Defence Forces And Nice

A chara, - While it is obvious that the Health Service is in disrepair, Mr Joe Murray's comments (July 24th), are misdirected…

A chara, - While it is obvious that the Health Service is in disrepair, Mr Joe Murray's comments (July 24th), are misdirected. Like many critics of the Nice Treaty, he seems to allow his emotions to influence his misguided military opinions. So let me address several issues that seem to have been overlooked.

1, As Jim Cusack pointed out (Opinion, July16th), the monies being used to upgrade the Defence Forces are largely covered by revenues gained from the sale of military assets and from voluntary redundancies. This is a re-investment programme and does not take money away from healthcare or other areas of need.

2, The primary role of the Defence Forces is to defend the State from internal or external aggression. Successive governments have seen that the Defence Forces are ill-equipped to do so and this modernisation goes part of the way towards rectifying that.

3, The ability to integrate and inter-operate with foreign forces is crucial to any successful joint operation whether it be with the UN, EU or NATO.

READ MORE

4, It should also be understood that it is naive to think that there would be no link between NATO and the RRF. The simple fact of the matter is that in many cases it is impossible to move large amounts of men and equipment without the help of the US (who are the driving force behind NATO).

People should be more concerned about the misdirection of funds to national sports stadiums and to the GAA than to the Defence Forces. To criticise a modernisation programme that is long overdue is lame and shows gross ignorance of the requirements of the modern armies. - Yours, etc.,

Sean O'Gorman, New Jersey, USA.