teflon2 Posted November 15, 2018 Share Posted November 15, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 9:26 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 9:00 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. Published over 2 years ago Brian ... Macron/Merkel both believe differently now dont they Did you read it all, Antony? It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary. I'm unaware of any change to those provisions. Do you know different? "I'm unaware of any change to those provisions" YET *-) ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 So that's a no, then Dave. Your dreams and nightmares are not real, and you have nothing to fear, except fear itself. Turn off the light and go back to sleepy byes. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 4:53 PM So that's a no, then Dave. Your dreams and nightmares are not real, and you have nothing to fear, except fear itself. Turn off the light and go back to sleepy byes. :-) Have they changed your med's Brian? :-S ........ Coz your talking kinda wired/weird 8-) ....... Unless your posting whilst p*ssed? :D ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-11-16 5:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Relevance? Just askin' :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 6:00 PM pelmetman - 2018-11-16 5:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Relevance? Just askin' :-D ie ......knowing what your talking about ;-) ........ I may have only have been a little more than a cog :-| .....But I know that cog would only have gone to war based on a command from a single entity ....... Our Prime Minister ;-) ........ If you really think the EU will set up an army without the facility to allow such a single entity to press the attack button 8-) ............ Then your not as intelligent as us dumb folk once thought you were :-| ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teflon2 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) Pray enlighten me. What is to stop a group of MEPs proposing a bill adopting the Eurocorps as the designated EU defence corps and if it passes in the EU parliament being accepted as such? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 teflon2 - 2018-11-16 6:28 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) Pray enlighten me. What is to stop a group of MEPs proposing a bill adopting the Eurocorps as the designated EU defence corps and if it passes in the EU parliament being accepted as such? As I read the linked article, they don't have that power. But then there are many things some group of MEP's might do, one day. It seems that you are arguing we should leave now because someone, somewhere, may one day do something with which the UK so radically disagrees that it decides to leave the EU. That suggest to me that you think no-one in the EU possesses the wisdom of the UK to be able to spot the flaws in whatever idea, and refuse to implement it. You may be right, but it seems to me very extreme to leave on the pretext of something that might happen, one day (or of course, might not). Were we to stay in, we might obtain an opt out, we could veto the proposal (qualified majority voting is not applicable), or we could then decide to leave because they'd all gone mad! Wasn't it Churchill who said "we have nothing to fear, but fear itself"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-11-16 6:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 6:00 PM pelmetman - 2018-11-16 5:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Relevance? Just askin' :-D ie ......knowing what your talking about ;-) ........ I may have only have been a little more than a cog :-| .....But I know that cog would only have gone to war based on a command from a single entity ....... Our Prime Minister ;-) ........ If you really think the EU will set up an army without the facility to allow such a single entity to press the attack button 8-) ............ Then your not as intelligent as us dumb folk once thought you were :-| ........ Then you haven't been in the services otherwise you'd know your orders come through a CoC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-11-17 9:23 PM pelmetman - 2018-11-16 6:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 6:00 PM pelmetman - 2018-11-16 5:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Relevance? Just askin' :-D ie ......knowing what your talking about ;-) ........ I may have only have been a little more than a cog :-| .....But I know that cog would only have gone to war based on a command from a single entity ....... Our Prime Minister ;-) ........ If you really think the EU will set up an army without the facility to allow such a single entity to press the attack button 8-) ............ Then your not as intelligent as us dumb folk once thought you were :-| ........ Then you haven't been in the services otherwise you'd know your orders come through a CoC. Then you'd know that Chain of Command starts with the Prime Minister *-) ......... Why else was "Labours" Blair able to start a illegal war huh? >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 18, 2018 Share Posted November 18, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-11-16 6:21 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 6:00 PM pelmetman - 2018-11-16 5:25 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-16 5:22 PM teflon2 - 2018-11-15 7:23 PM Brian Kirby - 2018-11-14 8:53 PM antony1969 - 2018-11-14 5:00 PM Barry knows best when it comes to EU matters ... Macron of course didn't mean he wanted an EU army to defend itself against the US , China and Russia he meant ... Errrrr .... Ermmm Here you are then, a little background that isn't the opinion of a forum member: http://tinyurl.com/yd8d3xmx Have a read. The link totally ignores the existence of Eurocorps The Franco German initiative to form a European military force controlled by the core nations ie. France and Germany. Created in 1992 certification as EU battle-force HQ 2017. Macron and Mercle now calling for EU army, coincidence? something has an odour. Well, as I read Eurocorps, it is not a European army as I understand the term "army". The link I posted above explains, in essence, why it cannot be an army. As I said (and you omitted) "It is fairly clear that such an institution would require unanimity from the members for it to be implemented, and that there is no legal basis to coerce membership. As it is stated, there is already military co-operation between members as and when they decide to do so, but participation is voluntary." Even if the two countries chose to fully integrate their armed forces, it would still not be a European army, and it would still present considerable command structure problems. For example, could one country then order the combined force to attack the other, or some other country? Who would decide on that? A committee? "The Russians are coming, convene the defence committee, we must decide what to do." Now multiply by 27 for an EU army. :-) To have a unified command, you would need the complete federalisation of all EU states to at least combine and subsume their individual defence capabilities into a joint federal defence force. That would require a degree of political integration equal to that in the USA, with a European President as military Commander in Chief. I assume that would require Europe wide elections for the President. I may be a Doubting Thomas, but I really can't see all those individual countries chucking away their individual identities to be lost into a USE. Just the language barriers would make that an act of faith too far for many. Have a look back at the Austro-Hungarian Empire to see how that really worked out, and how Hungary was present in name only under that grand title. Half the reason we are contemplating Brexit is because a lot of people are unhappy with the present degree of European integration. Why assume that the inhabitants of the other EU states, with their varied, and far more bloody and turbulent histories, would react in any way differently to ourselves, secure on our snug little island? They aren't all daft over there, you know! :-) So is the above based on your military experience Brian? ;-) ........ Just askin? :D ......... Relevance? Just askin' :-D ie ......knowing what your talking about ;-) ........ I may have only have been a little more than a cog :-| .....But I know that cog would only have gone to war based on a command from a single entity ....... Our Prime Minister ;-) ........ If you really think the EU will set up an army without the facility to allow such a single entity to press the attack button 8-) ............. I think, if you read again what I said above, that is exactly what I was arguing. The orders would have to come from an EU Commander in Chief. What I question is the prospect of 27 or 28 countries (sovereign states to quote you :-)) volunteering to place their armed forces under the direct command of a Commander in Chief whose judgement they might not trust when push comes to shove. Europe stretches from Portugal to Romania. Would the Romanians really be happy for their forces to be under the direct command of (for example) a Portuguese CinC were they to be threatened from the east, or might they wonder if they could be sacrificed to prevent Portugal being directly involved in a war that, to the Portuguese, might be seen as a purely Romanian issue. For Romania and Portugal, switch in any other EU states you fancy: the question remains the same in relationship to the perceived threat, and who perceives it, and the response required to neutralise it and who is to deliver it, and whether they would. Clearly you wouldn't, I wouldn't, and I see no chance of the other 27 members thinking any differently. The EU has already decided that qualified majority voting does not apply in this area, meaning a) that unanimity is required for any such move, and in turn b) that any state has a veto over any such proposal, I can't see much chance of such a force being contemplated in the foreseeable future - if ever, far less implemented. There is so much more political and economic, and possibly language, alignment that would have to take place before all member states would be remotely inclined to contemplate totally relinquishing commend of their forces to such an unforeseeable entity. I think the other EU states are about as smart as the UK, and making that move, IMO, would require them all to have gone totally mad. I don't think they have, or are likely to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.