European Union: Discussion Thread

Hahaha... I get the impression that if Putin offered his services to sort out governments and get them working properly again he would work till the day he died and be seriously mourned when he died by the people who got the chance to take advantage of his services and even more so by those that didn't get time with him helping them.

But the idiots in power that could most use his help have demonised him to the point where it would not be possible or practical...

Don't take the attitude of this french Librarian as standard, there are other French members here who do France and the EU credit...

What Europe really needs to do and sit down and talk to each other and find all the things they can agree upon that makes them similar... not just the governments in power at the moment but all the major parties in each country to talk about where they see the EU going... the main problem I see is a small few making decisions for everyone without consultations and without referendums to see what the actual people want...

But why would a group in Brussels appointed by who knows, care about what the people of Europe want... they care about being PC and doing as Washington demands.

I see the German politician tell the Americans if they pull out of the INF treaty they can't put missiles in Germany... would have been a bit more impressive if he had voted for the Russian bill at the UN to discuss the INF treaty and what needs to change to keep everyone happy... I believe Germany Abstained from that one... really making a stand there buddy....

Aristide wrote:I would have him kicked out of the wheelchair.

..and this is why no-one here has any respect for you. off Russophobe troll.

Aristide wrote:The British actually lost both World Wars. And thats their problem.

Isn't that fucking hilarious???

Some French peon talking trash about Britains WW1/2 performances?

For Sale: French Army Rifle. EC. Never fired but dropped once.

Isos wrote:
French then got a seat ata the UN top 5 and their own nuks. UK is since then the 51st US state and has no nuks of its own. They are controled by USA.

This is actually true. They spend a lot of money maintaining nuclear ballistic submarines, but the actual ballistic missiles (and their warheads) are from US and need US approval to be used.

It is true that UK may benefit from having nuclear subs in their fleet, but they just need SSN (nuclear powered attack submarines), like their astute class.

It does not make any sense, like their decision to waste so much money in 2 very large carriers only capable of carrying VTOL aircrafts (and helicopters) and retiring early a capable amphibious assault ship, while they do not have enough frigates and destroyers...

Yeah, but France is only a couple of steps behind them in the irrelevance scale of things... France has no reason to remember WWI or WWII both were enormous wastes of men and material.

Would be careful calling the UK a US whore as the same description could be used to describe any european nation France and Germany included.

Someone in politics murmurs something about Putin being responsible for cancer and the EU and US will immediately support their position because it is highly likely even without anything like evidence.

Right now France is trying not to demonise Russia too much because they can see the decline of the US politically, and economically, and their military, while impressive on paper has always been rather flawed.

Soon the UK will take a similar stance, but Russophobia is strong in the UK, so I suspect their softening is going to have to be towards China... but that will upset India of course... for them... ideally they would be better softening their hard line stance against Russia and therefore gain extra bonus points against India and against the real economic threat of China... but neither China nor Russia are actual threats except threats to the western monopoly and ability to pick and choose international law and the brute squad that determines which crimes deserve punishments like anything Russia or China or Assad does, while turning a blind eye to the crimes of their lackeys like Saudi Arabia in Yemen and Syria and Libya and most other places or the Ukrainians bombing and shelling their own people for not wanting to give up the Russian language...

In WW2 french did better than UK. They surrendered but at least the country was clean.

At what cost? I can certainly understand a country surrendering, but don't try to pretend there is any pride there...

They are a random country trying to be the big guy by supporting any US move. The only thing they can do actually is be the US whore and exist through US.

You could say that about any NATO country couldn't you? France occasionally goes off script, but most of the time reads from the scripts written in Washington as passed on to Brussels.

The only reason Micron is acting tough and pretending to be independent is the same as the Canadian PM... and it can all be seen back to election time in 2016 when all of the EU and NATO and Canadian and other western leaders and politicians and media endorsed Hilary and scoffed at the very idea of Trump getting in to power... how could that orange idiot be president... well I suspect a few different things came together... many of his campaign promises sounded sensible... bring the troops home and focus on problems in American... bring jobs home for American people, and better relations with the one country that can end everything for America at the touch of a button... still only one country as long as you don't count Israel.

But of course he has turned out the same as Obama.... Trump is nothing new... he is just open and honest when he bullies countries and tries to steal their resources for the few people in the US who already have enough money... the 1%.

And with this election the person most likely to face him is a member of that 1%... creepy joe biden... I suspect Sanders supporters will jump ship because they will hate biden and his supporters and their tricks to get in to power more than they hate trump and vote him in again like they did last time.

2016 is when trump could have been defeated and the chance was missed... but ironically the only one that could have beaten him is Sanders and even if he won the US system is designed to turn him against Russia and to start more wars and increase the military budget.... and of course tax cuts for the rich...

The British actually lost both World Wars. And thats their problem.

Funny... you ask a British person about WWII and you would think they won it themselves... there is pride there... if you ask a French person.... well.... why would you...

Sadly the Italians get a bit of stick for changing sides, and so did the French when they were not in a position to do much more than they did... but the Italians don't often claim to have done better than other countries... maybe it is a pride thing for the French...

What did you do during the war?

Hid in a cupboard... or fought on the eastern front for the nazis...

Lying to yourself is something weak peopple do. French lost the war and don't hide that fact. UK won nothing, it was the US who won in the west against germans.

But is that the honest truth?

France had little choice but to surrender... they were never going to defeat the German forces that had just overrun western europe in a couple of weeks... their individual equipment wasn't amazing, but it was the way they coordinated it and used it effectively that made them unstoppable... both the British and the French forces rolled back when faced with that onslaught... those who stood and fought got surrounded and disarmed and sent to captivity... the rest ran away... sorry... tactically withdrew...

The British had somewhere to withdraw to, France did not.

The British could have surrendered, they chose not to... and the horrendous suffering they endured resulted in losses far less than most battles on the eastern front... the British effectively lost three quarters of a million people and the Americans lost a quarter of a million... so a total effectively of one million lost over the entire war.

The British could have reduced that with a surrender, and if everyone surrendered the losses of the war would have been much lower... likely over time not lower for the Soviets because it was a war of extermination so they were always going to lose large numbers of people... Germany wanted the land but not the people living on it. Of course the British and the French could have multiplied their losses 10 fold and moved D Day to 1942 when it really would have made a difference for the Soviets who were really not given the opportunity to surrender at all. Had they chosen to do that then it is rather likely there would have been a lot more land fighting in Western Europe and more of the German forces would have been kept in the west, so Soviet losses would have been dramatically reduced but it is also likely that the western allies would have done much more of the heavy lifting and probably most of eastern europe would have been "liberated" by the British commonwealth and US forces instead of Soviet forces.

By delaying D Day to 1944 the west essentially handed eastern europe to Stalin, but the amusing thing is that the soviets get the blame for that and not the British and American and French allies that agreed to who got what at Yalta...

The Germans and British probably would have gotten on rather well... many of the things the British and the French and other european colonial powers did many worse things to the damn natives in their time... exterminating some Bolsheviks probably would have been rather popular in some quarters of Europe and the US...

But the Brits are stubborn... they wanted to be in charge.... not those damn Hun...

UK alone was a testing ground for german V1.

Germany needed resources so it had to go east... just like Japan initially needed resources so it headed west into Mongolia but got stopped by the Soviets and redirected south and east to asia and the pacific. The germans eventually went south to africa with an interest to going east to the middle east also for resources...

French lost and surrender. Then germany occupied the country. Did they destroy the country ? No. Did they kill people ? Some jews. Did they destroy the economy ? No. French paid a lot during those few years but immediatly after the war France became a power again.

I appreciate they had nowhere to run to... the Soviets had vast areas of their own country to retreat through... but they could have just surrendered too, but they did not.

UK without US becomes a shithole like african states.

Well there are many places in the US where infrastructure is run down and the people are poor, but African countries are another level below in theory.... in actual fact there are some places in Africa that might surprise you... there is a huge gap between a first or second world country down on its luck, and a third world country... that is why people from Africa want to go to Europe and the US.

The UK will most likely find a niche, but very difficult times are ahead and it is going to have to be very good at juggling and it might need to swallow a lot of pride and trade with a lot of countries it has in the past treated like shit. A bit of Crow needs to be eaten and they can probably get by OK.

It has no military power, depend on US totally.

Yeah, the last 30 odd years western military power has been misused and abused to increase the wealth of the 1%... the UK can honestly do without that and focus on what it really needs instead.... a bit like Russia... a tiny conventional force and some nukes... I suspect some long range cruise missiles would be much cheaper than tridents to be honest... they will work that out eventually I suspect.

No ecomical power, depend on US totally and everything they make can be found elsewhere contrary to French and Geran stuff. Their City is attractive because it is some sort of hidden space but can be replaced too.

I suspect the first cost of leaving the EU will be the shifting of London as an economic hub to somewhere else, but then how healthy is it to be a financial centre that does not make anything...

Diplomatically they are US bitches, there is no other word to describe that. They try to invent some stupid stories about poisoning to confront the first diplomatic power that is Russa annd play the big guy but that is every time rather pathetic because no one support them other than in words because NATO/US told them so.

I seem to remember all of HATO backing them up on that and expelling diplomats in line with US and UK policy...

France and Germany are two level up. The US influence is still great but they are making it smaller and smaller everyday and Trump helps a lot.

Yeah, you are not addicts and you can give up any time you want... denial...

France/Germany >>>>>>> Spain/Italy >>>UK

And if US let them down:

France/Germany >>>>>>> Spain/Italy >>>Poland >>>>> UK

To be really clear... multiple stops of the circle jerk express right with Washington writing the script...

If the EU is lucky it might become a pole in the new multipolar environment, but odds are it will remain subservient to the US so it will be a pole... it will just be a junior pole that answers to the US... I mean you couldn't even stand up to the US over the INF treaty and prevent long range ballistic and cruise missiles from being deployed to Europe... you didn't even attend the event the Russians put on to show you the missile you claimed violated the treaty... so now the Russians will be free to put as many intermediate range weapons in Europe as they want... feel better? Feel strong and independent? Or do I have to ask an American to find out your position?