Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

An EU DEFENSE FORCE.

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030429/wl_nm/eu_defence_dc_2

Germany, Luxemborg, Belgium and France had a little meeting where they decided to create, what is needed in Europe, a modern, agile army and special ops force. Thing is #1 Spain, Italy and Britian weren't invited to this little meeting...."although we're sure members of the EU will want to participate." and #2, headquarters will be in Belguim. Wow? Is Belgium o.k. with the new jobs that will bring?

Anyway, read this article if you haven't heard of it yet. And tell me what you think. In another article about it, Blair was quoted as basically telling off France for undermining NATO and not including the UK in this meeting. France not being above board? Well, now I am shocked. :shocking:

Could be about France selling more aerospace stuff now that its Iraqi customer is gone.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can't see them actually spending the money to do it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What if it was a money MAKING opportunity for France. Gotta sell jets and stuff to someone......Ah Oui.:chin:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think its a good idea. Closer integration includes military integration. NATO should be disbanded. Its obsolete without the eastern bloc.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NATO should be disbanded. Its obsolete without the eastern bloc

    I agree with that. I was wondering if this initative is what has gotten Clandestine so busy.:chin:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    I agree with that. I was wondering if this initative is what has gotten Clandestine so busy.:chin:
    :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah , an Eu defence force , no way thats gonna work

    Firstly , they all speak different languages

    Also , the French have been proved to be complete losers when it comes to the military and war , I wouldnt trust them with a bb-gun , let alone command of an EU defence force.

    It is not in Britains interest to be in this alliance. Well stand back while it gets in a mess and sucks up huge amounts of cash , and keep our far more profitable alliance with America going.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why would we want to be strengthening our ties with Europe?

    They didn't invite Britian to the meeting. That's why Tony Blair was mad. I think it's a ploy by France to sell more of its military equipment and to isolate the US and maybe Britian from European protection/influence.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We want to strengthen our ties with Europe to vindicate their investment in us and keep the trade flowing in ever larger amounts. We want to be able to compete as a region with the US and Russia.

    We want to stop being so bloody xenophobic about anybody who doesn't speak english; The Matadore and Ilson's comment would have us in a 51st state standing with the US - far less power than in Europe and far less profitable.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Comments about the French being totally useless at war are about as ludicrous as saying all Americans are dumb, or all British are useless at sex and cooking. The French have had their fair share of military defeats in history. So what. What counts it's the present, and I'm pretty certain France could handle themselves pretty well. They are nuclear, they have a formidable aircraft industry, and rumour has it the French Foreign Legion would kick arse out of the SAS or Special US forces any day of the week. You could do much worse than having the French on your side.

    Since EU members don't have plans for world domination a mid-size, fast and modern European army would be everything we need. We have several carriers, a modern military machine including the best tanks on earth and are about to start receving units of the most advanced fighter plane ever built. We can handle ourselves without any outside help. To hell with NATO.

    I'm not surprised Blair or Aznar have been invited. The two have been having enough cosy meetings of their own with Master Bush anyway. This project will take time and there will be further meetings, with more European leaders invited along.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    I think it's a ploy by France to sell more of its military equipment ....

    Considering that French military equipment has proven to be only slightly more effective than Russian military equipment, that really relies on the buyers being stupid.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    rumour has it

    Typical of how you deal with military subjects, Aladdin. Rumor doesn't win battles or wars. The FFL are good troops...against third rate opponents. They don't have the training, leadership, equipment or logistical support to take on first rate opponents.

    The worst problem for the French military? Their Officer corps.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    I agree with that. I was wondering if this initative is what has gotten Clandestine so busy.:chin:

    But then...

    It could be...

    As was broached previously...

    That with Sodamn Insane on the run, the clandestine-collaborator is scrambling around, in search of a paycheck...

    ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat
    Considering that French military equipment has proven to be only slightly more effective than Russian military equipment, that really relies on the buyers being stupid.

    However, the Palestinian apologist buys into the idea...

    Must be a message in there, somewhere...

    :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry, I must confess to something. I deliberately included the remark about the French Legion kicking arse about the SAS or US Special Forces knowing it'd raise a few outraged comments.

    The truth is that we will not know whose special forces are best unless they engage in battle. Nor do this “my Special Ops guys are better than yours” rants really matter. Special Ops guys don't win wars- the bulk of the army does.

    Like I said, you could do much worse than having the French on your side. They are perfectly capable of being part of a European army, and silly remarks about 'not trusting them as they will surrender at the first chance' are so ridiculous they don't deserve further comment.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    May, 1940 - The biggest, best equipped Army in Europe belonged to?











    France.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So? Are you suggesting that armies cannot improve or get worse over the years?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They are nuclear, they have a formidable aircraft industry,
    Aladdin

    Key point. I believe this is about commerce...not just defense because France and friends were very quick to say they want NATO too. This year, France is going to break the debt limitation set by the EU 3% and its economy may shrink. It has to make up for lost sales to Iraq. What better way then to claim Europe as its sphere of influence and have a new European army supplied by France. There's much to do. The average age of the Belgian soldier is in the 40's. Any equipment they would use right now it dated too.

    Greenhat also made a good point about the cost. Based on how much growth Germany and France, if any, are achieving, they must include other countries to pay for this. They sure as hell can't.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The cost will be big, but France would not be by any means the only provider of troops or weapons. Germany and Britain build excellent tanks; several countries in Europe are about to take delivery of the Eurofighter- a project of 4 European countries-, so the main air attack hardware is covered... the Italians are very good engineers and have a decent weapon industry of their own... there would be many countries making a contribution.

    I think the idea would be to initially commit the troops and hardware needed from each country's own forces, to soften the financial blow. With time they can increase the number of planes, artillery, etc needed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat
    May, 1940 - The biggest, best equipped Army in Europe belonged to?











    France.

    I presume that doesn't include Air Force and Navy etc?
    Where did you get the information for your point from, I'm interested in WW2 and didn't realise France had best equipped army in europe in 1940
    By best equipped do you mean, most modern equippment, most new equippment or most equippment or all of the above?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin

    Like I said, you could do much worse than having the French on your side.

    Like depending upon a San Francisco Gay Pride / Flower Power parade for your defense? :rolleyes:

    Was this a joke - like the FFL allusion - or intended to be serious? Then again, you might find a greater will to fight in a Gay Pride - or a Flower Power - parade than in all of France...

    Iraq had a more formidable military than France... I guess it must be a comparative thing, then?

    Spain, perhaps? ;)

    Or perhaps Monaco?
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    So? Are you suggesting that armies cannot improve or get worse over the years?

    Since it has not gotten better for France, one must presume the alternative...

    Even Sweden looks better than France...

    If one depends upon more than arrogance and treachery for their survival, one should look to other places than France.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well since France hasn’t been involved in a full-scale war since WWII it is going to be difficult to find out, isn't it Thanatos? Perhaps you should bear in mind that today France has the power to destroy every man, woman and child in the US. A bit more punch than a gay parade don't you think?

    And as for past defeats, do you think that Great Britain would have not been defeated by Hitler had it been part of the Continent?

    And how exactly are the French treacherous? Because they refused to bow to the Master and dared to voice their opposition to this illegal, self-interest driven war on Iraq?

    Let me put it this way: all these fallen American WWII soldiers people keep mentioning when talking about French ingratitude and treachery will be turning in their graves to see that their deaths defending freedom and a just cause are being used by a deranged, selfish warmongering US President and his band of cheerleaders. The concept of "fighting for America's freedom" has certainly changed a lot since WWII. :rolleyes:

    One last thought: if it wasn't for the French you'd still be a British colony. Show more respect for your saviours please! :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Simbelyne
    NATO should be disbanded. Its obsolete without the eastern bloc.

    Why? Aren't there any other threats to the member states?

