patrick.net

Hungary first. For the good of all Europe those uppity Christian Hungarians must be crushed.

Nick Clegg of the Pro-EU Liberal Democrats Blasts Farage: Fantasy Fear of EU Army
www.youtube.com/embed/aFa3cR0znjM

The EU army sounds like the French, supporting the Americans in the Argonne Forest during WWI.

In other words, they didn't. The French got credit for capturing the rail hub at Sedan but that'll because of thousands of American causalities, who'd spent much of the autumn of '18, clearing the forest in full force.

Merkel booed as she calls for EU Army pic.twitter.com/dkextgTSnq

— Jack Posobiec ?? (@JackPosobiec) November 13, 2018

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Why an EU Army when there's NATO?

Because the whole point is to not depend on the US.
Republicans wanted Europe to pay, and they will have their wish fulfilled.

If Trump was working for the Russians and wanted to break NATO into pieces, I'd say he's a genius in the way he's doing it.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Why an EU Army when there's NATO?

Why not? Nobody's asking "why German
army when there's NATO". Same shit here.

Heraclitusstudent says

Because the whole point is to not depend on the US.
Republicans wanted Europe to pay, and they will have their wish fulfilled.

This was first floated long before Trump came down the Escalator.

.DASKAA says

Why not? Nobody's asking "why German
army when there's NATO". Same shit here.

If they have $$$ to kick off an EU Army, they can contribute the NATO minimum of 2% of GDP.


I'm all in favor, by the way. Huge Savings.

The point is that the EU Superstate is the endgoal, and claims to the contrary is gaslighting. The best thing about Brexit is the superstate by stealth project is now out in the open.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

If they have $$$ to kick off an EU Army, they can contribute the NATO minimum of 2% of GDP.

You do realize that "contributing to NATO" means contributing to national armies, right? If Germany buys a new tank for the Bundeswehr it is counted as contribution to NATO. That's it.

If they buy that new tank and call it "contributing to the EU Army" it still be a contribution to NATO.

I hope the Euro Army consists of topless female contortionists.

Neoliberals, quoting Mandela while planning an Army that is certainly for "disciplining" populism that gets in the way of "Guided Democracy". The only question is who is first: Catalonia or Poland?

So you are seeing the EU Army as more Soviet Interior Ministry than external defense? Like the Warsaw Pact, ostensibly to repel NATO, but only used militarily to suppress Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

Good. Pay for their own defense. Hopefully they don’t become usurpatious. No pesky 2nd amendment to help EU sheep out.

It's a face-saving measure, nothing more. "We don't spend more money on our armed forces because Americans told us to do it, but because we're building a new EU Army".

Good. Let them build it and learn all the lessons the hard way. They think it'll save them money, time to learn to do it on their own.

They should sooner or later realize that having an army costs a shit ton of money. And maybe in 20 years they'll finally have something that resembles an army.

What's the point of an army that will be so weak that it'll get decimated by just about any other army that's been around for generations like all major powers?

DASKAA says

You do realize that "contributing to NATO" means contributing to national armies, right? If Germany buys a new tank for the Bundeswehr it is counted as contribution to NATO. That's it.

If they buy that new tank and call it "contributing to the EU Army" it still be a contribution to NATO.

Good point, it's part of military GDP spending.

I'm pretty sure the French want German money to pay to patrol the Francophonie, so much of it will be spent on light infantry on patrol mines in Africa, rather than on Armor to guard the Polish Plain.

DASKAA says

It's a face-saving measure, nothing more. "We don't spend more money on our armed forces because Americans told us to do it, but because we're building a new EU Army".

Okay, that's a good observation; however I believe Macron also mentioned the EU Army would be there to defend against the US, which puts it at odds with NATO.

www.youtube.com/embed/O39mivdYGAk

Independent is also reporting Macron's remarks that included Russia, China, AND the USA as potential military adversaries.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/eu-army-trump-macron-france-europe-military-us-russia-china-defence-a8627176.html

Europe is failing

logistics, training, equipment, personnel, r&d, military branches...and getting bunch of different countries with different cultures to agree... good luck with that one Europe.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Okay, that's a good observation; however I believe Macron also mentioned the EU Army would be there to defend against the US, which puts it at odds with NATO.

That's what Trump understood and tweeted about.
Macron didn't say that.
He made a separate remark about the Internet and being on the defense against foreign influences from China, Russia and even the US.

Not much more dangerous to peace than a standing army. Sooner or later it’s gonna get used.

What would a European Army look like? Basically national armies with a central control, and that will be NATO.
So we are talking of a thin layer added within NATO.
The goal is to short cut the authority of each nation on how the army is used. The fractious nature of Europe means that as it stands it would be very hard to control NATO operations outside very well defined contexts.

The power-that-be are trying hard to drag this super state upon reluctant populations.

Heraclitusstudent says

Macron didn't say that.

He did. Both AFP and the Independent both translated the remark similarly.

LOL, an EU army is something hilarious.

I live now in the EU and I can say that Europe is interested to develop new technologies, make business and go forward without any interest to fight or attack others.
Let's say that they are afraid of Russia, but they are making business with them (natural gas is a great resource for Europe and is sent from Russia), so both the EU and Russia have no interested in fighting each other, they only want to make business together.

And of course, there is NATO, so the EU already has an army represented by the European army of NATO.

Well good-how many billions do we save?

Dannyman says

And of course, there is NATO, so the EU already has an army represented by the European army of NATO.

You mean the American Army of NATO. Rich, wealthy Europe underfunds it, then uses the difference to finance Trade Deficits with the USA. They know in the end the US will still pay for everything and honor all commitments, while they underfund NATO and criticize the USA.

I am very pleased that both #Merkel and Macron are now fully behind a European army. We fought for this for many years. In the world of tomorrow, we have to take our destiny into our own hands! ?? Watch my #EPlenary speech here: https://t.co/k8rvCqSUQi— Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) November 13, 2018

Sure sounds to me like the EU wants a replacement to NATO. Suddenly, they'll find money. Magic!

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

You mean the American Army of NATO

Exactly. Calling NATO an "EU Army" is a huge stretch. Germany hasn't met its payment obligations fully in over a decade (yes they partially fund). The other "NATO" allies can barely put modern jets into the air.

I can't wait to see these bankrupt EU nations attempt to put an army together. It's going to be such a huge economic disaster for them, they might end up sending refugees the other way across the Mediterranean.

Goran_K says

Exactly. Calling NATO an "EU Army" is a huge stretch. Germany hasn't met its payment obligations fully in over a decade (yes they partially fund). The other "NATO" allies can barely put modern jets into the air.

I can't wait to see these bankrupt EU nations attempt to put an army together. It's going to be such a huge economic disaster for them, they might end up sending refugees the other way across the Mediterranean.

a couple hundred thousand broom handles and black paint can't cost that much.

MegaForce says

Catalonia or Poland?

Neither. It will be Italy they hit first.

Another reason for not attacking Poland is that Polish army might defeat the United Euroarmy...

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

He did. Both AFP and the Independent both translated the remark similarly.

No. These are Macron's statements:
- ""Ce qu'il faut pour l'Europe c'est un projet", lance Emmanuel Macron. "On ne protégera pas les Européens si on ne décide pas d'avoir une vraie armée européenne. Face à la Russie qui est à nos frontières et a montré qu'elle pouvait être menaçante, on doit avoir une Europe qui se défende davantage seule, et sans dépendre seulement des Etats-Unis, et de manière plus souveraine"

... meaning a military defense that doesn't DEPEND ON the US.

- Six minutes before: "six minutes plus tôt, Emmanuel Macron évoquait des menaces, non pas militaires, mais sur internet. "Nous sommes bousculés par les tentatives d'intrusion dans le cyberespace et l'intervention dans notre vie démocratique de plusieurs [...]", explique le chef de l'État sans terminer sa phrase. Et d'embrayer : "Nous devons nous protéger à l'égard de la Chine, de la Russie et même des Etats-Unis d'Amérique."

... i.e. "we must protect ourselves from intrusion in cyberspace from China, Russia, and even the USA."

I don't know who mixed the 2 sentences.

Heraclitusstudent, everybody is reporting Macron's remarks the same way:

French President Emmanuel Macron Calls for a 'European Army' to Defend Against China, Russia and the U.S.
Time: http://time.com/5446975/emmanuel-macron-european-army-russia-us/

Macron wants 'Euro army' to combat China, Russia and US
Sydney Morning Herald: https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/macron-wants-euro-army-to-combat-china-russia-and-us-20181107-p50ef7.html

EMMANUEL MACRON CALLS FOR ‘TRUE, EUROPEAN ARMY’ TO PROTECT AGAINST U.S., CHINA AND RUSSIA
Newsweek: https://www.newsweek.com/macron-wants-european-army-protect-against-us-1203115

Discussing the threat from cyber-hacking and outside meddling in the electoral process, Mr Macron said Europe needed to protect itself against China, Russia “and even the United States”.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/trump-and-macron-smooth-row-over-insulting-defence-proposal-1.3693612

Now many are taking from AFP, but I'm sure AFP knows how to translate from French to English, including shades that may not be apparent to a non-native or very fluent speaker.

