Ideas of United European Army

Of course NATO can't stand for an EU army... if there was an EU army WTF would they need a NATO army for?

NATO is an EU army controlled and led by the US...

GarryB wrote:Of course NATO can't stand for an EU army... if there was an EU army WTF would they need a NATO army for?

NATO is an EU army controlled and led by the US...

NATO is 80% US. EU army would be 20% as powerfull as NATO. All the countries in europe would want NATO to protect them insted of EU army.

Macron thinks he will be te suprem commander because the EU nuks would be french ones and he can rule europe this way. Never gonna happen.

The irony is that the US pays for NATO because it controls NATO and by that they also control Europe.

Times are a changing and the US will no longer be the only boss, so the EU needs to decide if it wants to keep being Americas bitch, or if it wants a seat at the table of its own.

If the world is a wedding then currently Russia and China and India are sitting at the kids table, but at the main table there is only the US with crawlers on the floor scrambling for scraps.

America has lousy table manners and most of the food ends up on the floor so countries like the UK and EU countries actually are rather well fed by the arrangement as long as they can cope with being on their knees all the time.

The problem is that the kids are growing up and they don't want on the floor... they want a proper seat... even if they have to leave and create their own wedding...

The biggest obstacle to a european army was the UK, but they are now leaving the eu so their opinion no longer matters.

Having a separate eu force means more independence and freedom of operation for the force that can be used for european interests... a bit like the US uses NATO at the moment, but with eu interests in mind rather than american so rather better for the eu.

It probably wont be cheaper and without US toys it wont be more effective than NATO but it will raise the question of why they need NATO as well as a eu force.

NATO drags them in to all sorts of conflicts that are really not in europes interests... like the conflict with Russia... and especially the conflict with China.

China has been working on building multiple trade routes from China to Europe... if the enemy was Russia and China then why are they working together to build all sorts of trade routes from Asia to Europe?

Why are they spending money on icebreakers to clear a passage via the arctic ocean to transfer goods from China to Europe and back through Russian waters and ports and rail links?

I can see the US being afraid of China and Russia because cheaper trade between Russia and China and Asia (including Japan and Korea and other Asian nations) and Europe kinda makes the US less competitive, so of course they will depict the Chinese and Russians as the bad guys, but for Micron to claim the enemy is Russia and China.... well why would Russia build those network links all the way to the EU... why not just have them stop at Moscow and St Petersburg... and put enormous tariffs on anything that needs to go to the EU?

The question comes down to independence... does europe want to continue trading primarily with the US where the US calls all the shots and controls the mechanisms by which world trade run, or does it want to increase trade with Asia and become an economic and political and military centre of its own that can make its own rules, and act on its own interests.

Within NATO it needs americas permission of course for everything...

Each country of europe has their own military force but individually they are pretty weak and ineffectual... together they become a force that cannot be ignored... even if they have to keep a better eye out for cargo ships in the dark...

The point is that if it wants to say with america it needs to separate itself from Russia and China.... but Russia and China are making plans to create lots of alternative trade routes from europe to asia... they are anticipating a lot of trade between europe and asia and they are building the infrastructure to support that trade... is europe going to say... thanks but no thanks we will continue to trade with the US instead.

I am sure Russia wont care... the trade routes they are creating go through Russia from Asia, but as far as they are concerned they can block the routes into europe from their territory and use the easy access to asian economies for themselves and their own products...

China will be likely a little miffed because the Russians likely wont buy as many chinese products as all of europe would, but if europe wont accept links with Russia it is hardly russias fault...

I am sure the US will trade with asia... there is money to be made of course... europes loss.

There is almost zero chance of an EU force... except within the Battlefield 2 game...

What sort of command structure would it have?

How would a country like France have French forces for domestic purposes, NATO forces for combined NATO operations and EU forces for unified EU roles... it would be a total mess... who gets the best equipment?

Having to pay for what would basically be three different military forces would be confusing and wasteful.

I rather suspect it is more likely to lead to the US pulling out of NATO and NATO collapsing into an EU force and a US/Canada force.

The cost of the loss of NATO to Europe would be a significant drop in military power, but also much more control, and the freedom to trade with Russia and China and Asia through Russia and the various trade links being set up by China and Russia.

The cost of continuing to trade with the US will be that they will not be able to use trade links set up and managed by Russia and China so trade with Asia will be more expensive for them... this will give the US competitive advantages with trade to Asia vs the EU...

Clearly they think there is money to be made in Iran... whether they also think there is money to be made in Venezuela is another question... the EU seemed happy to follow Trumps lead and declare Guano leader of Venezuela... despite never receiving a single vote from anyone.

Did you write that?