Will the europeans ever be powerful?, page 3

Originally posted by drfunk

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
So, America doesn't have 8,000 extra troops now, huh? We have half a million men in our army alone, and just 150,000 are in Iraq. The British were not necessary. Anyone who says otherwise is probably just a biased Brit.

America wanted other nations to chip in. The British gave more support than anyone. It's appreciated. It doesn't go beyond that.

And Europe's military power is not anywhere near comparable to America's. Europe, even their combined strength, does not rival America's. Just remember, Europe, you guys couldn't even have dealt with Iraq after years upon years of sanctions.

America's military strength has been drastically cut since the end of the Cold War, and we're still ahead of the combined strength of Europe. America spends more per man then probably anyone in the world. We have the best equipment in the world in just about every aspect.

Besides the UK and France, no one in Europe has anything but a conscript army. No military in France is suited for wide deployment. How much support could the UK even give to mainland Europe if they were attacked? I highly doubt it could be done on short notice. It would take a month or two at least. In that time America could probably have taken most of Western Europe.

sometimes what a child (the US) needs from the adults (europe) is a good kick in the arse to teach it some hard learnt lessons

[edit on 31-1-2005 by drfunk]

100s of years, and Europe still couldn't learn that you stop a war-mongerer when he goes on a conquest (i.e. Hitler). Europe always has complained and bickered and always will. Actually, what Europe needs is a good swift kick in the arse from the U.S. All they do is complain, complain, complain, and they are a bunch of ungrates, trying to take away U.S. sovereignty, even though we practically re-built them after WWII. They bickered over each other with Bosnia even, until Clinton finally went in and did the job for them.

And now, over in Indonesia, the entire U.N. is screwing up the U.S. Navy's operations there because it is supposed to be a "global effort;" the navy has had to support all the U.N. folk over there who do nothing but act like they should be there. They call the U.S. cheap, yet then they are not at all willing to provide any navy ships for aid; you aren't seriously telling me the French navy or British or German navy can't send a supply ship or a carrier ship (yes Europe does have carriers, just smaller ones) to help with the effort.

But nope, Europe's idea of "help" is to just send some $$$, but put the brunt of the work on the U.S. military.

The problem with Europe is just as drfunk said; they consider themselves "adults" and the U.S. as a "child," even though it is the U.S. who saved their arses twice, and helped keep the Soviet Union away from them, and teaches them how to set standards for modern warfare. Not that Europeans can't fight, but in terms of naval and air power tactics, the U.S. leads the way.

And with the amount of responsibility the U.S. has around the world these days, I certainly would think it is the farthest thing from being a "child."