• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Germany speaks out in favour of European army

So what do Americans thnk about this, how about Europeans, and how about others?

Germany has the biggest say in the parliament.

What do I think about it?
I absolutely hate the idea of a European Army. It will not happen for a long time.

Besides, what would be the point of such an army? Not like the Europeans have the balls to use force wrapped up in a hippy pacifist mindset especially if it would be led by the Germans.

Edit: Who/what would this army pledge their allegiance to? The British army/soldiers has and always will be her Majesty's Armed Forces and allegiance goes to the crown not to Europe.
 
Last edited:
To the extend that no matter what party I'd vote for none would deny the simple historic facts you denied, would approve statements like:

Your view on Saddam Hussein and the French refusal to join the illegal Iraq war, and your silly theory that France and Germany was in cahoots with Saddam smells like conspiracy theory mixed with Fox News brainwashing. As do your opinion on Europe and European defense in general smell Fox News brainwashing.
Its clear in history that Saddam was more a tool of the US than any European state.

None of the two extremist parties in the US that is. They tend to always blame the French and always wave the American flag.

Oh really, how interesting :2razz: Which state best represents the one party sytem in your view?

China is a pretty good example.

The European Union commission has no parties, they just propose the policies they see as the best way forward, and the people of the commission varies all the time. Thats a pretty good example, but its not a government, just a good type of political indstitution.
 
What do I think about it?
I absolutely hate the idea of a European Army.

Why do you hate the idea? Do you not think a European+national DEFENSE, could defend Europe and the nations within it BETTER than the current national defense structure?
It will not happen for a long time.

It IS HAPPENING..

Besides, what would be the point of such an army? Not like the Europeans have the balls to use force wrapped up in a hippy pacifist mindset especially if it would be led by the Germans.

It would be a European DEFENSE.. Not an offense. Your thoughts of "using" the army is so knit to your following bad American "normality".

Edit: Who/what would this army pledge their allegiance to? The British army/soldiers has and always will be her Majesty's Armed Forces and allegiance goes to the crown not to Europe.

In my view it would plea allegiance to western values and the European charter of fundamental rights, before their natural allegiance to the nations they are born in.
 
IMO, the net benefits of such an approach will depend on how it is set up. For example, if the European countries model a common defense force along the lines of how NATO is set up, the design could allow for greater effectiveness without a serious sacrifice of sovereignty. The design of such a force and setting for of authority will probably be the most challenging aspect.

Like European governance it cannot be compared with federal America, the UN or any other type of past governance. Its something altogether new.

I think also a European defense will be something never before seen. I believe in many different ways it can turn out. But most of all I believe in a national restructuring of defense resources and the building of a small professional force on top of that. I believe the biggest change will be all the new strategies and command that will be added to make it a true European defense.

I have no belief that a European defense will be anything other than a DEFENSE strictly.

Given the large number of shared interests between the European countries and U.S., I doubt that a European Army would be seen as threatening to the U.S. Arguably, a common European Army could be seen as being in the interests of the U.S., too, as it makes sense for friendly states to have a robust capability for defending themselves.

Exactly.
And NATO have to be a two way alliance also. In case the US need it we also need to be able to contribute significant defense of the US as well.

A NATO of the United States, the European Defense Organisation and Turkey, eh?

Finally, in this thread there seems to be an implied, but not too subtle, suggestion that Europe's countries are somehow incapable of managing their affairs and cannot be trusted to shape their own destiny. I strongly disagree.

I dont know where these ideas come from, but when uttered on this forum, they usually seem quite extreme, and from people with general extremist standpoints.

Europe deserves much credit for having evolved into a prosperous and democratic zone. To be sure, U.S. security guarantees during the Cold War and post-WW II assistance e.g., the Marshall Plan, made significant positive contributions, but the Europeans did a lot on their own. The efforts of the Europeans were indispensable to the outcome.

Also the European Union is doing a lot. Its expanded the zone of peaceful and prosperous countries from a zone of 6 to include most of Europe, and it affects countries far beyond Europe as well in their wish to also become the same way(some in a far stretched hope of becoming members, others in their own versions of the EU).
 
None of the two extremist parties in the US that is. They tend to always blame the French and always wave the American flag.
That could be true but in this particular case the French had invested in Iraq and never denied their economical interest. So, France not supporting a full scale invasion could also have a lot more trivial reason.

China is a pretty good example.
What part do you like, their cultural revolution, the way they handle students, or their improvement of Tibet?

The European Union commission has no parties, they just propose the policies they see as the best way forward, and the people of the commission varies all the time. Thats a pretty good example, but its not a government, just a good type of political indstitution.
Can you name me a few of their achievements? What's so appealing?
 
It's a terrible idea. The growing centralization of power in world governments is becoming a worrying trend. Oh wait! I forgot...modern humans are different - they're incorruptible and incapable of committing atrocities, so there's no reason to worry about that stuff anymore...

I would view the formation of an EU army as a threat to world security, given their general instability and love of centralized authority. If the EU becomes a giant super-state it will most likely devolve into an authoritarian regime.
 
Last edited:
What do I think about it?
I absolutely hate the idea of a European Army. It will not happen for a long time.

Besides, what would be the point of such an army? Not like the Europeans have the balls to use force wrapped up in a hippy pacifist mindset especially if it would be led by the Germans.

Edit: Who/what would this army pledge their allegiance to? The British army/soldiers has and always will be her Majesty's Armed Forces and allegiance goes to the crown not to Europe.

Laila, your part of the world is becoming increasingly scary for anyone who enjoys their personal freedom and national sovereignty. A European super-state would be the final nail in the coffin for the British people. If you want to come to the US before it's too late feel free to send me a PM...;)
 
So what do Americans thnk about this, how about Europeans, and how about others?

This is a work in progress since the Maastricht treaty. But I mean, "under full parliament control" :confused:

Germany has the biggest say in the parliament.

Give up control of money and now military to some huge bureaucratic nightmare of an institution? Yeah, that's a great idea. Pretty much looking to destroy all the sovereign countries in Europe.
 
What part do you like, their cultural revolution, the way they handle students, or their improvement of Tibet?

Like a typical anti-Chinese you ignore any of the great things that has happened in China, and choose to focus on 2 negative issues that happened 20 years apart. And those issues being negative since you probably didnt really understand any of the properly.

Can you name me a few of their achievements? What's so appealing?

Bringing more than the equivilant of the full population of the US out of poverty into relative comfortable lives.

For example.

Also politics in China is much more controlled by the people now than it was 20 or 30 years ago. The peoples party cannot ignore the will of the people. That doesnt mean they have to make stupid decisions like lifting the information monopoly and allowing indoctrination from the outside onto their population. That would be quite dumb actually.
 
Give up control of money and now military to some huge bureaucratic nightmare of an institution? Yeah, that's a great idea. Pretty much looking to destroy all the sovereign countries in Europe.

Nightmare bureaucratic institution? At least its not dogmatic-static and unable to change like US federal political institutions..

And its a great political creation, the most promising of any government in the world at this time.
 
Like a typical anti-Chinese you ignore any of the great things that has happened in China, and choose to focus on 2 negative issues that happened 20 years apart. And those issues being negative since you probably didnt really understand any of the properly.
I feel so exposed for being typical anti-Chinese.

You have not answered my question but I'll answer yours.

I do not ignore, I fail to see "any of the great things". I'm glad your answer gave me more insights, detailed as it was. I named 3 'negative isseus', which has more to do with my laziness than the lack of gross violations of human rights by the Chinese government. Mostly against their own people, as can be expected from one party systems.

Bringing more than the equivilant of the full population of the US out of poverty into relative comfortable lives.

For example.
Well that changes everything. I must admit its the first time anyone told me this but I'm sure you have plenty sources to back it up.

Also politics in China is much more controlled by the people now than it was 20 or 30 years ago. The peoples party cannot ignore the will of the people. That doesnt mean they have to make stupid decisions like lifting the information monopoly and allowing indoctrination from the outside onto their population. That would be quite dumb actually.
Yes, it's always the totalitarian, authoritative states who prosper. Imagine all the knowledge, wisdom and creativity coming from China the next few decades, it's so exciting.
 
I feel so exposed for being typical anti-Chinese.

You have not answered my question but I'll answer yours.

I do not ignore, I fail to see "any of the great things". I'm glad your answer gave me more insights, detailed as it was. I named 3 'negative isseus', which has more to do with my laziness than the lack of gross violations of human rights by the Chinese government. Mostly against their own people, as can be expected from one party systems.

I think those things are necessary "evils".. I see the justifications for the Tiannamen Square breakup. I also dont necessarily stand on the side of Tibet in their "issue". I do support reginalism in Europe to some degree, but China is not mature enought for that at all, which is the reason I completely support Chinese action in Tibet, unlike all the people who watched these things in Tibet sympatic partly anti Chinese(because they are instead pro-western) western media.

