Should NATO be folded in favor of a European Union unified command?

[Beskar]

The American politicians of the Post-War years understood the character of their nation, and they understood that the US needed to be forced to do what was morally right to protect the European democracies, because otherwise you wouldn't.

I'm certainly not averse to a US drawdown vs a European uparming, but it's helpful for US troops to be stationed in places like the UK and Germany for cultural reasons, and the reverse is also true. Just today I was thinking what a good idea it would be to have a Romanian, Polish, or Bulgarian garrison in the UK to reduce racism against those countries and to harmonise the various NATO militarises more.

That would be a lot of garrisons in the country.. or we could have an EU one, and we export/import eachothers soldiers into our respective countries for the same reasons you just stated.

[Brenus]

“NATO should be disbanded.” Agree. NATO being a USA tools, I don’t see why Europeans should foot the bills and sent troops to reinforced USA expansion war(s) in Afghanistan, Iraq or others. If the US is happy to send young men and women dying to protect or expend their market, fine. Why we should finance it or contribute to as it serves no purpose in European Countries point of view?
If European Countries needs defence there are enough Military Factories, knowledge and experience in this side of the pound, and just leave the USA deal with their Military-Industrial Complex. Following the USA left European countries believing in “Missile Shield” and “Special Forces” things when we need tanks, air-planes, boats, submarines, aircraft carriers with planes on it and boots.

[ICantSpellDawg]

“NATO should be disbanded.” Agree. NATO being a USA tools, I don’t see why Europeans should foot the bills and sent troops to reinforced USA expansion war(s) in Afghanistan, Iraq or others. If the US is happy to send young men and women dying to protect or expend their market, fine. Why we should finance it or contribute to as it serves no purpose in European Countries point of view?
If European Countries needs defence there are enough Military Factories, knowledge and experience in this side of the pound, and just leave the USA deal with their Military-Industrial Complex. Following the USA left European countries believing in “Missile Shield” and “Special Forces” things when we need tanks, air-planes, boats, submarines, aircraft carriers with planes on it and boots.

You guys foot the bills? We supplement your national defense saving you untold oodles.

[Husar]

Pretty much what Brenus said. The German army is being sized down to turn it into some small airmobile force that can be used all around the world to pretend that we're important because we can support conflicts like Afghanistan better because due to this one single conflict everybody thought it would be the only kind of conflict we get from now on. Turns out we may have to defend our Russian friends from US-led aggression instead and a light airmobile force won't do in that scenario.

You guys foot the bills? We supplement your national defense saving you untold oodles.

During the cold war perhaps, now you stress our budgets by begging us to support your adventures to secure your oil empire.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Pretty much what Brenus said. The German army is being sized down to turn it into some small airmobile force that can be used all around the world to pretend that we're important because we can support conflicts like Afghanistan better because due to this one single conflict everybody thought it would be the only kind of conflict we get from now on. Turns out we may have to defend our Russian friends from US-led aggression instead and a light airmobile force won't do in that scenario.



During the cold war perhaps, now you stress our budgets by begging us to support your adventures to secure your oil empire.

Defend your Russian friends? You are a nut. Wherever you are getting your news from; get your money back.

But anything that causes Germany to foot the bill for its own protection, I am in favor of it. Your action in Afghanistan has helped keep your military from atrophying. Also, a NATO ally was attacked by the government of Afghanistan, lest you remember.

[Husar]

Also, a NATO ally was attacked by the government of Afghanistan, lest you remember.

Wherever you are getting your news from; get your money back.

[Kagemusha]

Well, if you'd asked me two months ago I'd have said NATO should encompass as many nations as possible (including Russia) in order to counter China, but since then things have changed a bit. Europe is not a theater America should be spending superpower bucks at. We've got too much to pay for at home to focus on the entire world, and NATO isn't helping us with China, so I say phase it out. Once Europeans have to defend their own interests and pay for their own superpower-scaled military industrial complex it'll be interesting to see if they also develop a rash of chickenhawks to go with it.

Like i said, this is not a spending issue. EU countries combined already spend more then China and Russia combined and i cant see Europe ever starting to compete with USA in that department, at least i hope i will be long dead when such day would come.

[Kagemusha]

If the EU already spends more than China and Russia combined, and it still relies on NATO logistics and NATO frameworks to operate in a theoretical global war, then I shudder to imagine the money the EU would have to spend to out-and-out replace NATO. Have fun with that. Maybe we can spend the savings on real universal healthcare?

EU is not a singularity, so lot of European spending is used on overlapping factors. But i agree and i think so does many others. Western hemisphere should really think again what they are using their military spending. You guys still spend almost three times what EU countries, more then four times what China and about seven times what Russia does and what you get for that money?

[rvg]

...You guys still spend almost three times what EU countries, more then four times what China and about seven times what Russia does and what you get for that money?

I think we're about to find out.

[Kagemusha]

Its a strategic singularity or its a strategic liability. I refer to a whole, singular Europe on purpose.

'
There is no such thing you are referring into. NATO is the factual strategic singularity when it comes to most European security and that is the choice of both USA and European countries. EU is nothing more then partial monetary Union and otherwise a cooperative organism for individual European countries with plans of possible expansion with different expectations for different countries. Let us stick with this reality we live in my friend.

I think we're about to find out.

I am leaning into direction that we arent and sincerely hope so as well.

[Kagemusha]

Its a changing reality. America has been pulling out of Europe for years. If Europe had acted quicker maybe Russia wouldn't be bullying your borders.

Speculation. Of course US have been pulling their troops from Europe as you have to even send your National Guards units to act as regulars to crisis zones in order to have enough boots in the ground. Now we again get back to the spending issues of Western hemisphere.

[rvg]

If China really wanted to expand, they would have already done so. There is no NATO there to stop them. If they went after Laos or Vietnam, I doubt many would care. Besides, China already broke some teeth in Vietnam once. As for going against India, India can handle itself just fine imho. The rest of Chinese disputes are maritime, and their navy as of today isn't strong enough to challenge us over, say, Taiwan.

[Husar]

Well, if you'd asked me two months ago I'd have said NATO should encompass as many nations as possible (including Russia) in order to counter China, but since then things have changed a bit. Europe is not a theater America should be spending superpower bucks at. We've got too much to pay for at home to focus on the entire world, and NATO isn't helping us with China, so I say phase it out. Once Europeans have to defend their own interests and pay for their own superpower-scaled military industrial complex it'll be interesting to see if they also develop a rash of chickenhawks to go with it.

Funny guy, we already have such a thing, it may just not be as apparent as it is in the US because we do not talk about it as much.

http://www.uk.peacelink.org/gmd/articles/art_27.html

I mean we're the continent that invented the World War, of course we have an abundance of military manufacturers. Or had, before they turned into a few megacompanies. I'm not sure whether scale is a problem, the only thing stopping us from churning out another 600 Leopard 2 and selling them to our best friends in Saudi Arabia is apparently politics, although I think that one is not finally decided yet.

And there are still countless smaller companies all over Europe that design their own gear or specialize on upgrading existing gear etc. Poland upgrade their own T-72s, I think the Czech design their own tanks etc. The bigger nations often each have a company for everything if it isn't part of a megacorporation yet.

Heckler & Koch, FN Herstal and countless premium small arms manufacturers such as Mauser, Walther and so on are/were European and even the mighty USA use their designs. The M60 used the British L7 gun, the Abrams uses the Rheinmetall L44, your infantry uses the FN Minimi and so on and on. I'm not sure why exactly one would think we are lacking in terms of arms manufacturing capabilites. Quite a few people in Europe think we have way too many and export way too many death machines to conflict zones and elsewhere.