1) Basically all of western Europe is in NATO, meaning none of the countries there neighbour any potential aggressor. Russia would first need to barrel through Poland in order to get to Germany and France, for example.
2) Most of european militaries are a complete joke that wouldn't even slow down the enemy.
3) All of them count on US to do the fighting.
4) Despite the sad state of the military, it still manages to eat up massive amounts of money every year as well as features one of the most corrupt sectors in almost any country.
With these facts in mind, is there even a point for a western European country to have any army whatsoever? Their armies are incapable of doing anything useful (except maybe pretending they're doing something in Afghanistan and syria so that the US can pretend it's not there alone), they are irrelevant when it comes to combatting foreign aggression, they are not threatened by any of its neighbours and they have the US to do any fighting for them should Russia try getting there through Poland. So why not ditch the army entirely? Just dissolve all of it and use the money more constructively, send all the troops into the private sector to fuel the economy, and sell all the left over hardware for a quick buck.
Alternatively, they could increase military spending to actually make their army useful for something, at which point it might be worth keeping, but they don't seem too keen on doing that.
>unironically shilling (((Euroforce)))
>implying no NATO countries have ever been at odds before
>implying national defense doesn't matter
>implying foreign military interests don't matter
>implying Greece should give a shit what happens in England, ever, with no binding defense pacts
Where do you think you are?
>>unironically shilling (((Euroforce)))
But I'm suggesting the exact opposite
>implying no NATO countries have ever been at odds before
At odds, sure, but not at war.
>implying national defense doesn't matter
The army is incapable of providing that already, so the point is moot
>implying foreign military interests don't matter
The army is in no state to pursue any foreign interests except doing PR for the US in shitholes
>implying Greece should give a shit what happens in England, ever, with no binding defense pacts
What are you even on about?
If the US is incapable of stopping the enemy, then so are the european armies. I mean no matter how I look at it, it feels like the following scenario:
>Shopkeeper is afraid of a nearby gang attacking him
>10 yo Timmy has a stick and offers to protect the store from the gang
>shopkeeper gives Timmy $10 every day for protecting his store from the gang
>times get tough, shopkeeper has little money, needs to cut costs
>gets suggested he should stop paying Timmy for "protection" or at least have him help out at the store
>shopkeeper replies than nobody would protect him from the gang then
>muh Russiam boogeyman
Think you look towards the wrong enemy.
>with vacuum tubes from the 60s.
>not using EMP resistant vacuum tubes
I would trust the european troops more than american "troops".
Just where do massive idiots like OP come from nowadays?
>„just disband the air force guys”
>„just disband the army guys”
Are they honestly this retarded or are they doing it intentionally?
>direct linking to Russia today
why don't you counter my argument, then? There is no point to having an army that is entirely useless.
You see, if you are hungry and you have no food around, you could always just try to get food AT ALL COST instead of just lying down and starve to death. Same goes for the army.
because if you don't spend your required 2% we are gonna look the other way while you get rolled like Ukraine
you can't live without food but you can live without the army.
>implying the US would allow anybody to infringe upon its sphere of influence
The US would likely defend its european vassals even if they demanded US paid them for the privilege. Europe is the cornerstone of US global hegemony
>you can't live without food but you can live without the army.
only untill the moment when everybody notices you dont have an army
No nation can exist too long without an army.
This. Until every nation (and I mean EVERY) becomes pacifist, armies will be needed.
>The US would likely defend its european vassals even if they demanded US paid them for the privilege
Poland literally offered to pay for the US to pay for the deployment of a tank brigade a few months ago. Europe doesn't give us oil so why should we give a fuck about you guys? All's we need is one good excuse to dissolve NATO and we are out of there
Offered to pay for the deployment*
And this. Once the US pulls out of here for whatever reason, we are on our own. Raise and equip your army in the possesion of this knowledge.
valid if you are not in what happens to be the largest military alliance in the world headed by the largest military in the world.
>Europe doesn't give us oil so why should we give a fuck about you guys?
To maintain world hegemony and oversee the destruction of the white race, obviously. The only reason US gets to pull its shit on the international stage is because it has its european vassals agree to it.
>All's we need is one good excuse to dissolve NATO and we are out of there
Please do. Then there might be some hope of european countries getting some sovereignity back, at least as long as they didn't double down on EU instead.
>Once the US pulls out of here for whatever reason, we are on our own.
Which might also be fifty years down the line. Fifty years of spending on something that was entirely unneeded. Once US leaves, sure, build up the army, but until then, keeping this half-dead mockery of an army is just a waste of money.
On a semi-related note, I've wondered why Ukraine can't join NATO until I looked into it.
>not a democracy
>piss poor economy
>if you can say they even have any sort of economy
>Ukraine is at war with separatists
>meaning they are not in control of their territories
I almost stared a new thread on this, but I found my answer and, it makes sense for western Europe. Any Streloks care to elaborate on the opposite side of the spectrum here?
what are you even talking about? Ukraine is on a fast track to joining - it literally changed its constitution last month in order to make it easier to join NATO and EU
>why should we give a fuck about you guys?
You don't. America's only purpose in Europe is to protect the jews.
>There is no point to having an army that is entirely useless.
You don't get it.
The European Army will be used to fight nationalists rebellions within the EU.
I'm not talking about the cancer of the fucking European Army that hopefully will never happen. I'm talking about how fucking ridiculous it is to be spending billions on something that is entirely useless in its current state. Either increase the funding and have an actual army capable of defending the nation, or don't have anything at all and use the money in a more productive fashion.
> Russia would first need to barrel through Poland
I Wish we weren't in NATO and had russian IRBM's stationed instead, that'd at least be a guarantee of an alliance being serious unlike what we have with muttmerica where they threaten of ending any and all alliances over law that would prohibit kikes from retconning holocauster cinematic universe to have Poles as the main perpetrators.
So I can't really imagine ZOG doing anything for Poland's sake in case of a real conflict, be it le Russian Boogeyman or t*rkroaches.
>only untill the moment when everybody notices you dont have an army
Only third worlders engage in actual wars now, and only between each other, the big brained move is to send completely unarmed women and children in fighting age and prime health as refugees or immigrants, and then either wait for them to bring their families over and democratically take over or if you're particularly impatient you send them arms shipments later through minority unions, kind of like ZUP does in Poland.
>So I can't really imagine ZOG doing anything for Poland's sake
ZOG would never allow Russia to grab a prize as great as Poland, so it'd indeed help. Against russia, that is. Were it, for example, enrichment hordes, there would suddenly be a million reasons for why USA cannot help. But that's a different scenario altogether.
>Most of european militaries are a complete joke that wouldn't even slow down the enemy.
Until you mathematically prove this, then your thread is as relevant as a pajeet in india taking a shit behind an alley
>ZOG would never allow Russia to grab a prize as great as Poland
Anglokikes did it twice and murdered Patton over ever suggesting help, how are things different now?
USA would probably nuke Poland instead to halt the Russian advance, and offer condolences and maybe some 15 dollar medals.
In countries bound by European Human Rights Charter military isn't allowed to shoot invaters as killing anyone for any reason is prohibited, so they'd need to make them surrender or use non-lethal measures
Alright, let's take my country's army as an example then:
>25k soldiers total, 3k reservists
>those form 2 brigades and one artillery regiment, rest is logistics, military engineers, etc.
>yearly budget 3 billion USD
I find it rather difficult to see how such a force would even be capable of defending the border or provide any meaningful resistance to a serious enemy, yet I see plenty of ways 3 billion dollars per year could be used effectively
>ZOG would never allow Russia to grab a prize as great as Poland
Who said that would be done by russia? If they conquer us and Belarus (already done) polans technically are gonna be steamrolled by the dozen of a newborn "people's republics" with russcucks smirking at the background. Let's see NATO dealing with that.
>you can't live without food but you can live without the army.
Not if Russia is your neighbor.
>Russia is your neighbor.
they took back Crimea because ukrainian subhumans got lucky after fall of soviet union and got more territory than they deserve or can do anything useful with.
A fire alarm is completely useless until you have a fire.
It's almost like these people think Russia isn't controlled by Jews the same way and they're just playing both sides.
>1) Basically all of western Europe is in NATO, meaning none of the countries there neighbour any potential aggressor. Russia would first need to barrel through Poland in order to get to Germany and France, for example.
That's basically the biggest reason Europe needs its own standing army. France using NATO as an excuse to bomb and then import Sandniggers aside, if the US pulled out of Europe, while they'd be "safe" insomuch that as you said they're all allies, they'd be basically defenseless should Russia or really even a new caliphate decide to capitulate on this fact. It would be a gradual change, but you'd see Russia start bullying western Europe via military power to let them expand their businesses further west.
>2) Most of european militaries are a complete joke that wouldn't even slow down the enemy.
France bombs Muslims almost as much as the US does, and for a while the UK wasn't too far behind so I'd hardly call them incompetent insofar as combat roles go. That being said, most of their incompetence is because the US is basically subsidizing European militaries with their very presence in Europe. If the US pulled out of Europe, most of those socialist safety nets would collapse because Europe would have to actually take their militaries seriously, or they'd be defenseless. Imagine if the US completely pulled out of Europe tomorrow- either everyone would have to take their military seriously and there'd be a LOT of infighting between European nations over who's spending how much on how many, or no one would increase their military spending and it would be very, very bad for the when a less scrupulous nation took advantage of that fact.
>4) Despite the sad state of the military, it still manages to eat up massive amounts of money every year as well as features one of the most corrupt sectors in almost any country.
Because there hasn't been a real war in years, yet they all receive funding as if they were at war. Again, at least US troops pulling out would force them to reconsider how they're spending their military funds.
I don't trust the American "troops" to even be useful in Europe either. Much in the same way little Kim just has to use his artillery and the entire US presence in South Korea will be wiped out in a day, it would take very little for Russia or a Caliphate to do the same (or very similar in Europe anyways). It's the presence of those troops that's the real threat, not the numbers though. The presence of those troops is basically an "if you attack them, you are attacking us as well" threat.
>keeping this half-dead mockery of an army is just a waste of money.
Soldiers don't just grow on trees, anon. You have to cultivate a proper soldier for months if not years
so they can get shot in the head by some farmer with a plinking rifle. Heavily-intensive boot camp just gets them into the minimal operating standard needed to shovel them wherever you need them and have them not fall apart when the artillery starts flying.
OP, this thinking is exactly WHY the European militaries are in shambles. Because those before you said the same thing when you actually had a functional military. I can't wrap my head around how you don't understand this.
Are you claiming your military that got stripped of any leadership by King nigger and is now full of trannies and women is serious? The US has been a joke for as long as any of us have been alive. It just likes bombing little brown people in far off lands to feel like it's a big man. The UK isn't much better but no western military is serious, it's too pozzed for that.
And then they fall apart any way because most of them are thugs and niggers who would rather rape than win a war.
importing rapefugees is France's sovereign choice and it'll continue to do so with or without NATO. Without an army, they at least wouldn't bomb shitholes to faciliate the influx.
>if the US pulled out of Europe
not gonna happen without a serious SHTF scenario. US pulling out of NATO would literally mean the end of the US empire, and kikes rely on US empire with everything. Until someone quite literally overthrows the american government (or bombs america into a lifeless wasteland), USA will not pull out of NATO.
Should this scenario actually happen, I expect the rest of NATO to quickly create their own armies afterwards.
>France bombs Muslims almost as much as the US does
Not really; they're played up in the media so that Frenchies can pretend they're still a power to be reckoned with and the US can say it's not there alone, but their contributions to bombing ISIS, for example, was negligible, as was Britain's. Besides, this is bombing sandniggers that have no real way of shooting back we're talking about – if the enemy was actually competent and well-equiped, France couldn't afford to do this shit.
>If the US pulled out of Europe
>either everyone would have to take their military seriously
Yeah, that's what I kind of expect. They'd be forced to take the military seriously and turn it into a fighting force. Good for them. But until then, why waste billions on an "army" that cannot be taken seriously by any serious opponent?
So you agree it's a waste of money, at present time? I am all for having an army, provided it is actually good for something. If it's not good for anything, then either increase the funding and make it useful (something few countries in Europe seem willing to do) or cut off the funding entirely and use the money in some better way.
>OP, this thinking is exactly WHY the European militaries are in shambles. Because those before you said the same thing when you actually had a functional military.
Those before me actually had a functional army at the start; something useful. I'm left with some half-aborted monstrosity demanding billions each year and providing exactly nothing.
>At odds, sure, but not at war.
Reminder that when Germany unified in 1990 half of Europe and almost everyone of their neighbors shit their pants and were against it, because Bundeswehr+NVA were some serious DAKKA and nobody gave a shit that West Germany was part of (((NATO))).
>But until then, why waste billions on an "army" that cannot be taken seriously by any serious opponent?
>Those before me actually had a functional army at the start; something useful. I'm left with some half-aborted monstrosity demanding billions each year and providing exactly nothing.
>instead of rebuilding the army to a functional state he wants it gone
I think your style of thinking is the cause of your problem.
>Are you claiming your military that got stripped of any leadership by King nigger and is now full of trannies and women is serious?
Fuck no. I'm claiming that its presence itself is a deterrent. See >>653260
>And then they fall apart any way because most of them are thugs and niggers who would rather rape than win a war.
I was referring to European militaries in that post. I assume in the UK, Germany, France, etc. they have something resembling boot camp and don't just go "here's a uniform, you're part of the military now!"
>not gonna happen without a serious SHTF scenario.
The US government is a house of cards. I'm not saying it's likely but I am saying it's a possibility (I'd even say it's a strong possibility) and Europe would be in a bad situation if it did. It would NOT be "US pulls out, X moves in" situation, but it's not hard to imagine a slow US withdrawal from Europe would be followed up by internal fighting and countries like Russia using military pressure to get that sweet, sweet oil contract or railroad or business office with X or Y. It would start small, say Poland giving a favorable contract with Russia for some mine or plot of land, but it would end much bigger over the course of a decade if Europe (as a whole) didn't get their shit together. I know I'm using Russia as an example, but that's only because Russia is military-minded, really you could use Turkey or Saudi Arabia or even one of the more militaristic European countries as the example and it would still work. If European countries have no defensive spending whatsoever, it might be too late by the time those countries realize what's on their doorstep and they'd be left with a quarter-assed defense instead of a half-assed one.
>France doesn't have military
Tell that to their dozens of military vocational schools (I think there's 16 in Western Africa alone), munitions stockpiles, and troops that actually receive training. The frogs do a lot of shit wrong, but maintaining a standing army is not one of them. They're pozzed as much as any other western army, but their army could at least turn an invasion into a war instead of a blood bath.
>So you agree it's a waste of money, at present time?
I agree that it's a waste of money at present time, but it's for the same reason that a flare gun when hiking, or an extra box of ammo you don't need, or those MREs hidden in your closet are a waste of time. It's better to have something and not need it, even if it's inefficient with all the bells and whistles, rather than need it and not have it.
Perhaps I should expand on the "if you are attacking them you are attacking us" thing a bit, actually. Consider that international waters are largely protected by the US Navy. Obviously there's still pirates in Africa, but most international waters are safe. The US Naval presence is not concentrated in any one region, and it can in fact be quickly destroyed by any country that gave half a shit to do so whether via ocean mines, long-range artillery, or just ramming a cargo ship into the side of a naval vessel. It's not that any small group of US naval vessels are an actual threat, it's that intentionally and maliciously destroying any one US Naval vessel will result in the redirection of a partial or full US Naval fleet and Navy Airforce down on an individual. Even that might not be a legitimate threat depending on the country, but it's enough of a nuisance that any involved country would rather not slap the bull. If in a dystopian future let's say Turkey decided to invade Greece and killed US troops stationed there, they would be invoking the US to go to war with them, but also potentially any US allies that the US bullies into joining the war effort.
I said it like a dozen times already that increasing the funding is fine, but if the countries in question refuse to do so, then cutting it entirely is still better than the current situation.
>It would start small, say Poland giving a favorable contract with Russia for some mine or plot of land, but it would end much bigger over the course of a decade if Europe (as a whole) didn't get their shit together. I know I'm using Russia as an example, but that's only because Russia is military-minded, really you could use Turkey or Saudi Arabia or even one of the more militaristic European countries as the example and it would still work.
But these things are already happening with Chinese and Jewish companies, without any military pressure needed. By the time Russia started pressing for contracts, it would be muscling out chinks and kikes rather than actual whites.
>it might be too late by the time those countries realize what's on their doorstep and they'd be left with a quarter-assed defense instead of a half-assed one.
It doesn't take that long to create an efficient army from nothing. Look at how quick Hitler was, and he needed to bring his country out of an economic quagmire and hide shit from the entente along the way.
>I agree that it's a waste of money at present time, but it's for the same reason that a flare gun when hiking, or an extra box of ammo you don't need, or those MREs hidden in your closet are a waste of time.
Those things do not continuously swallow a big chunk of your budget; there is no negative to actually having them around. The issue isn't having the army (even though it's useless), but having to PAY the army billions each year, when you could use those billions in an actually useful manner instead. Would you be willing to rent a flaregun every day for $10 when you know the munition provided is faulty and will not work and when you don't plan to go hiking this year?
Wasn't Hitler's military mostly made up of veterans up until around the last year or two of WWII? That's hardly comparable (without even going into the collapsing smoke and mirrors exhibition that was NEETSoc Germany).
>Those things do not continuously swallow a big chunk of your budget
>Big chunk of your budget
As compared to what? Doesn't your government spend roughly 40% of its GDP? That's fucking huge. US Government spending as a percentage of GDP is roughly 36% of our GDP, but health care, pensions, debt, and education which could all be cut considerably make up like half of that spending. 5% of our GDP is our military compared to a simple 1.2%.
Sorry for the triple post, I really should consolidate it into one post, but the only way you're going to convince me that your 1.19% figure isn't the best use of that money is if you're going to say to leave it in the hands of Czech citizens and tell them to go buy a gun or something rather than waste it on some inefficient government bureaucracy.
You forget that even 1% of GDP is a massive maount of money. For example, diverting all of it to education would solve all our current (massive, since everything is underfunded) problems in that area and likely still leave a billion more to spend elsewhere.
Who the fuck are you kidding? Throwing money at a school full of niggers is not going to solve shit. There are massive issues with the education system from all sides and no amount of money will fix that. It's an ideological problem which can only be fixed through a lack of resources bringing reality into play.
>Throwing money at a school full of niggers is not going to solve shit
I understand that this might be a culture shock for you, but my country isn't the UK and we don't have schools full of niggers.
>There are massive issues with the education system from all sides and no amount of money will fix that.
Our main problem is that the teachers are underpaid and can easily get paid more even in low skill professions, so now there are too few teachers.
>It's an ideological problem
We don't have that, though, at least save for gender studies etc. in shit colleges. The rest of our education system is entirely free of pozz.
I should also add that the whole measuring by GDP is fairly stupid when you get a much better idea by comparing how much of total spending goes where. This year, 4.5% of the entire budget will be going to the army.
>Slavs aren't niggers
>We don't have a problem if you ignore the problems
>Teachers are underpaid
You sound like the most bitch basic retard possible. Same shit in every country.
Teachers are underpaid because they are bad at their job. People who fail to be a writer become an English teacher, people who fail at sports become sports teachers. The saying goes "Those who can do, those who can't teach". They're glorified babysitters designed to get women away from being mothers and into jewish sweat shops.
>diverting all of it to education would solve all our current (massive, since everything is underfunded) problems in that area and likely still leave a billion more to spend elsewhere.
Most teachers are not underpaid, they're unionized which eats up a portion of their pay. The Russian system and (old) American system got things right in that teachers aren't supposed to make much money, however they get reimbursed in non-monetary forms such as having dinner with students' families or being given some of the harvest.
>Wasn't Hitler's military mostly made up of veterans up until around the last year or two of WWII?
No, WW1 ended in 1919 and WW2 started in 1939, there were 20 years between that. Even the youngest Veterans from WW1 were reaching their 40s at that point.
This means you had a lot of Veterans in the Officers Corps, but the common Wehrmacht Soldier was a child during WW1.
>The issue isn't having the army (even though it's useless), but having to PAY the army billions each year, when you could use those billions in an actually useful manner instead.
Governments around the world waste ten times as much money under shittly labels like "promotion of culture", which in the end boils down to nothing but using Art and Education for political Propaganda.
If you are looking for wasted funds that could be spend better, the military of your country is the wrong place.
>thinks he knows anything about my country
My country has been going through a massive labour shortage for the past few years, meaning there is a shortage of people everywhere, meaning private sector is raising wages everywhere, meaning a fucking assembly line worker has a comparable paycheck to a teacher, as well as a big entry bonus. The pay of teachers (and other state employees) did not copy this trend at the same pace, meaning the teachers literally are underpaid. As for the rest, maybe stop projecting your country's shittiness on others – not every place is as shit as the UK. In fact, most of them aren't.
