The Danger of Supranational Superpowers

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
81
Originally posted by: miguel
Originally posted by: freegeeks

I don't see why the Americans are against all this. For years they are whining that we should invest more in defense and when we actually start doing that they start whining about it. It seems to me that the US just wants lapdogs. It's OUR taxeuro. At least we should have a say in what we are doing. A common euro defense policy is going to be complimentary with NATO and benefits both Europe and the USA. It's not the goal to be a superpower in the US sense but a strong ally that is able to project power worldwide without the use of USA military capacity. We are not going to build 15 supercarriers and 5O ICMB subs. In a few years with the addition of the new British carriers and the ongoing Airbus program for airlift capacity, Europe will have the means to operate worldwide if needed

I haven't seem where "Americans are against all this." Did I miss it? I for one would welcome a Euro military that would take care of their own problems and other problems around the world without requiring the assistance of the US.


watch the news. there was and is strong objection of the Bush administration about the plans for an independant eurocrops HQ. That was an important issue when Bush visited Great-Britain last week.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: freegeeks
what the hell are you talking about

the EU is led mostly by elected politicians

and I see nothing wrong with another "superpower" in the world
IMO the most dangerous thing today is the fact that there is only one (arrogant) superpower in the world

checks and balances keeps the world save

The EU is no superpower, the next potential superpower is china, don't have delusions of grandeur, last I checked the rapid deployment force of the EU was still only 50,000 strong... There are two competing schools of thought on superpowers, one advocates bi/multilateralism as the most stable solution as the superpowers play off of each other, of course look at the conflict between the US and the USSR, I'd hardly call that stable, with the exception of our current administration the unilateral hegemony has been far more peaceful than periods of bi/multi spheres of power.

Does the EU rapid reaction force still rely on American airlift power?
WTF are you talking about? The Eu rapid deployment force is a force that can be mobilized within 90 days to engage in millitary conflict, if you think that the rapid deployment force is even near American millitary power both technologically speaking, and in its ability to deploy you are sorely mistaken... not that I think it would come to that of course.

The EU does not have much airlift capability. In order to be rapid, they have to make some phone calls to the US.

that's why there is the Airbus program .....

Which will not be ready for years.

I never said that the European Common Defense Policy is a 5 week program. It's going to take years ...
delivery of the A400M is for 2009.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
what the hell are you talking about

the EU is led mostly by elected politicians

and I see nothing wrong with another "superpower" in the world
IMO the most dangerous thing today is the fact that there is only one (arrogant) superpower in the world

checks and balances keeps the world turning

Great...cause europe has such a great history of knowing how to keep the peace.
rolleye.gif


yeah,

just like the USA


rolleye.gif


We have done a better job then war ravaged europe.
major wars in the last 50 years, name em

Please... people remember things from more than just 50 years. The truth is that certain European countries have cause so much suffering in the world that what the US has done is petty in comparison. I like how Europeans like to say that everyone hates the US when most people have a greater hatred of European powers than the US.



Yeah, and how about those Sumerians?

One of the reasons the EU exists is to prevent another WWII scenario. A mutual economy and currency goes far to prevent what happened generations ago. The real root of concern is competition. We don't want any.
Quite wrong in fact. It is only recently that the EU has adopted a common security and defese policy, the original union sprang from the European community which was purely economic in nature and was designed to lend stability to european currency.

What language will the common defense forces speak? English or French? or something else?

English and French

Should be fun to watch the the EU common defense force communcate via a translater in the middle , while trying to be a rapid defense force.

bullsh*t

I don't see your point. NATO is also an organization with different countries (and languages) and it also works.

you should know that most europeans know English. All Eurocorps officers are bilingual (English). Eurocorps has operational command in Kosovo and it works ...

