European Army

Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
OMG the French, supported by Germany and Poland, are mooting the idea of setting up a European army. We cannot agree as member states of the E.U. or within NATO.

We have a country, France, who have never won a war in the history of the nation and Germany whose constitution only allows limited armed forces for defence.

Thankfully at the moment, although they can be bought, the government are reluctant and Ireland are against it because of their neutrality issues.
 
Dec 9, 2007
383
0
0
Visit site
It was only a matter of time,LB.

Can you imagine the cost.And,of course,no prizes for guessing who will be the largest contributer both in cash and manpower.

CRAZY !!!

Dave
 
G

Guest

Not quite true, the bit about the Germans. They do have troops in Afghanistan, but of course stay miles away from the action. Their sausages might get damaged.

The only positive thing one could say is that with those 2 clown nations involved we would never go to war, as they could never agree who was in front, or who carried the flag.
 
G

Guest

Mind you having seen the pictures of Parisiens enjoying themselves during the last War, one could be forgiven for wondering who was actually fighting who.
 
Mar 26, 2008
873
0
0
Visit site
Apart from the EU creating a lot more fat cat military jobs that we'll end up paying for I think an EU Army could be a good Idea.

Apart from about 1% of the French who could run resistance they are not fit for the job.

Scandinavian countries have proven to be on the backfoot when on UN duty, that's them counted out.

Even I know about Italian and their tanks being faster than a Ferrari in reverse so thats them out.

Spain, well they only fight each other. So the're ruled out.

Dutch and Belgiums let anyone walk over them. No job for them.

Germany, well they have no hope! They've lost two world wars and only ever beat those they could walk over, choose to fight in winter with little or no idea on the logistics and pick on people who gave them previous hidings.

So the job should only go to British forces as they have the best track record ;0)
 
G

Guest

So you are happy for UK squaddies to die while the rest of the lazy europhiles live it up? I think you did not mean that.

I think it would be far better if the UK was the only country NOT involved. Let the rest of them go eat the dirt for while.

As you have mentioned the only EU country that ever did have good armed forces was beaten in 1945 and not allowed to play anymore.
 
Dec 9, 2007
383
0
0
Visit site
As every army in history has marched 'under a banner'ie fought under a flag bearing their own representative emblem, I wonder what the mighty EU force will have as a flag/emblem/mascot.

Come on you lot - any ideas?????

Dave
 
Mar 26, 2008
873
0
0
Visit site
S'Lad. I'm sure that conscription/national service ended around 1957.

I'm at a loss as to why people bleat about those who volunteered to sign up and join the armed forces. Surely they realise that they can die and that politicians shed crocodile tears.

Wise words and choices made in Parliaments have always come before the people doing the fighting. Any UK man oe woman fighting for the EU will have made their choice.

My son is a fighter pilot, he made his choice and knows the risks. But I would not be seeking compo or an enquiry after a worse case scenario. Money would not bring him back and I doubt that the whole truth would ever come out.
 
G

Guest

I am sure if you studied the general status of the volunteers you wil discover that the majority come from areas where work is in short supply, so there is little alternative, unless you wish to be a drug dealer, or a Labour politician. The student at Cranwell, Sandhurst or Dartmouth for example usually does not have that kind of background.

Does that mean they have the right to esxpect to be shot for the stupidity of polticians. Defending the UK is one thing, fighting ridiculous and impossible wars for the tantrums of Tony, is quite another.

Funny there has been no outcry from the Austrians, Hungarians, Czechs, Romanians, Latvians, Lithuanians or the Italians et al for example to wish to join in.
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
This is from Oct. 2007 regarding NATO.

The United States was rebuffed yesterday after urging Nato countries with a minimal troop presence in Afghanistan to send more soldiers to ensure the success of the campaign.

The appeal, delivered at a meeting of Nato defence ministers at Noordwijk, in the Netherlands, was rejected by Germany, and other nations were reluctant to boost their numbers, alliance sources said.

Franz Josef Jung, the German Defence Minister, said that the call for more troops was misguided. "We need security and reconstruction and development, that is the wider concept, that's why I think these calls simply for more and more military involvement are misguided," he said.

