European Army

[weejock]

The points that Colin and Lord B make are both correct. I however think that the issue comes down to personal predjuices and if these cannot be overcome then you will never have a succsesful European army.

Anyway look to the future 8 years of Tory goverment so there will be no change then once Milliband is Prime Minister he will give away the country anyway.

 

[Lutz]

OK, so the French exported 2690 million dollars worth of arms in 2007 compared to the UK's 1151 million dollars, but don't let anyone make me believe that this was because the UK arms industry has higher morals regarding who they do business with. Business is business and jobs are jobs so the industry won't voluntarily turn down a contract unless there is government intervention. How much did the UK export to Argentina before the Falklands conflict or to Iraq before the war?

 

[colin(bridgend)]

We buy Argentinian corned beef and I like it.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Again you are missing the point Lutz. I care not who they sell them to, simply because I couldn't do anything about it. Again I care not how much money/profit they are making.

What I do care about and would expect, is a so-called ally to stop arming the enemy of their ally.

This is where morality comes in even if they (the Frogs) care not a jot about the friendship.

Using Franks scenario of a European army where the Brits do the fighting armed by the French and Germans do you think the Germans or French would stop selling arms to the aggressors or carry on saying sorry, we have to because we are under contract.

Don't forget, the Falklands was in 82 and we have been members of the E.U. since 73. They were even members of NATO until 66 when they got in a strop over too many American officers so left the organisation.

I think "trust" was mentioned in a post above and regarding the French why should we "trust" them now?

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Colyn, the U.K. was Argentinas biggest trading partner until the Falklands war. The war happened to divert attention from the military junta and it's human rights abuses.

Funny how military dictatorships never work, even right up until todays dictatorships in North Korea and Zimbabwe.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Again you are missing the point Lutz. I care not who they sell them to, simply because I couldn't do anything about it. Again I care not how much money/profit they are making.

What I do care about and would expect, is a so-called ally to stop arming the enemy of their ally.

This is where morality comes in even if they (the Frogs) care not a jot about the friendship.

Using Franks scenario of a European army where the Brits do the fighting armed by the French and Germans do you think the Germans or French would stop selling arms to the aggressors or carry on saying sorry, we have to because we are under contract.

Don't forget, the Falklands was in 82 and we have been members of the E.U. since 73. They were even members of NATO until 66 when they got in a strop over too many American officers so left the organisation.

I think "trust" was mentioned in a post above and regarding the French why should we "trust" them now?

BTW I would prefer there to be, in any conflict, American officers leading from the front than French officers. That probably stems from historical fact and their achievements.

 

[Lutz]

France is still a member of NATO, it's just not a part of the military organisation within NATO.

I'm sure that the UK arms industry would have sold the same rockets to Argentina if they had been in their catalogue instead of that of the French.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Quote ... "France is still a member of NATO, it's just not a part of the military organisation within NATO".

Agreed but they are now thinking of, if they haven't already started, negotiating full membership.

Quote ..."I'm sure that the UK arms industry would have sold the same rockets to Argentina if they had been in their catalogue instead of that of the French".

Maybe but somehow I don't think they would sell them to Argentina if that country was at war with one of our allies. I know you will think/say different so this is one point we will never agree on Lutz. It's called loyalty :O)

 

[Lutz]

I have yet to come across any arms industry, whether it be in the UK or the rest of the world, that has any convictions about selling anything to anyone so long as their respective government lets them. Don't be so sure about loyalty of the British arms industry. They're out to make money, not to choose friends.

 

[Gumbo]

Looks like our next carriers will have a lot of French input.

I find this thread interesting, because people are looking all the time for the Negative rather than the Positive. The 1900s or the 1930s Can Not be Repeated. A benefit of the European Union

 

[ShadySadie]

Sorry to dissapoint anybody but Sad is not me!

I don't take offense when the British are labeled as beer swilling binge drinking Thalaraki style low lifes and never intended to offend Lutz.

We have a different views and with war still ever present I'll just say that I don't believe an EU army to be viable.

I am sorry Lutz I did not intend to upset you.

I've not been hiding, I've been working and had a project to finish this week.

 

[Lutz]

Apology accepted.

To be honest, I can't see a European army to be workable at this time. I don't think we're ready for it. As I mentioned before, I think it's a sneaky ploy by German supporters of the idea to get round Germany's inability to engage in anything but a purely defensive role. If German troops were assigned to a European army, they would presumably be able to move into southern Afghanistan, for example, without such action requiring approval from the government, which they wouldn't get.

My main objection to some of the replies in this thread, however, was that other EU countries were being set up as being less trustworthy. Maybe there have been the odd instances where perhaps a change of government has thrown previous agreements overboard, but I think no country is 100% innocent of that. Even we as individuals have the right to change our minds if situations change.

 

[Guest]

It does seem strange that the main driver for this Treaty, including the European Army is La Merkel. As she was fully aware that her Constitution did not allow German troops to take part, then she obviously was quite happy to see other young men and women do the dirty stuff. Rather typical of the 2 faced nature of that lady, and of course her French boyfriend would do anything that allows him to wear a bigger shoe size.

There is always this panicky argument from the European nations that we would suffer badly if we came out of the EU. Funny I do not see either Norway or Switzerland suffering too much. We are their biggest market which has more to do with it than anything else, so personally, although I love and enjoy Europe, being in the EU is a disaster for the UK.

 

[Gumbo]

Neither

Norway or Switzerland are trading nations !!!!!!

Norway + Switzerland populations total about 12 million combined.

You are not looking at like for like SL when you compare them to the UK.

What's in it for us if we come out of the EU ???? I struggle to see any benefit at all ??

Maybe we would need 1000s of Border Guards to keep the illegals out !!!

Spain and France would send the British Expatriates back. So it would swell our old aged population by 1000s.

 

[Guest]

Sorry Frank, you are missing it also. Norway probably has more ships on the water than we do so is definitely a trading nation, albeit the goods do not all pass through Norway. This is also a country that did not squander its oil wealth on wacky ideas and donations to the EU. Switzerland also trades but in finance and is now home to more big Companies than the UK. Just ask Mr Branson why Virgin Holdings is based in.....Switzerland. Lewis Hamilton etc etc. After all we gave up all our trading partners because the EU told us so and if you recall the last time the French truckers blockaded the Channel Ports it was the French farmers who were crying and demanding compensation. Why? because they were losing their biggest market. Only about 30% of our exports go to the EU but nearly 70% of our imports come from there.

As for illegals, unfortunately about 60% come from outside the EU so that is irrelevant and as for the ones in Europe, I doubt it as they contribute money to the society and as they are very small compared to the total population, except in small isolated pockets, they pose no threat to the locals. Unlike here.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

You are right SL, Britain abandoned her Scandinavian trading partners in E.F.T.A. to join the E.U. We also abandoned our close trade with the commonwealth countries like Australia, New Zealand and Canada, countries we had more in common with than mainland Europe.

 

[davedee]

LB.Time to remember the family moto is suspect (or at least one of them) - 'nil illigitimi carborundum'.

Dave

 

[Guest]

People should take a close interest in our real trade, not just what the politicians would have us believe. Ironically one of our main trading partners is still the US, even if we all hate George Bush. We cancelled our trade with the Antipodeans at the bequest of the EU and they have still not forgiven us, as they had in turn to find new markets. I also suspect if Frank looks around his home he will find much of his equipment comes from the Far East, Japan, Korea and of course China. We have global trading partners, not EU ones. Even our banks, down as they are at this time are far more global than we really know, or of course the sub prime affair would not have hit us so badly.

No, we are still a global trading nation it is just the doomsayers who would have us sign up to tbe the slaves of Europe in their own small minded nonsense. This is because they are terrified we really see the true situation and realise we are being screwed wholesale. Yes, we then could not supposedly travel easily to Europe. Actually, we cannot at this time because we did not sign up to Schengen so we are treated the same as every other country outside Europe. Tell me the advantage there?

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

LB.Time to remember the family moto is suspect (or at least one of them) - 'nil illigitimi carborundum'.

Dave

Heh! heh! heh! ;O)

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

SL, my post above was about who we had as trading partners in the past and how we abandoned them. Nowhere did I advocate leaving the E.U. and going back to 1959 as peeps with clouded vision inferred.

I do wish people would read the posts properly instead of trying to score cheap points or using insults.

Dave, that will never happen mate, I'm too long in the tooth for that now .. heh! heh!

 

[Guest]

I was respoding to Frank's post, not yours. I may also disagree with your point regarding 1959. Yes, going back is maybe not a good idea, but why not review the past and re- adopt the good bits, if they can be made to work. There is this fear among many that leaving the EU will lead to disaster. I for one do not share it. No, we will not be a colonial power again, but we can be an economic one that is for sure.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

I was respoding to Frank's post, not yours. I may also disagree with your point regarding 1959. Yes, going back is maybe not a good idea, but why not review the past and re- adopt the good bits, if they can be made to work. There is this fear among many that leaving the EU will lead to disaster. I for one do not share it. No, we will not be a colonial power again, but we can be an economic one that is for sure.

Yes, understood you were replying to Franks post SL but was just clarifying my posting and his answer to it :O)