|
would you support a EU army? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| PHALPAX |
| There are better chances for someone "re-discovering" cold fusion than the formation of a federalized Europe, nevermind army. |
|
|
| mps242 |
| Maybe Europe should try and find a common language (english being the only sensible option)... you know... so they can talk together before they go out and kill together? |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| Sure, what could it hurt? If nothing else it would be something at which to laugh. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by PHALPAX
There are better chances for someone "re-discovering" cold fusion than the formation of a federalized Europe, nevermind army. |
Why? Many EU countries (a ajority of) are in NATO, what do you think will be different from NATO and an EU military capability? Plans for an EU military capability are at an advanced stage. There are already plans for a 60,000 rapid reaction force and an airforce and naval force. The only stumbling block is over planning facilities like what NATO has. The EU wants to use NATO facilities (SHAPE etc) but Turkey is refusing as Greece is a member of the EU. However, I believe Turkey is coming around (as it is extremely eger to commence negotiations on accession) |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by mps242
Maybe Europe should try and find a common language (english being the only sensible option)... you know... so they can talk together before they go out and kill together? |
It may seem strange to us English speakers, who are think as pig in regards to languages, but I can assure you speaking English is of no problem to most educated Europeans (look around this forum) |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Sure, what could it hurt? If nothing else it would be something at which to laugh. |
As opposed to that laughing stock known as the US military? Who even the British military, your greatest allies, look down their noses at? |
|
|
| PHALPAX |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Why? Many EU countries (a ajority of) are in NATO, what do you think will be different from NATO and an EU military capability? Plans for an EU military capability are at an advanced stage. There are already plans for a 60,000 rapid reaction force and an airforce and naval force. The only stumbling block is over planning facilities like what NATO has. The EU wants to use NATO facilities (SHAPE etc) but Turkey is refusing as Greece is a member of the EU. However, I believe Turkey is coming around (as it is extremely eger to commence negotiations on accession) |
NATO is primarily run by the U.S. and U.K. forces and any one who says otherwise is shamlessly lying. The only militarily significant players in Europe are the U.K. and (and dare I say) France. All other European nations have dismal military capabilities and budgets.
Let's say in theory that European nations decide to put together a military. Who has control? The EU? Or some other central command? What about technology and arms? These are sovereign countries which have different interests so who are going to share what and how? What about money? Europeans don't exactly like to blow billions on the military and how is the EU going to convince citizens and taxpayers of European nations that they need a 'united' European force? The plans for a rapid reaction force have been in the works for years but nothing has materialized so far, so why should anyone take it seriously? |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by PHALPAX
NATO is primarily run by the U.S. and U.K. forces and any one who says otherwise is shamlessly lying. The only militarily significant players in Europe are the U.K. and (and dare I say) France. All other European nations have dismal military capabilities and budgets. |
Still, if they'd all join together, they would have a somewhat significant military.
| quote: | | Let's say in theory that European nations decide to put together a military. Who has control? The EU? Or some other central command? What about technology and arms? These are sovereign countries which have different interests so who are going to share what and how? What about money? Europeans don't exactly like to blow billions on the military and how is the EU going to convince citizens and taxpayers of European nations that they need a 'united' European force? The plans for a rapid reaction force have been in the works for years but nothing has materialized so far, so why should anyone take it seriously? |
Well, the EU is pretty much integrated, and if the new constitution passes that would ensure a somewhat common foreign policy, then it wouldn't be much of a problem. Now, as for money, the tax payer cost shouldn't be any larger than to provide for regular standing armies of each individual country. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
As opposed to that laughing stock known as the US military? Who even the British military, your greatest allies, look down their noses at? |
Precisely. You're starting to catch on, I think. |
|
|
| slinkyhead |
EU army sounds like a bad idea to me, would be a disaster. for example out of the current EU there are over 150 different varieites of tanks, think of the problems of trying to unify it into one coherent fighting force.
i would not mind diff countires having diff specialisations particularly the smaller European countires. Eg Belgium could specialise in attack helicopters, Sweden as medics, Norway as marines, Dutch as paratroopers, italians can wave the surrender flag (seems their only mililtary strength), another country could specialise in intelligence based arouond the primary fighting forces of UK and France (sic) |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by smokeape
EU Army would be fine as long as they don't subscribe to any French cut and run doctrine.
HAHAHHAAAA!!!
[[[smoke]]] |
Ya much better then the American, come at the last 8 months of the war method and then claim you win. |
|
|
|
|
