eu-armyIn the 1950s, the French Prime Minister, René Pleven, proposed a pan-European army.  The European Defence Community (EDC) was a response to US calls for the rearmament of West Germany. Memories of the Second World War were still fresh, and the French leader wanted a way to control German military might.

The plan collapsed after the French parliament rejected it, fearing a loss of sovereignty. However, the idea of a joint European military never went away, and a group of Central and Eastern European countries (including the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland) have now renewed calls for an EU army.

Almost 25% of EU defence expenditure currently comes from the UK. Following Brexit, the UK is still committed to working with its European partners in security and defence cooperation. However, smaller EU Member States in particular are concerned they will be unable to “pick up the slack” without Britain in the EU, particularly at a time when EU-Russia relations are at such a low point, and civil conflict and terrorism threatens Europe’s neighbours in North Africa and the Middle East. So, is it time to revive the old EU army idea?

Curious to know more about European defence cooperation? We’ve put together some facts and figures in the infographic below (click for a bigger version).European-defense-cooperation-3

Is it time for a European army? Would enhanced European defence cooperation be the best way to defend from a newly belligerent Russian and radical Islamist terrorism? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below, and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – Ministerio de Defensa
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.


618 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

    • Serge Lauer

      Of course we need an European Army but a United One which is more highly reliable and effective instead a confederated one least for the Eurozone !
      And most importantly a United Europe .. at least for the Eurozone which are the founding fathers of the E.U. !
      Elected Leaders in the E-Council should remember the speech of Winston Churchill from 1947 in Zürich about clearly a United States of Europe !
      Now go ahead and seal the deal !

    • EU reform- proactive

      Serge, very ambitious & factually wrong! The Eurozone (19) is a region within the EU using the euro as their national currency managed by the ECB.

      The term Founding Fathers of the EU refers to a group of seven politicians and six founding member states in the 1950’s.

    • Erik Verbrugge

      Yes we do!

    • Raul A.

      If you want to have a state that has a place at the table of negotiations in today’s geopolitical world, you need a powerful economy and army. No exception. The army of any European state, alone, is’n worth much when compared to that of the US, Russia, Iran, Turkey or China. If you think you can continue to matter in geopolitics with because you were an empire once, you are wrong. Europe is a chance for all of us to lead and impose our point of view in geopolitics. Stronger states will always influence our way of thinking and of doing politics. You can’t face them alone, try to see the big picture. Strong vs Weak, its always been like that.

  1. Paul X

    And who would be in charge?
    The effectiveness of any armed force depends entirely on a clear and robust command and control structure and if an EU army is run along the same lines as the rest of the EU, (i.e. “by committee”), then it will never be deployable and will serve no purpose except for carrying a blue starred flag and playing Beethoven as they march past Herr Juncker taking the salute…

    …..of course he will lap it up, (but god help the planet if they give someone as immature as him and the rest of his cronies control of a real army)

    • Mihai Baba

      Your point is valid! An EU army is only worth considering if coupled with effective leadership.
      So, first: reform the EU leadership structure (directly elected president of the commission, abolishing the veto right, making resolutions compulsory everywhere)
      Step two: establish and EU army controlled by the directly-elected european commission.

    • George


  2. Tiago Blanch

    Yes! Its time for full integration! Countries either choose to be part of an economic partners agreement area (like the UK for example) or take part in the integration process. The EU as it is now it is terrible and wont last!

  3. Luis Castro

    The humanity will slowly start to walk toward is end…

  4. Andrew Lally

    you cant even manage a currency and you think we will let you create an army? FOOLS!
    Ireland spent 700 years under a common currency and common army. NEVER AGAIN!

    • George

      Well, you just trigger article 50 and get lost.

    • Duncan

      @George, this person based on nothing more than his/her comments about Ireland will still be in the EU after article 50 has been activated by the UK. Since the Irish republic is no longer a part of the UK, and hasn’t been for some years. Although I must say from a personal point of view they are welcome to rejoin it anytime they wish. But as it stands an Irish republic citizen has just as much right as anyone In Europe to speak out against an EU army.

  5. Vytautas Vėžys

    One Union
    One government
    One army.
    If only we would have similar unification in history to look where it would end…

    • Paul X

      Ein Volk
      Ein Reich
      Ein Führer

      We know exactly where it ended…..

    • EU citizen

      @Paul x. Apart from the word “One” I see no similarities. One union is not one folk (the last one refers to a specific nation), one government is not one reich and one army is not one fuhrer. Actually Britain is more close to the concept of one folk (throwing immigrants out and protecting British values), one fuhrer – that still hasn’t happened and I hope it never does and one Reich is self explanatory. So your parallel is in line with the populist brexit talk or at least it sounds like that.

    • Paul X

      Actually the word “one ” is the point of my post. Both statements express a desire to unify power and control under one entity

      But just for you, there are other similarities
      Führer (leader) = Government
      Reich (empire) = Union
      Volk (people) =Army

      For the record we haven’t thrown any immigrants out and as for protecting British values 100% spot on, because unlike many other countries our values are actually worth keeping

    • EU citizen

      How are the British values different from the French or the Italian values for instance, just trying to see what you are protecting. I am just not sure whether all British people are behind those values either… Also I speak German so I need no translation, for me “Ein Folk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer” applies more to the British/English situation (apart from the one Führer part) rather than the EU. For instance, you can’t voluntarily leave an empire. AS to throwing all EU immigrants out: Have you seen the Leave campaign? Many people with British values voted EXACTLY for that, and the next day asked immigrants (not only EU immigrants) why are they not “OUT” since people voted out. Anyway, it is hard to see the faults in your own country.

    • Paul X

      You first mentioned British values so I assume you have an idea what you were referring to?, though as you also mention populist in your post I imagine your only one step away from the usual “little Englander” rhetoric for anyone who disagrees with those craving “one-ness” (Ein-ness?)

      I’m very aware of the leave campaign, I also know that a lot of sensible intelligent people voted leave and (blown out of proportion by the media) a very small minority of racist bigots abused a few immigrants following the result, please do not try and it is childish to try and infer they are all of one mentality
      The leave campaign never threatened to throw out immigrants, only to control the amount entering the UK….. and as of yet no-one of any political persuasion has managed to say what benefit uncontrolled immigration delivers that controlled immigration could not …any ideas?

      Actually, I know my country has many faults but I also know none of them are being made any better by membership of the EU

    • George

      Englishmen are panicking at anything Europe does well.

    • Duncan

      @George, what makes you think that? I’m an Englishman and I don’t panic about anything Europe does well, I’ve owned a bmw before and i think the reworking h&k did to the l85-a2 was remarkably good. So yet again you state an OPINION as FACT. Learn the difference!

    • Paul X

      which it why I’m as calm as it is possible to be..

    • Yasmine

      Paul’s got his own version of reality ;-) Leave him alone.

    • EU citizen

      @Paul X. I may have to disappoint you, it is isn’t just a few people or me and my sister are extremely unlucky. I got harassed twice when speaking a foreign language (and I wasn’t shouting or anything). My sister got harassed twice too while talking to her boyfriend. What is more she was asked by one of her British colleagues whether she is still planning to stay (my sister is a scientist) and a lady on the street asked when was she going to her country. We have been here for many years and never have we faced anything of this sort! The leave campaign was all about immigration and for more people any immigration. I have no idea why you voted but for a great majority that was the reason it wasn’t controlled immigration, it wasn’t the NHS it was just hate, nothing you can promise them could satisfy the hate and the desire to get rid of muslim and other minorities along with all the EU. I am not saying there weren’t smart people that voted leave, to be fair it doesn’t even matter whether Britain is in or out, on the grand scheme of things people with power/money will find way to benefit from any situation but I am against bigotry and right now it is on a massive scale in the UK, at least compared to what it was before. I have no idea what your ethnicity is but your comment sounded like a white guy trying to explain to a black guy that there is no racism …

    • Duncan

      @EU citizen, I’m very sorry to hear about such negative reactions. I would say that enquiring if somebody intends to stay is hardly the same as telling someone they need to leave, so not really sure how that’s an example of racism. The sad fact is that racism does still exist, and it exists everywhere (even on this forum I’ve seen plenty of examples of it). But I would point out that immigration control is important and it has nothing whatsoever to do with racism. It boils down to 2 key issues. A few years ago we had a financial wobble of some severity, this lead to a reduction in available job vacancies. This was made worse by David Cameron deciding that was the time to make huge cuts in public sector jobs. Yet despite this local shortfall in job vacancies, people were still coming to Britain on an uncontrolled level looking for work (they did not in many cases have a pre existing offer of employment, they came to an area where competition for work exceeded availability and increased that competition. That needs to be something that cannot happen again). The second point is frankly the UK is overpopulated. We have just under 1% of the total land mass of the EU and yet just under 8% of the population of the EU. Apart from anything else this is scaling up the cost of housing at a rate wages cannot match, but also without any form of birth rate limitation and an uncontrollable immigration situation it will lead to pressure to develop housing in our already shrinking green areas, the parts of this country that reflect it’s true beauty in my opinion. I voted leave, I did not think for a split second it would mean the instantaneous deportation (or eventual deportation) of every foreigner living here. I did and still do believe that anyone resident here will be granted a visa. As regards to my main reason for voting leave it had nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with my personal objections to the loss of independent rule I have seen in my life and concern over further reductions in sovereignty that I could foresee happening in the 40-? Years it would be before we were asked again if we were happy with the state of the EU. But think yourself fortunate that the racist encounters you refer to have been limited to verbal, still not acceptable by any stretch of the imagination, but far from being shot on sight and/or dumped in a mass grave as some victims of racism have been. I hope this is some consolation, as too I hope is the fact that I have in the passed criticised anybody for making racist comments within my earshot (culminating in me threatening to hit someone I have known for over twenty years if they didn’t stop) and I will continue to do so in the future. Perhaps we will get to utopia one day, for now though the UK is proportionately very tolerant of diversity. The statistics do back this up as much as statistics can be trusted. But so too do the majority of people living here.

    • EU citizen

      @Duncan. I have always considered the UK a very tolerant country. That is why I was disappointed when treated that way. I agree it could be worse if it gets beyond verbal but who knows what’s going to happen if there are any cuts in the budget. I understand the UK is very densely populated but you see such rhetoric unfortunately allows to blame everything on the EU citizens in this country. We were blamed for job shortage, NHS crowding, house prices, lack of training schemes, benefit fraud, just to name a few things so the hate towards us will grow. Thank you for your kind words though!

    • Duncan

      @EU Citizen. I blame the ineptitude of the governments past for these problems, including being unable to adjust immigration levels as and when required. Ever agreeing to this situation was stark raving mad In my opinion. No rational person can blame somebody from (for example) moving to Britain with the promise of massively increased earnings and benefits such as the nhs available. And in times of economic growth this isn’t an issue in of itself, although it doesn’t still redress the population problem obviously. Although the housing policies of the past governments again could have eased this issue by making new york/dubai styled city high rise accommodation. In the 60’s we had lots of flats built, but they were done cheaply and looked like eyesores. As a result people hated them. Something more akin to big open plan space with plenty of glass fronts large balconies and underground parking I feel is the way to go for future developments of this kind.

    • Yasmine

      “unlike many other countries our values are actually worth keeping”

      Paul, you statement is the epitome of arrogance, ignorance and nationalism. The Brexit is not really about “immigration”. It is about the lazy, unemployable Brits desperately trying to prop themselves up, get rid of the competition and leave the state and private employers with no choice but to hire them. This is a kind of social blackmail by the person that is not willing to try.

      There has already been a murder of a Polish man in the UK by 6 teenagers and the police think that this was a “hate crime”. You can read about this here:

      The Brexit discourse has given the worst elements of British society a chance to reveal themselves. The only thing that your posts here do is to try and gloss over the ugly face of desperate, impoverished, incompetent and nasty provincial Britain. As far as I am concerned, I am not convinced by your excuses. I think that your attempts are not doing you any favours. You even attempted to come up with your own personal definitions of words in order to make this xenophobic and introvert behaviour to look somehow more innocent.

    • Yasmine

      And here is the UN’s verdict on the role of the Brexit campaign in this. I am no fan of the UN but I think they have got it right on this one. All that Brexit politicians have done in their talk about immigration and what Paul here is doing as well is to put hatred and xenophobia across in a way that makes it sound legitimate and acceptable for the purposes of a public discourse. Hatred without any rationale or actual arguments for the things that “immigration” has been blamed for. Shame.

    • Yasmine

      And just for the record, Paul:

      Ein Volk
      Ein Reich
      Ein Führer

      is where the UK is heading.

      However, you have tried to spin and distort this (your debating strategy here) in order to incite hatred towards the EU. For your information the word Volk, people, is referring to a ethnic group and has a racial meaning, nothing to do with an army of people from different countries; Reich refers to a kingdom and/ or reign and therefore has nothing to do with any kind of democratic unification on people’s free will including democratically elected representative with parliamentary voting rights; and Fuehrer refers to a person not a group of elected people. Please, stop distorting and manipulating language for the purposes of your own propaganda.

    • Paul X

      A bit tetchy today aren’t we Yasmine?

      I see you are regurgitating the usual EU propaganda about Brexit only being about immigration

      But anyway, with regards to “the lazy, unemployable Brits” ……how about the unemployed Brits that cannot get a job because they have families, houses and other responsibilities and could not survive on a minimalist wage or live rent free in a caravan on a farm?…that is a reality, come and see for yourself instead of believing all the hype

      And as already explained, my initial comment was based on the parallels in the use of the word “one” it was not me that started out comparing the actual context of the statements

    • Duncan

      @Yasmine, your personal attack on Paul x aside (with which I disagree with you on some points, but I don’t wish to digress from my key issue), you state what brexit was about from a point of (highly critical) opinion. Speaking as a supporter of brexit I know my own personal motives behind supporting it and I cannot stress how wrong you are. I am employed, I would not be considered lazy by any stretch of the imagination, in fact as a result of a strong work ethic and a slightly hyperactive tendency I have suffered ill health due to overdoing my contributions to work. I do not hate any of the people I work with of which some are immigrants. I also do not hate the Polish people who live across the road from me, the Caribbean people who live next door, or the Czech girl I lived with previously. The fact a small proportion (yes it is a small proportion, getting all the attention from the media. And public opinion as a result is grouping everyone together as bad, just like with muslims and suicide bombers) of brexit supporters did so because they are neo nazi anti social un-evolved backwards scum is not a true reflection of the motives behind wanting to leave the EU. What’s more is the media In this country despite having free press rights supposedly to prevent bias of information have been split into pro leave and pro remain camps since before the vote, and even now you will get a very different set of opinions of the world view based on what press articles you read. The bbc are heavily within the pro remain camp. I’m not quite sure what they hope to achieve since the vote has been cast and the die is set. But it is a sickening state of affairs no better than that of a state controlled media feeding the masses propaganda. So while I believe the base fact that a Polish person was murdered, I would be exceptionally sceptical of any other information I did not see in context of the full and uncensored statement of the police this quote was taken from. If you went to the telegraph no doubt you can find some example of British citizens being murdered by Europeans, but it doesn’t mean anything without perspective. The fact is in a large enough group of people you will have a proportionate amount of criminals and psychopaths. Anyone wanting to portray “others” as bad can find supporting evidence. We all need to stop looking for reasons to hate each other, and frankly your view of British leave voters is just another example of this wrong behaviour.

    • EU citizen

      @Paul X. How about the greedy landrods (most of them not EU) who put up rents despite having paid off their mortgages, how about greedy employers who want to pay less and less, how about money laundering in expensive residential properties? It really depends on how you want to look at it. I have had to hire people on several occasions and the Brits do have an advantage they are fluent in English and they have been raised here and know the etiquette (this is a massive advantage in most jobs). How can a Bulgarian or Romanian with no/little English steal your job, I mean you must be pretty bad, right? Unfortunately, there were barely any British candidates and the 2 of the 3 I had were even late for the interview and one came with a hangover (that was for a consultancy position by the way and fluent/native English was a must!).

