European army backed, page 1

GERMANY, France and nine of Europe's most powerful countries have called for European army, an elected European Union president and an end to Britain's veto over defence policy, in radical vision for the ''future of Europe''.

The plan was backed by Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Holland, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg and Portugal

The proposals also demand an end to countries being able to veto initiatives, aimed at preventing the UK which opposes a European army being able to block its creation.

In order to ''prevent one single member state from being able to obstruct initiatives'', a reference to British opposition to a European army, the German-led group demanded an end to existing national vetoes over foreign and defence policy.

This would give the EU the power to impose a decision on Britain if it was supported by a majority of other countries.

Sydney Morning Herald.

The EU has the largest economy in the world, has a population of 500 million people and is the largest trading block in the world.

A European army would allow it to protect its interests globally and translate its economic power into real geo-political leverage. I'm British but with the waning global clout of individual European nations, I feel such a move is long over-due.

A new superpower on the block however may tread on the toes of both China and the USA.

Originally posted by glen200376
Had to laugh at the quote about stopping one member blocking things,does this include wars for the nice new army?Hopefully the u.k. has nothing to do with it,we want out of the bloody e.u. not to be enslaved by an army who answer to people who want to force us to accept new 'initiaves'.

I must admit that I support an EU army despite being British.

On the other hand, the EU set up we have at the moment is a huge gravy train. For the last 17 years, the Court of Auditors has refused to sign off the EU accounts

reply to post by ollncasino

---

Didn't Germany try this in the 1930's and 40's?

Instead of bullets and bombs now they use spreadsheets and budgets.

reply to post by ollncasino

---

we can hardly pay for the soldiers we have and have been getting rid of them .no doubt this will mean lots more pounds to the e.u. and paying for foreign soldiers.
I don't want foreign soldiers here which they would most likely do.Funny how this happens when their has been more talk of a in out referendum on Europe.

reply to post by purplemer

---

The US made a sham in Kosovo

Even more despicable was the covert US arms dealings against the UN embargo.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by ollncasino

---

Didn't Germany try this in the 1930's and 40's?

Instead of bullets and bombs now they use spreadsheets and budgets.

Actually, Germany's population is projected to be surpassed by both France and the UK by 2060. The UK is predicted to be the most populous country in the EU, so it is unlikely that Germany will dominate Europe in the future.

The survey predicts that Britain's population by 2060 will increase by 25% from the current figure of just over 61 million to almost 77 million.

Germany is the biggest country in the EU, with more than 82 million people, but it is likely to shed almost 12 million by 2060, says the report. The widely praised family policies and support of working women in France means that the French population will rise to almost 72 million by 2060.

By 2060, the population of major European countries will be:

UK 77 million
France 72
Germany 71
Italy 59
Spain 52

The Gaurdian

The future of the EU isn't German.

Originally posted by ollncasino
GERMANY, France and nine of Europe's most powerful countries have called for European army, an elected European Union president and an end to Britain's veto over defence policy, in radical vision for the ''future of Europe''.

The plan was backed by Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, Holland, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg and Portugal

The proposals also demand an end to countries being able to veto initiatives, aimed at preventing the UK which opposes a European army being able to block its creation.

In order to ''prevent one single member state from being able to obstruct initiatives'', a reference to British opposition to a European army, the German-led group demanded an end to existing national vetoes over foreign and defence policy.

This would give the EU the power to impose a decision on Britain if it was supported by a majority of other countries.

Sydney Morning Herald.

The EU has the largest economy in the world, has a population of 500 million people and is the largest trading block in the world.

A European army would allow it to protect its interests globally and translate its economic power into real geo-political leverage. I'm British but with the waning global clout of individual European nations, I feel such a move is long over-due.

A new superpower on the block however may tread on the toes of both China and the USA.

edit on 22-9-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

No wonder the UK opposes such a force, we had to save Europe from one, twice in the last hundred years.

Originally posted by glen200376
reply to post by ollncasino

---

we can hardly pay for the soldiers we have and have been getting rid of them .no doubt this will mean lots more pounds to the e.u. and paying for foreign soldiers.
I don't want foreign soldiers here which they would most likely do.Funny how this happens when their has been more talk of a in out referendum on Europe.

No it will mean savings. As the military can be streamlined and a lot of money will be saved..

reply to post by citizenx1

---

No wonder the UK opposes such a force, we had to save Europe from one, twice in the last hundred years.

The reason the UK opposes such a force is because the US does and the UK is Americas poodle atm....Please tell me when the UK last saved Europe for a European army...?

reply to post by ollncasino

---

I haven't given this a lot of thought so this isn't my considered opinion...just shooting the breeze.

My first thoughts see a lot of difficulties in the idea. For example, the infrastructure would need a monstrous level of bureaucracy to get over the regional, political and language differences. An army run by committee sounds doomed to fail! Also there are 'armies' and there are armies. Some nations have far better forces than others and wouldn't enjoy being in theatre with those who have a bad reputation, bad training and crap equipment.

On the positive side, Britain has jumped into one or two US-led wars that I didn't agree with. By being part of a Euro Army, we'd be more tied to the EU Human Rights legislation and make the UN more of an authority rather than just a choice. I'm not keen on having a missile ring pointing at Russia and the ME either and perhaps an EU Army would remove the need for that system?

The way to ease tensions between the US, China, Russia and the ME isn't by ramping up defences and using proxy hostilities; it's going to be by negotiation and balances of power. Maybe having this type of army would help that process?

reply to post by purplemer

---

Do you seriously believe it would save money? If it would Cameron and Co would love it.The e.u has proved over and over it can't be trusted with money.
In fact it can't be trusted full stop.Just think of the nice e.e.c. in the 70s,nothing like what we have forced on us now,why would this be different?

reply to post by ollncasino

---

I can't argue with that.

Originally posted by glen200376
Do you seriously believe it would save money? If it would Cameron and Co would love it.The e.u has proved over and over it can't be trusted with money.

In fact it can't be trusted full stop.Just think of the nice e.e.c. in the 70s,nothing like what we have forced on us now,why would this be different?

I am no fan of the current EU. The fact remains however that the UK and other European countries are in relative decline in terms of population and economic power.

When the UK was at its peak as superpower, it controlled about 37% of the world's GDP. It is now 3.4% Wiki. In the last 30 years the UK's share of world GDP has dropped by a third.

In 1950, the Europe population was about 20% of the world population. In 2010 this had dropped to 10%. It is projected to drop much further, perhaps below 5%.

If Europe doesn't unite, it may not be just the USA pushing us rather gently around. It may be China with its boot to our throat.

Norway To Open Century Old Package
  Posted 19 days ago with 127 member flags

World\'s richest woman calls for Australian workers to be paid $2 a day to compete with Africans
  Posted 6 days ago with 69 member flags

Blame The Real Bad Guys - The Powers Behind Super Powers
  Posted 18 days ago with 65 member flags

19 Yr Old Hostage Gunned Down By Police While Escaping Captor
  Posted 8 days ago with 53 member flags

DHS Source: “It’s going hot”
  Posted 14 days ago with 49 member flags

Police Shoot Another 911 Caller In Her Own Backyard
  Posted 19 days ago with 46 member flags

50,000 people have 90 mins evacuate , Percy Quinn Dam expected to break
  Posted 12 days ago with 46 member flags

The Oatmeal\'s Tesla Fundraiser Pushes Past $1.1M
  Posted 15 days ago with 44 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: