KAUSpilot
Topic Author
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:15 pm

'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:13 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/30/weu30.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/04/30/ixnewstop.html

What do all you peace loving anti-iraq anti-military europeans have think about this. Are you happy about it or do you feel betrayed by the fact that the EU government is very interested in positioning itself as a new military rival to the US?
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU A

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:25 pm

Well be sure to install the right amount of reverse gears in the transportation equipment.

Thanks,
France
----
Please keep the tanks out of our yard.

Thanks,
Belguim and The Netherlands


[Edited 2003-04-30 06:28:42]
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:30 pm

The US needs a worthy rival. I predict this will hasten world peace rather than delay it.
Dear moderators: No.
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:38 pm

I seriously doubt that even still they will stand a chance, you have to have money to pay for the high tech equipiment, look at how long the Eurofighter program is taking.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:38 pm

>>>The US needs a worthy rival. I predict this will hasten world peace rather than delay it.<<<

To do what?






You're only as good as your last departure.
 
We're Nuts
Posts: 4723
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 6:12 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:44 pm

To act as a checkman to keep us from making asses of ourselves.
Dear moderators: No.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 2:31 pm

Sounds like just a joint Franco-German army ultimately.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 2:57 pm

I am all for Europe pulling its own weight in matters of defence. By all means, as Europe has similar economic potential with the U.S., the U.S. should in fact insist that the EU maintain force projection capabilities on par with those of the U.S., so that the U.S. no longer has to subsidize European interests, as it has for 50 years.

Force projection means aircraft carriers, troop transports, pre-positioned equipment, etc. It costs money. Europe generally doesn't like to spend that kind of money.

My big question is how the command-and-control would be handled. What will be the operating language of the military? Will the nationalities of the different commanders become a political issue?

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:18 pm

My big question is how the command-and-control would be handled. What will be the operating language of the military? Will the nationalities of the different commanders become a political issue?

All valid questions. I think a bigger question is what if Europe cannot develop a unified political stand? How can an army support a non-unanimous decision? Look at the division of Europe over Iraq......that would render a Euro-army impotent from the get-go.


I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:24 pm

>>>To act as a checkman to keep us from making asses of ourselves.<<<

Can you be more specific? For instance, what would've been the scenario with Iraq had this EU force been in place?
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
saintsman
Posts: 2037
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2002 12:34 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:56 pm

I'm sure France would love an EU Army with a common equipment policy. As long as it was French equipment of course.

There is no way that France would remain in any EU Army if they did not purchase most of their equipment from them.
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:05 pm

Can the kids stop with the France bashing please? I guess there is more to bash about in the US with cowboy Bush, than about Chirac (although I don't like both).

First of all, I think that the Iraq crisis made the way for a new Europe (btw: even now we are not the old europe kauspilot, can you stop your anti-europeanism please?). Everyone faces now that from now, we have to sit around the table for everything, and take a general standpoint following what the majority thinks. What we need is integration.

@Charles: language is indeed a problem... Probably English (what else)?

Not America only has to decide about world affairs what they want, and do what they want, also Europe needs it's voice. And I think this is the first step to a new and better Europe.
 
KAUSpilot
Topic Author
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:15 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:21 pm

btw: even now we are not the old europe kauspilot, can you stop your anti-europeanism please

Yeah, that's great. Blame me for the title of the article.
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:31 pm

I think it's rather funny to see how we first get picked at for not having a proper army, and when we decide to get one, we get picked on for that... True colours shining through?

Staffan
 
KAUSpilot
Topic Author
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 2:15 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:33 pm

I'm not saying it's necessarily good or bad, just want to know what you think about it.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:42 pm

Sabena,

The French refuse to even comply with common sense safety rules concerning French and English. Here in Geneva, if you listen to ATC radio, all the airlines use English, except for the French - no matter what the dangers are and in spite of accidents having happened in France itself due to pilots speaking different languages. Given this level of national pride, I don't believe they will accept having to use English for all military communication.

