Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EU needs military arm to be taken seriously by US: Belgian FM

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • EU needs military arm to be taken seriously by US: Belgian FM

    EU needs military arm to be taken seriously by US: Belgian FM

    BRUSSELS (AFP) Nov 23, 2003
    The European Union must have an independent military arm if it wants to be taken seriously by the United States as well as to combat terrorism, Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel said Sunday.
    The US government has reacted suspiciously to plans by four EU countries that opposed the war in Iraq -- Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg -- to set up a military planning headquarters for the bloc.

    Washington fears the drive to bolster the EU's military presence could rival NATO, the bedrock of the transatlantic defence alliance.

    But Michel, speaking during a political talk-show on RTBF television, said there were broader issues at stake.

    "As long as the European Union lacks an autonomous military capacity to be a major global actor alongside the United States, and to bring about... a real and permanently influential political dialogue with the United States, we will not be able to properly respond to the big questions of this challenge, notably terrorism," he said.

    Following talks with US Secretary of State Colin Powell in Brussels on Tuesday, Michel said Belgium and the United States had buried the hatchet after months of diplomatic tensions caused by the Iraq war.

    The Belgian foreign minister reiterated on RTBF the necessity of "remodelling" transatlantic relations, declaring he was "a very strong supporter of a strategic partnership with the United States".
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  • #2
    OoOoOoO Big talk from Belgium.

    Lets see how USA will take this.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by PiggyWiggy
      OoOoOoO Big talk from Belgium.

      Lets see how USA will take this.
      He's right, but are the Euros going to actually build a military? Nah...That would take away money for their welfare programs.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Leader
        He's right, but are the Euros going to actually build a military? Nah...That would take away money for their welfare programs.
        You know, it would help if you actually knew what their military capabilities were instead of just mumbling out of ignorance. That's three countries (Belgium, France, and Germany) that can deploy and sustain a battle group anywhere on earth, something that not China, not Japan, not Israel can do.

        Germany just demonstrated that they can field a brigade to Afghanistan.

        France has been fighting brush wars in Africa, including destroying the Lybian Army in Chad. The French, alongside the British and the Americans, are currently the only forces on earth that can field a division half way across the globe.

        Social spending aside, it's well known amongst the military circles is that if you want to belong to the big boys club, you have to act like a big boy. The European armies have done their share, especially the British and the French.

        Comment


        • #5
          well...if each nation could give enough money to sponsor a 50,000 man team, that will add up to a preety nifty army.

          wouldnt you say?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by PiggyWiggy
            well...if each nation could give enough money to sponsor a 50,000 man team, that will add up to a preety nifty army.

            wouldnt you say?
            Yeah, I'm sure it would be. Most EU nations don't have an active duty army of more than 50,000 men however, and it would be incredibly expensive.
            "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

            Comment


            • #7
              A good start would bethe 101st getting French Soldiers to step off a transport at Baghdad International Airport. Not unlike a dog thats nervous of a visitor.

              Comment


              • #8
                the only critical thng that EU needs is the anglos.

                Those guys (i am going to try not cursing) are always playing with everyone.

                They want to be part of everything EU does, but then they want to be Americas, PAL.

                THEY MAKE MONEY BOTH WAYS!

                Comment


                • #9
                  You know, it would help if you actually knew what their military capabilities were instead of just mumbling out of ignorance. That's three countries (Belgium, France, and Germany) that can deploy and sustain a battle group anywhere on earth, something that not China, not Japan, not Israel can do.

                  Germany just demonstrated that they can field a brigade to Afghanistan.

                  France has been fighting brush wars in Africa, including destroying the Lybian Army in Chad. The French, alongside the British and the Americans, are currently the only forces on earth that can field a division half way across the globe.

                  Social spending aside, it's well known amongst the military circles is that if you want to belong to the big boys club, you have to act like a big boy. The European armies have done their share, especially the British and the French.
                  Considering Germany is the third largest economy in the world and they had to PROVE that they could deploy a Brigade is PATHETIC.

                  Israel has no need to deploy troops anywhere but there and even if they could they wouldn't. Japan relys on the US because their constitution FORBIDS them to have offensive force(but they happen to have one of the most powerful navy's on the planet even know they are only spending something like 1% of their GDP on defense). Two bad comparisons. As for China they are still 3rd world nation which needs tons of military reorginization.

                  Leader's point is that the military forces within the EU compared to the US are inferior. He never claimed or implyed that he was comparing them to the nations you have stated.

                  Last edited by Praxus; 25 Nov 03,, 01:33.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Praxus
                    Leader's point is that the military forces within the EU compared to the US are inferior. He never claimed or implyed that he was comparing them to the nations you have stated.
                    Every military when compared to the US is inferior. My point is that these countries have aided the US far more outside of their own borders than the countries I've stated. And the countries I've stated, especially Israel recieved far more aid than all of NATO combined.

                    So, you tell me, who is not holding their end of their bargin here? NATO or Japan and Israel?

                    BTW, NATO's charter does not give it the right to deploy outside of the North Atlantic and yet, we've been to North America and Afghanistan. Legality does not give Japan and Israel the excuse of not being true allies.
                    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 25 Nov 03,, 05:49.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      As far as Israel in concerned, any overt help in military operations would be extremely incideiary.
                      "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ironman420
                        As far as Israel in concerned, any overt help in military operations would be extremely incideiary.
                        So what's the point of this overly expensive alliance? Israel has often been quoted as America's most dangerous ally - to America.

                        Not to insult the US nor Israel but the rest of NATO did not and cannot see the benefits of this alliance, not when we're willing and did bleed on behalf of the US and Israel did not and could not.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I completely understand what you're saying -- but isn't Israel as base of absolute last resort for the US?

                          If everything else fails, there's always Israel.
                          "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ironman420
                            I completely understand what you're saying -- but isn't Israel as base of absolute last resort for the US?

                            If everything else fails, there's always Israel.
                            You've got to clarify that for me. I remember the 73 War when the US went DEFCON 3. What other last resort is there would you rely on Israel beyond this?

                            Again, no insult to Israel but in essence, this meant that the US would have forced NATO to goto war on behalf of Israel. And Israel would done didly squat for NATO.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Every military when compared to the US is inferior. My point is that these countries have aided the US far more outside of their own borders than the countries I've stated. And the countries I've stated, especially Israel recieved far more aid than all of NATO combined.

                              So, you tell me, who is not holding their end of their bargin here? NATO or Japan and Israel?

                              BTW, NATO's charter does not give it the right to deploy outside of the North Atlantic and yet, we've been to North America and Afghanistan. Legality does not give Japan and Israel the excuse of not being true allies.
                              The only real thing Israel can give us is intelligence, their Military is needed in Israel to defend against facist dictatorships and tyrannical theocracys. I don't think the Iraqi's or Afghani's would be to happy with Merkava Mk. IIIs rolling down the streets.

                              NATO doesn't need our aid, they aren't being attack by a bunch of Islamic Militants hell bent on the destruction of the West.

                              Japan can't help us because of their Constitution, and we certainly don't want a return of militantism(correct word?).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X