      I agree with many of the harsh statements from Yasmine, however, I have to admit that this is Britain and it is up to British people (all of them including the lazy ones) what kind of country they want to live in.

      As to the comment about the fact that there have been Brits killed by EU nationals. It reminds of a conversation my mum had with my headteacher before I got accepted into primary school where my mum asked my headteacher whether she could recommend a more tolerant, open minded teacher and the headteacher replied to her “It is nobody’s fault you have a child like that”. My mum didn’t reply so I can go to the “prestigious school” despite my ethnicity but my point is don’t make hate crime/racism acceptable in any shape or form!

    • EU citizen

      @ Paul X. I did say there were people who voted for reasons other than hatred towards any immigrants. Do you accept/support that kind of behavior though? Also I was making comparison between the UK before and after the referendum to show a trend and not the UK and the rest of the world. The latter can make you feel better I suppose, it is even possible to increase hate crime more and the UK will still be better than most countries.

    • Yasmine

      Paul, your assertion that someone living in a caravan, with poor language skills and a social stigma on them can go for the same job and successfully compete against someone local, with connections, perfect language skills, living in a safe and stable environment sums up the perversity of your claims and anti-foreign propaganda. And no it is not a British thing. It goes on everywhere. It’s biggest defender was Hitler.

    • Duncan

      @EU citizen, nobody is saying racism is acceptable (although Paul x does appear to be supporting isolationism). My comment about EU nationals killing British nationals was firstly and foremost to point out the failure of the media to remain neutral of opinion as I feel they should be. And as a second point to illustrate that because someone is murdered who is of a particular group, sub group etc. by a person or group of persons from a different group does not automatically make it a racial/hate crime. But the biased media wishing to cast a long shadow over those who are biased in the opposite direction are very quick to twist a story to suit their own ends.

    • Duncan

      As a follow up note, it’s my opinion that treating any crime as different based on the motives of the criminal (except possibly with regards to the reason of extenuating circumstances) is wrong. If someone was murdered in cold blood, that alone should be cause enough for public abhorrence. I personally feel it’s actually counterproductive to utopia (surely the world we all wish to build towards) to consider a crime, argument or any other interaction between two people of different backgrounds (be they racial, religious, or any other differences) to be motivated in any way by the fact of those differences. If we are truly to get rid of racism, surely we need to stop seeing it as race? To describe someone’s appearance should be the only time skin colour needs consideration, and in no way more significant then height, weight eye colour etc. Dr King put it more eloquently than me, and before me. But surely the fact this is not a new idea, and is so very obviously a good idea should mean by now it would have taken route in our lives?!

    • Paul X

      @EU Citizen

      What about greedy landlords ripping off people? I do not deny that goes on but why are you you trying to justify one unacceptable situation by quoting another?

      I’m sick to the back teeth of the “hardworking immigrants doing jobs that lazy Brits won’t do” brigade…. who the hell do you think used to do all the farm jobs in eastern England before the influx of cheap labour?….the fact is people with little responsibilities (and no need to be fluent in English, the “gangmasters” are usually their fellow countrymen) are employed on farms for a hell of a lot less than someone local could survive on. That is a fact that no amount of pro EU-babble can gloss over

      …and i think you have already had it pointed out that I had nothing to do with the comment about people being killed…

    • Paul X

      @ Yasmine, your points are completely off the mark. We are talking about low skilled jobs where the only requirement to be competitive is an acceptance of a lower wage

      The “safe and stable environment” you refer to costs money, far more than the average unskilled farm worker will ever earn these days

      The fact you consider what I’m saying is not a “British thing” is completely irrelevant, what I’m saying is fact, not propaganda, and no amount of emotional dribble can detract from that

      And as for the “anti-foreign” accusation you really should grow up…. I have a good job working for a “foreign” company. I visit many “foreign” countries for business and pleasure. I love many “foreign” cultures and l have many “foreign” business and personal friends…but at the end of the day I’m perfectly entitled to be critical of EU policies which are detrimental to my country and I should be free to do that without the usual “racist, xenophobic etc” accusations which the pro-EU lobby are so fond of using against anyone who dares to disagree

      I mean for gods sake you are “foreign” but if you could just manage to stop the anti-Brexit rhetoric for a day or two I’m sure even we could get on.. ;-)

    • Positive EU/Brit

      @Paul X. I completely understand your argument about low paid labour. However, just a couple of points there. First, brigades for hiring Eastern EUropeans to do farming jobs exist way before some of these countries even joined the EU. Global trade (and competition from other countries) is what drives the costs for home produce down in order to be competitive and hence low paid labour. Even after the whole Brexit drama is over I am pretty sure that labour in farming will be hired from abroad. As a matter of fact I watched a documentary on channel 4 about North Koreans taking farming jobs in Poland which comes to show how pressured companies are for driving costs down. On the global scene (ignore the EU for a second) you will need cheap labour to be competitive that’s the truth and your farmers will fight to get it! It is globalisation that drives the costs down not the EU!

    • Paul X

      @Positive EU/Brit

      EU agriculture does not compete (fairly) on a global market due to CAP so you cannot say external influences are driving the need to look for cost savings… it is more of the case that a cheap source of labour is readily available and is being used as a means to increase profits.

    • Yasmine

      Paul, it is actually your comments that are off the mark all the time. I was referring to the same workers that you tried to use as an argument. So, apparently, you were referring to people with no skills that want to earn enough to have all the comforts…And you scenario is once again completely hypothetical. The same people that hire cheap labour from Eastern Europe will not necessarily stay in business once they have lost that cheap labour or, from what I have heard them say, they would look at automation, as they cannot afford a British labourer or the quality of their work, which is apparently much slower than that of Poles and destroys most of the crop…

      But that left aside, your entire post relies again on spinning and rhetorical fallacies…

      The argument that you use in your defence to prove that you are not xenophobic…does not cancel my previous statement. You clearly said previously that you think the UK has a culture worth preserving, so you clearly think that there are countries whose cultures are not worth preserving. Presumably these are not the ones you refer to visiting or would work for…isn’t this hatred and hostility/arrogance?

      You also say that you are entitled to be critical of EU policies detrimental to “your country” without being called xenophobic. Well, is that a law? It is exactly begging the question of this exchange…you have exactly failed to prove that EU policies are detrimental to any specific country, as you have been unable to show that you are not xenophobic, even if that word only includes certain countries…quite the opposite. We have democracy and freedom of speech and we have the right to call you xenophobic, and I have provided evidence for this, which you have been unable to counter and indeed have not commented on at all.

      You have no arguments and no way to defend yourself. All your posts are based on hypothetical situations, manipulation of language and empty arguments. Sorry, but I think that I have proven my point and you have no leg to stand on. No time for any further pointless posts. You clearly have nothing of any substance to support your claims and/or defend yourself.

    • György

      If history is your guidance than Britain’s goal is the destruction of Europe. Which is pretty clear anyway.

    • Duncan

      @Yasmine, I have never worked in agriculture, but I have worked alongside Polish workers (and currently do) and I cannot see any evidence to support a claim that they are better workers than the English workers,or workers from anywhere else from Europe.
      @Gyorgy, England, Britain & the UK have never historically attempted to destroy Europe. In fact History would demonstrate an intention from England/Britain/the UK to actively help Europe out of problems. We have been at war with certain nations at one point or another, but more often than not it has been to help another European country, or group of countries that were threatened or occupied by that country.

    • Paul X

      @ Yasmine

      Quote “you have been unable to show that you are not xenophobic”

      Here in the UK we prefer to accuse people based on what they have done, rather than expect them prove what they haven’t done…..

      …just another part of our culture we would like to preserve…….ciao :-)

    • Yasmine

      Paul, but your comments above and the articles I have provided do show what you and the Brexit campaign have done. So your point about the UK, which actually is the case across Europe, is a general one and does not fit this case. You just wish to spin and manipulate again, because this is the only way you can make yourself and your views look better.

    • JUAN

      it is call the USA

    • George

      True! We are Europeans and it’s time to take matters in our hands.

    • Duncan

      @George, an opinion is not “True!” It’s an opinion. You may agree with an opinion if you wish, or disagree. But don’t cite it as fact, it demeans the validity of anything else you say.

  6. Matej Zaggy Zagorc

    No! That would be another forced idea of a “common union”. And the fear of our failing border should not be exploited for achieving such a decision.

  7. Shibabrata Das

    In some extinct am agree with it if European have one army for secure there boarder ,its fine…if more than that…it might be happen like slovakia…

  8. Andrea Scacchi

    No at all. Never. Ever. A foreign army eill be used to control troubled area. If such an army will exist in the future i’ll certainly join a counter resistance group to fight it. No kidding

  9. Filipe Oliveira

    For what? For german and french rule? Like they do with economic policies disregarding small countries? F*** you.

    • EU reform- proactive

      To be precise ……yes, the present EU concept is not a country- far off!

      How can a “concept” have an army? The EU political experiment may dream of an EC expeditionary or mercenary force- never a traditional ARMY …… !

    • Duncan

      @EU Reform- Proactive, why would it need an expeditionary force? Surely any and all justifiable reasons for EU forces being sent to non EU territory will be UN lead forces? I’m still ashamed that British troops were ever involved in anything but the rebuilding process in Iraq. And I hope that Tony Blaire actually receives the punishment he deserves for his involvement in the process that lead us there. Just as I hope those that died or were injured or suffers the loss of loved ones are at peace.

    • EU reform- proactive

      …….no, it would NOT need an expeditionary force- it would BE a mercenary force- like the french legion or Daesh! Defense (force) is STILL a national competence. JCJ is jumping the gun!

    • Duncan

      Yes I agree, forming an EU army while the EU Is still individual nations is putting the cart before the horse. But more troubling is the fact the European project is several layers. If this EU army were to be for the Eurozone or the Schengen areas only (I don’t see how they could validate including economic zone countries) then what happens if the EU tries to force everyone to pay for it? Would Norway be able to refuse to pay for an army not built for or by it? Would the EU army be used as a political tool? Threatening looser connected nations with military force if they don’t merge fully with the EU? Will the UK end up being forced to once again sacrifice a generation of young people to fight a war in Europe which according to some opinions on this thread is none of our business? Like our involvement wasn’t wanted in 1803, 1914, 1939 and during the cold war. Well tell you what, how about we really do leave Europe to it’s fate in future? If it’s none of our business if you rip yourselves to bits or let someone else do it for you. We’ll sit on our island watching the chaos and say, it’s none of our business.

    • EU reform- proactive

      Duncan, one should sit back, “relax” & wait patiently! All these EU wizards in charge in Brussels are destined to fall off their treaty bicycles one day. I believe a better; more realistic & more acceptable concept will eventually emerge! Let’s see after the US election.

    • Paul X

      Quote Duncan
      “Forming an EU army while the EU Is still individual nations is putting the cart before the horse”

      Agreed, almost as stupid as trying to introduce a single currency…..oh…. hang on…

    • Duncan

      Well, the single currency concept has merit. But only if applied across the entire world and came hand in hand with equality in earnings and cost of living. As it would essentially stop currency trading from stripping money of any true value to the peoples using it. Making banking a far less corrupt and more opaque system, much more easily monitored and controlled and would result in fairer distribution of wealth. But this is off topic.

  10. Abraham Sánchez

    Yes! It wouldn’t mean, however, that we should for that reason a unique common government (although I personally would support the idea). I think it would make the control of the borders of the EU easier and more effective. But without a doubt, there must also be drawbacks, although I can’t imagine any right now. I would give it a try, yeah, why not?

    • Duncan

      You suggest an amendment to the constitutions of the world akin to the one Japan made after ww2? Where every nation forgoes it’s right to make war other than in defence of it’s own lands? Well, at that point alliances wouldn’t be possible. But also, isn’t declaring war illegal now under international war already? In theory only allowable by UN approval.

  11. Αναγέννηση

    Yes, Yes, Yes . It is time for the expansion of the current European Security and Defense Policy Unit of the European Union to be transformed into a million man all professional EU Defense Force , with a Galileo GPS system and French Nuclear weapons., designed to defend a protect the European Union from all external threats .

    • Duncan

      See, straight away you’d be cutting around 350,000 from the fighting strength of Europe. just under 1.5 million take away the 150,000 UK troops from that figure should leave 1,350,000. This unified fighting force will see the big numbers being thrown around to confuse and misdirect the public into thinking they’re being made safer while cutting back on defence. That’s before you factor in the effects on the economy those 350,000 people you just put out of work would have, then of course there’s the knock-on-effect job losses as fewer tanks, airplanes uniforms etc. Are ordered so companies will close or merge and that will cost jobs. Defence cooperation already exists to keep Europe safe, it doesn’t require a unified fighting force to keep you safe.

  12. Ivan Burrows


    A German controlled European Army ? history repeats itself and the EU fanatics wave their silly little gold & blue flags with joy.

    It will give us a new target for the Successor-class submarines to point their missiles at.

    Fortunately for the world France will be leaving the pointless EU next so at least you won’t have any nuclear weapons.

    • George

      Why are you still here? Trigger Article 50 and keep quiet in European matters. What you are afraid of is what you going to get. Crumbling loudmouths.

    • an european

      Luckily for you , Nige , Westminster still owns Scotland to rely on their nuke subs !
      But history could of course repeat itself if you enjoy and vote fare rights and you’re a british supporter of whatever far right like UKIP EDL NSDAP !
      Nothing blue in it anymore ….
      Yes but not me but i am proud of the Blue Flag ! You know reds are always warmongering …American Revolution !
      Take in mind that the scottish independence could leave UK nuclear weapons homeless and share’em to the European Union …..
      What then does remain of weaponry in England ..

    • Duncan

      @An European, what an absurd notion. If Scotland does leave the UK then the UK will simply stop basing it’s naval forces in Scotland. It won’t give it’s nuclear submarines away. Especially not to Scotland whose MP’s were all so vocally against having nuclear weaponry to begin with. As for UKIP getting elected (since EDL are not actually any more politically electable than the ira let’s focus on one group you mentioned that actually are a political party) it won’t happen. It will never happen unless the rest of the politicians do something even more stupid than any politician has ever done so far. Despite the fact the country wanted to leave the EU, and despite raising angst and anger towards the political establishment the UK’s population of neo nazi’s is small, UKIP are a broken clock, which is right twice a day and wrong the rest of the time.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @An European
      What a silly, illogical and emotional tirade.

  13. Andy Sanders

    Lets start by further military cooperation and adjusting the purchases as well as the BENELUX already does.

  14. Nando Aidos

    No! Enough of “joint” anything! Why do it? So that one has no choice if some idiot in Brussels decides to declare war on some “illusive WMD” country? Not only no, hell no!

  15. nando

    No! Enough of “joint” anything! Why do it? So that one has no choice if some idiot in Brussels decides to declare war on some “illusive WMD” country?
    Not only no, hell no!

    • George

      Don worry Englishman it’s not your business. Despite desperately holding on to your illusions your country’s lack of values can not be made good by talking and propaganda.

    • an european

      Do you mean Scotland invading England ?

    • Duncan

      Lack of values? What a bigoted ignorant response. Of course European protection is our business! Are we allies or are we not? To imply that Britain has no business debating the merits and disadvantages of European defence strategy is beyond moronic. It suggests that NATO has no business to complain about member states dropping their armed forces entirely and saying “Everyone else will protect us”.

    • Duncan

      @George, have you thought about what an EU army’s socio economic effects will be? Poor countries within the EU will be the largest recruitment base while richer countries such as Germany will have more to do with manufacturing and politics. Ergo Greek and Polish people would have to go off and enforce German will by fighting and killing/being killed. If that’s what you wanted to have happen then why the blazes did we even fight against hitler?

    • Danny Boy

      One question, given the British are the only European country with any experience of actually winning wars and they’re not going to be involved, who on earth is going to take this rag bag collection of perennial losers seriously??.

