Europe and the Rest of the World - A Military Analysis

[Subotan]

Cool was that before 1950 Subotan if it was before 1950 then there was no Northern team as such, however there were two teams from two rival associations, but both claimed to be Ireland and drew players from the entire Island. FIFA had to intervene to sort it out eventually for the Brazil World Cup in 1950.

It was before 1950, but I honestly can't remember any such details, as the photo is back home and I'm at university. I'll dig it out once I go back home and get back to you :)

I really hope that I am wrong Frags (for the sake of both the US and Europe), but I am not so sure. What if Europe would be suddenly attacked on the weekend without warning? How long would it take their military to mobilize and meet the threat? Against a determined attack (and esp if several large cities have been nuked), how long before their resolve breaks.

Not that much different compared to Americans. You just think you'll last longer because you have guns everywhere.

You don't understand Americans. When we were attacked on our own soil we were shocked because that is not supposed to happen in America, and instead of abhorring war, everyone in America was making ready for it. You punch us and you may take us by surprise, but we will see red and we will tear off your head. You cannot abhor war the way that Western Europeans do and still have an effective military. Yes, you have to know that war sucks, but you have to ready, able, and WILLING at any moment to go to war.

When the 7/7 bombings hit London (in fact when any terrorist bombing has hit any part of the UK including from the IRA), there's always been a sense of "we had it coming", thanks to our close association with American foreign policy.

If your country is attacked, you cannot have questions about right and wrong (is it right to go to war or not? Maybe we can appease them), you have to have worked that out in advance, you have to stand for yourself, and you have to counterattack fervently.

good god I can't believe I'm hearing this. This sounds like a parody of a line from Starship Troopers.

If you hate war and think of it as the most horrible thing in the world that must be avoided at all costs (instead of as one of the most horrible things that some times is necessary and that you need to be ready for...a much wiser approach imho), will you try to avoid it at ALL costs? Will you give up your freedom or settle into a disadvantageous peace that will make your citizens the slaves of another?

Who is going to attack us? The European Union binds us together and suppresses the easiest way to form divisions and conflict, nationalism. Russia is a wheezing power, who's primary threat is shutting off oil (Equivalent to trying to drown a man in your own blood) and China doesn't care about the EU. If anyone else attacked us our small professional armed forces would kerb-stomp them. Manufacturing fear of a non-existent enemy is completely abhorrent.

Look how the European's love of appeasement and avoidance of war messed things up with WWII. Making big webs of alliances and prizing peace over freedom has never stopped wars. It has only postponed them, and made it that when war does come, it will be much bigger than before.

Wow, just wow. I am absolutely stunned that you are comparing the interbellum peace in Europe to the post-war/communist peace in Europe. The two are linked solely in that they took place on the same continent. The entire structures of the two different peaces are so different, economically, socially, politically, historically... It just blows my mind that you think such a comparison is possible.

WWI happened because people thought that their ridiculous webs of alliances would keep them safe and they let their guard down. WWII happened because the Europeans would do anything to avoid another World War...and because of that they caused one. You cannot control the bad guy and what he does, you can only control yourself and what you do.

No it didn't! NATIONALISM was the root cause of the Second World War! The failure of the League of Nations and European countries to suppress caused the Second World War.

If more countries had the attitude of sitting on their porch with a shotty (yes, a creative hyperbole), and were more willing to use military force against someone who transgressed against them, you would not have wars.

Give me one example where a state of constant militarisation has prevented war.

I would like to think that it is not true, but I think a careful study of history shows that it is true.

Europe (at least the parts in the Union) is a post-conflict continent. A war between the member states is absolutely unthinkable.

Wrong, that apocalyptic nonesense was invented to scare children. A nuclear war would NOT mean the end of humanity. Heck, we got things a lot better than nukes now. They are only mentioned as a scare tactic. (And to be honest, it literally may help our war effort if the likes of New York City, Chicago, and Miami are nuked. I don't think I would mind that too much. :P)

Please show me your sources indicating that civilisation would not vanish entirely and permanently from this Earth if there was ever a nuclear war.

You see, being prepared for war and starting wars are completely different things. I am always ready for a fight, and because of that 99% of guys don't want to pick a fight with. Guess what? I have NEVER started a fight in my life. Wars don't happen when there is mutual fear. When you remove that factor, bad people will take advantage or weak good people. That is the truth. You can be unarmed, good, and taken advantage of. You can be armed, bad, and take advantage of others, or you can be the third option: Armed, good, and not taken advantage of. You seem to think that to be ready (and even willing) for a war means that you have to start one. The guys who can get away with never being in a fight are the ones who are always ready and willing for one. Mutual fear breeds mutual respect. You cannot have love and good will without respect. You cannot have lasting respect without some degree of fear. It is a brute justice, but what keeps one from cracking the head of another is the fear that he could get his own head cracked.

An individual =! society =! international relations. This is really a pretty simple concept to grasp.

lol, first of all, don't get me started on France

No no no, I'm going to get you started on France. What about France? Do you have a Wikileak detailing plans by France to annex the left bank of the Rhine?

. Second of all, war is only being prevented temporarily through the military readiness of countries outside of Europe. That will not last forever.

No, peace within Europe is permanently prevented through co-operation and an abhorrence of nationalism in all EU member states.

Israel is a state that was founded by violence and terrorism, and is now the constant victim of violence and terrorism. It actually is a very good example. If it was not for the military readiness of Israel, it would NOT exist! Every Jew in Israel would be beheaded! They survive only because of their military readiness.

That has not been the state of affairs in Israel since at the very latest the 1990s.

What you are describing is sitting on someone else's porch, and not your own. It is something that both the US, but esp Russia has been guilty of in the last few decades. I am not supporting such a policy, and never argued that America is perfect. America has consistently bungled foreign policy and has done some thing that, quite frankly, I think is shaming to our country. That however has nothing to do with the discussion of military readiness, and a war ready populace. (Again, where America is not perfect, but far better than their anorexic, scarf wearing counterparts across the Atlantic.

Right, because isolationism did absolutely nothing to cause the Second World War. Nothing at all.