WI: Ireland intervenes in The Troubles?

Assuming Britain defeats the Garda, what next?

Policing Northern Ireland alone had already proved to be a miserable task; occupying the South would be the same experience raised to another order of magnitude.

Any alternatives?

Well first the Gardaí are the police force of the Republic (and being unarmed wouldn't need to be defeated), the Defence Forces are the Armed Forces of the Republic, bit of a difference.

The UK would never have gone South even if the Republic had been insane enough to try this (which as mentioned the chances were very slim), there would have been a punitive action, probably the destruction of the attacking forces, maybe a few strikes at Baldonnel the Air Corps home base, and then economic repercussions ie the collapse of the Irish Economy, probably the restriction of Irish free passage to the UK.
 
a victory is impossible. but a defeat would work just as well

I understand all the arguments that say that a military victory would be impossible given the imbalance between Irish Defence Forces and the British Army then stationed in Northern ireland, and I agree with them. But surely a victory would not be necessary, when a noble and bloody defeat would have worked just as well.

Consider the following. Charles Haughey, instead of Minister of Justice as he was in 1969, is made Minister of Defence. Exercise Armageddon is implemented in July/August 1969, with De Valera (President) and Lynch (Taoiseach) kept out of the loop. A small force takes and holds the centres of Derry and Newry within 24hrs and is told to hold til the last man. The Brits, after some confusion, get themselves organised and the IDF occupiers are entirely killed in place within 7 days. Lynch goes ballistic, fires Haughey, it all gets very deniable.

Film and television coverage of the seven-day sieges are transmitted worldwide, and the action and subsequent IDF deaths are romanticised as noble-cause, and garner further sympathy in the US. The split in US dealings with the Troubles (with somewhat naive pro-IRA sentiments by various Secretaries of State versus the anti-IRA FBI) develops earlier.

The Chichester-Clark devolved Northern Ireland government falls earlier, and Brian Faulkner succeeds to Chief Executive a year or two earlier than OTL. Internment and the switch to anti-British Army sentiment of the NI Nationalists takes place earlier.

Although originally appalled by the IDF action, the ROI electorate also romanticise the fallen and Fianna Fail become sufficiently more popular to defeat Liam Cosgrave's Fine Gael in 1973 (IOTL, they lost). IRA forces are pursued less effectively south of the border than they were IOTL.

In short, Exercise Armageddon is implemented and fails spectacularly. The deaths are romanticised and opinions on all sides in UK, US and ROI harden earlier and faster. NI becomes more Loyalist and more violent ITTL, the Troubles are extended by 5-10 years.

So probably best it didn't happen really...
 
I understand all the arguments that say that a military victory would be impossible given the imbalance between Irish Defence Forces and the British Army then stationed in Northern ireland, and I agree with them. But surely a victory would not be necessary, when a noble and bloody defeat would have worked just as well.

Consider the following. Charles Haughey, instead of Minister of Justice as he was in 1969, is made Minister of Defence. Exercise Armageddon is implemented in July/August 1969, with De Valera (President) and Lynch (Taoiseach) kept out of the loop. A small force takes and holds the centres of Derry and Newry within 24hrs and is told to hold til the last man. The Brits, after some confusion, get themselves organised and the IDF occupiers are entirely killed in place within 7 days. Lynch goes ballistic, fires Haughey, it all gets very deniable.

Film and television coverage of the seven-day sieges are transmitted worldwide, and the action and subsequent IDF deaths are romanticised as noble-cause, and garner further sympathy in the US. The split in US dealings with the Troubles (with somewhat naive pro-IRA sentiments by various Secretaries of State versus the anti-IRA FBI) develops earlier.

The Chichester-Clark devolved Northern Ireland government falls earlier, and Brian Faulkner succeeds to Chief Executive a year or two earlier than OTL. Internment and the switch to anti-British Army sentiment of the NI Nationalists takes place earlier.

Although originally appalled by the IDF action, the ROI electorate also romanticise the fallen and Fianna Fail become sufficiently more popular to defeat Liam Cosgrave's Fine Gael in 1973 (IOTL, they lost). IRA forces are pursued less effectively south of the border than they were IOTL.

In short, Exercise Armageddon is implemented and fails spectacularly. The deaths are romanticised and opinions on all sides in UK, US and ROI harden earlier and faster. NI becomes more Loyalist and more violent ITTL, the Troubles are extended by 5-10 years.

So probably best it didn't happen really...

The PDF (they are trying to rebrand as most think of Israel when you say IDF) aren't going to fight to the death, hell they aren't going to go North even if they have to make up excuses. They certainly are never going to fight to the death, they didn't do that in the Siege of Jadotville, they aren't going to do it in NI.

Given the scale of the repercussions that are going to hit the Republic from this is going to shatter any "romanticising" of the deaths, (though I'm not sure how more sympathetic the US support could be, hell they were more supportive of the IRA than the average ROI citizen).

I also can't see how FF gains anything from this other than an epic electoral defeat.
 
The PDF (they are trying to rebrand as most think of Israel when you say IDF) aren't going to fight to the death, hell they aren't going to go North even if they have to make up excuses. They certainly are never going to fight to the death, they didn't do that in the Siege of Jadotville, they aren't going to do it in NI.

I wanted to take it from a serious military operation involving thousands (which would have been unlikely) to a doomed-from-the-start adventure involving hundreds. I assume in any army you can find some who will do anything even if it's obviously stupid or suicidal.

I also can't see how FF gains anything from this other than an epic electoral defeat.

I further assumed that a dumb adventure would invite less violent reprisals. Fifty people dug in around a train station and dying quickly would not incite F4s dropping cluster bombs, wheras thousands of troops occupying a town might.

I then assumed that a more Loyalist North and a lack of OTL's Arms Crisis might shift the balance back towards Fianna Fail in '72, altho' you're right: it is a reach and you'd have to shove in a further POD (Lynch resigns due to ill-health and humiliation, Haughey stays in government?) to make it happen, and that might push people further towards Fine Gael, not away from.
 
I wanted to take it from a serious military operation involving thousands (which would have been unlikely) to a doomed-from-the-start adventure involving hundreds. I assume in any army you can find some who will do anything even if it's obviously stupid or suicidal.

I further assumed that a dumb adventure would invite less violent reprisals. Fifty people dug in around a train station and dying quickly would not incite F4s dropping cluster bombs, wheras thousands of troops occupying a town might.

I then assumed that a more Loyalist North and a lack of OTL's Arms Crisis might shift the balance back towards Fianna Fail in '72, altho' you're right: it is a reach and you'd have to shove in a further POD (Lynch resigns due to ill-health and humiliation, Haughey stays in government?) to make it happen, and that might push people further towards Fine Gael, not away from.

In some ways that might be worse for the FF, throwing a couple of hundred men into a no win situation that they and the military know is no win isn't going to be seen as glorious by the Republic, and even though the UK showed restraint in dealing with the Republic I don't see how they could overlook the Republic's actions and not have some reprisals. Even just cutting off the right for free access to the UK would impact many Irish and cost the UK nothing. Pre EEC Ireland relies on the UK for both its imports and exports mainly and if the Irish Embassy warned of "negative" reaction simply because of Haughey's Falklands position, and actual invasion would have far greater negative consequences

In terms of political fallout I just can't see it going well, the PDF gets a lot of stick in Ireland (completely undeserved in my opinion) but if they were deployed and lost in combat (no matter the numbers) then the public would most likely blame the politicians more. All you need is some ex-forces pointing out the hundred and one flaws, failings, under equipped/supplied etc and it becomes a sh*tstorm of blame over sending troops out to die.
 
Last edited:
In some ways that might be worse for the FF, throwing a couple of hundred men into a no win situation that the and the military know is no win isn't going to be seen as glorious by the Republic, and even though the UK showed restraint in dealing with the Republic I don't see how they could overlook the Republic's actions and not have some reprisals. Even just cutting off the right for free access to the UK would impact many Irish and cost the UK nothing. Pre EEC Ireland relies on the UK for both its imports and exports mainly and if the Irish Embassy warned of "negative" reaction simply because of Haughey's Falklands position, and actual invasion would have far greater negative consequences

In terms of political fallout I just can't see it going well, the PDF gets a lot of stick in Ireland but if they were deployed and lost in combat (no matter the numbers) then the public would most likely blame the politicians more. All you need is some ex-forces pointing out the hundred and one flaws, failings, under equipped/supplied etc and it becomes a sh*tstorm of blame over sending troops out to die.

Fair enough
 

Pangur

Donor
In terms of political fallout I just can't see it going well, the PDF gets a lot of stick in Ireland (completely undeserved in my opinion) but if they were deployed and lost in combat (no matter the numbers) then the public would most likely blame the politicians more. All you need is some ex-forces pointing out the hundred and one flaws, failings, under equipped/supplied etc and it becomes a sh*tstorm of blame over sending troops out to die.

To follow on from that, Ireland is and was even more so then a small country. Pretty much much every knows some who is in the defense forces or was in the defense forces. Getting soldiers killed just to show off is one of the fastest ways for a government to chucked out on its ar$# and quickly
 
I see much troubles with USA (and with the strong Irish-American community).
I don't think that none President of United States can permit this.

Which does the US need in 1970, a NATO member with substantial forces, or a non aligned nation that just demonstrated that it's incredibly stupid.

The US isn't going to pick the ROI over the UK, at best they will just ask the UK not to shatter the ROI.
 
To follow on from that, Ireland is and was even more so then a small country. Pretty much much every knows some who is in the defense forces or was in the defense forces. Getting soldiers killed just to show off is one of the fastest ways for a government to chucked out on its ar$# and quickly

Yeah that's true even today it's likely that everyone knows somebody that knows somebody that knows somebody, a loss of the PDF would change the Irish political situation completely.
 

Genghis Kawaii

Gone Fishin'
That's not as easy as you think. Given the public view on things (ie burning down the British embassy after Bloody Sunday) there may not have been the political capability to aggressively suppress the IRA at that time.

Since it was well before my time all I can say as another example would be an rte show that showed clips of border crossings in 69 I think during the attacks on Catholics, it was like something you'd see at the Syrian border today. Lines of cars, minivans, buses loaded with people that had been forced from their homes. It would have been a huge issue for any Irish government to deal with
Yeah, Ireland was going to stay out of this one from day one. I just can't help fantasizing, though, because I bloody hate the IRA.
 

Genghis Kawaii

Gone Fishin'
And killing thousands of Irish soldiers attempting to stop a bloodbath of innocent people is somehow going to make you feel better?

Fuck off.
Calm down. Seriously. It's an alternate timeline. It's not like any of this stuff actually happened or thousands of soldiers actually died. It's all make believe.

As for the British behavior, yes, they were being too heavy handed. However, it's not like the IRA was a bunch of angels. First off, the majority of the people of Northern Ireland wanted to stay British. As long as that was the case, the IRA was unjustified. They are the ones who started the Troubles, and while Britain needed to take a serious look at their tactics, I place a lot more blame on the IRA for what went down, especially with all the innocent blood they shed.
 

Genghis Kawaii

Gone Fishin'
As deathscampion has pointed out what has the Republic and its military got to do with the IRA?
The IRA wanted to unify Northern Ireland with the Republic, and there was spill over into the Republic. I'm wondering what would happen if the Republic came into the situation on Britain's side, though admittedly it wouldn't have happened.
 
Calm down. Seriously. It's an alternate timeline. It's not like any of this stuff actually happened or thousands of soldiers actually died. It's all make believe.

As for the British behavior, yes, they were being too heavy handed. However, it's not like the IRA was a bunch of angels. First off, the majority of the people of Northern Ireland wanted to stay British. As long as that was the case, the IRA was unjustified. They are the ones who started the Troubles, and while Britain needed to take a serious look at their tactics, I place a lot more blame on the IRA for what went down, especially with all the innocent blood they shed.

The Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association organised protest marches from 1968 seeking to improve conditions for Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland, who were discriminated against by the majority Protestant population. This had led to counter-protests and then sectarian riots, leading to 1,500 Catholic refugees moving south to the Republic of Ireland. The Government of the republic wanted to help in some way, and on 13 August 1969 the Taoiseach, Jack Lynch said in a television interview: "...the Irish government can no longer stand by and see innocent people injured and perhaps worse".[3][4] His cabinet was divided over what to do, with Kevin Boland and Neil Blaney calling for robust action. On 30 August Lynch ordered the Irish Army Chief of Staff, General Seán Mac Eoin, to prepare a plan for possible incursions.
While the riots continued, the introduction of British Army troops in the Falls area of Belfast, and around the Bogside part of Derry from mid-August under Operation Banner protected the Catholic communities from further such attacks. Therefore the planning of Exercise Armageddon into October 1969 was superseded by events and did not reflect the reality on the ground.


The riots in question.

During 12–17 August 1969, Northern Ireland was rocked by intense political and sectarian rioting. There had been sporadic violence throughout the year arising from the civil rights campaign, which was demanding an end to government discrimination against Irish Catholics and nationalists. Civil rights marches were repeatedly attacked by both Protestant loyalists and by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), an overwhelmingly Protestant police force.
The disorder led to the Battle of the Bogside in Derry – this was a three-day riot in the Bogside district between the RUC and the nationalist/Catholic residents. In support of the Bogsiders, nationalists and Catholics launched protests elsewhere in Northern Ireland. Some of these turned violent and led to attacks by loyalists working alongside the police. The most bloody rioting was in Belfast, where seven people were killed and hundreds more wounded. Scores of houses and businesses were burned-out, most of them owned by Catholics. In addition, thousands of mostly Catholic families were driven from their homes. The RUC was accused of helping the loyalists and of failing to protect Catholic areas. Events in Belfast have been viewed by some as a pogrom against the minority Catholic and nationalist community.[1][2][3]
The British Army was deployed to restore order and peace lines began to be built to separate the two sides. The events of August 1969 are widely seen as the beginning of the thirty-year conflict known as the Troubles.
 
The IRA wanted to unify Northern Ireland with the Republic, and there was spill over into the Republic. I'm wondering what would happen if the Republic came into the situation on Britain's side, though admittedly it wouldn't have happened.

Considering the reaction to demands to civil rights by the nationalists "heavy handed" might be a bit mild of a statement. There was no clean hand in the Troubles, no good guy. It was a fucking tradegy alround.

The OP is the Republic intervening against the NI administration and the UK. The Republic has no connection to the IRA so linking your hatred of one to the other is wrong.

Like I said up thread, I've seen video of Catholics fleeing like what you see on tv today from Syria. The last president of the republic was forced from her family home just because of her faith. It wasn't bad tactics, it was deep flaws in NI society.
 

Genghis Kawaii

Gone Fishin'
The riots in question.
I'm quite aware that the British and protestants acted wrongly all the time during the fighting. It doesn't excuse the IRA for starting the fight over territory they had no right to have, and it doesn't excuse all the innocents they killed (and there were a lot).
 
I'm quite aware that the British and protestants acted wrongly all the time during the fighting. It doesn't excuse the IRA for starting the fight over territory they had no right to have, and it doesn't excuse all the innocents they killed (and there were a lot).

Since both death and I are Irish I doubt you need to tell us about the death toll of The Troubles. The situation was and as evidenced with the riots currently is complex, and I still don't see how hatred of the IRA connects to the Republic and any proposal to intervene in NI.
 

Genghis Kawaii

Gone Fishin'
Considering the reaction to demands to civil rights by the nationalists "heavy handed" might be a bit mild of a statement. There was no clean hand in the Troubles, no good guy. It was a fucking tradegy alround.
I don't like the British tactics used at all, but I believe in their cause more so than the IRA cause, and IRA tactics weren't exactly nice, either.

The OP is the Republic intervening against the NI administration and the UK. The Republic has no connection to the IRA so linking your hatred of one to the other is wrong.
The discussion is about the Troubles. Discussing the Troubles without the IRA isn't much of a discussion. What I did was reverse the OP's statement, which I believe was valid.

During the Troubles, the Republic stayed neutral. The OP is wondering about them entering one side of the conflict. I wondered about them entiring the other side. I don't see that as wrong.

Like I said up thread, I've seen video of Catholics fleeing like what you see on tv today from Syria. The last president of the republic was forced from her family home just because of her faith. It wasn't bad tactics, it was deep flaws in NI society.
It goes both ways.
 
Top