 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
So many in the EU want to put forward the common defence policy. To enhance it that is.
And they're talking about increasing the GDP that goes to defence spending.
Greece is propably the only one member state which already fulfills any potential future quota since its defence spending is double that of the average rest of the EU sum due to the "danger from the east".
Of course the US has been breathing long enough down european necks asking them to increase their defence spending and "share the burden".
Votre opinion sur le sujet? (watcha think?)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Richelieu
|
|
Gatineau
Dec 2001
time: 00:27
|
|
I don't know.
In the light of recent events it seems to me that the better your military, the more inclined you are to use it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gsmoove23
How far away is the idea of a unified european military. Seems like a waste to have a number of separate militaries when none of the european countries are ever going to attack each other, hopefully.  Doing this would increase the effectiveness of any military expenditure wouldn't it? |
Yep, definately. We spend still less money than the US, but we even spend it in the wrong ways.
A common foreign/defense/security policy would solve a lot of prolems, however, the devil is in the details (as the recent month have shown).
Since it seems impossible today to get all EU states together on these subjects, many in Germany and France advocate again the idea of a "core Europe". This means those states who agree begin to realise common policies, others can join later. This was succesfully done with several EU projects, however, in the fields of security it is more sensible, because a power block like France/Germany could cause fears of domination in smaller EU states.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
on the road to a one nation sort of EU defense would probably be the last step. serious defense that is, not UN security force defense. but decisive largescale armies.
don't u guys have other hurdles to get over first?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
You wouldn't need federal taxation if the amount of money being spent on a national military were simply diverted to a combined military. This is not only sensible for nations who no longer have the need to defend themselves from another but a cost effective step, especially for Germany which seems to have effectively given up on the idea of having a military that can actually defend itself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gsmoove23
|
|
There is federal taxation within the individual nations, with an agreement between nations you can have joint investments, why not. It doesn't mean that people aren't being represented.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
And to be even more specific...
mms://media.astralwerks.tv/astralwerks_tv/open/basementjaxx/wheres_your_head_at_100.wmv
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-04-2003 21:24
But I concur, the EU should place part of their combined GDP towards military/force protection measures. 
|