I dont know what you aim at when you say cultural revolution.. There is a cultural revolution going on in China. That should be viewed as a positive thing. Even though they dont conform the western ideals, its not a bad thing, althout most westerners would try to force you to believe so.

I for one totally support the Chinese information firewall. I understand why its there, I understand the need for it, and I completely and utterly support the Chinese leadership decision on it, despite western nagging over it(because they are unable then to Brainwash the Chinese people).
The Chinese should be able to create their own way, and they are doing so, perhaps in 50 years we will learn from the Chinese way, and give up our silly multi party democracy political bickering disfunctional circus system and actually create a political system and hand more influence into the hands of the people, LIKE China IS doing.

Just because it is a one party system doesnt mean its incomtible with democracy. The reason westerners believe so, is because we ourself are so out of touch with what democracy really means.

Well that changes everything. I must admit its the first time anyone told me this but I'm sure you have plenty sources to back it up.

Do you seriously contend this?

Yes, it's always the totalitarian, authoritative states who prosper. Imagine all the knowledge, wisdom and creativity coming from China the next few decades, it's so exciting.

What you dont understand is that China isnt authoritarian, and that the natural development inside the Chinese one party system is that this type of system actually is bringing the people far more power than the pretend democracies of the west.
People have one party to view, and instead have to focus on the single issues at hand, instead of selecting a pre selected often incomatible menu.



I strongly recommend this book about the issue, if you want to understand how China is developing, and why I support that type of [ame="http://www.amazon.com/What-Does-China-Think-ebook/dp/B002RI9T9Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=A12MGAGPLUJEQK&s=digital-text&qid=1267131486&sr=1-1"]Amazon.com: What Does China Think? eBook: Mark Leonard: Kindle Store[/ame]
 
Last edited:
I think those things are necessary "evils".. I see the justifications for the Tiannamen Square breakup.
I also dont necessarily stand on the side of Tibet in their "issue". I do support reginalism in Europe to some degree, but China is not mature enought for that at all, which is the reason I completely support Chinese action in Tibet, unlike all the people who watched these things in Tibet sympatic partly anti Chinese(because they are instead pro-western) western media.
Are you somehow suggesting that it’s not Tibetans but in fact the western media who reject the Chinese colonisation of Tibet?
In regard to Tiannamen Square, where could a government kill and maim a couple of thousand students and remain in power. Surely not in a democracy. When you say “necessary evils", I think “Animal Farm”.
I dont know what you aim at when you say cultural revolution.. There is a cultural revolution going on in China. That should be viewed as a positive thing. Even though they dont conform the western ideals, its not a bad thing, althout most westerners would try to force you to believe so.
I’m sorry , I assumed you knew about Mao’s cultural revolution. Which brings me to the following. Which western ideals are you talking about?
I for one totally support the Chinese information firewall. I understand why its there, I understand the need for it, and I completely and utterly support the Chinese leadership decision on it, despite western nagging over it(because they are unable then to Brainwash the Chinese people).
China’s engaged in mind control and you support it. 30 years from now you’ll wake up in front of a teleprompter with a chip in your arse. BTW, the West isn’t nagging, they’re sucking up to China becuase they want acces to their markets and exploit their proletariat.
The Chinese should be able to create their own way, and they are doing so, perhaps in 50 years we will learn from the Chinese way, and give up our silly multi party democracy political bickering disfunctional circus system and actually create a political system and hand more influence into the hands of the people, LIKE China IS doing.
Just because it is a one party system doesnt mean its incomtible with democracy. The reason westerners believe so, is because we ourself are so out of touch with what democracy really means.
We used to know what the alternative means. I don’t mind criticism on democracy but as long as you don’t provide an alternative you leave it to my imagination.
Do you seriously contend this?
Hell yes!
What you dont understand is that China isnt authoritarian, and that the natural development inside the Chinese one party system is that this type of system actually is bringing the people far more power than the pretend democracies of the west.
People have one party to view, and instead have to focus on the single issues at hand, instead of selecting a pre selected often incomatible menu.

I strongly recommend this book about the issue, if you want to understand how China is developing, and why I support that type of Amazon.com: What Does China Think? eBook: Mark Leonard: Kindle Store
Sure I’ll buy it, maybe then I’ll appreciate the concept of the deliberative dictatorship more.
 
