Most Americans would be happy to see the EU army formed..it means the excuses for why Europe can't spend money on their own armies would stop.
It would also mean that they will fail spectacularly and that Putin would laugh all the way to the bank.
- - - Updated - - -
They are not going to agree to build one carrier, because these two countries have different mission goals. The UK wants nothing to do with continental Europe other than NATO endeavors.
Nope. For a landlocked country, Germany seems to have a modest amount of main battle tanks compared to smaller countries like Israel, Greece, etc.The German army alone is stronger then Israel, and again, they wouldn't.
Germany pays the most to the EU because their economy is the biggest.
German citizens are up in arms over debt relief for Greece. Why would German citizens be okay with more of the burden for a EU army?I told you how it could be paid for.
They don't see it that way as long as Merkel is leading the clown circus. This is why the Polish government, Greek Government, etc do not trust the "Western leadership" of Europe.They used to - Now they see it as a drain of money and a security problem - The Era of asylum might come to an end.
Yeah I understand GDP. USA spends a tiny portion of its GDP on military but still is more than a hundreds of countries combined. A EU army can't compete in spending with USA, China, Russia.Do you understand GDP? - Depending on how you count, the Eurozone is the world's largest economy - 3% of a unimaginably large pie is more than 8% of a much smaller pie.
So, in summary we have people from Western European countries telling me that NATO isn't doing anything for them, while people from Eastern European countries are begging for NATO to stay and to do more in their respective countries.
If the US soldiers stationed in Germany were to unpack and leave the local economy in Germany would be devastated. But hey..at least the Yanks left lololol
Looks like we will see on Tuesday. Bye bye single market - Hello Visas for Europeans to enter the UK.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-bri...-idUKKCN11V0C7
Oh and btw ,we are still going to veto your EU Army
13/11/2022 Sir Keir Starmer. "Brexit is safe in my hands, Let me be really clear about Brexit. There is no case for going back into the EU and no case for going into the single market or customs union. Freedom of movement is over"
Dude two things:
a) If we need visa you will need visa to travel to Europe and
b) Your link is bad news for you. If you need customs to sell into EU means your products will be less competitive.
No you wont :
http://www.politico.eu/article/marti...sa-may-brexit/
Dribbles is the perfect interpretation of this whole Brexit thing. UK losing access to the EU market would send UK economy back decades.
He doesn't know. Yet he talks. Weekend politics at its best!
- - - Updated - - -
I'm pretty sure the finance sector on which you built your economic success will be glad to see this happening.
You do know he is the speaker of the EU parliament? - (he has a diplomatic passport...)
- - - Updated - - -
Excuse? - The EU does not want to pay for it, and the Americans don't want them to pay for it.
I'm not proposing they share the carriers, i'm suggesting they pick one model and build only that model - The UK and French carriers do not have some different mission profile, its Atlantic ocean and Mediterranean deployments for the both of them, maybe some Gulf deployments too, but that's for the both of them.They are not going to agree to build one carrier, because these two countries have different mission goals. The UK wants nothing to do with continental Europe other than NATO endeavors.
Germany is not landlocked.Nope. For a landlocked country, Germany seems to have a modest amount of main battle tanks compared to smaller countries like Israel, Greece, etc.
40 billion is more than 16 billion.World total 1,676.0 2.3
1 United States United States 597.0 3.3
2 China China[a] 215.0 1.9
3 Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia[b] 87.2 13.7
4 Russia Russia[a] 66.4 5.4
5 United Kingdom United Kingdom 55.5 2.0
6 India India 53.3 2.3
7 France France 50.9 2.1
8 Japan Japan 40.9 1.0
9 Germany Germany[a] 39.4 1.2
10 South Korea South Korea 36.4 2.6
11 Brazil Brazil 24.6 1.4
12 Italy Italy 23.8 1.3
13 Australia Australia 23.6 1.9
14 United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates[a] 22.8 5.7
15 Israel Israel 16.1 5.
Germany's problem is not picking up the tab, its what the tab is for.German citizens are up in arms over debt relief for Greece. Why would German citizens be okay with more of the burden for a EU army?
If Greece had suffered some sort of natural catastrophe the EU would have handed them the credit card no questions asked.
Oh, And again, Germany pays more because it has the biggest economy.
Yes, but Merkel is changing her mind.They don't see it that way as long as Merkel is leading the clown circus. This is why the Polish government, Greek Government, etc do not trust the "Western leadership" of Europe.
Our Swedish government has been trying to get a joint EU system for refugees, and now they dont like it because its likely to not be any sort of minimum rules system, but instead a one rule system - That wont be generous.
What? I mean the rest is stupid too but that is really fucking stupid, France, Germany, Italy, and the UK spend nearly three times as much money as Russia.Yeah I understand GDP. USA spends a tiny portion of its GDP on military but still is more than a hundreds of countries combined. A EU army can't compete in spending with USA, China, Russia.
Oh and the US spends 3.3% of its GDP So if the EU, (that is either the largest or the second largest depending on how you count) also spends 3% of its GDP We get what amount of money ? - A comparable amount?
Are you for real?If the US soldiers stationed in Germany were to unpack and leave the local economy in Germany would be devastated. But hey..at least the Yanks left lololol
- - - Updated - - -
Indeed, the better comparison is saying you want a divorce and then vetoing your spouse's future plans of remodeling the basement of what is soon to be his house.
[QUOTE=Ulmita;42482906]From my perspective an EU army is the way forward. Sure there will be issues at the start, sure we will need to work hard to make this happen but it is very possible to make one.
You see EU has experience from NATO and we can continue on the same line.
Agreed. If Trump did dissolve NATO (I don't think he will though), I think it'd be a good thing.
He may want some Baltic land, which would be an issue re NATO etc. The key issue though is that in terms of threat, you have to deal with capabilities, not intents etc. Russia can invade the EU, therefore a wise man plans for them to, all the while earnestly hoping they never do.
Certainly the USA. I think the UK too often gets dragged along by them when it's not necessarily in our interests.
= + =
David Davis has said it too actually. That's 2 of the top foreign policy / Brexit people saying as much, and they're in the Cabinet, so... it's likely I think.
= + =
Stating something doesn't make it true .
If by that you mean that all these countries have their own defence establishments & industries, then yes they have tons of redundancy.
My point is the actual money involved. Since WW2, most Western European countries have funnelled money into their welfare states instead of defence, and have relied on the US umbrella (with its comparatively small welfare state) to protect them. As Europe's populations age, the tax base will become ever more squeezed, even as the demand for more money going into welfare will increase. Many countries will want to preserve their own defence establishments (France and much of Central / Eastern Europe I suspect), so in this case the government will have to split the money between the EU Army and their own.
Few EU countries spend even 2% of GDP on defence... compare the USA's roughly $600bn budget with the EU nations' roughly $200bn (including the UK, which accounts for ~25% of this).
Can the EU equal/exceed US spending? Of course it can - and probably easily. Will it? Frankly I doubt it, due to political / economic considerations.
Yup. But as I said, are they strong and cohesive units? I can't recall off hand whether they've engaged in any serious fighting at all TBH.
Consider these scenarios (country names in 1-3 pulled out of a hat):
1. Poles or Frenchmen fighting under a German general. No history there, right :P ?
2. Language barriers.
3. Spanish troops being sent to defend Latvia from Russia when they can't give a toss - or their government has even sided with Russia.
4. German troops being ordered to attack anyone, because OMG REMEMBER THE WAR!!!!111!*
A single, unified country like the USA, or France, or whatever... generally doesn't have these issues. International coalitions are rather different however.
*Seriously, German governments (and the people? I don't know TBH) need to get over WW2 already...
Hence meaningful overtures of peace.
I'm not saying it would work, but the point is that the Eastern European countries can defend against Russia without needing to subordinate their defence establishments etc at the EU level. This gives Putin an opening he could exploit.
Le Pen wants Frexit though, and the National Front under her are doing well. Suppose she wins the next election (or the one after, w/e)... she could either claim that as a mandate to activate Article 50 and withdraw from the EU, or (and bearing in mind as the President of France she could throw the power of the state behind her, unlike in the Brexit referendum) have her own referendum if she thinks she could realistically win it.
No, it's an argument for the EU nations doing more to defend themselves. That does not automatically mean an EU Army is the optimal choice (though of course, it does not mean the converse - it merely means that something ought to be done).
I mean, WW2 didn't see the USA & British Empire subordinate their armies into a general United Nations army, did it? No - they worked as allies, appointed a supreme commander in Europe etc, but remained quite separate as institutions etc.
Davis davis also thinks the UK is going to join the WTO (which would require leaving the EU customs union, a new development).
So he either does not know what he is talking about, or he does not know what he is talking about.
How would you solve EU security problems then?Stating something doesn't make it true .
yes.If by that you mean that all these countries have their own defence establishments & industries, then yes they have tons of redundancy.
The EU army would save money is my point.Can the EU equal/exceed US spending? Of course it can - and probably easily. Will it? Frankly I doubt it, due to political / economic considerations.
Note sure those exist.Hence meaningful overtures of peace.
No they cant.I'm not saying it would work, but the point is that the Eastern European countries can defend against Russia without needing to subordinate their defence establishments etc at the EU level. This gives Putin an opening he could exploit.
A, i doubt she will win, B, only the UK have the paranoid insane delusions of grandeur required to have a brexit.Le Pen wants Frexit though, and the National Front under her are doing well. Suppose she wins the next election (or the one after, w/e)... she could either claim that as a mandate to activate Article 50 and withdraw from the EU, or (and bearing in mind as the President of France she could throw the power of the state behind her, unlike in the Brexit referendum) have her own referendum if she thinks she could realistically win it.
The only realistic way to do this is an EU army.
No, it's an argument for the EU nations doing more to defend themselves.
I think you want to put Teleros in that quote and not me