posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 07:49 AM
This thread is getting pretty bizzarre.
1) The EU is not going to attack Israel!.
The EU is critical of certain Israeli policies (as anyone with eyes to see ought to be) but that is hardly anti-semetic or necessarily
As for that weird interpretation of the Bible?
Knock yourself out and enjoy! Whatever 'floats your boat'.
2) It is true that in 1940 into 1941 U-Boats destroyed a significant (and, yes these were unsustainable losses if they had been able to
continue it) part of the British merchant fleet.
But they did not sustain this for long enough......and for all the tonnage lost I suggest you check the actual size of the Brit merchant fleet to
begin with; it was vast.
.....and lets not kid ourselves either; before the USA entered the war and it had become clear the UK would survive, the USA traded with the UK
at top dollar and took most of the UK's reserves and empire territory as payment.....now that's all fair enough given the circumstances but it was
loans and trade not aid.
There were no freebys.....in fact we continue to repay today IIRC.
3) France was not actually defeated in WW1.
Even the French near-mutiny of 1917 was hardly unusual given the circumstances, Germany collapsed completely a year after. So what?
It was an appalling war unlike any other.....I can promise you one thing, any smart a$$ed idiot making cracks like that around WW1 vets who
experienced the truth of it and knew the score would soon be put straight as to how they ought to be ashmaed of themselves and didn't know what they
were talking about. Ditto WW2.
In WW2 France fell after the shock of finding out WW2 was not to be a re-run of WW1.....that was a shock for everyone, even including the USA (and
compared to the US forces in 1939-40.....you know before all the British tech and the nuclear scientists arrived? Wow, talk about not stand a
But there you are, it was seriously tough on France, Denmark, Norway, Holland, Belgium and the UK as we all suffered this shock first but the French
defeat was hardly unique or down to some ludicrous notion of something lacking in the French character.
The comment comparing the French resistance to the regular French army just illustrates how little you understand the situation back then. The
'French regular army' were not in France for a start, what with France being so completely controlled and mostly occupied they could hardly be in
France now could they? That really did limit their possible operations until after D-Day, right?
(You do know the Americans were outnumbered at D-Day by the British and Canadian troops alone, right?)
But this is just adolescent kiddies stuff isn't it?
Mere giggling name calling.
You can't possibly have the first clue nor live in a culture with the slightest idea about what living under an utterly amoral, ruthless and
murderous total occupation is like or you would not be making such stupid insulting comments.
Man you must have some serious insecurities.
4) Krazy Ivan.....if you think French military history is 'unimpressive' how 'unimpressive' is Napoleon then? He only managed to utterly
dominate Europe (and effectively the - then - world) for almost 20yrs.
5)Who by the way is this "we" who would allow Russia (in this very funny comical invasion that, firstly happens at all and, then, by-passes
Germany but takes France! ) to 'take France'?
6) Do you know anything about the current French military? They have 5 modern long endurance nuclear submarines each with 16 modern highly
accurate ballistic missiles (and unlike the UK's similar Trident D5 deterrent the French missiles are completely independant of any US involvement)
with full stealthy MIRV capability for a start....2 always out on patrol.
7) Error 404....I tend to agree with you. We do indeed have far more in common than divides us. Same with the European countries as we relate
to one another.
But I think there are those here who think that the unvarnished truth is anti-American.
This is idiotic and insulting to us in Europe where our families live and lived this stuff.
(plus there is just so much plain damn wrong gross ignorance masquerading as fact about the EU and what Europe is doing here at times, it's
pitiful.....should us Europeans not attempt to set things straight?)
What do I think about the Iraqi/Afghan war and UK involvement?
I think the US was determined to go to war in the ME (especially Iraq) long before 9/11 (read the PNAC documents and the surrounding documents) and,
given the pre-text, got together with some friends in UK intelligence and suckered the current UK gov into this.
I think our government to told either to come along or to f*ck off....IMO litterally.
The joy of 'with us or against us' fascism, huh?
I think Afghanistan was more 'just' than Iraq ever was.....but even there it's my view odd things went on....for instance it has been long
forgotten but the much heralded bringing democracy and the removal of the Taliban and regime change was merely a late 'tacked on' war aim.
I believe our government - rightly - decided that the atlantic alliance was far too valuable to sacrifice (for us in the UK and everybody else,
including Europe....and the USA for that matter) over a dangerous idiot like Bush and his ding-bat fundamentalist evangelical and neo-con crowd and
It's my belief the UK intended and does act as a moderating influence on the US (just like Clement Attlee did with the 'nuke 'em all' war-perv
lunatics in the US during the Korean war).
As far as the conduct of the UK troops goes? Well the news is loud and clear about that. The UK troops have generated far less hostility and because
of it taken far less casualties.....proportionally.
The UK has been to Iraq before, we have a clue about the place. Much to our shame we tried to subjugate the place with gross brutality (gas attacks by
air in the 1920's).
Perhaps that is why 'we' act with a sensitivity that is widely reported to be very lacking in the US approach.....plus things like our policies and
behaviour in northern Ireland have clearly demonstrated the short-term and diminishing 'gains' such a policy can only create.
I have a mate out there. He tells me a little of what is going on.
Here's an example of what UK troops don't do but Americans did (and probably thought it really funny....til the consequences arrived).
US troops at one point were often to be found in HumVees driving around Mosques - during the religious services - with recorded announcements blaring
out......now this might have been acceptable to a point given the practicalities but to follow the announcements with heavy metal music was just
asking for a very large crowd of resentful angry people. Do you see?
8) There isn't a lot of 'friction' between the EU & the US.
There are those trying to get some going as they see the EU as a 'threat' to there plans for a world utterly dominated by the USA but we all know
what they can do.
9) Now finally to return to topic.......
The EU is not attempting to become a military superpower.
That is not what has been proposed at all
There have been certain instances in the past where a 'Europe only' set-up would have been more flexible and quicker to act that the existing
This is the issue being addressed by the allocation of certain national units to this new creation.....it might even be the same units already
allocated to NATO. I don't know the full ins and outs of it but I do know it is exactly the same sort of idea.
There isn't going to be a 'new army, airforce or navy'.
There isn't going to be anything that does not already exist.
People in the USA can cast around for military threats as much as they like but it isn't going to be the EU.
Strategically we in the EU only spend the minimum we might - at a stretch - need.
Some people might reasonably say we could do with a slightly bigger army or a couple of squadrons of planes or maybe a few ships .....but that is just
peripheral tinkering...... the idea that we would ever fundamentally and grossly bloat out our military to anything like the absurd size of the US's
is just laughable.
But fundamentally Americans are on their own there.
Face it, America out-spends the next 35 countries in the 'league table' of militray spending combined.
We aren't playing that game - and we never will - and it's dawning on some Americans that they now have serious trouble justifying it as no-one is
playing that game any more.
Pity they keep voting for politicians who keep wasting mountains of their cash on military kit & high-tech toys they will never need.
10) Go home Americans. There is no need for you to be staying in Europe now, WW2 is long over, the cold war is long over, the Russians went
home 15yrs ago....why are you still here? Seriously, why?
There is nothing 'natural' about this. Just why are and why should be approx 116 000 assigned to Europe right now?
Save yourselves a lot of $ and go home.
Sadly you look more like an occupying army with each year that passes and this can only start to create problems for us all.
[edit on 13-11-2004 by sminkeypinkey]