The Axis of Weasel

[308nato]

telegraph.co.uk link to story

 

[freegeeks]

this is a good thing. there must be some kind of counterweight against the US dominance. I hope our (belgium) govt. decides to invest more in defense (together with Germany, France, Luxemb.) so we can have a credible mutual defense policy.

these 4 countries together have a defense budget of +- 54 billion. If they can use that money efficient, it should buy us a lot of military capacity.

 

[43st]

I agree, it's a good idea. Most people in the US are tired of putting our necks out for the rest of the world. Now the "world" can do it for themselves. I can't imagine a Conservative having negative comments about other countries stepping up to the plate with regard to world/self defense against terror.

 

[Red Dawn]

With France and Belgium as partners they can work on new innovative ways of surrendering!

 

[Moonbeam]

This is all part of Bush strategery, to create a powerful European state army able to challenge us in the world and escalating the cash flow into arms. The man's is turning out to be a real genius. We need to get rid of Nato. It has an N in it like UN does. That's gotta go too.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
This is all part of Bush strategery, to create a powerful European state army able to challenge us in the world and escalating the cash flow into arms. The man's is turning out to be a real genius. We need to get rid of Nato. It has an N in it like UN does. That's gotta go too.

So does Moonbeam, lunatic and oligophrenic.

BTW that doc. you keep quoting but have never read talks a little (if I remember right) about an EU military. You should read it sometime.

 

[blade]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
With France and Belgium as partners they can work on new innovative ways of surrendering!

 

[sMiLeYz]

Well this means that in the future, the US can no longer count on bullying around Europe or ignoring the big European nations.

I wonder if Bush can even pronounce diplomacy...

 

[Red Dawn]

n/m

 

[AnImuS]

Nothing surprising as to who is behind it. just has become desperation by these countries because the US ignored these countries WRONG stance against Iraq. and lets not forgot the belgium international court which was a joke to start with.

yup yup

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Checks and balances, it's the foundation of our gov. I think it is a very important concept, and I don't see why a lot of people are threatened by the emergence of another superpower. I think it would put MAD into effect ala Cold War and deter any kind of beligerence between the two. That would leave room for cooperation on productive things, and some credible dissent if America elects another Bush with wacky right wing policies. Furthermore, it would create another broker to mediate and counterbalance America's one sidedness in disputes such as the Israeli/Pal. conflict.

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Checks and balances, it's the foundation of our gov. I think it is a very important concept, and I don't see why a lot of people are threatened by the emergence of another superpower. I think it would put MAD into effect ala Cold War and deter any kind of beligerence between the two. That would leave room for cooperation on productive things, and some credible dissent if America elects another Bush with wacky right wing policies. Furthermore, it would create another broker to mediate and counterbalance America's one sidedness in disputes such as the Israeli/Pal. conflict.

The key point of MAD is the word "mutually"..(assured destruction). That is not relevant here. The Euroturds are the one sided weenies causing the problem.

Wacky right wing policies?

hee hee hee

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: 308nato

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Checks and balances, it's the foundation of our gov. I think it is a very important concept, and I don't see why a lot of people are threatened by the emergence of another superpower. I think it would put MAD into effect ala Cold War and deter any kind of beligerence between the two. That would leave room for cooperation on productive things, and some credible dissent if America elects another Bush with wacky right wing policies. Furthermore, it would create another broker to mediate and counterbalance America's one sidedness in disputes such as the Israeli/Pal. conflict.

The key point of MAD is the word "mutually"..(assured destruction). That is not relevant here. The Euroturds are the one sided weenies causing the problem.

Wacky right wing policies?

hee hee hee

If they aquire a powerful enough army, and some leaders are proposing a European army, then it would be relevant, which is what I was implying.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: 308nato

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Checks and balances, it's the foundation of our gov. I think it is a very important concept, and I don't see why a lot of people are threatened by the emergence of another superpower. I think it would put MAD into effect ala Cold War and deter any kind of beligerence between the two. That would leave room for cooperation on productive things, and some credible dissent if America elects another Bush with wacky right wing policies. Furthermore, it would create another broker to mediate and counterbalance America's one sidedness in disputes such as the Israeli/Pal. conflict.

The key point of MAD is the word "mutually"..(assured destruction). That is not relevant here. The Euroturds are the one sided weenies causing the problem.

Wacky right wing policies?

hee hee hee

If they aquire a powerful enough army, and some leaders are proposing a European army, then it would be relevant, which is what I was implying.

Until the EU really ups military spending, they are not going to be relevent. I doubt the EU is going to be very willing to give up its social programs for a military.

And as long as the this new organization is going to rely on Ukrainian and US airlift capabilities, it is not very relevent.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

I agree, it should be interesting times ahead though, there has been a lot of talk, now to see if there will be any action. We didn't get to where we are (militarily) over night, so if this happens, its going to take a good amount of time.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
I agree, it should be interesting times ahead though, there has been a lot of talk, now to see if there will be any action. We didn't get to where we are (militarily) over night, so if this happens, its going to take a good amount of time.

