Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the who's-da-boss? dept.

France's Macron Calls for Creating a 'European Army'

French President Emmanuel Macron called for the creation of a "true European army," issuing a sharp critique of trans-Atlantic security ties days before U.S. President Trump is due to visit France.

Europe's security ties with the U.S., which have been a bedrock of the continent's stability for decades, have come under strain as Mr. Trump has demanded more military spending from European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and questioned the alliance's benefits for the U.S. Such tensions have led Mr. Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel to publicly question whether the continent can still rely on the U.S. to come to Europe's defense.

Mr. Macron went a step further by grouping the U.S. among foreign powers he considers a potential threat to the continent. "We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States of America," Mr. Macron said on French radio.

Mr. Macron made the remarks as part of a weeklong tour of World War I battlefields ahead of the centenary of the Nov. 11 Armistice, when the French leader is due to host Mr. Trump, Vladimir Putin of Russia and many other heads of state.

Also at Newsweek.

Emmanuel Macron: Six held in 'attack' plot against French president

Six people have been arrested in France on suspicion of planning to carry out a "violent" attack on President Emmanuel Macron, officials say. The individuals, reported to be five men and a woman, were picked up by the French security services in Brittany, north-east and south-east France.

An investigation is now taking place into a "criminal terrorist association", a judicial source said. Details of the suspects and the alleged plot have not yet been released.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:46AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:46AM (#758888)

    Then get on with it! Europe really needs a EU force. We don't want the continent disintegrating because of populists again.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:49AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:49AM (#758890)

      Isn't this the plot of the Star Wars prequel trilogy?

    • (Score: 2) by aim on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:57PM (3 children)

      by aim (6322) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:57PM (#758932)

      Then get on with it! Europe really needs a EU force. We don't want the continent disintegrating because of populists again.

      I agree on the principle, but...

      First, Brexit must be cancelled. We all know the consultation (not a vote!) was heavily influenced by outside forces with an interest in weakening the EU. That alone should be sufficient reason, besides the still pretty close result.

      Second, fine for a common force... of core EU states. Explicitly excluding the eastern states who quite obviously do not want to share the common values (e.g. Hungary, Poland). Start off with the existing Eurocorps and build from there.

      Third, hammer some sense in all those halfwits who believe all the disinformation BS being thrown around by populists. I guess that much depends on proper education systems and actual brains, which is a hard nut to crack...

      Looking at the news, it sure feels much like the 1930ies... from what I learned from my parents, my grand-parents and of course school. Humanity should not go down that road again (with an especially hard look at the Trump administration)!

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:59PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:59PM (#758970)

        First, Brexit must be cancelled. We all know the consultation (not a vote!) was heavily influenced by outside forces with an interest in weakening the EU.

        And, the movement to cancel Brexit in the UK isn't being influenced by 'outside forces'?¹
        Fuck me, if you truly believe that then you're just another bloody naïve sheeple, albeit of a different flock, totally believing that all those EU orchestrated yappy little barking noises you're hearing are really big bad wolves...

        Get it into you head, both sides are lying BS merchants, all this posturing about borders etc you see this lot performing is for their financial and (future) political benefit, it is not being done to benefit you or yours, you just get to watch the Circus surrounding the posturing, and it's all made 'real' for you as you get to a chance to 'participate' in history by writing twaddle like this about this 'momentous event' online, and you get to make meaningless noises and have pointless protests in meatspace about both the Brexit Circus and the antics of the performers...Society of the Spectacle and all that.

        Listening to the choruses of bleating idiots on both sides has been one of the most amusing unexpected benefits of this Brexit thing, and there's no apparent end to it..perpetual popcorn time ahoy!²

        ¹ By 'outside forces' you're most probably implying Russia being behind the Brexiteers, yet the Labour Party (an organisation which, of old, was notoriously riddled with Soviet spies and those nasty 'comsymps' ) is, in its usual schizophrenic way, probably mostly anti-Brexit (going by the noises the local party Apparatchiks make, it is, anyway). I'll let you go figure it out.

        ²If you want my position, both the EU and the UK can go fuck themselves, in that order, hopefully.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:05PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:05PM (#759009)

        Revoke the free democratic choice of the British people? Form a military coalition with the goal of colonizing other states? Suppress political dissenters?

        Holy crap I hope you're being sarcastic.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:16PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:16PM (#759052)

          i know you know this but, no they're not being sarcastic. they are really that stupid. they mentioned poland and hungary, likely because poland and hungary have the goddamn balls to protect their people from this globalist scam and it's hordes of invaders. this stupid bitch thinks a bunch of unelected parasites is going to function on their behalf when they (like everyone else) can't even control their national elected government. sad.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Nuke on Wednesday November 07 2018, @10:45AM (24 children)

    by Nuke (3162) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @10:45AM (#758900)

    If there is a way to break up the EU, this is it.

    The member states will never agree its terms of reference, and will never agree to involve it in any action. Moreover, the major military force of the UK won't be in it. The EU has allowed itself to be invaded by Muslims, so what is the point of an army anyway? Europe might as well have rolled over in the 17th century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna [wikipedia.org]

    What is wrong with continuing with NATO? Even if the USA withdraws from it, or cuts its NATA budget (it has been reducing its share already before Trump) it still remains better than a EU force.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @10:52AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @10:52AM (#758901)

      Wow, not sure where to begin with this troll. So better not. Go back to kissing puttin's ass.

      • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:39PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:39PM (#758927)

        Trollish, maybe, but he has a couple of points..

        The member states will never agree its terms of reference, and will never agree to involve it in any action.

        This statement isn't trolling, the geopolitical aims of the EU != the geopolitical aims of France != Those of Germany != Those of Italy != Those of Spain etc etc. (as a trite example, the only way you'll get the Greeks to participate fully is if the first action of the EU Army would be to go stomp Turkey, which would annoy the Germans..).

        Moreover, the major military force of the UK won't be in it.

        Not that that actually matters, the French have more trigger happy goons than the UK to deploy, and also have the requisite nuclear toys to be the backbone of any EU force. The Germans might not like that though, as they might suspect the French of still harbouring a wee bit of resentment over their inconvenient past extra-territorial wanderjahre..

        The EU has allowed itself to be invaded by Muslims,

        Ok, trollish, but essentially true. There are parts of the UK where a white face is not welcome, and this is a purely religious thing, rather than race. I've lived and worked in areas of London with a large Yardie [wikipedia.org] presence and I had no trouble walking back to the flat I stayed in at 2:00~3:00am, I've spent some time in 'Muslim' areas in the Midlands and Northern England during the day...not a nice atmosphere and I couldn't wait to get away from there, there's parts of Glasgow that are now the same (Btw, have a number of Muslim friends, mostly from Algeria and Indonesia so don't get the idea I'm anti-Muslim, I've no time for religion in general and I don't care what particular flavour people follow, I don't judge them on that). There's a bunch of 'diversity' momsers who keep coming out with 'we (whites) created these ghettos, if only we'd integrated them better into our society', obviously having never spent any fucking time actually watching them create these 'ghettos' themselves as they regard 'our society' as essentially 'haram'.

        What is wrong with continuing with NATO?

        Trollish, I suppose, as being a member of a club where the US calls the shots doesn't fit in with the emerging EU realpolitik

        Wow, not sure where to begin with this troll. So better not. Go back to kissing puttin's ass.

        move over there at Putin's buttocks Nuke, I suppose I'll have to join you..

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:57PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:57PM (#758946)

          The EU has allowed itself to be invaded by Muslims,

          Except it wasn't. And if you looked at Syrians, they are, you know, normal people unlike the Wahhabi extremists Saudis are exporting worldwide (see Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc).

          Brexit

          Who cares? UK was the major reason for NOT having EU military force because they never wanted to integrate. Brexit allows better integration. I'm sure Lithuania would love to see its territory being defended by EU army, not some coalition that can do whatever is in their own nation's interest anyway.

          The member states will never agree its terms of reference, and will never agree to involve it in any action.

          Sure they'll agree. They'll agree on same terms like NATO. Except that EU army would need to be under command of EC, not national forces.

