Europe, Boring Until it's Not

[Ex-California]

Best solution all around, I agree. Make it so.

Do it. I want more money in my pocket

[TheReal_ND]

The EU wants their own military, and they should have one. Tax their people to pay for it, and get their own young men killed. They don't like what Russia's doing, they can do something about it, or not, they're the cuck EU.

Already moving in that direction:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 32706.html

The European Parliament has backed plans to create a defence union which will secure structured cooperation between nations as well as a new EU military operational headquarters.

Lawmakers at the European Parliament voted 369-255 in favour of the proposals, which also calls for greater spending by nations on defence.

Of course, while I'm perfectly happy with a EU substitute for NATO, an EU army could be a step closer to a "United States of Europe". If otoh it's implemented in a way that respects national sovereignty, while being a military structure dedicated to protecting the member states as a whole, I'd be for it.

Make it so. Have fun.

[Otern]

I don't support any EU army.

We already have NATO, and it could've worked great if every NATO member first and foremost focused on their national defense.

An EU army would have the same problems as NATO, and none of the benefits, other than being somewhat cheaper.

In a world without NATO, an EU army still wouldn't make any sense. But regional European alliances could work. Like a Nordic alliance; Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland. It wouldn't be strong enough to threaten anyone, but strong enough to make any attack not worth it, sort of like the Swedish defense doctrine of the 1970s. But mashing all of Europe in one alliance, will just lead to either the Baltics getting fucked over due to Russia calling the EU's bluff, or World War 3 if it's not a bluff.

[Speaker to Animals]

I don't support any EU army.

We already have NATO, and it could've worked great if every NATO member first and foremost focused on their national defense.

An EU army would have the same problems as NATO, and none of the benefits, other than being somewhat cheaper.

In a world without NATO, an EU army still wouldn't make any sense. But regional European alliances could work. Like a Nordic alliance; Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland. It wouldn't be strong enough to threaten anyone, but strong enough to make any attack not worth it, sort of like the Swedish defense doctrine of the 1970s. But mashing all of Europe in one alliance, will just lead to either the Baltics getting fucked over due to Russia calling the EU's bluff, or World War 3 if it's not a bluff.

Substitute for "NATO" the armed forces of the United States, United Kingdom, and France. Then consider how that sounds to the people of those countries.

[TheReal_ND]

Germany is still technically under the third reich as an occupied state. Ironically they are building up their forces and legally the largest state in the EU.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Didn't you used to be in the army? You'd have thought someone with military training would, you know, know that the greater threat to a border would be an army... rather than some immigrants. Probably a good thing you left the service if you can't tell enemy armies apart from groups of foreign hobos.

[Fife]

[Speaker to Animals]

Analysis of National Health Service (NHS) statistics has found that a case of female genital mutilation (FGM) is either treated or discovered every hour in England.
Though the practice of FGM, which is performed mainly in African and Middle Eastern nations, has been illegal in the UK since 1985, the problem was assessed by medics in England every 61 minutes between April 2015 and May 2016.

During this period, there were 8,656 occasions when women or girls attended hospitals or doctors’ surgeries and female circumcision was reported as being the problem. The figures show that, on average, brand new cases of FGM are discovered every 92 minutes.

The figures come as the world marks the awareness-raising, UN-sponsored international day of zero tolerance to FGM. The UN’s human rights chief, Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein, has not yet commented on the practice.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/02 ... y-hour-uk/

[BjornP]

In the name of fair, balance and an impartisan love of destroying narratives and as a gift to any American accused of not wanting to fight for any NATO ally if Russia attacks it:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... r-nations/

German willingness to honor NATO alliance: 38%

American willingness to honor NATO alliance: 56% (highest number of the countries asked)
(Canadian willingness to honor NATO alliance: 53%) (second highest)

Nice to know that even if you guys hate that you made a promise, most of you still want to honor the promise.

[SuburbanFarmer]

In the name of fair, balance and an impartisan love of destroying narratives and as a gift to any American accused of not wanting to fight for any NATO ally if Russia attacks it:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... r-nations/

German willingness to honor NATO alliance: 38%

American willingness to honor NATO alliance: 56% (highest number of the countries asked)
(Canadian willingness to honor NATO alliance: 53%) (second highest)

Nice to know that even if you guys hate that you made a promise, most of you still want to honor the promise.

That's how we roll.