Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does EU need Military Power?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    "but continental Europe will be responsible for its own defence. That much is clear."

    Good for us, bad for the US. But I'm not sure this will happen. If the Bushies have their occasional lucidum intervallum, they may realise that this is against their interest. Also, a russian threat would have to get through "new europe" which looks for US protection.

    "The US is talking about closing bases in Germany."

    Which has to do with US strategic interests, and nil with german security. And Germany doesn't exactly need to "re"-arm to defend itself.
    “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

    Comment


    • #92
      the EU will be adding between 5 and 15 new countries in the next decade or two, it's overall population will rise significantly faster than the USA
      Perhaps. Frankly, the EU has the "good" countries in it already. Latvia ain't gonna add much in the way of power.

      As to population, US population growth rates are higher than the EU so while the EU can grow by adding new countries, that is its only way to grow. Eventually the EU will run out of acceptable countries.

      While the EU can pursue a common economic policy, the current Iraq situation proves that it is decades away from having a united foreign policy, let alone a military. In fact, a military without a cohesive foreign policy is a recipe for disaster.

      "The world needs one superpower like a shot to the head, having said that though many competing powers causing arms races and other negative events would obviously be bad too."

      Mankind was pretty close to extinction the last time there were two superpowers. I can't see going back to that as preferable for anyone.

      "Should Europe re-arm? They'll have to. The US is in no mood to defend continental Europe any more."

      Against what, pray tell?
      You're kidding. Let's see how this would play out: Europe, which is fabulously wealthy compared to most of the world, has few guns. Middle Eastern, African and Asian nations are dirt poor but have lotsa guns and conscripts too. You tell me what happens next.

      The US and EU interests coincide in all the things that really matter. Both countries need to foster economic growth not only for each other but also in the rest of the world. Our goods and services are too expensive for the third world to buy. New markets need emerging nations but we also need each other. Trade between North America and Europe enriches both parties. There is no way any EU or US leader would jeopardize this.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by gunkulator


        Perhaps. Frankly, the EU has the "good" countries in it already. Latvia ain't gonna add much in the way of power.
        Maybe not that much, but nevertheless the fromer eastern bloc countries' economies will likely be growing at a rate faster than the US. If populous countries such as Poland do so then they will be very helpful.
        One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

        Comment


        • #94
          "Europe, which is fabulously wealthy compared to most of the world, has few guns."

          I don't know where this "few guns" nonsense emerges, and why it is such a popular nonsense. The problem with the EU members' forces is not that they are weak, it's that they are static. From the nrs that were drawn up to determine the headline and capability goals for the reaction force, the EU countries combined have for example something like 8000-10000 MBTs. But yes, europe will be overrun by Yeminite clansman who miraculously walk on water over the mediterranean.

          "The US and EU interests coincide in all the things that really matter. Both countries"

          HAH! HAH! TELL THAT TO RAH!!!

          "There is no way any EU or US leader would jeopardize this."

          I would have agreed with this 2 years ago. Now I'm far from certain.
          “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
            You can kiss Nato goodbye...
            Good! It's an archaic intstitution that has outlived it's usefulness IMO. I don't understand why my country is still in it frankly, it's not like we're actually serving a useful role in it.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by HershOstropoler
              "but continental Europe will be responsible for its own defence. That much is clear."

              Good for us, bad for the US. But I'm not sure this will happen. If the Bushies have their occasional lucidum intervallum, they may realise that this is against their interest. Also, a russian threat would have to get through "new europe" which looks for US protection.
              Don't ask me to defend current US policy - I think its mad.


              "The US is talking about closing bases in Germany."

              Which has to do with US strategic interests, and nil with german security. And Germany doesn't exactly need to "re"-arm to defend itself.
              It won't happen overnight but unless US policy changes, it will happen.

              Same goes for Japan.
              Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..

              Look, I just don't anymore, okay?

              Comment


              • #97
                A unified Germany has little to fear from Russia
                Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
                Douglas Adams (Influential author)

                Comment


                • #98
                  "It won't happen overnight but unless US policy changes, it will happen."

                  The sooner the better.
                  “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by gunkulator

                    So you would prefer going to sleep at night with the very real threat of nuclear war hanging over your head? Perhaps you are not old enough to remember the very real possibility of utter annihilation anytime US/USSR relations took a sour turn. I don't know about Germany, but many Americans in the 50's and 60's and even later figured a nuclear war with the Soviets was a matter of when, not if.

                    Remember the Doomsday Clock? First Strike Strategy? Dr. Strangelove? Cuban Missile Crisis? Nuclear Winter? As a German you must at least know about the hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops and thousands of missiles pointed at your home. Nobody even mentions these things today, let alone worries about them.

                    Surely mankind was never more on the edge of extinction than during the Cold War.
                    You always assume, that two or mutliple blocks with equivalent power would inevitably lead to a scenario which would be like the worst days of the cold war.
                    I think in this you are completely wrong.
                    I don´t propagate that the EU should start a nuclear armament Race with the USA just as the USA and USSR did during the cold war (btw. as a sidenote, the MAD-Scenario has worked as the USA and the USSR never had a hot war against each other ).

                    I just say, that Europe should build a significant conventional armed force which on the one hand would grant us independence from the US armed forces and on the other hand can´t such easy be dismissed by the USA in diplomatic negotiations.
                    And I think it would also prevent such Scenarios as just recently happened under the Bush Government, where the Senate decided that it would be correct for the US to invade the Netherlands if someday an US Citizen would be accused at the international court.

                    Originally posted by gunkulator

                    Why would it need an army? Armies are for external threats.

                    I suspect you may not really believe this. The gap between rich and poor in the world today is too great to make a world-wide representative government feasible. The much greater numbers of poor people would drain your economy of its wealth and capital to the point of it no longer being functional. It would be like the Russia of 1917 all over again. Your gov't, like all other western govt's, prevents this scenario with strict immigration policies.

                    The way to a one world gov't is to help developing nations achieve the same economic success as the west. The EU works because all its members are industrialized. It would not work if Bangladesh was a member.

                    Of course, and there would have to be much more prerequisites met. For example aside from the economics it would have to be assured that all citizens have an equivalent level of education. For my hypothetical scenario just assume that it would be a time in the future, where the developing countries have a strong economy and an education level like Europe or the USA.
                    Or as an Alternative let the World government be the UN (as Urban Ranger suggested earlier) and let the question be if I would support an UN-Army which is stronger than all the other armies in the world (and yes, I would support it)

                    Originally posted by gunkulator

                    In any case, my main point is that two or more powerful nations inevitably conflict. The results of these conflicts (large scale war, dictatorships, subversion) have not proven to be good for humanity.
                    And this is the point where our opinions are absolutely different.
                    I don´t see that such conflicts are inevitable. More and more conflicts between industrialized countries today are resolved peacefully in a diplomatic way.
                    If you want to compare the relations between the USA and USSR to a military strong Europe and the USA, than rather take dhte USSR under Gorbachev after Glasnost and Perestroika.
                    The relationship between USA and Europe would, even if Europe had a significant army, more resemble this scenario (I think it would even be better) than any scenario within the cold war..

                    Originally posted by gunkulator


                    Yes, you have no voice in US elections. But I would again ask what real oppression you are currently experiencing such that you prefer to turn back the clock to the era of authoritariansism, totalitarism and all the very real human suffering that accompanied it.
                    At the moment there is no opression, just an american president who gives a BS about international treaties and the things, other countries or the UN have to say (at least as long the things the other countries say don´t support its own opinion)
                    But imagine as a worst case scenario you someday elect a president which is much worser than George W. Bush and this president convinces the congress and large parts of the american citizens, that it would be right to invade europe.
                    I would sleep much more calm if I would know there is an army to prevent this (but I can understand that you, as an american with the most powerful army behind you, can´t understand those fears of poeple outside of the United States, maybe I would think likewise if it would Europe which had the most powerful army).

                    And I still fail to see, what getting a significant conventional european army has to do with authoritarianism and totalitarism. Just because we would have an united europoean army doen´t mean, that all european countries suddenly turn into dictatorships. European states would still remain the representative democracies they are today.
                    Last edited by Proteus_MST; March 21, 2003, 10:43.
                    Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
                    Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

                    Comment


                    • Hasn't the US already?

