Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

European Army

Old 4th May 2021, 16:21
  #301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 172
So in your opinion Russia has done nothing that would scare the neighboring countries? Everything is just NATO propaganda? Like the little green men vacating in Ukraine?
Or MH17?
Beamr is offline  
Old 4th May 2021, 16:33
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57
I can say yes about Georgia and Ukraine. Ukraine lost Crimea and the Donbas after the coup in Kiev in 2014 because in 2014, someone began to feed the people with buns in Kiev. Russia is not related to MH 17.
usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 4th May 2021, 16:38
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57

usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 4th May 2021, 16:51
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by usedtobeATC View Post
I can say yes about Georgia and Ukraine. Ukraine lost Crimea and the Donbas after the coup in Kiev in 2014 because in 2014, someone began to feed the people with buns in Kiev. Russia is not related to MH 17.
ok. We all live in our little bubble. And Putin is next to Mahatma Gandhi.

Meanwhile on topic regarding the european army it is very hard to see it happening as all the EU countries are in different position and capability of defending them selves. If looking at the ones outside of NATO, The Swedes woke up a few years ago and they are now investing to catch up two decades of eroding defence system. The Finns have been awake the whole time to make it as costly as possible for an intruder. And for a very good reason:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/w...-military.html

So we have EU in which everyone has different equipment and different capabilities, so I really can't see the formation of EU army.
Beamr is offline  
Old 4th May 2021, 17:27
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 92
Posts: 1,931
Originally Posted by usedtobeATC View Post
NATO was created not by Europe, but by America, and the brighter it burns here, the more America will rejoice. Who bombed Yugoslavia in 1999? Maybe Russia or France or England or someone else?
Everyone has his own opinion and NATO (USA) has it`s own too. In order to increase military spending, it is necessary that the society itself asks for this. That's why two James Bonds were invented (Petrov and Bashirov), which intimidated all of Europe. I wonder what will happen if the Red Army comes there?
NATO was not created by the USA.

On 4 March 1947, the Treaty of Dunkirk was signed by France and the UK as a Treaty of Alliance and Mutual Assistance in the event of a possible attack by Germany or the Soviet Union in the aftermath of WW2. In 1948, this alliance was expanded to include the Benelux countries, in the form of the Western Union, also referred to as the Brussels Treaty Organization (BTO), established by the Treaty of Brussels. Talks for a new military alliance, which could also include North America, resulted in the signature of the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949 by the member states of the Western Union plus the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland.

So it was created by diplomacy, discussion, and cooperation, not the hand of oppression like the Warsaw Pact.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 4th May 2021, 18:46
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Bonvoy Marriott
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by Beamr View Post

So we have EU in which everyone has different equipment and different capabilities, so I really can't see the formation of EU army.
This is exactly what is the problem and why the EU should develop their militaries together. Now you have 27 inefficient militaries who all do everything separately.

An EU Army canít happen overnight, that is why they should plan ahead together. Instead of buying different equipment, having different procedures etc.

minigundiplomat: I am all in favour of spending a 2 percent minimum for every NATO member. But you make it sound as Putin will march underneath the Champs Elysees tomorrow.
SaulGoodman is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 02:19
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by SaulGoodman View Post
This is exactly what is the problem and why the EU should develop their militaries together. Now you have 27 inefficient militaries who all do everything separately.

An EU Army canít happen overnight, that is why they should plan ahead together. Instead of buying different equipment, having different procedures etc.

minigundiplomat: I am all in favour of spending a 2 percent minimum for every NATO member. But you make it sound as Putin will march underneath the Champs Elysees tomorrow.
Short of a nuclear response, what militarily stops him from doing so?
West Coast is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 03:57
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Asia Pacific
Age: 50
Posts: 1,858
Short of a nuclear response, what militarily stops him from doing so?
Macron in a red cape? Dutch peacekeepers? Luxembourg's Special Forces? The Maltese Navy?

Ok, I give up....

Is it the current military alliance withe the US, UK and Canada?
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 04:38
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Bonvoy Marriott
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by minigundiplomat View Post
Macron in a red cape? Dutch peacekeepers? Luxembourg's Special Forces? The Maltese Navy?

Ok, I give up....

Is it the current military alliance withe the US, UK and Canada?
The UK and Canada arenít going to stop him either. On par with the French.

