|
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 November 14 2017 18:16 Pr0wler wrote:
Military spending(and budgeting as a whole) is a domestic matter, EU has no power over it. Now they are trying to put their hands even there. What, if we don't want to spend more than 2% on defense ?
And let's be clear here, we are not talking about money for new domestic military factories(or subsidizing old ones). We are talking straight up "Buy our planes,ships, guns and other equipment". And we can't buy these from China or Russia, because theirs are not "compatible" with our "allies". So we have no choice there, too...
On top of that we are giving up even more sovereignty with this "integrated military". How much can you bend the stick, before it snaps ?
In general, if the EU wants to survive the next decade, it should return to it's core - economic union with common market. If they try to push for more, it's doomed.
It's not really a national matter at all. As part of NATO, EU nations already have far-reaching commitments with regards to military spending, military deployment and military training. Add to that, closer bilateral or multilateral arrangements between nations, and there is already a lot more than purely national spending.
On top of that, this isn't "Europe" forcing anybody to do anything. It is a bunch of countries getting together and realizing that if push comes to shove, their military is inadequate, and to shore up their defenses, it is better to (1) spend more than they do right now (which is too low), and (2) work together better with their neighbours. I have no idea whether Bulgaria signs this agreement or is even invited to do so, but I see closer integration of European military as a very good thing. The Dutch army individually is absolutely useless. However, the Dutch army does a few things better than many other nations (strong navy, excellent special forces, reasonable air force) and can function very well in joint military actions.
|
On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event.
You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event.
On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power.
I still can't see why an economic and customs union needs "better military cooperation" and an actual army, which is the end goal. We already have NATO.
|
I think before anyone can discuss the meaning of a defence cooperation pact, they should read at least the list of commitments to get an idea of what it is about. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/31511/171113-pesco-notification.pdf There's a lot there, but it appears to be a mishmash of "commitments" and "ambitions" and other buzzwords. Mainly it appears to provide a frameword for multinational procurement projects, which is odd since France, Germany, Italy, Spain and UK have all cooperated together for quite a few major procurement projects in the last 30 years, without needing one. Perhaps the intention is to allow smaller countries to partake in weapon development, to the benefit of larger companies. Though it says that members now subscribe to a commitment to 2% defence spending, it doesn't have any recourse to force members to do so.
|
On November 14 2017 22:51 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event. You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event. Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power.
Grabbing? Or being given. There were two (three if you count UK) major elections in the EU this year. France voted for Europhile Macron. German results are harder to parse, but Merkel maintains her majority. In addition, the most pro-EU parties in the Netherlands gained about as much as the most anti-EU parties, and the center was simply redistributed. In all three a pro-EU government seems to be unopposed.
So how exactly is the EU grabbing anything? There seems to be a stable majority elected in the member states that is willing to continue and even increase collaboration. Meanwhile there is a (slowly growing) very vocal minority who sees this as a bad thing. But while they do a lot of yelling, they have no alternative. Brexit is the closest to an alternative, and Britain has never collaborated at the level of mainland EU states have, and the political fallout in Britain looks about as disastrous as it can be, with loads of infighting and no internal coherence even with regards to negotiating the exit.
|
On November 14 2017 23:25 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 22:51 Pr0wler wrote:On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event. You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event. On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power. Grabbing? Or being given. There were two (three if you count UK) major elections in the EU this year. France voted for Europhile Macron. German results are harder to parse, but Merkel maintains her majority. In addition, the most pro-EU parties in the Netherlands gained about as much as the most anti-EU parties, and the center was simply redistributed. In all three a pro-EU government seems to be unopposed. So how exactly is the EU grabbing anything? There seems to be a stable majority elected in the member states that is willing to continue and even increase collaboration. Meanwhile there is a (slowly growing) very vocal minority who sees this as a bad thing. But while they do a lot of yelling, they have no alternative. Brexit is the closest to an alternative, and Britain has never collaborated at the level of mainland EU states have, and the political fallout in Britain looks about as disastrous as it can be, with loads of infighting and no internal coherence even with regards to negotiating the exit.
Exactly, this minority is growing(slowly or not). We should ask ourselves why is it growing. And, if the people on the top don't address the issues, the minority (slowly) will become majority and the stick will snap. No coming back from there. Instead of that I see constant movement towards direction that "feeds" the anti-EU movements.
|
On November 14 2017 23:49 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 23:25 Acrofales wrote:On November 14 2017 22:51 Pr0wler wrote:On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event. You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event. On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power. Grabbing? Or being given. There were two (three if you count UK) major elections in the EU this year. France voted for Europhile Macron. German results are harder to parse, but Merkel maintains her majority. In addition, the most pro-EU parties in the Netherlands gained about as much as the most anti-EU parties, and the center was simply redistributed. In all three a pro-EU government seems to be unopposed. So how exactly is the EU grabbing anything? There seems to be a stable majority elected in the member states that is willing to continue and even increase collaboration. Meanwhile there is a (slowly growing) very vocal minority who sees this as a bad thing. But while they do a lot of yelling, they have no alternative. Brexit is the closest to an alternative, and Britain has never collaborated at the level of mainland EU states have, and the political fallout in Britain looks about as disastrous as it can be, with loads of infighting and no internal coherence even with regards to negotiating the exit. Exactly, this minority is growing(slowly or not). We should ask ourselves why is it growing. And, if the people on the top don't address the issues, the minority (slowly) will become majority and the stick will snap. No coming back from there. Instead of that I see constant movement towards direction that "feeds" the anti-EU movements.
Should we? Or should we accept that you can't please everybody, and people who want to regress back to 19th century nationalism should mostly just be ignored?
|
Its not like most of those people bring forth any real ideas despite "others bad!", let alone solutions or care about facts in general.
|
Sounds like fun. I wonder if the UK is upset at all. Not that it matters since they're one foot out the door and entirely unclear as to what they're going to make of it anyways.
|
Sometimes it is better to ignore a part of your population. I don't know how Bulgaria is in regards to that, but the 5-15 % of the germans that actually oppose what you see as the goal of the EU should not be integrated into the political process. Ignoring them is the right thing to do because they oppose the EU not for reasons but emotions, mostly negative. That of course is an arrogant political position but i am positive that a irrational political movement cannot simply grow because you ignore it, there is a limit to it's base. We simply can't risk appealing to nationalists to keep them happy.
Now, if Bulgaria is different and you have a higher percentage of people willing to hate the EU for whatever reasons, then your government should realize that and stay out of the EU. Nobody forces the states to stay in and should Bulgaria suddenly leave, i am sure the EU would survive. And if in the end the current nations stay in the EU like it is now and others join together in a real federal state like you seem to fear, that is fine as well. Nobody forces anyone.
|
So now that the EU is on the path to having its own army, who should we invade first?
|
The EU itself! Eurosceptic conspiracy nuts keep saying that federalists keep pushing for the EU army mostly because they want to be able to use force against the disobedient member states.
|
On November 15 2017 00:55 warding wrote:
So now that the EU is on the path to having its own army, who should we invade first?
I'm neutral about this.
(Obviously Kuba in case you later want to set up missiles).
|
On November 14 2017 22:51 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event. You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event. Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power. I still can't see why an economic and customs union needs "better military cooperation" and an actual army, which is the end goal. We already have NATO.
People also want more power for the EU or don't care enough to do something against it. Just look at the current and new governments.
I meant specific to your point about Bulgaria. I can't search for myself without difficulty and this statement is not really worth much investment if you don't even substantiate it yourself in the slightest.
|
I'm pretty sure Pr0wler wasn't talking specifically about Bulgaria so I don't get why you guys keep bringing up his country.
He's also not wrong about the election results. Le Pen and Wilders got more than before, Brexiters got more than enough. The eurosceptic camp is growing in each country. You want to ignore it, just like it wants to ignore "you", by leaving "your" union. Not that there is something wrong with their or your position. Sometimes there is just no room for compromise.
On November 15 2017 01:10 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2017 00:55 warding wrote:
So now that the EU is on the path to having its own army, who should we invade first? I'm neutral about this. (Obviously Kuba in case you later want to set up missiles).
Can't we just do that on Martinique or Guadeloupe?
|
On November 15 2017 00:55 warding wrote:
So now that the EU is on the path to having its own army, who should we invade first?
Norway. They are close and they have oil.
|
Why not just go Iraq and Afghanistan to start off strong and well-oiled?
|
On November 15 2017 01:24 Sent. wrote:I'm pretty sure Pr0wler wasn't talking specifically about Bulgaria so I don't get why you guys keep bringing up his country. He's also not wrong about the election results. Le Pen and Wilders got more than before, Brexiters got more than enough. The eurosceptic camp is growing in each country. You want to ignore it, just like it wants to ignore "you", by leaving "your" union. Not that there is something wrong with their or your position. Sometimes there is just no room for compromise. Show nested quote +On November 15 2017 01:10 Velr wrote:On November 15 2017 00:55 warding wrote:
So now that the EU is on the path to having its own army, who should we invade first? I'm neutral about this. (Obviously Kuba in case you later want to set up missiles). Can't we just do that on Martinique or Guadeloupe?
Could very well be a misunderstanding on my end.
Still, saying the majority doesn't agree with a unified army or is indifferent on the matter is a stretch.
Whereas the supposed savings achievable through that I'm sure many will embrace.
I'm much more scared that Germany now basically owns atomic weapons...
|
Throw the conservatives a bone, start with something traditional like Poland or Belgium.
|
On November 14 2017 23:25 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 22:51 Pr0wler wrote:On November 14 2017 21:34 Artisreal wrote:On November 14 2017 20:37 Pr0wler wrote:
Nobody is forcing us to do anything... and yet nobody is asking us when they are doing things. Interesting how that goes. The ministers just went there and signed the document and we learned about that from the news post factum. Same as the Lisbon treaty and pretty much every document regarding the EU.
Obviously that is a problem with spineless politicians that will do everything to please their overlords in Brussels, but also is a problem with EU wanting more and more power when clearly the people don't want that. The only thing that's clear is that you don't want that. That nobody is asking you in particular doesn't equate Bulgaria being against this step. I'd appreciate if you'd take the time of linking two or three articles that, if necessary, can be translated by Google to provide the non native speakers insight into the state of Bulgaria's mind. I had trouble finding appropriate sources on this recent event. You want sources proving that people in Europe don't want more powerful EU ? Look at the recent elections then. Maybe the rise of the nationalists is just a random event. On November 14 2017 21:04 mahrgell wrote:
And it isn't even a traditional EU agreement, where every EU nation is "forced to please Brussels".
It was voluntary to join this agreement, and several EU nations opted out.
I didn't talk about nations at all. Nations didn't make any decisions on the matter. I was talking about politicians of the spineless variety in particular. Electing them is our fault, that's for sure. On the other hand we have EU that slowly, but surely is creeping towards giant state by slowly grabbing more and more power. Grabbing? Or being given. There were two (three if you count UK) major elections in the EU this year. France voted for Europhile Macron. German results are harder to parse, but Merkel maintains her majority. In addition, the most pro-EU parties in the Netherlands gained about as much as the most anti-EU parties, and the center was simply redistributed. In all three a pro-EU government seems to be unopposed. So how exactly is the EU grabbing anything? There seems to be a stable majority elected in the member states that is willing to continue and even increase collaboration. Meanwhile there is a (slowly growing) very vocal minority who sees this as a bad thing. But while they do a lot of yelling, they have no alternative. Brexit is the closest to an alternative, and Britain has never collaborated at the level of mainland EU states have, and the political fallout in Britain looks about as disastrous as it can be, with loads of infighting and no internal coherence even with regards to negotiating the exit.
No no, candidates who were quite critical towards EU (not the "hence we need more integration" kind, I mean) still got the majority of the votes in the first round. Don't think that because Macron was elected in the second round against the far-right, he has wide approval on his views/program. In his federalist views he's completely minority in France. Outside of his base, he was not elected on his pro-EU stance.
|
On November 15 2017 02:05 Big J wrote:
Throw the conservatives a bone, start with something traditional like Poland or Belgium.
You need to follow tradition and invade Poland for the sole purpose of invading the country behind Poland soon after.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
