Opinion Future European defence policy


The EU

Which will in a few years have a bigger army than what the U.S has.

Should deeds actually follow recent words...that could become a reality. The EU has been woefully punching under its weight for quite some time. Hopefully, we shall see a seismic change. Personally, I am quite thankful for the rudest of awakenings delivered by the likes of Donald Trump, J.D. Vance and Elon Musk. The EU needs to depend and rely on ITSELF and take the most effective measures possible in diminishing and eliminating potentially highly hazardous dependancies.
 
A comparable European force to the US military won't happen. The required budget, the required economic and industrial development, the required international cooperation at state and corporate level won't happen, and even if it did all happen, and all happened overnight, the required defence projects take decades to come to fruition (even in the USA which is already home to half the world's top defence contractors), so all that stuff also needs to be maintained through countless national elections and governments. And eeeeeveeenn then, even if we'd had all that for decades, cooperation on deployment is far from a given.

I say this as a pro-European, but it's just not going to happen. Posturing about expenditure is for the headlines. There is not a single entity capable of collecting the tax, organising the military, dictating the policy and operating the resource like there is in the USA or China (or the old school USSR).

Anyway, this is well off topic now, if people want to debate European coalition defence policy I can move the posts to a new thread.
 
A comparable European force to the US military won't happen.
Alas, I'll have to agree with you here. The EU and its NATO member states find themselves confronted with issues that pertain more to various individual yet collective mindsets rather than the issues of material armaments per se. And where the U.S. military has perhaps vast superiority is in the field of intelligence/surveillance.
The required budget, the required economic and industrial development, the required international cooperation at state and corporate level won't happen, and even if it did all happen, and all happened overnight, the required defence projects take decades to come to fruition (even in the USA which is already home to half the world's top defence contractors), so all that stuff also needs to be maintained through countless national elections and governments. And eeeeeveeenn then, even if we'd had all that for decades, cooperation on deployment is far from a given.

When I say "seismic change", I was perhaps being overly theatric. What would be applauded is the implementation of far more effective deterrents. The expansion of the Anglo-French "umbrella", for example.
In addition, the EU and Great Britain are home to a good number of formidable defense technology/armament companies.
I say this as a pro-European, but it's just not going to happen. Posturing about expenditure is for the headlines. There is not a single entity capable of collecting the tax, organising the military, dictating the policy and operating the resource like there is in the USA or China (or the old school USSR).

Yes, agree. Winning minds over in collectively supporting sustainable financing will be an epic task at hand.
Anyway, this is well off topic now, if people want to debate European coalition defence policy I can move the posts to a new thread.

You're right. This whole situation is becoming all too surreal for me and increasingly difficult to assess. I should let it go and leave it to minds far more clever than myself.
 
I should let it go and leave it to minds far more clever than myself.

To me it rapidly becomes more of a philosophical debate. War is primarily about territory or ideology, but it's fought by the people with almost zero stake in the territory who are largely indoctrinated by ideology, which is often a function of the territory. The more leniency you give people on ideology, or territory, the harder is to ring fence a group. A highly democratic collection of small territories (i.e. the EU), is fundamentally different to an overall territory of the same size, living under one ideology (i.e. the USA). I own no territory in the country I live, and I'm not able to defend the space I occupy.... who the government "is" is who I pay my taxes to. I've never voted* for my taxes to go to our ruling party, so why would I care anymore if that ruling party was from a different country?

*ish... FPTP skews things.

If the US military wasn't federal expenditure, would Texas want to defend California, would California want to defend Alabama? It's the same question as to whether Sir Kier Starmer would stake the UK government on trying to prevent an Orban style presidency in slo-something-or-other.... or if he'd prioritise giving cost of living benefits to lazy disabled scousers, in Northern England....

if you can't ringfence enough tax payers, you can't do shit.


...


If you want unified pan-European action on defence, you have to vote for all the powers on taxation and expenditure to got to a unified pan-European government. This won't happen... because the EU means tethered bottle caps and bananas of a certain straightness, which soy boys vote against...

