Subject:
|
Re: Value of NATO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:47:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
432 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > (2)- it's pathetic that the EU represents the second largest *economic*
> > power on Earth and has no *military* power of its own. The Commission is
> > living in fantasy if it thinks anyone will take it serious in the world
> > arena before any of its threats can be backed up with actual power to
> > enforce them...
>
> Very few countries could seriously threaten the EU - of those that could, very
> few would.
Precisely. For the time being, there is no need for an European Army - there
are no threats! Although I argue there is a need to start testing its future
appearance, out of precaution alone; after all, the best way to avoid wars
is still not to make enemies :-)
> I'd rather my tax was spent on education. The EU and USA are aligned
> pretty well, so I see not need to compete with them in terms of military
> spending… afterall it’s cheaper to be the fig leaf.. Where we do differ
> politically, it's hard to see us doing anything militarily to upset the USA
I'm not advocating competition or an arms race - that's just dumb. All I'm
saying is that I'd prefer having *one* army instead of 15. If all are
working in the same continent and seeking a common interest, why not save
money and reduce the ranks? One army could be a lot more effective than 15,
all with different sizes and equipments.
Besides, national armies are the last breath of XIX century nationalisms.
Unify them, and the European Union will become one country of many nations.
I like that perspective!
> That said, I’ve no problem with a European “rapid-reaction-force” to do things
> like the UK did in Sierra-Leon.
The Euro-corps exists; its effectiveness is small, however. The language
barriers and conflicting hierarchies compromise the success of a unified
force, and that's why I think there should be studies on how to implement a
unified army. the army itself can wait years before it becomes needed, IF at
all.
> The downside to this the current Bush/Blair axis-of-war. ;(
I wonder what is his position after all: Europeist or Atlanticist? If he
wants to grab Prodi's job, he better start aligning with France'n Germany...
Pedro
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Value of NATO?
|
| (...) Very few countries could seriously threaten the EU - of those that could, very few would. I'd rather my tax was spent on education. The EU and USA are aligned pretty well, so I see not need to compete with them in terms of military spending… (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