This year's "record increase" in education budget (which hopes to solve these issues) was around 30 billion CZK. Army spending this year will be 66 billion CZK.
>Governments around the world waste ten times as much money under shittly labels like "promotion of culture", which in the end boils down to nothing but using Art and Education for political Propaganda. If you are looking for wasted funds that could be spend better, the military of your country is the wrong place.
I more or less agree, but just because the funds are wasted on worse things doesn't mean that they aren't wasted here as well.
You live in goblinistan. How many ways can they teach you to shit in the corner and to squat?
If the teachers pay hasn't risen then there is no shortage of teachers. Pay increases with demand. If it's not demanded it's not risen. But again you admit problems and deny they exist at the same time. So maybe you're right, the Czech education system is fucked. It makes people as stupid as you Goblin-kun.
>They spend more on the army than teaching us to finger paint on our hovel walls.
Of course they do. How else will you get enough stones to throw until one hits the target? Stones aren't cheap.
>You live in goblinistan.
<Bong thinks he of all people can shittalk other countries
>Pay increases with demand
Which is exactly why there's a discussion of raising the wages, you dummy. See, state sector doesn't work like the private sector, and to increase the wages, you need to actually have the government approve it.
>Goblin wants to shit talk an Aryan
Probably Jewish. Other wise would have been genocided by the commie kikes
ITT: Czechmonkey from cuckchan has no idea how much money are required for continuous supply of a modern military and thinks leaving your nation unprotected is OK because dude who cares lmao we can rely on others.
Retards like OP are never in their entire lives ever going to do anything more important than waste oxygen and produce feces
Forgot to turn in the VPN, "no airforce"-fag?
Throwing money at schools won't solve problems.
In fact, you should defund schools so only kids who are determined to learn can study under competent teachers.
>The army is incapable of providing that already, so the point is moot
Do you know why Catalonia isn't independent? No, it's not because of bulshit philosophical legitimacy arguments and it's not even because they don't have an army that could win in a symmetric war. It's because Spain could just waltz in and enforce whatever they wanted at virtually no cost. I guarantee you if there was a threat of civil/guerilla war, they'd think long and hard before going in.
What do you think will happen when some eurocrat decides that your country is "endangering western values" at a time when about any force can just come in and do whatever the fuck they want?
>My country has been going through a massive labour shortage for the past few years, meaning there is a shortage of people everywhere, meaning private sector is raising wages everywhere
Sounds like you either need private sector schooling or you have a saturation of useless teachers while other industries are suffering. Has it occurred to you that public education is a farce and parents or even a god damn community center could probably do a better job educating children/preparing them for the workforce?
>See, state sector doesn't work like the private sector, and to increase the wages, you need to actually have the government approve it.
And clearly your teachers aren't demanding it/quitting for those higher-paying jobs, so clearly (at least to me and probably others) either they're fucking useless or it's a non-issue. Just because pay is up doesn't mean prices are up too, but if they are, then these teachers, if they're truly suffering, need to tell people they'll fuck off if not. You only need like 10-16 teachers per 1,000 adults in a population though, so clearly there's not a shortage if these teachers are too afraid to walk away. In America, education is mostly handled at the state or city level, so I'm not wrapping my head around how this is an issue since different regional governments will have different education budgets.
Ukraine can't join for strategic reasons. Imagine if Canada signed the Warsaw pact. That's what this looks like to Russia, aided by the fact that they were promised by the US after the fall of the Berlin wall that east germany would be the easternmost and last country to join NATO in return for not standing in the way of german reunification. That informal promise was not kept, leading them to be a bit on edge about the encroaching NATO.
Armies need time and money to be effective. They're like insurance policies. If you wnat a really good one, it takes decades, as you have to build an esprit de corps and remember lessons learned elsewhere.
Europe, if all of the EUs militaries are combined, has the largest standing army by manpower. Sure, the equipment is not always up to date and the logistics would be a nightmare, but its just like economical warfare - united, we're the single biggest market on the planet and can practically make the rules that everyone else has to play by. That the EU turned in to such a corrupt shitshow is annoying, but the basic idea is very sound.
All those beautiful Mi24s got scrapped in favor of the NH90… SAD!
I know that this simplifies things massively and that there are advantages to a new platform, especially in the maintenance department, but the Mi24 was and is a damn good multirole helicopter platform.
no one needs to disable US Navy hulls when your incompetent crews steer them in fornt of cargo ships.
sorry, had to do it to ya.
Hitler wasn't hiding shit, he was actively pushing for a declaration of war from france. He was frustrated with their brit-led appeasement as he needed the war so he could stop the reparation payments and ignore the mounting debt due to his expensive infrastructure projects.
Stop applying US metrics to the EU. No Teachers union, techers here are under different rules like almost anything.
This is retarded, robotization will mean more and more academics are needed in order to keep welfare numbers down. That can only happen by pushing a significant amount of lower class up, which means they need to be educated in MINT - and you need schools for that. MINT teachers are gonna be expensive.
Finally, on topic: The most conservative and no bullshit nation on this planet was Prussia. They were an army that happened to have acquired a country. Their culture was exactly what 90% of you /pol/tards whack off to. Now fuck off and leave my board.
>This is retarded
Population numbers must be reduced, those too stupid to seek out development or have a family to rely upon are expendable.
>Europe is the cornerstone of US global hegemony
No, the USA is the cornerstone of US global hegemony.
Europe was the cage for the USSR
The USSR is now just Russia, a dying country filled with druggies and even more mutt immigrants than the West has.
Thus, the US doesn’t particularly need to cage in Russia since they are not a threat at a global level.
They are, however still a regional threat.
A very desperate regional power.
Ukraine is/was basically the tipping point.
It’s very clear now that Americans don’t give a shit what happens in Europe.
I give it ten years until Europe becomes another world war free for all.
Then the US will get to take on this century of immigrants from Europe.
It will be amazing, watching all those britcuck “lol so funny smart” youtubers desperately claw there way onto the shores of “redneck” America as their EU cities burn.
Thanks to the internet you’ll get to see the cowards flee in real time.
I hope they get bullied or shot for being britcucks.
I’d hate for them to establish themselves as another (((white))) fifth estate like the Jews did.
I don't understand this level of smug, America seems to be a more dire position than Europe is tbh.
>No, the USA is the cornerstone of US global hegemony.
Leave Europe then, mutts.
Yurop must become mutted
Because that anon you're replying to is a kike and needs to be burned alive.
All right /k/, here are my two cents on the whole EU-army thing.
In theory it's a great idea. Hear me the fuck out though.
Why is it a great idea?
Many European nations are facing the same problems right now: Threat of Russian invasion and impotence on a global scale. Take Poland as an example. The Poland and France as examples. The Poles are very much afraid of getting invaded by Russia in order to connect Königsberg with Russia through Belarus as a first stage of attacking into eastern Europe.
