Defense, Miitary, and Geopolitical Forum
                                                     The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | WAB Bookstore


LOGIN or REGISTER to REMOVE ADS

Go Back   World Affairs Board > International Defense > NATO & The Russian Resurgence



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2004, 13:25 PM   #1 (permalink)
Military Professional
 
Join Date: 11-05-04
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 784
Country:
european military strength

after a recent trip to the US i'm starting to question the transatlantic alliance - based on the americans leaving it rather than the europeans leaving it - and i'm intersted in the force projection capabilities of european powers and what it would take to transform european military forces into a expeditionary force rather than a garrison force.

projection capabilities would be all of africa, middle east and various european territories around the world.

the roles would be anti-terrorism, trade protection, peacekeeping/enforcement, stabilisation enforcment (think lebanon) and heavy ground and air forces to prevent china taking eastern and central russia in light of a possible russian collapse. (thats my pet theory, i know others don't think so, but i'm convinced)

big, flash heavy forces would be required, but most operations would be into environments without a traditional heavy military opposition.
dave angel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 14:36 PM   #2 (permalink)
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 21,638
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave angel
after a recent trip to the US i'm starting to question the transatlantic alliance - based on the americans leaving it rather than the europeans leaving it - and i'm intersted in the force projection capabilities of european powers and what it would take to transform european military forces into a expeditionary force rather than a garrison force.

projection capabilities would be all of africa, middle east and various european territories around the world.

the roles would be anti-terrorism, trade protection, peacekeeping/enforcement, stabilisation enforcment (think lebanon) and heavy ground and air forces to prevent china taking eastern and central russia in light of a possible russian collapse. (thats my pet theory, i know others don't think so, but i'm convinced)

big, flash heavy forces would be required, but most operations would be into environments without a traditional heavy military opposition.
Isn't that what ERRF (European Rapid Reaction Force) and NRF (NATO Response Force) are?
__________________
Chimo

Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 11-07-2004 at 23:05 PM..
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 17:33 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-29-04
Posts: 789
"heavy ground and air forces to prevent china taking eastern and central russia in light of a possible russian collapse"
LOL. so ironic if it happened.
EU nations are the ones arming the PRC.
Franco Lolan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 19:05 PM   #4 (permalink)
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave angel
based on the americans leaving it rather than the europeans leaving it
Which is a false basis, but it really isn't germane to the discussion anyway.

Quote:
what it would take to transform european military forces into a expeditionary force rather than a garrison force.
I can't speak to the military side, but on the political side, it needs public will. At the moment there is no such will. A significant proportion of Europeans believe that military force is usually unnecessary. Thus, they are, and will continue to be, unwilling to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on creating and maintaining a standing military.
__________________
"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
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 20:40 PM   #5 (permalink)
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 21,638
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Lolan
EU nations are the ones arming the PRC.
No, they're not. No one has yet to break the Arms Embargo, not even underhandedly.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 23:12 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-29-04
Posts: 789
LOL Officer of Engineers,
the EU Arms Embargo means ****. it pertains to the stance taken by security body of EU as a collective whole. it does nothing to preclude individual nations. France has had large transfers with PRC. read the Current History from 2 months ago.
Franco Lolan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 23:18 PM   #7 (permalink)
Death, the Destroyer of Worlds...
Senior Contributor
 
-{SpoonmaN}-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-08-04
Location: Amidst the rolling hills of merry England.
Posts: 1,528
Country:
I don't think that Europeans are really that much less willing to intervene militarily, it's just that they didn't buy the weapons of mass destruction line, and they were already prejudiced against President Bush, so they didn't support the action in Iraq.
A case in point of European forces operating abroad is the current French peacekeeping mission in the Ivory Coast, which has been coming up in the news lately. Perhaps the difference between Europeans and Americans is that Europeans are much more sympathetic to fighting on humanitarian grounds (Like the somewhat belated intervention in Kosovo) rather than the more nationalistic grounds upon which Americans fight.
-{SpoonmaN}- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2004, 23:26 PM   #8 (permalink)
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 21,638
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franco Lolan
LOL Officer of Engineers,
the EU Arms Embargo means ****. it pertains to the stance taken by security body of EU as a collective whole. it does nothing to preclude individual nations. France has had large transfers with PRC. read the Current History from 2 months ago.
Name one weapon system that has been sold to the PRC.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2004, 01:53 AM   #9 (permalink)
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
I don't think that Europeans are really that much less willing to intervene militarily, it's just that they didn't buy the weapons of mass destruction line, and they were already prejudiced against President Bush, so they didn't support the action in Iraq.
A case in point of European forces operating abroad is the current French peacekeeping mission in the Ivory Coast, which has been coming up in the news lately. Perhaps the difference between Europeans and Americans is that Europeans are much more sympathetic to fighting on humanitarian grounds (Like the somewhat belated intervention in Kosovo) rather than the more nationalistic grounds upon which Americans fight.
A humanitarian case was made for Iraq. The Europeans ignored it. Many in Europe are ideological pacifists. This number will grow as Europe continues to move to the left.
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2004, 02:59 AM   #10 (permalink)
Death, the Destroyer of Worlds...
Senior Contributor
 
-{SpoonmaN}-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-08-04
Location: Amidst the rolling hills of merry England.
Posts: 1,528
Country:
I think you'll find that humanitarian grounds was not enough for the American public to go to war in Iraq. That's where the WMD and terrorist links thing comes in. I'm all for taking out brutal dictatorships myself, with military force if neccesary.
But if that was really the reason for going to war in Iraq, why don't we see Delta Force storming the Saudi Royal Palaces, or B-1s dropping JDAMs on the suspected hideout of Robert Mugabe?
The fact is if we were going to have some kind of war on tyranny, then there'd be an aweful lot of countries getting invaded right now.
-{SpoonmaN}- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2004, 05:20 AM   #11 (permalink)
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
I think you'll find that humanitarian grounds was not enough for the American public to go to war in Iraq.
Which couldn't be more completely irrelevant since we are talking about Europe.

Quote:
But if that was really the reason for going to war in Iraq, why don't we see Delta Force storming the Saudi Royal Palaces, or B-1s dropping JDAMs on the suspected hideout of Robert Mugabe?
First, if the Iraq war was objectively right on humanitarian basis then it is irrelevant if that same standard would apply to other countries. As to the specific things you mention, destroying the Saudi government would be counter productive considering that there is no one but OBL types to replace them. As to Mugabe, I have little know of the situation in Zimbabwe other then that Mugabe is a thug and a racist.

Quote:
The fact is if we were going to have some kind of war on tyranny, then there'd be an aweful lot of countries getting invaded right now.
As I proved above this is not a valid reason not to invade Iraq on humanitarian grounds.
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2004, 22:59 PM   #12 (permalink)
Regular
 
slippery_chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-17-04
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leader
A significant proportion of Europeans believe that military force is usually unnecessary. Thus, they are, and will continue to be, unwilling to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on creating and maintaining a standing military.
Yeah - maybe if we weren’t so crazy about our equal rights for everyone we'd have less money to spend on health care and more money on bombing the **** out of people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Leader
A humanitarian case was made for Iraq. The Europeans ignored it. Many in Europe are ideological pacifists. This number will grow as Europe continues to move to the left.
I disagree strongly with this statement, Europe did not ignore it, it's simply the case that if you argue 'a humanitarian case' it means you want to over throw the current form of government which is illegal under international law, (not that the US bothers about such things). I also think that Europe is not pacifist, it's non-violent, it's a fine line but the difference is significant.
__________________
[www.stevenspencer.com]
slippery_chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2004, 23:52 PM   #13 (permalink)
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Illinois
Posts: 10,813
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by slippery_chimp
which is illegal under international law
If it's illegal to remove tyrants, and I haven't seen anything that says it was illegal, then the criminals are the good guys...
__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2004, 10:02 AM   #14 (permalink)
Staff Emeritus
She-Devil
 
Julie's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-04-03
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,793
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confed999
If it's illegal to remove tyrants, and I haven't seen anything that says it was illegal, then the criminals are the good guys...
It's all a matter of priority. Some have their priorities in order, and some....well....obviously does not.
Julie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2004, 13:05 PM   #15 (permalink)
Regular
 
slippery_chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-17-04
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confed999
If it's illegal to remove tyrants, and I haven't seen anything that says it was illegal, then the criminals are the good guys...
No, just that you cant go around "removing" leaders, whether they are tyrants or not, if you have not seen anything that says invading other countries to install a new leader is illegal then that to me just highlights one of the failings of the US media. Have you not heard that many groups are preparing to launch cases against Blair and Bush for their illegal activities? I hope that in the future we see them both sitting in an international war crimes tribunal, maybe 30 years from now, but it is looking ever increasing likely.
slippery_chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share this thread with friends:



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Military Uses for Space Ironduke The Staff College 6 10-03-2007 00:14 AM
Interview with PLAAF LGen Liu Yazhou Officer of Engineers The Field Mess 34 05-10-2007 15:44 PM
Articles and links for the Military Professional Officer of Engineers The Staff College 115 11-20-2006 11:28 AM
China's Changing Military Ideology Frank Zhou World Affairs Board Pub 0 05-03-2006 18:58 PM
Guerilla Warfare troung The Staff College 13 04-05-2006 02:25 AM

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.0
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:52 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting and a specialist in joomla hosting services.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.