Right on Manny

President Emmanuel Macron of France has called for a “real European army” to defend the continent against Russia, China, and even America.

Mr Macron, who has pushed for a joint EU military force since his election last year, issued the call while on a tour of northern France in the run-up to the centenary of the end of the First World War.

“We will not protect the Europeans unless we decide to have a true European army,” Mr Macron said in the interview at Verdun, the scene of France’s most bloody battle.

Dunno really, Nato did pretty well for decades…..

63 comments on “Right on Manny

  1. What fundamental problem with NATO could an EU army solve?

    Capability?
    Agility?
    Standardisation?
    Logistic resilience?

    Or is it an entirely political consideration?

    An EU Army directed by Brussels will be a paper tiger

  2. When you consider that the US troops in Eastern Europe are what’s stopping Vlad from pinching a little more real estate, the man’s deranged.

  3. A few months ago the Europeans were asserting that they couldn’t afford 2% of GDP for defence, a figure that assumed US help.
    Now M. Macron makes a proposal that will cost considerably more, even if we ignore the “defence against the US” rhetoric. To defend against the US would imply dismantling the welfare state throughout Europe.
    It’s just pie in the sky rhetoric, ain’t going to happen.
    Some parade ground force might well be raised, but that’s all.

  4. “What fundamental problem with NATO could an EU army solve?”

    Preventing secession from the EU…

  5. “We will not protect the Europeans unless we decide to have a true European army,” Mr Macron said

    Pretty accurate; it is mainly the US that has been protecting Europeans since WW2.

  6. He doesn’t feel the US can no longer be relied upon to defend Europe. So the feeling in finally now mutual.

    I presume he believes that the US and NATO would decline to authorise armed force against successionist states, so hence the need for the EU to have its own muscle.

  7. No doubt based on the French Foreign Legion ( or the Waffen SS) and under Franco/ German control.

    What could possibly go wrong?

  8. Henry Crun–With Granny’s Boy Macron–star of “The Bodyguard”–behind it , it would be the Vichyssoise government.

  9. Was importing all those military age young men with limited skills and no loyalty to any one EU country, the beginning of this plan?

  10. Can’t see the point in the french having an army. They would only need one drill. Surrender two thre four!

  11. It’s all part of his Napoleon complex.

    Napoleon’s army was made up of nationals from all over Europe; Macron just assumes that the new version will be under his command.

  12. … because history has shown us that when France or Germany militarise, things always turn out really well for the rest of Europe. Both doing it together – what could possibly go wrong?

  13. Do we still refer to the Frogs as cheese-eating surrender monkeys? Been a while since I’ve seen that.

  14. It’s high time the UK and the US withdrew from NATO. I mean now… today.
    Over to you EU little man..
    Just beware… this time around we aren’t coming to save you, you’re on your own.

  15. Maybe there is some sense in this after all. The most likely scenario for a war in Europe is between two European nations. So if they all turn their militaries over to EU control, they can fight that war on that great big military base in Belgium. Without messing up the rest of the continent.
    Now, what they need is a Spanish general to run it all. The Spanish military having the greatest experience of fighting themselves. They’ve hardly fought anyone else in the past couple centuries. And for bonus points, they normally lose.

  16. ‘Just beware… this time around we aren’t coming to save you, you’re on your own.’

    I submit that if the U.S. had minded it’s own business in 1917, and stayed out of the European war, the world would have been a better place. No Hitler, no Holocaust, no Soviet Union, no Israel.

    The nations would have sued for peace, and called it quits without reparations, without the dissolution of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire.

    We didn’t “save” you; we mucked it up some more. Thanks to Woodrow Wilson.

  17. “What fundamental problem with NATO could an EU army solve?”

    It would save the U.S. a lot of money. Though I’m sure our government rather likes have bases in Europe.

  18. Gamecock

    If the US had stayed out of WWI, the end result would have been the same, it would have just taken a bit longer.

    You would have carried on selling us stuff. The RN blockade that was starving Germany to death would have continued. The Hapsburg and Ottoman empires were already in their death throes before you arrived.

  19. I think the plan is brilliant.

    It will be much harder for the Russians to overrun Europe if they are laughing uncontrollably.

  20. Don’t worry, woggies, America will be there to protect you from the Russians while you go to the mosque for Friday prayers (whether you want to or not).

  21. Forget the French. Any time you have Italy and Greece as the backbone of your southern flank you are fucked well and good.

    The more I think about this, the funnier it gets.

  22. Most likely outcome:

    The EU puts together an army, which gets both the Americans and the Russians laughing so hard that the EU takes over the western world without firing a shot.