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Nato Secretary-General, suggested moving national forces around the country on rotation to alleviate the burden on those nations that have had to fight the Taleban. The British troops in Helmand province, the Americans in the eastern region and other Nato countries, including the Netherlands and Canada, have borne the brunt of the battles with the resurgent Taleban forces.

Holland and Canada have threatened to pull out if Germany doesn't do it's share of combat in the south.

Mr Jung said Germany's troops would continue to observe their parliamentary mandate. This imposes a limit of 3,500 troops, restricts the force to the safer areas of northern Afghanistan, other than in exceptional circumstances, and makes its primary role reconstruction and development not combat.

At present there are only 4 countries in combat in Afghanistan, Holland, USA, Canada and the UK.

Somehow it doesn't instil confidence in me hearing that Germany are calling for a European Army.
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,967
808
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
The suggestion of a European Army is probably a sneaky way of German supporters of the idea to get round Germany's constitutional obstruction against the deployment of armed forces for anything but defensive and humanitarian purposes.
 
Sep 10, 2007
157
0
0
Visit site
I'm sure that a european army flag would just be the german flag - Britain for one wouldn't say anything in case it was taken as racist or might offend someone.
 
Sep 10, 2007
157
0
0
Visit site
Is Germany not still an occupied country?

Germany should never be let to have an army or any say over military power. They can't be trusted!
They weren't allowed an air force after WW1 but managed to form and build the luftwaffe without detection - us Brits just probably sat there and did nothing in case we upset somebody - we were probably too busy whinging about the cost of petrol without doing anything about it.

I've forgotten what I started talking about
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,967
808
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
No, Germany is not an occupied country. And why should Germany not be trusted? Everybody should have known that Germany's constitution does not allow their armed forces to engage in active combat other than for defensive purposes. They knew that before Germany sent troops to Afghanistan so I don't understand what all the hoo-ha is about Germany's refusal to send troops to the south of the country.
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,967
808
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
And what, may I ask, has that anything to do with not trusting a country? Asking someone for help, knowing that they cannot offer the support that you want, is a bit pointless, don't you think?
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
I've no problem with Germans or Germany (except they don't laugh much, way too serious). What happened is in the past and is over and done with. Todays Germans cannot be held responsible for the past of their country and their forefathers actions. I believe that today Germany is still on a guilt trip and is beating itself up inside over it's past.

Sadie does have a point though. If the Germans don't trust themselves in having a full military compliment why should others trust them?
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,967
808
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
I still don't understand what you are trying to get at. The German constitution is quite clear as to the obligations and commitments of their armed forces and it was, after all, the British and American who drafted the German constitution after the War while the country was still occupied.
 
May 25, 2008
771
1
0
Visit site
IF and it is a big IF the politico are correct and due to Climate Change, Food and Fuel prices/shortages we will need a European Army to defend the continent.

It looks like we may get our rewards for living in a cooler climate (than say N Africa, Southern Spain ) We have both Water and Food and the ability to grow/stockpile more.

When the hords start to come because they want a share of the dwindling resources, that's when we will need a United European Army. We ( British ) couldn't defend ourselves now, never mind in the future. We can't defeat the Taliban even today. Our forces are stretched to the limit in both Men & Materials Having two Royal Marines in the family I do care about what goes on.

If it takes Germany, France or Italy to provide Top Notch Resources and we provide the Fighting Men so what, we are all being defended.

Think about it Before you start on the path of Rule Britania.

I would like to hear the alternative to a European Army Don't Forget Boys we are bust.We Have NO Helicopters available for Afghanistan, No Body Armour for Iraq, No Swimming Pool for our Injured Troops, Limited Compensation for the Injured Soldiers

I could go on but you must see the picture.
 
Mar 26, 2008
873
0
0
Visit site
I came home last week Frank, I dropped hubby at Nice airport on Tuesday as he had to go to Canada for the race.

Back in the office for a few weeks before next trip with sister and her girls for the summer school hols with the office on the road whilst avoiding Germans hogging all the sun beds on continental sites ;-)
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts