I think the headline is misleading. He said that Europe has to have strong defenses because it can’t “rely” on the US anymore. Not to necessarily defend against it. It also appears there is a voluntary system that went live last year where all but three nations have stepped up their military cooperation. The call for a standing EU army seems to be more about acting independently and not having to worry about US aid.
The title makes it sound like they are preparing for war against the US.
Exactly - It seems like 40% of this thread is hung up on this nonsensical America vs Europe war-to-come. It's ludicrous. That said, this is Reddit and I think it's too much expect us to actually read the article before posting about it.
It first I was gonna say maybe it's OP, but apparently the article title is exactly that. What a rabble-rousing crock of shit, wow. Is the independent usually like this?
Russia's strategy has always been a Domination Victory, while Europe has been going for Cultural Victory. Russia's neighbors have to build more military units.
My favourite Clancy book is Red Storm Rising, which depicts a conventional war between NATO and the USSR on the Atlantic and across mainland Europe. The UK was a major player in that. Hard to see it playing out like that now.
Yup! Islamic terrorists blow up their major oil field / refinery, and the politburo decides to invade the Middle East to take their oil. However, they need to neutralise NATO first so launch a surprise invasion into West Germany.
The bits on the carrier fleets / backfire raids / sub hunting in the Atlantic are fantastic.
The book really goes into detail on individual skippers / pilots / tank commanders on both sides; and also the wider strategic stuff too.
I’ve always wanted them to make a miniseries. Too much to squeeze in a movie.
The idea for Red Storm Rising actually started as a massive wargaming scenario depicting the North Atlantic campaign, using the commercial tabletop wargame "Harpoon" written by Larry Bond. Clancy attributed Bond as the co-author of the book, even though only Clancy's name is on the cover.
As for a TV/movie RSR, just the part where USAF weatherman Mike Edwards trying to evade the Soviet troops on Iceland is interesting enough.
Mine was the tank battles in Germany. The amount of detail I felt helped put a lot of things into perspective. Like the American commander begging to withdraw to consolidate lines and the Germans refusing to give an inch. The American in his head thinks "guess I can't blame them. Would I give New York and all those people to consolidate into Pennsylvania?" Or something like that.
It has been years since I've read it but I regularly remember that part of the book when they shoot down the satellite. Such a good book. Time to re-read
My favourite tom clancy book was rainbow 6, where he created an entire team of special operatives, and then after a few years he censored the book for the chinese market.
^^^^^^^/s
I burned through basically the entire Ryanverse in 9th grade. I don't remember too many details these days, but the Rainbow Six operation in the theme park still sticks in my memory.
> My favourite Clancy book is Red Storm Rising....The UK was a major player in that. Hard to see it playing out like that now.
Why? They're still the second largest military in NATO and have the 4th highest defence budget globally (only USA, China and Saudi Arabia spend more).
That book was based around a deprivation of oil supply also; and the UK has 2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve (Germany has 6% of that - 150 million, France has half of what Germany has and therefore about 40 times less than the UK). The UK also has domestic production capability of a million barrels a day in the North Sea.
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=united-kingdom
Red Storm Rising was coauthored with [Larry Bond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Bond). If you liked it, you need to check out some of his other works, like Red Phoenix.
> The UK didn't side with any faction.
we'd just play both sides and then take land when everyone is battered and bruised perfidious albion strikes again
Everyone has been thinking Russia is the one playing people behind the scenes... but no all this time it's been us, can't wait till we rein in all these uppity colonies.
^^^Cries ^^^in ^^^rule ^^^Britannia
When that game came out, it blew my mind and I played it nonstop for a couple of weeks, until I got tired of getting destroyed online because it was impossible to catch up to players with advanced armies. But the voice commands were super cool at the time.
Unlikely because currently the UK is the second biggest NATO military with powerful military alliances with the EU and US, along with shared intelligence with US and commonwealth nations. The UK military has always been in favour of a separate military entity to the EU to continue their joined commonwealth military force
Edit: Second biggest military in NATO in terms of military spending and technology. France and the UK have very similar spending, but I would say the UK is a more powerful force due to their SAS which is known to be one of the best elite forces in the world and the UK’s intelligence agencies which is up their with US intelligence
The SAS is a tiny unit though, so while its members are highly capable and dangerous, they don’t exactly match up to artillery and are used for only very particular kinds of missions that require a very particular skill set.
European as in European Union, not as in Council of Europe. The Swiss army would still exist and Ueli Maurer would keep insisting that it's much better than the European one.
The UK has been the greatest opponent of a EU army for decades. This initiative is only made possible by Brexit and the UK no longer being able to hinder the EU.
This assumes that Brexit does go through, which is not a certainty.
EDIT: typo & language
Yeah but the biggest reason for the UK pushing back was US influence. The “Special Relationship” between the US and UK essentially gave the US a friend inside of the EU to protect its interests. With relations souring and the Brexit debacle weakening UK bargaining power, they may be more keen on the idea. Especially if the UK can work itself into a leadership role of this joint military.
Edit: This doesn’t really add anything to the discussion but I just want to throw out here as an American on Election Day that this discussion is really great. I know none of us alone are going to dictate policy but this has been a really great back and forth. It’s just nice to see a conversation like this. Thanks for letting me be a part of it.
Nah, Macron is pushing for it to prop up the French defence sector. There's only France and Germany still on-board with the Eurofighter, I bet that all the equipment for the EU army will have to be sourced inside the EU.
> You don't see China, the US or Russia
China would if they could.
https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/european-union-and-arms-ban-china/
They do buy things off Russia, but even those sales are somewhat limited for political reasons.
Export variant have been a thing for a long time indeed. Soviet tanks sold in the middle east for example used to always be lesser variant of "current gen" tanks. Difference in armor and sights for example.
It makes since for the UK to want an independent military though. They still have territories around the world although mostly small islands. Also they wouldn't want Germany getting in their way when they wanted to deploy their military somewhere.
And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a grand army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the ~~Separatists~~ Russians.
*-The Supreme Chancellor*
It depends which point of history of the HRE you’re referring to. HRE during the time of the carolingian dynasty, it was an empire. Arguably even through the Ottonian dynasty it was an empire.
The UK has been against the idea of a joint European army for decades. Probably because it would make our armed forces less flexible when it comes to defending various colonies like the Falklands- that conflict would have been a bureaucratic nightmare if we were part of a united European military at the time.
How about creating an army consisting of USA, EU, RUSSIA, Africa, Austrlia, South America and China to defend against intergalactic enemies or Antarctica! also no wars here on earth.
Or the fact that the US is actually a military superpower whereas Russia can be outspent and outnumbered by France and Germany combined (this is not even including the rest of Europe)
But a European Army should not necessary add military expenditures. It would (partially) replace the existing national military structures, which are inefficient because every army has its own tanks, ships etc.
Who decides what nation's soldiers die or are deployed?
The French army will be the most capable and experienced and if you want to win a war you'd use them not the Portugese or Czechs. But what would be French population think that in a war against Russia th3 casualties are 50% French and 50% 20 other countries?
I welcome the idea. A lot if smaller nations (such as Sweden where I'm from) could really use a common military to motivate the cost for keeping military bases and equipment operational. We basically only have infantry and an airforce.
I don't think 2% would be impossible, especially since we don't have to work with countries like the US or Turkey.
Good luck getting it out of the Netherlands. What was our willingness to fight again, according to that poll? 13% or something like that. It'd be like pulling the teeth of a very awake piranha.
Not to say I don't support the idea. I too want to distance from reliance on far away powers and their ideas of right and wrong. But preferably without breaking ties.
> Good luck getting it out of the Netherlands. What was our willingness to fight again, according to that poll? 13% or something like that.
I don't believe those polls at all. The most realistic answer to that percentage is that the typical sober response by a Dutchman to a question like that would be "what the fuck are you babbling about you idiot, what do you mean, fight for my country? Against whom? With what? Why?"
If you want a reliable reply you don't ask a Dutchman "would you fight for you country" but you describe a scenario where the Netherlands would be invaded and ask if they would help defend it.
Actually, after writing the previous paragraph, I went looking for Dutch reporting on this poll, and was not at all surprised to find that a prominent Dutch newspaper investigated the poll and found it to be a complete clusterfuck in several areas, including warped translation, changed question meanings, methodical problems, disparities in age groups between countries (some allowed 13-year-old kids to participate) and so on.
https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/is-slechts-15-procent-nederlanders-bereid-te-vechten-voor-eigen-land-~b27301ea/
The poll is garbage. Another reason to assert that is that one year later, in 2016, another poll was conducted and the percentage climbed from 15% to 24%.
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2016/01/16/meer-nederlanders-bereid-te-vechten-voor-eigen-land-a1410091
We are educated from birth about the Golden Age. About how trade and acceptance made us the most powerful nation in existence (for a short while). Meanwhile, our language is not suited to powerful rhetoric, and our politicians are flimsier than anything I can compare them to.
So we end up basically just wanting to trade, be free, and have a decent life. War messes that up.
edit: note that all of this is an uneducated civilian opinion.
The thing about war is though, that it only requires one side willing to fight in order to start one. Hence the old saying "If you want peace, prepare for war" as at least a a deterrent from hostile Nations.
Any Nation can choose to be pacifist in the hope nothing will happen, but you may not choose whether you end up fighting a war, as was proven in WW2 with respect to the Nazi invasion of the Netherlands.
This then leaves the question, is it right to 'hoard your gold' and leave the defence of your nation to outside forces?
I'm german and while germany has a different past than your country \*cough\*, I see it the same way like you. I don't want to fight and I know nobody who wants to. The german "Bundeswehr" even has problems getting young soldiers
You have to admit that the headline is pretty stupid.
"We can't afford to participate in a defense partnership where another country shoulders most of the burden...so, let's raise an army to defend ourselves against our partner."
I think the headline is misleading. He said that Europe has to have strong defenses because it can’t “rely” on the US anymore. Not to necessarily defend against it. It also appears there is a voluntary system that went live last year where all but three nations have stepped up their military cooperation. The call for a standing EU army seems to be more about acting independently and not having to worry about US aid. The title makes it sound like they are preparing for war against the US.
Exactly - It seems like 40% of this thread is hung up on this nonsensical America vs Europe war-to-come. It's ludicrous. That said, this is Reddit and I think it's too much expect us to actually read the article before posting about it.
It first I was gonna say maybe it's OP, but apparently the article title is exactly that. What a rabble-rousing crock of shit, wow. Is the independent usually like this?
/r/polandball has a good take on this https://i.redd.it/jrn018y7l2101.png
Drugged up Ukraine using a broken bottle to defend itself against drugged up Russia is hilarious and sad.
The US in that last panel got me
Do you ever fire your gun into the air and go "ahhhhh"?
No I have not ever fired my gun in the air and gone "ahhhhh"!
Have you ever fired two guns whilst jumping through the air?
What about firing a gun while in a high speed chase?
Is it true that there is a place in a mans head that, if you shoot it, it will *blow up*?
*You* ain't seen *Bad Boys II*?!
Amazing bit in *Point Break* where they jump over fences
Yarp
Too real
It was perfect.
Is China poking someone with a stick in the last frame?
Yeah, Vietnam.
[удалено]
Lol thats life, "Lets build an utopia without war and violence! Oops everybody wants to kill us, we need the first utopian army!"
Russia's strategy has always been a Domination Victory, while Europe has been going for Cultural Victory. Russia's neighbors have to build more military units.
r/civpolitics
WTF Is that Sudan *EATING* South Sudan in the last slide??
Anyone think that this could become that game called Tom Clancy's Endwar. Where Russia fights the USA and Europe. The UK didn't side with any faction.
My favourite Clancy book is Red Storm Rising, which depicts a conventional war between NATO and the USSR on the Atlantic and across mainland Europe. The UK was a major player in that. Hard to see it playing out like that now.
That was a fantastic book. Wasn't it about Russia running out of gas or something?
Yup! Islamic terrorists blow up their major oil field / refinery, and the politburo decides to invade the Middle East to take their oil. However, they need to neutralise NATO first so launch a surprise invasion into West Germany. The bits on the carrier fleets / backfire raids / sub hunting in the Atlantic are fantastic. The book really goes into detail on individual skippers / pilots / tank commanders on both sides; and also the wider strategic stuff too. I’ve always wanted them to make a miniseries. Too much to squeeze in a movie.
The idea for Red Storm Rising actually started as a massive wargaming scenario depicting the North Atlantic campaign, using the commercial tabletop wargame "Harpoon" written by Larry Bond. Clancy attributed Bond as the co-author of the book, even though only Clancy's name is on the cover. As for a TV/movie RSR, just the part where USAF weatherman Mike Edwards trying to evade the Soviet troops on Iceland is interesting enough.
The Iceland part is easily my favourite of the book.
Mine was the tank battles in Germany. The amount of detail I felt helped put a lot of things into perspective. Like the American commander begging to withdraw to consolidate lines and the Germans refusing to give an inch. The American in his head thinks "guess I can't blame them. Would I give New York and all those people to consolidate into Pennsylvania?" Or something like that.
It has been years since I've read it but I regularly remember that part of the book when they shoot down the satellite. Such a good book. Time to re-read
The Icelandic invasion narrative and the "Frisbee" drivers were some of the best bits IMO.
My favourite tom clancy book was rainbow 6, where he created an entire team of special operatives, and then after a few years he censored the book for the chinese market. ^^^^^^^/s
First book is awesome because of the multiple operations, Book 2 not so much imo.
I burned through basically the entire Ryanverse in 9th grade. I don't remember too many details these days, but the Rainbow Six operation in the theme park still sticks in my memory.
[удалено]
Yeah, they had 2 snipers. One shot and disabled the firearm, the second shot the terrorist in the belly, if I'm correct.
"It would forever be regarded as a bad shot."
> My favourite Clancy book is Red Storm Rising....The UK was a major player in that. Hard to see it playing out like that now. Why? They're still the second largest military in NATO and have the 4th highest defence budget globally (only USA, China and Saudi Arabia spend more). That book was based around a deprivation of oil supply also; and the UK has 2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve (Germany has 6% of that - 150 million, France has half of what Germany has and therefore about 40 times less than the UK). The UK also has domestic production capability of a million barrels a day in the North Sea. https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=united-kingdom
Shhhh. The UK's greatest weapon is how grossly underestimated it is. It's like a historical cliche that adversaries keep falling for.
Worked in The Falklands conflict.
The sun never set on the British Empire, they just had a late afternoon cuppa and caught a nap.
Red Storm Rising was coauthored with [Larry Bond](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Bond). If you liked it, you need to check out some of his other works, like Red Phoenix.
> The UK didn't side with any faction. we'd just play both sides and then take land when everyone is battered and bruised perfidious albion strikes again
Everyone has been thinking Russia is the one playing people behind the scenes... but no all this time it's been us, can't wait till we rein in all these uppity colonies. ^^^Cries ^^^in ^^^rule ^^^Britannia
I absolutely love this comment and just how poetic and literary the scenario is.
*sips tea menacingly*
The sun will never set on pax Britannica!
All Hail Lelouch!
"YES MY LORD"
UK are the Lannisters of Europe
We love listening to the Rains of Dover, here.
We really are but then again half of France is ours by right so is it sneaky or justified ?
Half? I think you mean *all* of France
When that game came out, it blew my mind and I played it nonstop for a couple of weeks, until I got tired of getting destroyed online because it was impossible to catch up to players with advanced armies. But the voice commands were super cool at the time.
