Joint eu military

[Tamme 0]

a big fat NO, it would never work, there is so much corruption and personnel agendas, tbh id wish britain further itself from a common currency and getting more involved in the eu as is.

Corruption?

[EiZei 0]

Not that UK would be the least corrupted country in the EU..

http://www.transparency.org/pressre....en.html

[Lt_Phoenix 0]

It's not like Norway that we got by conquest.

Errm wrong again....

You didn't conquer us. Denmark was forced to give up Norway for siding with Napoleon. Since Sweden supported the winning side, they were given Norway, under the condition that that they kept their parlament. Other than that, some very valid points denoir

Quote[/b] ]Tick, tock, tick, tock, goes the clock for yet another major conflict within Europe.

Impossible ,Europe can never come in conflict again.We are to much economicly and socially intermingled with eachother.Thing's like WWI and II are thing's of the past here between E.U member's.

The economy part is a bit naive. Just because you have strong economic relations with another country, it doesn't meen you're unable to go to war with them

Example:

US biggest trading partner before WWII = Japan

France's biggest trading partner before WWII = Germany

Anyone see a pattern here?

I'm all for standard european equipment, and see the Eurocopter (Tiger), Eurofighter (Typhoon) and the A400M FLA (Future Large Aircraft) as a step in the right direction. It would be more difficult to have a common european army though. I think it would be better to expand NATO to include the other EU countries, and try and cooperate on that leve instead.

[WhoCares 0]

According to this logic it is iminent for Europe to get a strong military, as it has to face the USA

[Lt_Phoenix 0]

@WhoCares - If your refering to my post, then the US biggest trading partner is still Japan. I think they'd have more to fear than we do  

*edit - arrgh spelling.........

[denoir 0]

It's not like Norway that we got by conquest.

Errm wrong again....

You didn't conquer us. Denmark was forced to give up Norway for siding with Napoleon. Since Sweden supported the winning side, they were given Norway, under the condition that that they kept their parlament. Other than that, some very valid points denoir

Actually we got it in exchange of not burning down Copenhagen in 1814 We had taken a larg portion of Denmark and in the peace deal we got Norway (which was a backward Danish province back then).

When I said "in conquest", I was refering to Denmark.

But, now that you mention it, there was a military intervention and conquest of Norway in 1814 when Norway refused to honor the Kiel agreement between Denmark and Sweden that gave Norway to Sweden.

Here's a text in Swedish about it.

Needless to say, we kicked your ass in two weeks

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]The economy part is a bit naive. Just because you have strong economic relations with another country, it doesn't meen you're unable to go to war with them

Example:

US biggest trading partner before WWII = Japan

France's biggest trading partner before WWII = Germany

There is a BIG difference.You can't compare trade and international economic's of the 40's with those of the year 2000.Those are just the trade partners ,but not the trade volume's.The day of today those volume's are 100 times higher ,and we have Multinational company's spread around the whole world.Economy's the day of today are a thousandfold more intermingled with other economy's back then.Heck in Europe we have a single currency ,we hadn't that in WW2.How stupid would it be to go to war with a country that share's youre currency?

[denoir 0]

It should be pointed out that what is EU today was founded as the coal & steel community that was directly after WW2 introduced to make France, Germany and Britain co-dependant to that degree that a war would be impossible. The basic idea was that at any cost we would avoid another world war.

There could be a war between EU countries, but not a lasting one as the logistics would be impossible due to the division of resources among the countries. The countries could use up their arsenals but cannot maintain military production without resources from the other countries.

A second very important thing is the nukes which are a military absolute. Nobody can invade France or Britain without turning their own country into a parking lot.

And a third point is the very solid democratic grounds that Europe now stands on. This is no guarantee, but it's still a good starting point.

[ran 0]

I'm all for a common European defence.

nothing else to say

[Bordoy 0]

Thats because the french goverment don't use there military, so they need another countries military.

[Bordoy 0]

A EU army would be a good thing. It will keep the USA in check. With the fall of the USSR it gave the USA a free reign to do what it likes.

I doubt the EU will be ready to attack the US, and vice-versa. I also doubt the US would be "scared" of the EU.

[Badassdom 0]

Would you want a French general leading you? I know I wouldn't.

just as much as an american(nato)

[Acro 0]

I don't see any harm European countries coming closer each other. It could work (for a while atleast). Americans shouldn't be so worried. We are living 21. century, you know.

[ran 0]

Thats because the french goverment don't use there military, so they need another countries military.

watch the news mate

be thankfull we're still in Africa .... maybe you'd prefer british expats to be laying in the middle of central-african streets with their guts watching the sun

[Bordoy 0]

Thats because the french goverment don't use there military, so they need another countries military.

watch the news mate

be thankfull we're still in Africa .... maybe you'd prefer british expats to be laying in the middle of central-african streets with their guts watching the sun

why are they in Africa anyway? peacekeeping duties?

I meant no offence to the French or the the French Armed Forces

[ran 0]

Thats because the french goverment don't use there military, so they need another countries military.

watch the news mate

be thankfull we're still in Africa .... maybe you'd prefer british expats to be laying in the middle of central-african streets with their guts watching the sun

why are they in Africa anyway? peacekeeping duties?

I meant no offence to the French or the the French Armed Forces

well , you offended me

[denoir 0]

why are they in Africa anyway? peacekeeping duties?

Congo, UN mandate and doing a great job.

Incidentally around new year EU's rapid reaction force will be deployed in Congo. Although it's not rapid yet, it's the first unit under direct EU command and consisting of soliders from all member countries.

Quote[/b] ]

I meant no offence to the French or the the French Armed Forces

Wow, a Briton apologizing for a joking about the French. You sere there is still hope for cooperation  

[Bordoy 0]

Quote[/b] ]Congo, UN mandate and doing a great job.

Thats good to hear.

Quote[/b] ]Wow, a Briton apologizing for a joking about the French. You sere there is still hope for cooperation  

It wasn't meant to be a joke, but if you laughed them who cares apart from the Frech?

You HOPE for cooperation, yes?

edit: That'll always be the British flag in my avatar. No blue flag with stars in a circle representing equality among the nations but acutally brussels is in charge.

[denoir 0]

It wasn't meant to be a joke, but if you laughed them who cares apart from the Frech?

If it wasn't a joke then it was ignorance. France and UK have about the same size of populations while France has a larger military and spends more money on it than the UK. France is also consitently providing more troops to UN operations than Britain. Plus they have their own little wars in Africa (Ivory Coast).

Quote[/b] ]

That'll always be the British flag in my avatar. No blue flag with stars in a circle representing equality among the nations but acutally brussels is in charge.

Why British and not English? The UK is dominated by England far more than the EU is dominated by Brussels.

[Badgerboy 0]

I bet Bordoy reads the Daily Mail. They predict the mongrel hoards of Europe stealing our wives, and raping our cattle.

It's a horribly blinkered newspaper, that manages to launch moral crusades on pretty much everything. (Europe, computer games, cats)

[SgtBarnes 0]

Why British and not English? The UK is dominated by England far more than the EU is dominated by Brussels.

Interesting point Denoir. As a Scot i'm not suprised that Little Englander's are uneasy about a stronger Europe.

[Gollum1 0]

Good point Denoir.

[Bordoy 0]

Quote[/b] ]Why British and not English? The UK is dominated by England far more than the EU is dominated by Brussels.

Well, could change to Enlgand if the UK dismantled, but the Army i know of is the British Army.

Quote[/b] ]I bet Bordoy reads the Daily Mail

You just won your bet, well done. Congrats to the badger, once again well done.

Quote[/b] ]They predict the mongrel hoards of Europe stealing our wives, and raping our cattle.

France don't buy British beef, and if they steal our wives then i ain't surprised (look at them over there, hairy armpits and so forth)

Quote[/b] ]Interesting point Denoir. As a Scot i'm not suprised that Little Englander's are uneasy about a stronger Europe.

haha, little Englander. England ain't that small.

[ran 0]

Quote[/b] ]They predict the mongrel hoards of Europe stealing our wives, and raping our cattle.

France don't buy British beef, and if they steal our wives then i ain't surprised (look at them over there, hairy armpits and so forth)

AAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!!!!!!!

a roastbeef cristicizing OUR women .........

you made my day mate , thank you , really

[bn880 5]

Yep, kinda funny to a Canadian as well. I mean come on there...