Europe and the Rest of the World - A Military Analysis

**Husar** · 01-28-2011, 01:26

Originally Posted by Centurion1

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.

**Centurion1** · 01-28-2011, 01:27

why are you directing this at me.

**Vuk** · 01-28-2011, 01:57

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** · 01-28-2011, 02:08

Originally Posted by 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?

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.

**Major Robert Dump** · 01-28-2011, 03:22

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.

**Subotan** · 01-28-2011, 10:30

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."

**Quid** · 01-28-2011, 11:08

Originally Posted by Subotan

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

**Vuk** · 01-28-2011, 01:42

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by Husar

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** · 01-28-2011, 01:50

Originally Posted by Vuk

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** · 01-28-2011, 01:55

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

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