Europe as joke

Er, BUFDRVR, you have seen the ToEs of the new nations haven't you
(silly question, I'd damn well hope you were better briefed than me)?

Some of them are stretched to provide more than a battalion for ops,
very little professional military due to the soviet style national
service, and their air forces tend to be in meltdown. If you start to
push out the more traditional members of NATO, then the US will have
to shoulder even more of the burden than currently, and it's the air
components that will really be hurting.

Not Smart


Peter,
From a US perspective, we would much rather have an increased burden
in an alliance that can actually function. Right now, with France, Belgium and
Germany NATO is impotent and unless the policy of unanimity is dropped in favor
of some kind of majority vote, it'll remain so. The US understands very clearly
that several NATO nations would rather be in a pan-European alliance than NATO,
what are we to do if they choose this avenue? The general view of the situation
among US military (including leadership) is, if Germany wants to quit NATO,
great, we'll go elsewhere.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On or about 25 Oct 2003 17:43:14 GMT, (BUFDRVR)
allegedly uttered:

Peter,
From a US perspective, we would much rather have an increased burden
in an alliance that can actually function. Right now, with France, Belgium and
Germany NATO is impotent and unless the policy of unanimity is dropped in favor
of some kind of majority vote, it'll remain so. The US understands very clearly
that several NATO nations would rather be in a pan-European alliance than NATO,
what are we to do if they choose this avenue? The general view of the situation
among US military (including leadership) is, if Germany wants to quit NATO,
great, we'll go elsewhere.

Well, put, but the US is among the nations (as is the UK) opposing the
majority vote, for the same reasons we'll never voluntarily give up
our UNSC veto - we want to be able to stop things *we* don't like.
Short of the other NATO nations saying that we alone can keep our veto
it's not going to improve, and I don't see that happening.

For what it's worth I fully support the move towards deploying forces
further east. There is zero point in having several bases in Germany
in this day and age, and keeping large forces abroad is horribly
expensive. I would suggest providing 1st line bases around the
periphery of the NATO area, fully up to scratch with at least some
munitions in place, but with a minimal manning outside the host
nation. then when necessary forces can easily surge forwards. Of
course there would need to be very regular exercises to keep the
integration of the forces together (IMO the best part of NATO these
days is the relative ease that multinational forces can be put
together - we've been training an equipping together for 50 years).

Then more US and UK troops can be based at home, far cheaper and
giving a better personal life for the forces.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Peter Kemp
blurted out:

For what it's worth I fully support the move towards deploying forces
further east. There is zero point in having several bases in Germany
in this day and age, and keeping large forces abroad is horribly
expensive. ...

Then more US and UK troops can be based at home, far cheaper and
giving a better personal life for the forces.

I'm in total agreement with you on this...perhaps this will come to
pass.

Juvat

Well, put, but the US is among the nations (as is the UK) opposing the
majority vote

Well, perhaps you should say US politicians as most senior military leaders
feel the current policy renders the alliance impotent.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On or about 26 Oct 2003 02:05:10 GMT, (BUFDRVR)
allegedly uttered:

Well, put, but the US is among the nations (as is the UK) opposing the
majority vote

Well, perhaps you should say US politicians as most senior military leaders
feel the current policy renders the alliance impotent.

Indeed, and they'd be right, but they're not saying that the alliance
should move to the majority system. Until they and the rest of the
alliance are prepared to change, arguing about it is futile.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

Indeed, and they'd be right, but they're not saying that the alliance
should move to the majority system. Until they and the rest of the
alliance are prepared to change, arguing about it is futile.


I didn't know we were arguing. Additionally as a point of fact, NATO military
leaders are "arguing" about it themselves and according to a some, this is the
first step to the politicians "arguing" about it.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On 26 Oct 2003 02:05:10 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

Well, put, but the US is among the nations (as is the UK) opposing the
majority vote

Well, perhaps you should say US politicians as most senior military leaders
feel the current policy renders the alliance impotent.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Not only impotent, but to most Americans, repulsive. I believe that the
average US Citizen would much rather have (at least a trade) relationship
with the PRC than with Europe. The Europeans seem to be unable to
understand the depths of US feeling on this issue, and they continue
to expectorate the situation with their stupid comments.

Al Minyard

On 25 Oct 2003 17:43:14 GMT, BUFDRVR wrote:
Er, BUFDRVR, you have seen the ToEs of the new nations haven't you
(silly question, I'd damn well hope you were better briefed than me)?

Some of them are stretched to provide more than a battalion for ops,
very little professional military due to the soviet style national
service, and their air forces tend to be in meltdown. If you start to
push out the more traditional members of NATO, then the US will have
to shoulder even more of the burden than currently, and it's the air
components that will really be hurting.

Not Smart


Peter,
From a US perspective, we would much rather have an increased burden
in an alliance that can actually function. Right now, with France, Belgium and
Germany NATO is impotent

By "impotent" I presume you mean "not a puppet of the USA".

and unless the policy of unanimity is dropped in favor
of some kind of majority vote, it'll remain so. The US understands very clearly
that several NATO nations would rather be in a pan-European alliance than NATO,

That's not true. Several NATO nations would like to be in a
pan-European alliance *as well as* NATO.

what are we to do if they choose this avenue? The general view of the situation
among US military (including leadership) is, if Germany wants to quit NATO,

However, no informed commentator believes Germany will leave NATO.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

By "impotent" I presume you mean "not a puppet of the USA".

No you obnoxious loser I mean unable to act. Expanding to 19 nations spread
from the west side of the Atlantic to the Baltics means its going to be
*impossible* to get every nation to agree to any action.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On 26 Oct 2003 02:07:26 GMT, BUFDRVR wrote:
By "impotent" I presume you mean "not a puppet of the USA".

No you obnoxious loser

Well, you know what they say about people who resort to personal
abuse during an argument...

I mean unable to act. Expanding to 19 nations spread
from the west side of the Atlantic to the Baltics means its going to be
*impossible* to get every nation to agree to any action.

If unanimity isn't possible, that doesn't prevent individual NATO
members form acting, either individually or together -- there are
plenty of examples of this. So you are wrong, they are not unable to
act.

I would point out that the USA is hardly likely to want to change
NATO from unanimity to majority voting, since all except 2 or 3
(depending how you count) members of NATO are European.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).