If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Europe)   Germany leads swift charge to unite Europe with an army. Britain is the only country standing in the way. Not a repeat from 1939-1941   (neurope.eu) divider line 90
    More: Interesting, Europe, swifts  
•       •       •

10922 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Sep 2012 at 12:06 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-19 12:08:46 PM  
Well fark.
 
2012-09-19 12:11:24 PM  
This is a good idea how?
 
2012-09-19 12:12:31 PM  
The crescendo of all these news stories will be absolutely deafening and astounding. As much as people are downplaying the Mayan Calendar thing.... we seem to be making it into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 
2012-09-19 12:13:04 PM  
Substitute the word 'France' for 'Germany' and it's 1805-1812 all over again.
 
2012-09-19 12:13:28 PM  
Boy, that would be a fearsome bunch...
 
2012-09-19 12:13:34 PM  
Down with NATO!
 
2012-09-19 12:14:29 PM  
I want to know from people in those countries whether they really are in support of this gradual creep of the EU towards a federal superstate with its own central banks, military, judiciary, elected officials etc... Or whether like everyone else they dislike the idea, but unfortunately their politicians have sold them out.

I can't imagine anyone in favour of a united Europe, least of all Europeans. We have hated each other for 2,000 years, and the cultural differences from top to bottom are vast. Look how well trying to get everyone to think the same way economically with the Euro worked. It will not work.

Plus it's not very democratic when the elected representatives give all their authority over to an unelected council and president who are not removable and have no accountability.

I forsee this all going very bad, not very long.
 
2012-09-19 12:14:34 PM  

JackieRabbit: This is a good idea how?


If America is going to be busy with containing China, the Euros will have to deal with Putin. A pan Euro army would be something you could forward deploy into Eastern Europe and plays nicer than the Germans just flat out building a base in Poland and/or the Baltic States.

Also of course the UK isn't down for this. The fark do they need with an army? They're a naval power and need a big ass navy to keep their British Commonwealth trade routes protected.
 
2012-09-19 12:15:50 PM  
This seems like a pretty natural progression of the EU. Countries giving up independent armed forces would be a really big deal though.
 
2012-09-19 12:17:07 PM  

haterade: Down with NATO!


Does this mean that the U.S. can finally come home?
 
2012-09-19 12:17:43 PM  
I'm sure it would be fine if they would just call it "Her Majesty the Queen's Army of Europe."
 
2012-09-19 12:17:50 PM  
And I'm sure they'll all agre on who should lead this force, right?
 
2012-09-19 12:18:17 PM  
The morning will come when the world is mine.♫Tomorrow belongs to me.♫
 
2012-09-19 12:18:53 PM  
sylviabrallier.com

Thoguh: This seems like a pretty natural progression of the EU. Countries giving up independent armed forces would be a really big deal though.


The French can finally get a new battle flag under this arrangement.
 
2012-09-19 12:19:24 PM  

Slaxl: Plus it's not very democratic when the elected representatives give all their authority over to an unelected council and president who are not removable and have no accountability.


If people in power weren't petty little shiats, it wouldn't matter if the EU became a nation. It would be like, "oh, looks like someone changed my zipcode. that's cool, I guess."
 
2012-09-19 12:20:43 PM  
Maybe they'll buy a whole bunch of our shiat. USA USA USA
 
2012-09-19 12:20:44 PM  

Slaxl: Plus it's not very democratic when the elected representatives give all their authority over to an unelected council and president who are not removable and have no accountability.

I forsee this all going very bad, not very long.


Probably the best thing in reality is to split up defense concerns. Let the Brits handle the Navy. The Scandinavia countries can chip in with submarines as well. The French and Germans can handle land war. Everyone can chip in terms of Eurofighters. Smaller countries like Austria, the Low Countries, etc can contribute contingents of troops that integrate into French or German divisions. The French speaking Belgiums for example could have an armored regiment that frequently trains with a French army and can easily integrate in war time. Countries could also help kind of fund some of the Eastern European countries modernization. Like the Dutch overpay by a percentage on 100 Leopard 2s and in return the Poles get that percentage off on 100 Leopard 2s.

The big issue is that the French aren't reliable in terms of military commitments. They pulled out of NATO at one point, now their new socialist president is pulling away from Germany. You spend two decades setting up a framework with them, they wake up pissy one morning, and flush the whole damn thing.

The Italians can sit around and eat glue or whatever they do during wartime.
 
2012-09-19 12:20:46 PM  
We need a word that emphasizes the swiftness of it. What's German for "lightning"?
 
2012-09-19 12:21:24 PM  
We've always been at war with Eastasia...
 
2012-09-19 12:23:02 PM  
sounds great, for us. if europe had a decent sized army that worked in unison, then we could have a much larger ally in our errant endeavors... or, a much more significant opposition to our errant endeavors.

nice way to keep our indiscriminate aggression in check when it's nonsense, and then offer a big supplement when it's justified.
 
2012-09-19 12:23:32 PM  
This sounds like a mix of NATO and OSCE, and without US involvement.
 
2012-09-19 12:23:34 PM  

ha-ha-guy: JackieRabbit: This is a good idea how?

......Also of course the UK isn't down for this. The fark do they need with an army? They're a naval power and need a big ass navy to keep their British Commonwealth trade routes protected.



They are not a Naval power. They once were.....not anymore.
Cannot project power.

/NATO or UN sqabbles will equal EU military squabbles.
//nice idea, hard to make work
 
2012-09-19 12:23:36 PM  

StrikitRich: haterade: Down with NATO!

Does this mean that the U.S. can finally come home?


I wish. Let the europeans carry the security flag for a while.
 
2012-09-19 12:26:11 PM  
Thoguh
This seems like a pretty natural progression of the EU. Countries giving up independent armed forces would be a really big deal though.


Yeah, that's not very likely.
And the other stuff like "a pan-European foreign ministry" to write one strongly-worded letter instead of "Germany says X , France says Y, UK says Z and Luxembourg says 'I don't care'" has been talked about for at least 15 years.
 
2012-09-19 12:26:32 PM  
You said yourapeein'
 
2012-09-19 12:27:42 PM  
The United States seem to be about the only crackers around that still try to invade other countries.
I say they should go for it.
The US the one that needs to be restricted.
 
2012-09-19 12:28:51 PM  
It seems like a good, inevitable idea, except all the countries of Europe hate each other from all the fighting for 1500 years.
 
2012-09-19 12:29:27 PM  
Never trust a guy named Guido.
 
2012-09-19 12:33:41 PM  

Slaxl: I want to know from people in those countries whether they really are in support of this gradual creep of the EU towards a federal superstate with its own central banks, military, judiciary, elected officials etc... Or whether like everyone else they dislike the idea, but unfortunately their politicians have sold them out.

I can't imagine anyone in favour of a united Europe, least of all Europeans. We have hated each other for 2,000 years, and the cultural differences from top to bottom are vast. Look how well trying to get everyone to think the same way economically with the Euro worked. It will not work.

Plus it's not very democratic when the elected representatives give all their authority over to an unelected council and president who are not removable and have no accountability.

I forsee this all going very bad, not very long.


The basic, simple problem with The European Project: You got a bureaucracy before you actually got a government. The EU Parliament is a powerless joke.

The US had about 130 years before we ran into anything more burdensome than fire regulations, import duties, and dogcatchers.
 
2012-09-19 12:36:17 PM  
seems like a good idea to me. hard as hell to pull off but if they can then kudos to them.

to all the haters out there quick tip. It's a good idea when countries who like us pull together. you want your allies aligned and your enemies fractured, not the other way round.
 
2012-09-19 12:39:32 PM  
Doesn't the German Constitution EXPLICITELY forbid the German Army from using armored vehicules and artillary outside their own borders?

That is why they let other countries rent their tanks and cannon in Afghanistan.
 
2012-09-19 12:40:05 PM  
Nice, they can start financing their own defense. Maybe now they can take care of events like what happened in the Balkans in the 90's without depending on us to solve their problems.
 
2012-09-19 12:40:23 PM  
FrancoFile:The US had about 130 years before we ran into anything more burdensome than fire regulations, import duties, and dogcatchers.


The War of 1812 might have something to say about that.