#kill the rich
 
It is certainly easy to be left hopelessly jaded regarding the state of affairs, regardless of whether it concerns domestic and/or geopolitics. Attempting to view things philosophically... Perhaps that is the most effective method of seeking refuge in a world full of utter craziness. Ideologies ? More often a naive, reality detached brain prosthesis than not. And indeed, as cynical as it may appear, one may ask onesself "what skin DO I AND MINE really have in the the game" ? Other than taxation, which for most is as inevitable as bowel movement, the end of existence in this dimension commonly referred to as "earthly life", etc...what, save the love, affection and support of those who are genuinely close, is really worthy of investing much trust in ? EU "unity" ? The EU is not the often perceived melting pot of common interests. It is, at best, a salad consisting of many ingredients that may clash. "Don't pour that French dressing on my sauerkraut, pal !". The U.S. is not the long time "friend". It never was. By nature, politics are Machiavellian.
 
A comparable European force to the US military won't happen. The required budget, the required economic and industrial development, the required international cooperation at state and corporate level won't happen, and even if it did all happen, and all happened overnight, the required defence projects take decades to come to fruition (even in the USA which is already home to half the world's top defence contractors), so all that stuff also needs to be maintained through countless national elections and governments. And eeeeeveeenn then, even if we'd had all that for decades, cooperation on deployment is far from a given.

I say this as a pro-European, but it's just not going to happen. Posturing about expenditure is for the headlines. There is not a single entity capable of collecting the tax, organising the military, dictating the policy and operating the resource like there is in the USA or China (or the old school USSR).

Anyway, this is well off topic now, if people want to debate European coalition defence policy I can move the posts to a new thread.

Disagree with everything.

EU's combined army will be much bigger modern and stronger than what the US has ever had. There is no competition, the EU is vastly superior combined.

Simple facs. They have awakened a sleeping giant. All the companies in the European defense industry are beyond cutting edge.

If you want unified pan-European action on defence, you have to vote for all the powers on taxation and expenditure to got to a unified pan-European government. This won't happen... because the EU means tethered bottle caps and bananas of a certain straightness, which soy boys vote against...

Nonsense. Just thinking we get to vote for anything of substance is wild to being with.
 
A comparable European force to the US military won't happen. The required budget, the required economic and industrial development, the required international cooperation at state and corporate level won't happen, and even if it did all happen

It will happen, it's already happening and the EU has the largest concentration of wealth anywhere on the planet. All you mention is a piece of cake to resolve if they want to resolve. Which they want.

Times are changing for real now. Re arm Europe.

People like you and Scott who seems to laugh at the idea are in a tiny minority.
 
It will happen, it's already happening and the EU has the largest concentration of wealth anywhere on the planet. All you mention is a piece of cake to resolve if they want to resolve. Which they want.

Times are changing for real now. Re arm Europe.

People like you and Scott who seems to laugh at the idea are in a tiny minority.
You should learn about former defence minister and now elected EU Empress Ursula von der Leyen. You will laugh too.
 
It will happen, it's already happening and the EU has the largest concentration of wealth anywhere on the planet. All you mention is a piece of cake to resolve if they want to resolve. Which THEY want.

Times are changing for real now. Re arm Europe.

People like you and Scott who seems to laugh at the idea are in a tiny minority.


Who, precisely, are "THEY" ?
And precisely here lies a major crux. Simply looking at my country (Germany), I cannot detect anything similar to common shared sentiment. An estimated 3 mio. + ethnic Germans who relocated to Germany following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, a large number of which harbouring strong sympathies for Russia in general and many for the Putin regime. The legions of "aggressively" pacifistic, primarily liberal progressively left ideologically cemented citizens who continue to fervently support peace and no nuke moevements and organizations. Many Germans being disappointed that "too many Ukrainian refugees" are milking state funds by collecting "Bürgergeld" (a form of welfare) rather than actively contributing to the work force (please note that this may be blown way out of proportion by heavily pro-Russian-skewed German language media-but it has been good for incendiary headlines). Hence, it is a major task at hand establishing a more universal consensus. In addition, Germany does not even feature a stable government currently-and coalition talks have been dodgy. This is A MINDSET PROBLEM, that very well may override the capacities to produce and finance defense systems. A MINDSET PROBLEM that obstructs rapid legislation that would reinstall the armed services draft. All the money and resources that the EU and its NATO members have at their disposal (and that is undoubtedly a hell of a lot) is of little value in the event of large portions of a populace NOT having the stomach for a confrontation. Not all EU member state populations have the defiant, fighting spirit of say...that of Finland, the Baltic states, Denmark or perhaps Poland. Trust me, I really wish that it WERE NOT that way. But alas, this is what it is.