    Remember that the WTC attacks were covered under the NATO articles
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    These 'outrageous' comments Ilson are there just to counter the equally outrageous wave of "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", "traitors", "cowards" and similar name-calling disgrace that we have had to witness in the build-up to the war. When Thanatos or others call the French traitors or cowards- which is the biggest load of bollocks ever- then they are asking for similar replies.

    The hate campaign & boycott against France started in America and happily adopted by many will be seen by future generations as one of the most shameful and lowest points in America's history. God knows France is far from perfect and they are also protecting their interests but at the end of the day the extraordinary fit of rage shown by the US and the warmongers can only be seen as a reaction of outrage by the schoolyard bully who has just seen someone dare disagree with him.

    The ''if it wasn't for the French...'' comment is little more than a tongue-in-cheek remark. But remember how many in America are quick to remind us that if it wasn't for them we'd all be Krauts now- which is equally absurd.

    As for the relative military strengths of France... I can help but think that Thanatos (and sometimes others) only seems to value the goodness of a country by the size of its armed forces. As if anyone gave a shit anyway... Nonetheless, since he loves putting France down so much about its military I have just reminded him that France is a nuclear power, and if it chose to it could destroy the US (or as many cities as warheads France has, which probably a few hundred).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    Why? Aren't there any other threats to the member states?

    Remember that the WTC attacks were covered under the NATO articles

    The US doesn't seriously listen to NATO unless it suits its own ends. Neitrher does anybod else. Surely a new European RRF would be fine and the Americans can carry on playing with their toys and blowing themselves up on their own.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Ilson-Youth

    (just so you know i'm addressing you!)

    1) WWII is completely irrevelant to any modern discussion about warfare. Almost nothing is the same as it was then.

    2) 'My special forces are better than yours' is a childs game. Who cares who can kill who the best? Shouldn't we be concentrating on how not to kill people rather than inventing new and more interesting ways.

    3) You know you are horrendously stereotyping the French (I hope). If I said something in a similar vein about Israel I would be called Anti-Semitic. Why do you hate the French so much? They trade with us to a huge extent and are a valid nation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    "cheese-eating surrender monkeys"

    Indeed, that is out of order.

    We all know it should be "garlic-eating" ;) (j/k)

    Seriously Ilson, he has a point.
    Originally posted by Simbelyne
    The US doesn't seriously listen to NATO unless it suits its own ends.

    Since when? The only occasions when NATO has been called upon to act, are Kosovo (a Euopean issue I believe) and post-WTC. The only occasion when they have acted as a force was over Kosovo.

    Oh, and the French didn't much like the Kosovo option either. Another of their oppressive dictator friends ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    [BOh, and the French didn't much like the Kosovo option either. Another of their oppressive dictator friends ;) [/B]


    They supported Slobodan? BS.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    "European security and defense policy cannot become an exclusive project," Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said Tuesday. Speaking to lawmakers in Madrid, she said any "adventure" that sought to build a defense policy outside the EU "would have no right to call itself European."

    That was a comment on the meeting. I think many of the features of this new defense force are in proposals for a revamped NATO.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    "European security and defense policy cannot become an exclusive project," Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said Tuesday. Speaking to lawmakers in Madrid, she said any "adventure" that sought to build a defense policy outside the EU "would have no right to call itself European."

    Very true. It would have to be under the auspices of the EU.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    The cost will be big, but France would not be by any means the only provider of troops or weapons. Germany and Britain build excellent tanks; several countries in Europe are about to take delivery of the Eurofighter- a project of 4 European countries-, so the main air attack hardware is covered... the Italians are very good engineers and have a decent weapon industry of their own... there would be many countries making a contribution.

    I think the idea would be to initially commit the troops and hardware needed from each country's own forces, to soften the financial blow. With time they can increase the number of planes, artillery, etc needed.

    Armies, especially those that can undertake expeditionary operations, require logistical support. It isn't the weapons that will cost them the bucks, it is replacing the logistical support currently provided to NATO by the United States. None of the nations in Europe have those assets. BIG BUCKS. Your thoughts about "the idea" completely ignore that. I'm not surprised.
Sign In or Register to comment.