WI Ireland took advantage of the Falklands War to launch a sneak attack on Britain and liberate Ulster?

[sparky42]

One thing I wonder: I imagine the Irish would get most of their weapons from UK stocks and suppliers right? It'd make sense.
How much ammo did that peacekeeping neutral force like the Irish army keep in the 70's? How long until they'd have to ask nicely to the UK to give them some more bullets, in the interest of fairness?

By this stage outside of the 25 pounders, it was all pretty much NATO standard equipment so I guess we could have shopped around, I'm sure that wouldn't have been a problem... Besides there was still huge (for Ireland) stocks of PreNATO munition stocks, the .303's were still in service with the FCA till the late '80s...
Though slight nitpick, for the Troubles the DF was focused on internal security and ACTP activities even more than peacekeeping.

 

[sparky42]

In Ferriter's The Transformation of Ireland, he mentions the PM or some similar person in the Stormont regime getting a state visit to Dublin, while the leader of the north's Nationalist Party has his request to be "lunched" in the same style rejected, and is forced to be satisfied with "the humble of leg of lamb."

Maybe this snub was mandated by diplomatic protocol - or maybe it was an unnecessary two-fingers to our sundered brethren and sistren.

If you are talking about the visit of O'Neill before the Troubles, both times he had received the Taoiseach in Stormont first, so whatever way he received them then would have been replicated when he came to Dublin (and it wouldn't have been a State visit, he wasn't the head of State). As to how the leader of the Nationalist Party might have been treated, that could have been anything from politics to diplomatic intervention from London, either way I would say that's a fairly weak argument to suggest that they were "betrayed".

Again, from 1922 to the Troubles arguing against Partition and it's effects were a basis of Irish foreign policy, from the Imperial Conferences, through WW2 arguments with the US and UK, through to our time in the UN. The hard reality however is a nation of 3-4 million with feck all economy/military/advantages doesn't have the ability to force a Superpower/major nation/nuclear power to do or accept anything it doesn't want to.

 

[presidentofyes12]

I think the UK would have an easier time obliterating Ireland than they did in the Falklands War.

(Of course, that'd probably be because the Falklands is thousands of miles away, but still, this wouldn't happen even if Patrick Hillery was a blazing Anglophobe that got intoxicated with 40 liters of hard liquor)

 

[Tanc49]

By this stage outside of the 25 pounders, it was all pretty much NATO standard equipment so I guess we could have shopped around, I'm sure that wouldn't have been a problem... Besides there was still huge (for Ireland) stocks of PreNATO munition stocks, the .303's were still in service with the FCA till the late '80s...
Though slight nitpick, for the Troubles the DF was focused on internal security and ACTP activities even more than peacekeeping.

Ah thanks! My knowledge of recent Irish history is quite patchy, as I came to it quite late (I did go to a museum about O'Connell last year though).

Did they have any kind of decent artillery, in decent numbers? Say anyone gets barricaded behind a wall, would they have anything to dislodge them or is it in effect just rifles and the occasional grenade?

What about any navy besides small coastguard vessels?

On the topic, I saw that article some time ago, potentially interesting : https://warontherocks.com/2023/03/n...e-and-security-and-how-our-partners-can-help/

 

[TDM]

Have to go digging but that number seems low for the Troubles, might not include the FCA (though that's not exactly a game changer to put it mildly), but yes there's no way short of an ASB internvention that either A) Dublin would order such an attack, or B) the DF would be in position to carry out such an operation.

They could well be I don't even really know what's being counting in these figures

 

[MKD]

What if Ireland had taken advantage of the British Armed Forces being occupied in the Southern Hemisphere to launch a sneak attack to liberate Ulster and Unite Ireland?

how are they going to do this? Thier army has about 300 people, 4 non combat planes and 1 ship.

There are something like 10k British soldiers in NI in the 1980's. Added to that the British army ,despite commitments in the Falkland's, has several armoured division, several infantry divisions and most of the RAF available. They will be getting a nice trip to NI VERY quickly.

The UDR are going to resist as are the unionist people in NI. The RUC, being a majority protestant organisation, are armed and are going to join in and might well go a touch rogue in dealing with "criminal elements" ( aka terrorists, nationalist politicians, sympathisers, innocent Catholics) in thier communities. The terrorist groups left after the RUC "deal" with them are going to have a field day killing each other and anyone lese in arms reach.

We can then consider the NATO implications ( *cough* article 5 *cough*) and how our Yankee friends are going to respond to this. They didn't go with the Argentinians over the British, They wont go with the Irish. The US ambassador to Dublin will be dispatched with instructions to insist the RoI politicians ( assuming led by Charles Haughey at this time) grow a brain ASAP!

even if RoI win they then have to deal with an insurgency and a bankrupting bill for remediation of NI.

