European forces are under such transformation at the moment. The new Battle Group concept is all about having more rapid force projection capabilities. The first units are ready next year, others by 2007 or 2008.Originally Posted by dave angel
I beg to differ.
There's lots of poltiical will in EU at the moment. There have been swift changes towards a united military force with rapid force projection capabilities across the planet. Part of it is already a reality.
As for unwillingness on "creating and maintaining a standing military", I can only hope that you speak in regards of rapid force projection capabilities. Otherwise the comment has no correlation with reality.
I'm talking about a military force that would be significantly bigger, more costly and that would be of some significance to the balance of power in the world. Europe lacks the will to create such a force.
"Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
NEVER FORGET
The military forces of the united Europe are second in strength only to that of the USA. Militarywise Europe dominates the region without a question. Force projection on unnatural geopolitical regions is another thing, but even while such force projection capabilities are currently being build to some extent, I can't see real need for such capabilities (save perhaps for peace enforcement missions).
No need to nose in (with military) in regards of China-Taiwan crisis, India-Pakistan crisis or North-Korea-USA crisis. Those are the three important crisis at the moment, as far as I can see. Mid-East may get fairly critical, if the occupation of Iraq fails, but even then there isn't much that needs to be done militarywise about the situation, as Israel, Turkey and Saudi-Arabia are able to defend themselves and it's not in Iran's interests to spread the conflict further.
I don't know where you get the "lack of will" part. Europe is currently experiencing a phase of military build-up, especially in regards of global force projection. The fact that the force projection emphasizes on relatively light units, is mostly because Europe has economical muscle to deal with larger distant crisis by other means, not because of lack of will in itself.
Balance of power? Balance against whom?
The United States dominates Europe militarily, not the Europeans.
Balance of power? Balance against whom?Is there something unclear about that?
"Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
NEVER FORGET
Yes i do get it. im askin balance against whom? Usually balance means two opposites so if the europeans are going to have some effect on balance, who is counterbalancing?
Are you saying the presence in Europe, because you would be joking or showing blind patriotism with that statement i think. I serously doubt the US could even conventionally dominate Europe in an all out full scale war.
You think they are driving M4A4's or something?
I deny your premise. An infinite number of things can be in balance not just two.
"Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
NEVER FORGET
The US V Corps still form the basis of NATO (and therefore, EUROCORPS) force projection capability though most of its combat divisions are in Iraq.
Chimo
Fair enough, name them for gods sake man!!
Yep, but Europe is bigger than NATO, super duper hypothetically speaking if the US invaded Europe and the whole continent reacted, the US couldn't hope to win.
Thats my understanding of the reality of 'dominating Europe militarily'. I'm sure V Corps wasn't put there for that purpose, yesterday or today.
V Corps and the now withdrawn VII Corps (of which my 4th Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group was attached) were in Europe for the expressed purpose of stopping the Soviet 1st Moscow Crack Army and the 16th Guards Army. These two corps were the only thing stopping the Soviets marching to the Atlantic.
It is without exaggeration that the US is NATO.
Chimo
How large were those corps? How many tanks, artillery, engineer assets, etc did each corp have?
How strong was Soviet 1st Moscow Crack Army and the 16th Guards Army?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: