Future of the EU

boran_blok · #1 June 7th, 2005, 04:54 PM

well, the thing with no big military in the EU is the fact that the people overhere see no big use in having a big and modern army, I think the Us spends like 10 times as much as the whole EU does on it's army.

and the EU is mainly an economic union, with focus on economy, which is also the only real valid reason the constitution was shot, as it gave too much power to multinationals and such.

El_Phil · #2 June 7th, 2005, 08:26 PM

Now I think about it the German fighter thing was back in the cold war. Everybody who brought F-4s from the US (UK, Japan and a quite a few others) got Sparrow missiles except Germany, due to internal political arguments as I remember. The money was there (this was the cold war there was always the money

), no technical problems but bits of the goverment objected and so the Luftwaffe got no Sparrows.

I think they may have sorted that by now, but with the Green party in coalition goverment anything is possible (except common sense

)

Interesting reasoning boran. I've heard people state the exact opposite, that it gives too much power to unions and will lead us all into German stylee recession and unemployment.

As for the non-millitary, the EUs "Nordic Battle Group" composed of Sweden, Finland, Norway (not quite sure why they're there, but they are) and of course the mighty Estonian army (both of them) has been announced and treatys signed. It's not an army, just troops wearing EU badges supporting the common foreign policy of the EU. Nope nothing army like about that at all....

And if you believe that are you interested in this fine Baghdad timeshare? A very up and coming area....

Atrocities · #3 June 7th, 2005, 09:07 PM

I say the EU should allow Germany to modernize their military and re-arm.

narf poit chez BOOM · #4 June 8th, 2005, 12:50 AM

Let by-gones be bygones? Certainly.

dogscoff · #5 June 8th, 2005, 05:27 AM

Interesting and more-or-less on-topic article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4617721.stm

Yeah yeah, we do need armies and weapons and stuff, but wouldn't it be nice if some of that cash could be pointed in more constructive directions?

Sabin · #6 June 8th, 2005, 08:03 AM

Bah. People being scared of Germany after all these years? Quite...well, fearful, no? Unless Hitler is reincarnated, happened to live in Germany during yet another mega-depression and everyone ignores Germany, I don't really see how Germany is a threat. It is probably better to let Germany rearm anyway - surrounding nations and people would probably keep an eye on Germany - since it is known to be potentially armed, it would be best to watch it. However, if people thought Germany was helpless and not willing to make weapons...*smirk*...

Of course, a civilian or two might notice army movements and such...in this age, it would be fairly difficult to create a army. Then again, it is the risk of the Digital Age...which confers many advantages, and disadvantages. For example, people with an internet connection or cell phones can keep track of troop movements, with relative ease. Also, now everyone has cars, motor boats, and so on. If a war is started, secrecy would be a difficult thing to pull off. Therefore, deception would become the great shield.

Also, the ability to control communications, civilian properties, war management, and so on shall become critical. Currently, it is too easy for outside influences to affect warfare. I predict that World War III, along with other wars shall change warfare, not just in equipment and tactics, but also behavior and control.

El_Phil · #7 June 8th, 2005, 02:00 PM

I think it was Germans not trusting themselves. They could of brought them, their allies wanted them to buy them (take some pressure of the RAF and USAF if the cold war kicked off) and they had the money. But they didn't.

Random relavent(ish) point: The Abrams, main tank of the US army, has British armour and a German gun. It does have a US engine, that's why fuel economy is so poor