What if the European Armies are structured like the U.S. National Guard - i.e. normally under the authority of the individual states, but if the situation calls for it, it can immediately be placed under Federal authority? This would avoid having a large, fixed EU force. All you would really need is a rapid deployment force.

I think a rapid deployment force would consist of, under the full authority of the EU, 1 paratroop division, specialized light infantry tailor-made for being dropped into hot-spots on short notice, and as a heavier unit, although a bit slower to deploy, would be a unit similar to the American armored cavalry regiments, which are a very well balanced, hard hitting mixture of armor, infantry, and airborne capability (the downside to the cavalry regiments is that they lack much of the logistical tail - they depend on other units for support for sustained operations).

With 2 such units, the EU can have a very hard-hitting force of 15-20,000 or so men - pretty much all you really need on very short notice. These units could be rotated - i.e. one year, both units would be "on loan" from Great Britain, Italy the following year, then France, and so on. This would allow each unit to train together and be familiar with each others tactics, cultural issues etc which unavoidably will be a factor in creating an effective and cohesive fighting force, even in the very first years of the RDF.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 6:25 pm

An EU army without the British military is like NATO without the US. Pointless.
I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 7:22 pm

The French refuse to even comply with common sense safety rules concerning French and English. Here in Geneva, if you listen to ATC radio, all the airlines use English, except for the French

Ok Charles, I also don't like this, but the same happens in Spain! Also Iberia pilots talk Spanish to ATC over there.

Why do you actually blame the arrogance of France, while America is actually far more arrogant?

/Frederic
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 7:31 pm

Kauspilot, to come back at your introduction:

What do all you peace loving anti-iraq anti-military europeans have think about this. Are you happy about it or do you feel betrayed by the fact that the EU government is very interested in positioning itself as a new military rival to the US?

In the first sentence, I feel a lot of hatred towards the anti-war 'scum' over here.

1) peace loving: what do you have against peace?
2) anti-iraq: that's you. We are anti-Saddam, not anti the rest of the country.
3) anti-military: depends in which context. Wars were needed to maintain status quo until 1923. Now we have something called 'collective security'.
4) 'Europe will become military 'RIVAL' to the US': maybe you see, since you like what cowboy bush says so much, everything black and white (like 'you're with us or against us' for example), but here you are again wrong. It's not about becoming a rival of the US. Do YOU feel betrayed maybe because some scum old europe thing would developpe a european military unit? May only America have a good developped military unit?

United States population is about 4-5% of world population, it's time you guys realize that the world does not only turn around America, but also around other countries/states/whatever. Bush his unilateral attack on Iraq was low, very low, and if you want to see a better world, with a better relationship between europe-america, dump the bastard in 2004 and give the chance to a new start.

/Frederic
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3268
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 7:36 pm

The French are entitled by ICAO to use French.

Lets reverse the question. Imagine that not English but French were the official ATC language. Would Americans always speak French? I do not think so!

Just stop the France-bashing al right?
Attamottamotta!
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 7:49 pm

Very true Peter, but those guys are so used that everyone has to adapt himself to the US...

And still they don't know why all those people are becoming anti-american (let's make clear: not me included).

/Frederic
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:03 pm

I know they are allowed to do it, but that does not mean that it is a good idea. Also, Geneva is not in their country - they speak French simply because they know that the controller will know how to speak it, but both (necessarily) also speak English, and there are a lot more pilots operating around here who speak english and no French than the other way round. I don't care if they speak Swahili, but they should pick a single language and stick to it.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4443
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:23 pm

KAUS Pilot, you sound baffled.

With a man like George W. Bush in the White House, I'd be beefing up my defenses too.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:41 pm

Jcs17, for being a little kid, you sure think you know what the world is about. Fact is, son, you're getting all your one-liners, I imagine, from Mommy and Daddy, and any redneck friends you associate with.

I think France deserved just criticism for their actions, but enough is enough. This is a long-time friend an ally of the U.S., and this infantile behavior by the administration, by Congress and by others is getting to the point of absurdity.

With all those people making ânes of themselves, do we really need to listen to a teenage kid who knows shit about the world, trying to act clever? I don't think so.

