The article is a bit disingenuous. It notes, near the end and almost in passing:
Now, this is a picture that needs more qualifications than a brain surgeon. For a start, you wouldn't wish Iceland's fate on any economy. Huge spending cuts are still to kick in, and a lot more pain is in store. Thor Gylfason, an economist at the University of Iceland, reckons it will take another seven to 10 years before his country recovers from one of the worst economic disasters in recent history. This will be a long, slow haul.
That sounds pretty much identical to what Ireland is facing into. Albeit our adjustment might be more severe as our current account overspending is probably worse than Iceland's.
Which only leaves the approach to banking debt as the main difference between us. And if Ireland does not end up paying that debt and it gets massaged away in/by 2013, then really any suggestion of a gaping chasm between Ireland's and Iceland's approach is overstated. The history books might note that the only real difference was that, as EU members, Ireland had to go through some fancier and somewhat more prolonged choreography to get rid of "its" banking debts than Iceland did.