EU army

[amgmcqueen]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3927048/An...

Juncker is continuing his obsession with creating an EU army and I find it equally worrying as it is bizarre?

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower? If it gets too big who do they have to answer too? Are they seriously thinking of taking on Russia to fulfil their desire to annex Ukraine under the wonderful EU umbrella?

I must say after past history the thought of having a huge expanded army across Europe controlled by what is essentially a dictatorship is really rather alarming?!

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

[steveatesh]

amgmcqueen said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3927048/An...

Juncker is continuing his obsession with creating an EU army and I find it equally worrying as it is bizarre?

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower? If it gets too big who do they have to answer too? Are they seriously thinking of taking on Russia to fulfil their desire to annex Ukraine under the wonderful EU umbrella?

I must say after past history the thought of having a huge expanded army across Europe controlled by what is essentially a dictatorship is really rather alarming?!

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

The EU is not a trading block, it is a political construct and it has desires to become a single state, a proposed single military force should be seen in that context, i.e. Another step in that direction.

No doubt it will start as national military units operating togther, under a rotating head and eventually merge into a single EU military, assuming the EU lasts that long of course

[eharding]

amgmcqueen said:

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower?

Well, as it stands it appears Trump is set on withdrawing from NATO, and embarking on a US isolationist policy. If he's intent on letting Western Europe fend for itself, you can't complain when they set about doing so.

amgmcqueen said:

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

Who exactly elected you as the arbiter of what the people of Europe want?

[///ajd]

eharding said:

amgmcqueen said:

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower?

Well, as it stands it appears Trump is set on withdrawing from NATO, and embarking on a US isolationist policy. If he's intent on letting Western Europe fend for itself, you can't complain when they set about doing so.

amgmcqueen said:

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

Who exactly elected you as the arbiter of what the people of Europe want?

Quite, with Trump pulling back his support, the EU states need to do a bit more of the whole "2% of GDP on defence" lark.

I don't think the EU will ever have sovereign control over a decision to commit troops, ever.

[JawKnee]

eharding said:

amgmcqueen said:

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

Who exactly elected you as the arbiter of what the people of Europe want?

This. If he is so fking concerned about an EU army being formed then maybe he should have thought about that when deciding to give up this country's EU veto.

[SKP555]

It's almost like the EU is about more than trade and has political ambitions. I'll tell you what, we should have some sort of a referendum to see if people really want this or would prefer Britain to exit.

[eharding]

SKP555 said:

It's almost like the EU is about more than trade and has political ambitions. I'll tell you what, we should have some sort of a referendum to see if people really want this or would prefer Britain to exit.

We did.

We quit. We left. We flounced.

Hence, it's rather odd for the 'kippers to start whining about the EU wanting to get collectively and coherently weaponed-up. Who can blame them?

[anonymous-user]

it would be interesting if the EU army was used against a member state.

I think the project is starting to feel like the new German empire.

[vonuber]

The Spruce goose said:

it would be interesting if the EU army was used against a member state.

I think the project is starting to feel like the new German empire.

Get over yourself.

Personally given the sabre rattling of Russia, and the new PH favourite Trump making noises to withdraw form NATO and be best buds with Putin, an EU army might be a bloody good idea.

Still, we've got 20 odd miles of water to keep the Russians away.

[eharding]

The Spruce goose said:

it would be interesting if the EU army was used against a member state.

I think the project is starting to feel like the new German empire.

Well, you can speculate how interesting it would have been if NATO had been required to act against a member state, and whether we were part of an American Empire.

Truth is though, this is about the collapse of NATO, and how Western Europe deals with Putin's gangster state.

I grant you that the EU isn't perfect - far from it - but it now appears they're the only game in town prepared to counter Putin's imperial ambitions.

[SKP555]

Well I can certainly dislike the idea of a big EU dictatorship with an army, and presumably France's nukes. And I can blame them.

IMO post Brexit Britain should be doing everything it can to break the EU apart.

[grumbledoak]

eharding said:

I grant you that the EU isn't perfect - far from it - but it now appears they're the only game in town prepared to counter Putin's imperial ambitions.

I would argue that Russia is the only game in town prepared to counter the EU's imperial ambitions.

[gooner1]

eharding said:

amgmcqueen said:

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower?

Well, as it stands it appears Trump is set on withdrawing from NATO, and embarking on a US isolationist policy. If he's intent on letting Western Europe fend for itself, you can't complain when they set about doing so.

amgmcqueen said:

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

Who exactly elected you as the arbiter of what the people of Europe want?

All well and good, but the formation of anEU army was proposed long before Trump won the American election.

[vonuber]

grumbledoak said:

I would argue that Russia is the only game in town prepared to counter the EU's imperial ambitions.

An Empire where people voluntarily sign up? As opposed to via a T-90 and little green men? Righto.

[JawKnee]

SKP555 said:

Well I can certainly dislike the idea of a big EU dictatorship with an army, and presumably France's nukes. And I can blame them.

IMO post Brexit Britain should be doing everything it can to break the EU apart.

Why? If the people of Europe want to be united then who are we or anyone else to stop them?

[eharding]

SKP555 said:

Well I can certainly dislike the idea of a big EU dictatorship with an army, and presumably France's nukes. And I can blame them.

IMO post Brexit Britain should be doing everything it can to break the EU apart.

Wow. How would you then feel about the EU actively promoting independence for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Sounds like you're not just as 'kipper, but some fecked-up psycho-'kipper, looking for a fight wherever you can find one.

We're leaving the EU. We're happy...they're happy. But you still want to stab someone in the face anyway. Nice.

[alfie2244]

As per the EU presidency.... . I wonder if the generals will be rotated on a 6 monthly basis or just the commander in chief

[grumbledoak]

vonuber said:

An Empire where people voluntarily sign up? As opposed to via a T-90 and little green men? Righto.

This "voluntarily sign up" bit? The Irish and the Dutch voted against the EU Constitution but both had it imposed under a new name anyway. The UK just gave people a simple choice and we said "out, please" but we still aren't out. Is this a "special" EU form of "voluntary"?

[anonymous-user]

eharding said:

Well, you can speculate how interesting it would have been if NATO had been required to act against a member state, and whether we were part of an American Empire.

The difference is someone like Greece deciding to leave, and then the army being sent in to stabilise the country. an EU army is very bad thing, it will end up being used to police EU states. it won't be used against Russia for a while considering they supply 30% of the EU fossil energy requirements.

[whoami]

gooner1 said:

eharding said:

amgmcqueen said:

Why does a trading block need a 'super army' when NATO exists? Why would the USA allow the formation of another military superpower?

Well, as it stands it appears Trump is set on withdrawing from NATO, and embarking on a US isolationist policy. If he's intent on letting Western Europe fend for itself, you can't complain when they set about doing so.

amgmcqueen said:

Why is it needed?! The people of Europe do not want a fking EU army!

Who exactly elected you as the arbiter of what the people of Europe want?

All well and good, but the formation of anEU army was proposed long before Trump won the American election.

Indeed.

That's just a convenient excuse being trotted out.