Yes, but a language barrier will present problems. I also know that most people in the EU can speak english.
I also know what France thinks of english.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
what the hell are you talking about

the EU is led mostly by elected politicians

and I see nothing wrong with another "superpower" in the world
IMO the most dangerous thing today is the fact that there is only one (arrogant) superpower in the world

checks and balances keeps the world turning

Great...cause europe has such a great history of knowing how to keep the peace.
rolleye.gif


yeah,

just like the USA


rolleye.gif


We have done a better job then war ravaged europe.
major wars in the last 50 years, name em

Please... people remember things from more than just 50 years. The truth is that certain European countries have cause so much suffering in the world that what the US has done is petty in comparison. I like how Europeans like to say that everyone hates the US when most people have a greater hatred of European powers than the US.



Yeah, and how about those Sumerians?

One of the reasons the EU exists is to prevent another WWII scenario. A mutual economy and currency goes far to prevent what happened generations ago. The real root of concern is competition. We don't want any.
Quite wrong in fact. It is only recently that the EU has adopted a common security and defese policy, the original union sprang from the European community which was purely economic in nature and was designed to lend stability to european currency.

What language will the common defense forces speak? English or French? or something else?

English and French

Should be fun to watch the the EU common defense force communcate via a translater in the middle , while trying to be a rapid defense force.

bullsh*t

I don't see your point. NATO is also an organization with different countries (and languages) and it also works.

you should know that most europeans know English. All Eurocorps officers are bilingual (English). Eurocorps has operational command in Kosovo and it works ...

Yes, but a language barrier will present problems. I also know that most people in the EU can speak english.
I also know what France thinks of english.

a problem, yes - a problem that can not be solved, no

like I said before, eurocorps has operational command in Kosovo and we don't hear of language problems don't we??


edit: and in Europe we all have seen what some Americans think of the French. US politicians performed their patriotic duty by renaming fried potatoes and toast
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
81
Originally posted by: miguel
freegeeks: you got links? Post em!



BBC News - European defence 'deal' reached

Correspondents say the United States is likely to balk at the accord.

Washington will probably be unhappy with any moves which it feels undermine Nato's influence over European security.

The US is said to be particularly upset at calls for a European defence headquarters.







 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,122
5,651
126
Originally posted by: DaiShan
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Dari
It may be over the top. But europe is heading towards a democratic dictatorship unless democratic instruments are put into the EU constitution.

Maybe, but so is the US and it already has Democratic Instruments in its' Constitution. A Constitution is just a peice of paper with words on it. Many agree that the Soviet Unions Constitution was the best ever, unfortunetly it was little more than a Propoganda tool. One of the best Democracies of all time(Great Britain) doesn't even have a Constitution.

Being that you provide no way to quantify "the best democracy ever" I have a hard time taking your post seriously...

Make your own list and try not to include GB.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Originally posted by: freegeeks
what the hell are you talking about

the EU is led mostly by elected politicians

and I see nothing wrong with another "superpower" in the world
IMO the most dangerous thing today is the fact that there is only one (arrogant) superpower in the world

checks and balances keeps the world turning

Great...cause europe has such a great history of knowing how to keep the peace.
rolleye.gif


yeah,

just like the USA


rolleye.gif


We have done a better job then war ravaged europe.

our history goes back a little bit longer also

it just seems to me that the USA is getting nervous that someone can challenge them as the only superpower

I think the WHOLE world would be nervous with Europe as a superpower. We're talking about the place that basically raped the world ten times over here. Not exactly a fantastic history, especially for the rest of the world.

you do reallise that most Americans are of European descent right? do you really think we are better than them just because we crossed an ocean?

I don't think that Americans are better than Europeans. Where did you get that idea? However, I don't think that the world should forget the fact that Europe essentially raped the world ten times over when they were major powers.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Seems like people here are forgetting the goal of supranational superpowers: the elimination of sovereign nations. Supranationals want a regal-less, borderless and godless society ran by a powerful minority who hold token elections to keep the populace from getting restless. These revolutions are carried out at every available opportunity, particularly by secret societies. The last major ones within the past 300 years were the French Revolution, American Revolution, Russian Revolution, and the "ever closer Union" aspired by the eurocratic elite. Despite their deep involvement in the American revolutions, the members of the American revolution were of a different breed than their European counterpart, who were extremely close to the core. With the advent of Illumanitism in the 18th century, European revolutions took on a particularly inner-outer form (secrecy controlling populism).

I see Europe and America diverging on many issues as the world becomes more consolidated. I doubt the future will be pretty.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,122
5,651
126
Originally posted by: Dari
Seems like people here are forgetting the goal of supranational superpowers: the elimination of sovereign nations. Supranationals want a regal-less, borderless and godless society ran by a powerful minority who hold token elections to keep the populace from getting restless. These revolutions are carried out at every available opportunity, particularly by secret societies. The last major ones within the past 300 years were the French Revolution, American Revolution, Russian Revolution, and the "ever closer Union" aspired by the eurocratic elite. Despite their deep involvement in the American revolutions, the members of the American revolution were of a different breed than their European counterpart, who were extremely close to the core. With the advent of Illumanitism in the 18th century, European revolutions took on a particularly inner-outer form (secrecy controlling populism).

I see Europe and America diverging on many issues as the world becomes more consolidated. I doubt the future will be pretty.

Says you. Many view the American Revolution as being controlled by an Elite as well, does that mean they are wrong or even that such control is bad? Every Revolution is controlled by someone, no Revolution is born without Leadership, or a widespread coincidental action wherein diverse members work to the same end. Were George Washington and the other Founders not organizers? Does not their position as being the top organizers make them an Elite?

I sense another reason for your views on the EU, a reverse engineering of events based upon an expectation of an assumption. The assumption is that an evil unlike one ever seen in history will come from Europe, that a unified Europe will be responsible for giving that evil power. The assumption, IMO, is wrong.
 

dpm

Golden Member
Apr 24, 2002
1,513
0
0
Originally posted by: miguel
Originally posted by: freegeeks I don't see why the Americans are against all this. For years they are whining that we should invest more in defense and when we actually start doing that they start whining about it. It seems to me that the US just wants lapdogs. It's OUR taxeuro. At least we should have a say in what we are doing. A common euro defense policy is going to be complimentary with NATO and benefits both Europe and the USA. It's not the goal to be a superpower in the US sense but a strong ally that is able to project power worldwide without the use of USA military capacity. We are not going to build 15 supercarriers and 5O ICMB subs. In a few years with the addition of the new British carriers and the ongoing Airbus program for airlift capacity, Europe will have the means to operate worldwide if needed
I haven't seem where "Americans are against all this." Did I miss it? I for one would welcome a Euro military that would take care of their own problems and other problems around the world without requiring the assistance of the US.

It wasnt that the American Administration had a problem with Euope expanding its military, it was more a matter of political control. The French in particular were very keen for any EU force to be independantly controlled, outside of existing defense frameworks - ie NATO. Keeping an EU rapid reaction force within NATO control would mean that it is de facto controlled by the US. The EU was concerned that there might be times when it may wish to act, but the US may not, and so was insistant on a seperate planning / operational command.
The US administration also raised the point that at the moment any such force would extend national force commitments to the point where there contribution to NATO could be adversley effected. If such a force existed today, and the EU decided to deploy it, it would indeed face great difficulties without pulling forces from NATO or Coalition activities.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,198
4
76
I don't think that Americans are better than Europeans. Where did you get that idea? However, I don't think that the world should forget the fact that Europe essentially raped the world ten times over when they were major powers.

Last I checked Germany, France and Britain are still quite powerful militarily and ecomically. All 3 are trillion dollar economies and have fairly large armed forces.(sure, not like the US, but we also spend a higher percentage of our GDP, which is also about 5x that of theirs)
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: Strk
I don't think that Americans are better than Europeans. Where did you get that idea? However, I don't think that the world should forget the fact that Europe essentially raped the world ten times over when they were major powers.

Last I checked Germany, France and Britain are still quite powerful militarily and ecomically. All 3 are trillion dollar economies and have fairly large armed forces.(sure, not like the US, but we also spend a higher percentage of our GDP, which is also about 5x that of theirs)

I'm not denying that they aren't still powerful. Perhaps I should have reworded my previous statement to 'superpower' or actually 'still as significant on the world stage' - not to say that they aren't, but they seem to have less influence globally.