Discussion
psi310398 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Wouldn't a single European Army benefit from economies of scale and thus cost savings?
The ability to share expensive kit across borders and cut out replication?
Surely this makes good economic sense?
The only reason not to do so, would be if you felt you were likely to fall out with your neighbour in the EU? Given the whole premise on with the EU is built on is to avoid another European war, I can't see why some are so concerned?
Maybe the simple fact that you, unlike others here including me, haven't had family members murdered by Germans in army uniform, within living memory?The ability to share expensive kit across borders and cut out replication?
Surely this makes good economic sense?
The only reason not to do so, would be if you felt you were likely to fall out with your neighbour in the EU? Given the whole premise on with the EU is built on is to avoid another European war, I can't see why some are so concerned?
Helicopter123 said:
You do know how the EU was originally conceived, don't you?
Yes, and that does not invalidate fears of certain things happening again. Wishing something to be case is not the same as something being the case. It's largely why countries at peace hang on to their armies.If you want some history, remember that Bismarck's Germany grew out of a customs union and we know how that ended...
psi310398 said:
Helicopter123 said:
You do know how the EU was originally conceived, don't you?
Yes, and that does not invalidate fears of certain things happening again. Wishing something to be case is not the same as something being the case. It's largely why countries at peace hang on to their armies.If you want some history, remember that Bismarck's Germany grew out of a customs union and we know how that ended...
esxste said:
This is the thing. The UK was with France and Germany, one of the biggest influencers of EU policies. Very little was forced on the UK. And what was forced on us, often came with sweeteners in other areas. That's just politics at any level.
An EU army... assuming the Tories didn't see it as a way to further lower public spending, could have been opposed/delayed by us for a long time. Certainly the EU would have planned any defence force with the UK at the forefront, along with France for the obvious reasons that the UK and France have the biggest and most effective armed forces. To leave the UK out, while it was still a member of the EU would have been politically unacceptable... the increased costs that the EU countries will now face would have been unacceptable when someone can pipe up and say... "why are we doing this without the UK?, We should get them involved instead!".
I really do love the logical consistency I sometimes see, that the UK was somehow in thrall to the EU, a pitiful slave dictated to by others... but unshackled we're somehow going to be able to demand favorable trade deals around the world and be a power to be reckoned with.
That is your view. A long time is what? 3 years? 30?An EU army... assuming the Tories didn't see it as a way to further lower public spending, could have been opposed/delayed by us for a long time. Certainly the EU would have planned any defence force with the UK at the forefront, along with France for the obvious reasons that the UK and France have the biggest and most effective armed forces. To leave the UK out, while it was still a member of the EU would have been politically unacceptable... the increased costs that the EU countries will now face would have been unacceptable when someone can pipe up and say... "why are we doing this without the UK?, We should get them involved instead!".
I really do love the logical consistency I sometimes see, that the UK was somehow in thrall to the EU, a pitiful slave dictated to by others... but unshackled we're somehow going to be able to demand favorable trade deals around the world and be a power to be reckoned with.
I believe they would have pushed for the removal of the veto and pursued the agenda of infiltrating the command structure of the UK such that British troops are used to quell unrest in the Catalan region.
Mothersruin said:
It may sound somewhat dramatic, but I could see an EU Army moving into a member state who didn't fulfil their obligations and decided to do their own thing, all under the guise of stability etc...
Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
I do believe your post is utterly dramatic!!! Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
In fact I struggle to understand the thought process that manages to conceive such a silly post. Are you really suggesting that EU "troops would have been sent in to secure institutions"? Any precedence for this? Or just populist codswallop?
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Piha said:
I do believe your post is utterly dramatic!!!
In fact I struggle to understand the thought process that manages to conceive such a silly post. Are you really suggesting that EU "troops would have been sent in to secure institutions"? Any precedence for this? Or just populist codswallop?
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Simply? An EU army would exist to protect the EU.In fact I struggle to understand the thought process that manages to conceive such a silly post. Are you really suggesting that EU "troops would have been sent in to secure institutions"? Any precedence for this? Or just populist codswallop?
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Piha said:
Mothersruin said:
It may sound somewhat dramatic, but I could see an EU Army moving into a member state who didn't fulfil their obligations and decided to do their own thing, all under the guise of stability etc...
Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
I do believe your post is utterly dramatic!!! Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
In fact I struggle to understand the thought process that manages to conceive such a silly post. Are you really suggesting that EU "troops would have been sent in to secure institutions"? Any precedence for this? Or just populist codswallop?
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
"We need a big leap forward for Europe. A relaunch of the project so that we are ready to face the challenges of the new emerging age. We will be on our own in the world of tomorrow, facing China, India, Russia & perhaps even the Americans."
3 days after commemorating Armistice day. Keep it classy Verhofstadt.
psi310398 said:
Piha said:
SNIp
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Ahem. Hasn't he rather been challenging EU NATO members to contribute fully to NATO?Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
John145 said:
psi310398 said:
Helicopter123 said:
You do know how the EU was originally conceived, don't you?
Yes, and that does not invalidate fears of certain things happening again. Wishing something to be case is not the same as something being the case. It's largely why countries at peace hang on to their armies.If you want some history, remember that Bismarck's Germany grew out of a customs union and we know how that ended...
- neveragain
John145 said:
psi310398 said:
Piha said:
SNIp
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Ahem. Hasn't he rather been challenging EU NATO members to contribute fully to NATO?Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Piha said:
Mothersruin said:
It may sound somewhat dramatic, but I could see an EU Army moving into a member state who didn't fulfil their obligations and decided to do their own thing, all under the guise of stability etc...
Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
I do believe your post is utterly dramatic!!! Had Greece the courage of it's convictions when it all went tits up and they'd refused to accept the economic bail out conditions, reintroduced their own currency and written of the debts to the EU, I have no reservation that troops would have been sent in to secure institutions and arrest those deemed responsible.
Same if Italy did the same.
In fact I struggle to understand the thought process that manages to conceive such a silly post. Are you really suggesting that EU "troops would have been sent in to secure institutions"? Any precedence for this? Or just populist codswallop?
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
The term used was EU army, not EU troops. HTH.
Jinx said:
John145 said:
psi310398 said:
Piha said:
SNIp
Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
Ahem. Hasn't he rather been challenging EU NATO members to contribute fully to NATO?Trump has been tubthumping about the EU taking more responsibility of our own security due to a lack of EU funding.
When the EU impose their 'will' or "ideals" on others that don't play ball or cant play ball they will impose the financial stick - the trouble with that is that those miscreant EU members who are already being hit with the finical stick may get damaged so much that they turn around and use a real stick.
The EU wants to have an army to back up its mouth.
Helicopter123 said:
How many World Wars have we had since the Treaty of Paris?
Very droll.The right question, as you well know, is how many World Wars since 4th April, 1949 when the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established in Washington.
Surely even you can't imagine that the Warsaw Pact was quaking in its boots at the prospect of the EEC and then the EU?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff