It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

European Union, a military superpower?

page: 8
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Yes all countries contributed to the defeat of the Axis in WWII.

That being said, without the Soviets, Germany would have run crazy in the North Africa campaign, and the Balkans/Turkey, quite probably pushing past Egypt till they reached the border with India. Without the Suez, the U.K. would have had a hard time holding India. Big what if for sure, but without the tying down of men and resources that the Eastern Front did, it would have drastically changed WWII's outcome.

With no toehold in North Africa, there is no Operation Torch, no invasion of Sicily and Italy, not much of a chance of holding Egypt and the Middle East. Since the resources and manpower would have been available to Germany, England might have become ripe for an invasion attempt again rather than the Allies plotting an invasion of France.

The invasion of Russia by Germany was the tipping point in the war, there is no other event that comes close, save perhaps the Battle of Britain. Darn good stop by the U.K. there.




posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Yes the Battle of Stalington was indeed a crucial turning point of the war!



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 09:30 AM
link   
European Union, a military superpower?

Not in my life time, unless something happens which forces Europeans to cooperate more.

As it now stands, there is hardly any political cohesion within the EU. The EU hardly plays a role in world politics, and the impotence of Europe could clearly be seen in the Balkans conflict in the 90's. Europe led the Balkans to bleed, too long, because it lacked the military and political power to operate effectively. It only intervened with force when the Americans were willing to help, and that was under the umbrella of NATO.

As for economic effectiveness (cohesion) which is necessary to be a military power, the EU has approximately 500 billion citizens and the largest GDP on the world. Yet, what do we hear about European large scale technological projects? Even the Typhoon was delayed with more than a decade due to bickering, and only from time to time we hear something about ESA. It’s not surprising that the US (with approximately “only” 300 billion citizens and the 2nd largest GDP) has Raptors, F-117 s and B2s, while we have the Eurofighter (though it’s not a bad plane).

Europe will be the beautiful single that is always dancing between the US and China and cannot make up her mind.


Paranoid Duck



[edit on 29-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoid Duck

As for economic effectiveness (cohesion) which is necessary to be a military power, the EU has approximately 500 billion citizens and the largest GDP on the world.


Wow Europe's a lot bigger than I thought!!! I think you mean Million not Billion.

With GDP the number is only when you take the combined E.U. They are not completely unified economically, you must still consider each nations individual GDP rather than a conglomerate IMO.



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Wow Europe's a lot bigger than I thought!!! I think you mean Million not Billion.



Oops heh, sorry I meant million (can't edit it anymore).



Originally posted by pavil
With GDP the number is only when you take the combined E.U. They are not completely unified economically, you must still consider each nations individual GDP rather than a conglomerate IMO.


To be economically effective you can't have for example each EU nations to have it's own "NASA", "Stealth project", "Fighter Project", "Missile project" etc; you will lose the economic scale effect. In reality the opposite is often the case in the EU; each nation thinking of their own interest.

I don't understand why you think the EU is not economically unified.





[edit on 29-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]

[edit on 29-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   
the EU prefers to spend its money on research that more directly improves the lives of it's citizens rather than the next superweapon. In the next 6 years the EU has bugeted 50 billion euros for research under the framework 7 programme.

en.wikipedia.org...
ec.europa.eu...

that does not include each countries individual national programmes.



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
the EU prefers to spend its money on research that more directly improves the lives of it's citizens rather than the next superweapon. In the next 6 years the EU has bugeted 50 billion euros for research under the framework 7 programme.

en.wikipedia.org...
ec.europa.eu...

that does not include each countries individual national programmes.


The thread maker asked whether the EU can become a military super power. I fail to see the meaning of your reply in the context of the thread.

However, in response to your reply; does that project has a time line when the EU will be able to put it's own austronauts into space?



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 12:01 PM
link   
all the homeless people living in america and they would rather spend money into space programs

[edit on 29-11-2006 by PlayeR87]



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by PlayeR87
all the homeless people living in america and they would rather spend money into space programs

[edit on 29-11-2006 by PlayeR87]



If you want to make your own thread concerning homeless people and that it will be far better of to abandon the space program because of that, be my guest.

However, so far the only thing you have done concerning this thread is throwing some cheap rhetoric such as "the EU prefers to spend its money on research that more directly improves the lives of it's citizens rather than the next superweapon."

I have an idea, because it seems you to think much of your fellow human being, why don't you make a thread about the huge EU subsidies on agricultural products creating an obstacle for poor third world farmers to sell their products competitively? That 50 billion in the EU project you mentioned, is peanuts compared to the huge EU subsidies on agricultural products from their own farmers.

Enough off topic from my side.




[edit on 29-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoid Duck
the EU has approximately 500 billion citizens and the largest GDP on the world. Yet, what do we hear about European large scale technological projects? Even the Typhoon was delayed with more than a decade due to bickering, and only from time to time we hear something about ESA. It’s not surprising that the US (with approximately “only” 300 billion citizens and the 2nd largest GDP) has Raptors, F-117 s and B2s, while we have the Eurofighter (though it’s not a bad plane).



My comments about the 7th framework programme were in responce to the above statement. It was infact agreeing with you as i dont see the EU as currently being a military superpower. One of the principal reasons, that of lack of integration has already been discussed to death here. The next major reason is a fundimental difference in attidudes to defence. I was pointing out that what fully integrated research is conducted within the EU is aimed at civillian needs rather than at developing military hardware.

the 7th framework is not a 'project'. The information i provided was to the guiding framework by which thousands of projects will be funded over the next 6 years in a wide range of areas considered important to the EU.

Although as i stated earlier the EU military's are fractured and poorly integrated. The situation is recognised as unexceptable and is slowly improving. As with anything that involves 25 seperate countries working together it takes time.

Some of the highlights are

The European rapid reaction force and battlegroups (closest thing there is to an EU army)
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

The European defence agency
en.wikipedia.org...

EU miliatry staff
en.wikipedia.org...

Things are improving, just give them a bit of time.

The common agricultural policy (farm subsidies) cost 44 billion euros in 2005 a year. So cost about 6 times more than the research programme. Not everyone in the EU agrees with this policy tho. Especially the UK, who would gladly see the back of it.
en.wikipedia.org...


The EU has its own core of astronauts and are trying to develop their own launch vehicle (held up by lack of finances and politacal will as always).

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...


Ps. I know some people have problems with people quoting wikipedia as a source. I have used it repeatedly in this reply, just for the sake of speed, further information on each topic can be found, from more reliable sources, on the net.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2
What many Americans seem to forget is that Europe is a continent consisting of countries, not of states. Countries with very own ideas, habits, and cultures, which is in my opinion the reason why the launch of a Union's army has not been realized yet.

And as is evident by your member location, you, as with many Europeans, seem to purposely "forget" or voluntarily mention is that you/Europe are no longer the 'center' of the world, you/Europe are no longer the center of learning, you/Europe are no longer the center of Western civilization, that your/European population birth rates are on the downslide and will be overcome by the birth rate of European Muslims, the Euro is/will failing, and most inportantly, inherently due to European prejudices and age-old arrogance of the 'good ole days,' you/Europe are no longer a military superpower. The European Union, by sheer definition of "superpower," is not and connot be that which it is not. despite your/its longing to be to the contrary.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   
you all should read Olaf Stabbletons First and last men,predicts a war between the USA and Europe,then an americanised and chinese planet,

any war would be a long bloddy fight and it would depend on what side the rest of the world joined in on

history aside,and current military stregnth also, why? germany had 100,000 fighter aircraft in ww2 and still lost. push a animal into a corner and it will fight for its life,

the Us may have the more coherent forces but Europe is easily Rich enough to catch up,anti US sentiments would play apart which means latin america would prob support Europe ,india i expect would side also with us china i cant call would prob sit bk and wait till the world is theirs.

why do u think the EU wants turkey? it has an army of a million strong and would seriously enhance the EU,yougoslavia was planned to be the 1st call up for NATO,there is a video of the meeting be4 war broke out which a general says its all worked out,that outside forces will invade.

would have to be 1 hell of a pretext for it to start!

only ever democracies to declare war on each other?

the UK and Finland and not a shot was fired!

2cents thrown...



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
And as is evident by your member location, you, as with many Europeans, seem to purposely "forget" or voluntarily mention is that you/Europe are no longer the 'center' of the world,

Not acording to this map..
cse.ssl.berkeley.edu...
Unless ofcourse you've decided to change navigation..




you/Europe are no longer the center of learning,

And the US is?


you/Europe are no longer the center of Western civilization,

And who exactly is then?



that your/European population birth rates are on the downslide and will be overcome by the birth rate of European Muslims

Will they? I didnt know that people where "muslims" when they were born...



, the Euro is/will failing,

So is/will the dollar.


inherently due to European prejudices and age-old arrogance of the 'good ole days,' you/Europe are no longer a military superpower.

We never were lol, not since the romans lol.
Is this the same prejudices between you and canada since you two are no longer one military super power?



The European Union, by sheer definition of "superpower," is not and connot be that which it is not. despite your/its longing to be to the contrary.
[edit on 30-11-2006 by Seekerof]

Why cant it?



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Paperplane_UK

I understand what you mean. Sorry if it seems like that I got heated up. Being an EU citizen from one of the "founding nations" and seeing the debacle regarding e.g. the "constitution" and the political mess concerning candidate member Turkey-I have become skeptical when it comes to the future of the EU.

Just yesterday I read that the EU has established a rapid reaction force of 25.000 men that can be sent everywhere around the world within three days. Well, if a crisis arise somewhere in the world, it will take months to establish a political consensus within the EU- IF a consensus can be established at all.

UK: “We prefer an operation under US command.”
France: “No, the EU rapid reaction force should be under our command!”
Germany: “We can’t send our share due to our history in that region.”
Holland: “We are concerned about possible civilian casualties”
Belgium: “Our paratroopers are already under an UN mission somewhere else. We can’t participate.”
Italy: “We are concerned about the sharing of the costs – we already have difficulties with the Euro stabilization pact.”
UK: “We can allocate some of the agricultural subsidies to this operation and...”
France: “Not in my life time! Our farmers will strike. Berlusconi should find a budget somewhere else.”
Etc, etc…

Perhaps not a hundred percent accurate, but more or less it will be like that.

Anyway, it seems we both share the same opinion when it comes to the cohesion.

Edit: I messed up the usernames earlier which added to the miscommunication and my hars undertone previously- sorry for that too.

Paranoid Duck


[edit on 30-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoid Duck

To be economically effective you can't have for example each EU nations to have it's own "NASA", "Stealth project", "Fighter Project", "Missile project" etc; you will lose the economic scale effect. In reality the opposite is often the case in the EU; each nation thinking of their own interest.

I don't understand why you think the EU is not economically unified.


You are making my point for me. As I have said at least two times in this thread, how many DIFFERENT main battle tanks does the EU have? How many DIFFERENT Ships and Planes? Sure there is SOME integration, but not nearly enough, if you are to be considered a single entity Superpower.

It carries through to the commerical side as well. Each nation looks out for it's own interest first and then the EU's. How many different train companies, car companies ect are there? Will Italy fold Fiat if it makes sense in the Greater EU.... I don't think so. Do you think for a moment that Germany and France do not put their OWN economic interests a. of the EU's as a whole? As you said each nation is first then the EU. That does not make for a unified Superpower IMO.

What about Eastern Europe? Will the EU be content to let them develop into their "cheap labor" pool or will they spend the Euro's to bring them up to the standard of living of the Western half of the EU? Don't make it sound as if everything is perfect over their in EU land. The UK for God's sake hasn't even adopted the Euro and the ratification of the EU constitution is quite literally, a train wreck. Thats just a few reasons why i say the EU is not economically unified. Just wait till the first real economic downturn to hit the new and improved EU and you will see what I mean.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   
@ pavil

the EU as the potential to rule the world, you and everybody else are talking about the EU as it is '2006'.

in many ways (questionable military) it already surpasses the US, but 1 thing the EU will never be is 'united' we love our independence/culture and national pride too much, take it in mind the united states is 50 countrys into 1 THE 'UNITED' STATES this is why the america is the richest country in the world - (well poorest with all the debt but thats another issue).

but the EU will one day operate as 1 nation (infact it does in many ways now) but being 1 nation we will never be, europeans in general already enjoy better lifestyle than americans, if i had choice of having a better life options or a 'superpower' for a military, id choice 'life' all the time and i'm glad we (britain) no longer have our empire if thats the case.

anyway define the word 'superpower' for me, a superpower is like superman/spiderman 'you are above something' (ie:- superman is above humans - america is above other nations in a military sense).

yet why are they not showing this 'superpower' staus in iraq, alfghanistan, vietnam?
- the last i heard america was still losing lifes/president bush losing support/people wanting to bring the troops home - EVEN ASKING ONE OF THE AXIS OF EVIL FOR HELP (IRAN)


therefore if america struggles with *the above* what makes people think they can take OTHER military powerhouses PUT-TOGETHER such as france/germany/britain (along with) italy/spain/holland/denmark/belgium/poland/sweden (+ many more nations), all at once


people are talking out of their arse, theres only one winner
its not even debatable, the US wouldn't even beat 2 of the big 3 together (maybe even 1) as i feel it's now impossible for another country to beat another established country in todays world.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Sepiroth]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

You are making my point for me. As I have said at least two times in this thread, how many DIFFERENT main battle tanks does the EU have? How many DIFFERENT Ships and Planes? Sure there is SOME integration, but not nearly enough, if you ....

Obviously you and I have different interepretations of political cohesion and economic cohesion. The problems you and I described -and agree with- are part of the political cohesion. Also seen by the fact that the EU often doesn't have a consensus on foreign policy (e.g. Iraq, UK and France)

If you are talking about economic cohesion; in most EU countries there are no more borders in the movement of goods, capital and labour. A German can move into Holland, establish his business and buy a house without much hassle and special residential permit. In essence, the economic consolidation of the union is strong, there is free allocation of durable goods, labour and capital.


Originally posted by pavil
Don't make it sound as if everything is perfect over their in EU land.


Where did you get the impression that I wanted to depict the EU as perfect? In fact as stated above and in earlier replies, I clearly am skeptical.


Originally posted by pavil
The UK for God's sake hasn't even adopted the Euro and the ratification of the EU constitution is quite literally, a train wreck. Thats just a few reasons why i say the

EU is not economically unified.


With regards to economic unification it's more important to look at the free allocation of durable goods, labour and capital. The Euro is part of the monetary unifaction, different definitions and implications.


Originally posted by pavil
Just wait till the first real economic downturn to hit the new and improved EU and you will see what I mean.


Let's not go there as the last time I checked, the dollar has decreased its value towards the Euro and the US has a huge trade deficit. The US needs countries to buy its products to lesten the gap of its trade deficit. The US cannot use an EU in an economic crisis, no matter how hard you wish.

Paranoid Duck

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Paranoid Duck]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Norway and Luxembourg rank above the US in wealth
and Ireland ranks above the uk and germany
Us Irish are the tenth richest country cant believe it



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Not acording to this map..
cse.ssl.berkeley.edu...


Actually the center looks to be in Africa in that map. LOL. Gotta take those Euro centric glasses off. JK.



you/Europe are no longer the center of learning,
And the US is?

Either the US with 14 Million University Students or India with over 8,000 universities. Sure the US has problems with parts of it's education system, but people from all over the world come to the US for their higher learning.



you/Europe are no longer the center of Western civilization,

And who exactly is then?
Not sure, but since the end of WWII the US has had the lead role in Politics, Economics and world leadership.



that your/European population birth rates are on the down slide and will be overcome by the birth rate of European Muslims

Will they? I didnt know that people where "muslims" when they were born...


You know what he means. The birth rate of native Europeans vs recent immigrants is vastly different. Don't delude yourself that it wont change the society and culture. I bet many Americans in 1940 didn't think that many things they bought would have bilingual labels.


We never were lol, not since the romans lol.

What about the British Empire, those wonderful Colonial Empires spreading goodwill and cheer to the third world. How about Germany and something called WWII.


Is this the same prejudices between you and canada since you two are no longer one military super power?

Totally lost me on that one. Canada has always been a Commonwealth state more than part of the U.S. Ask any Canadian if you doubt me. BTW Canda is spelled with a capital C.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoid Duck
Where did you get the impression that I wanted to depict the EU as perfect? In fact as stated above and in earlier replies, I clearly am skeptical.


You are correct you are not, others imply that in the thread.



Just wait till the first real economic downturn to hit the new and improved EU and you will see what I mean.

Let's not go there as the last time I checked, the dollar has decreased its value towards the Euro and the US has a huge trade deficit. The US needs countries to buy its products to lesten the gap of its trade deficit. The US cannot use an EU in an economic crisis, no matter how hard you wish.


I don't think you understood what I was saying. When there is an economic downturn, EU will revert back more to the each nation looking out for itself first train of thought. When Turkey becomes part of the EU will it allow unlimited immigration from Turkey or Eastern Europe to other member states when the economy starts to go bad and take jobs from their own countryman?

Don't get me wrong, the EU is a economic superpower, if it is truly unified. Will it ever be a unified full blown superpower, remains to be seen. They lack the military will and the political will to flex their muscle like a superpower has to be able to do. Not saying that's a bad thing, just the way things are.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join