Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Hey, I'm glad to get out. It seems that none of your governments are anxious for us to leave. Toss us out. I'm serious.
Balls in your court.
Hey, I'm glad to get out. It seems that none of your governments are anxious for us to leave. Toss us out. I'm serious.
Balls in your court.
nobody want you guys to leave, its the USA that threatens to leave. The only problem for you guys is that nobody believes the threat is credible. As much as Mr Gates is convinced that US troops are defending Europe, Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron just know that the European bases and infrastructure are a cornerstone for projecting US power worlwide and his rant was actually about European involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. We don't want to toss you out, you guys are injecting millions of US tax dollars into the EU economy, but you are free to leave if you want. I have never heard an European politician talking about tossing the US out, only threats from US administration that you are going to leave. Like I said, we value your presence but if you want to leave, please do so because nobody believes that US troops are still in Europe for defending against some kind of invasion, despite Mr Gates hyperbole. Europe is the most important hub outside the US for your power projection. We know it, you guys know it, so whatever Gates is saying, we don't give a crap because we know the truth
ball is in your court, there are your troops, if you want to leave, we are not going to stop you
Last edited:
Broheim
Diamond Member
- Feb 17, 2011
- 4,587
- 3
- 81
/facedesk
why should we be anxious for you to leave? your logistical bases don't cost us anything.
I don't get how you reached the conclusion that we are completely dependent on you to provide us with some sort of bodyguard service, just because we allow you to have a few logistical bases in in our territories?
This has nothing to do with Iraq. Quit being a numbnut and parroting random leftwing talking points. It has to do with European military decline and how it's affecting NATO. If you would like to make NATO, and Europe in general, irrelevant to international security that's fine, just say it. But quit acting like you want to be involved while offering jackshit.
irishScott
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2006
- 21,562
- 3
- 0
exactly, this speech from Gates doesn't make sense at all and I'm sure that his European audience were thinking, wtf is this guy talking about.
It just shows the build up frustration of a country thats overextended military and financially
but it's all good, I'm leaving on holidays for the USA next week
going to buy me some goodies with 40% discount because of the euro/dollar conversion
you guys can thank me later for my contribution to the US economy
He wasn't talking about defending from invasion, he was talking about NATO obligations. As it is the US military is the only reason NATO means anything to anyone outside of Europe. Europe is simply not holding up its end of the deal. If you think NATO is obsolete and should be disbanded fine, but right now most of NATO is like that kid in the group project who doesn't contribute anything but still gets an A because he's a leech. If you're proud of that kind of behavior, then I'll just chalk it up to growing European arrogance I guess. How's that multicultural social utopia going for you guys?
US bases in Europe are important, the world needs someone to keep a watchful eye on the Europeans. It's about projecting US power into Europe so that the world can feel safer.
LOL, the same frustration in your posts like the frustration in Gates speech. Read Gates speech, he saying that Europe is not capable of its own defense, I say he is wrong. if he strongly believes it, US troops are free to leave Europe and US is free to leave NATO. His whole speech is just frustration about the declining role of the USA and the frustration about Europe that doesn't want to get involved in some of the US adventures. Even the old lapdog the UK is starting to realize that its security is more dependant on tighter European integration and not its so called special relation with the USA.
NATO was created against the USSR, it has lost its relevance 20 years ago. Broheim and myself have asked several times who we need protection against. Who is this mhytical invader the USA is protecting us tree hugging Europeans against. Like I said, if you guys want to leave, do so. If you want to end NATO, be my guest. Europe is not going to be less secure because of it. I don't want our soldiers to be involved in the adventures of the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq and also not in Lybia, if that makes us irrelevant to international security, so be it. I only care about European security when it comes to military matters and as it stand, we are more then capable of defending the European territory. Like I said, if you want to leave European bases, please do so. We thank you for your service and will wave you goodbye. Iran or NK can always try to drop a missile into Berlin, London or Paris. They will be greeted with an ICBM with a French or UK logo, goodbye Teheran or Pyongyang.
In the end thats what counts, Europe has not the biggest sledgehammer but it is still a very big one. Mr Gates speech implying that Europe's security depends solely on the USA is laughable.
