European Army (EU managed) - good idea?

Well, we already have EUFOR and that military force has done some excellent work in the former Yugoslavian states. There is certainly a place for a combined European military force - in maintaining borders, peace-keeping missions etc. I don't think we need a full-scale European army though - it would be completely impractical. If the EU members find it impossible to agree on foreign policy they would hardly be able to agree on how to deploy a shared army. I do feel that there is a place for a transeuropean rapid response force or for inter-country specialist military units which would work alongside the individual nations' armies.

no

the most advanced n well trained military force in the world = U.S.

britain no longer has the best armed forces, we need to wake up n smell the cocoa

should the eu build its own army?

1) what abt the nato army?

the nato army is an international one, it's jurisdiction does not lie solely for the purposes of the european union. also, european law is above national law of the member states whilst international treaties r not, so it is likely that other non-european countries are not going to be happy sending their army for the purposes of the eu, 'ur not respecting our promises, why should we respect ur whims?'

2) the whole concept of the eu is that it functions as a quasi federal state, i.e. it sorta represents a country on it's own that's capable of fragmenting into individual states if it was better served in that respect. if there r no armed forces dedicated to protecting the other non military interest of the eu, who else would? the numbers of the member states fluctuate, it is not constant, therefore it is not likely that when the time calls for it, the eu will be as adequately prepared as it would've been had it it's own standing army

3) a collective army would be much easier on the military budget of the individual member states whilst ensuring a much stronger army with minimal member state's resources

4) it is much harder for certain states to exercise dominance over the army as it would be too fragmented to function for the selfish purposes of a single member state, but elements of the army will still be loyal to their motherland, but at the same time serving the european union

reasons against an eu army:

1) remember the wehrmacht?

2) funding, n the veto system, who gets to decide where to send the army

3) military secrets

we have to remember the US is an army of inordinate superiority over any other standing forces in the world, the second, china is a long way off, n even then china, purely by numbers alone far outstrip any member state's individual army, not to mention china's invested loads in military technology over the last decade or two, n we r not certain what their developments r because of the reluctance of their state to make privy such info;

I remember well the 1991 Gulf War, the French in their wisdom deployed an aircraft carrier. Only small draw back was it didn't have any aircraft on it. Their ground force deployment was the French Foreign Legion and they spent a long time finding a map with directions from Turkey.

Don't think the Americans will be overly happy as it would be the end of NATO. It took the EU decades to decide the shape of a banana, the chances of sending an international army in the same direction seem remote.

It's a bad idea. An EU force is just an excuse to spend even less on a Western European military. I've heard the planners are thinking about a force of 100,000.

France actually has the second largest force, 36,000 troops, working outside it's country.

i don't think its a good idea and it will never happen. in fact, as more and more countries join the EU it becomes less likely. as more countries join, the EU gains different cultures and different perspectives. for example if Turkey join then you will have a predominantly muslim nation in the same organisation as the UK who are fighting islamic nations. so there is bound to be conflict, it is impossible to unite so many different cultures under one banner. NATO joins nations with similar interests which is why it works, but an EU army would not work.

also the people of european nations wouldn't stand for it. as a british person myself, i don't think we should sacrifice complete control of our armed forces after we had to fight off hitler, the spanish armada and the french to retain it in the first place.

Hm if im correct the EU has a rotating presidency for member states right? Im thinking that the president's own national troops would get biased treatment or something. Not a very prospect for states as sovereign as Europe(ean states). Maybe as the countries start losing their sovereignity and become more like one big "EU", but right no, no.

I once listened to some Ist World War veterans during the 1940s and each one agreed that French officered,German NCOs and British soldiers could take on the world!I suppose it has been on the cards for over 60 years!But the timing of this outburst!Well!Is it to take the pressure off those incompetents Brown and Darling?

For you British I would not agree to that.

Plus once you bring countries like France into military alliances, nothing ever gets done. And when it does, the Rules Of Engagement are so strict you might as well not bring a weapon. Look at what our glorious allies are doing in Afghanistan while the UK, Canada, and US actually fight the Taliban.

i wonder how long it will be before the EU eagle and swastika starts to appear? the troops fitted with jack boots.......Britain must be completely mad to get mixed up with this blatant Nazi organisation. they are as corrupt as they can be. and about as cowardly as they come. what support did they give us when the Falklands were invaded? they ran away and hid until it was all over the cowardly bunch of fools. and even worse! the French..'our so called alys' sold the Argies the missiles to fire at our soldiers during!! the conflict. Britain has a dangerously short memory when it comes to the EU. they are destroying Britain with the help of the policies of all three main British political parties....

NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have you seen the fallout from some of the decisions they finally got round to making, after changing it a million times to appease everyone?

They're hardly able to agree on something like human rights/farming subsidies/anything at all. Do you really think they'd be able to run an army worthy of the name?

Good question though!

p.s. Jammin7000 - you're a typical brainwashed spam, aren't you?