For example, a German might say "Unmoglich" which translates as impossible in English, but "really" only Very Difficult, Impractical, and Time-Consuming in German. It only really means "impossible" when used in the context of science and technology. If a bureaucrat says it, they are telling you it's going to be a hassle with 10 different agencies to get Redtapen Formen 154 "Verboten aus Sneezen Exceptung en Dag" filled out.

Also, "Dr." Merkel made it clear it would be for European purposes without the USA.
https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/trump-mocks-macron-as-europe-moves-on-defence-without-us

Guy von Hofstadt on Twitter made a similar remark.

Any European army will be 1/4 Muslim anyway. Not much different than what we’re used to fighting already.

Is more Meme Magic at work?

If their army is led by women, they will quickly descend into civil war.

Just a guess, but EU Defence would be a mash up of current national militaries. Language could be a problem. There could be some economies of scale, or losses due to complexity.

Macron's concern about US cyber activities have precedent. But hey, it was under Obama's administration, so good news for the Trump supporters.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-german-chancellery-decades-wikileaks-claims-merkel

I'm kinda surprised by how many people in this thread sound like they think an EU army would be good for us because we save some money.

Not that saving money is bad...but I think there's enormous benefits to being the country that they depend on militarily. When they need us for defense, they will treat us better than they otherwise would in all sorts of things. Plus, they would become a quickly increasing competitor to our military products and services, which means less money flowing through our systems, which means our R&D slows, and our advantage weakened. Especially Germany - they've proven their engineering and manufacturing abilities time and time again and would likely build stuff that rivals some of ours in short time.

Telling them to GTFO may feel good out of spite, as we feel unappreciated and ripped off by their commitment shortfalls, but I think we need strong allies now more than we have in a long time. Both Russia and China are getting pretty cocky towards us lately, and will be gaining immense strength over the next couple decades. Humanity is still just a bunch of angry violent monkeys who don't hesitate to steal and kill. We need help.

Hircus says

When they need us for defense, they will treat us better than they otherwise would in all sorts of things.

They don't. They run huge trade deficits with us, target our companies for extra regulation, and use the savings on Research and Public Infrastructure to be more efficient than us.

They also criticize us constantly and actually hamper our efforts.

France and Germany love selling dual use equipment to rogue states like Iran. Why? Guess who will take care of it if it becomes a problem later.

Literally - and pun intended - they know it will be the USA that cleans up the fallout.

Massive Moral Hazard.

Europeans also make their own larger weapons platforms, most use the Eurofighter Typhoon rather than the F-35, they use the LeClerc or Leopard rather than the Abrams, and also their own H&Ks rather than M-16s. Also build their own frigates and destroyers. And then they compete with OUR arms manufacturers for sales.

If they're not going to pay, then at least let us make some of it back by making us your own supplier and surrending your share of the world arms market.


Hircus says

Telling them to GTFO may feel good out of spite, as we feel unappreciated and ripped off by their commitment shortfalls, but I think we need strong allies now more than we have in a long time. Both Russia and China are getting pretty cocky towards us lately, and will be gaining immense strength over the next couple decades.

Macron and Merkel are talking like this because they are unpopular and tanking in polls. Europeans like to hear how morally superior they are to us, how more realistic they are than us, and do it with that world weary wise old far attitude of theirs. This goes back past WW2 to WW1, when Britain and France were facing million man mutinies for the first time and only a million fresh US Troops were able to blunt the large German Offensives at the end of the war. Today the French insist we had nothing to do with ending the war, when all sides were at the end of their manpower, industrial, and even political ropes, we came in fresh and strong.

Having Europe underspend on Defense, and make us provide 90% of the effort and money even in areas like Syria and Libya which are relatively easy to intervene for Europeans, is left to us. They also can underspend on their Navy, knowing it's the USA that will keep the Straits of Hormuz open for business and free of Iranian mines or fast attack craft.

If the Europeans spent more, Russia and China would actually be less of a threat. If France and Germany spent it's NATO 2% of GDP on Defense, Russia would be on their best behavior.

The Cold War is over, the Europeans face greatly reduced existential threats, so they leave us to do the heavy lifting and instead take in millions of Middle Easterners.

If that continues, we won't have any more strong allies either in 40-50 years.

Getting Europe to spend more money and do more is good for us. Not only with they have more capacity, their worldview will shift.

We should hang back and be the arsenal of Democracy, rather than the First Responder. Get to a war late, that way your equipment peaks at the end of the War rather than at the beginning.

Or to put it in redpill terms, A feminized Europe is actually playing a shit testing game with us. To see how much we will bend over backwards for them.