Last edited:
NATO has lost its relevance and is being abused for expeditionary adventures that have no relevance to the security of Europe and the USA, just dissolve it
Last edited:
William Gaatjes
Lifer
- May 11, 2008
- 22,669
- 1,482
- 126
The US is not going away. And Europe will by time use more force if needed but it is an diplomacy first perspective. As always some loudmouth as Gates shouts something but he is not aware of the complete picture or he makes sure that it is not clear. He can yell, it will blow over. The problem is that Afghanistan can not be fully attacked because of bad relations with Iran.
If Iran would be an alley, it is easier to take care of terrorists or even rebuild a country such as Afghanistan. But suppose we become good friends with Iran for some reason. Good negotiations between Israel and surrounding countries... Then we have Russia to worry about if we want to make serious changes in Afghanistan. It is quite clear, if we go in with soldiers to fight in civil wars of other countries, it will get nasty quickly. In Afghanistan, a lot of people blame the west now. Just as in Iraq.
We need the opinion of the people on our side. You know this all to well when thinking of Iraq and the best example is Vietnam. And that is just opinion of your own citizens. The earth is round, we cannot avoid each other anymore.
And if we all going to play dirty :
For example a lot of CIA financed coupes which caused a lot of civil wars. Civil wars where refugees came to Europe. What some people say is unfortunately the truth. The strategy of wanting to have control over the world while in reality just wanting to make a quick buck from it by use of taking natural resources and cost plus billing schemes has caused the enormous financial problems the US has. Then the banks selling high risk mortgages came into play. The money problems the US is not caused by Europe or any other country. It has been the arrogant view of your own conservatives who have bleeding you dry for decades. Every time even a democrat comes with an utopian idea(such as removing or adding specifically designed regulations), it is not stopped, it is encouraged and it as always becomes clear who are the big winners in the end. History is quite clear on this. Randism to the max.
Well the US military try's hard and strives hard to be the top leader in military weapons, machines, and black budget projects. It is no wonder they have put them selves in trillion dollars worth of debt. China has been purchasing US debt for quite some time, and is the largest holder in us treasury. I don't see how america could ever pay back the interest and full amount anywhere in the near future. Other countries either know already what the USA has planned, and choose to ignore the need for an advanced military, or simply don't care to hold similar military power.
NATO is an excuse to bring everyone into unnecessary wars. Demolish NATO, establish individual military sovereignty, and let each country make its own rational decisions on wartime matters. The USA alone accounts for 43% of all military spending in the world. No need to bully smaller countries into foreign affairs that cost tax payers money, and drive the country into debt.
NATO is an excuse to bring everyone into unnecessary wars. Demolish NATO, establish individual military sovereignty, and let each country make its own rational decisions on wartime matters. The USA alone accounts for 43% of all military spending in the world. No need to bully smaller countries into foreign affairs that cost tax payers money, and drive the country into debt.
William Gaatjes
Lifer
- May 11, 2008
- 22,669
- 1,482
- 126
I should add that the worrying about Russia i mentioned is purely about oil and natural gas and not a military force. Although Russian tech should not be neglected. It may not be as state of the art but it works.
How about the other 150 countries that America has troops deployed in? I call that imperialism.
Broheim
Diamond Member
- Feb 17, 2011
- 4,587
- 3
- 81
Denmark has the highest number of troops deployed -and most casualties- per capita of any country involved in Afghanistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan#Danish
and guess what, our involvement is completely paid for with Danish money, you don't pay for anything we do. I myself was deployed back in '08.
I don't get what you americans are bitching about, you asked for our (NATO member countries among others) help when you wanted to go into Afghanistan, and a lot of us showed up... you asked for our help again when you wanted to go into Iraq, a lot of us showed up again... so how the fuck aren't we contributing?