Jcs, maybe you should just stick to things that you know about, like being a good little redneck.

My wife and I are going on a trip to celebrate our anniversary this weekend. I think I'll get us a bottle of wine when we're on our trip, and I think I'll try to make sure it's French.

[Edited 2003-04-30 15:42:25]
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 1:12 am

Alpha 1, may I recommend a good (1995 perhaps?) Chateauneuf-de-Pape?

Had a very decent bottle last night in fact. Great stuff!
 
charleslp
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 9:33 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 1:43 am

An E.U. Army sounds like an okay idea, but you must also consider what makes the Army effective. For example, if you want an effective Navy, then you must have effective submarines, effective surface warships, effective Naval aircraft and effective aircraft carriers (but maybe not as big as Nimitz-class carriers).

What if the European Armies are structured like the U.S. National Guard - i.e. normally under the authority of the individual states, but if the situation calls for it, it can immediately be placed under Federal authority? This would avoid having a large, fixed EU force. All you would really need is a rapid deployment force.

Sounds like a good idea to me!  Big thumbs up
 
Thumper
Posts: 520
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2001 2:12 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 1:51 am

I think its a great idea.I have been saying all along the U.S. should get out of the U.N. and N.A.T.O. Think of all the money we would save to take care of our own problems at home.We should stay out of all European problems.Let Europe handle it. Let China,Japan,and S.Korea handle N.Korea. We would always be there to help any ally if they needed it,but if there is no direct threat to the U.S. stay out of it. Trying to police the world has brought nothing but hate toward us. Let the rest of the world take care of themselves. Countries like G.B.,Germany and most Europeans know that we would never let them down if it came down to an all out war,but anything short of that let them handle it.
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 2:10 am

Thumper, sounds good to me - but remember, if the US quit NATO, Germany, France, the UK etc. wouldn't be allies of the US any longer.

As for quitting the UN: I heard the UN was a "tool" from some American politicians - why would someone want to waste that "tool"?

But stopping to police the world would most likely reduce the hatred towards your country, which in return would definitely save a load of Dollars.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
747-451
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 2:40 am

Sabena....

"Very true Peter, but those guys are so used that everyone has to adapt himself to the US..."

Hmmmm....talk about arrogance yawn.....

************************************************

Alpha1;

"I think France deserved just criticism for their actions, but enough is enough. This is a long-time friend an ally of the U.S., and this infantile behavior by the administration, by Congress and by others is getting to the point of absurdity. "

France has been "problematic" to the US since DeGaulle. And the infantile behavior of Chirac (Along with Germany and Russia)to cover his extensive dealings with Iraq; ones which are of a such great degree and have/had the potential to do alot of damage. However, what distinguishes France from the others who did not support this "war" is how active they lobbied against the US, and decided to also use "unilateralism" in threatening to use their UNSC veto powers no matter what. There are other instances of refusal of fly overs etc in the past as well. Of all of the countires that have differing opinion, the French have been most vocal and most active in hedging against the US, which is okay for some of the issues--but their countering to the US in this affair (Iraq) while "enrighing" them (Dassault, TotalFinaElf etc) on the sly while contraveining 687,678 and 1441 is criminal, disgusting, imperious and something they now how to accuse others of, "unilateralist". These unparrallel actions on their part should not be "bashed" but should be remembered and taken into account in the US future dealings with them. As far as "infantile behavior", Chretien and his inabability to quell rhetoric from his cabinet (current and former members) as well as the some of the invective from the German elections show impetuousness is not exclusive to the US  Insane.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 2:47 am

how active they lobbied against the US, and decided to also use "unilateralism" in threatening to use their UNSC veto powers no matter what.

Oh, you mean like Dubya wanted to attack, NO MATTER WHAT OR WHO? THAT kind of unilateralism, 747-451?
 
GC
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 6:03 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU A

Thu May 01, 2003 2:49 am

"Lets reverse the question. Imagine that not English but French were the official ATC language. Would Americans always speak French? I do not think so!"


