European army backed

reply to post by Freeborn


i agree ..but it looks like we will be forced into Europe one way or another ...no matter what the British people want ..just like Ireland was ..the only other option is to emigrate ...for those who can

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)

And defend Europe against Russia.

reply to post by sitchin


Although this would be a welcomed idea by many Americans, I think, myself included. It would raise many concerns.

We Americans have enough Liberal states to contend with. Plus a Constitution many of you Brit's and some of our own, find odd and outdated.

Then there are those of us that do not think so. Which we know will lead to one conclusion, the writing is on the wall and it ain't pretty.

The answer will be desided by who is left standing.

By law we are union of free and soverein states. Our Federal government has been for years, over reaching its legally defind boundries. Which is what your EU is or will be doing to you.

Once a beast is created it has to eat to survive. It don't take long for it to get tired of it's rations and starts consuming more....... if you get my analogy.

My country has only been around a few + hundred years and it's all F'D up. Most of us aren't even sure what's legal anymore.

We Americans don't need to worry about any extra bodies in any coming events.

The UK. should buddy up with their commonwealth nations and stay tight with them.

reply to post by ollncasino


I agree China will continue to grow and won't be as polite as America has been. A European army will be the only deterrent if America falls.

Originally posted by purplemer
Please eleborate on your ambigous comment. What do you mean 69% are of the 'same group' that means nothing to me. What group are you talking about. Has this group got a name or is it one of those convenient truts..

What exactly is it about the comment "69% of the UK population is genetically the same as the group of people here pre-roman times" that you're having difficulty with?

If you really want to know that would be the largely Celtic populations that the Romans found here in the 1st Century, although research suggests that 3/4 of the English population (with similiar patterns found in the Welsh and Scots) can trace a direct genetic lineage back to the original Palaeolithic people that inhabited these isles after the ice age, with the Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Normans merely adding flavour as they never came here in large enough numbers.

This is not the same as found on mainland Europe.

One interesting article..
And another...

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
All of Europe does not have enough power to project globally especially since America has not left a void to fill and China continues to rise while Russia continues to be relatively powerful in the Caucasus, Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

Rubbish.. Europe has quite a significant armoury and combined, there are several aircraft carriers in service (albeit small ones) with more under construction, not to mention quite a significant airlift, sea lift and surface fleet capacity.

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
Remember that Britain and France had to borrow missiles and bombs from the US as they ran out during the Libyan campaign. If they can't subdue a country of 6,000,000 with a poorly trained and small army, they won't ever be projecting much clout.

No we didn't. The UK largely used home made storm shadows, with Tomahawks launched from a submarine. The French used their own version of the Storm Shadow. The UK doesn't used Tomahawks on their aircraft and we produce our own precision weapons, such as the Paveway IV, at factories in Scotland and Essex.

The Germans couldn't conquer Europe with force so now they are trying it with the facad of democracy... LOL!

Britain will never go along with that and rightly so. That is the next step to losing sovereignty just like the states in the US have lost theirs and are now dictated to by an out of control federal government...

This is just a protection measure by the International banksters for when the SHTF because this will not help the failing European economy it will just be another tool of oppression to put down the people if they rise up when their economies finish crashing.....

@the OP

The population of Europe is not 500 million its probably closer to 900 million when you add on the millions & millions of illegals in the EU, as of 2011 the population is 857 million

Any way... yeah, A European Army would be unstoppable

On the outside this looks like a wonderful idea one army in the interest for all of Europe all those countries working together. Until the more power county(s) want more power until one country gets butt hurt you either have this new army doing anything the highest payer says or you guessed it WWIII or maybe even an illuminati influence is somewhere in there. But hey who knows. Guess we'll wait and see what happens.

reply to post by stumason

What exactly is it about the comment "69% of the UK population is genetically the same as the group of people here pre-roman times" that you're having difficulty with?

I am having difficulty because you are not addressing my point. I asked what grouping are you referring too. You are not referring to a race of people. The best you have come up with is the original 'Palaeolithic people that inhabited the UK after the ice age'. So you are saying people came to the UK and lots of people in the UK are related to them. Please answer my question...

reply to post by purplemer


So you want me to spoon feed you? Did you even read the articles I posted?

Lets make this really simple... Genetic studies of the population of the UK show that upwards of 2/3rds (69%) of the people within the UK have a direct lineage back to original palaeolithic inhabitants of the islands who migrated here after the last Ice Age.

Now, there is no fixed term for the people as we're talking history that stretches back 12,000+ years, but they are of the same distinct grouping as the Basques of Northern Spain who also are of a different creed to the vast majority of the continental population, who are largely post-Roman migrants from the East, having displaced the pre-Roman populations of Celts (who were originally from the area around Austria and spread West prior to Roman expansion c450BC) and many Germanic tribes who migrated West after the end of the Roman Empire.

I realise that might be somewhat confusing, as it is apparent you are not that versed on the migrations of people Pre and post Roman empire, so lets dumb it down further.

The Basque-like people move into the area known as the UK today after the last Ice Age ended. Then the Celts, around 500-400BC, migrated to the UK and ended up dominating the culture there, leaving a genetic imprint in the population. Then came the Romans, who replaced the elite, dominated the culture but left a small imprint, then the Germanic migrations c500AD, again replacing the top strata of society and dominating the culture, but leaving a small imprint. Then the Vikings, once again the same thing happened and lastly the Normans, who did the same.

As a result, the people of the UK, while having genetic influence from all the above still retained a large portion of the genetic heritage to those people whom originally inhabited these islands.

However, on the continent, the vast majority of the Celtic and other "original" ethnic groupings that occupied lands stretching from Spain through to Western Germany all the way down to Romania were displaced by people's such as the Franks, Visigoths, Huns etc who all came from the east. The Franks became what are known today as the French, but are actually a Germanic set of tribes displaced from the region around the Rhine by migrations from the East towards the end of the Roman Empire..

Originally posted by ollncasino

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.

I hate to sound so technical, however; the largest trading block is actualy NAFTA; which is over $18 trillion in GDP as of 2012. Last year, the EU's combined GDP was 12.6 trillion Euros. Using the latest exchange rates, that is roughly $16.3 trillion. Meanwhile, the actual eurozone GDP (countries who actually use the Euro as their currency) is only $12 trillion. This is roughly $3.5 trillion less than Americas total GDP.

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.

I feel that the move would definitely be beneficial to the US, as America could stand to let someone else take up some of the slack...especially when it comes to safe passage of the seas for international transit. The problem is that such a move will dissolve national identities in order to maintain the super state. This will certainly cause quite a bit of turmoil, as European culture varies by quite varying degrees across the EU. Language is also an issue. Also, having an EU "president" could serve to be problematic...having a person decide policies in Brussels (which would effect the whole EU) could rub people living in London, or Paris the wrong way.

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

There is only one "true" superpower in the world today, and that is America. Europe and the US are on fairly good grounds being allies and all. Most of our trade is with one another, and culturally, we are not exactly dissimilar. Roughly 60% of the worlds GDP is based in Europe and the US. So clearly, this could actually help create far more stability than it could not...any competition it would create would be all the more beneficial to us and the world at large.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

That all sounds a bit arrogant and in truth ill formed opinion. What makes you think that if and thats a big IF the technology actually works, that other nations could not obtain the technology too? The US first got nukes but it wasn't too long before the UK, China, Russia, France and Israel obtained them, meaning a stalemate due to MAD.

The US is a mighty nation, but you underestimate other nations, just like your government does. The US cannot win the war in Afghanistan and they are a tin pot nation of small villages in the desert. What makes you think things will be any different in the future, technology can only take you so far.

The TECH. WORKS because it has already been demonstrated on U-TUBE and when I saw this I ALMOST FELL OUT OF MY CHAIR! I NEVER thought they would make it public until I found out that it would be installed as a NUCLEAR FEL on the soon to be launched...2015..USS. STEALTH CARRIER CVN-78 GERALD R. FORD. The FORD CLASS is the first new Carrier Class since the Nimitz class. It will use a Mag-Lev Catapult as well as a Fully Operational FREE ELECTRON LASER that is NUCLEAR POWERED. The Fords Carrier Group also includes a Nuclear Powered AEGIS CRUISER that ALSO will have installed a FEL that is Nuclear Powered. The second FORD CLASS CARRIER will be the USS. CVN-79 John F. Kennedy which also will have an FEL as well as it's Aegis Cruiser. A High Orbital Specialized Reflection Satellite System is already been placed in Orbit and a conventional Laser Mirror would not work as the FEL would just VAPORIZE IT! The Satellite Reflection System is said to look like a DRAGONFLY'S EYES with THOUSANDS of independent movable EYES like a BUG. This allows multiple FEL BEAM SPLITTING TECH.

As far as China or Russia developing this TECH....RUSSIA TRIED AND FAILED. CHINA IS SO FAR BEHIND...THEY HAD TO BE INFORMED! This is not arrogance. THIS is for the FIRST TIME A POSSIBILITY TO THE END OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS! The FEL is designed to VAPORIZE the actual NUCLEAR WARHEADS and at SOLAR CORE BEAM TEMPS....THIS WILL VAPORIZE THE URANIUM OR PLUTONIUM INTO HELIUM AND HYDROGEN! The FEL was not designed just to SHOOT DOWN A NUCLEAR MISSILE. It was designed to Vaporize the Warhead as well as be capable of being OFFENSIVE IN NATURE AND VAPORIZE CITY SIZED TARGETS WITH WIDE BEAMS. Split Infinity

Are you kidding me? You support a super state amassing an army just across the shores from us? They are trying to exclude us from having a say and you think this is within our interests?

So they have currency, president (we the people can't vote in), a pseudo constitution, a police force and now and army. All the while trying to take away fiscal responsibility from member states as well as over rule nations laws. How on earth do you see the forming of an army as anything positive? Easier for them to go to war, why is that a positive?

This same superstate which just tried to create a constitution and then when the member states like Ireland and others rejected it they said "no you picked the wrong choice, vote again" and then they rejected it again then they set out to exclude them from it all together, that's the way they do things. Then failing that they just changed the title of the constitution to Treaty of Lisbon and slimmed it down a bit (like remove national anthem) but kept the basic premiss of the original document and in doing so circumvented individual nations national sovereignty in preventing them from having referendums.

Even Brown didn't turn up for signing ceremony photo op with the other 26 member states and done it later on.

So sad to see members of this site supporting the arming of a superstate, you ignorance is beyound me! How long will it be before it's basically the United State of Europe.

In my opinion the euro will collasp in 2014-15 and hopefully spell the end to the nasty experiment.

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Is collectively defending ourselves as Europeans such a bad thing?

I am not European - I am English and British - and very proud of both.

Exactly who are we defending ourselves from because as far as I can tell history teaches us that the biggest threats to UK sovereignty has always come from continental Europe?
This is just another attempt by the Franco-German alliance to gain European domination.
And all this will do is allow them to ride roughshod over individual nations who do not agree with their dictates.

In 1975 the UK voted for continued membership of the EEC - a free trade alliance - not once have we agreed to the transferance of sovereignty to foreign powers and the subsequent dilution of parliament's elected right to govern the UK.

If the people of the UK voted for continued membership of the EU in a referendum then so be it - until then I for one will passionately oppose to any such move.

Handing over our independant ability to protect ourselves to the EU, or anyone else, would be an insult to all those who have given so much to ensure our independance.

Well if you're so disgusted by european then maybe you and your Uk can be kicked out anf left to fend for oyuselves. You're not a world power anymore. Like someon sayd you contorll a 1/10 of what you used to , you have no authority, you're nothing without the EU.
The UE wil continue to go forward. Its the logical step. The United States of Europe. Simple. Who doesn't like it big deal. It wil stil happen. The way it works for the US , it wil laso work for us european.
If yo ubritish folks think you are so great, some of oyu that keep bashing the EU, then if you leave the UE you also lose trading prviledges. Then you will be exactly what you ar A SINGE LONELY ISLAND. Perfect wiht the rest of 26 states.
Go about the world economy by yourself if you are that smug. See how long it lasts.

The EU needs ot get together as one single country, one singel army, oen singl pressident. and loe and behold no national official language.
If the US has no official language but we all know its' english, then the case of Europe is even more straight forward. It's ot a lot of languages, so we'r not going ot impose a singel official language. Still English , and French are stopke nin multiple countries. Most turist can deal with english just fine. Whatever..It's now the end of the world ..what's important its' that we get together and act as one ..otherwise we fall prey ot the divide and coquer. Look at the US, united...look at China 1.3 billion. Again united inside one border.
If someoen thinks the EU is gonna last like this with the current econmic crisys, and all future event .well.let's just say they are day dreaming. SO with or without the Uk , Europe will be united. We preffer with the Uk, If now ..fine..let's see how much trade you can do by beying a single island of the coast of a lanrge conutry such a the USE(U.S.of Europe).
SO you've got hte banking system set up..bit deal, we'll keep the swiss doing the job for us. ...just to spite you...if oyu 're out , you're out for good, no more freebies ! No more trade agreements, no more interbanking stuff. Are you ready ?

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by ollncasino

 

I am sure that if Europe ever faced a mutual threat from outside the continent then appropriate alliances would be formed and a co-ordinated strategy developed and actioned - the same can be said about any possible threat posed by an emerging rogue nation within Europe.

There is no need to compromise our ability to independantly defend our own borders and to hand control of our Armed Services to foreign powers.

edit on 22/9/12 by Freeborn because: spelling

Why are yo usure ? If a threat from outside apears, well tough luck mr. "uk is not european, it's british and it rullz!!11".
You want a referendum on leaving the EU, you leave the EU ? well you're on your own !!!!

The idea here is to have one army, one country...so you brits are nt giving over comand to "foreign powers"(thou you are doing it now with the US), you are part of the same armyas everyone else...I guess logic's hard for some.

reply to post by Choice777


It's not Europeans that I or a lot of my fellow countrymen dislike or distrust or even the idea of some sort of federal alignment with a free trade and mutual defence agreements etc but rather the grotesque monstrosity that is the EU we have at present.

It is riddled with corruption.
Waste and cronyism are both endemic.
Bureucratic red tape strangles incisive decision making.
It is both undemocratic and autocratic.
It fails to recognise national and cultural differences and preferences.
It is unwieldy and dictatorial.
It is unrepresentative and self-promoting.

Oh, and it is decidedly anti-UK and passionately pro Franco-Germany.

The transfer of sovereignty to Brussels is illegal under UK Law.

The British electorate voted to remain within the EEC in 1975.
The EEC was a free trade organisation - there was no mention of political union.

Coming from North East England I have a deep distrust and dislike of the London centric nature of UK politics - I have even less reason to trust unelected political mandarins in Brussels to look after me, my family and my friends interests.

All I want is a referendum so that the British people can decide themselves if they want to remain within the EU.

If they decide to do so then we should do it with full commitment and try to change it into something we can be proud of.
If they decide to leave the EU then we have to put our differences aside and work together towards building a positive, vibrant and caring UK that it could and should be.

But we want the freedom and right to self-determination.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here as to the British desire to remain out of this endeavour.

Its not disgust of continental Europe.

We like Europe just fine. We like to visit, we like to trade.

We just do not want to be either bound to it irrevocably, subservient to it, or dependent upon it.

To suggest that the UK would allow the EU to be overrun without acting in its defence is a nonsense. In reverse its not credible that a united EU would allow a hostile force to overrun the UK thus providing that force with an unsinkable staging post off the european coast.

The UK simply has no need to be a part of this.

More credible is the army will be used to prevent a state from returning to independence after it decides the EU superstate isn't to its liking. Consolidated political power in the EU will only be sustainable with violence implied or practiced, which is only achievable with a military owing its allegiance to the superstate rather than the state. Thats what this is really for. The Southern US states once thought they had joined a club they could leave. Joiners of an EU superstate will make the same discovery.

reply to post by Choice777


Got to love the irony of you having a pop at Brits apparently being "disgusted" at Europe, then you launch into a vitriolic and bile filled post against the UK.

No one here has said they hate Europe, but rather the current setup which, if you want us to integrate and become part of (and face it, the EU needs the UK like it needs Germany) then there had better be some major changes.

However, if you so choose to continue down the path of becoming a monolithic, undemocratic and bureaucractic monstrosity, then we (and everyone else in the EU for that matter) should have a fair and free vote on whether they should be a part of it.

If we did decide to extricate ourselves from the EU, we wouldn't lose our free trade or travel. We'd have the same set up as Norway. Be part of the trading bloc (as we originally voted for) but leave the political union to those that want it.

reply to post by justwokeup


Being from the United States, I enjoy reading this.

You all are learning what we in the US have learned the hard way.

You are saying the right things and asking the right questions. Good to see...

I hope the UK thinks good and hard before they join this, U.S.E. LOL! It spells "use".... Just noticed that!

Anyway. One could go, on and on regarding all the trappings of such a political union. MOST of you seem to have a handle on it.

Regarding our cival war. It was about the rights of free and sovereign states. Yes once a state joins such a Union it is very hard to get out and costly.

As it did in the US, it'll only take a couple generations of federal public school indoctrination of your children to loose there cultural and national identities.