          United States of Europe - that's what we need. And similar army structures, where you have main EU army and the member states only have local militia to deal with local problems, but not things like invading your member states. EU army needs to be guarantor of stability on the continent.

          move over there at Putin's buttocks Nuke, I suppose I'll have to join you..

          I guess better than Trump sucking at the front

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:10PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:10PM (#759012)

            United States of Europe - that's what we need.United States of Europe - that's what we need.

            Uhm.. what we need is to take a fucking chill pill and ideally replace the EU with a bulletin board.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:20PM (19 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @12:20PM (#758917)

      There are things wrong with continuing with NATO, but if some frog thinks it would be better with French and Germany calling the shots then i don't know what the hell he is thinking.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:00PM (18 children)

        by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:00PM (#758934)

        What he's thinking is blindingly obvious: He no longer sees the USA as a reliable ally, probably because the leader of the USA comes off as a bit crazy, stupid, and remarkably friendly with enemies of his country. Based on that, he wants a Plan B in case the Yanks are completely unable or unwilling to do anything to protect his country.

        It sounds pretty rational to me, and at worst will mean that the Russians will have to give up any dreams of re-conquering eastern Europe even if the US is totally cool with it.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:14PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @01:14PM (#758940)

          Nah. It's a scared young Frenchman trying to look tough in the wake of the assassination plot against him.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:00PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:00PM (#758948)

          What he's thinking is blindingly obvious: He no longer sees the USA as a reliable ally

          Exactly! Just look at the last election - still large support for the Idiot in Chief.

        • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:08PM (10 children)

          by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:08PM (#758950) Journal

          They didn't seem to have a problem with George W. Bush, who comprised those qualities also.

          I think they're mad Trump has demanded they pull their weight with NATO's funding. Building their own EU force, however, will cost a lot more than ponying up for NATO and will create confusion in lines of command and rules of engagement.

          And who leads the EU force? Will Germany call the shots? Will the rest of the EU member states be OK with that? Or do they have a junta that will have to unanimously agree to take action every time action is required?

          There's no question that Europe has the resources and technical know-how to create a first-rate military, but it's all that other stuff that will get in the way of its effective use.

          --
          Washington DC delenda est.
          • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:30PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:30PM (#759023)

            I'm sure we already have a first rate military. Post the enemy on the bulletin board and planes will take off from all European countries. I think we should have went with another plane than Joint Strike Fighter. The Swedish Gripen was cheaper and better (it works).

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:01PM (5 children)

            by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:01PM (#759069)

            The EU's major military threat is the Russians. Trump is very friendly with the Russkies, George W Bush was not. Hence it's perfectly reasonable for the EU to consider Trump less reliable than Bush as far as coming to their aid should trouble start.

            By the numbers, on paper, the Europeans have what it takes to beat the Russians in a conventional war, and put up one hell of a fight if it came to trading ICBMs, especially if the Brits help out. As for coordinating the EU forces, the EU has a Military Committee, led by a 4-star general selected by the heads of the militaries of all the member nations, and they've done some joint EU military actions in Africa so they aren't completely inexperienced.

            Of the nations of the EU, France is the heaviest hitter militarily, with the world's third-largest nuclear force, the EU's largest air force, hundreds of helicopters, hundreds of tanks, thousands of other armored vehicles, the largest navy that's not about to Brexit, and more military personnel (210K) than other EU nations. They also generally build their own equipment, and supply a bunch of the other EU nations with materiel. That makes Macron the right person to say this kind of stuff.

            My expectation of what would happen if the Russians decided to really push a conventional attack westwards, and the US and UK basically said "screw this, we're out": Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine, and Belarus would be occupied very quickly. The main defense of Scandanavia would be the Russians sending more of their stuff south rather than going after them: The Finns are probably in trouble, Sweden's not much better off, and if those two are done so is Norway. I'd expect the defense that would really begin to slow them down to be in Poland and Romania, with substantial help from Greece, who between the 3 of them have 300K troops and a good supply of modern arms for their armies. Slovakia and Hungary are probably saved by the Polish and Romanian efforts on either side of their lines. The biggest players (Germany, France, Italy, Spain) would be able to organize behind that and stabilize the main continental front completely no further west than the old Iron Curtain defense lines (which conveniently means the Swiss can continue to be neutral throughout all this). At which point, the Russians would attempt to solidify their gains by threatening nukes if anybody tries to counter-attack, and we're into Cold War 2.0.