If the pilot was a cajun from Louisiana they wouldn't have a probem  Smile


The good thing about this joint Army is at least there won't be a Franco-Germanic war for the first time in 300+ years!  Big grin
 
Guest

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 3:02 am

747-451 wrote:

"However, what distinguishes France from the others who did not support this "war" is how active they lobbied against the US, and decided to also use "unilateralism" in threatening to use their UNSC veto powers no matter what."

So because France dared to oppose Bush's plans they are now "unilateralist"? What about Bush and his repeated opposition to issues important to Europe (Kyoto, to name just one) or his repeated ignoring of that continent's legitimate concerns?

"And the infantile behavior of Chirac (Along with Germany and Russia)to cover his extensive dealings with Iraq"

I see... Any opposition to the war (or any policy advocated by Bush) is by definition infantile and driven by unterior motives. Bush's motives, on the other hand, are as pure as driven snow. Riiight... BTW, I'm no fan of Chirac's, but there is a certain irony when a Bush supporter calls other politicians infantile.

[Edited 2003-04-30 20:03:25]
 
747-451
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 3:22 am

Oh, you mean like Dubya wanted to attack, NO MATTER WHAT OR WHO? THAT kind of unilateralism, 747-451?

No, Scorpio, I'm saying France is in the same boat and guilty of the same thing--typical French hypocrisy; who does the same thing the US does.

PHX-LJU:

So because France dared to oppose Bush's plans they are now "unilateralist"? What about Bush and his repeated opposition to issues important to Europe (Kyoto, to name just one) or his repeated ignoring of that continent's legitimate concerns..

No PHX, read my post. Germany, Russia and a slew of others opposed this war, and that is fine. But the French went out of their way to oppose us, to a much greater degree than Germany or Canada for instance. That distinction implies that unlike Canada or Germany, we will not be able to mediate our differences as easily, if at all. PS-I never said I had a problem with dissention, but I do have an issue with French methods--especially since they employed, with notable ease. the same hegemony and "unilateralismn" as the US--which they made such a "big deal" about.

"I see... Any opposition to the war (or any policy advocated by Bush) is by definition infantile and driven by unterior motives. Bush's motives, on the other hand, are as pure as driven snow. Riiight... BTW, I'm no fan of Chirac's, but there is a certain irony when a Bush supporter calls other politicians infantile."

PHX, please! read the post. As I have said many times, I have no problem with diseention, however, the childishness goes all the way around from "idiot" to "B#$%^&D". Nice to see how many others will lower themselves to "Bush's" level  Insane

PHX, BTW, I don't support our incursion into Iraq. and I view Bush as a failure on the domestic front. However, I wont stand for the pot calling the kettle black, whether it be from Europe or Scttsdale.  Insane

 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 3:44 am

No, Scorpio, I'm saying France is in the same boat and guilty of the same thing--typical French hypocrisy; who does the same thing the US does.

Ah, so it's OK when the US does it, but NOT when someone else does the same in response? Got it.
 
747-451
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 4:21 am

"Ah, so it's OK when the US does it, but NOT when someone else does the same in response? Got it."

Oh, excuse me? where did I say it was okay? Because I didn't. What I am saying is that France practices hypocrisy with ease, like the US does.  Insane
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 4:41 am

Oh, excuse me? where did I say it was okay? Because I didn't. What I am saying is that France practices hypocrisy with ease, like the US does.

So why then is your bitching aimed exclusively at France, and not at the US, if they are, as you say, both the same?
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 5:00 am

I think its a great idea.I have been saying all along the U.S. should get out of the U.N. and N.A.T.O. Think of all the money we would save to take care of our own problems at home.We should stay out of all European problems.Let Europe handle it. Let China,Japan,and S.Korea handle N.Korea. We would always be there to help any ally if they needed it,but if there is no direct threat to the U.S. stay out of it. Trying to police the world has brought nothing but hate toward us. Let the rest of the world take care of themselves. Countries like G.B.,Germany and most Europeans know that we would never let them down if it came down to an all out war,but anything short of that let them handle it.

Thumper, some remarks:

1) The UN and the NATO are made in the theory of 'collective security'. This means that, if one countrie attacks another without any reason, that they will decide which one is the agressor, and will collectively attack the agressor. Result is that the agressor makes no chance. This is why for example Germany would never start a war with France. Diplomacy is since 1928 the word, not war based on status quo.

2) As a lot of you seem to forget: America needs Europe, as Europe needs America. Withdrawn from an international situation (or even suggest this) gives prove of narrow-mindness. It does not go about 'let them solve this and they have to solve that', if there are serious troubles, everyone has to sit around the table and make a COLLECTIVE decision. As for Iraq: the vote of the United States (which includes a lot of countries) was under the circumstances negative for the invasion in Iraq. Bush didn't find this important enough, so he decided to do it unilateral. This is a nice example of how wrong his foreign politics are. He had to listen to the view of the majority. UN is not an institution made to support the UN in everything, but to let us make one statement. If this is no, this also counts for the US (which still counts for only 4 à 5% of the world's population).

3) 'if there is no direct threat to the US': it is because there was no direct threat to the US, that the UK (with the exception of Churchill), the US, ........ decide not to do an intervention in Germany, where Hitler was doing everything that was prohibited to Germany by the winners of WW1. This led to WW2. You see what can happen if nations decide not to act if they are not directly involved?

America would defend Germany, UK,... in case of war, like Belgium, Germany, France,... would defend America in case of war. You finally face that we all need eachother?

/Frederic
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU A

Thu May 01, 2003 6:05 am

747-451:

"And the infantile behavior of Chirac (Along with Germany and Russia)to cover his extensive dealings with Iraq; ones which are of a such great degree and have/had the potential to do alot of damage."

It's really frightning how ignorant some people can be. Of course France dealt with the Saddam regime, but so did the US. I get the impression you believe your country never has done any 'dealings' with Iraq, nor any other represive regime in the region. Get real! As a matter of fact, Germany was the country that did most of the business dealings with Saddam's regime followed by France and, in third place, guess who?

"However, what distinguishes France from the others who did not support this "war" is how active they lobbied against the US..."

How active they lobbied against the US? Excuse me, but the US wanted to go to war, France didn't. All France did was promote their viewpoint, as did the US. France did so at the international organization specifically founded to handle such matters, the UNSC.

", and decided to also use "unilateralism" in threatening to use their UNSC veto powers no matter what."

Well, that's what veto-powers are for. And, actually, it wasn't 'no matter what'. They said they favoured giving Hans Blix more time, as did other nations at the UNSC.

"There are other instances of refusal of fly overs etc in the past as well."

Say Mexico wanted to invade Canada and the US would be against it. Would you nevertheless allow the Mexican Air-force to fly over your country?

"Of all of the countires that have differing opinion, the French have been most vocal and most active in hedging against the US."

Maybe because of all those countries, France has a veto-power and does not depend, economically speaking, on the US.

"but their countering to the US in this affair (Iraq) while "enrighing" them (Dassault, TotalFinaElf etc) on the sly while contraveining 687,678 and 1441 is criminal, disgusting, imperious and something they now how to accuse others of, "unilateralist"."

This is one of the biggest misconceptions in this whole Iraq issue. France HAS NOT been enriching themselves during the sanctions-period, nor has any other country. The companies you referred to did dealings with Iraq prior to the sanctions being installed and so did US companies, the latter selling the Iraqis chemical- and biological weapons.

Bash France all you like, but before you do so, make sure you have all the information right!
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 6:08 am

This "EU Army" is really just symbolic, it has no strength. 60,000 French, German , Belgium and Luxemburg troops.

In comparison the US Army National Guard is over 350,000, not including the Air National Guard which boosts B-1 Bombers, F-15, F-16s, C-5s, KC-135s, A-10s.

60,000 EU troops is not going to help maintain peace or change US Foreign policy, in fact I agree (as most other European leaders) with Prime Minister Tony Blair when he said that Europe should not unify just for the purpose of Challenging the US and creating a multi polared world. That will no doubt cause more conflict, not less.

It's just France and Germany's way of saving face in light of the strong support most European leaders showed for the US during the recent build up to the campaign against Saddam's former regime.

Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 6:16 am

France HAS NOT been enriching themselves during the sanctions-period, nor has any other country.

That's up for debate in many quarters. Prove they have not. They and a few others are in DEEP somewhere. But it really is a non issue now. Saddam's gone, the French made money and now everyone hates the U.S. for doing what it did.

One big happy world! LOL  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

"You Can't Beat The Experience"
 
Guest

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 6:38 am

747-451 wrote:

"But the French went out of their way to oppose us, to a much greater degree than Germany or Canada for instance."

Well, Canada and Germany are not permanent UNSC members, so they don't have veto power. I'm sure you would view their opposition differently if they had had the power of veto and tried to use (I can see at least Germany in that position on Iraq).

Anyway, if you blame the French for going out of the way to oppose the war, couldn't you say that the Bush administration went out of its way to support it? Just as Bush tried to convince numerous other nations to follow him, so France tried to persuade them that the war is a bad idea. If the former (a call for certain action) is acceptable to you, why should the latter (a rejection of that call for action) be "taken into account in the US future dealings" with France? Should France respond likewise? If so, what will be the final result of all this? Is this purely about a misguided national pride or about making sure that France (the horror!) doesn't go out of its way to oppose Bush's plans again?

PHX, BTW, I don't support our incursion into Iraq."

This is the problem here. Even though you apparently agree with Europe on the continent's position on the war, you are complaining that some European countries dared to go out of their way in order to oppose Bush's war. In other words, I sense a certain "us vs. them" attitude here: "The Europeans may be right on this issue, but they were wrong not to support us." Well, it's not that simple, sometimes our administration is right (admittedly not too often under Bush), sometimes "they" are right; complex policy matters like this should never be reduced to a "us vs. them" or "How dare they oppose Bush so loudly," sort of arguments, which we hear all too often.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 6:46 am

Actually most European Nations did support the US, it's only Germany, France and Belgium (and Russia)that were opposed.

Spain, Italy, the UK, Poland, Bulgaria, Netherlands, Czech Republic all openly stated their support for the campaign against Saddam's Regime.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU A

Thu May 01, 2003 6:51 am

Jcs17, for being a little kid, you sure think you know what the world is about. Fact is, son, you're getting all your one-liners, I imagine, from Mommy and Daddy, and any redneck friends you associate with.

I think France deserved just criticism for their actions, but enough is enough. This is a long-time friend an ally of the U.S., and this infantile behavior by the administration, by Congress and by others is getting to the point of absurdity.

With all those people making ânes of themselves, do we really need to listen to a teenage kid who knows shit about the world, trying to act clever? I don't think so.

Jcs, maybe you should just stick to things that you know about, like being a good little redneck.

My wife and I are going on a trip to celebrate our anniversary this weekend. I think I'll get us a bottle of wine when we're on our trip, and I think I'll try to make sure it's French.


I know Alpha1...What gives it away? I'm a redneck!!!!

In your view, anyone who is a conservative and doesnt agree with you is considered a total redneck.

Listen, I could throw some insults back your way, but I'll pass...

No offense, bro, but youre really coming off as a jackass lately...
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
 
Guest

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 7:19 am

STT757 wrote:

"Actually most European Nations did support the US, it's only Germany, France and Belgium (and Russia)that were opposed."

Well, you could look at it this way: Germany, France, and Russia are three of the four major European powers, with influence and wealth (or potential wealth, in the case of Russia) that dwarf many smaller countries put together*. Only one of the four regional powers, the UK, was in favor of the war.

Furthermore, ordinary people in the vast majority of European countries (but not the UK) were overwhelmingly opposed to the war, so we can safely speak of Europe's opposition to the war.

* No offense to small countries (I'm Slovenian-born myself), but we need to put things into perspective.


[Edited 2003-05-01 00:20:03]
 
747-451
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 7:19 am

PHX;

Anyway, if you blame the French for going out of the way to oppose the war, couldn't you say that the Bush administration went out of its way to support it?

Not necessarily, because of UN Resolution 1441. This resolution should never have been passed if it were viewed so half heartedly by the UN and it's members-it appears that it was passed as sabre rattling by the UN who never thought it would have to be acted on-but it was at the US and Bush who acted under it's authority. The desire of others to continue the failed "inspections" are an indicator of the unwillingness to use force.

"PHX, BTW, I don't support our incursion into Iraq."

This is the problem here. Even though you apparently agree with Europe on the continent's position on the war, you are complaining that some European countries dared to go out of their way in order to oppose Bush's war. In other words, I sense a certain "us vs. them" attitude here: "The Europeans may be right on this issue, but they were wrong not to support us." Well, it's not that simple, sometimes our administration is right (admittedly not too often under Bush), sometimes "they" are right; complex policy matters like this should never be reduced to a "us vs. them" or "How dare they oppose Bush so loudly," sort of arguments, which we hear all too often."

No, you don't understand where I am coming from. I don't support this incursion. I don't support US action in this affair not one iota. (I also believe that Bush's domestic policies (economy) are a major failure). However, what does disgust and gall me is the hypocrisy of the UN and Europe. I have no problem with disagreements between ourselves and other nations. However, the fecklessness and the moralizing coming forth is apalling. Yes, the US is wrong for it's entanglements in Iraq. And perhaps we are wrong for trying to dictate morality. However, it is equally wrong and hollow for the UN (an organization who would allow a nation like Cuba to head up a human rights commission for example) or Europe (who themselves have extensive entanglements with Iraq for example including some especially dirty ones, such as the French and Germans selling technology what could be weaponized and the Russians selling night vision goggles and GPS jammers to Iraq DURING this incursion, the same Russia who didn't apply to themselves the hands off approach they wanted the US to for example) to be calling the US criminal, imperious or acting disingenuosly--because they do the same exact thing-apoint lost on many on this forum, European houses of parliament and the UN. I guess arrogance and stupidity is only worth censure if the US does it, not if Europe and others wallow in it. Secondly, everyone is guilty of "rhetoric"; whether it be Rummy's outrageous sabre rattling or German/Canadain chidishness/namecalling--again "all inclusive". PHX, the only way that everyone can look at eachother as equals is to avoid arrogance which goes not only for the US, but Europe as well. And it appears that countries such as Germany for instance, are more willing to work on these issues than others rahter than automatically turn themselves off to the US.

 
Guest

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 7:52 am

747-451 wrote:

"Not necessarily, because of UN Resolution 1441."

But the Bush administration only went to the Security Council when they had the support they needed. When they realized that a new resolution would fail, they decided to bypass the body and forego an international consesus. They had made their mind to go to war a long time ago and did everything to do to gain support of other nations... So why blame France for opposing the war too loudly?

"However, it is equally wrong and hollow for the UN (an organization who would allow a nation like Cuba to head up a human rights commission for example) or Europe (who themselves have extensive entanglements with Iraq for example including some especially dirty ones, such as the French and Germans selling technology what could be weaponized and the Russians selling night vision goggles and GPS jammers to Iraq DURING this incursion, the same Russia who didn't apply to themselves the hands off approach they wanted the US to for example) to be calling the US criminal, imperious or acting disingenuosly--because they do the same exact thing-apoint lost on many on this forum, European houses of parliament and the UN."

No-one is perfect. Bush was wrong on this issue (and a host of others as well), while European countries were wrong numerous times in the past -- and received their fair share of criticism. There's no doubt that Chirac has made a number of arrogant statements. However, why should we "deal differently" with France now? Because of that country's past entanglements with Iraq (which we also had back in the 1980s)? Or, as you said above, because France went out of its way to oppose Bush? As far as the UN is concerned -- sure, that organization has proven to be disgracefully ineffective on several occasions in the past (i.e. Bosnia), but does that mean that we should stop relying on the Security Council to obtain international approval of various actions? If yes, what should replace it? Or are all other nations, including our allies, irrelevant now?

PHX, the only way that everyone can look at eachother as equals is to avoid arrogance which goes not only for the US, but Europe as well."

Agreed, but I have to say that the Bush administration has had more than its share of arrogant policies and attitudes here; after all, it is the Bush administration that consistently refuses to see our European allies as equals. For instance, Bush was quick to oppose Kyoto and other treaties, issues very important to Europe, yet was outraged when France and Germany dared to speak out too vocally against the war in Iraq.

Mind you, this attitude predates the Iraq situation. Here is a cartoon from the late cartoonist Herblock, published in 2001 (in other words, at the very beginning of Bush's presidency). It sums up Bush's arrogance nicely:


© Copyright 2001 by Herblock in The Washington Post

It is important to realize that the US is not inherently arrogant, as some like to see it, it is merely the Bush administration that is acting this way, and doing significant damage to our nation's reputation in the process.

[Edited 2003-05-01 01:08:01]
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 8:08 am

Does anyone here really think that Europe will fund a fighting Army that will rival what the United States has? Choices have been made: (Most of) Europe has chosen to fund cradle-to-grave social welfare programs, and allow the US to fund the defense. The US (and UK, to some extent) has decided to fund a robust military, and eschew many of the social programs that Europeans take for granted.

Frankly, if you tried to fund both situations, you'd go bankrupt. And imagine asking the French or Germans to fund a 60,000+ Army in place of welfare coverage? I don't think it's going to happen.

As someone above (and today's London Times) indicated, why try to fund an Army that will duplicate what NATO already provides? The answer, of course, is hubris and a desire to put the US "in its place". When the European powers-that-be can't agree on a single policy on Iraq, what is the likelihood that there will be a single consensus on when and where to deploy this Europe-wide "strike-force"?
 
Guest

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 8:24 am

Travelin man wrote:

"Does anyone here really think that Europe will fund a fighting Army that will rival what the United States has? Choices have been made: (Most of) Europe has chosen to fund cradle-to-grave social welfare programs, and allow the US to fund the defense."

I agree with this assessment. While I do see a common lean, mean EU military in the future (it makes perfect sense), I think Europe would be foolish if it tried to rival the US militarily -- which is, frankly, almost impossible -- and risk its quality of life in the process. Given the Bush administration's policy of ignoring Europe and its concerns on a regular basis, Europe's desire to do just that is understandable, but I strongly believe that the EU and the US should work together (militarily, economically, politically...) rather than split into rival blocs, which would hurt people on both sides of the Atlantic. With a different president in the White House, this wouldn't sound so far fetched.

[Edited 2003-05-01 01:28:52]
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 8:28 am

I've said it many times in this forum and i'll say it again, Europe (EU) is desperate to balance the power against the US "hyperpower". The bureacrats in Brussels detest seeing American political muscle flexing, the latest how of this power was the Iraq saga. A Euro army is not for peace-keeping or humanitarian purposes, it's there to act as a counter balance against US military power. Instead of uniting Europe and the US, it will distance itself more, or even star a new, 21st century cold war, with two new power blocks. Only this time we're talking about the EU vs US as opposed to the US vs USSR.

In Arsene we trust!!
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: 'Old Europe' Presses Ahead With Plans For EU Army

Thu May 01, 2003 8:38 am

A Euro army is not for peace-keeping or humanitarian purposes, it's there to act as a counter balance against US military power.

The thing is, Europe will not POSSIBLY want to spend what it would actually take to "counter-balance" the US militarily. As PHX-LJU said, it would be much better to work together on this issue. I fully expect the US to backtrack regarding this issue and say "we never really MEANT that the EU should support itself militarily."

As I said previously, Europe and the US have made different decisions regarding this issue (military spending). It would be foolish to have one try to equal the other, without having cuts in either military spending or social programs. Everyone should acknowledge this (and, acknowledge that US presidencies are for terms of four years, and long-term EU policies should not be decided on whom happens to be in power in the US).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests