FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Does Europe need its own army?

Does Europe need its own army?

(5:04) On March 8, 2015, EU President Jean-Claude Juncker called for an EU army to persuade Russia that it is serious about defending EU values. Finland and Germany say they're on board, but France and the UK disagree. What do you think?

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: wolf78000 (917 days ago)

There can be no European army as long as ther is no political leadership. Currently we live under a bank dictatorship with a financial led european comission. A British soldier fights for his queen, a French soldier fights for his country a Gernman, for his culture. Only once there is a unified political democracy with a strong political leadership will you have a european army.

ReplyVote up (101)down (56)
Original comment

There can be no European army as long as ther is no political leadership. Currently we live under a bank dictatorship with a financial led european comission. A British soldier fights for his queen, a French soldier fights for his country a Gernman, for his culture. Only once there is a unified political democracy with a strong political leadership will you have a european army.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (916 days ago)

Why? NATO works without the need for a unified political democracy between NATO countries, whatever that even means. So do UN peace-keeping forces.

Original comment

Why? NATO works without the need for a unified political democracy between NATO countries, whatever that even means. So do UN peace-keeping forces.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Casey Casey (916 days ago)

Let's face it, NATO marches to orders from Washington, any other considerations are cosmetic., there's your "unified political democracy". For that reason alone, to rid Europe of Americas influence, I would be for an EU army but it ain't going to happen so it's just another political boondoggle to transfer money and power into the hands of a few politicians and aggravate tension in the area at the expense of the tax payer...inept politics as usual.

Original comment

Let's face it, NATO marches to orders from Washington, any other considerations are cosmetic., there's your "unified political democracy". For that reason alone, to rid Europe of Americas influence, I would be for an EU army but it ain't going to happen so it's just another political boondoggle to transfer money and power into the hands of a few politicians and aggravate tension in the area at the expense of the tax payer...inept politics as usual.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (917 days ago)

I support a European army, at least in principle. It would save money for every European state as well as create a credible deterrent. As with NATO, an attack on any EU country would be treated as attacking all EU countries.

If a nuclear deterrent is deemed necessary, then Britain's Trident system could act for Europe, and be paid for by Europe, saving us a ton of money. France could then mothball their nuclear weapons and save themselves a fortune while making the world a tiny bit safer.

Creating a European army to work effectively as a fighting force - that is more difficult. So we might as well start now, as there will be lots of lessons to be learnt.

Original comment

I support a European army, at least in principle. It would save money for every European state as well as create a credible deterrent. As with NATO, an attack on any EU country would be treated as attacking all EU countries.

If a nuclear deterrent is deemed necessary, then Britain's Trident system could act for Europe, and be paid for by Europe, saving us a ton of money. France could then mothball their nuclear weapons and save themselves a fortune while making the world a tiny bit safer.

Creating a European army to work effectively as a fighting force - that is more difficult. So we might as well start now, as there will be lots of lessons to be learnt.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: SAT. (917 days ago)

not that simple

ReplyVote up (101)down (56)
Original comment

not that simple

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (913 days ago)

Why not?

Original comment

Why not?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Casey Casey (914 days ago)

as usual Nigel Farage nails it!

LINK

Original comment

as usual Nigel Farage nails it!

LINK

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (914 days ago)

Your link doesn't work. Can you post it again? I'm curious how Nigel Farage nails anything.

ReplyVote up (101)down (55)
Original comment

Your link doesn't work. Can you post it again? I'm curious how Nigel Farage nails anything.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Casey Casey (914 days ago)

can't get it to work. Look up on youtube for "An EU army to face Russia? Who do you think you are kidding Mr. Junker?" You gotta love the play on words...😃

Original comment

can't get it to work. Look up on youtube for "An EU army to face Russia? Who do you think you are kidding Mr. Junker?" You gotta love the play on words...😃

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (913 days ago)

Not quite sure what you thought Nigel Farage nailed. He didn't say anything about why he thought a European Army was a bad idea. Why do you think a it's a bad idea?

Here's another go at the link. LINK

ReplyVote up (100)down (55)
Original comment

Not quite sure what you thought Nigel Farage nailed. He didn't say anything about why he thought a European Army was a bad idea. Why do you think a it's a bad idea?

Here's another go at the link. LINK

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Casey Casey (912 days ago)

For the very reason Farage states hat there is already a number of defense forces in the EU and also from about 4.40 he makes the case that intervention has consistently made a bigger mess of things than if otherwise left alone, siting Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc. A standing army is almost always seen eventually by politicians as something that should be used, either as means to a "Legacy" or just a power trip or to divert attention away from domestic issues caused by those very politicians. Yet another army is not going to make the world a safer place just as more bombs aren't. As I said, Farage nails it. So, where do you think Farage is wrong in his thinking..?

Original comment

For the very reason Farage states hat there is already a number of defense forces in the EU and also from about 4.40 he makes the case that intervention has consistently made a bigger mess of things than if otherwise left alone, siting Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc. A standing army is almost always seen eventually by politicians as something that should be used, either as means to a "Legacy" or just a power trip or to divert attention away from domestic issues caused by those very politicians. Yet another army is not going to make the world a safer place just as more bombs aren't. As I said, Farage nails it. So, where do you think Farage is wrong in his thinking..?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (912 days ago)

Farage just stated that we already have European defence forces, of which NATO is one. From Wikipedia: "The policy area of defence is principally the domain of nation states, and the main military alliance in Europe remains the intergovernmental North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), which includes 22 of the EU member states ...".

I didn't hear him argue we should reduce current EU defence cooperation.

And his point about intervening in foreign affairs - the results are not always a bigger mess. Consider the British intervention in Sierra Leone civil war (2000) and NATO in Serbia/Kosovo conflict (1999).

Also, a European Army is less likely to intervene in foreign affairs, because getting agreement at an EU level, is much more difficult than at a national level. Isn't that what happened with Iraq? The US and UK couldn't get agreement at the UN level (France used their veto to block war), so they went it alone.

Original comment

Farage just stated that we already have European defence forces, of which NATO is one. From Wikipedia: "The policy area of defence is principally the domain of nation states, and the main military alliance in Europe remains the intergovernmental North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), which includes 22 of the EU member states ...".

I didn't hear him argue we should reduce current EU defence cooperation.

And his point about intervening in foreign affairs - the results are not always a bigger mess. Consider the British intervention in Sierra Leone civil war (2000) and NATO in Serbia/Kosovo conflict (1999).

Also, a European Army is less likely to intervene in foreign affairs, because getting agreement at an EU level, is much more difficult than at a national level. Isn't that what happened with Iraq? The US and UK couldn't get agreement at the UN level (France used their veto to block war), so they went it alone.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Casey Casey (911 days ago)
Latest comment:

The British intervention in Sierra Leone was principally to project and protect British influence and assets. Not only was it done without parliamentary consultation but the public weren't informed of it until after the fact.it didn't hurt that SL has considerable natural resources, diamond mines among them. It amounted to basically taking sides with one warring faction over another, SL is still a mess with hardly any funding going into relieving poverty and most of it going to support the army and police of the ruling puppets. As for Kosovo there is heaps of evidence that NATO intervention made the situation MUCH worse. As for getting an agreement to go to war being more difficult for an EU army you may be right but it would be exactly because of people like Farage that that would happen.

Original comment
Latest comment:

The British intervention in Sierra Leone was principally to project and protect British influence and assets. Not only was it done without parliamentary consultation but the public weren't informed of it until after the fact.it didn't hurt that SL has considerable natural resources, diamond mines among them. It amounted to basically taking sides with one warring faction over another, SL is still a mess with hardly any funding going into relieving poverty and most of it going to support the army and police of the ruling puppets. As for Kosovo there is heaps of evidence that NATO intervention made the situation MUCH worse. As for getting an agreement to go to war being more difficult for an EU army you may be right but it would be exactly because of people like Farage that that would happen.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (918 days ago)

I don't understand the confilict between EU and Russia, both have a lot more interest in cooperation than in confilct.

Original comment

I don't understand the confilict between EU and Russia, both have a lot more interest in cooperation than in confilct.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: wolf78000 (917 days ago)

The USA doesn't want Europe and Russia to get too close as it would represent a major economical unbalance against them.

Original comment

The USA doesn't want Europe and Russia to get too close as it would represent a major economical unbalance against them.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Bacon arrives to boost moral
Bacon arrives to boost moral
Confusion Through Sand
Confusion Through Sand
NATO is not enough, EU needs an army
NATO is not enough, EU needs an army
Finnish field artillery bombardment
Finnish field artillery bombardment
Female soldier earns her badge
Female soldier earns her badge