PS - Rev. Ian Paisley as a war leader . O and indeed MG

 

[sparky42]

Ah thanks! My knowledge of recent Irish history is quite patchy, as I came to it quite late (I did go to a museum about O'Connell last year though).

Did they have any kind of decent artillery, in decent numbers? Say anyone gets barricaded behind a wall, would they have anything to dislodge them or is it in effect just rifles and the occasional grenade?

What about any navy besides small coastguard vessels?

On the topic, I saw that article some time ago, potentially interesting : https://warontherocks.com/2023/03/n...e-and-security-and-how-our-partners-can-help/

At the time of the Falklands? The 25 pounders had just moved from the DF to the FCA to be replaced with the 105s so depending on the replacement schedule maybe 36-48 pieces split between the two types. After that it’s mortars of various generations/sizes and ATGM/RPGs and plenty of infantry weapons, with various APCs (some just hideous, as the Chieftain showed recently).

The Navy has never had much more than patrol capabilities, the funniest bit there would be the fact that we were still using the RN for training at this point I think, so fun times for any poor midshipman.

As to that article, Irish defence policy is… fucking insane, but currently trying to crawl to a slightly less stupid place… wait and see.

 

[Ijon Tichy]

"The less stupid place" my fellow Gael envisages is one where Fuinneog and Gúna from the fee-paying private schools get interesting jobs in something or other at headquarters, while Darren and John Paul from the flats get fed into the meat grinder (the spice profits must flow).

 

[Albidoom]

Also note that back then Ireland was a net recipient of EU funds (or rather EC funds) which with such an attack would likely be stopped immediately making that attack even more of an economic disaster for ireland than what it already is.

 

[Tanc49]

At the time of the Falklands? The 25 pounders had just moved from the DF to the FCA to be replaced with the 105s so depending on the replacement schedule maybe 36-48 pieces split between the two types. After that it’s mortars of various generations/sizes and ATGM/RPGs and plenty of infantry weapons, with various APCs (some just hideous, as the Chieftain showed recently).

The Navy has never had much more than patrol capabilities, the funniest bit there would be the fact that we were still using the RN for training at this point I think, so fun times for any poor midshipman.

As to that article, Irish defence policy is… fucking insane, but currently trying to crawl to a slightly less stupid place… wait and see.

It's a bit strange to be stuck in the middle. If you forgive me the digression, and see no ill intent in what I'm trying to say, I'll expand:
Ireland, as a mostly historically agrarian country/colony at the far western end of Europe is fundamentally weak. You have no historical resource like Belgium, or any status as a potential buffer like Belgium again, or Switzerland.
Ireland most likely way to power is as part of a bigger ensemble, be it the UK or Europe, and in a "realpolitik"/cynical/brutal world, you would probably get subsumed in a bigger ensemble cause I don't see Ireland having resources to survive on its own in an adversarial world. You don't have the manpower for a big army, and since you're not between existing big power, you can't play the balancing game.

In that world, your best bet is either to declare full neutrality, be Switzerland with more potatoes and don't touch any alliance, or join a well integrated system of alliance. You don't have the backbone (economical, industrial...) to have a full force. You'd best be a part of a bigger army, for example specialising in infantry or navy or whatnot in an EU army.

Unfortunately, the EU army does not exist, so you're stuck in the middle of the road, having to maintain what is supposedly an independant army (while under the joint EU/NATO umbrella) which is not strong enough to play any role on its own.

Hope it makes sense?

 

[sparky42]

"The less stupid place" my fellow Gael envisages is one where Fuinneog and Gúna from the fee-paying private schools get interesting jobs in something or other at headquarters, while Darren and John Paul from the flats get fed into the meat grinder (the spice profits must flow).

And this is why Irish defence policy is insane. Because the vast majority of people that comment on it have zero idea of what a normal national defence policy is.

 

[Devvy]

I’d also just point out that a “neutral” state has just attacked a NATO member within Europe.

All NATO members are required by treaty to support the UK in the name of mutual defence, should the UK ask for it.

Ireland isn’t crazy. There’s no way they are launching this, there’s no way they can win.

I’d also just take point with the phrase “liberate” as it implies they’d be welcomed in with open arms. It’s a touchy subject but roughly half of NI, probably more than half at the time don’t want to be part of the Republic. Even if Ireland somehow militarily defeat the UK with some handwavium, there will be a mammoth grassroots resistance campaign that will make it so painful for the Republic, and force them to either withdraw or use tactics which will entrench hostile reactions to them.

 

[sparky42]

It's a bit strange to be stuck in the middle. If you forgive me the digression, and see no ill intent in what I'm trying to say, I'll expand:
Ireland, as a mostly historically agrarian country/colony at the far western end of Europe is fundamentally weak. You have no historical resource like Belgium, or any status as a potential buffer like Belgium again, or Switzerland.
Ireland most likely way to power is as part of a bigger ensemble, be it the UK or Europe, and in a "realpolitik"/cynical/brutal world, you would probably get subsumed in a bigger ensemble cause I don't see Ireland having resources to survive on its own in an adversarial world. You don't have the manpower for a big army, and since you're not between existing big power, you can't play the balancing game.

In that world, your best bet is either to declare full neutrality, be Switzerland with more potatoes and don't touch any alliance, or join a well integrated system of alliance. You don't have the backbone (economical, industrial...) to have a full force. You'd best be a part of a bigger army, for example specialising in infantry or navy or whatnot in an EU army.

Unfortunately, the EU army does not exist, so you're stuck in the middle of the road, having to maintain what is supposedly an independant army (while under the joint EU/NATO umbrella) which is not strong enough to play any role on its own.

Hope it makes sense?

You mean full neutrality like Switzerland with their sizeable defence capability for their size and population?

 

[sparky42]

I’d also just point out that a “neutral” state has just attacked a NATO member within Europe.

All NATO members are required by treaty to support the UK in the name of mutual defence, should the UK ask for it.

Ireland isn’t crazy. There’s no way they are launching this, there’s no way they can win.

I’d also just take point with the phrase “liberate” as it implies they’d be welcomed in with open arms. It’s a touchy subject but roughly half of NI, probably more than half at the time don’t want to be part of the Republic. Even if Ireland somehow militarily defeat the UK with some handwavium, there will be a mammoth grassroots resistance campaign that will make it so painful for the Republic, and force them to either withdraw or use tactics which will entrench hostile reactions to them.

Given the state of Ireland in the 1980s, even the Catholic Nationalists might be thinking “hold on a second”, and yeah it would likely have been about two thirds of the population at that point were Unionists.

 

[vizzer]

The main result of this would probably be to vastly reduce the catholic population of NI as various pogroms/ethnic cleansing drive them out.

 

[Ijon Tichy]

And this is why Irish defence policy is insane. Because the vast majority of people that comment on it have zero idea of what a normal national defence policy is.

We know very well what a "normal national defence policy" entails. "Good morning, good morning, the general said, when we met him last week on our way to the line. . . "

 

[sparky42]

We know very well what a "normal national defence policy" entails. "Good morning, good morning, the general said, when we met him last week on our way to the line. . . "

Hey if you are happy having the U.K. controlling every aspect of our defence, and telling our nationals to pray that someone else will save them, and that those nice Russians wouldn’t hurt anyone…
Thats a nice world you live in, but it’s still an insanely stupid policy, filled mainly with empty soundbites and distortions.

 

[yulzari1]

The Irish army exists to ensure the Republic remains the winner of the Irish Civil War not carry out a military invasion.

If they actually tried to invade Northern Ireland they would likely meet a Landrover and a canteen van blocking the road and a senior officer inviting them to join them for a mutual tea party with nibbles and cakes whilst the politicians sort themselves out. The Catering Corps and Regimental Cooks can be a valuable weapon in defusing conflicts. I have defused a determined bunch of protestors in the past by sending them hot cocoa on the cold morning rather than the police.

In the unlikely event that they were dim enough to be all tactical some of the survivors might last long enough to have darkness to cover their tracks walking home. More likely to be enjoying a free lunch and dinner at Her Majesty’s expense.

The Irish Army had brave and capable soldiers, one of whom was in my British army unit after service in the Irish Army, but a gross mismatch. Even with the Garda they would be incapable of controlling the Loyalists without wholesale gratuitous public violence which is foreign to their behaviour.

 

[Infinite-Monkeys]

So I'm with the consensus that this is generally an absolute disaster for everyone involved but particularly the Republic of Ireland. Thinking about how it would actually go down/the implications. I think you have roughly 2 scenarios.

A brief border war and an embarrassing climbdown
Republic forces start crossing the border, the British armed forces in Northern Ireland is roughly a peer to it ( and off course there are huge amounts of additional forces on GB proper and easily accessible forces that could be drawn from say deployments in Germany if needed), the RAF devastates the Republic forces as they cross and they pretty quickly hitt very well dug in British troops (Given much of NI was already pretty well militarised and troops there fairly well defended in case of attacks by the IRA). The Republic's government realises they are off their meds resignations and apologies happen and the war ends very quickly. The USA does not have to get involved and is very happy about this, probably sets back the peace process in Ireland by decades the Republic agrees to pay reparations to cover the cost of the invasion Unionist parties get a massive boost both among unionists and more unaligned groups, and Ireland finds itself somewhat politically on the naughty step when it comes to the US for at least a few years.