France also has to design a carrier that can keep its props on and have a flight deck long enough to land planes . This will not happen overnight either.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Utterly predictable.

Get some popcorn and pull up a seat. The next fifty years ought to be interesting.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Utterly predictable.

Get some popcorn and pull up a seat. The next fifty years ought to be interesting.

We can only hope it wont get as interesting as the last 50 years.

 

[Loralon]

A European defense structure without the U.K. being involved? Things that make you go hmmm ... Despite all the proclamations from the participants that this new Euro command structure was really meant to boost European military capability and enhance NATO rather than compete with it, so far it looks a lot like just a new command structure that's independent from NATO. There's no mention of the economic commitment required to refashion European defense in a reasonable way much less the organization in planning force structure, systems procurement to truly enhance military capability. All in all it seems to me that this entire mini-summit was just a crass political statement in favor of this bi-polar world the French seem bent on leading.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
This is all part of Bush strategery, to create a powerful European state army able to challenge us in the world and escalating the cash flow into arms. The man's is turning out to be a real genius. We need to get rid of Nato. It has an N in it like UN does. That's gotta go too.

yup, and after he gets rid of the N, all that will be left to dispose of is U...:Q

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
Well this means that in the future, the US can no longer count on bullying around Europe or ignoring the big European nations.

I wonder if Bush can even pronounce diplomacy...

He must have done ok, Russia. China, Germany, and France all called begging to kiss our butts again. What about Iran, Syria, and NK falling in line? How about that 3 year plan for a Palestinian state? What about pulling out of Vieques? What about pulling out of SA and democratic reforms being promised there? What about Afghanistan?

Tell me ONE leader who has ever gotten UN approval to wage war other than Bush?

Can you spell "blind" and "bias", how about "denial"?

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: freegeeks
this is a good thing. there must be some kind of counterweight against the US dominance. I hope our (belgium) govt. decides to invest more in defense (together with Germany, France, Luxemb.) so we can have a credible mutual defense policy.

these 4 countries together have a defense budget of +- 54 billion. If they can use that money efficient, it should buy us a lot of military capacity.

All for it, but next time don't ask for our help. You have already started 2 world wars we had to help the good guys win. Remember how you cut up the middle east after WW1? The US takes alot of heat over the history of conflict in the region, nothing we have done rivals the chaos THAT caused, we are just getting the blame.

 

[cpumaster]

Hay what happened to BUSH proposal of National Missiles defense system aka Star Wars? The admin seemed pretty quiet now days, are military still working on it? Maybe it's a good time to bring this program back up now, oh wait, we can't, the money already spend on the tax cut, maybe Bush will have to raise the tax in the future if he ever want to go back to the program.
Anyway, I can imagine now, Cold War 2 in the future although instead of Democracy vs Communist, now we have Democracy vs Democracy, EU vs US
US, Britain, Canada, maybe Mexico vs France, German, Belgium, (Luxemberg probab. doesn't count), maybe Russian.
Wow that would be awesome, can you imagine what the neo-con reaction would be when they dream up of this scenario in their head? Probably wet their pants with multiple-orgasm...

 

[Dari]

This is a long-term joke. While the Euro was supported by almost all members of the EU and the US, this farce of a coming army will be deliberately crippled so as to not challenge the US globally. Besides, to think globally, you have to exert yourself (read: outposts and bases) globally.

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: freegeeks
this is a good thing. there must be some kind of counterweight against the US dominance. I hope our (belgium) govt. decides to invest more in defense (together with Germany, France, Luxemb.) so we can have a credible mutual defense policy.

these 4 countries together have a defense budget of +- 54 billion. If they can use that money efficient, it should buy us a lot of military capacity.

All for it, but next time don't ask for our help. You have already started 2 world wars we had to help the good guys win. Remember how you cut up the middle east after WW1? The US takes alot of heat over the history of conflict in the region, nothing we have done rivals the chaos THAT caused, we are just getting the blame.

Your right in that the UK really blew it when it came to nation building (and that's an understatement), however, to say that you are getting "blame" (of which I guess means negative publicity and accountability to those informed in these events) unfairly I feel is a tad conservative. Regardless of your views it cannot be denied that the US has been extremely supportive of the Israeli government for many years, both with UN voting and military assistance. By giving such support you lend the belief that you approve of the methods of their government. Also being the major power in the world and obviously able to pick and choose how you deal with any one country, it makes your support even more apparent given the choices open to you.

The UK may have been the initiator in this but the US has certainly picked their team and kept the ball rolling. So IMHO its not simply the case of the US "being picked on".

Cheers,

Andy