/if it could speak
 
2012-09-19 12:41:27 PM  

tom baker's scarf: to all the haters out there quick tip. It's a good idea when countries who like us pull together. you want your allies aligned and your enemies fractured, not the other way round.



With 27 contributors and policy being decided by vote it's pretty fractured. This isn't the unity you are looking for.
 
2012-09-19 12:41:57 PM  

Jim DiGriz: FrancoFile:The US had about 130 years before we ran into anything more burdensome than fire regulations, import duties, and dogcatchers.


The War of 1812 might have something to say about that.

/if it could speak


and the whiskey rebellion.
 
2012-09-19 12:42:54 PM  
You know who else wanted one army all over Europe? Bet lots of people are feeling mighty embarrassed now.
 
2012-09-19 12:45:05 PM  

netcentric: ha-ha-guy: JackieRabbit: This is a good idea how?

......Also of course the UK isn't down for this. The fark do they need with an army? They're a naval power and need a big ass navy to keep their British Commonwealth trade routes protected.


They are not a Naval power. They once were.....not anymore.
Cannot project power.

/NATO or UN sqabbles will equal EU military squabbles.
//nice idea, hard to make work


Their SSN fleet is fairly modern and well maintained. They'll also have one carrier battle group functional. Looks like the second carrier and the Type 45s needed to escort a second one aren't happening, but still between the Type 45s they do have, the Queen Elizabeth, and assuming the Type 26 gets built, they'll be in the Top 5 in terms of naval power projection. Especially in terms of sea lane control and the ability to hunt down commerce raiding vessels/submarines.
 
2012-09-19 12:45:54 PM  
HELL NO.
 
2012-09-19 12:47:32 PM  

SuperT: Jim DiGriz: FrancoFile:The US had about 130 years before we ran into anything more burdensome than fire regulations, import duties, and dogcatchers.


The War of 1812 might have something to say about that.

/if it could speak

and the whiskey rebellion.


You're both missing my point. The War of 1812 had nothing to do with an overreaching, overconfident, dismissive federal government. The Whisky Rebellion was a tax issue, not a bureaucracy issue.

The #1, #2, and #3 complaint about the EU is the continual, unending, and arbitrary regulatory activities of "Brussels".
 
2012-09-19 12:49:27 PM  
US centric mindset:
Pro - Less money from the US, they will pay for their own.
Con - Less input and control from they US, they can stand on their own

But is it really necessary in a M.A.D., mad, mad, mad World??
 
2012-09-19 12:49:43 PM  

Snargi: Never trust a guy named Guido.


Especially a German guy named Guido.
 
2012-09-19 12:51:47 PM  

ha-ha-guy: Slaxl: Plus it's not very democratic when the elected representatives give all their authority over to an unelected council and president who are not removable and have no accountability.

I forsee this all going very bad, not very long.

Probably the best thing in reality is to split up defense concerns. Let the Brits handle the Navy. The Scandinavia countries can chip in with submarines as well. The French and Germans can handle land war. Everyone can chip in terms of Eurofighters. Smaller countries like Austria, the Low Countries, etc can contribute contingents of troops that integrate into French or German divisions. The French speaking Belgiums for example could have an armored regiment that frequently trains with a French army and can easily integrate in war time. Countries could also help kind of fund some of the Eastern European countries modernization. Like the Dutch overpay by a percentage on 100 Leopard 2s and in return the Poles get that percentage off on 100 Leopard 2s.

The big issue is that the French aren't reliable in terms of military commitments. They pulled out of NATO at one point, now their new socialist president is pulling away from Germany. You spend two decades setting up a framework with them, they wake up pissy one morning, and flush the whole damn thing.

The Italians can sit around and eat glue or whatever they do during wartime.


Sitck their finhers in the air, see which way the wind is blowing and choose that side. At least until the the momentum changes.
 
2012-09-19 12:56:09 PM  

ha-ha-guy: assuming the Type 26 gets built, they'll be


I agree that sometime after 2020 they 'may be' marginally able to control sea lanes. Right now, not so much.
(ie: the recent mine sweep Naval exercises in the Gulf etc... etc...)

I'm big on carriers....and you ain't got one. And you ain't got any naval A/C anymore.

The sub fleet is carrying the bulk of the UK fleet, as a best deterent.

Good luck, I hope you prevail. I hope funding gets you what you need. but it'll take a decade.



/India, China and Asia in general
 
2012-09-19 12:57:09 PM  

Hillbilly Jim: Sitck their finhers in the air, see which way the wind is blowing and choose that side. At least until the the momentum changes.


Gotta respect that they don't need a weatherman to know with way the wind blows.
 
2012-09-19 01:01:07 PM  
They are putting a German charismatic, one-testicled, mustachioed, Austrian ex-pat, megalomaniac named Hilter in charge, too.
 
2012-09-19 01:02:18 PM  

netcentric: ha-ha-guy: assuming the Type 26 gets built, they'll be

I agree that sometime after 2020 they 'may be' marginally able to control sea lanes. Right now, not so much.
(ie: the recent mine sweep Naval exercises in the Gulf etc... etc...)

I'm big on carriers....and you ain't got one. And you ain't got any naval A/C anymore.

The sub fleet is carrying the bulk of the UK fleet, as a best deterent.

Good luck, I hope you prevail. I hope funding gets you what you need. but it'll take a decade.



/India, China and Asia in general


Take 5 seconds to click my profile and read the location field before you assume I'm British.
 
2012-09-19 01:08:39 PM  
thesnowolf.com

The Brits once had balls. That was after they went around the world stealing everyone else's balls.

None had more brass than Piper Bill.

2.bp.blogspot.com

All his comrades were carrying rifles. He was playing his bagpipes. That's a very early wave during the Normandy invasion.

Big. Huge. Brass. Balls. Huuuuuggggeeeeee.
 
2012-09-19 01:09:15 PM  
An effective European defense policy? LOL.

/when America collapses Russia will steam roll them
 
2012-09-19 01:12:15 PM  
ha-ha-guy
The Italians can sit around and eat glue or whatever they do during wartime.

"The Italians are on Hitler's side? Fair enough, we had them last time" - Churchill (maybe)

Gen. Von Klinkerhoffen: Ah, the Italian War Hero Medal. I have never seen one of these...
 
2012-09-19 01:14:30 PM  

ha-ha-guy: JackieRabbit: This is a good idea how?

If America is going to be busy with containing China, the Euros will have to deal with Putin. A pan Euro army would be something you could forward deploy into Eastern Europe and plays nicer than the Germans just flat out building a base in Poland and/or the Baltic States.

Also of course the UK isn't down for this. The fark do they need with an army? They're a naval power and need a big ass navy to keep their British Commonwealth trade routes protected.


"British Commonwealth"? That went out of official use in 1949.

Your argument might make sense, if trade with the Commonwealth was anything like trade with the EU. Let's ask Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, shall we?

UK's EU exports have decreased by £0.3 billion (2.2 per cent) compared to June 2012, to £11.8 billion. Compared to July 2011, exports have decreased by £1.1 billion (8.2 per cent).
UK's EU imports have increased by £0.2 billion (1.3 per cent) compared to June 2012, to £17.1 billion. Compared to July 2011, imports decreased by £0.2 billion (1.2 per cent).


UK's non-EU exports have increased by £2.0 billion (17.3 per cent) compared to June 2012, to £13.5 billion. Compared to July 2011, exports have increased by £1.9 billion (16.1 per cent).
UK's non-EU imports have decreased by £0.7 billion (4.1 per cent) compared to June 2012, to £16.0 billion. Compared to July 2011, imports have decreased by £0.6 billion (3.8 per cent).


So, EU and non-EU trade are comparable. But remember that "non-EU" lumps the Commonwealth in with China, Japan, Russia and the United States. Those trade routes get more protection from the US Navy than the Royal Navy, which has one aircraft carrier and 10 submarines, and I suspect that the Commonwealth comes in fourth among those trading partners, maybe even fifth. Its role as a preferred trading partner went out the window in the name of joining the EU.

Your notions about the Commonwealth are outdated, and the Royal Navy has been a second-rate naval power since the 1970s. It's not going to slip to third-rate status until it gives up its boomers and mothballs the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, but I suspect I will live to see that day.
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report