Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"The European Commission has said it is “delighted” that the leaders of France and Germany have backed the creation of a “real” EU army."  https://www.independent.co.uk

It's about time. That should put one more "Sheriff" in town so the U.S. doesn't have to ride the range and be the only one keeping the lids on a whole bunch of pots that could boil over.

I know the old saying about "great power and responsibility" but the world is like a cheap lunch counter. There is plenty of bologna to go around and it's time for Europe to move up from the kids table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a quite superficial analysis.

The US spends more on military and NATO contributions, but the EU spends more on humanitarian aid and global development (as share of GNI).

Or to stay in your metaphor, you're pushing down on the lid of the pot to prevent it boiling over, while the EU is trying to douse the fire below.

This arrangement actually benefits the USA, because you are able to translate your military investment directly into geopolitical influence, whereas the benefits of global development are more widely distributed and don't always return directly to the donor countries.

Also, by keeping the EU military small, you're neutering a potential future military rival and keeping EU countries dependant on the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh don't get me wrong, I am all for a EU army. It's time for someone else to step up and let their sons and daughters play fireman to the worlds hot spots. After all, all it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to stand by and do nothing.

And as far as it being a "soft army" all I can say is Rugby is like American Football. Only they don't wear all the fancy protective gear for a similar contact sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

I am curious what our European compatriots think about this. To me, it looks bizarrely unnecessary -- what's the point?

Wasn't it Roosevelt who said "speak softly and carry a big stick"? Maybe the words have to be louder now that the stick has become smaller. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When an individual or country abandons their desire, or will to defend themselves, then they abandon their freedom and their sovereignty. The countries of the EU will never be truly independent until they can properly defend themselves. 

However, whether Europe has a dedicated and unified military or not, the U.S.A. will always have an interest in the security of Europe, as it would prefer to keep any conflict as far from it's own territory as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎4‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 3:21 AM, Erwin said:

Should be called the Entire European Union Guard of Honour...  or EEUGH.

I reckon it should be called the Europe Union Nations' Unified Command Headquarters.....Because they don't have any balls either.  :P

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/1/2019 at 3:46 PM, Bulletpoint said:

I think that's a quite superficial analysis.

The US spends more on military and NATO contributions, but the EU spends more on humanitarian aid and global development (as share of GNI).

Or to stay in your metaphor, you're pushing down on the lid of the pot to prevent it boiling over, while the EU is trying to douse the fire below.

This arrangement actually benefits the USA, because you are able to translate your military investment directly into geopolitical influence, whereas the benefits of global development are more widely distributed and don't always return directly to the donor countries.

Also, by keeping the EU military small, you're neutering a potential future military rival and keeping EU countries dependant on the USA.

Well said. I don't have any trust in a US led NATO anymore, which is only abused for US interests. With such 'friends' one doesn't need enemies anymore. Perhaps a European army isn't such a bad idea. A new chapter in the book of Europe. Same goes for the Brits. They've never been really interested in Europe, only in how they could weaken it and use it for their own political games.

https://www.theweek.co.uk/85860/should-europe-have-its-own-army

I'm more and more starting to understand why many Europeans are fed up with such so-called allies.  

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I reckon it should be called the Europe Union Nations' Unified Command Headquarters.....Because they don't have any balls either.  :P

Yes, and just how much balls you Brits have, we can every day read in the news...😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't think the EU needs an army, NATO will probably be reformed within the next decade. 

Brexit is yet another example of why a referendum result needs to obtain a supermajority in order to be binding.  Not to mention also that those forgetting that wide consensus is always more important than internal party power politics do so at their peril.

Edited by BletchleyGeek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, BletchleyGeek said:

I don't think the EU needs an army, NATO will probably be reformed within the next decade.

On one thing I totally agree with Trump and that is that Europe should take care of it's own safety. With or without NATO. US will more and more concentrate on China and Putin will try to take advantage of that. US will not want to alienate Putin too much and drive him even more in the arms of China. Europe should follow the example of Finland and arm itself to the teeth, but at the same time try to have 'normal' relations with Moscow and Bejing. No more adventures in the Middle East, no more listening to 'his master's voice'. We have enough to worry about in our own backyards, for example the time bomb of the Baltic states, Ukraine and terrorism. I'm not saying we should turn our back on the US though. A good relationship with the US is still vital for the future of Europe. Same goes for  Britain of course. We may not like each other, but in the dangerous times ahead everybody will need alies.

 

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:

On one thing I totally agree with Trump and that is that Europe should take care of it's own safety. With or without NATO. US will more and more concentrate on China and Putin will try to take advantage of that. US will not want to alienate Putin too much and drive him even more in the arms of China. Europe should follow the example of Finland and arm itself to the teeth, but at the same time try to have 'normal' relations with Moscow and Bejing. No more adventures in the Middle East, no more listening to 'his master's voice'. We have enough to worry about in our own backyards, for example the time bomb of the Baltic states, Ukraine and terrorism. I'm not saying we should turn our back on the US though. A good relationship with the US is still vital for the future of Europe. Same goes for  Britain of course. We may not like each other, but in the dangerous times ahead everybody will need alies.

 

Not all Brits hate Europe or voted out. Indeed 16 million of us wanted to stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Same goes for the Brits. They've never been really interested in Europe, only in how they could weaken it and use it for their own political games.

Don't agree with that at all sorry. I think the issue with Britain is that we are an Island nation, and on the fringes so to speak, therefore a large portion of Brits have never felt any real affinity to Europe as a whole or certainly not the same as mainland Europeans feel towards each other. That is not the same as not interested. A large part of our trade and business is with Europe so of course we are interested, we would be stupid not to be. As regards 'weaken it for their own political games' which is a broad statement, where are your facts?

 

Also you mention 'Same goes for  Britain of course.We may not like each other, but in the dangerous times ahead everybody will need allies.' you have made it clear from your statement that you do not like us, but where again is the proof to the contrary?

 

Quote

Not all Brits hate Europe or voted out. Indeed 16 million of us wanted to stay.

 

para, i agree with your statement, but more wanted to leave, so leave we must for the sake of Democracy. I voted to leave, but it is not to do with any 'hatred' of Europe. It is purely down to regaining sovereignty, and making our elected politicians responsible for their actions. Also i think the European Union (politicians not the people of Europe) are way to Bureaucratic, the system is bloated and self serving.

For some of the above reasons that is why i think a European Army would be a bad thing, if it meant you would not have your own standing Army. The bureaucracy you would need to go through to get any meaningful decision for deployment would be so long winded as to make it virtually useless, when you need to get all member states on board. Look at recent wars such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. Europe has been far from unified on any response.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what would happen if a putative member of this euro military grouping got into a squabble with a NATO member?  Don't say it can't happen, we've seen it plenty of times in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, slippy said:

As regards 'weaken it for their own political games' which is a broad statement, where are your facts?

The - historical-  facts go to point out that  the last four Tory prime ministers in British history have been incinerated as a result of their policies regarding the EU. Thatcher, Major, Cameron and now May, seem to have find the end of their political careers on the same or a similar shoal. Always loudly demanding concessions from those "exploitative" continentals, always getting them, and all to, inthe end,  have been summarily thrown out of a window by a faction in the Tory party.

Rik Mayall totally nailed what those games are about with this impersonation

30 years ago!

Edited by BletchleyGeek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

😂😂 Always liked Alan B'stard, very funny. However even though you may draw some comparisons you must remember it was a comedy sketch right? You can't tell me there are no comedy sketches from Europe or anywhere else that  take the piss out of Britain in much the same way? Especially since the Brexit debacle and the way it is being handled by our politicians.

Quote

The - historical-  facts go to point out that  the last four Tory prime ministers in British history have been incinerated as a result of their policies regarding the EU. Thatcher, Major, Cameron and now May, seem to have find the end of their political careers on the same or a similar shoal. Always loudly demanding concessions from those "exploitative" continentals, always getting them, and all to, inthe end,  have been summarily thrown out of a window by a faction in the Tory party.

yes your right, there has always existed those in the Tory Party who have wanted to leave Europe, and successive Tory Prime Ministers have attempted to solve this recurring issue time and again with no success. You will find though that most if not all European countries have Euro skeptic parties so it is by no means a British Trait.

But the quote was Britain attempts to 'weaken' Europe, i still do not see how? Demanding concessions does not weaken them, that is just the political game.

 

Please you should not mistake the want for sovereignty to be anti European. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, slippy said:

But the quote was Britain attempts to 'weaken' Europe, i still do not see how? Demanding concessions does not weaken them, that is just the political game.

 

What's so difficult to see? It has been British policy for hundreds of years.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/25/how-britain-negotiated-its-entry-to-the-eec-then-failed-to-play-its-part

 

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Aragorn, please do not quote the Guardian as actual fact mate. It is a leftist - Liberal paper that is very Pro-Europe, and biased to a certain point of view.

 

This discussion could go on and on, so i will say my goodbyes to it now, as we are going off track, with regards the original question. All i would like to say is that your posts single out particular countries, for example the UK and US, for criticism. If you are going to do this in a public forum then you will get reactions opposing your views. Is Britain the perfect country with an unblemished record? Absolutely not. Is any country perfect? Britain is my country of which i am very proud, as you and others quite rightly will be of yours, and therefore i will not stand by and see people slate it based on their own perceived perceptions of it.

If you check any of my posts, you will see that i do not make personal remarks on an others country, it is not my place to do so, and i am aware that i am not armed with the full facts, all that i would ask is that you pay me and others the same courtesy. Have your views by all means, but think before you post.

cheers

 

slippy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

I don't think the EU needs an army,  

Bureaucracies are like the Roman empire, expand or die.  Iv'e seen many examples of a small government office established to deal with some issue.  Staffed by a handful of people (many of whom are temporary hires) and crammed into a small office space.  Return to that same office a few years later and it will probably be expanded to dozens of full time employees, a suite of offices and plans to move to a new office building to accommodate all the future hires promised in the next fiscal budget.  

