Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe.

Watch
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
As many of you know I am interested in geopolitics. George Friedman founder of strategic forecasting or Stratfor has a new book coming out, it is the title of this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KzSkHPvJeU

This persons views matter, he is in my view a geopolitical genius. He believes the EU and NATO will break apart, I believe so too. This is why I want Britain to leave NATO and the EU before they break apart. With NATO and the EU gone Britain will be once again an independent nation state having to combat the Russians, Germans and French. They will be our competitors, not our allies. I would prefer to leave the EU, then a few years later leave NATO because two such economic and military actions at the same time would be to damaging to the nation.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
His conclusions about the state of the EU seem a little odd. He's certainly on the money with his comments about the attitude towards Greece. But to say that no one is speaking for the EU is way off. Even in Greece support for the EU as an institution is high. I don't actually think anywhere except in the UK does support for the break up come close to support for continued membership.

He's on the money about the Euro being rigged for German exports.

As for his comments around NATO fragmenting along with the EU, I really don't find it convincing. There is simply too much at stake for the EU to fall apart, and too much will in the EU for the union. What we might see is a shrinking of both ( might not be any bad thing to lose some of the weaker members of both in the long term) rather than the total collapse of NATO and Europe. I think he is presenting an far too pessimistic view of the long term future of Europe.


Given the trade within the EU and how mutually dependent Britain, France and Germany are on each other, bar a huge economic crisis you aren't going to see them set upon each other. Frankly if Russia keeps up the way it is today that will do more to push and strengthen the EU and NATO than anything else.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#3
(Original post by Aj12)
His conclusions about the state of the EU seem a little odd. He's certainly on the money with his comments about the attitude towards Greece. But to say that no one is speaking for the EU is way off. Even in Greece support for the EU as an institution is high. I don't actually think anywhere except in the UK does support for the break up come close to support for continued membership.

He's on the money about the Euro being rigged for German exports.

As for his comments around NATO fragmenting along with the EU, I really don't find it convincing. There is simply too much at stake for the EU to fall apart, and too much will in the EU for the union. What we might see is a shrinking of both ( might not be any bad thing to lose some of the weaker members of both in the long term) rather than the total collapse of NATO and Europe. I think he is presenting an far too pessimistic view of the long term future of Europe.


Given the trade within the EU and how mutually dependent Britain, France and Germany are on each other, bar a huge economic crisis you aren't going to see them set upon each other. Frankly if Russia keeps up the way it is today that will do more to push and strengthen the EU and NATO than anything else.
He is saying no one can act for the EU to get things done. They have to go through a number of EU institutions and the nation states. It takes to long and everything has to be watered down to get through, so it never workers. In fact the only thing that actually works is when the Germans bypass the EU and do the bailouts directly through the ECB and private banks. He isn't saying the EU doesn't have support, but in any case support for the EU has dropped and is dropping.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5FAjtU4PB0
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
Due to nuclear weapons, an Anglo-Franco-German conflict is no longer viable. There's no situation in which any of those parties could expect to gain more by fighting than by not fighting.

Even if NATO breaks apart, which I interpret as meaning the US leaving, the Western European powers will still collaborate to keep the Eastern minors in their sphere and to keep the Russians out of it. Ultimately that includes Greece; paying whatever Greece costs, worthless as Greece itself may be, is worth it to stop someone else gaining a toe-hold on the continent.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by william walker)
As many of you know I am interested in geopolitics. George Friedman founder of strategic forecasting or Stratfor has a new book coming out, it is the title of this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KzSkHPvJeU

This persons views matter, he is in my view a geopolitical genius. He believes the EU and NATO will break apart, I believe so too. This is why I want Britain to leave NATO and the EU before they break apart. With NATO and the EU gone Britain will be once again an independent nation state having to combat the Russians, Germans and French. They will be our competitors, not our allies. I would prefer to leave the EU, then a few years later leave NATO because two such economic and military actions at the same time would be to damaging to the nation.
If he's predicting all of that then he's a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.

Nato isn't going anywhere. Why would it?
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
If he's predicting all of that then he's a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.

