I'm talking about the abolition of all national armies - not neccessarily the abolition of national governments & national laws.
It seems to work for the United States, China & India - three massive continents. It would bring efficiency gains as well as a pooling of capabilities, and the world would take note of what the European parliament has to say then.
2007-02-02 08:01:06 · 12 answers · asked by profound insight 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Never, EVER plan anything that involves the French.
2007-02-02 08:05:28 · answer #1 · answered by Not Ecky Boy 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Let us be objective about this.
The major military players in Europe have different military doctrines. Great Britain emphasises individual training, which makes British Infantry superlative. Germany favours balanced forces built on speed (not surprising, given the legacy of Model, Rommel, Von Manteuffel, Spiedel etc). France has the potential to be excellent in military terms, but is hampered by her politicians. Norway, Belgium, Austria will sponge on the UK, Germany and the Dutch. Holland maintains a very good navy for the size of the country, including very competent Marine infantry.
Spain is not much use. Portugal can just about defend its homeland. Italy is trying hard. Greece does its best to resist espionage by arresting planespotters who photograph their sixty-year old transport aircraft. Turkey, with a lot of elderly equipment and conscription to boot, proves that one can make a silk purse out of a - handful of bulgar wheat.
To make a united European Defence Force, therefore, we can depend on the UK, Holland, Germany, Turkey, and perhaps Italy. This is not enough. We need France, but as long as France puts her national interests first - which is down to her politicians - she will never be able to form part of the backbone of a European Defence Force. This is a pity. The French Daguerre Division, under Gen Rocquejoffre, played an important role in the First Gulf War, and fought well, with elan and panache.
One posits a force of
British infantry
German artillery
Dutch Marines
Italian cooks.
or, the ****-up factor
Italian infantry
German Marines
Dutch artillery
British cooks!
And Turkish Military Police!
2007-02-02 08:51:41 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The largest of the European powers have shamefully ignored their responsibility to NATO in Afghanistan by withholding their troops from entering into hostilities with the Taliban.
Having said that, why would any non-European nation want to partner up with European country's that make up the rules as they go along. Except for Poland, the European powers have not shown themselves to be a proven, dependable, and loyal ally to it's NATO allies, what makes you believe they can ever again be trusted to be part of an even larger coalition?
The problem that often happens with coalition partners is that politics entrench themselves into management decisions. "Too many chefs in the kitchen, spoil the broth." This adage applies to coalition armies because ever one wants to be the boss, soon all you have is anarchy!
2007-02-02 08:41:40 · answer #3 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OH my good GOD..! wake UP...!..it's up and running, & in whithall in the UK,who needs a constitution there pressing ahead anyway with thier dream of a utopia, even though the constituion was shot down by the people's of France & Holland.
And i dare say you think Britain is getting a new aircraft carrier wich is being built in France,,HA,,Ha,,Ha,,No it's for the European defence force, BUT we're paying for it..?
2007-02-02 09:29:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah it sounds great in theory but the EU conflicts with itself quite often. It is a bunch of countries that don't like each other. They bicker so much that european military efficiency would be an oxymoron.
2007-02-02 08:55:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I keep in mind those costs...they're from the rest room Stossel interview, astounding? i think of he's easily sane. What, purely using fact he adheres to the form, he's insane? i comprehend it fairly is not a typical ingredient to be a constitutionalist in as we communicate's present day society, regrettably, even nonetheless it fairly is American as American gets. "is it not genuine that all and sundry it takes for evil to triumph is for stable adult adult males to do not something" genuine, yet what we've finished is obviously the incorrect ingredient. how are you able to argue it fairly is not? Ron Paul additionally reported the factor that we've ousted Saddam, yet on the comparable time have borrowed $10's of billions from China to grant Musharraf; a militia dictator who overthrew an elected government. ....is that an act you think of is sane?
2016-12-13 07:18:16 · answer #6 · answered by bustamante 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
us one country
china one country
india one country
europe several dozen the germans and french would try to run it
history now
germany lost twice www1 www2
france need help twice www1 www2
the brits were there both times to help out
british army best in the world
us army best equipped
french army best surrenderers in the world
german army biggest bullies
2007-02-02 08:17:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
In time maybe but until they can sort them selves out in Brussles I don't think it would be a very clever move
2007-02-02 08:24:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You must be joking, haven't you forgotten about World War II
2007-02-02 08:09:31 · answer #9 · answered by deadguns1 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
IT'S CALLED THE EUROPEAN UNION AND IT'S HAVING A HARD TIME BECAUSE THEY ARE DOMINATED BY FRANCE AND GERMANY.
2007-02-02 08:07:13 · answer #10 · answered by strike_eagle29 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