France on the other hand is seeking to strengthen their seat on the strategic stage of the world and their role in their former colonies. Both might seem like goals in opposite directions at first.
One nation needs an army that can fight off a full scale invasion, the other is looking to bomb some huts in the deserts of Africa.
However what if both nations were to work together? France's military industry is on the brink of collapse. Their last gun manufacturer closed down and their (extremely advanced) missile industry is collapsing as we speak. Why? The French government and neighboring nations haven't really had a reason to buy large quantities of those kinds of weapons. You don't need ATGMs to win against unarmoured opponents. However you do need those to equip an army capable of defending a nation.
If, for example, the French were to equip parts of their army to defend Poland, and Poland were to send some of their troops to assist the French in places such as Mali both would benefit. French arms industry would get more contracts and survive. French get aided in killing locals, Poles get some experience with modern firefights and French troops on their borders.
The problems I see with it are crippling however.
a) Who is in charge of this new army?
Which person decides who does what when SHTF. You can't have military decisions done by some EU parliament. The endless bickering over who should be in command would probably stop the project before it got started.
If that one got sorted though b) what if a nation refuses to aid once SHTF?
Do you rip control of their armed forces from them? That never goes well. Do you add a veto right for each nation to refuse taking part in the war? That would make the entire idea useless. Do you impose sanctions? Not gonna work either.
But let's say that all nations always agree to defend their parterns. Then c) LANGUAGE.
Now I am not trying to insult soldiers, but in the EU there are Spanish, French, German (all 24 local accents of it), Polish, Czech, Romanian, Hungarian, Italian, Lithuanian, Estonian, and many many more languages. What language will be the standard. French, English, or German? Will you force all soldiers to learn that one language? Even NATO uses French and English as the official languages. So what happens when the troops on the ground have to cooperate? Will you make some German Grenadier talk to a Hungarian tanker in English? Again, not trying to insult anyone, but infantry doesn't tend to be the best educated social class in any society. Their English will be shit. And they will try to talk to another non-native English speaker in a potentially very loud and uncomfortable situation.
Will all EU army members be forced to leave NATO? What if a NATO member state gets attacked, so almost all EU army members go to help them, but then the EU gets attacked? Surely you would have to prioritize one over the other.
e) outside nations
What if one member state A has a contract with a non member state B and then another member state C attacks the non-member state B. Should A be allowed to defend B against C although both A and C are members of the EU army?
All of these are problems that have been solved before. NATO solved them expertly. The only problem with NATO is the dominant position of the US, and guess what: the only reason the US got that position was because most NATO member states simply decided to shrink their military past a critical point. The US is right in demanding more from their allies. If they want to talk at the bigboy table they must smoke cigars like thee big boys.
>Who is in charge of this new army?
Who else could it be?
It's not a good idea because it means a lot of european states will lost their own army, to be protected by Big Brotha, kinda like the USA.
Look German, I am really the last one being against blobbing or uniting/reuniting, but don't you think you went a LITTLE bit too far by expecting every European countries to collect their entire army into one huge one that they have no control over?
Can NATO fight off Russia without the US at all?
Sounds like you're just describing tighter cooperation between national armies (which is fine by me). What I understand the hypothetical EU army to be is separately build force funded from the EU budget controlled directly by some EU institution (the commission, presumably). The way this is gonna work is the eurocrats will push through some sort of small "emergency defense force" ("it's just a small emergency force, we have no ambitions to replace national armies, we swear"), and then they will gradually increase its budget, which the national governments will then always use to decrease their national army's budget and funnel it into whatever corrupt shit they want, until, in few decades, there will be one big army controlled by European Hauptkommissar and defenseless nation states.
Is this an honest question?
Don't worry they would come with same """reasonable"" explanation for talking your land too. Polacks would even vote 146% to "voluntary" join basted russia after occupation
Yes it can.
Russia is a goddamn paper tiger and Putin is trying his hard to project power.
What matters is that whether europeans think Putin is better than whoever rule their country (likely not, Putin is just the other side of the ZOGcoin).
We could just terrorize them into giving us the same treatment as Chechnya.
Eat shit. THEN die.
Things were far better when Germany was just a collection of independent states under the thin guise of the Holy Roman Empire. Each noble and state should have its own army WITHIN Germany, hell it was better when other nations had this again. Nobody was dumping millions of invaders into Europe when the nobles and their various armies held sway, only under an EU massive central Super State. Now, you want us to centralize further, claiming this will make things better? I wonder who you are working for.
Once you lose your army you lose your power. A state without an army isn't a state at all, now is it? Isn't that the REAL point of making a EU army, so that its transformation into a Super State under its own power and will become a total empire with no one underneath able to field any force to resist their tyranny?
Better the EU dissolve, in fact its evil and should dissolve. I like NATO, and it does fine with various nations and countries supporting it. We don't need to further centralize it to fight Eurasia if it ever comes down to WW3. In fact, some of the greatest coalitions that have formed to balance geopolitical issues have come from decentralized states throughout history, some of the worst are from vast formal monoliths. IN FACT THE HUGE FORMAL MONOLTIHS ARE OFTEN THE EVIL THE DECENTRALIZED ALLIANCES FORM TO FIGHT AGAINST. Now you are telling us to quit relying on the successful former, perhaps to become the latter which might be a great evil?
Yes krauts, do it! France will never produce a Napoleon again!
Can amerimutts stop talking about shit they know nothing about?
>Can NATO fight off Russia without the US at all?
No. They have an overwhelming numerical advantage while they've closed the gap quality of troops wise both because they invested a lot in it but also because most of NATO have dropped all attempts at maintaining decently trained soldiers despite cutting numbers like crazy while they were a big part of NATO fighting power.
You can refer to Afghanistan as a metric, plenty of ex-commanders wrote on who was doing their jobs and who just left the talebans alone while cowering in their bases.
>US can sanction their shit into stagnation
No they can't.
This isn't 1991, most of the world economy isn't NOT under the control of any state, let alone the US, first most countries don't follow the US sanctions policies and have worked to isolate themselves from any of their stupid games, the result is that ALL the new economies are still trading with Russia and not just Russian allies (China, Iran and cie) but Israel (oy vey), Brazil, South Korea, India, all of SE Asia, all of South America, all the middle east, etc…
Then not even most of the EU has stopped trading, first we removed everything important from the scope of sanctions (energy) as it's vital for both our economies, then due to the massive financial frauds the EU creates with it's countless loopholes, fiscal paradise and near total absence of actual border controls most of what was exported to Russia is now exported to Poland (you know the country with a big flat area going on for miles of frontier with Russia/Belarus which is not suspicious at all).
>They have an overwhelming numerical advantage
Next time you'll say we should be afraid of Turkey.
>while they've closed the gap quality of troops wise
Of the small portion of their army that is actually of some use. Half of their army is conscripts and half of the remainder is fatasses doing office shit.
And yes, sanctions do matter. Guess what broke Germany's back in both world wars.
>first we removed everything important from the scope of sanctions
that's because we're not at war with russia, you dumbass
>who was doing their jobs
ie: being stupid ZOGdogs.
>who just left the talebans alone
>cowering in their bases
Said the french faggot. :^)
Internal security aka
supress the population when it rises up
Why do you think they have so many IFVs and armored cars?
The US is already leaving you shut-in kraut.
They gave your country a bill, for subsidizing your national defense for the past half century.
>Germany never neeeeeded the US to OCCUPY IT!!!1
I'm sure Germany never needed the Soviets to occupy it either.
Guess you should try not to lose world wars, retard.
>I don't understand this level of smug, America seems to be a more dire position than Europe is tbh.
Let me give you a history lesson gook.
Contrary to popular belief their were actually three conflicts which were global in scale.
The first was the Seven Years war. which was global in scale but not the meat grinder that the World Wars were.
Then their was World War 1, and World War 2.
The "Theaters" of conflict in ALL of those wars were as follows:
1. Europe, Obviously.
2. The Middle East and Africa.
3. East Asia.
The only time North America saw any action as a conflict zone was the Seven Years War, which was because the Content was divided between Britain France and Spain
After the war the American colonists got fed up with the taxes, the warfare, the general bullshit that Europe engaged in, revolted, and ever since a foreign power has never been able to penetrate American Territory past it's coastal regions
North America is a fortress continent. A land invasion is virtually impossible.
North America also has a fuck ton of wealth and an Economy far more stable than anything in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Nearly $20 Trillion of capital flight from foreign countries has poured in the US the past year.
This is because they know shit is about to fall apart in the East. (And when i say East I include all of Europe as well as Asia, basically I mean everywhere out side of the Americas)
I'm not saying all this to gloat, I'm just telling you how it is.
The only other regions that could have some form of stability would be Australia and New Zealand.
So if you have an untamable Ameriga hate boner then you can immigrate there while the rest of Europe and Asia flees to the states.
Everything else will burn in the hellfire of WW3.
>NUKES will kill America.
2. Space Force / The Star Wars programs
If anyone has developed ICBM counter measures it's the US.
How does the EU's dick taste? Did you make sure to fondle the balls too?
>I more or less agree, but just because the funds are wasted on worse things doesn't mean that they aren't wasted here as well.
It does actually, every country needs an army or it isn't a country at all.
International law is nothing but a facade, in the end every nation has to survive like a man in the jungle and the military is a nations survival knife.
Just because your nation's military can't defeat a global superpower in a direct fight doesn't mean its useless, all it has to do is being so annoying to deal with that your country becomes undesirable to attack and your nation has secured its existence from this type of threat.
Meanwhile all this "promotion of culture" shit with its events, art installations and meetings does jack shit for your country, its your politicians, the upper class and their chosen servants having a party with billions of the taxpayers money, while there are people living in poverty.
Funding education can also be a similar wast of money like "promotion of culture", since just because you pay a teacher higher wages doesn't mean he has or will become a better teacher.
I still don't understand the smugness, you realize the enemies realize an actual military invasion is not needed to bring America to its knees right?
Just send in spics, moslem and refugees to blacken America.
If you can't beat them, just outbreed them.
Based Atlantik Brücke.
>retarded unfounded mutt drivel
Either boomer bait or absolute horseshit.
>believing trumpkike propaganda
>mutt rockets not inferior to vatnil wares
>North America is a fortress continent. A land invasion is virtually impossible.
Big talk when you are under 50% "huwhite" at this point.
Ded manufacturing and deader debt. Of course you can try to kick start a world war to end your debt, but the game is radically different this round.
Less guns, more shitskins, more debt. That is your reality.
But Q larp more please.
Hahaha seems I struck a nerve.
Ad Hominem won't win you WW3. Untermensch
As for the White population question.
>Just send in spics, moslem and refugees to blacken America.
>If you can't beat them, just outbreed them.
Funny you should mention that.
Because it seems the US is the only country that actually knows how to produce children.
Litterally everyone except the USA sucks at making babies.
So yeah Basically everyone and everything in the Eastern Hemisphere is fucked.
America isn't collapsing anytime soon, at least not this century.
That's just the way things are.
No the US is not fucked.
What all this means is that the US actually has a stable future you retard.
lol, you know nothing about geopolitics.
Read my fucking post to the end, niggers. I am not pro EU-Army, I am against it because it's superfluous and NATO already solved all of the problems and all it takes to fix issues would be to actually fucking cooperate for once.
That's my fear as well.
Frogs: send 5000 frogs to Poland and 1000 frogs to Mali.
Poles: send 1000 Poles to Mali and keep the rest at home.
Number of soldiers in Mali doubled and Poland gets a sizable extra defence force.
But there is no need for an EU army to cooperate like that. They could do it today.
What are the French doing in Mali anyway? Didn't they lost all their colonies like Great Britain?
No the french actually quietly kept their colonies after world war 2.
The U.S.'s plan after world war 2 was to dissolve the old imperialist system. The general excuse was because it would stop future world wars, world peace blah blah, but the real reason was because the Imperial powers were a nuisance and a National Security threat to the United States.It also acted as a benefit tying the European powers to the US and effectively forcing them to support the US unconditionally in the Cold War.
What the U.S. effectively did was say to everyone: "No more imperialism stuff, we're fighting communists now. We'll subsidize global trade for you so you can rebuild, m'kay partner?"
This came to a head with the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956.
>Nationalist Egyptians think Suez is Egyptian Clay.
>French, British, and Isrealis say that the Suez is Western Powers clay.
>All sides gear up for war.
>US steps in and says: "No the Suez is a international water way, managed by Egypt."
>French, British, and Isrealis: "But but but but."
>US: "Or Else."
Basically the three sides each learned different lessons from this incident.
Britain decidied that the only way to get anything done in the world would is being Daddy USA's bitch slut.
Thus they slowly gave up all their former colonies and are now demoted to the status of a tourism Island.
France decided that the only way to save it's empire would be to (re)build up it's own military networks without relying on the US, and try to keep the status quo in it's colonies by sending in "intervention" forces to whatever desert shithole they need to. Generally speaking France is probably the country that can best decouple from NATO, since they are so self managing. They even have their own oil shipping routes secured from Africa. Not that they need it since the French have and extremely self sufficient Nuclear Power program.
Israel decided that the best way to get what they want is to bribe the US congress. Offering up it's neighbors as target practice.
>The U.S.'s plan after world war 2 was to dissolve the old imperialist system.
Bullshit, the USA's entire plan during the World Wars was to cripple the European Empires, so it could take the colonies for itself under Manifest Destiny.
Invading an underdeveloped shithole with many resources is much easier if it has no European protector. The USA never abandoned the goal that it had since the Spanish–American War from 1898.
All the talk the USA ever did about fighting Communism, Terrorism or the right of certain Ethnic groups to their own Nation is just Propaganda to justify its goals.
Remember Vietnam, and how that one kicked off? Frenchies were trying to hang on to their colonies, and Commie instigators were trying to take them away. There are some very nice early cold war pictures of the French army fighting all over Africa.
The modern missions there are part MINUSMA (UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali) and part EUTM Mali (European Union Training Mission Mali).