This is really what should happen with any realistic Republic government at the time, but then again I also can't figure out any realistic government would actually have started the war in the first place so you somehow end up with something a lot more militaristic who actually try to continue the war after they realise they're not just going to get waived in and greeted as liberators you get into

Short but very bloody conflict
In this case, the Irish keep going; they might manage to take a few border towns and then start to get pretty shredded. The US is a nightmare scenario domestically Reagan, providing actual military assets to the British against the Irish is going to hurt a lot, but if the Brits invoke article 5 and he does nothing it makes NATO look like it's not worth the paper it's written on so massively costs him abroad ( unlike Argentina they can't really claim the exception for colonial wars applies which to be honest was a bit of stretch even there ) plus of course the ussr will be milking this for everything it is worth.

My suspicion is the US effectively bribes the Brits to not invoke article 5, offering them diplomatic support to the hilt on both Ireland and Argentina, and a great big chunk of economic aid to help them through this 'turbulent period', while internationally trying to reframe this as not the Republic of Ireland V the UK but instead some sort of rouge (and presumably communist sponsored) cabal taking over a peaceful Western nation, and trying to destroy NATO and the Irish peace process with a pointless war ( does not particular matter whether this is true or not it's just the only narrative they can really do let them save face). In part due to this the US will absolutely want greater regime change more then just a few resignations at the top for this, and will almost certainly get it.

In the war itself the British take some casualties but the Republic's Armed Forces are pretty much annihilated, If the government still reesists and the Brits have to start heading into the Republic proper I suspect things get quite nasty with lots of potential for civilian casualties etc. My prresumption is they basically put together an armoured column and make a beeline for Dublin, sieze the different mechanisms of state and at that point anything short of ASB mind control will force a surrender. This is unlikely to impact the Falklands war at all ( amusingly possibly making their lives easier as the US is more willing to back the UK diplomatically just to avoid the British feeling they have to invoke article 5 over Ireland to reduce pressure on the home front), the bigger challenge the British for the Falklands was getting their forces there, which is greatly unaffected by this and they can handily manage with troops still on the home islands.

Longer term implications of the short bloody war scenario
The Unionist government in NI is at this stage very much not nice and not acting in good faith, and they have an excuse (and a US and UK government who to be honest or unlikely to overly care after the war), I expect you see de facto forced population movements of, some Catholics out of chunks of NI particularly any of the border towns that were taken ( effectively the Ulster government taking any excuse to label folk as collaborators and push them over the border).This combined with a rally around the flag effect for More neutral NI citizens, likely slows the tendency of increased support towards republicanism by a good few decades.

Once the new government has been established in Dublin I strongly assume they do everything they can to blame what happened on the IRA and similar groups ( so undemocratic paramilitary radicals), effectively to speed their re-entry back into polite society, this is the narrative the US will be very happy with, but it means the paramilitary side of republicanism in NI effectively get lumped into the bad guys in Cold War politics find their sources of funds cut off etc. longer term the impact of this probably depends on how restrained the UK government feels. Both Unionists and the Republicans in NI during the troubles were pretty vile, and if this means the Unionists get to let themselves loose while the Republicans have their hands tied behind their back, then you see even more de facto forced population movements and aa lot of impoverishment of Northern Irish Catholic businesses, power blocs et cetera. This probably eventually leads to renewed support for republicanism in parts of the wider world but they probably got a good decade or two we are effectively the unionists can, push their score up. If the British government show more restraint, and have the army stop the unionists from doing anything extreme there is effectively an opportunity here to start to push a peace process but one more firmly in line with the wishes of both the UK and the unionists, I can very much see things go either way and in part it probably depends on things like the scale of British casualties during the war, and for that matter UK domestic politics.

Thatcher gets an even bigger boost, although long-term identity that affects things too much just means she hits even bigger highs before a roughly as per OTL decline.

The actual terms on the Republic would be fairly light. Neither the UK or the US want it to suffer particularly. I suspect it gets very heavily demilitarised, has to accept some sort of international observers/peacekeeping force on the Irish side of the border (maybe US-led?) Until things calm down effectively to root out paramilitaries, but no UK troops sticking around, and while reparations are paid I expect this is arranged with a US loan on very generous terms or maybe just effectively writing off some debt the British owe the American. However the fairly heavy loss of life and quite possibly devastation of their capital is coming at the worst time (just from this should be starting to transition into the period of the Celtic Tiger) which might make Ireland miss the boat on its optimal time to develop and leave in a much worse situation long term,

 

[Dan1988]

Would the US have come to Ireland's aid? Reagan (US President at the time) was half Irish and apparently sympathized with Ireland.

Of course the US won't aid Ireland. Despite the lobbies and NORAID, there wouldn't be that much sympathy in Washington for something that would be so bone-headed. Instead, either the US threatens Dublin to stop or it decides a change in the Government is needed.