            --
            The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
            • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:50PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:50PM (#759093)

              You could say they already invaded Europe. 77% of the Russian population is living in Europe (25% of Russian soil). We're not enemies.

              yah европеец

            • (Score: 4, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:03PM (3 children)

              by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:03PM (#759197) Journal

              Today's Russia has a population of 144 million. The EU has a population of 513 million. The average life expectancy of a Russian man is 66 years. In the EU it's 79 years. The GDP of Russia is $1.58 trillion dollars. The GDP of the EU is $17.28 trillion.

              In short, Russia is not the threat to the EU that the Soviet Union was to Western Europe in the Cold War.

              Also, George W Bush was reasonably friendly with Russia. During the eastern expansion of NATO that brought in the Baltics Russia became a partner (I forget the exact designation) of the alliance. That was when Yeltsin was around. Putin was the one that eventually ended that relationship and took a stronger stance against NATO. Obama was pretty friendly with the Russians also; there was a PR event in which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hit a giant restart button to signal a fresh, warmer relationship with Russia under Putin.

              There's an additional dimension to current European security: energy. With Germany, Denmark, and other EU states rapidly moving to renewables dependence upon Russian oil and natural gas is waning, too.

              So in actual military, security terms, the EU's in pretty good shape. There is no pressing need to form an EU army.

              Some people think that 10 million refugees from Syria and North Africa represent a fundamental threat to European security and identity, but I don't. Those refugees are vastly, vastly outnumbered. Even if all of them turned out to be murderous terrorists Europeans could quickly squash them like bugs and kick them out. It's just not even a contest.

              --
              Washington DC delenda est.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:35PM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:35PM (#759215)

                there was a PR event in which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hit a giant restart button to signal a fresh, warmer relationship with Russia under Putin

                Worlds population is afraid that either country push the button and start nuclear holocaust. She push a big fat red button. That's a brilliant morbid joke.

              • (Score: 2) by Lester on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:00AM

                by Lester (6231) on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:00AM (#759336) Journal
                • EU population is much aged than Russian population. So they can conscript much more soldiers. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't see EU population becoming fierce warriors.
                • Russia has much more natural resources than EU (oil and gas, to begin with). Tanks, jets fighters, bombers, helicopters and trucks don't move with renewables yet.
                • Money marks the difference if you can keep the battle far from your soil. Send armies out of your homeland and use proxy fighters. WW II is a good example. UK, France, Netherlands, Belgium and were much richer than Germany and were crushed by German army. UK survived because it is an island and Hitler was more worried by Eastern front. Without Russia now we would be talking in German. By the way, Russia won WW II, not Western allies, while 40 divisions fought in France since 1944 and and no more 20 in Italy and Africa since 1943, 200 divisions fought in Eastern front since 1940. Western aid to Russia is almost a myth. In 1945, it was less than 10% of Russian own production and, in the worst times, 1940, it was less than 5%. Russia, a country those days with a mostly farming economy, won the powerful Germany almost alone. Think of today that Russia has a military industry.
                • Actual military, security terms, the EU's in pretty good shape in asymmetric wars with the aide of USA, sorry I meant NATO. If Yugoslavia war or current Syria War is an example of EU military power... well
                • 10 millions refugees are a threat if you do nothing. I'm more afraid of an army of lambs led a lion than of an army of lions led by a lamb. No matter how strong you are if you are doubting each minute whether to use the force or not. The will to fight may change a lot of things.
          • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday November 08 2018, @02:04AM (2 children)

            by bob_super (1357) on Thursday November 08 2018, @02:04AM (#759266)

            > They didn't seem to have a problem with George W. Bush, who comprised those qualities also.

            [blink]
            [blink]
            Did you forget your appointment to talk to your doctor about your memory ?

            Let me give you a hint: "Freedom Fries".

            • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday November 08 2018, @02:55PM (1 child)

              by Phoenix666 (552) on Thursday November 08 2018, @02:55PM (#759375) Journal

              Ahem, it is you who ought to have your memory checked. You're talking about France opting out of the "coalition of the willing." Also, that was the invasion of Iraq. Our allies were happy to go after the Taliban before then, because America had just been attacked and we were still the good guys at that moment.

              Nobody in Europe was talking about an EU army then, despite the absurdity of the invasion of Iraq.

              --
              Washington DC delenda est.
              • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday November 08 2018, @05:14PM

                by bob_super (1357) on Thursday November 08 2018, @05:14PM (#759424)

                You are perfectly correct, while not answering what I said.

                I was commenting on "not having a problem with [W]".
                "opting out of the coalition of the willing", including record-setting street demonstrations, is sadly only a small part of having a problem with W.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:43PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:43PM (#759067)

          I think he just wants every other country to defend France from being taken over again and again and again.

        • (Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:17PM (2 children)

          by legont (4179) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:17PM (#759074)

          Historically, France is the friendliest western state to Russia along with Germany. That's because they tried to invade Russia already and remember the consequences. Especially French that is where the most popular dining out is bistro (means quickly in Russian). That's what Russian solders screamed in Paris - food and whores, bistro, frogs.

          So, the reason he wants European army is to detach from the US psychopathic policy and to prevent WWIII inside Europe.

          --
          "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
          • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:06PM (1 child)

            by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @11:06PM (#759199) Journal

            I think he's just mad that Trump is asking him to pony up more money for defense instead of spending it on national healthcare, free university education, and programs like that. But it really is cutting your nose off to spite your face to think that the answer to spending more money on your military is to throw a tantrum and wind up paying even more money for your military than it would take for NATO, because you want to have an EU army.

            --
            Washington DC delenda est.
            • (Score: 2) by legont on Thursday November 08 2018, @12:41AM

              by legont (4179) on Thursday November 08 2018, @12:41AM (#759236)

              Perhaps, but the key here would be to give that extra military spendings to French industry or at least to EU industry.

              --
              "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 08 2018, @07:03PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 08 2018, @07:03PM (#759475)

          It isn't like the US was unsupportive of France in the first two World Wars...

          Oh, wait, I guess it kind of is like that.

  • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by looorg on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:18PM (3 children)

    by looorg (578) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:18PM (#758953)

    This is so odd and unrealistic it's hard to tell what the point of the proposal would even be.

    First of all most of the EU members are already in NATO, but apparently that isn't good enough. Instead there should be the creation of a new layer by form a single EU army. While a lot of the individual nations already follow similar rules and have similar training, all following the various NATO standards, this works because they are also still distinct and different. Not every NATO member have to take part in every action, unless it's an article 5 action and even then it's a bit unclear what that would actually entail since it really hasn't happened yet since that would more or less be WW3. It's all fine to have common goals under various missions but I seriously doubt you would want the "ONE TRUE ARMY", there is going to be massive cultural clashes and issues due to the inherent differences between the nations. I can imagine just a few issues without much contemplation -- the Turkey - Greece - Cyprus issue, the various Balkan nations in and out of EU that are also in and out of NATO .

    There are reasons why the SACEUR is always an American (so far) and they are alternating the deputy post between British and German hands (even tho it has been very British the last few times, or is it the overall structure here that is perhaps why the French are upset? Nobody wants French leadership -- after all they already left the NATO command structure once cause they had issues with the Anglo-Saxon dominance).

    Just look at the EU parliament they can't even agree on shit and that is just civilian shit -- now imagine those same representatives being in charge of the foundation of the True European Army (the nazi-jokes and references are going to write themselves).

    Perhaps they should create that ONE EU state first instead of an army, unless that is why he wants to army so he can create the single unified European state (good luck with that, cause that is just not going to happen -- east vs west, north vs south etc can't agree on squat).

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:36PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:36PM (#759064)

      First of all most of the EU members are already in NATO, but apparently that isn't good enough.

      The unspoken, but real, point of having an "EU army" is not to complement NATO, but to get rid of it. This is a proposal to get the US out of Europe. As an American, I support the proposal wholeheartedly.

      • (Score: 2) by looorg on Wednesday November 07 2018, @08:48PM (1 child)

        by looorg (578) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @08:48PM (#759141)

        The unspoken, but real, point of having an "EU army" is not to complement NATO, but to get rid of it. This is a proposal to get the US out of Europe. As an American, I support the proposal wholeheartedly.

        I'm somewhat less certain you should be happy about that. If the US withdraws so does your powerbase, the "friends" (we can really talk about if they are friends or not) in Europe won't like you very much after that and if they don't like you they'll pretty much stop buying your overprices military hardware etc. So while a lot of Euros might not pay that magical 2% on their own military spending they do seem to be buying American products quite a bit. Which would pretty much go away if you start to build a Euro-Army, even tho as noted previously that is so filled with horrors it's not even funny and unlikely to ever be a thing. No point in buying that bribe- and friendship goods anymore, no world resale to your lackeys and allies anymore so you as the american taxpayer is going to have to suck up the entire bill from the military industrial complex -- that is unless you think you are somehow going to be spending less on military which would just be hilarious.

        • (Score: 4, Interesting) by number11 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:52PM

          by number11 (1170) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:52PM (#759165)

          They'll see what good, caring friends the US is, when they tell the US to stop interfering with their continued observance of a treaty that all those parties concluded with Iran.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:22PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:22PM (#758956)

    but a army needs weapons. today that is more then a sword, bow and arrows and emergency rations also known as a horse.
    a modern army needs ... geez ... a whole specialized industry and research?
    it would also mean that europe would have to go to war with someone else these industries would have nothing to do. (un)fortunatly america has monopolized the war business globally already.
    so if the euro army would like to stay friends with numb-merica they would have to go to war with martians or venutians?

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:13PM (1 child)

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @06:13PM (#759072)

      The EU manufactures most of its own military equipment, including fighter aircraft, tanks, troop transports, and a wide variety of ships. They also definitely know how to make small arms. The idea that the Europeans are unable to supply their own militaries hasn't been true since they recovered from WW II.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:53PM (2 children)

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:53PM (#759003) Homepage Journal

    I'm a clean-hands freak; and dislike shaking hands. One of the curses of American society is the simple act of shaking hands, and the more successful and famous one becomes, the worse this terrible custom seems to get. I happen to be a clean-hands freak. I feel much better after I thoroughly wash my hands, which I do as often as possible. Medical reports have come out saying that colds and various other ailments are spread through the act of shaking hands. I have no doubt about this.

    To me the only good thing about the act of shaking hands prior to eating is that I tend to eat less. For example, there is no way, after shaking someone's hand, that I would eat bread. Even walking down the street, as people rush up to shake my hand, I often wonder to myself, why? Why risk catching a cold?

    Some business executives believe in a firm handshake. I believe in no handshake. It is a terrible practice. So often, I see someone who is obviously sick, with a bad cold or the flu, who approaches me and says, "Mr. Trump, I would like to shake your hand." It’s a medical fact that this is how germs are spread. I wish we could follow the Japanese custom of bowing instead.

    And there's so many real estate folks with whom you don’t want to waste the effort of a handshake because you know it’s meaningless. I’m talking about the lowlifes, the HORROR SHOWS with whom nothing counts but a signed contract.

    The worst is having to shake hands during a meal. On one occasion, a man walked out of the restaurant’s bathroom, jiggling his hands as though they were still wet and hadn’t used a towel. He spotted me, walked over to my table, and said, "Mr. Trump, you’re the greatest. Would you please shake my hand?" In this case, I decided to shake hands, because I was a little overweight at the time and knew that if I shook his hand I wouldn’t eat my meal -- and that would be a good thing.

    But Emmanuel is so different, so special. When he shook my hand, he put INCREDIBLE strength into it. Like you've never felt in your entire life. Like he was giving me all his strength. And all the strength of the great French people. And Brigitte took my other hand, we did the 3-way handshake. I'll tell you, Brigitte's in such good shape. She's in such good physical shape. Beautiful. I and Brigitte looked so deeply into each other's eyes. Like there was nobody else for us. And I didn't look at Emmanuel. At all. But I could feel him in my hand. I was looking at her. Feeling her. But, feeling him too. And it was amazing. Devil's Triangle. But with our clothes on. And hopefully next time, no clothes.

    And he's great with Military. He has a very special day. Which he calls Bastille Day. His special day for Military. And I went to that one. Magnificent parade. Huge parade with so many airplanes. Like you wouldn't believe. And I said to my Generals, look into that one, can we have Bastille Day? Because I want parades like that. And even bigger. Parades with airplanes of my Air Force. And space ships of Space Force. So everybody will know, America is Great Again. And very strong. The likes of which this world has never seen. With the best people, my great, and very brave Soldiers. And the best equipment.

    Everybody wants to buy our equipment. So we are helping some of those countries get online and buy the best equipment. We're talking to Saudi Arabia about, let's send them our nuclear. Some of our very peaceful nuclear. Although, if they want to use that one for Military, hopefully they can. I mean, why not? It's going to happen anyway, sooner or later. It's a way for them to defend themselves without costing us money. In fact we make a lot of money on it. We actually make money -- you don't hear that too often, folks. But you're going to be hearing it more and more. And if it's sooner, we get the money sooner. We call that one, 123 Agreement. And it's going to be much fairer than the horrible Iran Deal.

    Many people are saying, NATO is obsolete. Costing us a lot of money. And goes into many places where folks don't want it. Afghanistan, Libya -- there are many more. Now Emmanuel is saying, let's have European Army, let's protect ourselves. As France has been doing for so long. They have some of the best military. After U. S. A. they're the next best. Great nuclear, great army, great wall. Very strong. With a very strong leader. Although, I think they should get together with Spain. And build that wall across Sahara. Stop the Muslim invasion!!!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:48PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:48PM (#759123)

      I, for one, have never read one of your posts.

      I sure as hell ain't gonna read a wall of text.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday November 14 2018, @07:36AM

        by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Wednesday November 14 2018, @07:36AM (#761643) Homepage Journal

        I'm a very High Energy guy and I'm very energized from our BIG WIN last week.

        And don't worry about reading. We love the poorly read!!!!

  • (Score: 1, Troll) by archfeld on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:39PM

    by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Wednesday November 07 2018, @09:39PM (#759161) Journal

    They've been freeloading militarily speaking off everyone else since their spirited showing in WW2, and their heroic defense of their population in Vietnam. France has been first in line to sell military to anyone, now they are looking to the rest of Europe to foot the bill for their defense. The US spends 100's of billions supporting countries around the world that could easily balance our budget and provide a decent health care system for our own citizens. Ok maybe that is a simplified view of things but bottom line we spend far too much on military and military aid to foreign powers when we could be educating, and rebuilding our internal infrastructure.

    --
    For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
  • (Score: 2) by Lester on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:26AM

    by Lester (6231) on Thursday November 08 2018, @11:26AM (#759339) Journal

    NATO was a cold war agreement that satisfied both parts. Europe wanted the security of a powerful ally against an aggressive neighbor. USA wanted proxy allies that allow it to deploy troops near its enemy and far from USA soil, move the potential battle field to the gates of enemy and far from homeland. NATO satisfied both agendas. But after the cold war, things changed. European allies wasn't so afraid of its neighbor, it didn't look that aggressive, so they wanted to focus on economy and social development, and international goal was to get bigger share of world economy and not waste in military. On the other hand, USA had defeated its enemy, now it wanted to assure that it was the only superpower in economy and military. In economy, EU is a rival, not an ally, in military, USA wanted to keep military supremacy, while EU wasn't very interested in the military (there is no contest against USA). So the agendas diverged.

    There was still some courtesy and some public image that they shared interests, they are democracies, you know. But USA was pushing its agenda against its reluctant allies. USA still wants to keep NATO's deployed bases around the world, and EU still wants a strongman behind. The problem is that USA is each day less interested in European bases and more uncomfortable with allies hindering its agenda. On the other hand, EU begins to think that the bodyguard is politically too expensive and it is more interested in its own agenda than in being its bodyguard. The final straw is Trump "America First" attitude. That looks like EU can't relay on its bodyguard anymore and are looking for an alternative, not as strong as the current bodyguard, but good enough.

(1)