MINUSMA is the followup operation of operation Serval in 2012, which was essentially trying to stop Tuareg rebels in northern Mali from taking southern Mali. MINUSMA is now roughly the same as ISAF, but mostly led by the French.
EUTM I like to call EU-Targeted-Moneyspending, because it's main purpose is retarded: Train the local police to stop migrants from moving north towards Europe. Meanwhile everyone just takes bribes and migrants reach the med unhindered.
How could such a bluepilled faggot have ended up finding this place and posting his verbal diarrhea here.
Ah right. A german.
White births will be a minority next year, that is in 2020, but I'm sure baste spics will want to pretend they're white at least on a census.
How quick can Europe re-militarize?
The 3rd Reich did it in what? 7 years?
In just 7-8 years, they managed to build like 3 battleships, some biggest of the world.
With modern production tech and a willing populace, maybe 3-5 years are enough for re-militarization?
Maybe an advanced german fleet that can destroy the american navy so they can't land troops?
There's an ocean away between America and Europe.
Without the brits help last time, there's no chance America is gonna land in Europe.
Why don't you go out and kill some mutts stationed in Germany already?
For all the big talk you do, you don't do anything, brat. You sound like the average tough guy americuck. Get out of university and go kill some mutts already. Oh wait. You won't. You're just like the americucks. Americucks say how they'll fight the gov. They won't. You go on about how you'll fight the mutts. You won't. You're all the fucking same.
That goes to the tough guy pole, frenchman, and pretty much everyone else on /k/. None of you will do anything except be an internet tough guy while things get worse and worse.
Well shit, let's face it. The fucking jews won. Everything is hopelessly fucked. gg no re
You can suck my "gg no re"
Kill yourself first blackpill cuck.
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
The US is at the cusp of becoming a failed empire, losing hegemony. A nation is its people, without that they are nothing. This doesn't just mean NUMBERS like autistic retards think, its QUALITY of people. The autistic Whizz Kids of today who complete these number theories think that NUMBERS are everything, "IF WE HAVE A LARGER POPULATION WE AUTOMATICALLY WIN HO HO HO" which is about the same as Eric Cartman thinking he is the buffest, strongest, best looking BEEFCAKE there is because he's huge. In the minds of the autistic, those who look at the US Civil War and the two world wars and go THE SIDE WITH BIGGER NUMBERS WON, now thinks that making a country with a larger population means automatic victory, completely ignores not only tactical and other important values, but also makes the critical error that all people are the same and sheer numbers wins all.
Like Beefcake Eric Cartman, the US is now just a fat, disgusting blob of awful shit. "BUT WEZ GOTZ 320 MILLIONZ PEOPLZ, WE BIG AND BEEFCAKE" except that only about 200 million of those people are worth a fuck, the rest are dead weight disgusting fat hanging off the body of the country. They forget that many of those people aren't of great quality and there numbers don't add much, they forget that diversity and conflict destroy the country from within and that some population IS A NET NEGATIVE because they are more harmful to the State them helpful. In order to become huge the west is losing its strength and shape, more obsessed with getting big than getting good and strong. Instead of a 300 pound mean lean killing machine, we have become a 600 pound lethargic fat ass waiting to die under its own weight, cuz bigger is better, right guys?
Brazil is big. Its also another fat useless sack of shit. To internally weak, with shitty people, its human capital is garbage, just that they have lots of…. human garbage. What power does Brazil have, to defend itself? How has Brazil's population served it? If the US doens't fight the Russians and Chinese, they will just die anyways, in peace, as it rots from the inside, becomes a shithole like Brazil. No longer a world power, no longer a first world country with high standard of living. Just suffering, crime, poverty in was once a near utopia. Also, if WW3 does come, will the shit people fight and work in factories or serve as 5th column opportunities, will they become rebellion spots where real soldiers will be diverted from the front lines fighting the Eurasians to fighting rebel groups all over the US, even Europe?
Rome tried similar shit and FUCKING DIED. Europe, Japan, Canada, the US would be better of smaller and stronger than bigger and fatter. This increase in foreign people isn't the pumping up of the west, it is its internal destruction.
>Didn't they lost all their colonies like Great Britain?
The UK actively decolonized their empire, notoriously stabbing in the back their african colonies.
France on the other hand "decolonized" in the strictest sense (removed the colonial administration and gave independence) but that's only as far as it went, with the exception of Algeria and Indochina (that became soviet and now Russian satellites), the other states oscillate between strong allies, protectorate, dominion and… puppet states.
In fact if anything it has grown has some colonies from other EU countries joined.
France Malian intervention was only an exception as it was widely reported on by the MSM. On average a french brigade ends up being shipped in Africa to quash some insurrection every 2 years (since the 60's), it's the only reason why France has managed to stay a fairly independent fighting force (with lots of logistical assets) prior to the 2008 economical collapse and also why french ex-colonies are largely "peaceful" and non-failed states.
> On average a french brigade ends up being shipped in Africa to quash some insurrection every 2 years (since the 60's), it's the only reason why France has managed to stay a fairly independent fighting force (with lots of logistical assets) prior to the 2008 economical collapse and also why french ex-colonies are largely "peaceful" and non-failed states.
Well, using niggers as target practice is all nice and good, and I could also imagine it fueling the French military industry, but do you have anything else in this "pseudo-colonies" besides that? And what now after the 2008 economical collapse? I heared about French and German military industrial corporation increasingly being forced to cooperate, is that true?
I thought you were Mr. Big, Strong Übermensch German Man? One who could fight off a hundred mutts while blindfolded, an arm tied behind your back, and in complete darkness.
Surely you can take on an entire base full of mutt soldiers by yourself. Hell, just killing one should be child's play.
Or are you too much of a cuck like the americucks to take out at least one mutt?
Go on. Prove me wrong. Show me that /k/ isn't full of cucks who'll just take it up the ass by their governments.
>he hasn't taken the blackpill
Pretty pathetic, tbh. Oh well, I suppose it's easier to be big internet tough guy than to admit that everything is fucked beyond saving.
That in no way detracts from what he said, Germany.
Nice reading comprehension you got there. Still don't see any mutts you killed, cucki. I thought you were supposed to be an übermensch. Where's your pile of dead mutts to show off?
America has more Germans than Germany.
You keep going about wanting to get rid of mutts. Yet I don't see your pile of dead mutts. I thought you were supposed to be superior?
Why don't you go to the US bases in Germany and kill all the mutts there already. Your glorious Teutonic genetics should make it the easiest thing.
Yet you don't kill mutts? Are you a cuck like the very mutts you despise?
>I-i'm too afraid to go kill mutts and cleanse Germany.
>I'll just be an internet tough guy and call this other guy a nigger. That'll show him.
Just like the rest of /k/. Everyone talks tough but would do nothing.
>muh great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather wuz german an shieeet
China wins over US because it is bigger.
Why the hell are you mentioning me and why should I be buttmad? I've had a nice productive day, enjoyed it a lot with no reason to be upset whatsoever.