Putin canít afford a war with a GDP the size of the Benelux. And he canít definitely afford to start a war with a member of a trading bloc that is his biggest trading partner by far.

nevertheless like I said to you many times already. Iím all for NATO and the minimum of spending 2 percent. But all your arguments against an EU Army are actually arguments in favour of one.
SaulGoodman is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 05:23
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57
To promote the idea of a EU army, you need not only money, but also a leader for this army. Name at least one in Europe or America? There was only one named Trump, and even then he was not elected.
usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 05:31
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Asia Pacific
Age: 50
Posts: 1,858
nevertheless like I said to you many times already. Iím all for NATO and the minimum of spending 2 percent. But all your arguments against an EU Army are actually arguments in favour of one.
As I have said from the start, if the EU wants an army club, I have no issues with that.
However, I do have issues with kids from Dorset or Michigan, Brisbane or Alberta dying in the defence of Europe when it all goes wrong. So, if you really want your army club, it needs to be an 'instead of' NATO rather than some halfway house where you squander billions on homemade hardware selected for the country of manufacture and then run to the US, UK and Commonwealth when it turns to sh1t. I don't think that's an unfair ask?
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 05:55
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by SaulGoodman View Post
This is exactly what is the problem and why the EU should develop their militaries together. Now you have 27 inefficient militaries who all do everything separately.

An EU Army canít happen overnight, that is why they should plan ahead together. Instead of buying different equipment, having different procedures etc.
.
Should develop, but unfortunately EU is too scattered since majority are members of NATO and the rest are doing what they think is best for them. What must be remembered is that EU is an economic union, not a military union.
However, there are very strong signs that the non-NATO countries are developing higher and higher NATO compatibility in their equipment and practices, in essence this raises the possibility of co-operation and the potential for successful outcome of co-operation. Take Finland for example: the change from cold war era T72:s to Leopards and having approx 250 of those MBT's with additional 250 IFV's was made in 10 years during 90's/00's. The change from MIG21's and Drakens to Hornets in the 90's. Acquisition of NATO compatible assault rifles. NASAMS, AMRAD-R's etc. Now the new HX project has only western fast jets participating.

What comes to pro-Russians here claiming that US is causing all the fuzz. An interesting piece of information is the EU/NATO countries that do have borders with Russia ie are in the first line:
Finland: 1271km (EU)
Estonia: 294km (EU+NATO)
Latvia: 270km (EU+NATO)
Lithuania: 266km (EU+NATO)
Poland: 204km (EU+NATO)
Norway: 196km (NATO)

When looking at the 10 countries exceeding the NATO 2% limit for 2020, these five are within. Finland is jumping above that 2% limit too with the HX project (not that it would have any meaning since not a member of NATO).
To me it looks like every country that is next to Russia is really securing themselves in one way or another (by fulfilling the NATO contract requirements or whatever). So the question is again: what is considered as a threat if it is not Russia?
Surely the answer is not that naive statement of "US propaganda scaring European", Russia has itself freightened everyone with its actions all around its borders, from Crimea and Georgia to Estonia and the Archipelago of Finland.


Beamr is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 07:13
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57
For 6 years of war in the east of Ukraine (from 2014), 3,055 cases of civilian deaths were recorded: 1,814 men, 1,057 women, 98 boys, 49 girls and 37 adults, whose gender is not established. What makes Kiev kill its citizens in the east? Yes, it is Uncle Sam who forces them to do this, otherwise they will not be accepted into NATO. But Ukraine and Georgia are not Yugoslavia, where good Europe allowed NATO troops to kill civilians in order to shift all the problems to Europe.

That's just why Putin threatened Ukraine last month, that if Kiev launches a large-scale military operation in the Donbas, it will lead to the death of Ukraine.

You do not like that Russia prevents the killing of civilians in Ukraine and Georgia, then do not approach our borders with your NATO. America really wants to unleash a conflict in Europe.
usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 07:21
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 2,996
"NATO is intimidating Europe about the Russian threat and forcing it to build up its military capabilities. "

NATO can't even get its founding members to meet its proposed expenditure levels mate
Asturias56 is online now  
Old 5th May 2021, 07:55
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57
There are more smart people In Europe, than fools who understand where the real threat comes from, which is why they do not want to pay in vain to NATO. That is why they do not want to create a EU army, they have enough of their own armies.
usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 08:24
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by minigundiplomat View Post
Macron in a red cape? Dutch peacekeepers? Luxembourg's Special Forces? The Maltese Navy?

Ok, I give up....

Is it the current military alliance withe the US, UK and Canada?
They may do battle, my question is whatís to stop him from marching on a tree lined Paris street?

An impotent Biden administration whoíll yell stop or Iíll drop more sanctions? The Germans? The British who have whittled away their forces?

Maybe the Irish, theyíll get them all drunk on Irish moonshine.
West Coast is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 08:24
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by usedtobeATC View Post
There are more smart people In Europe, than fools who understand where the real threat comes from, which is why they do not want to pay in vain to NATO. That is why they do not want to create a EU army, they have enough of their own armies.
Where does the real threat come from?
West Coast is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 08:49
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: somewhere beyond the forest
Posts: 57
I have already said about it several times and now I want to know your ideas.
usedtobeATC is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 09:19
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by usedtobeATC View Post
For 6 years of war in the east of Ukraine (from 2014), 3,055 cases of civilian deaths were recorded: 1,814 men, 1,057 women, 98 boys, 49 girls and 37 adults, whose gender is not established. What makes Kiev kill its citizens in the east? Yes, it is Uncle Sam who forces them to do this, otherwise they will not be accepted into NATO. But Ukraine and Georgia are not Yugoslavia, where good Europe allowed NATO troops to kill civilians in order to shift all the problems to Europe.

That's just why Putin threatened Ukraine last month, that if Kiev launches a large-scale military operation in the Donbas, it will lead to the death of Ukraine.
err... Russian forces are within Ukraine borders, "on vacation". On vacation not dissimilar to the vacating veterans in Crimea in 2014. Once Kiev is threatening to throw out hostile foreign military, Putin is threatening Kiev with death. What a peace keeping mission, I say. Uncle Sam has nothing to do with it. Make it other way round: if you'd have foreign troops within Russian territory, what would you guys do? Try throwing them out?
Putins peace keeping: invade and annex.


Originally Posted by usedtobeATC View Post
You do not like that Russia prevents the killing of civilians in Ukraine and Georgia, then do not approach our borders with your NATO. America really wants to unleash a conflict in Europe.
So you are saying that Russia will invade its neighbors in case they make sovereign decisions about their defence? If anyone does anything that is not of Kremlins liking, Putin brings in the troops. No wonder one doesn't have that many friends...
This isn't going anywhere. Now I've got your point of view, and I can't agree with it.
Beamr is offline  
Old 5th May 2021, 09:21
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Bonvoy Marriott
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by Beamr View Post
Should develop, but unfortunately EU is too scattered since majority are members of NATO and the rest are doing what they think is best for them. What must be remembered is that EU is an economic union, not a military union.
However, there are very strong signs that the non-NATO countries are developing higher and higher NATO compatibility in their equipment and practices, in essence this raises the possibility of co-operation and the potential for successful outcome of co-operation. Take Finland for example: the change from cold war era T72:s to Leopards and having approx 250 of those MBT's with additional 250 IFV's was made in 10 years during 90's/00's. The change from MIG21's and Drakens to Hornets in the 90's. Acquisition of NATO compatible assault rifles. NASAMS, AMRAD-R's etc. Now the new HX project has only western fast jets participating.

What comes to pro-Russians here claiming that US is causing all the fuzz. An interesting piece of information is the EU/NATO countries that do have borders with Russia ie are in the first line:
Finland: 1271km (EU)
Estonia: 294km (EU+NATO)
Latvia: 270km (EU+NATO)
Lithuania: 266km (EU+NATO)
Poland: 204km (EU+NATO)
Norway: 196km (NATO)

When looking at the 10 countries exceeding the NATO 2% limit for 2020, these five are within. Finland is jumping above that 2% limit too with the HX project (not that it would have any meaning since not a member of NATO).
To me it looks like every country that is next to Russia is really securing themselves in one way or another (by fulfilling the NATO contract requirements or whatever). So the question is again: what is considered as a threat if it is not Russia?
Surely the answer is not that naive statement of "US propaganda scaring European", Russia has itself freightened everyone with its actions all around its borders, from Crimea and Georgia to Estonia and the Archipelago of Finland.
just to clarify: an EU Army as a single entity is decades away, if it ever happens. But at the moment there are 27 different islands all going at it alone varying from medium level (France) to piss poor (Malta) all with different equipment and different procedures. Where is the problem of aligning the 27 militaries.

Why negotiate the procurement of equipment separately to end up with a mixed bag of equipment? The MRTT fleet is a small example of how it could work.

At the moment the EU is a ďsuperpowerĒ and single entity when it comes to trading and regulations, but military wise it canít act together at the moment. I also donít see why NATO and an ďEU Military AllianceĒ canít exist in paralel.
SaulGoodman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.