    It then promptly surrenders to Iran.

  23. In WW1 France was allied to Russia, in WW2, Russia joined the war after Petain surrendered and only de Gaulle and a few Free French kept fighting, so the only comparison we have is 1812 when Napoleon lost 90% of his army to “Generales Janvier et Fevrier”.

  24. @ Gamecock
    The USA joined in both “World War”s after Germany could not win and after making a fortune from selling arms to Britain and France (including some ships which were nearly junk to France in 1940).
    The Versaille peace treaty would not have been any better if Woodrow Wilson had not been present – Clemenceau was so determined on vengeance that the other leaders (many of whom felt some sympathy) could not have totally restrained him.
    The British and French would still have won had the USA continued to sit on its backside coining its profits.
    If you can bear looking at the facts: the British Empire – not the USA – was the world’s greatest military power until 1941 when our losses in battle pulled us down below the rising power of the rearming but undamaged USA. Sadly we were not stronger than Germany, Austria, Italy, Russia, and Japan combined in 1939, but that’s because virtually no-one except Churchill thought that we needed to be.

  25. @ Dennis
    The Greeks have a history of being good fighters. Not just Theseus, Leonidas, Pericles, Alexander etc but the modern Greeks were one of the earlier countries to throw out the Ottomans despite being an almost trivially smaller numerical force and they gave the Italians a bloody nose when invaded until the Germans sent in their elite troops in numbers far exceeding the Greek regular army. After 1945 they were the only eastern European country to resist invasion by Stalin’s lackeys.
    Did your history teacher think history started when New College was 397 years old?

    OTOH i like your suggestion that the US and Russian armies die laughing like Styrbjorn who, legend says, was laughing out loud at his uncle Eric’s old-fashioned armies when an arrow struck and killed him [the implication is that, had he not been laughing his iron helmet would have saved his life].

  26. America will be there to protect you from the Russians while you go to the mosque for Friday prayers (whether you want to or not).

    Says the guy who literally works in a mosque. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  27. Wilson went to Versaille with his “14 Points,” to ensure a just settlement to the war.

    British and French representatives pulled him aside, and said, “Look, without reparations from Germany, we can’t pay you back.”

    Wilson threw out his Just Settlement.

    U.S. influence on WWI came way before we sent troops over. I submit that had we stayed out of it, all European parties would have called it a draw and gone home. We sustained it, as well as throwing the balance over to Britain/France.

  28. @john77

    You’re correct about the US timing in WW1 and perhaps about the Allies winning WW2 without American involvement, but did you forget the small fact that we declared war after being attacked by Germany’s ally?

    Your sour grapes are strange in this context. Would you have rather NOT had American help repelling the Hun? Also, that Americans profited from the European habit of slaughtering each other is perfectly fair IMO. Especially considering the subsequent 3/4 century of security benefits bestowed by my fellow taxpayers.

  29. Dennis

    “Greeks”

    What John said. Gave a bloody good account of themselves against Jerry, and especially so for a Club Med team.

  30. Says the guy who literally works in a mosque. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    I don’t work in a mosque. I have two mosques that are clients. I provide professional services. They pay me for those services.

    In any event that’s not the issue. The issue is – and I doubt any European can truly understand this – there is a difference between co-existence and abject surrender.

  31. “…1812 when Napoleon lost 90% of his army to “Generales Janvier et Fevrier”.

    It’s staggering just how persistent this myth is.

    Three quarters of the army was already gone by the time Napoleon rolled into Moscow. In September.

  32. The Greeks have a history of being good fighters.

    So do the Germans. Big deal. At the moment they have fighters and transports that cannot fly and don’t have close to the number of tanks and armored vehicles they need. Their military is shit and probably couldn’t whip Albania on a good day, much less Russia.

    The fact that the Greeks happened to give a good account of themselves before being overrun by the Germans in WW2 doesn’t really have much to do with whether they have the troops, artillery, tanks, helicopters, fighters and bombers that will be necessary to repel a Russian attack in the near future.

    When in doubt, wave off unpleasant realities by falling back on past glories and other irrelevancies… How very European.

  33. Dennis – so you’re a paid dhimmi.

    Evidently you don’t understand the difference between co-existence and abject surrender. There’s a surprise. And now you’ve shown you don’t understand dhimmitude either. Another surprise.

  34. Steve –

    Wanna know the two most important differences between Columbus, Ohio and London, England?

    When a Muslim attacked passers-by with a knife in Columbus, Ohio, he was shot dead in the street.

