Europe and the Rest of the World - A Military Analysis

[Fragony]

Nothing wrong with European armies. I wonder how resiliant these socalled good citizens are when it's war comming to them, when a town is whiped from the map as retaliation or an entire village rounded up and executed because of militia activity. That terror also comes from your own army, good citizens killing their own, Europeans will expect that to happen.

[Subotan]

This a complete failure of an analysis.

I guess that my point is that most Western Europeans do not have that will to fight for their country, their family, and their society. They are not proud of themselves, where they came from, or their country. Why would they give their lives after all? Their entire lifestyle is contrary to what makes a good soldier AND citizen.

Absolute rubbish. If there was ever, God forbid, another large war on European soil then Europeans would put everything in to win. The difference is Vuk, not that we are soft, or decadent, or not proud of "where we come from" (I.e. not being a brown Mohammedan amirite?) but that we have put the millennia of constant warfare that has haunted Europe behind us. The nationalism which you so admire and reminisce for was and still is a cancer within Europe, and the weakening and gradual erosion of it is something which should be celebrated as one of the greatest foreign policy successes in the history of mankind, not mourned for causing the loss "of a culture that produces good citizens and good soldiers."

[Greyblades]

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).

Eh... I dont think that we see it like that. See "with europe but not of it" in tvtropes.

The nationalism which you so admire and reminisce for was and still is a cancer within Europe, and the weakening and gradual erosion of it is something which should be celebrated as one of the greatest foreign policy successes in the history of mankind, not mourned for causing the loss "of a culture that produces good citizens and good soldiers."

Eh I gotta disagree with this nationalism should not be removed but restricted, national pride shouldnt be shunned unless it results in violence or intolerance. I'm looking at you BNP.

As for vuk, now that I am rested and recharged this seems more like trolling against europeans than anything else.

[HoreTore]

I want to hug you, Subotan.

[Fisherking]

Vuk,

I think that you are the victim of a misperception, possibly born of American insulation from broader views of the world.

Much of Western Europe suppresses their patriotism and nationalism, seeing it as the cause of two world wars, particularly in Germany.

I wouldn’t want to say that their armies are of any less quality than that fielded by the US.

Yes, many of them are tiny but it is because they though they could get away with that as the US was covering their backs, to a great extent.

It is more a matter of governments than of individuals.

[Quid]

This a complete failure of an analysis.



Absolute rubbish. If there was ever, God forbid, another large war on European soil then Europeans would put everything in to win. The difference is Vuk, not that we are soft, or decadent, or not proud of "where we come from" (I.e. not being a brown Mohammedan amirite?) but that we have put the millennia of constant warfare that has haunted Europe behind us. The nationalism which you so admire and reminisce for was and still is a cancer within Europe, and the weakening and gradual erosion of it is something which should be celebrated as one of the greatest foreign policy successes in the history of mankind, not mourned for causing the loss "of a culture that produces good citizens and good soldiers."

Could not agree more. I think what Vuk is underestimating is the still very much prevalent national pride. Just one reason that 'Project Europe' is a task that will stretch over many generations if it ever were to succeed fully. Of course, it is true that Europe does not concentrate on military might as it has done in the past. There is no need. There is no imminent threat. However, as soon as there were just such a threat, be assured, the Europeans would be up in arms in no time. We are, and always have been, a divided continent. Animosity towards others and fierce national pride does not disappear in just a few generatinos.

Quid

[Furunculus]

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).

and yet, britain as a society appears far more warlike in that it is 'happy' to engage in military 'adventures'.

[Fisherking]

and yet, britain as a society appears far more warlike in that it is 'happy' to engage in military 'adventures'.

Blame it on the Scotts

[Fragony]

and yet, britain as a society appears far more warlike in that it is 'happy' to engage in military 'adventures'.

The UK has more of a military culture, count the proverbs you casually use that can be traced back to things military (same for Americans). Likewise for us when it comes to trade and the sea.

[Sarmatian]

Eh... I dont think that we see it like that. See "with europe but not of it" in tvtropes.

You can not ''see'' geography. A mountain is a mountain and a lake is lake. Deciding that mountain is a lake will not change reality. If people of Britain and Ireland see themselves as distinct and different than other Europeans, that's another issue. Vuk mentioned geography and politics, the former I already explained and the latter is easily proved by looking at how many European organizations Britain and Ireland are a part of from small and insignificant ones to CoE and EU.

and yet, britain as a society appears far more warlike in that it is 'happy' to engage in military 'adventures'.

Current circumstances, still doesn't change what I explained above.

[Greyblades]

Oh I know that, I just dont think most of us Brits see it that way.

[Furunculus]

Current circumstances, still doesn't change what I explained above.

fine, as long as you are not referring to the difference in broad cultural acceptance of military action between Britain and the continent, which is what i was referring to, because otherwise we disagree very significantly.

[Subotan]

Eh... I dont think that we see it like that. See "with europe but not of it" in tvtropes..

To paraphrase Porfirio Diaz, "Poor Britain, so far from Europe and so close to the United States"

Eh I gotta disagree with this nationalism should not be removed but restricted, national pride shouldnt be shunned unless it results in violence or intolerance. I'm looking at you BNP

Well, the kind of national pride easiest to do that with is the celebration of common values held by Britons, such as our history of democracy, tolerant nature, culture etc. It so happens that we share a lot of these values with Europeans. Blood and Soil nationalism is vile though.

I want to hug you, Subotan.

*Hug*

Could not agree more. I think what Vuk is underestimating is the still very much prevalent national pride. Just one reason that 'Project Europe' is a task that will stretch over many generations if it ever were to succeed fully. Of course, it is true that Europe does not concentrate on military might as it has done in the past. There is no need. There is no imminent threat. However, as soon as there were just such a threat, be assured, the Europeans would be up in arms in no time. We are, and always have been, a divided continent. Animosity towards others and fierce national pride does not disappear in just a few generatinos.

Quid

Remember of course that the kind of war Vuk declares that we would be crap at i.e. a full-scale industrial war between the great powers would almost certainly involve nuclear weapons, so there's not much of an incentive for anyone with the kind of power to threaten Europe to the degree that Vuk says that we can't resist to attack us.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You can not ''see'' geography. A mountain is a mountain and a lake is lake. Deciding that mountain is a lake will not change reality. If people of Britain and Ireland see themselves as distinct and different than other Europeans, that's another issue. Vuk mentioned geography and politics, the former I already explained and the latter is easily proved by looking at how many European organizations Britain and Ireland are a part of from small and insignificant ones to CoE and EU.

Britain and Ireland are both island nations we have a fundamentally different way of viewing the world because every direction is "out there" never "over the border".

So we are not the same as mainland Europeans, no matter how many times you try to tell us we are.

[gaelic cowboy]

fine, as long as you are not referring to the difference in broad cultural acceptance of military action between Britain and the continent, which is what i was referring to, because otherwise we disagree very significantly.

I dont see it as clear cut as that, after all I bet certain states in US have different attitudes to the army too.

I think the difference is the political arena not on an individual scale, I mean lots of people marched against Iraq in the US and UK does that mean the people are soft mentally.

I dont buy this idea that certain people are bred for war, once you join you get trained and have to forget all your preconceptions blah blah cos whatever you think you know on joining the reality is they soon set you straight.

[gaelic cowboy]

Britain and Ireland are both island nations we have a fundamentally different way of viewing the world because every direction is "out there" never "over the border".

So we are not the same as mainland Europeans, no matter how many times you try to tell us we are.

I agree we do both see the world differently but were still not going to let europe bang away without being involved.

After all this is Totalwar.org the way to win the early games like MTW or Rome was to ensure no one got too powerful in Europe if you were Britain.

[al Roumi]

I did also think we had dealt with Vuk's fevered giberring musings on the decadence of Europe. To my mind, he basicaly thinks that only a staunchly militaristic society is strong enough to survive in the world as he sees it: i.e. one in which a perpetual state of "total war" exists, or where we are all two steps from tipping into one.

I think you should lay off the Fox news Vuk.

I could also organise a small collection round the forum, to finance the purchase of a club and bridge for you to act out your vocation.

[gaelic cowboy]

Anyway who says that people who are more martial are suitable for service today, your as likely to be taken on with an arts degree as having a black belt. If everyone in the army all looked at the world the same way there would be no innovation etc etc and eventually you would stagnate.

Our tiny army recruits officers from all disciplines from engineering to the arts basically in order that the army does not become trapped in a particular worldview.

[Furunculus]

I dont see it as clear cut as that, after all I bet certain states in US have different attitudes to the army too.
I think the difference is the political arena not on an individual scale, I mean lots of people marched against Iraq in the US and UK does that mean the people are soft mentally.

I dont buy this idea that certain people are bred for war, once you join you get trained and have to forget all your preconceptions blah blah cos whatever you think you know on joining the reality is they soon set you straight.

granted, but this is a representative democracy, just like the rest of western europe, so the political arena is ultimately the public arena.

nor would i buy the idea that people (individual) are bred for war, after all our military is tiny and largely invisible to society, and yet that society is composed of a people (collective) who have a cultural ambivalence to the use of military adventurism that obviously isn't considered tolerable on the continent.

[al Roumi]

[British] society is composed of a people (collective) who have a cultural ambivalence to the use of military adventurism that obviously isn't considered tolerable on the continent.

I think you have Tony Blair to thank for that. From a liberal/lefty stand point anyway, his arguments for interceding in Bosnia, then Sierra Leone are what set the scene for Afghanistan and then...Iraq. Don't you right wingers all salivate explosively when it comes to the notion of waging anyway?

[Fragony]

granted, but this is a representative democracy, just like the rest of western europe, so the political arena is ultimately the public arena.

nor would i buy the idea that people (individual) are bred for war, after all our military is tiny and largely invisible to society, and yet that society is composed of a people (collective) who have a cultural ambivalence to the use of military adventurism that obviously isn't considered tolerable on the continent.

Is that really so, we just don't talk about it on the mainland. France is much worse than the UK, is and will always remain the most brutal post WW2 Euro country.

[Furunculus]

I think you have Tony Blair to thank for that. From a liberal/lefty stand point anyway, his arguments for interceding in Bosnia, then Sierra Leone are what set the scene for Afghanistan and then...Iraq.

cart before horse, tony blair could get away with what he did BECAUSE british culture/society is as it is.

Don't you right wingers all salivate explosively when it comes to the notion of waging anyway?

as long as Britain chooses to be a security council member it has an obligation to enforce UN resolutions as part of a wider obligation to collective security. there are even legal norms such as R2P that encourage such activity.

[Furunculus]

Is that really so, we just don't talk about it on the mainland. France is much worse than the UK, is and will always remain the most brutal post WW2 Euro country.

our record is second to none:

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/main/index1.html

[Fragony]

our record is second to none:

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/main/index1.html

In the military sense perhaps, the French military seems to accept atrocity much more willingly as a fact of life. They don't care all that much as it's simply war,

[Strike For The South]

[SARCASM]American childern are hedonistic, narcassitic, and gluttonous

They are the fattest and stupidest in the south where the majority of Vuks Spartan/Ubermensch come from

I wish we had something as advanced as the meditrainian diet or the French love for high culture[/SARCASM]

I have read some ignorant and stupid things in my time but this may be the most ignorant and stupid of them all

Removed

[Centurion1]

i would argue that certain cultures are more apt to ways of war than others. and furthermore that certain individuals are superior for war. however, vuk is absolutely wrong to say that the western world (basically whose culture is the very essence of modern warfare) is incompetent in martial arts/

[Tellos Athenaios]

I think what Fragony means is that the French military (and the French prisons) has a certain reputation of ruthlessness.

[Fragony]

I don't think it's ignorant, sense of duty can be both military and civilian no? Seems like a valid point to me on why a country can get the edge over another. Vuk does seem to forget the insanily bloody history of Europe which as others hinted at, is always just under the surface. A German will have zero problems here, a German trying to have a normal conversation on WW2 is bound to get into trouble though, we haven't healed yet

[Strike For The South]

i would argue that certain cultures are more apt to ways of war than others. and furthermore that certain individuals are superior for war. however, vuk is absolutely wrong to say that the western world (basically whose culture is the very essence of modern warfare) is incompetent in martial arts/

I feel like we have a bunch of samuel huntingtons in the room, the entire world now follows the Western doctrine of total war. There is no clash of civilzatons

On an individuals level? sure but that still means jack all without training or supplies. The Japaneses were pretty tough ol boys but it didn't matter in the end

As for Africa being on the same level of Transylvania. That's just flat out wrong

But I would expect nothing less

[Centurion1]

for an example arabian culture is not good at modern western style warfare. a war doctrine which is undoubtedly best. the point that individuals can be better designed for war than others has a hell of a lot of relevance.

you know what else is flat out wrong using the term jap. dont its insulting and i do not want to hear it.