                      No. The US and EU economies are roughly on par, in aggregate, even though the economy per capita in the US versus the EU is a lot higher. If the US continues to add population, then economic growth should be higher.
                      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TheStinger
                        A unified Germany has little to fear from Russia
                        I'm sorry but history says otherwise. What we will see in Eastern Europe unless the rift is patched up quick is strategic competition between Germany, Russia and The United States for influence.

                        Russia is weak now but Russia has been weak before.

                        Germany would need to guarantee its borders by keeping bordering states in its orbit.

                        The United States will play a similar role to that Britain used to play - a spoiling role.
                        Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..

                        Look, I just don't anymore, okay?

                        Comment


                        • Unless Russia gets back the Ukraine it is no longer demographicaly in aposition to dominate Germany especaily if the Germans remain allied to France.
                          Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
                          Douglas Adams (Influential author)

                          Comment


                          • Can't you just accept the possibility that the world can exist on one pole? Who needs a counterweight and why?

                            Stability.

                            I don't think we need a multipolar world, what we need is a One World Government

                            Colonize Mars first, talk about consolidating Earth second.
                            Blog | Civ2 Scenario League | leo.petr at gmail.com

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by HershOstropoler
                              I don't know where this "few guns" nonsense emerges, and why it is such a popular nonsense. The problem with the EU members' forces is not that they are weak, it's that they are static.
                              No, the problem is that they are divided. Would the EU risk war to save future members like, say, Turkey? The recent failures in Kosovo show the EU is completely paralyzed militarily. You can't have an effective military when there is no cohesive European foreign policy.

                              And who says the Middle East will invade Europe a la WWII? Far easier to threaten to nuke a few cities and extort money and technology a la North Korea. Without a military that can project force, you are powerless to do anything about it.

                              But yes, europe will be overrun by Yeminite clansman who miraculously walk on water over the mediterranean.
                              This is the early 21st century, not the early 20th. Rich Middle Eastern countries have some pretty impressive hardware these days, including WOMD, some of it helpfully provided by EU countries.

                              "The US and EU interests coincide in all the things that really matter. Both countries"

                              HAH! HAH! TELL THAT TO RAH!!!
                              Stunning comeback.

                              "There is no way any EU or US leader would jeopardize this."

                              I would have agreed with this 2 years ago. Now I'm far from certain.
                              So you would cut off your nose to spite your face? One thing I've noticed about the EU that is troubling for its continued unity is the arrogance of both the French and Germans. Somehow you feel thay you alone ARE the EU and that anyone within the EU who disagrees can simply be dismissed as unimportant or simply wrong.

                              Face facts, the EU is not nearly united enough to flex any kind of military muscle. And why bother? A big military is a huge drain on your resources. The US is not going to invade Germany or France. In fact, our interests are best served by a strong European economy which lets you enjoy the large amount of freedom you have today.

                              Freedom is a commodity bought and paid for by the blood of soldiers. It is maintained by force. Not by laws, not by politicians, not by Hollywood actors.

                              Comment


                              • gunkulator:

                                "No, the problem is that they are divided. Would the EU risk war to save future members like, say, Turkey?"

                                That is another problem, but it would be overcome if it is clear there no longer is a NATO.

                                "The recent failures in Kosovo show the EU is completely paralyzed militarily."

                                That was a case of intervention, not self defense.

                                "Far easier to threaten to nuke a few cities and extort money and technology a la North Korea. Without a military that can project force, you are powerless to do anything about it."

                                And with its force-projecting military, the US still is powerless to do anything about it - even more so when US cities get into the reach of NK missiles. Don't see a solution apart from MAD. Some for other WOMD.

                                "Stunning comeback."

                                No comeback, a sidenote. Check rah's sig.

                                "So you would cut off your nose to spite your face?"

                                That fallout comes from the US side, not ours.

                                "One thing I've noticed about the EU that is troubling for its continued unity is the arrogance of both the French and Germans. Somehow you feel thay you alone ARE the EU"

                                Yes, they need to learn to accept the voting majorities - and they usually do, despite the rhetoric. I'm neither french nor german though.

                                "Freedom is a commodity bought and paid for by the blood of soldiers. It is maintained by force. Not by laws, not by politicians, not by Hollywood actors."

                                Force, laws and brains.
                                “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                                Comment

                                Working...