Why do you hate the idea? Do you not think a European+national DEFENSE, could defend Europe and the nations within it BETTER than the current national defense structure?

No it wouldn't.
Who would it be answerable to? Who would control it? How can you ensure it is 'controlled' fairly?
I refuse to accept German-only leadership or French only. Will small countries have as much control of said defense as UK?

It would be a European DEFENSE.. Not an offense. Your thoughts of "using" the army is so knit to your following bad American "normality".

So another useless project? Noted.

In my view it would plea allegiance to western values and the European charter of fundamental rights, before their natural allegiance to the nations they are born in.

British soldiers pledge their allegiance to Her Majesty, the Queen. Not some bloody charter. It has been for hundreds of years and it will remain.
Europe is really pushing it. Lets just abolish all national pride and history and restart it all over again :/

And people wonder why the British fear closer integration if it is this kind of stuff they dream up.
 
Last edited:
Of course I cannot. Can you?

Thats the problem exactly with multi party/bi party systems. The reason I support a one party system where the people vote on policies rather than the party.

Unfortunately, a one party system in Germany proved your sentiment foolish. Of course, there's always the possibilty that the Nazi Party was merely misunderstood.
 
Perhaps we are just trying to pave out an alternative direction to the insane global policies of the current United States, whom just like Germany(FOR EXAMPLE), turned from being an open society into a closed one.

Hmmmm...weren't you celebrating the greatness of Barrack Obama as reaching out to Europe just a few months ago while people like me were ruining it? Yet here you are talking about America's "current trend" of looking to be a more closed society. Wasn't it your kind that bestowed the Nobel Peace Prize upon our magnificent Washingtoin king? Perhaps your fears of a "closed" American society has you worried about having to work harder to eran a seat at America's table in the future?

The way I see it, the farther we can keep you kind away and force you to defend and fight your own battles the stronger a Western world is. As it is, you are weak because we are strong and this makes us weaker than we have to be.

By the way, I wonder how you feel about your earlier preaching about how America's economy was finished. Seems we are bouncing just fine as predicted (which is the American way) while you all are being as European as always. Turn your back on us. Embrace Russia and Soviet Union. I mean you owe everything to them over the last 100 years don't you? Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Quite........

The most prosperous and peaceful time in Europe's history was during the Cold War when America was parenting and defending western Europe's nursing needs. So much is owed...so much is refused...
 
Are you somehow suggesting that it’s not Tibetans but in fact the western media who reject the Chinese colonisation of Tibet?

Colonization? You mean like US "colonization" of Hawaii and the souther states? :lol:
Or even worse, perhaps you mean like Spanish "colonization" of the Basque region?

The fact is that Tibet has been part of China for a long time, longer than the US have existed, and have recently had their attempts at BREAKING away from China, just like Basque has tried in Spain. Both are rebel populations in a region where the majority doesnt necessarily support indpendence, and where such is historically incorrect.

Like I said also, personally I support greater regionalism in Europe, but China is nowhere near Europe in such a maturity that it can even think about such things. But heck, then again, I support Californian independence or indepenence of many regions both in Europe and the US. Not exactly mainstream like all the wrong bickering about Tibet, just because western politics through media brainwashing is trying to wage war against a China they fear.

In regard to Tiannamen Square, where could a government kill and maim a couple of thousand students and remain in power. Surely not in a democracy. When you say “necessary evils", I think “Animal Farm”.

So what? A "western" democracy in China will not work, and let everyone with a bit of sanity hope forever that western style democracy is avoided in China.

Lets instead hope that China keep moving in the direction they do, and keep their 1 party, and keep making it less authorative, and keep giving the people more and more influence over political decisions. Thats democracy, what we have in the west will then be considered very poor democracy.

I’m sorry , I assumed you knew about Mao’s cultural revolution. Which brings me to the following. Which western ideals are you talking about?

But I do... I didnt know this was what you referred to.

China’s engaged in mind control and you support it. 30 years from now you’ll wake up in front of a teleprompter with a chip in your arse.

Isnt this what is going on in the US actually? :mrgreen:
President reads from a teleprompter and people are being chipped and tracked.

BTW, the West isn’t nagging, they’re sucking up to China becuase they want acces to their markets and exploit their proletariat.

China has moved to far away from communist ideas in my opinion. They should re-embrace equality and a society that works for EVERYONE instead of the individuals first, then everyone second.

We used to know what the alternative means. I don’t mind criticism on democracy but as long as you don’t provide an alternative you leave it to my imagination.

So, can you not imagine something better than a sham democracy?


Hell yes!

So you contest the idea that hundreds of millions of Chinese people have been lifted out of poverty the last 20 years? :confused:

Sure I’ll buy it, maybe then I’ll appreciate the concept of the deliberative dictatorship more.

Well, if you read it, you will understand that democracy of the future is not about electing one of the big parties with a political menu that you may know 5% of or may know 10% of, and where 50% of policies will go through no matter what you vote. This is oppose to a system with one party, where people get to decide where policies move, and dont care about who politicians have sex with or which party is best at throwing one liners on TV.
 
Unfortunately, a one party system in Germany proved your sentiment foolish. Of course, there's always the possibilty that the Nazi Party was merely misunderstood.

Yeah? So NAZI Germany one party system is the only one party system you can imagine in your creative and open mind? :shock:
 
No it wouldn't.
Who would it be answerable to? Who would control it? How can you ensure it is 'controlled' fairly?
I refuse to accept German-only leadership or French only. Will small countries have as much control of said defense as UK?

I am pretty sure it will be a dual system, where any use of the COMMON European defense will have to be unanimous, whereas any military action taken by several or individual states will need some kind of majority approval. But heck, there are many possibilities, those are the ones I find most likely.

A system where Germany or France or any one nation controls the defense will not happen, DEFINETELY. I do believe however that a French German cooperation in that area would carry a lot of weight just like it does in shaping policies in the EU.

So another useless project? Noted.

Whats useless about having a DEFENSE?

British soldiers pledge their allegiance to Her Majesty, the Queen. Not some bloody charter.

Ahh, exactly. Thats where you come from, you think its better and more sane that a military pledge alliance with a single person rather than common values?

It has been for hundreds of years and it will remain.

So has human-animal intercourse. Lets hope that doesnt continue either.

Europe is really pushing it. Lets just abolish all national pride and history and restart it all over again :/

Hell yeah! But lets not start over again around such values, lets start over again and create a new society based around common sense.

And people wonder why the British fear closer integration if it is this kind of stuff they dream up.

I do wonder...
 
Hmmmm...weren't you celebrating the greatness of Barrack Obama as reaching out to Europe just a few months ago while people like me were ruining it?

Nope. Didnt do that. I actually only liked Obama in the beginning of his campaign, and started predicting NO CHANGE in the US long before he took office.

Yet here you are talking about America's "current trend" of looking to be a more closed society.

Its not "looking to be a more closed" society. It has become a closed society, certainly not by intention(I HOPE), but by pursuing the wrong direction.
Compare the US in the 90s with the US now.. Compare the US now, with the US of the past.. It is a closed and dogmatic society with polarization the only value left. (unfortunately). A breeding ground for extremism.

Wasn't it your kind that bestowed the Nobel Peace Prize upon our magnificent Washingtoin king?

No one in Europe supported that. It was a nobel committee who did that, for what reason no one knows. Perhaps as a celebration that he isnt Bush, and he deserves one just for "not being republican".
I dont know why he got it, no European I have talked to knows.

Perhaps your fears of a "closed" American society has you worried about having to work harder to eran a seat at America's table in the future

Nah, I dont care about all that. I just think its a great shame that America has gone from being the most open society in the world, to being a closed dogmatic society with extremism, ignorance and polarization as the driving forces.
It makes me sad...

By the way, I wonder how you feel about your earlier preaching about how America's economy was finished. Seems we are bouncing just fine as predicted (which is the American way) while you all are being as European as always. Turn your back on us. Embrace Russia and Soviet Union. I mean you owe everything to them over the last 100 years don't you? Thoughts?

If you understood economics, you would understand that the American economy is in crisis and that the fundamental parts of the economy have declined enourmously, like me for example predicted years ago. The fascist/socialist program, and the military expansion has helped none on the economy, and the real pain will come when the effect of those program starts peeling off again..

I think Europe are embracing Russia more and more since the break up of the Soviet Union, and for good reason, it was one of the most closed societies in the world, and is moving more and more in a positive direction towards and open society.
Thats reason enough to reward them for sure.
 
Yeah? So NAZI Germany one party system is the only one party system you can imagine in your creative and open mind? :shock:

...We're talking about Europe's creativity right? Europe has a history of "one party systems." You're love affair for dictators is legendary. But hey, what could go wrong with a European one party system with a military to back it up?
 
Back
Top Bottom