EU army

[davey68]

Coolbanana read some history. The Russians faced the best units (and equipment) the Germans had and eventually crushed them. They lost over 20 million people in the process but they turned the tide of the war without doubt. At least get your facts straight if you are going to make such comments.

[Vanden Saab]

jjlynn27 said:

Indeed. So, it's not 'practically only country'. And that's with the fudge to include pensions (from memory) in order to get over 2% mark.

You know there are 28 countries in Nato not the 10 shown so "practically only" when it is only 5 out of 28 would seem fair...

[jjlynn27]

Vanden Saab said:

You know there are 28 countries in Nato not the 10 shown so "practically only" when it is only 5 out of 28 would seem fair...

No. 'Few' would seem fair. 'Practically only' would make sense if we were the only other country next to USA to meet (even if it's the help of creative accounting) the 2%.

HTH.

[s2art]

jjlynn27 said:

skyrover said:

5 NATO members meet the minimum spending obligations

Indeed. So, it's not 'practically only country'. And that's with the fudge to include pensions (from memory) in order to get over 2% mark.

The same 'fudge' that all countries use, including the USA?

[Vanden Saab]

jjlynn27 said:

No. 'Few' would seem fair. 'Practically only' would make sense if we were the only other country next to USA to meet (even if it's the help of creative accounting) the 2%.

HTH.

Meh only 3 of 21 European countries meeting their obligations in NATO is less than a few to most normal people. Only would make sense if we were the "only" other country besides the USA. Practically only would mean 2 or 3 more.
HTH

[CaptainSlow]

Vanden Saab said:

jjlynn27 said:

No. 'Few' would seem fair. 'Practically only' would make sense if we were the only other country next to USA to meet (even if it's the help of creative accounting) the 2%.

HTH.

Meh only 3 of 21 European countries meeting their obligations in NATO is less than a few to most normal people. Only would make sense if we were the "only" other country besides the USA. Practically only would mean 2 or 3 more.
HTH

Ha, let him keep digging, the excuses are comical to read.

[jjlynn27]

CaptainSlow said:

Vanden Saab said:

jjlynn27 said:

No. 'Few' would seem fair. 'Practically only' would make sense if we were the only other country next to USA to meet (even if it's the help of creative accounting) the 2%.

HTH.

Meh only 3 of 21 European countries meeting their obligations in NATO is less than a few to most normal people. Only would make sense if we were the "only" other country besides the USA. Practically only would mean 2 or 3 more.
HTH

Ha, let him keep digging, the excuses are comical to read.

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

[irocfan]

Gloria Slap said:

Solutions to moving military assets across Europe?

Why has this not been thought of before?!



Abhrams & Paladin in Poland.



Weight limits for infrastructure.

Its almost as if tanks fitting under railway bridges is considered during the design phase.

Damn the EU perpetuating/updating something practical and logical. They should stick to making passports a colour that makes gammon puke!

sooooo your view is that it is the EU that is responsible for the implementation of being able to move assets around the continent? Hmmmmm

Those lovely little signs you see are a great idea, however, and I'm happy to be corrected on this, are only to be found in Germany - or more specifically West Germany. Now that being the case don't you think that maybe, just maybe, those signs are actually fk-all to do with the EU and more to do with NATO (or to be more specific again) US military requirements in certain parts of Germany?

[98elise]

jjlynn27 said:

Vanden Saab said:

You know there are 28 countries in Nato not the 10 shown so "practically only" when it is only 5 out of 28 would seem fair...

No. 'Few' would seem fair. 'Practically only' would make sense if we were the only other country next to USA to meet (even if it's the help of creative accounting) the 2%.

HTH.

I don't see why pensions would not be part of military spending. It's no different to any other non front line cost and it was part of the T&C's on joining.

If you were breaking down government spending where would you put military pensions. I would expect any government pension liabilities to be attributed to the respective department employment costs.

[Gloria Slap]

irocfan said:

sooooo your view is that it is the EU that is responsible for the implementation of being able to move assets around the continent? Hmmmmm

Those lovely little signs you see are a great idea, however, and I'm happy to be corrected on this, are only to be found in Germany - or more specifically West Germany. Now that being the case don't you think that maybe, just maybe, those signs are actually fk-all to do with the EU and more to do with NATO (or to be more specific again) US military requirements in certain parts of Germany?

Yes, but that is the point I'm making - its been done before, the EU are not suggesting anything untoward or odd.

Its routine. Ordinary.

And yet the gammon are up in arms moaning about it and now its kicked off some well trodden whinge about GDP.

It seems to matter little whether there is any actual issue, as long as they can wag their fingers in disgust and tut loudly at the EU.

[Vanden Saab]

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

Love the personal insults, if you hadn't realised yet they are of no concern to me. You must be a bit rattled though as that is always when you trot them out. It is a shame you do not stick to the point though as when you do, on occasion, you make some good points. The constant personal stuff however just makes you look like a tt.

[alfie2244]

Gloria Slap said:

lots of wibble
.

You been on the Pernod again Glo?

[jjlynn27]

Vanden Saab said:

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

Love the personal insults, if you hadn't realised yet they are of no concern to me. You must be a bit rattled though as that is always when you trot them out. It is a shame you do not stick to the point though as when you do, on occasion, you make some good points. The constant personal stuff however just makes you look like a tt.

But there were no personal insults. Personal would be if I said that your father smelt of elderberries.

I found your "theory" on how the balance of trade works very very funny. I didn't make that up, did I? As for you thinking that I make good points or that I look like a tt, inconsequential. Funny staff adds value.

Anyway, what you meant was to thank me for correcting you on the number of NATO members. Right?

[CaptainSlow]

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

I haven't got a clue what you're referring to. I actually believe you're mentally deranged.

[jjlynn27]

CaptainSlow said:

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

I haven't got a clue what you're referring to. I actually believe you're mentally deranged.

There are no prizes for guessing how much I care about your beliefs. Stop polluting every thread with your personal stuff. There was no reference there for you to get. If in doubt always, always refer to Arkell v. Pressdram.

Now, if you don't mind, I'd like to get this thread back on course and talk about EU 'army' and the like.

[Vanden Saab]

jjlynn27 said:

But there were no personal insults. Personal would be if I said that your father smelt of elderberries.

I found your "theory" on how the balance of trade works very very funny. I didn't make that up, did I? As for you thinking that I make good points or that I look like a tt, inconsequential. Funny staff adds value.

Anyway, what you meant was to thank me for correcting you on the number of NATO members. Right?

Not really but I should correct you for "funny staff" Is that your dog or a member of your personal entourage?

[CaptainSlow]

jjlynn27 said:

CaptainSlow said:

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

I haven't got a clue what you're referring to. I actually believe you're mentally deranged.

There are no prizes for guessing how much I care about your beliefs. Stop polluting every thread with your personal stuff. There was no reference there for you to get. If in doubt always, always refer to Arkell v. Pressdram.

Now, if you don't mind, I'd like to get this thread back on course and talk about EU 'army' and the like.

When it comes to thread pollution your constant drivel is the main cause, You are a complete and utter moron.

Anyhow, back to the EU Army, now that the Toxics are starting to admit it will happen....just no one is willing to pay for it.

[jjlynn27]

Vanden Saab said:

Not really but I should correct you for "funny staff" Is that your dog or a member of your personal entourage?

Thanks for that. Indeed stuff, rather than staff. You are still wrong on only, few and number of NATO members.

Now, it seems that your sidekick is getting too emotional for my liking, so I'll ask you, what do you think about EU army, regardless of 29 members of NATO.

[ATG]

Dr Jekyll said:

Coolbanana said:

Absolutely. Utterly pathetic comments by some Leavers really. Great Britain would have been destroyed had it not been for the USA in WW2. Fact.

Isolationism in all things is retarded in this Age. The EU have the correct idea, together in a common ideology is the way forward; a Federal EU with a common Army while retaining individual country / state military identities but working for all is where I'd want it to go. Obviously, we'll bail out and help the poor Little Britain's if they get themselves in a mess, so I guess they can keep going on their isolationist agenda.

The UK is practically the only European country that meets it's NATO commitments, hardly isolationist.

He didn't say the UK was isolationist. He said some Leavers on this thread were isolationists. Surprised the difference needed pointing out.

[ATG]

Vanden Saab said:

jjlynn27 said:

The exceptionally slow and the 'influence of £20 widget on balance of trade' desperately trying to make fellow brexiteer looking less dumb. Looks at Lord Ashcroft's exit polls, yep, make sense.

'excuses'

And there are 29 Nato members, widget-boy.

Love the personal insults, if you hadn't realised yet they are of no concern to me. You must be a bit rattled though as that is always when you trot them out. It is a shame you do not stick to the point though as when you do, on occasion, you make some good points. The constant personal stuff however just makes you look like a tt.

Err ... the insults almost always start flying from the Leaver side of these threads. I frankly can't be bothered to see if you've lobbed any around, but claiming that jjlynn27 generally resorts to them first is risible.