Nato isn't going anywhere. Why would it?
He doesn't predict anything, he looks at trends in economics, demographics, geography and so on. He is not a conspiracy theorist. I haven't just looked at George Friedman but also the people he employs or employed at Stratfor, these people aren't Alex Jones or Russia Today, they are serious people. Fred Burton, Peter Zeihan, Kamran Bokhari, Robert D Kaplan.

Because the Spanish aren't threatened by Russia, but the Polish are. NATO is pointless, why would the Germans want to aid the Polish against the Russians? It will be put to the Eastern and Central European nation states Poland, Romania, Hungary, Lithuania and so on to for an alliance against the Russians, with America, France and maybe British support. However such support would be technology, training, logistics. It would basically be the Polish lead alliance buying from Britain, France and US.

You must understand that NATO and EU have became ways to constrain the Germans, but later as Germany's demographics fall and their economic dynamism is lost Germany is no longer a threat so there is no need for the EU or NATO.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by william walker)
He doesn't predict anything, he looks at trends in economics, demographics, geography and so on. He is not a conspiracy theorist. I haven't just looked at George Friedman but also the people he employs or employed at Stratfor, these people aren't Alex Jones or Russia Today, they are serious people. Fred Burton, Peter Zeihan, Kamran Bokhari, Robert D Kaplan.

Because the Spanish aren't threatened by Russia, but the Polish are. NATO is pointless, why would the Germans want to aid the Polish against the Russians? It will be put to the Eastern and Central European nation states Poland, Romania, Hungary, Lithuania and so on to for an alliance against the Russians, with America, France and maybe British support. However such support would be technology, training, logistics. It would basically be the Polish lead alliance buying from Britain, France and US.

You must understand that NATO and EU have became ways to constrain the Germans, but later as Germany's demographics fall and their economic dynamism is lost Germany is no longer a threat so there is no need for the EU or NATO.
NATO was never a mechanism to constrain the Germans. The Germans are an active part of nato and quite vocal supporters of it.

I have no idea what you are going on about germany and the eu. Some think it was a mechanism to shackle France And Germany together to stop yet another european based war. (3 in 75 years.) some think the EU is the basis of the fourth reich. But pan Europeanim has been around since the time of Bonaparte.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideas...ty_before_1945
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
NATO was never a mechanism to constrain the Germans. The Germans are an active part of nato and quite vocal supporters of it.

I have no idea what you are going on about germany and the eu. Some think it was a mechanism to shackle France And Germany together to stop yet another european based war. (3 in 75 years.) some think the EU is the basis of the fourth reich. But pan Europeanim has been around since the time of Bonaparte.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideas...ty_before_1945
NATO is now a mechanism to constrain the Germans. Basically you bring the Germans into a military alliance and allow their economy free trade throughout Europe. The Germans have what they want without war and don't build up military capabilities. The EU is the price Europe is paying to constrain the Germans military capabilities. So of course the Germans support NATO and the EU. However as I said once the Germans are weaker because of demographic and economic reasons the need to constrain the Germans will be gone. So no need for NATO or the EU.

Either the French, Italians and Polish will get sick of their economies being constrained by the Germans through the EU, or the Germans will fall. Which ever comes first will be the reason the EU breaks apart. NATO will happen simply because some countries don't want to help Poland. Poland really is becoming the most important nation in Europe. Sandwiched between a weak Germany and a weaker Russia, the Polish are going to have a long of room to play in within 20 years.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by william walker)
NATO is now a mechanism to constrain the Germans. Basically you bring the Germans into a military alliance and allow their economy free trade throughout Europe. The Germans have what they want without war and don't build up military capabilities. The EU is the price Europe is paying to constrain the Germans military capabilities. So of course the Germans support NATO and the EU. However as I said once the Germans are weaker because of demographic and economic reasons the need to constrain the Germans will be gone. So no need for NATO or the EU.

Either the French, Italians and Polish will get sick of their economies being constrained by the Germans through the EU, or the Germans will fall. Which ever comes first will be the reason the EU breaks apart. NATO will happen simply because some countries don't want to help Poland. Poland really is becoming the most important nation in Europe. Sandwiched between a weak Germany and a weaker Russia, the Polish are going to have a long of room to play in within 20 years.
Are you still banging on about germany or France starting WW3?
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Are you still banging on about germany or France starting WW3?
I would be more worried about Poland and the US starting WW3 with Turkey and Japan.
0
reply
gagaslilmonsteruk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by william walker)
I would be more worried about Poland and the US starting WW3 with Turkey and Japan.
I can't remember the author, but you've read that book about the next 100 years haven't you? I've read a summary of it online. Considering the book came out in 2009, there have been a few but not too many inaccuracies.
1
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#13
http://rt.com/shows/politicking-larr...berg-friedman/

Skip to 19:22.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by gagaslilmonsteruk)
I can't remember the author, but you've read that book about the next 100 years haven't you? I've read a summary of it online. Considering the book came out in 2009, there have been a few but not too many inaccuracies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NyLjeRBrqU

He will get the events and times wrong, but the underlying trend of the book will be correct. The question for Britain is how do want ride the trend to get the best outcome.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by Observatory)
Due to nuclear weapons, an Anglo-Franco-German conflict is no longer viable. There's no situation in which any of those parties could expect to gain more by fighting than by not fighting.

Even if NATO breaks apart, which I interpret as meaning the US leaving, the Western European powers will still collaborate to keep the Eastern minors in their sphere and to keep the Russians out of it. Ultimately that includes Greece; paying whatever Greece costs, worthless as Greece itself may be, is worth it to stop someone else gaining a toe-hold on the continent.
Nuclear weapons don't stop competition between greater powers over smaller powers. Which is what will happen between Germany, Britain and France over the Low countries, Denmark and Norway.

No the US will remain in Europe support specific countries, rather than doing its military support through NATO it will do it direct. No the western Europeans don't care about the Eastern Europeans at all. They would care of the Russians were threatening them, but the Russians aren't. Indeed the Germans weren't be opposed the Russians grabbing territory because they would also start grabbing their territory in eastern Europe. What the Americans and Polish and French and British fear is a partnership between Russia and Germany. They will do everything they can to stop it happening again as it did in WW2 and later part of WW1.
0
reply
Swanbow
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
Meh.

So long as Russia fails to integrate with Europe and fails to adopt political and economic reforms they'll be a need for NATO. So long as the West faces a collective threat, whether that is in the form communism or islamism or whatever the next bogeyman will be, NATO will exist. No doubt NATO is becoming less relevant, but I don't see it going anywhere any time soon.

And just because the EU finds it difficult to agree on foreign policy and military matters doesn't mean that it's existence is threatened. Some federalist would love for our foreign policy to be dictated on an EU level, but for the moment France Germany and the United Kingdom are for the large part happy for it to be done independently. Just as the Europe is economically diverse for the Eurozone to properly work for everyone, is it also too politically diverse for any kind of meaningful foreign policy and military decision to be made by at the EU level. Despite the failings of the EU, so long as it is supported by the main political parties in it's constituent countries nothing will change. I don't think the rise of Euroscepticism will seriously dent the project either. It is here to stay so long as Germany and France want it to stay.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by william walker)
Nuclear weapons don't stop competition between greater powers over smaller powers. Which is what will happen between Germany, Britain and France over the Low countries, Denmark and Norway.

No the US will remain in Europe support specific countries, rather than doing its military support through NATO it will do it direct.
With what purpose?

No the western Europeans don't care about the Eastern Europeans at all. They would care of the Russians were threatening them, but the Russians aren't. Indeed the Germans weren't be opposed the Russians grabbing territory because they would also start grabbing their territory in eastern Europe.
The Russians aren't threatening because of the overwhelming military and economic superiority of NATO. If Russia were allowed to rebuild the Warsaw Pact, it would become threatening. With European military spending as low as it is, simple US withdrawal would make Russia threatening, even without any further loss of members or new Russian allies. The Germans are spending about 1% of GDP and want to reduce it further.

What the Americans and Polish and French and British fear is a partnership between Russia and Germany. They will do everything they can to stop it happening again as it did in WW2 and later part of WW1.
Yes, this would be a particularly bad outcome, but a very unlikely one. German society has been too much reprogrammed and Germany too much weakened and encircled by those other powers.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
NATO - If we are talking a minimum of 2040 (probably further in reality) then should Russia eventually become a wealthy nation and ally with the west i could see NATO basically becoming US-UK-France given how little appetite there is for holidays to the middle east and the like in Europe. So long as Russia does not ally with the west though, NATO will stand tall and firm regardless of what the US people want because the executive rightly views Russian expansion as not in its interests.

EU - Can't see it, it's gone too far. In terms of it's constituent states, opposition to the EU is heavily regional varying significantly from state to state so while there is the threat of some leaving, i don't think the domino scenario plays out as a lot of skeptics seem to hope. The EU as an institution itself has gained ever more power and is extremely expansionist and willing to protect its self interest. I find it far more likely that wavering EU states like the UK and a handful of others will leave but only strengthen the hand of federalists as their opposition simply leaves. In essence, i expect in 2050 to be looking at a smaller, but more power concentrated EU/Euro-zone. I don't really buy the assertion that Germany's fate matters, it may have previously and does today but right now the project is simply viewed as a means to project greater collective power in the world. So to me the poster 2 above is right.. the EU will exist as long as France and Germany want it to.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by Swanbow)
Meh.

So long as Russia fails to integrate with Europe and fails to adopt political and economic reforms they'll be a need for NATO. So long as the West faces a collective threat, whether that is in the form communism or islamism or whatever the next bogeyman will be, NATO will exist. No doubt NATO is becoming less relevant, but I don't see it going anywhere any time soon.

And just because the EU finds it difficult to agree on foreign policy and military matters doesn't mean that it's existence is threatened. Some federalist would love for our foreign policy to be dictated on an EU level, but for the moment France Germany and the United Kingdom are for the large part happy for it to be done independently. Just as the Europe is economically diverse for the Eurozone to properly work for everyone, is it also too politically diverse for any kind of meaningful foreign policy and military decision to be made by at the EU level. Despite the failings of the EU, so long as it is supported by the main political parties in it's constituent countries nothing will change. I don't think the rise of Euroscepticism will seriously dent the project either. It is here to stay so long as Germany and France want it to stay.
Why would the Russians want to join the EU or NATO, the Russians don't fear Germany and they see both the EU and NATO as American projects against them. So the Russians aren't going to join the EU or NATO. The west no longer faces a collective threat from Russia, the Polish are threatened, but nobody else is. The Germans aren't threatened by Russia. They have a buffer between them and Russia. The conflict will come in the buffer states between Poland and Russia with the Americans supporting Poland against the Russians and Poland attempting to form an alliance along the buffer with Russia. So it will become Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and Lithuania with American support against the Russians. The buffer states are Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. This is one the Flash points in Europe George Friedman's book is talking about.

No the EU can't agree on any action to solve a problem because anything put forward is always watered down so more people and nations support it. So in the end if you want to bailout Greece you do it through national institutions and the ECB directly and not the EU. The main parties are falling all over Europe or they are having to change their policies in Greece, Italy, Spain, France. All the nations who have lost economically because of the need to contain Germany.
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by Observatory)
With what purpose?


The Russians aren't threatening because of the overwhelming military and economic superiority of NATO. If Russia were allowed to rebuild the Warsaw Pact, it would become threatening. With European military spending as low as it is, simple US withdrawal would make Russia threatening, even without any further loss of members or new Russian allies. The Germans are spending about 1% of GDP and want to reduce it further.


Yes, this would be a particularly bad outcome, but a very unlikely one. German society has been too much reprogrammed and Germany too much weakened and encircled by those other powers.
To bypass the politics of NATO and get military support directly to the nations that need it.

The Russians aren't threatening because they are to far away from Germany and western Europe. However the Russians are threatening Poland. Yes so the Americans and Polish are going to attempt to stop the Russians in the buffer states of Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Latvia and Estonia. Rather than just allowing Russia to take them and further threaten Poland. The US isn't going to withdraw, in fact the US will be increasing its efforts to help a young Polish based alliance against the Russians.

What Germany hasn't been reprogrammed, it has been drugged by economic growth and employment, it is happy so it doesn't attack anyone. However if the drug Germany is on ever runs out the Germans will revert back to being attacking other nations. Unless they are weakened before that happens. Yes and when Germany is encircled it wants to breakout, this is why the World Wars happened.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (176)
14.56%
I'm not sure (56)
4.63%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (354)
29.28%
I have already dropped out (35)
2.89%
I'm not a current university student (588)
48.64%

Watched Threads

View All