My fellow European, it's simple, it's USA no1 cheerleading
official USA policy from the last 10 years is "You're either with us, or against us"
maybe they can rename french fries again so we can have some more laughs
their military is still in shambles, they have nowhere near the capabilities they had 25 years ago. Training has been neglected for 20 years now. Their fighter pilots sometimes only fly 15 hours a year. A Western pilot probably flies 10 times as much. Much of their stuff is in storage, new tech is only bought at a very low rate
they still have a long way to go
Broheim
Diamond Member
- Feb 17, 2011
- 4,587
- 3
- 81
haha I still laugh when someone reminds me of it... most amusing temper tantrum in history
Heh. Europe just isn't the kind of imperialist partner that Neocons want, that's all. They'd rather Europeans be all gung-ho, like Roman allies who got put up front to get hacked up first, wear down the enemy, so that Roman legions would have an easier time of it.
America is essentially draining her treasury to make the world safe for offshoring capitalists, to expand their access to raw materials, labor & markets.
And it'll all trickledown to the rest of us sometime RSN, honest, particularly if we give 'em another tax cut, huh?
You have an uneducated opinion about world politics and peace. A revolution in military affairs and international systems is under way and the character of conflict is changing as globalization increases. Non-state actors, failed and rogue states, internal crisis and atrocity situations, stability and support ops, etc, is the name of the new game. This isn't 20th century realm of balance of power and strict state sovereignty. International institutions, organization, integration, and democratization is the new approach to preventing and dealing with armed conflict. Collective security is more important than ever. Cooperation and engagement is key.
I personally think NATO is important, even more so than the UN, and the Europeans need to uphold their end of the bargain.
It takes a little more than "showing up."
I know I'm talking in broad generalities, but I will say that I know from personal experience Denmark is the exception to the rule. While most European countries have forces less than half of what they were in 1991, Luxenburg and Denmark are fairly close.
Just stop. Stop your hack propaganda you tool. Gates a Neocon? (ooooooo, that evil term we love to throw around, shout it out as often and as loud as you can, scare those masses!) Gates is a classic pragmatic realist you sack of ignorant shit, they way you idiots abuse the term Neocon is pathetic. But let's not forget the capitalists, them bastards are evil too! Never mind that the Europeans having nothing on our corporatist ways, and Obama himself must be one of those EVAL offshoring-capitalist-warmongering neocons, cause aint shit changed.
Please, if you can't STFU, stay on topic without the wild leftwing tangents and conspiracies.
I agree, a collective European army would be the best option to serve European interests. No need for NATO where European interests and American interests are sometimes so different. the USA can form an alliance with former countries from the coalition of the willing like Palau and Micronesia to serve its interests and conquer Iraq. Total European defense expenditures is around 290 billion, USA expenditure is around 680 billion, thats around 43%. If we pull together and we can buy ourselves 40% of USA military capabilties, that would be totally awesome. For the money we are spending now, we could afford 3-4 supercarrier battlegroups and a whole other bunch of goodies with the same budget. The problem is not the budget. 290 billion is a huge chunk of money, its more then Russia and China combined. The problem is the inefficient spending. An integrated European army, with combined 290 billion purchase power, developing and buying the same toys would go a long way.
Last edited:
unfortunately, a lot of times the American way of cooperation is "my way or the highway"
you disagree with us about Iraq, then you are the old Europe, not relevant anymore, etc...
The USA has spitted us out under Bush, don't be surprised if we are giving you the cold shoulder now when it comes the foreign affairs and military
engagement. Keep mocking us and make the French happy. They always wanted a closer European military alliance without outside influence, USA foreign policy of the last decade is slowly creating what they want.
Last edited:
I think that the US should pull out of most of them and concentrate on Europe. It's good that you bring up imperialism - that's precisely why I want the US to keep a close eye on European powers. These nations raped and pillaged the entire world over and they will do anything to do it again. However, the US can keep European power in check. Moreover, I think that the US needs to keep a close eye on Europe in case they decide to commit yet another genocide.
I 100% agree. European nations are a declining power and, really, the US should not be in alliance with nations that the US should actually be closely watching and/or policing.
Instead, the US should shift alliances to other countries and begin to distance itself away from Europeans.
you are contradicting yourself, in a previous post you were saying that you want to keep the European bases. No alliance with Europe means no US bases in Europe
For the rest I agree, I'm sure that Palau and Micronesia are going to be of great help in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our 34000 boys and girls can come home from Afghanistan
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter