|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever?
really good question, and i hope that it happens because that would change the narrative of the EU elite
right now they are going to do everything they can so it doesn't happen
|
The euro will likely collapse at the next big crisis, and after that I doubt that the European Union will survive in its current form.
|
So which of your countries are planning to increase their defense spending to meet the NATO targets?
|
I mean Germany has pledged to increase the spending ever since that helicopter disaster from... idk a couple years ago and I'm fairly sure I've read multiple times about it. Not sure if we're going to increase it beyond that though
Von der Leyen said Germany was boosting military spending by nearly 2 billion euros in 2017 to 37 billion euros, or 1.22 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). It is due to reach 39.2 billion euros by 2020.
|
these fuckers here will: BUCHAREST (Romania), November 29 (SeeNews) - Romania will allocate 2% of gross domestic product (GDP) to defence next year even if the effort may take budget deficit above the ceiling of 3% of GDP agreed with the European Commission, president Klaus Iohannis said on Tuesday.
"Romania will respect its commitment of allocating 2% of GDP to defence. We will see what the deficit will be in the budget draft for next year and the draft will probably be presented by the next government. Should the deficit reach the critical 3%, the government will certainly know what and with whom to negotiate to promote its draft budget," Iohannis said in a statement following a quarterly meeting of Romania's Supreme National Defence council. 'cause who cares about deficits. + Show Spoiler +
|
Lithuania and Latvia are increasing their military spending by a quarter but it shouldn't put them above that 2% threshold. Maybe they took Trump's "you gotta pay up" seriously lol
|
On January 19 2017 04:52 LegalLord wrote:
So which of your countries are planning to increase their defense spending to meet the NATO targets?
Germany increased its defense spending by 10% last year and already said that a significant spending increase would be made available for EU joint defense forces.
With the Brits gone, there is finally some chance something in this direction may happen. If not... you won't see much from Germany. So either EU forces (or more direct cooperations with neighbors similarly to how there are Dutch/German joint forces) or nothing.
But you won't see Germany drastically increase it's defense spending just to make Donny happy.
|
On January 19 2017 05:02 Sent. wrote:
Lithuania and Latvia are increasing their military spending by a quarter but it shouldn't put them above that 2% threshold. Maybe they took Trump's "you gotta pay up" seriously lol
yeah I guess so. I've read the other day that Airbus supposedly had a really good year in 2016 when it comes to it's military department and is expecting more for 2017.
|
Estonia4505 Posts
On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning labels, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting?
That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place.
|
On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place.
Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that.
|
Estonia4505 Posts
On January 19 2017 05:08 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place. Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that.
I was asking you the following question: Is "Occupation" a loaded term, and hence, inapproriate? How about "puppies"? Opposition is largely dependent on how an EU army would be used in practice. Increased security by itself in the face of the threat of expanding militarist powers is sensible, and opposition can be overcome over time.
|
On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows?
Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now.
Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis.
Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped.
What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened.
On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not."
Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway.
I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify.
Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own.
|
|
|
On January 19 2017 05:13 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:08 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place. Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that. I was asking you the following question: Is "Occupation" a loaded term, and hence, inapproriate? How about "puppies"? Opposition is largely dependent on how an EU army would be used in practice. Increased security by itself in the face of the threat of expanding militarist powers is sensible, and opposition can be overcome over time.
Occupation as in, how would German troops being deployed in (insert country here) the way US NATO troops are, be interpreted? If you think there wouldn't be a substantial number of people who would say "this is precisely what we fought against, 70 years ago" then you would be far too optimistic.
|
Like who really? I wouldn't give a shit if there were German troops here honestly and neither would anyone who isn't 70+. German hate used to be pretty strong here but now it's all gone.
|
Hence all the talk about join-military. I'd agree there are going to be people who will feel like that no matter what you say or do. Just can't help it. But if the soldiers stationed there are a mix of german, french or whatever else, people would probably be a more fine with it?
|
On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own.
Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis.
Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it.
What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world?
|
Estonia4505 Posts
On January 19 2017 05:20 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:13 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:08 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place. Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that. I was asking you the following question: Is "Occupation" a loaded term, and hence, inapproriate? How about "puppies"? Opposition is largely dependent on how an EU army would be used in practice. Increased security by itself in the face of the threat of expanding militarist powers is sensible, and opposition can be overcome over time. Occupation as in, how would German troops being deployed in (insert country here) the way US NATO troops are, be interpreted? If you think there wouldn't be a substantial number of people who would say "this is precisely what we fought against, 70 years ago" then you would be far too optimistic.
Does it accurately a hypothetical foreseeable situation? Why did you choose the highly negative connotation term occupation out of a selection of the also applicable terms "deployment" or "supporting local forces"? Is any military presence occupation by the virtue of people having differing opinions about it, or is it a legal term?
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"?
|
On January 19 2017 05:29 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:17 RvB wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 bardtown wrote:On January 19 2017 04:14 Makro wrote:
with the brexit, medias are doing a good thing at hammering the head of the people that leaving the EU would be the biggest catastrophy ever and will turn the country into dust
that's why many europeans leaders are actively trying to resolve the brexit issue harshly, it's good publicity
that's the main reason france leaving the EU won't happen And what if the UK comes out the other side stronger than ever? On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Right. Because nothing has changed since 7 years ago, has it? I mean, it's not like one of the biggest members has left. Not like Italian banks are on the brink of collapse and Greece is no better than before. Not like millions of migrants have come to the continent against the will of most people. Also, did you notice that Farage did not (and never would be able to) win a general election in the UK? Even without a populist leader being elected, there is only so long that you can deny your peoples the votes that they want. And then, who knows? Farage wouldn't win an election but the Tories have had a strong anti EU fraction for decades and Labour had a Eurosceptic leader this time around. Farage didn't make Brexit happen by himself. Yes Britain leaving sucks but they weren't one of the founding members and they haven't been one of the core members for a while now. Italian banks aren't on the brink of collapse. They're stuck with lots of non performing loans and their equity buffers are too low. Equity buffers are too low due to increased regulation though and they've been in years. Yes they require more equity but no they're not close to bankruptcy like in the credit crisis. Migrants can cause more trouble (who knows really) but the biggest flows have already stopped. What will happen when Brexit will go fine? Who knows right? Article 50 still hasn't been triggered so we'll see. Whatever happens it'll take years before Brexit has truely happpened. On January 19 2017 04:41 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 04:33 RvB wrote:
I've been hearing that the EU will collapse since the eurocrisis. THat's 7 years ago. The EU isn't going anywhere. THe PVV is no danger, M5S is supposedly eurosceptic but wanted to join the liberal fraction in the European parliament and Greece doesn't even want to leave after all the shit they've been through. France is a little bit of a toss up but Le Pen isn't going to win.
Meanwhile Trump giving Europe the cold shoulder only strengthens the case for Federalists since there's no viable alternative left except the EU if the US isn't willing.
Yes the EU has been through a lot of crises with the credit crisis, the euro crisis, the refugee crisis, Brexit and Russian aggression but we've actually been climbing out of that hole for a while now. Growth and inflation is picking up and the refugee flow has greatly receded. Kwark was right, in a way, when he said, "if you predict economic crisis you will eventually be right." So that much is true. The biggest thing now, though, is that the EU's crisis is buried more so than resolved (Greece will default again, for sure) and we have some very concrete reasons to think this is only going to get worse. Britain for example already voted to leave; they might not have too many good options outside the EU but they did make the choice in the referendum and it very well may happen. The US basically says that the EU is on its own, which should be further reason to be concerned. The Eurosceptics just keep getting stronger and stronger as we go forward. There is no real sign of this EU crisis getting less severe; it keeps going from crisis-point to crisis-point (Greece, refugees, Brexit, Trump) and I just don't see any resolution on the horizon. While five years ago I would have probably said an EU breakup is unlikely and they will work it all out eventually, at this point I would have to classify it as "more likely than not." Greece will likely need more debt relief but I doubt they'll go in an actual default. Greece isn't really going to take the rest of the eurozone with it anymore anyway. I don't see why the US saying the EU is on its own will make it break up. Please clarify. Brexit isn't really a EU crisis though, it's more of an internal matter of the UK and Trump is really no crisis for the EU at all. We'll be on less friendly terms with the US and they might be a competitor but so what? There are alternatives if the US doesn't want to cooperate and the EU has plenty of economic might of its own. Greece continues to be an economy with no hope for recovery faced with creditors who categorically refuse debt forgiveness. A default would likely lead the way to a larger scale financial crisis. Trump and the US, that just helps to undermine any form of ideological support for a union. He's basically saying, "want to leave? We're cool with that, go for it. What alternative for the US would you be likely to stake the future of Europe on? China, the new staunch defender of globalism, as the leader of the free world?
Why would a Greek default lead to a wider financial crisis? Nobody in the financial sector has exposure to Greece anymore and the bailout money not coming back isn't going to make any country go bankrupt.
You're overestimating Trumps influence. He's massively disliked in Europe. I remember a poll in NL where 90% thought negatively of him.Trump being negative about the EU won't really matter at all.
There's no real alternative for the US as an ally tbh (this goes both ways, the US has no real alternative to the EU). Economically though there are plenty of partners like China, India, other developed countries etc.
|
On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2017 05:20 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:13 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 05:08 LegalLord wrote:On January 19 2017 05:05 mustaju wrote:On January 19 2017 04:27 LegalLord wrote:
It does. To be honest I don't see a larger scale EU collapse come to fruition without economic strains becoming crisis-level. But the makings of an economic crisis certainly seem to be there.
For one, I wonder how much "pay 2 percent or we don't necessarily got your back" is going to look, economically. And how it's going to look to nations that don't want German occupation.
Considering our previous conversations about your sensibilities in assigning, how do you justify calling increasing German influence in the EU-s defense discussion "occupation" as appropriate? You also call countries that can easily find common ground with Germany in the EU "puppies." What kind of response are you expecting? That's not to say that a EU army would be without risk, but if well executed, it could end up reducing the insecurity that has lead to the rise of the Far Right in the first place. Which countries in Europe do you expect would be most opposed to increased German military involvement? I could easily name a few if it isn't obvious that not everyone would like that. I was asking you the following question: Is "Occupation" a loaded term, and hence, inapproriate? How about "puppies"? Opposition is largely dependent on how an EU army would be used in practice. Increased security by itself in the face of the threat of expanding militarist powers is sensible, and opposition can be overcome over time. Occupation as in, how would German troops being deployed in (insert country here) the way US NATO troops are, be interpreted? If you think there wouldn't be a substantial number of people who would say "this is precisely what we fought against, 70 years ago" then you would be far too optimistic. Does it accurately a hypothetical foreseeable situation? Why did you choose the highly negative connotation term occupation out of a selection of the also applicable terms "deployment" or "supporting local forces"? Is any military presence occupation by the virtue of people having differing opinions about it, or is it a legal term?
Because any nation with any sense of national pride would see a German garrison in their homes as little more than an occupation. Yes, it is true that "nation with any sense of national pride" is a dying breed, but they still exist. And let's not pretend that an EU-centric military project wouldn't elevate Germany to the status of the strongest military force within the bloc. The U.K. and French militaries don't set such a high bar to overcome, and Germany would easily be able to take its place at the top there. It would start to look like something resembling an occupation to people who are not so inclined to want German garrisons.
Which countries would see it that way? France and Britain would, almost certainly. The German puppy bloc, almost certainly not. Everyone else, I don't know. But I doubt it would look pretty.
On January 19 2017 05:30 mustaju wrote:
And again, explain to me, why are the Nordic and Baltic countries or anyone supporting a continuation of the EU German "puppies"?
Well you're certainly not behemoths and certainly not equal partners. Which term would you prefer? Pack wolves? Willing subjects? Junior partners?
|
|
|
|
|
|
541
EPT
