Europe as joke

In message , AIA
writes
Money to save USA from Troubles in Iraq? No Thanks we have more serious way
to spend our money... For example to build a common European defence to
definitively kill NATO.

No way. Who do you think would be at the point?

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Money to save USA from Troubles in Iraq? No Thanks we have more serious way
to spend our money... For example to build a common European defence to
definitively kill NATO.

For fifty years, the U.S. poured men & money into Europe. If you have
not created a credible military force in half a century, when will you
ever manage it?


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote:

: For fifty years, the U.S. poured men & money into Europe. If you have
: not created a credible military force in half a century, when will you
: ever manage it?

About now, apparently. Decades of pleas from US
presidents to achieve a stronger European defence
have failed to achieve what the hostile behaviour
of this US administration towards its former allies
has produced: A serious drive to come towards an
European defence. Actively sabotaged from Washington,
of course, but one can't have everything...

Emmanuel Gustin

On 25 Oct 2003 14:10:32 GMT, "Emmanuel.Gustin" wrote:

Cub Driver wrote:

: For fifty years, the U.S. poured men & money into Europe. If you have
: not created a credible military force in half a century, when will you
: ever manage it?

About now, apparently. Decades of pleas from US
presidents to achieve a stronger European defence
have failed to achieve what the hostile behaviour
of this US administration towards its former allies
has produced: A serious drive to come towards an
European defence. Actively sabotaged from Washington,
of course, but one can't have everything...

Emmanuel Gustin

He said "credible". Forces made up of different systems/units
from a collection of small, ineffective forces is not "credible",
especially when directed by committees of committees.

Al Minyard

On or about Sat, 25 Oct 2003 05:03:04 -0400, Cub Driver
allegedly uttered:



Money to save USA from Troubles in Iraq? No Thanks we have more serious way
to spend our money... For example to build a common European defence to
definitively kill NATO.

For fifty years, the U.S. poured men & money into Europe. If you have
not created a credible military force in half a century, when will you
ever manage it?

If there are no creditable forces in the European parts of NATO, then
why is the US asking for their troops, and indeed assigning two of the
four zones of Iraq to European command?

A quarter of the forces in OIF were British, and even some of the
USMC was under UK command, despite the statements post Mogadishu that
no US troops would ever be under foreign command again.

Consistency please, consistency.
---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

In article ,
Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote:

If there are no creditable forces in the European parts of NATO, then
why is the US asking for their troops, and indeed assigning two of the
four zones of Iraq to European command?

To try and get them to shut the hell up about how awful we are for
ousting Hussein...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Money to save USA from Troubles in Iraq? No Thanks we have more serious way
to spend our money... For example to build a common European defence to
definitively kill NATO.

You won't kill NATO, we'll just move east and southeast where people still
remember what its like to live without freedom. A NATO without France
(observers??), Germany and Belgium would become, once again, a credible
military-political alliance.


BUFDRVR

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

*ROTFL* Also Mr Blair supports a common european defence policy and also Mr
Berlusconi... They don't want another HQ in opposition to NATO like France
but they support France and Germany in the decision to make a Eropean
defence. It is more than we need for now to start to mining NATO's future...
Poland and other east europe countries are excluded from this process
because the have not enough money and technology to stay on the walk on this
project...

On or about 24 Oct 2003 22:30:01 GMT, (BUFDRVR)
allegedly uttered:

Money to save USA from Troubles in Iraq? No Thanks we have more serious way
to spend our money... For example to build a common European defence to
definitively kill NATO.

You won't kill NATO, we'll just move east and southeast where people still
remember what its like to live without freedom. A NATO without France
(observers??), Germany and Belgium would become, once again, a credible
military-political alliance.

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 Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

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"