Europe needs its own NATO Watch

Andrea12
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Don't you think that NATO may bite dust soon? Actually at present NATO is mixture of American money and American ambitions plus European cannon fodder. And the new cannon fodder supplied by post communist countries of Europe has turned to be good for nothing. Americans still can rely only on Old Dame Europe and her well-trained military force. Needless to say, the main burden is on France and Germany. Sick and tired of this, both the French and the British! Americans are least reluctant to get involved into real fighting. In Libya those were French military that did most job you know. Americans are leaving Afghanistan.
Financially, it's no better in recent times. I think already in nearest future Americans may find it very rather difficult to ensure financial footage of NATO. The recent budget crisis has made it absolutely clear that Washington must count money and austerity measures are inevitable imo.
So, it's the time Europe started some processes to launch its own NATO or sort of it.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
(Original post by Andrea12)
Don't you think that NATO may bite dust soon? Actually at present NATO is mixture of American money and American ambitions plus European cannon fodder. And the new cannon fodder supplied by post communist countries of Europe has turned to be good for nothing. Americans still can rely only on Old Dame Europe and her well-trained military force. Needless to say, the main burden is on France and Germany. Sick and tired of this, both the French and the British! Americans are least reluctant to get involved into real fighting. In Libya those were French military that did most job you know. Americans are leaving Afghanistan.
Financially, it's no better in recent times. I think already in nearest future Americans may find it very rather difficult to ensure financial footage of NATO. The recent budget crisis has made it absolutely clear that Washington must count money and austerity measures are inevitable imo.
So, it's the time Europe started some processes to launch its own NATO or sort of it.
You have a very odd understanding of NATO if you think Europe puts in more than America. The States basically carry NATO, Libya and Mali showed what tends to happen when European nations go to war without America, they just don't have the capacity.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing, nothing wrong with working with your allies but to present NATO as being carried by Germany and France or Eastern European cannon fodder is laughable.

As for a European style NATO it's not going to happen, neither the money nor political will is there.
3
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
(Original post by Aj12)
You have a very odd understanding of NATO if you think Europe puts in more than America. The States basically carry NATO, Libya and Mali showed what tends to happen when European nations go to war without America, they just don't have the capacity.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing, nothing wrong with working with your allies but to present NATO as being carried by Germany and France or Eastern European cannon fodder is laughable.

As for a European style NATO it's not going to happen, neither the money nor political will is there.
I'd have to agree with you on that one. Having served in a NATO environment I can assure you that without the US logistics, intelligence, training, finance and equipment, Europe would fall flat on its face.

Europe ran out if bombs in Libya and had to get US bombs. The French needed US logistics support in Mali.

i guess the OP was just going on an anti US bash
0
reply
wildrover
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
No why would Britain want to leave well funded organisation to join one were the armies probably still throw rocks at each other
0
reply
pol pot noodles
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by Andrea12)
Don't you think that NATO may bite dust soon? Actually at present NATO is mixture of American money and American ambitions plus European cannon fodder. And the new cannon fodder supplied by post communist countries of Europe has turned to be good for nothing. Americans still can rely only on Old Dame Europe and her well-trained military force. Needless to say, the main burden is on France and Germany. Sick and tired of this, both the French and the British! Americans are least reluctant to get involved into real fighting. In Libya those were French military that did most job you know. Americans are leaving Afghanistan.
Financially, it's no better in recent times. I think already in nearest future Americans may find it very rather difficult to ensure financial footage of NATO. The recent budget crisis has made it absolutely clear that Washington must count money and austerity measures are inevitable imo.
So, it's the time Europe started some processes to launch its own NATO or sort of it.
Two thirds of ISAF deaths in Afghanistan have been American, almost half of the remainder have been British. Germany only allowed it's troops to be deployed in low intensity regions of the country. Your perception of NATO is far from reality.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by pol pot noodles)
Two thirds of ISAF deaths in Afghanistan have been American, almost half of the remainder have been British. Germany only allowed it's troops to be deployed in low intensity regions of the country. Your perception of NATO is far from reality.
Europe has more men in uniform than the US. That should tell you something about how seriously Europeans take war fighting.

Point to note though. When you factor in the sizes of countries and their troop deployment in Afghanistan, the Danish military have been hit the hardest, then the UK, then the Canadians, then the US.
0
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
I believe personally that we should leave NATO, and focus on non aggression pacts and defensive alliances rather than military alliances. We don't need NATO, what we actually need is independence from coalition alliances/invasions and the ability to fight our own wars, and protect our own territory, rather than others.

NATO is irrelevant anymore, the USSR has gone and China wants economic supremacy not military. Besides, it was only the USA, UK and the odd input from France, Canada and Denmark that made up NATO. The other members didn't really give a ****, or pull their weight.
1
reply
Yi-Ge-Ningderen
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
Unless we get out of the EU, we will be part of the EU army soon enough.
0
reply
Rovey
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
Integration is a euphemism for bureaucracy who the hell would want that
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by the mezzil)
I believe personally that we should leave NATO, and focus on non aggression pacts and defensive alliances rather than military alliances. We don't need NATO, what we actually need is independence from coalition alliances/invasions and the ability to fight our own wars, and protect our own territory, rather than others.

NATO is irrelevant anymore, the USSR has gone and China wants economic supremacy not military. Besides, it was only the USA, UK and the odd input from France, Canada and Denmark that made up NATO. The other members didn't really give a ****, or pull their weight.
NATO is still relevant. Russia still poses a significant threat. China, Alhough economically is getting stronger, its military is being developed with air craft carriers and we're now starting to see overseas troops deployment with them. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea indicate that they are flexing their military muscles.

You're list of NATO nations that you feel didn't pull their weight seems to include Holland, who were, and still are paired up with No 3 Commando brigade very often, the Norwegians who have always done an outstanding job and the Germans who were the only NATO nation who had plans to go on the attack against the Soviets and were equipped to do so.

Infancy, with the exception of the US, UK and Canada, all NATO member states have up until recently had conscription. I'd say that's taking things quite seriously.
2
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
NATO is still relevant. Russia still poses a significant threat. China, Alhough economically is getting stronger, its military is being developed with air craft carriers and we're now starting to see overseas troops deployment with them. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea indicate that they are flexing their military muscles.

You're list of NATO nations that you feel didn't pull their weight seems to include Holland, who were, and still are paired up with No 3 Commando brigade very often, the Norwegians who have always done an outstanding job and the Germans who were the only NATO nation who had plans to go on the attack against the Soviets and were equipped to do so.

Infancy, with the exception of the US, UK and Canada, all NATO member states have up until recently had conscription. I'd say that's taking things quite seriously.
We have trident. Any country who decides to **** us around such as China or Russia should be threatened with nuclear warfare. That includes spain and their stance towards our fellow citizens down at Gibralta. I think we have more of a threat of cyber warfare from China than conventional, so we should be focusing more resources there.

Those countries you list provide very minimal contributions, and certainly did not pull there weight. You say concription. Okay, how many Spanish soldiers were deployed in kosovo? Italy is a big country, with a strong economy (well used too) so where is there nuclear weapons? How strong is their Navy?

What has NATO done for us in the past 20 years apart from intervine in kosovo and invade Afghanistan? Where are the French in Iraq? How many poles are in Afghanistan? Compared to us and the USA? **** all thats how many. We are being used and abused by our so called "allies". They send a couple of hundred of soldiers in, and maybe 2 aircraft and then think they have 'contributed'. Bull ****, have they ****!

We act as a coallition now, not NATO.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by the mezzil)
We have trident. Any country who decides to **** us around such as China or Russia should be threatened with nuclear warfare. That includes spain and their stance towards our fellow citizens down at Gibralta. I think we have more of a threat of cyber warfare from China than conventional, so we should be focusing more resources there.

Those countries you list provide very minimal contributions, and certainly did not pull there weight. You say concription. Okay, how many Spanish soldiers were deployed in kosovo? Italy is a big country, with a strong economy (well used too) so where is there nuclear weapons? How strong is their Navy?

What has NATO done for us in the past 20 years apart from intervine in kosovo and invade Afghanistan? Where are the French in Iraq? How many poles are in Afghanistan? Compared to us and the USA? **** all thats how many. We are being used and abused by our so called "allies". They send a couple of hundred of soldiers in, and maybe 2 aircraft and then think they have 'contributed'. Bull ****, have they ****!

We act as a coallition now, not NATO.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Quite a few Poles in Afghanistan. They're based in in the Eastern part of the country. A good set of guys. (I've spent quite a bit of time in AFG) Infact, all of the other nations that you've decided to **** off, from I'm assuming is an arm chair General stand point' have contributed quite a lot.

Spain has kept it's military funding quite low. This is mainly because in my Life time Spain was an undemocratic Fascit state under Franco and they're a bit reluctance to have a large Army any more just in case some politician decides to use it for nefarious activities.


I think you'll find that UK media tends to focus on UK contributions. The Spanish troops in Western Afghanistan did a great job. As did the Italians. My personal favourites were the Germans. Although politically hamstrung by the German population and politicians back home who are still bearing the scars of Nazi Germany, they're untested on deployement outside of Europe, predominantly conscript Army who's conscripts had to volunteer to serve an additional year to allow them to go the Afghanistan did a great job, and not in just providing beer and currywierst. Norwegians, Danish, Estonians, Swedes. I could not say anything bad about them.

You've sadly fallen into the pariochial viewpoint of the world. I'm hazarding a guess you wear football tops on holiday and insist on eating British food when abroad.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
NATO gives the EU's ~$200bn defence spending access to the US's ~$500bn defence spending. This seems like a good deal for the EU.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by Andrea12)
Don't you think that NATO may bite dust soon? Actually at present NATO is mixture of American money and American ambitions plus European cannon fodder. And the new cannon fodder supplied by post communist countries of Europe has turned to be good for nothing. Americans still can rely only on Old Dame Europe and her well-trained military force. Needless to say, the main burden is on France and Germany. Sick and tired of this, both the French and the British! Americans are least reluctant to get involved into real fighting. In Libya those were French military that did most job you know. Americans are leaving Afghanistan.
Financially, it's no better in recent times. I think already in nearest future Americans may find it very rather difficult to ensure financial footage of NATO. The recent budget crisis has made it absolutely clear that Washington must count money and austerity measures are inevitable imo.
So, it's the time Europe started some processes to launch its own NATO or sort of it.
There's no real chance of NATO collapsing anytime soon and nor should it, it is a great western military alliance.

That being said, it does look like eleven EU nations will forming an EU armed forces (common navy, air force, army), the UK however won't be involved.

Your assertions are also off as well, the UK and France are the major military forces in Europe. The Germans produce a lot and i'm sure they'd kick the crap out of a lot of countries if they ever wanted to (i actually want them to be more active with the UK and France) but in terms of action not so much.

Defense spending in the US has been protected quite well and it's still double Europe.
0
reply
CEKTOP
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Europe has more men in uniform than the US. That should tell you something about how seriously Europeans take war fighting.

Point to note though. When you factor in the sizes of countries and their troop deployment in Afghanistan, the Danish military have been hit the hardest, then the UK, then the Canadians, then the US.
Yeah, more personnel by like 100k. US military is much more capable and advanced in terms of technology.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by CEKTOP)
Yeah, more personnel by like 100k. US military is much more capable and advanced in terms of technology.
I imagine there are certain things like intelligence services and experimental weapons that the US is better at however in terms of the navy and air force there comparable. It's my understanding that our astute class subs are regarded as some of the best in the world as is the destroyer we have near the Falklands.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Economics Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (52)
14.33%
The paper was reasonable (182)
50.14%
Not feeling great about that exam... (88)
24.24%
It was TERRIBLE (41)
11.29%

Watched Threads

View All