Yoda Power
✫✫✫✫✫✫✫
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 13,870
Well it makes most sense to focus on realistic scenarios, before we start with the funny ones.
European military (in)capabilities - why is Europe so "weak"?
- Thread starter Winner
- Start date
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
The US Military stands at appx. 2,659,000 soldiers. Only appx. 1,400,000 of them are active duty troops, with the rest in reserve or national guard units. Even still, many of these troops are logistics, not combat troops.
That will never happen. A war, or a cold war, between EU and US would be so idiotic that it dosn't even makes sense to think about it.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
That's true if you have enough money to bribe him.
Europe don't need that large territorial defense forces. We're not going to be invaded in the foreseeable future. What we need is the ability to project power in the region of Middle East, Eastern Europe and Africa.
I don't agree with the opinion we need large aircraft carriers etc. It is too expensive and unnecessary. Our enemies will be more like Hezbollah and we will fight in asymmetric wars. I'd focus on training and personal equipment, UAV's, air support, air transport, light armored vehicles etc.
AL_DA_GREAT
amour absinthe révolution
How many of them do you think actually will fight? Do you realize that they are costing 10 000 of dollars each every year?
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
Well it makes most sense to focus on realistic scenarios, before we start with the funny ones.
In 1914, nobody would have thought that the United Kingdom and Russia would be enemies. In the 1800s and prior, nobody would have thought the UK and France would be friends. In 1776 or 1812, nobody thought that the US and UK would be friends, today. Things change. You have to prepare for that.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
I never said that it was not too big, only that the number is not four million.
You'll be singing a different tune when the ChiComs finally begin their war for world domination. Guarantee you'll wish you had massive force projection capability then.
Trajan12
Deity
We should take that up with the new Secretary GEN. UN efforts to quell violence world wide should be more direct IMO.
We should have an American Union. I think although we have something of the sort, defense wise. NORAD and RIO. RIO however is not very strong.
I can think of plenty of scenarios. We need those troops because we are the primary contributors to UN security council acts. We are the World Police as they like to say.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
It is very unlikely. If it comes, we will adjust our policies, but frankly, it would be idiotic to plan a new Cold War against your long-time ally, especially if it is the only ally you have.
-0blivion-
Musically inclined
The spectre of nuclear war in this scenario tends to make those past scenarios irrelevant.
Trajan12
Deity
You have a better idea? Who else is going to do what we do if we were to cut back? As of now, not many could.
By you logic, Denmark should begin arming our selves for the future reconqista of Sweden... it's easier now with the bridge and all...
No way!
Though we disagree on several things, we're too alike to wage war. Plus a war would end in every major city in EU and US being nuked, which would make it even more idiotic.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
I say we need to develop huge walking nuclear equipped deathmobiles. Or as they say METAL GEAR!
But yeah good post Winner. We need to beef up our armies.
But yeah good post Winner. We need to beef up our armies.
Desmond Hawkins
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2002
- Messages
- 9,922
Some countries might wish they didn't have these world police on their soil...
Really though, Europe has a larger army than the United States. The force projection capabilities are coming online pretty quickly despite the relatively lower funding. The naval projection might not be there (nor is it necessary, as Storealex has pointed out), but airlift capacity is going to get a huge boost once Airbus gets its act together and gets the A400 going.
Indeed. The army is under 500,000 now, and the marines are about 180,000. Still a massive force relative to other countries, but smaller than most people know.
Trajan12
Deity
I'ts actually a tiny percentage of the entire budget. I'd rather give that fraction than be unprepared.
Yoda Power
✫✫✫✫✫✫✫
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 13,870
And why is it not easy to accept?That is pretty easy for you to say
Meh. If you really have an old school realistic foreign policy view I can't argue with your logic, without claiming your world view is wrong. And I'm never going to be able to change that view.
But think about this:
It is very unlikely that a revolution is going to make Europe a commie state.
It is very unlikely the US and EU will have colonial interests that will result in war between them.
It is however, very likely that the EU and US will continue to work together in NATO. The current War on Terror is currently uniting more than it is seperating the two continents. They both need each other, now is not the time to fight.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Well, sorry to say that, but China is mainly your "problem". China and Europe don't have many conflicting interests, their spheres of influence don't clash (maybe in Africa a little bit, but that's not serious) and I don't think there is a potential for a crisis between China and Europe.
AL_DA_GREAT
amour absinthe révolution
I say Europe has an army which fits the need.
