[quote]Europe is planning to forge ahead with plans for an EU Army that some fear could eventually displace Nato, with senior officials in Brussels urging EU member states to capitalise on the “political space” left by Britain’s decision to vote to leave.
Federica Mogherini, the EU's foreign policy chief, is preparing to forward a timetable setting out steps to create EU military structures “to act autonomously" from NATO.
Europe’s top diplomat reportedly told colleagues that the military plan - billed by some countries as the foundation of a “European army” - represented a chance for the EU to relaunch itself after the "shocking" Brexit vote.
“We have the political space today to do things that were not really doable in previous years,” Ms Mogherini told EU ambassadors, according to a report in The Times.
The military plan foresees countries such as France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland creating permanent military structures to act on behalf of the EU and for the deployment of the EU's battle groups and 18 national battalions.
It could also comprise an EU military planning and operations headquarters in Brussels that could be a rival to NATO. Last week, the Czech Republic and Hungary backed the plan as the basis to "setting up a joint European army.”
The idea has also reportedly been backed by Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister, who is pushing for more defence co-operation, according to an article in La Repubblica.
His ideas, which are mirrored in the EU plans, include exempting defence equipment manufacturers from paying VAT, and applying EU research grants to the sector – a move which could conflict with EU Treaty restrictions on using EU budget for military expenditures.
A timetable for the plan will be discussed at a meeting of 27 EU leaders — excluding Theresa May — at a summit in Bratislava on 16 September.[/quote]
[URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/europe-forges-ahead-with-plans-for-eu-army/"]Source[/URL]
If a load of these counties cant even pay into NATO properly then the EU army is gunna be a bunch of sit on lawn mowers or something lmao
No.
[QUOTE=Cructo;51010031]This would make no sense unless they want to turn all EU countries into a single territory or something, otherwise they'd simply honor the NATO agreement in the first place[/QUOTE]
eu countries pretty much are a single territory dude lol
[QUOTE=Cructo;51010031]This would make no sense unless they want to turn all EU countries into a single territory or something, otherwise they'd simply honor the NATO agreement in the first place[/QUOTE]
Of course, the only point of stuff like this is that the EU is taking steps towards a Federalization
[QUOTE=Lolkork;51010081]A nato without the US involved would be pretty good.[/QUOTE]
a nato without the US involved as it currently is would have little to no military capability at all
[QUOTE=Lolkork;51010081]A nato without the US involved would be pretty good.[/QUOTE]
You mean a NATO without half of the member states being bankrolled by the US?
Why do you think ~Eurofighters~ take forever to get off the fucking ground and that states would rather keep buying our stuff
i'd be glad for this to go through, so we don't have to spend as much money being europe's military protection
At-least we have a good old exception to it.
I really don't see it happening, however, since so many EU members are apart of NATO and would be working together regardless, in the case of war.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51010108]i'd be glad for this to go through, so we don't have to spend as much money being europe's military protection[/QUOTE]
I'd be okay with continuing support for Visegrad, as they're actually in danger and are willing to cooperate with the US and NATO rather than whine and complain about "imperialism" and then quickly jump into our arms whenever anything burps in Eastern Europe
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51010097]
Why do you think ~Eurofighters~ take forever to get off the fucking ground and that states would rather keep buying our stuff[/QUOTE]
compared to what? the f-35?
NATO Mk2?
for the record EU battlegroups have already existed for a few years now, this looks like it's just calling for a better military structure to deploy them
[QUOTE=Lolkork;51010166]I never said that it would be feasible, I just think it would be nice to not have to depend on the US for defence.[/QUOTE]
then i agree, that would be best for everyone involved.
Yee, EU army!
Time to take back what's ours aka the world.
[QUOTE=Cructo;51010183]Then maybe the EU governments should try to [I]at the very least[/I] spend the agreed amount of the GDP for defense, and even more of that if they want an independent force.[/QUOTE]
How is that guideline established? Not that I'm saying we shouldn't do as we say, but is that a guideline decided by the NATO organization separately as a recommendation or is it something that the individual countries have actually decided on democratically?
