific this situation is, it’s the literal perfect opportunity to deploy peacekeepers from a neutral country.
Also “putting your money where your mouth is”, is a fairly common saying it doesn’t literally mean spending money.
By this logic, you want the US and UK and Germany who you say are complict in the genocide of Gazans, to them have their troops in Gaza. Is that not incredibly flawed?
They are complicit - they are selling arms and ammunition to the genocidal forces
So, you'd want them in charge of the armed forces in Gaza based on that logic?
Well we’ve done much whinging about Gaza it would be good to actually do something useful, so yes.
The stabilisation force won't be a force of good though, so why give tokens?
The useful thing is almost never to do with soldiers or weapons. Stop the EU Israel trade agreement - would have 100 times the effect of soldiers.
For inaccurate naming, Gaza Stabilisation Force is up there with Gaza Humanitarian Foundation - the "aid" distributors who shot dead 2,000 hungry people seeking aid.
Europe needs to keep our forces to protect against Russia.
A strong deterrent against Russia in Ukraine as part of a peace settlement could be 500,000 troops. That would require about 6,000 Irish troops, that's half our total forces.
6000 personnel is essentially our entire army, not half, and Europe has nowhere close to half a million *deployable* troops. Britain for example would struggle to maintain a presence of 10k troops in Ukraine, France maybe slightly more, Germany around the same etc. You're probably talking about 50-70k at the very max that Europe could deploy to Ukraine -Ireland in such a scenario would struggle to send even a battalion sized contingent of about 600. But there will not be a European force deployed to Ukraine after this war ends, I say that with 99% certainty.
Then Russia will repeat this all over again.
Russia is more belligerent now than the USSR was post-Khrushchev. Today's Russian army is of course smaller, yet it is slowly grinding through the second most powerful land army on the continent which has close to a million men under arms. A five figure deployment would be a capitulation by Europe to Russia.
I'm not denying that, but I'm just saying that Europe really isn't in a position to deploy enough of a contingent as would act as a deterrent. There is also seemingly very little to no will to do so, bar maybe the French. The coalition of the willing has already transitioned to a grouping offering financial and military aid, as opposed to still talking about actual deployments.
What a wild take
Ukraine is much more important to us.
Half a million troops in Ukraine after a peace deal?
The US military had 213,000 troops in West Germany in 1990.
The British Army of the Rhine numbered 50,000.
The US has decided it no longer wishes to defend Europe and Trump is behaving in a Russophilic manner against Ukraine, so we cannot rely on US defensive assurances.
A deployment comparable to what was in West Germany seems most appropriate if we are to deter Russia. Allowing Russia to create a frozen conflict in Ukraine would devastate Ukraine economically.
No Under No circumstances
Not if Hamas hasn’t disarmed.
Would be killed by the IOF most likely.
Get real
Normally, and morally, yes. Practically and realistically, absolutely not.
Perhaps if Netanyahu is deposed and a non-lunatic Israeli government is elected then there’s some hope for Gaza and we should be part if helping keep it safe… but that’s not going to happen.
We’d just be sending Irish troops into harms way to be “accidentally” killed by the IDF when they decide they need to put the boot into the Palestinians some more.
Absolutely not!!
I mean yes, but the idea that Zionists would allow it is almost laughable even as a thought piece.
To ad to this, and regardless of your opinion on Israel-Palestine, the idea that either side would actually observe any sort of „peacekeeping“ is highly unlikely. Just look at how (un)successful the mission in the Lebanon was. Consistent exchanges between Hesbollah and the IDF, despite UN presence.
Any effective peacekeeping would involve actual military engagement with both sides, and I can’t see many in Ireland having the appetite (or training) for that…
Because Germany, the US and the UK would soon find out that Israel wouldn't give to fucks about killing Thier troops in order to kill more Arabs 👍🏻
Yes, we are always whinging about instability in Gaza, so let's put our money where our mouth is and actually contribute to it.
Can’t happen, the idiotic triple lock prevents us.
It's currently being removed
We contribute to UN troops
This is not a UN mission
You can downvote me all you want :), the point of the triple lock was to prevent a government from being able to do things like this.
Yes UNIFIL is being wound down so troops won't have something to train towards plus overseas pay to supplement a very poor salary.
Edit : To clarify as part of a UN mandated peacekeeping mission.
Troops to combat Israel are required.
Of course the Irish public would support Irish boots on the ground in Gaza. Ireland supports the people of Gaza.
This will not be supporting the people of Gaza.
Yes definitely 💯
Israel needs to face serious consequences for what they've been doing since they were created. They should not be treated as a legitimate nation because they aren't one. Israel needs to be completely cut off from the civilized world and anyone who has served in the IDF needs to be treated as the criminals they are.