As long as there is an EU it will continue to expand and do more and more things to eventually include an EU army.  I don't know if an EU army is "needed" or not or if it is a bad thing or not.  But it will be a thing.  Might be 20 years from now but it will be a thing if the EU stays the EU.       

 

7 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Europe should follow the example of Finland and arm itself to the teeth,    

Having stated above that I think there will be an EU army someday (as long as there is an EU).  There will probably always be the competition for funding between social welfare programs and the military.  At present it seems that the individual military establishments within the EU are losing this competition and are under funded.  I don't know that this will change.  If it does not change it is likely the future EU army will be underfunded and under equipped with a low state of readiness. 

However, I guess it might be useful to use internally for quelling unrest resulting from various EU imposed austerity programs etc.    

 

7 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

no more listening to 'his master's voice'. 

Admittedly I'm an outsider looking in but I find the whole topic of Brexit and the EU interesting and have been trying to read up on it and understand it.  It seems the EU voice from Brussels can punish some old widow lady in a small village in Italy for not properly recycling her garbage?  I'm not sure if the widow lady has a say in the election of this voice or not.  It seems they do have some type of elections in Brussels but maybe internal not direct?  So does she have a choice in listening to said voice?  .............. not clear on that yet.        

 

Edited by MOS:96B2P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, slippy said:

Aragorn, please do not quote the Guardian as actual fact mate. It is a leftist - Liberal paper that is very Pro-Europe, and biased to a certain point of view.

 

This discussion could go on and on, so i will say my goodbyes to it now, as we are going off track, with regards the original question. All i would like to say is that your posts single out particular countries, for example the UK and US, for criticism. If you are going to do this in a public forum then you will get reactions opposing your views. Is Britain the perfect country with an unblemished record? Absolutely not. Is any country perfect? Britain is my country of which i am very proud, as you and others quite rightly will be of yours, and therefore i will not stand by and see people slate it based on their own perceived perceptions of it.

If you check any of my posts, you will see that i do not make personal remarks on an others country, it is not my place to do so, and i am aware that i am not armed with the full facts, all that i would ask is that you pay me and others the same courtesy. Have your views by all means, but think before you post.

cheers

 

slippy

Fair enough, Slippy. Point taken. And for what's it worth, I'm an Anglophile, addicted to Six Nations Rugby, Endeavour, Rory Clements and so on and so on. Always was, always will be.

Edited by Aragorn2002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Fair enough, Slippy. Point taken. And for what's it worth, I'm an Anglophile, addicted to Six Nations Rugby, Endeavour, Rory Clements and so on and so on.

No problem mate, all is well. Just aware that the UK is making a bit of a hash over things at the moment, and i hate to see my country like this, so a bit defensive i suppose.

Take care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Well said. I don't have any trust in a US led NATO anymore, which is only abused for US interests. With such 'friends' one doesn't need enemies anymore. Perhaps a European army isn't such a bad idea. A new chapter in the book of Europe. Same goes for the Brits. They've never been really interested in Europe, only in how they could weaken it and use it for their own political games.

https://www.theweek.co.uk/85860/should-europe-have-its-own-army

I'm more and more starting to understand why many Europeans are fed up with such so-called allies.  

Whow, I am afraid, I do not agree with you too often, here it is fully due!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:

If it does not change it is likely the future EU army will be underfunded and under equipped with a low state if readiness. 

However, I guess it might be useful to use internally for quelling unrest resulting from various EU imposed austerity programs etc.    

I'm often critical of the EU, but it's not Tiananmen Square over here :)

 

1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Admittedly I'm an outsider looking in but I find the whole topic of Brexit and the EU interesting and have been trying to read up on it and understand it.  It seems the EU voice from Brussels can punish some old widow lady in a small village in Italy for not properly recycling her garbage?  I'm not sure if the widow lady has a say in the election of this voice or not.  It seems they do have some type of elections in Brussels but maybe internal not direct?  So does she have a choice in listening to said voice?  .............. not clear on that yet.   

The EU works in a pretty complicated manner, and I'm no expert. But we do have direct elections to decide who gets to sit in the EU Parliament.

As I understand it, if the little old Italian lady has to recycle, it's because the Italian parliament voted to approve a directive that has already been voted through EU parliament. So her vote has actually been heard twice. And believe it or not, but many people like to recycle :)

The approval in the national parliament is mostly to decide exactly how that particular country wants to implement the directive so that it is suited to the local situation.

For all its faults, the EU is not some Communist empire. If a country wants to leave, they can leave. Look at Britain.

Out of curiosity, what would happen if California voted to leave the USA?

Edited by Bulletpoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...