[QUOTE=Lolkork;51010081]A nato without the US involved would be pretty good.[/QUOTE]
A NATO without us involved is a completely helpless NATO that can't staff its front lines, has no reinforcement capacity, and is easily stopped production-wise.
NATO hinges on America's unique ability to make a whole hell of a lot of materiel with absolute impunity should shit go down. Europe may be able to pony up a single wave, a front line, but it's gonna be America that resupplies it. It's one of the major ways we helped win the last major fustercluck the world found itself in.
[QUOTE=TestECull;51010217]A NATO without us involved is a completely helpless NATO that can't staff its front lines, has no reinforcement capacity, and is easily stopped production-wise.
NATO hinges on America's unique ability to make a whole hell of a lot of materiel with absolute impunity should shit go down. Europe may be able to pony up a single wave, a front line, but it's gonna be America that resupplies it. It's one of the major ways we helped win the last major fustercluck the world found itself in.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because Europe isn't industrialized at all. You serious?
Europe has manpower, funds, and factories. If shit goes down, things can immediately be changed. Factories be repurposed and military funds be immediately upped to supply a powerful army.
It's seems to be a very popular thought here that Europe is actually disarmed and got no army at all. Are you sure you're not exaggerating a little?
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51010128]compared to what? the f-35?[/QUOTE]
yeah that's why you're the ones buying f-35s and we're not the ones buying eurofighters
[QUOTE=Fantastical;51010238]Yeah, because Europe isn't industrialized at all. You serious?
Europe has manpower, funds, and factories. If shit goes down, things can immediately be changed. Factories be repurposed and military funds be immediately upped to supply a powerful army.[/QUOTE]
if shit goes down you may not have the time to repurpose those factories to the effect they need to be
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51010058]eu countries pretty much are a single territory dude lol[/QUOTE]
Wait, when did we federalize?
Did I missed something?
if the war machine takes too long to rev up then it is useless
[QUOTE=Jund;51010294]yeah that's why you're the ones buying f-35s and we're not the ones buying eurofighters[/QUOTE]
that was literally a question
because if he was saying the eurofighter can't get off the ground but the f-35 can, i'm interested to know the reasoning considering the f-35 is still in testing while the eurofighter is in active service
[editline]6th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;51010313]if the war machine takes too long to rev up then it is useless[/QUOTE]
what do you think this thread is about resolving
[QUOTE=Jund;51010294]yeah that's why you're the ones buying f-35s and we're not the ones buying eurofighters[/QUOTE]
On top of what Cloak rider said, you could at least be happy that a lot of our military spending (even if it is below what NATO is asking for) goes toward buying your shit.
Perhaps it's a good idea for Europe. Truth be told, I'm not sure what results it will bring. Hopefully, it will increase global stability and make for a more equal distribution of military spending. Only time will tell what consequences such an action will bring.
[QUOTE=Fantastical;51010238]Yeah, because Europe isn't industrialized at all. You serious?
Europe has manpower, funds, and factories. If shit goes down, things can immediately be changed. Factories be repurposed and military funds be immediately upped to supply a powerful army.[/QUOTE]
The difference is that Russia is right on Europe's doorstep. The Russian tank blitzkrieg that NATO feared during the entire Cold War could overrun Eastern Europe within weeks, long before a BMW factory could be repurposed into a Leopard factory.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51010325]On top of what Cloak rider said, you could at least be happy that a lot of our military spending (even if it is below what NATO is asking for) goes toward buying your shit.[/QUOTE]
The USA military industrial complex has made a fortune off of the NATO treaty.
[QUOTE=Dutch Flowers;51010335]The USA military industrial complex has made a fortune off of the NATO treaty.[/QUOTE]
That's kinda why I'm asking where the 2% came from - is it just NATO saying "Yeah this is the amount we need" or is it something Denmark (along with everybody else) agreed actually to at some point?
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51010097]You mean a NATO without half of the member states being bankrolled by the US?
Why do you think ~Eurofighters~ take forever to get off the fucking ground and that states would rather keep buying our stuff[/QUOTE]
You mean German ones which they only have half of them operational.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.