Europe and the Rest of the World - A Military Analysis

[Vuk]

south americans? bwahahaha do they get siestas?

You are simply stereotyping, and not accurately. Tough life's make tough people. Their main problem is crime and instability. They have potential to be good citizens and soldiers if they get that sorted out.

[Centurion1]

they have a good military and a mandatory draft.

[Vuk]

they have a good military and a mandatory draft.

Who?

[Centurion1]

and you are doing the same exact thing. you think life in finland is easy? or poland? life in America is easier than anywhere else (unless your retired in western europe)

Edit: norway

[Vuk]

and you are doing the same exact thing. you think life in finland is easy? or poland? life in America is easier than anywhere else (unless your retired in western europe)

Edit: norway

I never said that life in Poland was easy. Life in most of Eastern Europe is very hard. Trust me, I know how lucky I am to be American. Life in Norway though is nothing compared to the hell that life in a 3rd world South American country is. Norway has a good military system and enough good citizens to keep it working, but I still think that you are over rating them. Eastern Europe, South America, and most of East Asia are probably amongst the hardest places to live on earth.

[Greyblades]

Ok then I'm obivously tired and I'm going to bed soon but I will ask afew questions:

Do you know any Europeans? Face to face instead of inside a forum? What about our potential soldiers, have you met one? How about our millitaries, have you got some special access to our recruiting figures? Our medical records? Specifically our reports on the viability of new recruits? Have you gotten some information that indicates what you are saying?

In other words: Do you know what you are talking about?

[Centurion1]

africa..... middle east....

look western militaries are top dog not only because of technology but because of what our values are . the reason the middle east has (excuse me) such crappy militaries after the medieval period is because they do not know how to respect subordinates or delegate authority. there are numerous essays on this. besides turkey they are all worthless as fighting forces.

[Husar]

lol the eurofighter. the UK wants the JSF anyway.

The UK has very short carriers that need VTOL/STOL capable aircraft, the Eurofighter is not such an aircraft as most of the countries in the program didn't need such a thing.
The UK still purchases Eurofighters for their land bases AFAIK.

The point about Germany being purely defensive is a bit funny considering we're in Afghanistan and our navy helped secure the lebanese shore etc.
Our special forces seem to be a bit more involved at times but it's not exactly the kind of thing you read about in newspapers.

I don't really see how you can say western europeans are unwilling to defend themselves as long as they aren't even really threatened.
There have been several attempts to do terror attacks in Germany, some were borked by the terrorists, others prevented by the policem, but well, this whole premise is just laughable anyway.

Europe's wealth comes mostly from trading and technology, once half the world fights over our wealth there is simply no wealth left to fight over so it's entirely pointless.
Then you forgot about nukes, Russia has them too but Russia also has a lot more natural ressources and fertile land, if you think their army is strong, think again.

Pro Tip: The Cold War is over.

[Vuk]

Ok then I'm obivously tired and I'm going to bed soon but I will ask afew questions:

Do you know any Europeans? Face to face instead of inside a forum? What about our potential soldiers, have you met one? How about our millitaries, have you got some special access to our recruiting figures? Our medical records? Specifically our reports on the viability of new recruits? Have you gotten some information that indicates what you are saying?

In other words: Do you know what you are talking about?

I have been to several European countries, been on military bases (in Europe and the US), befriended many Europeans, read lots of research, seen lots of news...yeah, I do think I know what I am talking about.

[Centurion1]

why are you directing this at me.

[gaelic cowboy]

Have you ever talked to or even seen a european soldier, or are you just basing this on some op-ed in a US newspaper.??

I have never heard of any recruitment problems in any Western European armies ever. Ireland has a microscopic army with a tiny budget but they never have a recruitment problem I ever heard of, usually the only way to get in is through a cadetship from university(officer programme). I think this idea that somehow people are incapable mentally of serving in an army is rubbish, if we had the money even more people would join cos we can be just as patriotic as you Vuk

The real problem for any military is money, how and where it is spent(in our case if we even have any), all of that impacts on training which affects the ability of the troops to fight but the potential recruits are prob still pretty much the same.

[Vuk]

africa..... middle east....

look western militaries are top dog not only because of technology but because of what our values are . the reason the middle east has (excuse me) such crappy militaries after the medieval period is because they do not know how to respect subordinates or delegate authority. there are numerous essays on this. besides turkey they are all worthless as fighting forces.

Yes, of course life is hard in Africa and the Middle East (probably harder in Africa than any place in the world...though Transylvania is probably on parr with many parts of Africa), but I did not mention them as the chance of any real military thread coming out of them in the next 100 years I see as extremely unlikely. Therefore they are not important to this discussion.

The UK has very short carriers that need VTOL/STOL capable aircraft, the Eurofighter is not such an aircraft as most of the countries in the program didn't need such a thing.
The UK still purchases Eurofighters for their land bases AFAIK.

The point about Germany being purely defensive is a bit funny considering we're in Afghanistan and our navy helped secure the lebanese shore etc.
Our special forces seem to be a bit more involved at times but it's not exactly the kind of thing you read about in newspapers.

I don't really see how you can say western europeans are unwilling to defend themselves as long as they aren't even really threatened.
There have been several attempts to do terror attacks in Germany, some were borked by the terrorists, others prevented by the policem, but well, this whole premise is just laughable anyway.

Europe's wealth comes mostly from trading and technology, once half the world fights over our wealth there is simply no wealth left to fight over so it's entirely pointless.
Then you forgot about nukes, Russia has them too but Russia also has a lot more natural ressources and fertile land, if you think their army is strong, think again.

Pro Tip: The Cold War is over.

The Germans are the ONLY major power in Western Europe with any real sort of military. It is very precise, but again, I don't think that the Germans have the resolve they need for sustained warfare.
The French? Certainly not!
The Cold War is over? Really? Then what is all the fighting in the Middle East? What is the problem in Korea? What is the ongoing cultural war?

[gaelic cowboy]

England has some potential for good soldiers and citizens. Australia has a lot (quite possibly a lot more than the US does). The Germans are a joke. The French are pathetic. Spain is ruined. etc.
I gotta disagree with you about Norway. I have a lot of Norwegian heritage, and such they hold a special place in my heart, but I think it would be generous to say that they have a little potential.

France has no potential fo breeding soldiers, would this be the same France with bases all over North Africa and plenty youth unemployment, I bet the french army has no problem recruiting stout lads.

Germany is no joke that is plain for all to see.

Spain, I recall reading recently they had a new recruitment drive and it was easily oversupplied.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Have you ever talked to or even seen a european soldier, or are you just basing this on some op-ed in a US newspaper.??

I have never heard of any recruitment problems in any Western European armies ever. Ireland has a microscopic army with a tiny budget but they never have a recruitment problem I ever heard of, usually the only way to get in is through a cadetship from university(officer programme). I think this idea that somehow people are incapable mentally of serving in an army is rubbish, if we had the money even more people would join cos we can be just as patriotic as you Vuk

The real problem for any military is money, how and where it is spent(in our case if we even have any), all of that impacts on training which affects the ability of the troops to fight but the potential recruits are prob still pretty much the same.

The Irish produce some of the best soldiers in the world, and you fight like demons for the British Crown so I hate to think how you'd fight to defend Ireland.

Vuk is also wrong about the French military, it is operationally very good but badly used by its political masters.

I'm sorry Vuk, but what you are saying doesn't jive with anything I have EVER read about military power. The consensus I have always seen is that america is top dog because it has the best gear, but it has historically suffered from dicipline and moral problems.

Oh, you know who else make great soldiers?

The Swiss.

[Vuk]

Have you ever talked to or even seen a european soldier, or are you just basing this on some op-ed in a US newspaper.??

I have never heard of any recruitment problems in any Western European armies ever. Ireland has a microscopic army with a tiny budget but they never have a recruitment problem I ever heard of, usually the only way to get in is through a cadetship from university(officer programme). I think this idea that somehow people are incapable mentally of serving in an army is rubbish, if we had the money even more people would join cos we can be just as patriotic as you Vuk

The real problem for any military is money, how and where it is spent(in our case if we even have any), all of that impacts on training which affects the ability of the troops to fight but the potential recruits are prob still pretty much the same.

No, you are wrong. Money is only half the problem. First of all, when I am talking about Europe, I am not including the Britain or Ireland, as they are not (to the best of my knowledge) part of political or geographical Europe.
The only military (major military that is) in Europe with even close to the type of discipline that makes good soldiers is Germany, and they are still far, far off the mark. Good military discipline makes good citizens. Good citizens make good soldiers. I highly doubt that there are enough citizens in any major country in Europe that would allow that country to fight a sustained war. Right now their militaries are at a tiny standing level, and they are still rank with discipline problems. Even disregarding that, the non-military population also is not suited to wartime conditions (or willing to endure them).

Have I ever seen or talked to European soldiers? Yes, I have. I have friends in both the German military, and the Hungarian military. (I actually got to attend a seminar in Hungary by a guy who teaches Hungarian specialists hand-to-hand combat) I also know several people in Nato intelligence who have been to many military bases in Europe, and I have talked to them extensively.

[gaelic cowboy]

The Germans are the ONLY major power in Western Europe with any real sort of military. It is very precise, but again, I don't think that the Germans have the resolve they need for sustained warfare.

The French? Certainly not!

Says who?? Dr Phill how do we know what is in the mind of euro recruits obviously if they joined they must want to be there.

The Cold War is over? Really? Then what is all the fighting in the Middle East? What is the problem in Korea? What is the ongoing cultural war?

Well apart form Korea all of that fighting is the USA's problem cos you started it.


I notice you talk about good citizens well in Europe there is a strong tradition now of citizenship engagement with community, enviroment this makes a good citizen blah blah so if they had to join the army for some reason I do not see them reverting to anarchists.

I really don't see this as a problem, now you might have been on better ground in the type of politician europe breeds as they tend to be concensus driven.(but then thats good as war between europe would be a disaster globally )

[Vuk]

The Irish produce some of the best soldiers in the world, and you fight like demons for the British Crown so I hate to think how you'd fight to defend Ireland.

Vuk is also wrong about the French military, it is operationally very good but badly used by its political masters.

I'm sorry Vuk, but what you are saying doesn't jive with anything I have EVER read about military power. The consensus I have always seen is that america is top dog because it has the best gear, but it has historically suffered from dicipline and moral problems.

Oh, you know who else make great soldiers?

The Swiss.

America has the best gear? Bollox! We cannot afford to equip our guys with the best gear. Germans, Belgians, etc have far better gear, and yet these countries still would fear US Marines. It is not the machine, but the operator.
You see, everything you are going after, tech, etc. is all very good, but it does not matter if it is given to the wrong people. Could you imagine if the US Marines were drawn mostly from New York and Mass? What a joke!

[Vuk]

Says who?? Dr Phill





Well apart form Korea all of that fighting is the USA's problem cos you started it.

Not really, the Russians had a burn and leave policy in the Middle East. They could not take control of them and their resources, so they decided instead to empower and supply people who would make life difficult for the US and its allies. Yeah, the US played God there a bit, but the main fault of the US was not going to war with Russia and stopping their meddling. It is Russia which is to blame for most of the problems in the Middle East

[Vuk]

I find it hilarious that you can all have the attitude "We could never stand against Russia/China, the US will protect us" one second, and "Achtung! We have the best military in the world!" the next second. Seriously, if your militaries are so good, then why the dependence on the US, and why the European attitude that it needs the US for protection?

EDIT: Hitting the hay now. I will reply tomorrow to any new posts.

[gaelic cowboy]

I find it hilarious that you can all have the attitude "We could never stand against Russia/China, the US will protect us" one second, and "Achtung! We have the best military in the world!" the next second. Seriously, if your militaries are so good, then why the dependence on the US, and why the European attitude that it needs the US for protection?

I dont think that Russia is even capable of taking on the Baltic countries nowadays, any attempt by Russia to rattle sabres will end badly for them. While europe would be devastated in any continential war that would hardly any different if all the recruits were like klingons or terminators.

The US has troops in european countries because it is part of it's foreign policy, a policy that is there because the USA still needs the ability to project power in Europe, Middle east and North Africa.

[Vladimir]

lol the eurofighter. the UK wants the JSF anyway.

Yea, good luck with that. Problems with the JSF program dwarf those of the Euro.

[PanzerJaeger]

In terms of size, budget, tech, etc they are ok, but esp. considering that they are small fish in the ocean, they cannot rely on out spending enemy armies and pumping more troops against them. There is a strength that cannot be directly observed or measured, and it is that that, alongside money, is the deciding factor in military engagements; much more important than troop count. History supports me on that. If Europeans are not willing to do that and straighten out as a society (which they probably will never do) it will be to their detriment, as well as to the detriment of the US and the rest of the world.

How does history support you on that?

Absent environmental factors, the difference between victory and defeat can always be traced to quantifiable differences in morale
, training, planning (tactical & strategic), equipment, and/or technology.

In fact, nations that have relied on that special, intangible 'something' to compensate for other deficiencies have suffered. The Japanese military during the Second World War is a good example.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

America has the best gear? Bollox! We cannot afford to equip our guys with the best gear. Germans, Belgians, etc have far better gear, and yet these countries still would fear US Marines. It is not the machine, but the operator.
You see, everything you are going after, tech, etc. is all very good, but it does not matter if it is given to the wrong people. Could you imagine if the US Marines were drawn mostly from New York and Mass? What a joke!

Can't afford? Rubbish, your defence budget is higher in millions of dollars, Per Capita and GDP wise.

F-22 Raptor, able to target and engage even before they show up on enemy raidar.

Yanks get all the Guccii battlefield control tech, it's what gives you the ability to direct your soldiers. Everything else is pretty much on par, we all use the same basic infantry weapons, only Britain uses an individual tank gun... etc.

what does Germany have that is better than US gear?

[PanzerJaeger]

what does Germany have that is better than US gear?

The G36.

[Husar]

what does Germany have that is better than US gear?

We have better beer.

I'm not entirely sure but I think our vehicles also have better protection against mines and IEDs.

[Major Robert Dump]

Pretentious OP followed by back pedals camoflouged by more pretentious posts and claims of being misunderstood yet peppered with moral and intellectual superiority. This thread made my day, thanks for the effort.

[CBR]

The sinews of war are not gold, but good soldiers - Niccolò Machiavelli

And good soldiers have always come from training and in modern times good equipment and logistics helps too.

Am I right? Am I being too harsh? Do I not have a good take on things? Have I just lost my mind? You tell me..

I cannot say if you have lost your mind but you are far away from having a good take on things. Nuff said.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Edit: Upon reflection, the previous content deemed a bad idea and removed.



Gah! The many sufferings one has to endure for being a moderator! Life's no fun anymore....

[PershsNhpios]

Oooooh my ears are ringing with all this loud noise.

The thread should be called 'America and the Rest of the World'.

[Sarmatian]

No, you are wrong. Money is only half the problem. First of all, when I am talking about Europe, I am not including the Britain or Ireland, as they are not (to the best of my knowledge) part of political or geographical Europe.

Britain and Ireland are both politically and geographically very much part of Europe... Europe stretches from Scandinavia to Bosphorus (north-south) and from Iceland to the Urals/Caucasus (west-east).