>Muttspammer is a hohol anchor baby
What are the proofs?
USA has given 80 (eighty…."four score") nukes to the Turkish AirForce, stored on a Turkish AF base with no Americans in control.
On paper they need some "NATO (American) authorization" to use them, and maybe we got an alarm on the storeroom.
But any college physics student can tell, once you got the "material" making a working A-bomb is trivial and even Turks could do it, and they no doubt already have one ready to go, just need to install "materials" after a quick foundry operation.
Turkey, like any Western puppet govt with an oppressed Muslim super-majority, is always one triggering incident away from revolution or coupe.
And they just bought Russian S-400, so don't count on any Western airstrike fixing things.
If nothing else, ALWAYS keep something in reserve. What do they teach you at s/k/ool?!?
>too stupid needs purging
70% of your intelligence depends on upbringing within the first 6 years of your life. Unless you're actually retarded, smarts depends on the parent's capability and wish to raise you to be an intelligent being. The more you demand of baby brains, the more smarts it gets.
So in theory you can have a high IQ being from a low income environment that won't be able to afford schools, unless you want to saddle that individual with massive debts to the banking overlords. Great. What a waste. Retard.
Just weeding out theoretically available brain power is just going to get you Nuremberg'd.
> but do you have anything else in this "pseudo-colonies" besides that?
Strategically, most of the french Uranium mines are in the Sahel region. And France is the only country with Russia and the US to have a fully fledged nuclear industry from extraction to reactor building (and nuke building) to waste treatment and others. France has some uranium deposits, but it's so much cheaper (and less poisonous) to have niggers dig for it.
Elsewhere it's oil and other assorted things, like basically the entire control of trade on the continent via french owned ports and railways.
France and it's not-colonies still have old school preferential trade accords, a lot of the french import/export are tied to Africa.
>I heared about French and German military industrial corporation increasingly being forced to cooperate, is that true?
Yes. Basically french politicians want a full union with Germany (which you know… neither the french or the Germans want).
Their latest bright idea was to "merge" Nexter (big ass french land system company, Rheinmetal company) with KMW (German tank company).
That right they merged them as equal (under a dutch law so they never have to pay taxes ever again, isn't the EU great) when KMW hadn't half the income of Nexter, let alone profitability.
It's Airbus all over again.
Bicycle corps…. reporting.
>muh spics will keep things running for me
>euro union flag
>disgusting whore with fake tits and ugly face
European armies are only to backup police in case anyone starts to question the Holohoax.
US military in Europe is to back up Euro-armies, and/or free them up for full scale Holohoax Regime enforcement.
Its like the Dark Ages where everyone had to agree with (((The Church))) or else.
Cops could care less if someone is wacked on weed or booze, they just need something to allow them to put people in jail and get paid.
>but until then, keeping this half-dead mockery of an army is just a waste of money.
It's Europe's Task Force Smith until Uncle Sam gets over there.
>1) Basically all of western Europe is in NATO, meaning none of the countries there neighbour any potential aggressor. Russia would first need to barrel through Poland in order to get to Germany and France, for example.
Do you really think anyone would step in if the Ruskies invaded Poland? Or any other eastern European country?
Ukraine gave its nukes to Russia, in exchange for defense by France and the UK. But when Russia invaded we just wrung our hands and said how bad it is.
>To maintain world hegemony and oversee the destruction of the white race, obviously. The only reason US gets to pull its shit on the international stage is because it has its european vassals agree to it.
To be fair though we dont always agree to it.
How can any EU country expect the US to defend them when the EU undermines US ability to put sanctions on rogue states with the Swift banking system.
I went to a lot of small towns with German names last Summer, they're nothing but boomers who don't speak a lick of German and spics.
The spics are the mutts though.
No. That way Imperator can steamroll them easier.
You mean people who refuse to be mulattoes?
Would things have turned out better had Friedrich III. not been a chain smoker?
Great, that's for THE Medal of Honor, not whatever gay honor medal/challenge coin was in the pic. Use you brain before posting, nigger.
> France will never produce a Napoleon again!
especially because Napoleon was born in Corsica to a relatively modest family of Italian origin from minor nobility
>alliances will keep us safe
Next time you have an idea like this try reading a little history on the topic before posting.
Every nation needs a military because if you depend on others for your safety you are beholden to them, even better develop enough of a nuclear capability to play the MAD game.
you are completely missing the point. I agree every nation needs an army to protect itself, but the current "armies" EU countries have are not fulfilling that purpose in the slightest, and it doesn't seem like that's going to change. So if you army is useless, and you do not have the means to improve it into something usable, then is it not better to simply dissolve it entirely and use the money for something that does have a purpose?
Even a weak military is better than none as it can be used to buy time and in war time is a valuable resource.
But there's already Poland there to buy time. If eastern Europe (with its often much bigger army than western europe) cannot hold potential Russkie invasion back long enough for burgers to arrive, then a couple more piddly divisions aren't going to anything either. And you need to consider that if you let go of the army it wouldn't be just a one time boost - it'd be billions of dollars saved every single year, compared to having an army that has no use in a WW3 scenario and does fuck all all year save perhaps for bombing Libya for Zog and similar
No one survives WW3 but there are plenty of conventional wars all the time. As for relying on the US for help remember ww2, they just watched until Tojo kicked sand in their eyes.
As for an example of a small military getting shit done here in Aust we supported the insurgency in East Timor against Indonesian and gained a huge oil field as part of the deal. We are weak as fuck compared to China but we can still fuck up our weaker neighbours and they know it.
Europe is a little different but insurgencies are going to become more common and the traditional alliances don't means shit when the government that signed them is being overthrown.
Any attack on a western european nation would immediately kick off WW3
>insurgencies are going to become more common
I mean if we're going that route, then no military is a massive positive as it'd allow us to overthrow ZOG more easily
But without a military you don't have a place for patriots to consolidate political power. If a military backs an insurgency the government is done and militaries tend to pick the right side during such things.
Maybe this is why (((the west))) is determined to fill the military with women and faggots, to drive out the patriots.
>But without a military you don't have a place for patriots to consolidate political power.
Dunno about your military, but ours is
<"NATO #1 AMERICA FUCK YEAH LET'S GO DIE IN AFGHANISTAN!"
That is sad to hear, for now our military is still full of patriots but there are constant attempts to increase diversity.
>that's for THE Medal of Honor
Oops, I didn't look at the pictures, I just read the words
i personally think that there is no need for any country at peace to have a standing military, aside from research in arms technology. The idea is that if there is an attack, there will be enough time for the country to redirect manufacturing to military purposes and institute a draft and start training soldiers while a militia or reserve force holds off the invasion.
Nowadays a few missiles pointed at enemy cities probably would deter an invasion anyway (as it currently is in the Koreas).
2.1% master race reporting in.
Czechia, I have bad news: we are considered to be "Eastern Europe" by pretty much everyone except us, the Poles and the Slovakians.
Bullshit. We've had a 'good excuse' for decades, and they still wont do it. The cultural relationship between the United States and Western Europe is sacrosanct.