Still, I appreciate the Trump/Vance/Musk wakeup call. May more and more EU member state citizens will realize that their countries can ONLY DEPEND ON THEMSELVES for protection of territory and general well-being. It is of existential significance.
 
Nonsense. Just thinking we get to vote for anything of substance is wild to being with.

Klier, you're talking to a guy who had a vote in a referendum to leave the EU, which we did... and in no small part because (the then myth) of the creation of a European army would remove our sovereignty. It should be blindingly obvious that in many countries, and even in the European parliament there is a large amount of euro-scepticism. A shift to an anti-EU government in a major European economy is a distinct possibility, and that undermines the long term stability of any defence pact.

Geert wants the European parliament dissolved, and he leads your biggest party! The USA went from wanting to be the world police to allying with their long-standing foe as an aggressor in European conflict in one election.

Voting achieves things.

People like you and Scott who seems to laugh at the idea are in a tiny minority.

I don't laugh at the idea, I don't even have a problem with it... I'm just being realistic about what can be achieved when the cooperation of 20-30 governments is required for decades at time, and the benchmark is the worlds largest and most advanced unified military force. You can look at European collaboration performance versus that of America by looking at the Eurofighter and the F-22. The former took 30 years to get from idea to production aircraft flight, the latter took only around 15 years. And if the EU ends up bunging a Trillion Euros to America for their stuff (like the UK's been doing for aircraft), it's just falling into Donny's protection racket scam.

I find it exciting to think about how a unified European military would look, consisting of the EU-27 states, with the UK, Iceland and Norway too... I just don't think that excitement should cloud reality.
 
It will happen, it's already happening and the EU has the largest concentration of wealth anywhere on the planet. All you mention is a piece of cake to resolve if they want to resolve. Which they want.

Times are changing for real now. Re arm Europe.

People like you and Scott who seems to laugh at the idea are in a tiny minority.

Also time to remove US troops from Europe and extricate themselves from NATO.

European countries have also made some stupid purchases, the number 1 being the F-35, they have to ask US permission every single time they fly it. The only countries with unlocked F-35's are the UK and Israel.
 
Also time to remove US troops from Europe and extricate themselves from NATO.

European countries have also made some stupid purchases, the number 1 being the F-35, they have to ask US permission every single time they fly it. The only countries with unlocked F-35's are the UK and Israel.

Sprawling red tape bureaucracy and electorate mindsets have long been obstructing the EU + Great Britain and its NATO member states from rapidly developing a highly effective, highly potent deterrent armed forces. The technology is there, perhaps save the sophistication seen in U.S. or Israeli intelligence and surveillance equipment. And a number of large as well as mid-tier corporate enterprises with spare capacities could be placed on some sort of "quasi wartime economy" footing. Financing, while not universally popular, is achievable.

And yes, I regret to admit it as a person socialized in the spirit of the transatlantic alliance..but I suspect that this alliance has now been shattered to smithereens-and may never be able to be reassembled in a form that it once was. The EU and its NATO member states should toughen up and get as "machiavellian" as hell ! There is no "dreamy eyed" friendship in geopolitics. Simply opportune and often temporary "partnerships".
 
What tech and in what way? I'm genuinely interested.

The European companies invested in warfare (dozens and dozens in every EU country) are extremely high tech. And now that money will be pouring in for every possible side, they will start developing high tech the world has never seen. All EU made, no penny spend in the US.

Trump has awakened the most formidable world power.

Basically, all the US has left is their crashed Alien technology LOL......and their arsenal of nukes.
The F35 is a joke any modern drone will shoot out of the sky without even looking. Let me know when the pilot of an F35 is capable of 20 G in a turn.
 
And now that money will be pouring in
And where will this money come from?

Everyone is in the red. Most EU economies are struggling. Even the German economy has shot itself in the leg, with the constantly rising cost of power. Will taxes fund the new war effort? People are already struggling, with constantly rising cost of power, food and rent. I highly doubt ordinary people will be happy to struggle even more.
 

Thread statistics

Created
klier,
Last reply from
Design FIRST,
Replies
52
Views
2,153

Trending content

Latest posts


Back
Top