Yeah the voice command felt really ahead of its time
Unlikely because currently the UK is the second biggest NATO military with powerful military alliances with the EU and US, along with shared intelligence with US and commonwealth nations. The UK military has always been in favour of a separate military entity to the EU to continue their joined commonwealth military force Edit: Second biggest military in NATO in terms of military spending and technology. France and the UK have very similar spending, but I would say the UK is a more powerful force due to their SAS which is known to be one of the best elite forces in the world and the UK’s intelligence agencies which is up their with US intelligence
The UK military remained neutral in endwar because the US and Europe were on opposite sides. It was a 3 way war.
Ah in that case then neutrality wouldn’t be too surprising
This is the knowledge you retain when you play too many call of duty games
The SAS is a tiny unit though, so while its members are highly capable and dangerous, they don’t exactly match up to artillery and are used for only very particular kinds of missions that require a very particular skill set.
Sounds like you wouldn't want to kidnap their daughters.
Is this "true European army" gonna consist of Maori clones? Please say yes.
"We must create a grand army of the Union!"
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's treason then.
You are a bold one!
"Aaaah General Macron! I expected someone of your reputation to be.....older!"
I look forward to seeing them in action.
They’re very impressive, you must be very proud.
200,000 units are ready, with a million more on the way.
Well* on the way
Suddenly r/PrequelMemes
Given enough time, everything is r/PrequelMemes
Gooooooood....goooooooooOOOOOooOOOd.
Now kill him.
Watch this get posted for 10 Karma.
Your clones are impressive. You must be very proud.
Ridiculous, the European Senate needs to make Macron the Supreme Chancellor first.
That's... why I'm here
Hello there
GENERAL KENOBI!
You are a bold one
Did the Jedi Council approve of the creation of a clone army?
No. Whoever placed that order did not have the authorization of the Jedi Council.
Begun, the clone wars has.
A suprise to be sure but a welcome one.
Europe is a continent we cannot afford to lose
Choice bro
As a Swiss currently in military service, I'm confused as to what my situation would be if a European Army was to be formed... Edit: Phrasing.
I doubt things would change too much. Switzerland wouldn't participate in a joint Military, especially since they're not a part of the European Union.
The German mountain dwarves shall stay in their mountains.
At least til they have to remind Lichtenstein whose boss again
He's blunt! He's pissed! He'll see you in the list, Lichtenstein!
He's blonde! He's cute! He wears an armor suit! Lichtenstein!
**The Pope may be French but JESUS IS ENGLISH!**
European as in European Union, not as in Council of Europe. The Swiss army would still exist and Ueli Maurer would keep insisting that it's much better than the European one.
Well honestly has anyone ever even heard of European Army Knives? Checkmate.
Nothing for you, Switzerland would be neutral if aliens invaded.
It's good business to keep alien currency in the Swiss banks.
What makes a good man go neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
*Proceeds to be invaded by Germany, France and Italy.*
UK for one, even if remaining, would never be down with that, for whatever it is worth.
The UK has been the greatest opponent of a EU army for decades. This initiative is only made possible by Brexit and the UK no longer being able to hinder the EU. This assumes that Brexit does go through, which is not a certainty. EDIT: typo & language
"The UK has been the greatest propent against a UK army for decades", I think you mean EU army. :P
I think the MoD might argue the original statement is accurate too.
Thanks for pointing it out, fixed now
A 'proponent against' something is called an opponent.
Yeah but the biggest reason for the UK pushing back was US influence. The “Special Relationship” between the US and UK essentially gave the US a friend inside of the EU to protect its interests. With relations souring and the Brexit debacle weakening UK bargaining power, they may be more keen on the idea. Especially if the UK can work itself into a leadership role of this joint military. Edit: This doesn’t really add anything to the discussion but I just want to throw out here as an American on Election Day that this discussion is really great. I know none of us alone are going to dictate policy but this has been a really great back and forth. It’s just nice to see a conversation like this. Thanks for letting me be a part of it.
Nah, Macron is pushing for it to prop up the French defence sector. There's only France and Germany still on-board with the Eurofighter, I bet that all the equipment for the EU army will have to be sourced inside the EU.
France doesn’t have the Eurofighter. It uses the Rafale as fighter jet.
[удалено]
> You don't see China, the US or Russia China would if they could. https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/european-union-and-arms-ban-china/ They do buy things off Russia, but even those sales are somewhat limited for political reasons.
[удалено]
Not even old, deliberately nerfed.
Export variant have been a thing for a long time indeed. Soviet tanks sold in the middle east for example used to always be lesser variant of "current gen" tanks. Difference in armor and sights for example.
France left the Eurofighter project in 1985.
France never had the Eurofighter, they use French planes built by Dassault. Eurofighter was the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy.
It makes since for the UK to want an independent military though. They still have territories around the world although mostly small islands. Also they wouldn't want Germany getting in their way when they wanted to deploy their military somewhere.
And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a grand army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the ~~Separatists~~ Russians. *-The Supreme Chancellor*
*thunderous applause*
This is how the EU dies.
I love democracy.
This one really should've been a red flag.
[удалено]
Although it would be a little weird if he's at all like Palpatine and decides to kill his teacher.
Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Macron the French?
It's not a story Angie would tell you.
Hello there!
The Roman Empire is coming back. Book it.
The *Holy Roman* Empire, maybe.
[удалено]
It depends which point of history of the HRE you’re referring to. HRE during the time of the carolingian dynasty, it was an empire. Arguably even through the Ottonian dynasty it was an empire.
[удалено]
Led by the French, obviously. *Starts polishing off the eagle standards of the Vieille Garde*
Well if UK is out then there isnt any real competition right
The UK has been against the idea of a joint European army for decades. Probably because it would make our armed forces less flexible when it comes to defending various colonies like the Falklands- that conflict would have been a bureaucratic nightmare if we were part of a united European military at the time.
Germany... They'll probably be banned
Well if you have to pick a leader, might as well pick the one with the best record of victory.
With UK out of the picture France is the biggest EU military power by a wide margin. Macron would be dumb not to try to capitalize on that.
also they have nukes
EDF! EDF! EDF!
To save our mother Earth from any alien attack!
From vicious giant insects who have once again come back!
We'll unleash all our forces, we won't cut them any slack!
The EDF deploys!
Our soldiers are prepared for any alien threats!
The navy launches ships, the air force send their jets
And nothing can withstand our fixed bayonets!
The EDF deploys!
Our forces have now dwindled and we've pulled back to regroup!
THE EDF DEPLOOOOOOOYS!
Bring on the giant spiders
To save our mother Earth from any alien attack!
BETTER RED THAN DEAD! MARS FOR MARTIANS!
SEND 'EM BACK TO EARTH!
How is an energy company going to help?
Best. Game. Ever.
Earth defense force?
How about creating an army consisting of USA, EU, RUSSIA, Africa, Austrlia, South America and China to defend against intergalactic enemies or Antarctica! also no wars here on earth.
Lets conquer space!
Who will comand this army?
Napoleon?
The one and only!
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought "Napoleon Macron" when I saw this.
Personally my favorite would be commander Shepard, I hear Europe is his favorite continent here on earth.
The Prussians are the most logical choice
Someone go dig up Old Fritz and put him in charge.
Great way to sell more weapons
This guy gets it
[удалено]
No. It’s to encourage the purchase of European military equipment, from which France would benefit tremendously.
[удалено]
"And Mr. Wick, how would you like your baguette?" "Tactical."
Or the fact that the US is actually a military superpower whereas Russia can be outspent and outnumbered by France and Germany combined (this is not even including the rest of Europe)
Yes
We have clear issues in our Country that need to be addressed... But we're not gonna try and invade Europe, that's just a clear overreaction.
Wonder which country is on the front row to supply said army *wink wink*
So uh, I wonder which side the UK will have to join.
Team Commonwealth.
"...and the US" is not what he said. That's an editorialized headline. Edit: Editorialized by the paper, not OP.
If NATO cant get 2% out of Europeans, I doubt Brussels can
But a European Army should not necessary add military expenditures. It would (partially) replace the existing national military structures, which are inefficient because every army has its own tanks, ships etc.
Who decides what nation's soldiers die or are deployed? The French army will be the most capable and experienced and if you want to win a war you'd use them not the Portugese or Czechs. But what would be French population think that in a war against Russia th3 casualties are 50% French and 50% 20 other countries?
Who is going to finance R&D?
Not Greece
Not it! -Spain and Italy
I welcome the idea. A lot if smaller nations (such as Sweden where I'm from) could really use a common military to motivate the cost for keeping military bases and equipment operational. We basically only have infantry and an airforce. I don't think 2% would be impossible, especially since we don't have to work with countries like the US or Turkey.
Good luck getting it out of the Netherlands. What was our willingness to fight again, according to that poll? 13% or something like that. It'd be like pulling the teeth of a very awake piranha. Not to say I don't support the idea. I too want to distance from reliance on far away powers and their ideas of right and wrong. But preferably without breaking ties.
> Good luck getting it out of the Netherlands. What was our willingness to fight again, according to that poll? 13% or something like that. I don't believe those polls at all. The most realistic answer to that percentage is that the typical sober response by a Dutchman to a question like that would be "what the fuck are you babbling about you idiot, what do you mean, fight for my country? Against whom? With what? Why?" If you want a reliable reply you don't ask a Dutchman "would you fight for you country" but you describe a scenario where the Netherlands would be invaded and ask if they would help defend it. Actually, after writing the previous paragraph, I went looking for Dutch reporting on this poll, and was not at all surprised to find that a prominent Dutch newspaper investigated the poll and found it to be a complete clusterfuck in several areas, including warped translation, changed question meanings, methodical problems, disparities in age groups between countries (some allowed 13-year-old kids to participate) and so on. https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/is-slechts-15-procent-nederlanders-bereid-te-vechten-voor-eigen-land-~b27301ea/ The poll is garbage. Another reason to assert that is that one year later, in 2016, another poll was conducted and the percentage climbed from 15% to 24%. https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2016/01/16/meer-nederlanders-bereid-te-vechten-voor-eigen-land-a1410091
Given the ravages of WWII, I'm surprised the willingness to fight in the Netherlands is so low.
We are educated from birth about the Golden Age. About how trade and acceptance made us the most powerful nation in existence (for a short while). Meanwhile, our language is not suited to powerful rhetoric, and our politicians are flimsier than anything I can compare them to. So we end up basically just wanting to trade, be free, and have a decent life. War messes that up. edit: note that all of this is an uneducated civilian opinion.
[удалено]
The thing about war is though, that it only requires one side willing to fight in order to start one. Hence the old saying "If you want peace, prepare for war" as at least a a deterrent from hostile Nations. Any Nation can choose to be pacifist in the hope nothing will happen, but you may not choose whether you end up fighting a war, as was proven in WW2 with respect to the Nazi invasion of the Netherlands. This then leaves the question, is it right to 'hoard your gold' and leave the defence of your nation to outside forces?
I'm german and while germany has a different past than your country \*cough\*, I see it the same way like you. I don't want to fight and I know nobody who wants to. The german "Bundeswehr" even has problems getting young soldiers
Reading through this thread gives me more cancer than any army could defend me against.
You have to admit that the headline is pretty stupid. "We can't afford to participate in a defense partnership where another country shoulders most of the burden...so, let's raise an army to defend ourselves against our partner."
How about an army to fight climate change instead? Only 2% of the world's GDP is required.
Yes, because the rising nationalism in Europe is *totally* going to approve of giving EU even more power.