    There hasn’t been a knife attack by a Muslim in Columbus, Ohio since then.

    That’s the difference between co-existence and abject surrender.

  35. @ Sam
    Of course I am glad that the USA joined in to shorten the War – massively so, as I suspect Japan would have fought to the death without Hiroshima.

    It is NOT sour grapes to state the honest truth.

    I could have said that the Americans were so craven that Roosevelt could not get them to declare war until Japan had attacked them, without a declaration of war, and Hitler, in a strange fit of adherence to historical ethics, had declared war on the USA. I chose not to do so because that would have been misleading and cast unfair aspersions on the majority of Americans.

    FYI The British taxpayers have spent more (as a % of income) to protect Europe than US taxpayers – we have spent much less on the Pacific Ocean but more on Europe. Germany spends very little on military power in order to avoid frightening its neighbours but subsidises the other 26 countries in the EU by transfer payments so compensating for its low spending on defence.

    I can sympathise with the US taxpayer asking “Why do we spend to defend Europe?” I could write an explanation, saying that the net benefit to the USA exceeded the cost, but it would takes months for me to dig out the up-to-date data and most guys wouldn’t understand it even if I did.

  36. @john77

    OK, fair enough, though I’d point out that one man’s craven greed is another man’s principled military isolationism. Moot point now I guess.

    And I’ve heard that the US is keen on keeping it’s Western Europe bases nearly exclusively due to the recruiting boon they represent. Anecdotally speaking nobody I’ve known joined up with delusions of a cushy European deployment, but I could see it being a help at the margins.

  37. And now you’ve shown you don’t understand dhimmitude either.

    Do you get paid in silver?

    Wanna know the two most important differences between Columbus, Ohio and London, England?

    The Columbus, Ohio murder rate is about 10 times higher and conservatives still have a chance of being elected Mayor of London? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  38. @ Sam
    I am not suggesting, and do not wish to, that Americans were cravens – tens of thousands of them volunteered to fight, including quite a few who crossed the border into Canada to do so. I just want to debunk the idiots who claim the USA single-handedly saved the world.

  39. Russians my arse- it’s to fight against the native populace to keep them under control – though the wehrmacht has been described as an aggressive camping organisation so they might not be up to the job anyway.

    The russians have only got to wait until the muzzoids have taken over – they can then walk in with hardly any opposition though quite why they’d bother by then is hard to imagine

  40. The Columbus, Ohio murder rate is about 10 times higher and conservatives still have a chance of being elected Mayor of London? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    London Vs. Columbus Murders…

    Last Reporting Year:
    London (2017/8) – 153
    Columbus (2017) – 143

    2018 Through Nov. 5:
    London – 119
    Columbus – 91

    Your command of fact is about what I was expecting…

  41. My experience of Americans is the guys who talk least perform the best.

    Translation from Wog to American:

    “I can’t figure out how to refute septic criticism, so I’ll adopt a pose of lofty European sophistication and hope it goes away.”

  42. I could write an explanation, saying that the net benefit to the USA exceeded the cost, but it would takes months for me to dig out the up-to-date data and most guys wouldn’t understand it even if I did.

    Ah, the battle-cry of every mooch that ever walked the planet.

  43. “When a Muslim attacked passers-by with a knife in Columbus, Ohio, he was shot dead in the street.”

    I love a story with a happy ending!

  44. @ Dennis
    When I was young (many moons ago) we had two Yanks boxing for us: the older one was quiet and skilful and won although he, having aged, was less fit than he had been and was boxing a weight above that he used to; the other was a brash lad from West Point and got knocked out in the second round.
    I don’t know how to translate into American but I’m damn sure that you’ve got it wrong.

  45. “In a time when murder rates in most major cities are on the decline”

    Not happening. A BS assertion.

  46. @ DtP
    Columbus, Ohio has population less than one-tenth of the population of London

    Let the use of qualifications begin!

  47. Jack C –

    Note that the 2018 Columbus murder stats show 2017 for what it was… an anomaly. Go back and look at pre-2017 numbers to confirm.

    And you’re quoting a fucking college newspaper staffed by journalism students… so you’re getting your analysis from a bunch of college sophomores.

  48. None of this changes the essential fact that Europe never will actually do what is necessary to properly defend itself from Russia. Europe is, for all intents and purposes, a ward of the state… that state being the USA.

    And what hasn’t been mentioned here is whether any Eastern European nation would buy into this even if Britain, France and Germany actually got serious about it. Seems to me the EE boys might, based on historical president, decide to retain NATO and the USA rather than trust the word of an Englishman, Frenchman or German when it comes to protection.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.