    • Duncan

      @Danny Boy, what a ridiculous and inaccurate comment. Rome, I.e. Italy had an empire long before Britain, so too for that matter did Greece & Spain. France actually has a very good war winning ratio. And it was Germanic peoples that sacked Rome and took over from Rome in Britain when the Romans left. It was Vlad the impaler (Romanian) who halted the expansion of the ottoman empire. Just basically read a few history books and ask your parents to try to teach you manners before posting insulting and wrong comments on the internet in future please.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      Ah, you must be a denizen of Utopia then?

    • George

      London: Giant village of crumbling infrastructure, useless education, byzantine lying culture, 30% of GDP in the grey economy, corrupted qualifications, lack of ability to renew oneself (infrastructure, professionals), dreadful conditions and epmployment rights, total lack of aspirations, animalic life ain animalic stables and animlaic carelesness about oneself (do your teeth first …) and on top of it mighty debt.

    • Duncan

      @George, so many untruths and exaggerations all in a single post! Is London perfect? No, frankly I’ve only ever been when paid to do so. How often have you been I wonder? Giant village, well I suppose that’s a very poetic description for a city. Crumbling infrastructure? No, the roads in and around London are some of the best maintained in Europe. Education is never useless, in fact it appears you could benefit with some. Byzantine lying culture? No, simply not the case. Byzantia and London have extremely different cultures and lying whilst it may be something done is not a cultural trait. Corrupted qualifications . . . . . I’m not even sure what you’re trying to get at here. Lack of ability to renew oneself, well give it 10 years of independence from the EU then let us talk more on this subject. Dreadful conditions and workers rights, really? Victorian london’s conditions and workers rights were even then far better than people in some countries must suffer through today, and believe me when I tell you Victorian conditions and workers rights are completely abysmal compared to the UK today. Animalic life in animalic stables with animalic carelessness about oneself . . . . . I guess some former stable have been repurposed into living accommodation, but only after extensive alterations. Animals do care about themselves, it’s instinctual. Besides which humans are animals. Do your teeth first. Really, personal insults about appearance? Wow should I get my 10 year old to debate with you? Seems they’re more at your level intellectually, even if they’re still more polite. Mighty dept, yes cannot deny that. It’s a by-product of western economic procedure that all developed countries operate in dept. The “mighty dept” just reflects the size of the economy behind it.

    • George

      No soldier will die for Greece when Turkey will knock on the door.

    • Serge Lauer

      Of course not we aren’t anymore on the 2nd WW where Americans sacrifice their life against far right regimes !
      I wouldn’t bet that “no soldier” would sacrifice to defend European Union territory then ask you the first why are or have you committed for the Army !
      Times to be permanently be dependent on our american friends are over !
      The U.S. have sacrificed a lot of soldiers already by saving us against far right Nazi operation overlord ! And now it’s up to us to do the same in an united way learning to defend properly and acting offensively and preventively !

    • Duncan

      @serge, I agree that relying on US military is a bad thing. But that doesn’t make a unified EU army the automatically right way forwards. For a starters, what would it’s borders be? Economic zone, Schengen zone or what? A border force with independent armies would be a better way to go imo.

  16. Rui Daniel

    The same Europe that is unable to distribute among themselves refugees or applying common sense measures to address a economic crisis ?!
    How long would this European army endure, until it collides with the interests of countries that have divergent views about Russia, Middle East , China or the United States?!
    This is not the time for adventures

    • George

      The reason for not being able to deal with these problems is precisely the lack of complete integration. The countries that hindered EU are the most vocal about its problems that they have caused in the first place. Why do border countries let in migrants and then expect others to take them?

    • Duncan

      @George, I think you’ll find the things preventing the EU being able to deal with cooperative programmes like these are because of the nature of ruling by committee. No country wants something pushed on them that’s bad for their country. No idea is ever unilaterally accepted by all. How many people have asked for the return of the death penalty? Killing is wrong, we know this yet people still think we should kill killers, not everyone but that’s my point. If you want a full EU country you need to abolish independent sovereignty entirely. No France, Germany, Itally, Czech republic, Spain etc. etc. just one Europe, with one European Capitol (probably in Brussels) one government, and one electorate. Until you have that you have nothing workable. Partial integration doesn’t work.

  17. Francesco Cecchi

    It’s time. European national armies are worth nothing compared to U.S army, Russian army or Chinese army. An European army would be at least comparable to those.

    • Paul X

      So there is no other justification apart from an arms race?…smells like trouble to me

    • Duncan

      Well, one alternative option to a unified European army (possibly more justifiable, or used as a gateway to eventual military integration) would be to establish a shared border security force with all the military capable trimmings. Patrol vessels and aircraft as well as armed personnel. If the EU is determined to have a shared external border with no enforceable internal borders then there’s a very real need to jointly secure the external borders and EEZ. Meanwhile enabling/requiring each member to still maintain a military force in it’s own right for self defence and defence of allies against aggression. Frankly I think until the EU fully integrates as a state any joint army would merely be a way for the financially poor nations to neglect spending in the right areas. I’m also a sinic of cooperative military hardware projects. Not least of all because by reducing the variety of military hardware by having one (for example) main battle tank for all of Europe it limits looking into viable alternatives, reduces likeliness of finding the best design possible even further by it needing to fill too many different requirements all at once to suit every theatre of war possible (just look at the f-35 stealth plane project) and it would stagnate research into better systems because it would be an all or nothing market, either the EU adopts H&K’s new superwonderassaultrifle or nobody does. But in principle it’s a nice idea and sounds really cozy for Europe to have a shared military, I just pragmatically think it want work well in practice.

  18. Franck Néo Legon

    No. Just a strong military alliance, an Europe only alliance that would end US-NATO destroying the world for the profit of US big oil and guns.

    • Duncan

      How naive of you to think that. The US may well be the big player in NATO, but I wouldn’t think that NATO’s existence has ever once helped or hindered US foreign policy. And at least while NATO is still a thing Europe is assured US military support in the event of hostile invasion. I don’t think any ww3 Scenario would allow Europe the 2-3 year breathing space the US took to get pulled into the other two before Europe would be almost unpopulated or completely militarily controlled

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Franck Néo Legon
      If NATO disassembles then the lesser-EU AKA rump-EU will have to quadruple its military expenditure just to match the expenditure of the old NATO.

      I’m sure that the loss of the EU’s 2nd biggest (some say biggest) net EU contributor and the super-hike in military expenditure post-NATO will go down well with all rump-EU citizens, especially the ones in so-called neutral countries.

    • George

      No its not the same. NATO is static. The EU can not avoid taking its share in world policing. Remember the protracted wars in the Balkans, the Middle East today, Chinas illegal expansion that might too much for the US to tackle alone, etc. Our word must carry serious weight to it, so we have to have an army

    • Duncan

      @George, the UN is meant to be the world police force, not NATO as it has often decided to pretend to be and certainly not the EU.
      Until EVERYONE stops interfering in other countries business except in defence of life through the UN, there is no way forward for countries in the spirit of cooperation. And believe me, we all need that cooperation. The status quo of over populace being handled with hatred war and murder will not enable our species to survive the end of the Sun. Only through cooperation can we find a long term solution to the survival of everyone. While we’re still at the point where we want our group of humans to be the ones in charge and killing, bullying and cheating to ensure it happens we are perpetuating our inevitable and at that point frankly deserved destruction. Take care of each other, take care of our home, find a way to make a new home when this one gets too small or utterly uninhabitable. And human endeavour can transcend the rest of time.

    • Paul X

      Agreed, no need for an EU army but definitely need a combined border control force.

      At least then there may be some chance of preventing all the illegals entering Europe wandering their way up to Calais where according the French they suddenly turn into “UK problem”

    • Duncan

      Did not see this post before posting above. Yes I share the sentiment. Joint security border force/counter espionage & terrorism cooperation. Is what the EU needs. And is probably something a post brexit UK should also support.

  19. Simion Truta

    We don’t want war we want the care where we are thought how womens cravings drive us crazy around the world and we die, and after that we suffer even more caoz they let go like they have not enough data storage space in their hearts to live with it and experience life like a ride with a bouth on the Stix!

    • Duncan

      Until nobody wants war, you still need a defence force as a minimum. Navies are very useful too, protection of commercial shipping, oil refineries, preventing smuggling and poaching & humanitarian/disaster relief efforts are all good reasons to have a navy. The only good reason not to right now is if you’re land-locked.

    • Paul X

      For example?

  20. Luchian Mdm

    Absolutely !!! With an aggressive Russia & a supporter of proxi war like Turkey with herself an aggressive stance against the EU with its overwhelming 1 million strong army we are fools not to consolidate and enforce a large modern european army. With western wages you will also attract unemployed men from Greece and the rest of the eastern countries Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania who will bear the full front of an eastern aggression on the EU.

  21. Любомир Иванчев

    I would just like to also add that Russia isn’t our enemy. Half of the European countries have common interests in trading with Russia and it is ridiculous to create an army to protect us aginst them. We are also highly dependent on Russian energy resources, like gas. The purpouse of this army should be to protect the european civilization and the values of democracy and liberalism from the invasion of islamist fundamentalism.

    • Duncan

      Well, as much as I agree that Russia is not necessarily our enemy, when they annex large swathes of land through force and enforce it with threat of more force it is childish to think of them as entirely peaceable. Besides, a military isn’t something you have because you need it now, you have it in case you need it tomorrow. As with ambulances, sea rescue vessels and fire engines. It is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Stating one single potential threat as not being a threat in no way reduces the need to protect against it’s potential future threat and other potential threats. But this is all off topic . . . . .

  22. Heba Elshazly

    Let’s say if EU Had such an army already and a country like UK decided to leave the EU .. How complicated the situation would be ?! Would some countries inside the EU wouldn’t use such an army union thing to pressure the Union?! What about the non EU countries ?! Is the EU has the same opinion and vision about what could be a challenge and how to solve it ?! Is the EU financially ready ?! Creating an army or helping EU countries whom in crisis?! And finally .. Would such an army strengthen or weaken the EU ?!

  23. George

    The EU needs a pan European army (I don’t know what English are doing talking here) and it is long overdue. We have to have weight to our words in the region and for our share of world policing.

    • Duncan

      Pan European but not including Britain? Kind of like a Pan British army that excludes the isle of white? What about Switzerland? The Vatican state? Norway? Are these countries part of Europe by your geography standards? How will their involvement in this European Army work? You seem angry against English people George, but you are not actually making any valid points to support your view on the subject matter.

    • EU reform- proactive

      …….anti democrats, despots, fear & war mongers………… quite revealing!

    • Duncan

      @EU, please explain what you mean/how you reached your opinions.

    • EU reform- proactive

      …………..@ George!

    • George

      Britain is not European. Never was and go deal with the world!.

    • Duncan

      @George, we are European. Like it or not it’s a geographical fact. Deal with it and move on with your life.
      Also, we as a nation were dealing with the world long, long ago and we will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

  24. Julia Hadjikyriacou

    I don’t see a belligerent Russia, if you have some info you are not sharing let us know. Apart from that, an EU army is ok as long as you 1) Disband NATO, never force conscription, use it for defense only and not attack, never use to attack or promote political agendas [your own or others] & resource [corporation/financial] wars., never use on other EU countries to bully them for disagreeing with some position of the EU, never use it against EU citizens if they dissent against EU policies.

    • Duncan

      You’ve described a border force. :)

    • EU reform- proactive

      …..good points- but “EU army” is ok?……disband NATO? Did you confer with the US?

    • Duncan

      @EU, this is obviously in hypothetical debate stage, notification of the US that NATO is going to be scrapped is to use the phrase jumping the gun a bit don’t you think?

    • Duncan

      Did you turn a discussion about possible EU army into a legalise cannabis debate? Or did I misinterpret your words?

    • Mihai Baba

      I see what you did there. Kudos!

  25. Filipe Marinho da Rocha

    Yeah its time for federal Europe with common Defense and foreign policy… Why no politic talks about a European federation??? Because they are still elected by national elections for european positions?

  26. Matej Mlinarič

    Biggest expense of any country is military. So if common army means allocation of those resources where ever they are required that would mean way less of economic burden on that specific country where that military would be allocated. Beside what ever happens to any of our countries could just as easily happen to someone else. So if we really stand united in common goals for our security and affairs for rest of the planet we would have a lot more leverage, if we at least show willingness to any competition that we are willing to combine our military capabilities for common efforts. When that is actually needed. Just however this is done national armies must have first priority to their our native country.

    Especially for countries with weaker economies when military expenses means lack of funds for social programs like pensions or something as vital as energy production. Since external borders really start with poorer countries their security is ultimately our security. So when it comes to security of our continent we need to look on what benefits greater whole then individual pieces. Beside if you don’t use military for something they are just expense anyway.

    • Duncan

      Yes, an ideal army is just an expense. But ultimately worth paying if it’s existence prevents it’s use wouldn’t you say? In peacetime though there are many jobs an army can do. Flood and earthquake aid. Plus let’s not forget all those engineering driving and medical skills it teaches people who would otherwise not likely afford such schooling (even if the schooling is free a poor background makes not going out and earning a wage asap financially difficult). There should be cost saving benefits to the unified EU army concept, bulk purchasing 6million pairs of boots should include significant discounts. Sadly I worry the bureaucracy will make it more expensive per military personnel, not cheaper. Then there’s the 2%of gdp pledge to NATO to consider, meaning any savings the military creates would need to still be spent in the military anyway. Which should lead to a bigger &/or better military (a good thing) but I suspect it would be used as an excuse to cut the 2% requirement and would weaken overall defensive capabilities.

  27. Enzo

    I think the answer is yes, defenetely. Without England Europe must strenghten its union in every field.

    • Serge Lauer

      Of course !

      E PLuribus Unum

    • EU reform- proactive

      …………………the “melting pot” metaphor may work in the US, here it meanders along an evolutionary labyrinth!

    • Duncan

      Imposing further unity will cause a bigger divide. The EU needs to be more inclusive of it’s peoples desires rather than leaving them out in the dark. It’s the only chance it has for a future. Make the unity you have already work and then build upon it if it seems there is merit for it in the eyes of the people. Don’t stack failed unity on top of failed unity.

  28. Ainhoa Lizar

    … Yeah… the future “european army” is crossing the mediterranean right now… and invading europe… People must be careful with what they desire. A common EU army in the wrong people´s hand – like the actual EU traitor leaders-, is not a good idea. Before an army we need borders, decent leaders, a common language, common economy and development all over Europe, and so on…

    • Duncan

      Exactly, if/when EU becomes a single state it will then need a single armed forces. Until then such an idea is foolhardy.

  29. Serge Lauer

    Of course it’s time or already overdue !
    I would say the Eurozone should have a united army wilst non zone States confederated Armies.
    Federal Army is HIGHLY effective in all areas whilst a confederated NOT !

    • EU reform- proactive

      Bravo! You made JCJ’s day!

  30. Thomas Beavitt

    No point in having an EU army AND NATO! So, how about disbanding the latter and merging Britain’s and France’s nuclear deterrents?

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Thomas Beavitt
      The French talk a good fight but NO more!
      Besides they still haven’t understood that they’ve lost the language war.

    • George

      Britain has nothing to do with Europe. Should be voted out of the EU ASAP.

    • Duncan

      1stly wrong, England has got something to do with Europe.
      2ndly illegal. Article 50 is our to activate and ours alone. Don’t worry though, we will be leaving. But that doesn’t come with a national shove off the continental shelf, so we will still be in Europe even out of the EU.

  31. Stefania Portici

    . ” il 25% di spesa viene dal Regno Unito ” , spesi per creare il problema ISLAM ! Come si può pensare all’esercito se lo Stato non ci sta ! Pazzi !!!

  32. Bullshit

    Lots of Englanders and Kippers who speaks against an EU army !!
    Nothing new !

    • Duncan

      Well frankly, why wouldn’t we be against the idea? Is it wrong of us to say we think it’s a bad idea? Should we just say bravo, go for it and stuff like that and then start learning to speak Russian? A European alliance = good (NATO already exists) European army = bad (until such time as there may or may not be a country called Europe, this will not change). One good idea was a joint border security force (which should also protect invisible borders, I.e. Monitor the web) to replace all those internal borders that you got rid of. And help keep terrorists and smugglers under control.

    • Gyorgy

      Yes, English are very active to hinder Europe. Time to put them and their money where their mouth was! We need the European Army and European external borders and a European Secret service, we need mandatory 5 hours a week of a European language to be taught in school, we need all political leaders to be fluent in 2 European languages too. From national parliaments to national governments.

    • Paul X

      Near the top of this thread I give a very good reason why an EU army will not work….now instead of some pathetic rhetoric (with exclamation marks !!!!!!!) you can maybe explain how it will work?

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      Lots of people with silly names spouting silly thoughts…

    • Duncan

      @Gyorgy, what makes you think we are hindering? If your parent told you not to poke a cobra with a stick are they hindering you in your opinion? An EU Army is a bad idea (at least as the EU currently stands) we have told you why it’s a bad idea. I and a few others have even suggested a unified border protection and policing force which might work. This (for my part at least, I cannot speak for others) has all been done with Europes best interests at heart, not in an attempt to subvert Europes best interests.

    • EU reform- proactive

      ……….you mean the “EU”………. not far off!

  33. Manolis Karras

    This army should of been created long ago. Secondly, a highly trained border patrol as Tim Knight said should of been in effect basically to protect against all illegal activities.

  34. Luchian Mdm

    We can not base our defence on the US, in case of ground asymmetrical attack by proxies (Russian proxies in Ukrain, Turkey proxies in Syria), like in Ukraine/Syria, we need other solution than full Earth Destroying Global Nuclear War. We need our european army a.s.a.p.

  35. Belamie Versco

    “Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.” Albert Einstein

    • EU reform- proactive

      …………and that is incompatible with high testosterone & IQ levels!

    • Duncan

      I like this notion that testosterone levels have anything to do with warmongering. It’s a simple undeniable fact that if you want peace, you must prepare for war. Think a mother of six girls would be ok with a foreign power being able to walk troops in and rape and murder and loot as they see fit?

    • EU reform- proactive

      Duncan, seems you compete with Einstein?

    • Duncan

      @EU, I’m not competitive in nature. I’m all for a world of cooperation and everyone on the same side.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Belamie Versco
      Great, but what if the enemy does NOT want to understand.

    • EU reform- proactive

      Duncan, be that my last response: in the pro or anti “EU”- everyone is one side anyway- all other sides are just imaginary enemies, created by politicians & need no army, only different concepts and diplomats. Therefore, this concept must change!

    • Duncan

      I agree, debate even (or especially) from different viewpoints is far better for our species than conflict. But sadly not everyone shares this viewpoint. Some will use violent means to achieve their ends.

  36. Luchian Mdm

    Look at our neighbours and the countries at the frontier of the UE armies : 1. RUSSIA (active 845.000 soldiers, total including reserve and paramilitary – 3.3 Million soldiers) 2. Turkey (active 510.000 soldiers, total including reserve and paramilitary 1 million soldiers – very well military equiped ) vs Main Eu Borders States which would face the first brunt of an attack from Russia/Turkey or others proxies (we are not including reserves from eastern countries many have already migrated and can not be called for military service in time vs those of two countries Russia and Turkey which are lead by strong dictators and are able to settle up the reserves faster than us) : Poland (active 99.000 soldiers), Czech Republic (23.000 soldiers) . Hungary (active 26.000 soldiers), Austria (active 22.000 soldiers), Slovakia (active 15.000 soldiers), Romania (active 75.000 soldiers) Bulgaria (active 31.000 soldiers), Greece (active 143.000 soldiers) and of which the Poland has the best equiped of all, Greece used to have but with the crisis they are not in excellent shape. We need an united European Army well trained and well equiped for defensive purposes only to defend against intentions to carry out direct/assymetrical conflicts againts Europe and must include here threats from terrorist paramilitary organization which can be linked officialy !! to a state

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Luchian Mdm
      In an EU war v Russia and/or Turkey – I’m sure that if NATO does not get involved then the EU or at least the UK and Eire will not be invaded.

      What do you think?

    • Duncan

      Terrorism is not linkable to a state, that has a different term. Espionage.
      Also, NATO has an active armed force capable of unified strategic defence of Europe, it’s actually one of the key reasons it was founded.
      Thirdly NATO incorporates Turkey. So you are in fact suggesting a NATO state attacking other NATO states. Given the politics situation between Turkey and Europe right now, it’s possible they may quit NATO, but until that happens lets not include their military numbers amongst threats Europe faces.
      Fourthly, NATO incorporates all of the armed forces of the individual nations that any EU army would have, in fact it would in no way strengthen numbers of troops actively ready to defend the EU, all it would do is restructure the command system of the nations willing to leave their defence to the EU committees that would take charge of it. If anything it may well be used as an excuse to cut defence spending even further within the EU, resulting in fewer numbers to defend against attack in total, not more.

  37. Hector Niehues-Jeuffroy

    Yes. A European army is long overdue. There are substantial gains in efficiency to be achieved in terms of efficiency once 28 distinct military forces are grouped into one and European military procurement is centralized. This army should be tightly constrained to the defense of the territorial integrity of the EU, with any foreign intervention requiring the explicit approval of the EU Parliament in an open vote (so that citizens can check which MEP voted in favor or against it). Furthermore, once a European army is created, the NATO treaties should be revised and e.g. the clause of mutual protection in case of foreign aggression be dropped, as the U.S. seem to have very different security policy objectives compared to Europe and some EU members aren’t members of NATO and shouldn’t be held to defend NATO members against their own interests.

    • Mihai Baba

      Really. :-|

  38. Duncan

    Cost saving.
    Prevents state organised internal war.

    Cons; unwieldy command by committee.
    A single army only needs to surrender once for the war to be over. 28 armies need to surrender 28 times before an enemy has won the war.
    Reduction in competing military hardware options limiting versatility of design concepts and eventual reduction of arms manufacturer companies as the bigger ones will get the one and only contract for tanks for Europe, planes for Europe, etc. Further limiting conceptual innovation thus rendering Europes military tech less effective.
    Simple jurisdictional issues, who has to contribute and who doesn’t?
    Reallocation of political will that an army represents. If Germany call the shots and don’t care about that patch of land will they really order the army in to protect it, and risk a war? France has elections coming up, it’s leader cannot risk voting for a war right now, they might lose their job! No sorry, you’ll just have to sign papers to agree to letting it go.

    • Duncan

      All countries should do this, no need for it to be exclusive to the EU.

  39. Valentin Le Dily

    Yup, gonna be fun transmitting orders down and up the chain of command in 24 official languages under enemy fire :D

    Good uncle Sam will be there to lead the way.

    • Duncan

      A federal European government would be the only way an EU army might actually function. Personally I’d be against this and the fact it looks inevitable is a key reason I voted out on 23rd of June. But, if it is the will of the people of Europe to merge their sovereignties I wish them the best of luck.

    • Richi

      There is so many reasons to do and not to do :) those contries and boarders been inveted how long ago?

    • Duncan

      @Richi, that varies wildly from country to country.

    • Gyorgy


  40. Michael Chambers

    It seems a big jump from national armies suddenly to a European one, especially in the absence of a firm Europe-wide demos. I read that Germany and the Netherlands are integrating their military to some extent. This kind of voluntary national cooperation and integration in small steps seems more viable.

    I am happy that the UK work with other European armed forces in various joint projects like dealing with piracy off the coast of East Africa.

  41. Grant Scott

    Yes it should be done. It will undermine NATO within Europe, kick the USA out and let us protect our own and build relations with Russia. Not let the USA use us as a buffer zone any longer.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Grant Scott
      If you think USA dominance is bad, wait till you experience Russian dominance!


  42. Seán Rohan

    YES. A Federal Europe with 1 strong Federal Armed Forces. Only European troops allowed in Europe, no Americans, no Russians, no British

    • Duncan

      So, the British army has to leave Britain? Or do we have to air lift all of UK land mass off the European continental plate? Does it swing both ways this policy of yours? When European troops wish to train with the S.A.S. Or SEAL to learn key skills do we and the US say piss off, no EU troops in our country? People in the media have accused Brexiteers as being closed minded and anti cooperative, this thread just proves that (certain) Europeans are definitely guilty of this mindset.

    • George


  43. Jeník Pikna

    Best way how to ensure Hungarians won´t fight Slovaks, Germans won´t fight French, ….

  44. Giannis Dimitrakis

    Europe gets better and better. European Union, Eurozone, Europol, now EuroMil (military). Coming up, EuroRifle, EuroBullet, EuroGrenade, EuroBomb and EuroNuke, dropped by the EuroFighters already in place. EU becomes the hated USA, day after day. A new imperialist is born, filling the gap between USA and Russia, ready to bomb the crap out of whoever disobeys the master.

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Re-Inventing Europe
      Is this Goebbels high?

  45. EU reform- proactive

    No. It is well known that EU Field marshal JCJ is calling for the creation of an EU army. This -not to be trusted- little Luxembourger presidential EPP candidate’s ambition is out of order!

    His “wishful” call may serve as a pretext for suppressing unfavorable political and social developments (EU collapse) which could end in an “Orwellian dystopia”! And- he has to overcome & abolish defense as a STILL national competence as well. Will the majority of European let this happen?

  46. Tobias Stricker

    Would be the best project for transfer union. All save money and have more securtity and the pur countries profit most.

    • Duncan

      ? So force Spain to allow Portugese to fight in their army etc.? YEAH RIGHT!

  47. Helder Alexandre

    Não me parece. Já ninguém se entende sobre nada quanto mais sobre um exército comum. Esqueçam!

  48. Pavel Ma

    Spoločná armáda EÚ mala byť vybudovaná už v tom období keď sa EÚ zakladala.

    • Boxhead

      Countries that live close to North Africa…. Surely North Africa is the most peaceful place of the Earth…

  49. Manuel Gps Lopes

    Get lost! 😠
    What about priorities?
    Who’s the country(ies) that have have weapons to sell?
    Why don’t you ask to discuss a common european tax system, a common european retirement system, a common european health system, etc. etc.?

    • Richi

      Wow somebody forgot how long we have peace in europe

    • Duncan

      Length of period of peace in Europe is very speculative. The last time a conflict occurred was in the 90’s with the Kosovo crisis, the last time Europe had foreign troops forcibly take land was in the Crimean peninsula not very Lon ago at all. The last time European troops were involved in using weapons against live targets was in Syrria. That’s so current I don’t even know how long ago it last happened. The last “war” in Europe ended in 1945. About 70 years ago.

  50. Yannick Cornet

    Yuk. Let us just remember what Einstein had to say about that in ‘The world as I see it’ (a must read by the way). Here, copy-pasted for you: “This topic [the importance of individuality] brings me to that worst out-crop of the herd nature, the military system, which I abhor. That a man can take pleasure in marching to the strains of a band is enough to make me despise him. He has only been given his big brain by mistake; a backbone was all he needed. This plague-spot of civilization ought to be abolished with all possible speed. Heroism by order, senseless violence, and all the pestilent nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism — how I hate them! War seems to me a mean, contemptible thing: I would rather be hacked in pieces than take part in such an abominable business. And yet so high, in spite of everything, is my opinion of the human race that I believe this bogey would have disappeared long ago, had the sound sense of the nations not been systematically corrupted by commercial and political interests acting through the schools and the press.”

    • Duncan

      Wasn’t Einstein instrumental in the Manhattan project?

    • György

      Because the great honvédség that has 3000 operational staff and 24000 thousand office workers will corrupt the enemy too…

  51. mr-ede

    Who will be the commander-in-chief and by which constitution will he be bound?

    • EU reform- proactive

      At this stage:

      “Deployment decisions are taken by national ministers from EU countries meeting in the Council of the EU.” & The “Lisbon treaty” applies.

    • mr-ede

      @EU Reform-Proactive
      The treaty of Lisbon is a multilingual treaty and not a constitution. You can see that, because some countries have exceptions. Hard to imagine, that a part of France is not fully bound to the French constitution – isn’t it?

    • EU reform- proactive


      nothing is simple in the EU! I agree and share your opinion that the Lisbon Treaty cannot substitute or compare to a “conventional” CONSTITUTION. But we know- nothing is conventional in the EU! Maybe supranational unconventionally fudged?

      The attempt by the EC to establish a “Constitution” in 2004 for “Europe” (EU) FAILED- since it could NEVER be ratified by all. The French and Dutch rejected it. The ratified “Lisbon treaty” (“Reform treaty”) is hailed by the EC & Eurocrats as its “replacement”. Not by me! Remember- JCJ’s democratic attitude: “if members reject it, we do it anyway”!

      Some “great” EU minds are still pondering about it:

      Therefore, a call for an “EU army is illegal & irresponsible! Who cares?

    • Duncan

      Regardless of constitutions that means before troops could be deployed to combat a threat you need to assemble the council and get them to agree on deployment . . . . . . How long would it take (just as an example, I’m in no way speculating about probability of it happening) Russia to take over eastern Europe when facing no coordinated defensive strategy? Being able to bypass troop deployments with a main push while using reserves to encircle them to prevent their effect deployment upon receiving orders? Council members rushing to Brussels from one side, Russian troops rushing to Brussels on the other, meanwhile even if the council assembled first, troops for the EU can only start rushing to defend Brussels after the council meets and agrees, by now only western EU troop strengths are combat capable since they are the only ones not already cut off. . . . . . . . . . .

    • mr-ede

      The EU has a mutual assistance clause. You don’t need a common constitution for that.

      But if you have a common army, then you should have a constitution, because a soldier (we also could look at the police) should know, by which basic rules (constitution) he is bound.

      You see the difference?

    • Duncan

      @Mr-Ede, my post stated very clearly at the very start that my point mattered not if this joint EU army was constitutionally linked or not.

    • György


  52. Hr Tom Mosen

    no! – they will just use it to support the US in a war against Russia – and we dont want to go to war with Russia.

    • Richi

      Who will use u? We didnot wanna go to afganistan,iraq….wtf get lost then!!!

  53. catherine benning

    A ‘joint’ European Army with whom being in control?

    Don’t you mean an extension of the American/Globalists expansion programme. The one that plans to envelope the entire planet so that people like Bill Gates can double their already massive wealth. Example, It is said, Gates, has 90 BILLION dollars. More than many countries worth.

    How sick is that?

    Private wealth use tax payers money to create bigger wealth for themselves by the private sale or weapons of mass destruction, and of war in general, to governments who purchase them with OUR money.

    Next there will be a European enforced military conscription of both male and female citizens. Do you want to be one of them? Or, your sons and daughters be part of it? In order that akin to Israel, you can kill to expand a goal of world domination in order to make the wealthy richer? Look at those who begin war for the Globalists to spread their fatal experiment. Do you see their family used as killers? Did Blair’s four kids go into the forces to defend their father’s goals? Tell me of those modern day war mongers whose children fight for their cause.

    Are you ready to die for Juncker, Merkel and Hollande to remain stooges of world money?

  54. klassen

    Hold on !
    Lets first ask the people of europe what they want. The first step should be democratic in/out referendums. This is putting the cart before the horse and will only lead to more discontent. Dont force ideals on people , it always backfires.
    We need to stop the globalists and banking cartels, throwing democracy overboard and forcing people to follow is a bad idea. They are biting the hand that feeds them. They are a desperate bunch.
    We all need to vote the europhiles out of office before its to late.
    Our countries will cease to exist if this goes any further. Dont let it happen..
    The european people need to start looking out for thier countries, if they dont they wont like whats going to happen.
    Turn the tide , its time for a change.

  55. Jesper Ipsen

    Are you gonna name that Army “Europäische Wehrmacht”, or just “Waffen EU”?

  56. Danny Boy

    I assume this new European army given the cost will mean NATO will have to be disbanded,so being as the U.S provides the majority of the manpower, leadership not to mention the money,the question is who will take over the America role.
    And how large will this army have to be?.NATO has always tried to have parity firstly with the Soviet union and lately with Russia,will the EU army have this policy?,without the U.S,U.K or Turkish forces involved that’s never going to happen.

    • Duncan

      Erm, the funding would not conflict with NATO funding, unless you think an EU army would be as well as all EU states in NATO keeping a separate armed forces in addition to it? It would be a logistical change of how some NATO members organise their troops, not forced to affect NATO fighting strength or cause it’s abolishment (despite a few calls for that happening on this debate).

  57. Yordan Vasilev

    The EU is the second market in the world and it must defence against the blackmail by Turkey, Russia and others. The law is nothing without the force. Because of that yes, it is time for a joint European army.

    • Duncan

      Well, that’s just not accurate at all. From start to finish blackmail only works on people who are scared. Needing a big unwieldy and ineffective army standing with you to reject blackmail just proves the timidity involved. Europe already has troops in adequate numbers, and allies to further bolster those numbers, with a good level of training and equipment to back them up. Any successions to blackmail that may or may not have happened are down to the timidity of the blackmailed. If this is what troubles you then I’d suggest new leadership.

  58. Bernardo Simões

    Obviously! The more we depend on NATO and the US interests, more problems we’ll have for more integration, sovereignty and independence to deal with Russia, Turkey and our own defense agenda.

    • Paul X

      To think the EU could “deal with” Russia without the aid of the US (or the UK) is naive beyond belief

      It’s all very well spouting an anti-US rhetoric but if T-14’s start crossing an EU border everyone will need to still be uncle Sam’s best friend

    • Duncan

      I think this is a mute point. If the EU does want military independency from NATO then fair enough. Start putting more into defense spending and you’re golden. History has shown us time and again just how big armies can get in Europe. No doubt they could match, or exceed the troop numbers of every bordering nation combined if they are willing to put the money in.
      BUT, I don’t see why that would need to be in the shape of a single army lead by committee and not just an EU agreement to increase defense spending. AND I can see the risk of an EU army suffering from cuts, indecision and various other extra bureaucratic issues which would render it as effective as a trade embargo on oxygen. Unify sovereignty, have a codified command structure in place and maybe an EU army could work, till that happens it’s a recipe for disaster.

    • EU reform- proactive

      Well soldiers, nobody doubts your Westpoint or Sandhust wisdom & war experience, but please do not forget to start and create enough hospitals, doctors, nurses and funeral parlors first before galloping into battle! PS: make a last “will” also!

      Or is it all an April’s fools joke? There will never be an EU army- because there want be an EU by that time! (-:

    • catherine benning

      @ Paul X

      Who in the world is a US friend? Are you kidding me. Was the Godfather the friend of all those he protected for a pay off? I don’t think so.

      What the real issue is here, but, they are not revealing is, NATO want more money from European tax payers. They want, as they call it, Europe and the rest of the fools in that union, more. As I mentioned prior, the Godfather wants to expand his business. Or, is that another doubt you have.

      You are so pro USA and its military moves, it does make me wonder if you are one military shill?

      And here you have the men at the top teling it the way they see it.

      And the woman who feels she was victorious as chaos was created. Chaos being the prime motive behind military movers and shakers.

    • Paul X

      Catherine, I would not consider myself exceptionally “pro USA” but I certainly do not agree with the anti-US rhetoric that seems to be an endemic part of EU culture

      I’m a realist not a fantasist and am not in denial about the fact the US has dug this continent out of deep trouble in the past and would most certainly be needed again if events ever took a similar turn

      I have had experience in dealing with Americans including their military and have no problems with them as people, quite why a whole country should be bad mouthed just because of conspiricy theorists and their allegations against their government and corporations is beyond me

    • Duncan

      @Paul, well I would suggest that since public figures are the only real way outsiders who have not interacted with Americans it is bound to be the case that is how America is measured. Also, the people of that country have a certain amount of accountability for their elected officials. After all, they elect them.

    • catherine benning

      @ Paul X:

      I trust you and your family are going to sign up to be on the front line of the war created and exploited by their military machine? If not, why not? As you are so joined at the hip with their expansionism plans you would love to be part of it? If you are not a willing participant, then you expect others to sacrifice for you, are you not?

      ‘I’m deeply sorry men that I cannot be with you on this tremendous day of victory. However, I trust you are fully capable of doing your duty without me beside you today.’

      And please don’t give me the John Wayne crap of the US saved the day for The UK with their continued debt, to this day have unpaid loans of billions in interest and their last minute entry into the horror show it became is another example of the pretend protection racket. They only joined after the Japs got involved at Pearl Harbour, what were they doing there I wonder? I suppose it did give them an opportunity to try out their atomic weapons on the cities of that country. Which they did ‘after,’ and I repeat, ‘after,’ Japan had verbally surrendered.

      Besides, this raising of the last world war is used to deflect from the chaos and war they are creating and exploiting today. 70 years have gone by since that event and the USA has changed out of all recognition since then. Ask any of your American friends. Today it is a hell hole of unprincipled hegemony.

    • Duncan

      @Catherine, I feel like I must make a correction. While it’s true America did not join in in the second world war until after pearl harbour (should that be harbor if it’s an American port?). It was in fact the fact hitler declared war against the US in support of his Japanese allies that brought them into the conflict in Europe. Also, this idea that the US somehow save britain in ww2 is speculative at best, downright wrong at worse. Britains navy and air force coupled with Hitlers’ poor decision to invade the soviet union are what saved Britain in ww2, U.S. Involvement merely made the liberation of Europe possible/much swifter to achieve. Also, I disagree that the U.S. has really changed dramatically since then. It seems to be very much as it was, a country so full of divisions yet hypocritical enough to try telling the world the American way of life is great and everyone should want to live like this. But it doesn’t take away from the fact that Europe has spent the last 70 years subcontracting a vast proportion of it’s defence to the USA, as such, without drastic increases in spending on defence across all of Europe any conflict that threatens European soil and lives will require the involvement of the USA’s military to be sure of a European victory. NATO is the bed assurance of the USA getting involved on Europes behalf in a timely manner. It’s as important to know the reality of the world we live in as it is to know the world we should live in.

    • Paul X


      To be fair I wasn’t putting so much emphasis on what America has done in the past but in relation to the topic of this thread, my main point is that even with an EU army Europe would still be incapable of defending itself without the assistance of the US

      ….and unfortunately I’m now beyond the age limit for signing up but I can assure you I have already done my bit

  59. Richi

    To the big thinkers EU army is good and is time to do so !!!!

    • Duncan

      Big thinkers, you mean like Socrates? Didn’t know he was pro EU army! I do hope you don’t mean the likes of Junkers.

    • catherine benning

      @ Duncan:

      From my point of view a lot of what you write is uninformed. First Americans do not and cannot spell English the way it was meant to be. They spell as they do in cartoons and adverts. They leave the u out of humour, labour, colour and so on. They seem to think we British are illiterate when we spell as they do not get taught in school proper English. they also have trouble with syntax and grammar. American spell, humor, color, labor, harbor and so on.

      Pearl Harbour is not in the USA it is Hawaii, so why did they have their military there are that time, December 1941? Why was it acceptable for Americans to steal Hawaii as they did? Because they had pineapples? Think what you are saying.

      The US declared war on Japan, Hitler did not at that time declare war on the USA. That is completely wrong. Likewise, when the USA dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, at the end of WWII, the Japanese had already, been defeated and were ready to surrender. So the USA carried out the bombings as a test of the power of these bombs. They wanted to see how much damage they could do, and to let Russia know they could and would do it. I will add links at the bottom.

      I have never suggested or insinuated the US saved the UK or Europe. That is a figment of their imagination. Along with Duke Wayne, they sell it for political reasons. In fact I know by historical papers that it is far from true The USA made money from the last war and the previously one, WWI, the British are still paying for, and will never be able to pay off debt. The interest is too vast.

      It is true that had Hitler not decided to invade Russia they probably would not have lost WWII. As with Napoleon, they underestimated Russian winters.

      As a person who has relatives living in the US and having spent a good decade there myself, I know full well, as in the UK, it has changed out of all proportion. Not only since after WWII but since 1975. Franklin Roosevelt created the politics for a vast change to American standard of living in the 30’s. Which, since Reagan and Thatcher, has now been dismantled and left the people of America in severe poverty, including much of the middle class. Poverty of the kind they see now has never been as destructive before. Even 1929 didn’t bring such a downfall of their income and opportunities as they see today.

      The divisions you speak of in the US has never been as it is now. I believe you have been sucked in by the idea that the import of slaves to the Southern Plantations created the divisions we see now, as the story goes, it was only African slaves who were sold to the US for these purposes. That is completely untrue. White slaves from Ireland and other European places were sold in the US at the time, but, until today has been all but hidden. The colour of their slaves was not important to them. The same propaganda is sold today to keep the story of slavery a black issue rather than a human issue. Additionally, slavery is more widespread and prevalent today than it ever was. It has never ceased and the trading is the same as always. People of all colours, race and creed are sold through slavery in the Middle East, India, South America and Africa, just as always. The only reason you don’t hear so much about it is, political movements want to play on the issue of colour and racism. Reality reduces their argument when you point out the facts. And those who are benefiting from the one side view get very angry when reality is raised and truth outs. Because it kills their sales.

      Europe didn’t subcontract its military to the USA. It was forced on Europe after the war, via the US Martial Plan and their set up and plan, via the CIA, of the European Union. Europe, is part of the US Empire and they don’t want that falling out of their hands. ~We are big money makers, via our enforced military spending on their bases and their control of NATO. More importantly, with the UK running as patsies, as they believe we are, they want to increase our spending on this junk as they have plans to expand their land grab eastwards, with us and our cities as the sacrifice.

      Private money makes billions out of the tax payer by pretending they need more and more war and its machinery. And they do it by privately selling through government collusion, arms to us the people. Which increases shares and dividends in arms companies they have huge shares and dividends from. This builds their bank balances no end.

      Look at who invests in the arms trade. It is leaders and politicians who make enough for twenty lifetimes that are the lead marketeers in this business. Get smart and use your loaf.

      The promoting of so called ‘racism’ is what keeps the populations motive going for war. Which is why they have promoted mass migration from outside Europe so rapidly. It causes chaos and chaos creates war.

      The stealing of Hawaii

      Then, much later, Roosevelt made a difference for the starving Americans. Of course he was hated by the rich and powerful. This is a reflection of what is taking place across Europe today. The theft of tax payers rights and funds. In other words, the planned return of slavery.

      How the Americans lived in the 1950’s after the increase of their personal income via the Roosevelt policies.

      Then came Reagan and Thatcher, who decided they, the rich, didn’t have enough. So, as with Hawaii they stole from the poor.

      And last but not by any means least.

      Hope you enjoy the history lesson.

    • catherine benning

      @ Paul X:

      Who will Europe need to defend itself from?

      How much more military hardware is needed to ‘protect’ Europe? The enemy of Europe is already within its administration. The policies it is following is its downfall. And defending it by a viral military machine is futile.

    • Duncan

      @Catherine, pearl harbour/harbor is indeed in Hawaii. But it was/is a U.S. Naval military port. I was not commenting about the validity of their presence their, merely I enquired as to the etiquette involved I referring to a harbour in English when I was referring to something named in American English, I.e. Should I drop the u or not?
      I may have been misinformed about the German declaration against the U.S. In ww2, but this was information I got from my father who was alive at the time as well as at least 3 documentaries on the matter, not usually less reliable than Wikipedia as sources for information go.
      I never commented about the dropping of the bombs, but i think it fair to point two points, first is I have (until you mentioned it) never heard this version of events where Japan surrendered and then the US dropped the nukes. And secondly, they didn’t feel the need to drop the hydrogen bomb on a population centre to demonstrate it’s destructive potential to the world, they simply filmed it and that was enough for massed hysteria (justifiably) to set in around the world.
      The divisions in America go back far further than the introduction of the plantation slaves. One key reason for American independence being declared was the restrictions placed on the colonies with regards to taking further lands from the natives, the reason (or one of the reasons) that the country even existed was to enable stealing, murder and religious persecution. They then also used mass slave labour, the used massed Chinese immigrant workforces to build their railroads under abysmal working conditions, they then freed the slaves but failed to make them equal citizens even to the point where a U.S. Olympic hero who was African American wrote that he received better treatment in Nazi Germany than he did upon returning to the U.S.A. The division has always been there and if you want to delve into such a dark seedy part of America’s history you will be able to see for yourself that it’s no worse now than before, simply just still not good enough.
      I’m not really sure how to comment about your long winded rantings regarding your anti-establishment conspiracy about the U.S. Government (which may or may not be valid, but it the way you talk about it was akin to wearing a tin foil hat to stop them reading your mind) other to say it was immaterial to anything I have posted. But you need only look at the amount spent on defense, and to have seen some of the defence reviews undertaken (or read the minutes online) to know that (no matter why) U.S. Military strength has been used across Europe as a reason to validate cutbacks in military and/or to not spend on military since the end of ww2. The UK only developed their own nuclear weapon programme as a result of 1 bad experience from 1 bad meeting between a British and a U.S. politician, and even then once the British had demonstrated capability in the field they were eager to drop research and development costs involved and merely purchase U.S. Built warheads instead.
      My piece said, I will now peruse your links.

  60. Yasmine

    Yes, it is. We need to defend our borders. We are being invaded from the east and south.

    • EU reform- proactive

      Y, “of course”, a police force is “incapable & incompetent”. The invasion from the south by refugees & economic migrants need an EU army urgently & fortifications on the “eastern front” against Russia & China as well!

      Let me commend you for supporting (of course your democratic right) another such dangerous “step by step” fantasy promoted by Bilderberg, Goldman Sachs etc.

      Never mind our home grown clowns JCJ, Angela Merkel, Federica Mogherini, Bulgarian economist and EU administrator Kristalina Georgieva.

      Surprisingly, today’s emancipated EU female battalion will only hasten the EU’s collapse and save us all from a most unfortunate & unprecedented event of the 21st century.

      We know, after Brexit the EU is in a “period of reflection”! Or is it panic reaction?

    • Yasmine

      EU, I find your claim that the Greek police can stand up to the Turkish coast guard who smuggle jihadis into Greece thoroughly entertaining. You are aware that Turkey has officially threatened Greece with war, is illegally occupying a part of Cyprus, is not recognising the Republic of Cyprus, is in denial of genocide, and is currently invading Syria after pulling out Iraq? And all this while it is a Nato member. We need gun boats not handcuffs.

    • EU reform- proactive

      Y, WHO said “Greek” police? It’s your writing- or? Your emotions got the better of your senses once more. Ever heard & understood what FRONTEX’s role is?

      Hint: A border “POLICE” institution created by the EU- at times “assisted” by members’ naval ships in the Med Sea for “humanitarian” reasons . EU Critics (me) maintain it failed dismally- so did the “DUBLIN ACCORD”! And so does the whole EU!

      It is highly advised, that vehement pro EU supporters be adequately informed about their beloved concept- otherwise such militant EU female troopers opinions could be mistaken with fiction- like: “The Modern Amazons”.

      I believe, even JCJ wouldn’t ENTERTAIN to use an offensive military machinery (“EU ARMY”) to control & “defend” the Schengen borders (~12,000km land & 44,000km sea)

      To assist you please start and learn more about FRONTEX & other EU legislated matters. A first but good start would be :

    • EU reform- proactive

      Erratum: sorry, let me be accurate & admit my gross name deviation while referring to the “Dublin accord”. It’s EU name is: the Dublin Regulation, the Dublin regime or the Dublin Convention! How can I?

  61. EU citizen

    @Paul X. I may have to disappoint you, it is isn’t just a few people or me and my sister are extremely unlucky. I got harassed twice when speaking a foreign language (and I wasn’t shouting or anything). My sister got harassed twice too while talking to her boyfriend. What is more she was asked by one of her British colleagues whether she is still planning to stay (my sister is a scientist) and a lady on the street asked when was she going to her country. We have been here for many years and never have we faced anything of this sort! The leave campaign was all about immigration and for more people any immigration. I have no idea why you voted but for a great majority that was the reason it wasn’t controlled immigration, it wasn’t the NHS it was just hate, nothing you can promise them could satisfy the hate and the desire to get rid of muslim and other minorities along with all the EU. I am not saying there weren’t smart people that voted leave, to be fair it doesn’t even matter whether Britain is in or out, on the grand scheme of things people with power/money will find way to benefit from any situation but I am against bigotry and right now it is on a massive scale in the UK, at least compared to what it was before. I have no idea what your ethnicity is but your comment sounded like a white guy trying to explain to a black guy that there is no racism …

    • Duncan

      @EU citizen double posting? Please read my response above.

    • Paul X

      @EU Citizen
      I can assure you I accept there is racism…… not only here in the UK but in every country in the world

      …and I feel sorry for you, not sorry because of what you have experienced but sorry that you feel over 50% of the UK population are racists because of it

  62. Nikos Themelis

    If the Eastern countries want a unified army, they are free to create one, with their own funds and personnel.

    • catherine benning

      @ Paul X:

      What is this racism you accept as being so?

      Race is not the reason for this discontent of mass foreign import. The discontent and its rejection, is of other cultures and creeds, because those cultures and creeds do not assimilate into the host cultures or creeds.

      The changes taking place in Western societies due to differences of belief in what is criminal or acceptable to the host culture is creating fear of loss of what is already present and is seen as being happy with. And are they wrong? The murders, rapes, deaths, strange belief systems, life practices, and mutilations that are totally opposed to the way of life and acceptability of the European is indeed a great danger to our cities and towns.

      The race of the individual has nothing at all to do with it. And to pretend otherwise is simply devious. Lifestyles, not race, are the issue creating the fear. And it always has been so since this began in huge numbers.

      The people, many years ago, made it more than apparent to our politicians that they didn’t want these changes, but, they were ignored. Democracy is supposed to be the will of the people or nation within that democracy. To defy that will is called treason.

      It has been denied since not too long after WWII. The trouble with the differences began back than, and the propaganda filled lies began in earnest. The problem was created by Empire.

      And here is an interesting alternative view. One that should be listened to with great importance. It shows that national identity really is important to man. And that his right to keep that ‘race’ and ‘culture’ in tact is paramount to all human beings.

    • Paul X


      I was not referring to any specific example of racism merely responding to an accusation that I was in denial that racism exists (also adding the important fact that is not just a UK problem, as many on here seem to believe)

    • György

      Because the world around EU is Syria, Ukraine, Lybia, Turkish coup de etat, uncontrolled migration, conflict in the Middle East, the wars in the Balkans etc. This is why.

  63. Julia Hadjikyriacou

    As long as NATO is disbanded, no compulsory conscription, not to be used in EU countries for dissenting governments or citizens. Also end this ridiculous and dangerous idea being forced on EU member country Cyprus by the UN, NATO and the EU of having the invader and occupier Turkey placing a 100% Turkish army under the guise of NATO as a guarantor, when as a guarantor they invaded and still occupy Cyprus with their illegal troops, and replace them with the EU army as our guarantor.

    • Duncan

      To be fair, they are there as a guarantor of a treaty they co-signed regarding Cypriot independence. Not under the guise of NATO, also Britain also maintains a garrison in Cyprus as another guarantor of the same treaty. It was actually a Greek lead invasion that legitimately threatens the lives/rights of the Turk-Cypriot minority that triggered Turkeys invasion. I’m aware the invasion was never ratified by the UN, but as a signatory state, they upheld their promises. It’s also almost certainly overdue for them to withdraw or at the least downscale the operation given the aggressive Greek government responsible has long since gone. . . . . . . but I think it vital to keep perspective rather than adopting a position of extreme opinion. Who can say how many deaths were prevented? Nobody knows, what would people have thought if Turkey had not intervened and all Turk-Cypriots had been massacred? Would you be condemning inaction just as loudly? Certainly Cyprus would have been independent no longer without Turkish intervention.

  64. Peter

    I’d rather say yes – but much more important, I’d say: it is time for a European republic based on rather equally inhabited regions, and finally abandon annoying 19th century nation state concepts which don’t solve any problems!

  65. Jonathan Thomson

    Haha. All those grubby little countries want to get their hands on Frances nukes. Lol has to be France’s nukes now coz their obviously not getting britain’s.

  66. Jokera Jokerov

    A common EU Army whre the Germans will command after loosing 2 WWs, the French will do the catering and the Italians will do the fighting. Switzerland will defeat it in 2 weeks. :D

  67. Victor Kristiansson

    Pros and cons.

    A greater statement to Russia and America

    But what of standardisation? Every nation uses different armaments. And we will need a common foreign and defense policy, and good luck with that

    • György

      Why good luck with that? Everybody in Europe wants to control the migration, everybody in Europe wants Europe to have a heavy word in the affairs in surrounding territories.

    • Duncan

      @Gyorgy, I’m impressed that you have been round all of Europe and asked everyone what it is they want. But surely not every nation wants the same ‘heavy word’ for every surrounding territory. After all, countries dependent on Russian gas would surely not to “poke the bear” over Ukraine, whereas nations with stronger ties to Ukraine would probably be in uproar over the Crimean crisis. That’s just one example foreign policies may vary.

  68. George Grammatopoulos

    Let’s take a step back: Europe is still supposed to function as an alliance, not a federal republic. Its executive instruments do not possess enough authority to undertake effective command of independent armed forces. Regardless whether it would be desirable or not (which is a whole different story), no, it definitely is not time for a joint European army.

  69. Eugenia Serban

    If that army will be able to ensure the border security of EU states against illegal migrants, then yes, a strong well trained army would be necessary

    • Duncan

      Using military assets against migrants smacks of despotism. Frankly I think a more European/air,sea & land version of the U.S. Coastguard As a joint border security service, would be the better option. Trained to high standards, access to secret services databases. Stop and search checks on shipping within territorial waters/eez. Capable of deploying coastal patrol vessels, search and rescue helicopters, firearms trained officers with military grade equipment , long range radar stations. Border checkpoints all round Europes land borders. Possibly a step too far but maybe not would be defensive surface to air missiles, at afv’s and air defence interceptors. This would in fact make it a policing force with military grade equipment and training. It’s only mandates to protect Europe from smuggling, infiltration, illegal immigration, piracy and so on. This would keep the armies of Europe intact, and in event of a prolonged war would add hundreds of thousands of potential military personnel with a high degree of skill crossover to the military of the state nations. I don’t think anybody is arguing that a joint border protection & enforcement is a bad idea when there exists a joint border. That makes plenty of sense. Sending apache gunships against civilian refugees should be condemned by the world if it happens.

    • György

      And when Turkey knocks on the door in Cyprus remember what you just said.

    • Duncan

      @Gyorgy, this tickled me. The notion of (what I assume you think as an invading force) knocking . . . . . .

  70. Diego José Costa Pérez

    We are not prepared for that, we are still a group of countries. Maybe in some years, we COULD officially become a whole, but it’s too soon. Then, it would be right to create an army. In addition, EU needs to change a lot since there’s a tremendous democratic deficit.

  71. Bart Van Damme

    The “union” that turns on its own members every chance it gets should have a unified army? LOL

    • György

      Those members that view the Union a milk cow of fools.

    • György

      When and if North Africa will go kaboom you will be the first to ask “where is Europe?!”

    • Duncan

      @Gyorgy, when/if North Africa “goes kaboom” Europe will be situated to the north across the Mediterranean Sea from North Africa, just as it always was. What has this got to do with the topic or Alfredo’s post?

  72. Nikos Themelis

    There is no reason for a European army. Europe never supported Greece against the Turkish aggression. Cyprus is still to this day half in Turkish occupation. If the Visegrand countries want adventures with Russia,they can go annoy the bear themselves. We have no interest in war games and we cannot afford them.

    • Adrian Limbidis

      Having your country invaded by Russia for 60 years was no “adventure”, dumbass.

  73. Tomas Mzr

    Never ! I would prefer to go for a war with Russia myself than giving up lefties from Brussels another inch of my sovereignty.

    • Adrian Limbidis

      You weren’t asked !
      You’re out of this union, brit. This no longer concerns you.

    • Duncan

      @Adrian. I think I made my point about why it does concern us Brits earlier.

  74. Tomas Mzr

    Never ! I would prefer to go for a war with Russia myself than giving up lefties from Brussels another inch of my sovereignty.

  75. SD

    This policy cannot work with Neutral Countries being involved. MARK MY WORDS this European Army will fight wars just as Nato has fought wars in Afghanistan, Iraq etc., they will claim to bring democracy while they are doing Regime Change and looking for Oil, Lithiun, Gas or any of the vital Ressources that they need.

  76. Paul X

    So from his speech today it looks like Juncker is going to push ahead with this?

    Again the UK will be watching from the sidelines as another ill-conceived, badly managed attempt is made to artificially force together a symbol of individual countries sovereignty ………… and again it will cause major internal issues and fail miserably

    Just like the Euro only this time people’s lives will be on the line

    • Duncan

      So in your opinion Europe (in the form of the EU) needs an aggressive foreign policy? Why else does it need an EU army to have this Unified foreign policy, so that must be what you mean.

  77. Christos Mouzeviris

    Nope… Why must it be “aggressive”? We are more “aggressive” by being in NATO under US leadership… With our own army we can be more independent and less obliged to America for their protection, in return us participating in their wars that we did not decided on.

    • Duncan

      You already have your own army. And America has never forced anyone to fight along side them. They’ve never needed to. With NATO being made up of smaller members it’s usually been the case that at least one will back them militarily. Any independence gained from American control would be overshadowed by EU taking over command completely of any and all armed forces of 27 countries.
      If the foreign policy you would wish for is none aggressive why would it need an army to be successful? Also, as noble as you (claiming) to want/need an army to impose, sorry enFORCE, sorry I mean support your none aggressive foreign policy dream. What guarantee do you have this army will not fall under the command of someone who does wish to use it aggressively? US, Russia, China. At that point, these are the people who could stop this behemoth army. Do you really want to risk a situation where one of them feel they need to attack Europe because of a single (potential) megalomaniac? NATO is only forced to fight as a complete and full sized force if one or more members is directly attacked. Not because one person (or maybe one small group of people) want to make India give them cheaper prices for tea, or to make north Korea remove Kim jong Un from power or whatever else that they have no real right to do. Which is less antagonistic?

    • Duncan

      In short as I’ve said elsewhere, for defence NATO is already there, it already works why change what works? For political will, ethically only talking is acceptable. For curbing despotism and war criminals please see the UN. There is 0 justification in terms of “foreign policy” for an armed force of any kind at all. An army is a terrible thing to unleash upon anyone, and should only be done in absolute need. When not being unleashed as a fighting force, training in readiness to fight and humanitarian efforts such as participating in UN sanctioned peacekeeping forces, disaster relief etc. are the only things it should be used for. It should never be used to threaten others into submitting their will to yours.

  78. Christos Mouzeviris

    Have you read the article before you go on on your delirium? Who said of sending Apaches against refugees??

    • Duncan

      Nobody, but several people mentioned using this joint EU army to stop immigrants, Apache gunships are one example of what that might include. Sorry, I’ll amend my point to replace apache gunship with weapons of any kind. Better?

  79. Adrian Limbidis


    1. GERMANY should not decide unilaterally. Nor should any of the russian gas addicts of Europe.
    Otherwise this “army” is already in the grasp of Putler.

    2. No more foreign “interventions”.
    We like our young lads alive thank you very much.
    Let americans die for rich billionaires.

    3. This army should uphold NATO’s commitment of keeping Russia in line.

    4. The EU should get nukes.
    No nukes = no power. I hate to say this but it is the TRUTH.

    • Duncan

      Provisos you will never get.

  80. Christos Mouzeviris

    @Adrian… I am with you on the above 100%… Totally agree on your comment!

  81. Andy Ramirez

    Soy hombre de negocios, nacionales y internacionales. Tengo amigos en Europa, Podrian tener muchos veneficios si sirven en europa. Muchos son Descendientes de europeos,o europeos antiguos.Deacuerdo a mi apellido estoy registrado en Europa. Busco lo mejor para mis amigos, mejores negocios, seguridad y bienestar para mis amistades.

  82. Andrew Lally

    try a single currency first and see how that works …. if smaller countries are not pushed around by big ones, then go for the army …. oops, been there, done that, failed

  83. Hector Niehues-Jeuffroy

    Certainly not. Oh, sure, there would be considerable savings in terms of joint procurement once a dozen European countries stop channeling their defense spending into their inefficient, small-scale domestic defense industries and force down piece rates by buying in bulk. And, well, I admit that it might be both efficient and effective to aggregate and streamline the 28 defense administrations found in the EU alone. But what about differences in security policies? Clearly, it’s not like there is some broad field of agreement, is it? I mean, surely, EU member states cannot agree that Jihadi terrorism and unfettered immigration or Russia’s geopolitical weight-throwing constitute security challenges to Europe, can they? And, last but not least, can anyone imagine a bigger obstacle to further European integration than having a common army? After all, it’s not like these European soldiers would fraternalize among themselves and come to see their considerable commonalities. Silly idea.

    • Ivan Burrows

      George Thomson

      Replace NATO with an EU army ?! lol

  84. Ivan Burrows


    The German government have already dismissed this idea, more National cooperation yes, warmongering EU army no.

  85. Andrew Lally

    try a single currency first and see how that works …. if the big countries don’t bully the small countries, then go for a single army …. oops, been there, done that, failed!

  86. Julia Hadjikyriacou

    If all EU member countries left NATO and the EU army did not follow the US aggressive policy, if conscription is optional and is never used against EU member states whose government or citizens dissents with the EU for whatever reason, then yes. But with the US manufactured ‘Russian agression’ comment in the article it sounds highly unlikely. So in that case, I vote no. The EU must come up with truthful info on Russian agression because all the people see is 1) Russia is in Syria legally. 2) Assad wants the Russian pipeline. 3) Russia has GMO-free agriculture. 4) Russia is the main supplier of energy to the EU. So what is the real issue the EU has with Russia? And please tell the EU citizens the whole truth.

    • Hector Niehues-Jeuffroy

      I’m sorry, but from the illegal war against Georgia in 2008 over the illegal occupation and annexation of Crimea in 2014 to the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine, what exactly isn’t “Russian aggression”? And please, don’t tell me “the U.S. does it too”; that has never been a valid excuse for anything.

    • Laurinda Seabra

      Hector the US does indeed do it at a multitude of a 1000 times more and in more countries than I have fingers in my hands and feet. (Not the the russians are any angels neither)

    • Julia Hadjikyriacou

      Crimea voted to stay with Russia. And all these countries are to do with Russian politics not EU politics. Also what about EU candidate Turkeys’s agression that is real and happening in the present. Turkey is ready to fight over Mosul, unwanted, uninvited and warned by Iraq, whom Mosul belongs too. However Turkey has recently stated Mosul,some Greek Islands that are owned by an EU member country, and even EU member country Cyprus belongs to Turkey. Turkey has its turkish army occupying one third of Cyprus, which it invaded in 1974 as a guarantor protector and nember of NATO. Why isnt the EU talking of Turkish agression in the now? Why is Turkey still an EU candidate when it is threatening taking land from EU member countries? The EU silence us deafening on a real threat within the EU and is concerned with non-EU politics and scaremongering about Russia with no actual real reason..

    • Julia Hadjikyriacou

      Crimea voted to stay with Russia. And all these countries are to do with Russian politics not EU politics. Also what about EU candidate Turkeys’s agression that is real and happening in the present. Turkey is ready to fight over Mosul, unwanted, uninvited and warned by Iraq, whom Mosul belongs too. However Turkey has recently stated Mosul,some Greek Islands that are owned by an EU member country, and even EU member country Cyprus belongs to Turkey. Turkey has its turkish army occupying one third of Cyprus, which it invaded in 1974 as a guarantor protector and nember of NATO. Why isnt the EU talking of Turkish agression in the now? Why is Turkey still an EU candidate when it is threatening taking land from EU member countries? The EU silence us deafening on a real threat within the EU and is concerned with non-EU politics and scaremongering about Russia with no actual real reason..

    • Julia Hadjikyriacou

      Let alone the Turkish agression in their own country from reporters, to army, to police, to academics, to citizens and atrocities against the Kurds, from an EU candidate.

    • Julia Hadjikyriacou

      Let alone the Turkish agression in their own country from reporters, to army, to police, to academics, to citizens and atrocities against the Kurds, from an EU candidate.

    • Hector Niehues-Jeuffroy

      @Hadjikyriacou: Crimea voted to stay with Russia? You mean the referendum that took place under foreign military occupation and without UN or OSCE observers? With ridiculously high participation? Organized by a guy who essentially became prime minister in a coup? Lol.
      The reason why the EU isn’t talking about Turkish aggression, as you certainly know yourself, is because it doesn’t want to deal with new waves of refugees coming from Turkey. Personally, I find Russia’s activities in Eastern Europe just as scary as the problems with Turkey.

  87. Andrew Lally

    try a single currency first and see how that works …. if the big countries don’t bully the small countries, then go for a single army …. oops, been there, done that, failed!

    • Zoltan Maurer

      Leadership lol they are losing everywhere they go …How long they wanna fight in Afghanistan =Vietnam…

  88. Stefania Portici

    un esercito senza Stato non si è mai visto ,a chi dovrebbe rispondere? Alla Commissione ? Suvvia …… ci sta la NATO

    • Davide Vecchi

      Ci hanno sempre provato e hanno sempre fallito. Ah già giusto, un esercito europeo senza inglesi… Tanti auguri

  89. Любомир Иванчев

    Yes. If the EU wan’ts to be an independent political superpower in the global economy, we need to have the means to secure EU political and economical interests. Diplomacy is means number 1 of course, and it always needs to be the default solution to problems, but in some cases it’s not enough. Like for example when dealing with terrorist states.

  90. Zoltan Maurer

    EU are not able to sorted refugees crisis can you imagine real conflict in EU ? It will be disaster…

  91. Marinos Ioannou

    I thought Nato was a joint army. Or you want to officially announce that Russia won’t be part of it but US will be?

    • Edi Eduard

      Smartass Nato is a joint army but its not a European joint army ,In a European joint army the Usa would not be there because they are not in Europe! ….

  92. Zisis Poimenidis

    Any army without a strong national backround is simply a mercenary army. Who profits from an army like that?

  93. Vinko Rajic

    NO , we have to wait until Germans remove Anghela and we remove “Christians” from our governments . Christians could create problems with EU army and army is nothing to play with.

  94. Bobi Dochev

    Yes, it is! Kick US and Canada out of NATO which serve only to US interests any way and voila, we have joint European army which going to protect us and our interest!!!

    • Kevin Ó Siondaile

      The US pays for most of our defence. I don’t want them in NATO, but we NEED them in NATO. Have no problem with Canadians, they should be allowed stay.

  95. George Athanasakos

    For the last 26 years Greece has been in the front line of European Defense at Europe’s one of the most sensitive South-East borders. Greece before the crisis had an average defense budget of 6-7% while for the rest of European counterparts was 1,5-2,5%. At the same time the European counterparts were trying to sell as much Military equipment they could to Greece( some times with bribes) in order to improve their economies and business even though that would put Greece into more serious debt. Now its time to share responsibilities by having a common EU defense budget and improve European cooperation.

  96. Kevin Ó Siondaile

    Yes! I would love to see a joint military, not just an army. I would love to serve in a European Air Force rather than having to go the the RAF in order to have any decent military career!

  97. Miguel Palma

    Separate armies but that train to work together if necessary. Many more advantages to have separate armies, many risks in having a joint army.

  98. Mikhalis Kanakis

    no, it’s late. It should had been years before, but better late than never. Time for a fully profesional european army

  99. Peter Nicko'lay Canseeheart

    The most important thing about that is how people flow trough space and communities. All the unnecessery talks and moves must be got out. We must start acting as a global community. Some people know it long before me of course, but I am laying my position here. So we need to be able to move single or by packs. It is part of the same thing. But that is a long process which starts in the basic needs that create, keep on and secure life.

  100. Ricardo L Gomes

    That’s the most stupid nonsense idea ever! we should even dismantle NATO and give up every kind of army, at this point we are roaming back to middle age…

  101. Michael Kalavritinos

    Yes, because the defence of European Borders Ideas,and Policies should be united apart of the economical advantages.It should be a common obligation to defend one of the most democratic areas in the whole world!

  102. Ricardo L Gomes

    You’re all sick and need to fall in love by someone, so put down the PlayStation and start acting sexy and get out on the streets! Grow up nerds!

  103. Fabrice Soulié

    Of course… and a federal police, a federal minimum wage, a federal social security, a federal retirement, etc…

  104. Nando Aidos

    NO! The Eu has not been able to get itself out of the economic proverbial paper bag and now it will fight a war? Give me a … break!

  105. nando

    NO! The EU has not been able to get itself out of the economic proverbial paper bag and now it will get together to fight a war? Give me a … break!

  106. Eugenia Serban

    Ooh, more money for guns
    While we re trying to finish the economic crisis and live decently
    What a good idea, yeey

  107. José Bessa da Silva

    No it is not! Europe is not a country. I don’t have to pay taxes to solve Lithuania’s or Italy’s problems with Russians and Immigrants. Their interrests are not my interests. My needs are not their needs. Our countries are not the same and I don’t trust my safety and security to foreigners. Even less I’m willing to give power to someone that I don’t vote for to run an army, that can be used against myself, my freedom, my culture, my ethnicity! I was never a Salazarista, but “Proudly Alone” seens a fair policy to be followed when people start to act stupid enough to even consider such barbarisms like this! What we need is to dismantle the EU and NATO…

  108. Alberto Esparcia

    The problem o EU is moral and the lack of european identity. Is mad trying to implement it with bureaucratic mesures. A joined army is the most stupid of them. The worst problem: euroarmy could be feel of an ocupation one in some countries, and this feeling is not stupid.

    04/10/2017 Pier Virgilio Dastoli, President of the Italian Council of the European Movement and a member of the pro-federalist Spinelli Group, has responded to this comment.

    04/10/2017 Jose Luis Marti, Associate Professor of the Philosophy of Law at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, has responded to this comment.

  109. Kyle Reese

    If US is involved in any way, thanks but no thanks. Enough of bad influence.

    • Ingmar Peitl

      In Austria the army helps for nature catastrophes, gives social aid, education etc etc. But it’s there for peace operations and defense naturally too. It helps at the borders.

  110. JoseQ

    1) Coordination is paramount on war and diplomacy.
    2) Military budget optimization is of major importance, always.
    3) A stronger, more coordinated EDTIB would boost innovation, maybe then we could even tackle space challenges and see Europeans colonizing the solar system.

    4) Of course it is dangerous to give military power to greed politicians and lapdog bureaucrats. Who among those on the EU institutions really believe in Europe and love Europeans? How many of them have greater aims than their materialistic comfort and decadent pleasures?

    5) <> is the solution to raise up an army?
    Over the last months I started to understand modern Russian patriots that live on western Europe, it is clear what’s their priority and which side they would take if there were fire in the middle; The same for Muslims and blacks by the way.
    *****Happy to hurt hippies and commies.*****

    It is clear that energy needs will grow a lot over the coming decades, but the costs of the war on Ukraine and Syria are enormous, “it is an insult for the whole human kind and the nature”. When all this shit is over, I would like to see the figures and check the balance, and compare costs against other alternatives like LNG or maybe what could be the biggest ever underwater gas pipelines.
    I wish I could check them!
    But this way there are some stakeholders taking huge profits; the problem I guess is that those same don’t want a strong Europe, just a lapdog Europe, and you’re playing their game (you too ‘Debating Europe’).

    It is disgusting to read your articles. If you don’t put clear all the obstacles behind Europe, then you are not aiming for the best future possible.
    Put that clear in your minds first, maybe then you will find courage.

    I am waiting for an European army, only then I would join an army and enjoy the military life and service to the European people and companies.

    God bless Europeans.

  111. JoseQ

    1) Coordination is paramount on war and diplomacy.
    2) Military budget optimization is of major importance, always.
    3) A stronger, more coordinated EDTIB would boost innovation, maybe then we could even tackle space challenges and see Europeans colonizing the solar system.

    4) Of course it is dangerous to give military power to greed politicians and lapdog bureaucrats. Who among those on the EU institutions really believe in Europe and love Europeans? How many of them have greater aims than their materialistic comfort and decadent pleasures?

    5) [[ When EU-Russia relations are at such a low point ]] is the solution to raise up an army?
    Over the last months I started to understand modern Russian patriots that live on western Europe, it is clear what’s their priority and which side they would take if there were fire in the middle; The same for Muslims and blacks by the way.
    *****Happy to hurt hippies and commies.*****

    It is clear that energy needs will grow a lot over the coming decades, but the costs of the war on Ukraine and Syria are enormous, “it is an insult for the whole human kind and the nature”. When all this shit is over, I would like to see the figures and check the balance, and compare costs against other alternatives like LNG or maybe what could be the biggest ever underwater gas pipelines.
    I wish I could check them!
    But this way there are some stakeholders taking huge profits; the problem I guess is that those same don’t want a strong Europe, just a lapdog Europe, and you’re playing their game (you too ‘Debating Europe’).

    It is disgusting to read your articles. If you don’t put clear all the obstacles behind Europe, then you are not aiming for the best future possible.
    Put that clear in your minds first, maybe then you will find courage.

    I am waiting for an European army, only then I would join an army and enjoy the military life and service to the European people and companies.

    God bless Europeans.

    • JoseQ

      It is disgusting to read your articles. If you don’t put clear all the obstacles *in front of* Europe, then you are not aiming for the best future possible.

  112. Ingmar Peitl

    Austria as State and area has the obligation to stay neutral from WW II part contract of Vienna from 1955. This came from the States of the World. And most Austrians want to stay so. And so do I. So Austria only is allowed to take part to peace org.s in the militarian field. And we should accept this agreement and fact.

    of/from Austria-Hungary
    Pollau (Pöllau)(Styria), State of Austria

  113. Petio Peshov

    big YES but the 27 countries need to vote for the heading personal and the army has to participate only in EU defending missions or also help in case of natural disasters or humanitarian missions and border defense and protection. It will be good also if EU develop more not just the cooperation but to has a coordinated EU corps regarding rescue operations in case of fires, natural disasters and so on. EU is a Babel tower but we can communicate and harmonize to be useful and helpful to each other instead of oblige and sanction. These institutions are more useful than all the EU Parliement and EU commission decision taking bureaucrates who create jobs and privileges for themselves wasting public money.

  114. Tamás Kovács

    See the USA election and Trump`s opinion about NATO .. like who will not pay enough NATO is not going to protect.. shows well, how easy to collapse NATO .. and you can become vulnerable very quick .. Yes I say, it is time to set up a European Army.. because we cannot rely on decision of American people in the future about their own presidential election.. although it is about their country but because of NATO and tradings and etc.. it is not only about them.. we need to stand up for our-self in Europe..

  115. Manuel Alonso

    Yes, more than a traditional army we need an European armed force that secure the European common external borders. We can not have millions of people from other countries arriving by food to our streets.

  116. Andre L

    I may change my opinion while Trump won this election with his crazy rhetoric. If he is going to move forward, NATO is compromised (I guess). We need our own defense in that case.

  117. Angelos Triandos

    Little late, lets have NATO go as other structures of the dreadful Cold war.USSR ia gone, so should NATO

    • Ivan Burrows

      Angelos Triandos

      Then who will stop Russia marching into Sofia ?, Brussels ? lol

    • Ed Hill

      It was rattified last week, so we’ve already got it… didn’t you notice it was mentioned on page 23 in the bottom right corner under the advert for hearing aids.
      Anyway google it….

    • Michael Lievens

      Concentrate on the Brexit and dont interfere. Thank you, come again.

  118. Marko Martinović

    Maybe EU should start by distancing itself from countries that fund ISIS? Or violate human rights? There is a reason EU is failing, and it is not Army

  119. Stefano Nasini

    It is time to leave the NATO and to start a European defense project. NATO is one of the bigger threats to global peace!

    • Paulius Paždagis

      And this accusation of yours is based on what?

    • Ivan Burrows

      Stefano Nasini

      NATO is the only thing keeping you safe.

    • Stefano Nasini

      Safe from themselves . . . Neither Russia nor China have never threat to invade my country. Who should I be kept safe from?

  120. Bobi Dochev

    I’ve said it many times! Get rid of NATO, then join the EU forces. Very simple and effective!

  121. Dimitri Fiori

    More complicated than it seems. A common army means we must all agree about who is our ennemy. Do we have the same ennemies and friends in France and in Latvia ?

    • Katrin Mpakirtzi

      All West european Greekroman valus of freedom democracy respect other religions and idiaiterotita of humans and societies ..

  122. Yiannos Phiniotis

    Definitely and should have been created long ago to keep barbarians out of the EU borders! Look at Turkey which invaded Cyprus in 1974 and its army is still there holding illegally 40% of Cyprus and threatening the island’s oil reserves and its Economic Zone area!!

    • Elisabeth Sommer

      Very interessting your view, because i live in Central EU and i am againt eu-army, but now I can understand that the Situation in Greece and Cyprus is different. (But please watch my post)

  123. Besnik Mufali

    No . Europe is not fare. Europe didnt do anything against the crimes of serbs against , bosnian, croatians, and also in Kosovo if it weren’t for USA and England . Europe has devided Albanian borders . Europe helpef Greeks to do masacres against ethnik Albanians of Cameria. Only USA knows how to keep the balances in the world.

    • Yiannos Phiniotis

      😂😂😂. You need to learn some history. Greece did masacres of Albanians?? Albania is not even a country. It’s just an extension of Islam. Hahaha. You are a joke!

    • Besnik Mufali

      What exactly dont you understand ????

    • Jose Quintans

      Stop crying for past injuries (all we already know we did hurt each others, we were a mess) and look forward, as Europeans, for a great common future.

    • Besnik Mufali

      We are not crying, but we are saying the truth. These people in the video and thousends like them are still alive , they have their houses in greece and ,greece a europian countrie doesn not allow them to go back to their propery.

    • Besnik Mufali

      Europe is not fare. We know that, most of Europian countries have a history of colonisation and still have colonies today. They hate one another and a common army is imposible. France is more conected with Africa and her colonies than with Europe. Germany is interested in Turkey in Asia than Europe. England is with Usa. Sllavs and Greece with Rusia .So is imposible.

    • Denis Ionascu

      Personally,I think Greece can hold the turks back,even with no help.And yes it will,if ever formed,sultan erDOGan can go screw himself.

    • Elisabeth Sommer

      I am against Eu-Army, because i am against more forgein soldiers in Germany (USA, GB, French they should finally leave Germany; The Russians did 23 years ago.) —- But if a Country from outside EU attacks one EU-Country the National Armys of the 27 must help. (Otherwise EU would be a bigger Joke than nowadays.)

  124. Alex Tselentis

    WW2 was basically fought over this “concept” it will never work in reality, as NATO doesnt work, Turkey today is ready to attack Greece, both are NATO members, and what does NATO/EU do ?? Sit back and watch it all ..

  125. Gatis Gailitis

    Yes. NATO as any organisation is interested in doing business. In the idea world, NATO woukd be aiming to put itself out of business, but in the real world we know it’s not going to happen. There is a need for a EU army now more than ever. We don’t need any foreign wars. We need to protect our borders and our brothers and sisters need to feel safe on our streets.

    • Ivana Arambašić

      You think that Orban, for example, would aloud such army to protect Hungarian borders 😂? Slovenia built a wire wall on Croatian border so where a hack this army is suppose to take the border position?

  126. Joao Antonio Camoes

    No. Europe is not a country neither a federation. We have UN, NATO and a few bi-lateral state agreements ( for instance Portugal and UK have the most ancient living military agreement in the world).

    • Pedro Luís

      Dá pra ver que a OTAN/NATO tá funcionando muito bem.

    • Denis Ionascu

      Not really,only people with different opinions than yours.

    • Adam Bxcz

      Lol one doesnt neccesarily exclude the other

  127. Enric Mestres Girbal

    I think is more important a policy of peace and frienship with our natural neighbours, and use the money to help the citizens.

  128. Nicola Piazzalunga

    I don’t think it is the time. Europe hasn’t been so divided as today and you need a cohese entity to have a common army.

  129. António Morais Rodrigues

    Yes it is time. Many of us are not to fond of armies…truth is Trump will leave us out for dry, and Putin does not have quite the same interests europe has.

  130. Αναγέννηση

    Of course it is long overdue for the establishment of a all professional million man EU Defence Force to protect and defend the European institutions of the European Union , like our much cherished Schengen Institution, which gives meaning to the European Union for all our citizens across the EU , from being undermined and destroyed by external threats like the Turkish State Sponsored flood of illegal immigrants into the European Union from Turkey. The EU needs to galvanize its military forces and position them against Turkey to effectively stop Turkey swamping millions of illegal immigrants into the European Union, and a EU Defence Force will end also the British State Sponsored Turkish Military invasion and occupation of EU member Cyprus since 1974, which has provided the British Military bases in Cyprus a security advantage against American efforts since 1950 to expel the British Military from Cyprus .

    • Παυλος Χαραλαμπους

      It can’t work, ok we can have some task forces here or there but a real common army technicly speaking can’t exist. Just imagine being attacked by Turkey in aigian or Cyprus and waiting 28 different palaments to give the”OK” to react!! Or imagine soldiers who barely speak English to have to work as a unit while bullets are flying over their heads, or think of the morale of the troops that they will have to leave their families in Germany or Austria to go and get killed for a country that they don’t care of or even worse they dislike.. Also think of the cost of building a army from zero it’s ridiculous to believe that it can work

  131. Elisabeth Sommer

    No. I am against an EU-Army. What about the different Languages, what about the national Sovereignty, what about the own and common history of each Country??? I want forgein Armys OUT of Germany (US, British, Rest French) and not more of them inside (- at the Moment and for a long time). — We need (maybe common) Bordercontrol on Schengen border – if Italy, Greece, Spain cannot manage it, but no eu-army. – If somebody will attacks one of the 27 (28) we must help this EU-Country but not stay there forever. (I ask for more Information: Why should we have eu-army, i can not see any very important reason.)

    • Elisabeth Sommer

      Now i read the posts of others and that Greeks fear Turkey this days and still of the occupation of Cyprus 1974. – This needs attention and a special solution.

    • Jose Quintans

      There is a nasty world close to Europe’s borders.
      Europe is the playground, none in the world wants a strong Europe, not China, not Russia, not Turkey, even the USA is not interested in a strong Europe.
      Europeans only have each other.

    • Παυλος Χαραλαμπους

      Greece is officially threaded with war from Turkey since 1986!! In fact many of the economic problems of Greece has to do with the military build up that started back then and continues even today.. Just think, Greece especially after 1996 crisis started the biggest re arming program since ww 2..and to be honest the way the things go, I can’t blame our politicians for that, after all in 1974 U. N and NATO didn’t want to help 1987 things was so bad that we started thinking about “last resort ” methods.. 1996 we were forced to give up our right to but our flag on our ground we even had to “thank the Americans “for that…. So after all these is only natural for the Greeks to feel “alone “

  132. Jose Quintans

    There is a nasty world close to Europe’s borders.

    Europe is the playground, none in the world wants a strong Europe, not China, not Russia, not Turkey, even (of course) the USA is not interested in a strong Europe.

    Europeans only have each other.

    • João Machado

      More Europe, more federalization and a European army won’t solve any of those “problems”…

    • Besnik Mufali

      Without NATO not only woun’t be a Europian army but Europian countries will attack one another as they have done before. USA keeps the pace in Europe. Wining of Trump and Brexit is dangerous for the world

  133. JoseQ

    There is a nasty world close to Europe’s borders.

    Europe is the playground, none in the world wants a strong Europe, not China, not Russia, not Turkey, even (of course) the USA is not interested in a strong Europe.

    Europeans only have each other.

    – Military budget optimization.
    – Information gathering and intelligence reports for sound decision making.
    – Coordination.
    – Counter terrorism, drug trafficking, humans trafficking.
    – Protect Europe’s energy supply.
    – Stable and peaceful environment for business prosperity.
    – Foster human progress pushing innovation through boundaries which only the military could dare to.

    Looking forward to join.
    Nov 22nd filled my heart with hope and gave oxygen to my inner fire!

    Next step is to put pressure on the European Council to approve the draft.
    I’ll join the debate again when I have more time.

    God bless Europeans.

  134. João Machado

    As usual, the EU is already doing it behind the curtain without asking anyone’s opinion (EU “democracy” as we so well know it by now). The EU army is already in place! Check what happened to the UK’s defense budget for example…
    We already got the flag, the anthem, the constitution disguised as a treaty, the army would be the next logical step. Let’s stop the madness from its roots…

  135. Isabella York

    No. That’s admitting to more War always driven by the US. Stand up to the bully the US govt and say NO and yes to peace no European army not with my boys.

    • Max Bé

      You are wrong here. A European Army is the only alternative to the NATO. We would be more independent from the US. It would be a first step to unite the EU. If we want to compete with the rest of the World, this is our only option.

    • Isabella York

      Ok I hadn’t considered that. I only want no more War. But your argument against America and NATO is a good one.

    • Isabella York

      But the competing with the rest of the World smacks of more War talk not peace and that is what I am against.

  136. Stella Kontogianni

    European army is not the first priority that EU has now. The first priority is to settle a common policy on several problems such as natural disasters, immigration, health issues and then probably could think of a european army

  137. Thomas Krikonis

    Hope everyone realize that there are some common enemies for European countries …US never likes the idea of European army …If we want E.U strong yes there must be a defense army

    • Ivan Burrows


      Including Brussels jackboots on the streets of anthems to put down austerity protests ?

    • Thomas Krikonis

      No not at all …I mean real army that will defend Europe from ISIS and some friends of them if you know wich country I mean. . not some policemen that try to show off to poor E.U.citizens

  138. Παυλος Χαραλαμπους

    It can’t work, ok we can have some task forces here or there but a real common army technicly speaking can’t exist. Just imagine being attacked by Turkey in aigian or Cyprus and waiting 28 different palaments to give the”OK” to react!! Or imagine soldiers who barely speak English to have to work as a unit while bullets are flying over their heads, or think of the morale of the troops that they will have to leave their families in Germany or Austria to go and get killed for a country that they don’t care of or even worse they dislike.. Also think of the cost of building a army from zero it’s ridiculous to believe that it can work

  139. Frank Denne

    It is high time that Europe has its own defense that allows its own Foreign Policy. With a population of 550,000,000 million, with a GNP far more important than that of Russia, with a European culture that dates back to Ancient Greece, Rome and the Enlightenment, a technological know-how that Europe has spread worldwide, how can we now accept to be considered as an has-been that has to rely on the USA for its defense hindering Western Europe to build its own cultural, political and economic relationship with our natural European partner : Russia ?
    To be able to do this, Europe has to spend money on its Defense to be able to live its own way of life with its own values and ethics.

    • randomguy2017

      Frank Denne

      I agree that Russia is actually more European than the US.
      Most Russians live in Europe. Most Americans do not.

      Czech President and Former Prime Minister Italy supported the enterance of Russia into EU in the future.50% of Russians wouldnt mind entering.

      I rather have Russia in Europe, than in some “Eurasian” or SCO.

      If EU wants true democracy, then they would support a nation with a different non-liberal view enter. Already Visegrad is resisting EU (and they have some good points).

  140. Jakarto

    An european army lol

    Except an army lead by the British, german, italien people should be a good idea. Do you remember than United Kingdom is the only european country to have nuclear weapons …. ?

  141. Oli Lau

    that’s probably one of the few things making sense at the european level

  142. Bobi Dochev

    How many times? Yes It is! Get rid of NATO and convert what left after US and Canada are gone into EU army!

    • Stephen Pockley

      Don’t forget the UK will be gone too.

    • Bobi Dochev

      That doesn’t change anything – they were always on the US side so it might be even for good.

    • Bobi Dochev

      Paulius Paždagis Because it is pointless organisation. It can justify its existence only by creating enemies, and this is exactly what NATO does – creates imaginary enemies! That’s why I call it criminal organization!

  143. Marko Martinović

    EU is falling appart, and getting more warlike. Without fixing internal problems, this will only backfire. EU is starting to look like tyrrany

    • Marko Martinović

      How did you get to Trump from that? Are you Trump-phobic?

    • Miguel Palma

      Our military knows how to work together already, Joint leadership is more easily corruptible.

    • David Alan Roden

      a much better idea would be for each NATO country to fulfill their obligations as part of NATO and use 2% of GDP on defence and thereby contribute to our common defence.

      This is just a way for some countries to try and avoid their obligations and also a means for the eu to force the creation of an artificial eu superstate. Dangerous

    • Duirmuid Mac Sean

      i agree. And as I come from a none NATO country, I would like to see my country join NATO. But the EU need a defence capacity and joint command structure under civilian control to protect the member states and defend our values.

    • Paul F. Summers

      With the upcoming geo-strategic shifts, i.e. Brexit, Trump cutting funding or policy for NATO and UN and increasing scenarios of uncertainty, cyber and nuclear war, Europe could very much see herself defendless and without striking capability. In order to strenghten and deepen Europe, avoid new Exits and remain a player in World Politics, be able to stand on it’s own feet, be self-reliant and defend itself, YES, Europe needs not only a more Common Joint External Policy but also a European Defence Force and Cyber Unit. We can start with Border and Marine Control Units and the strengthening of a European Task Force and more Cyber Counter Intelligence please. Thanks. Please send my regards to comrade Putin (former KGB) and mad Trump ! Remember the previous might have agents commenting on this same post on their benefit as part of their informational and cyber war !

  144. David Alan Roden

    no – military power is the realm of the nation state – do you think that giving such destructive tools to an undemocratic structure like the eu is a good idea? Madness.

    NATO is our best common defence and as long as NATO. member states uphold their part of the pact all will be good.

    An eu army would detract from NATO and thereby reduce potential support and solidarity from non-eu NATO states.

    An eu army is just another political tool to force the creation of an artificial eu super state.

    • Pedro Castro

      When trump says he could eventualy not honour nato’s agreement, one has to start being creative.

  145. Milo Kobalicek

    It would be good time, but as there are still some existing problems / issues (economical, immigration, brexit), united army could be abused by populists and anti-eu parties.

    • David Alan Roden

      why? Why would France ( the eu 27s only nuclear power ) give away control of its armed forces?

    • カメニャク マリオ

      Why would it give it to the NATO instead lol?
      The EU forces would just as much be French forces as they would be the forces of every other European country. That is what European cooperation means.
      France already has an agreement with Germany to allow it to use it’s nukes in case of an emergency.

    • Ivan Burrows

      カメニャク マリオ

      Give nuclear weapons & an army to the same who that created the migrant crisis, the Euro crisis, the banking crisis, the agricultural crisis, the democratic deficit crisis and heaped misery onto millions of people across the EU ?


  146. Nando Aidos

    Where is NATO? And what would be the role of a joint EU army?
    I suppose you mean armed forces.
    While the EU is suffering from a leadership vacuum concentrate on leadership and then let’s talk armies and other follies.
    NATO forces, UN white helmets, now the EU army… where will this military budget splurge end?
    Come on! Think outside the box. Better still, pretend there is no box!

  147. nando

    Where is NATO? Build on what you have!
    And what would be the role of a joint EU army? More wars?
    And I suppose you mean “armed forces”.
    But while the EU is suffering from a leadership vacuum concentrate on leadership and then let’s talk armies and other follies.

  148. Giannis Tsirimpis

    Ναι. Γιατί αγαπιόμαστε στην Ευρώπη και θα φτιάξουμε και κοινό στρατό. Αρκουδευδες.

  149. Paul F. Summers

    With the upcoming geo-strategic shifts, i.e. Brexit, Trump cutting funding or policy for NATO and UN and increasing scenarios of uncertainty, cyber and nuclear war, Europe could very much see herself defendless and without striking capability. In order to strenghten and deepen Europe, avoid new Exits and remain a player in World Politics, be able to stand on it’s own feet, be self-reliant and defend itself, YES, Europe needs not only a more Common Joint External Policy but also a European Defence Force and Cyber Unit. We can start with Border and Marine Control Units and the strengthening of a European Task Force and more Cyber Counter Intelligence please. Thanks. Please send my regards to comrade Putin (former KGB) and mad Trump ! Remember the previous might have agents commenting on this same post on their benefit as part of their informational and cyber war !

  150. Ivan Burrows


    Would it include troops from Russia, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and the rest of ‘Europe’ or just in the EU ?

    History repeats itself as ‘EU Europeans’ forget their past.

    • Miguel Cabrita

      An European Army would turn instead into a powerful political tool to the joy of those brainless leaders EU haves today.

  151. Jorge Lux

    It’s too late. Europe is falling down and the majority of the citizens want to exit, just like the brits.

    • Jorge Lux

      Paulius Paždagis No, out of your mother’s one.

    • Catarina Taveira Guerra

      What? ??who wants to leave? Comunists and extremists from right? Sorry to dissapoint you but you are not the majority.

    • Miguel Cabrita

      Paulius Paždagis EU constitution went to vote in the Netherlands, France and Ireland, in all those referenduns the NO won. Also the Euro was voted in some Nordic countries, another win to the NO. EU went to vote in Britain, the NO won again. Every time EU or any feature associated with it goes to public scrutiny it is rejected. Always.

      These are not statistics, these are political facts.

    • Miguel Cabrita

      Catarina Taveira Guerra EU constitution went to vote in the Netherlands, France and Ireland, in all those referenduns the NO won. Also the Euro was voted in some Nordic countries, another win to the NO. EU went to vote in Britain, the NO won again. Every time EU or any feature associated with it goes to public scrutiny it is rejected. Always.

      These are not statistics, these are political facts.

  152. Robin Coates

    what a waste of time an EU Army, would never agree on anything and therefore would be a joke that opponents would see as a ridiculous farce that can not act to stop anything happening, thank god we are leaving short term pain for long term gain.

  153. Mihai Petru Ceuca

    It is time to make a new Europe, not this one, that only helps riches to avoid paying their share of taxes. On the salaries, we pay taxes before even our money reaches our accounts. The riches get secret legal deals to pay zero taxes, and there are no more money for schools, healthcares, and they blam it on the migrants, or who ever they want. It’s time that this Stops.

  154. Benjamin Jose Rekarte Aranguren

    Si. Europa necesita tener un ejército común que de credibilidad a una política exterior común,además sería mucho más rentable que mantener decenas de micro ejércitos descoordinados.

  155. Julia Hadjikyriacou

    As long as EU member countries leave NATO with its dubious agendas and it is not used on dissenting EU member countries or citizens and conscription is not compulsory. No supporting resource wars or interfering with non-EU countries elected leaders. And not for economic warfare with Russia or China. i.e. for defence purposes only.

  156. Ariste Arvanitides

    Νοτ with Germany leading. They create the problem, then they want to create armies to control to limit the damage. NO.

    • Catarina Taveira Guerra

      Really? Poor germans … without an army and dealing with the refugees crisis. Chut up man.

  157. Tibk Jdna Jaba

    I think is time for people to realise we do not need army, it is time for a world to realise that if we wont work together we will die fighting.

  158. Dino Boy Mican

    We wish. There can’t be one, as every nation has a world view slightly different from the other, different orientation, different view of history and, most and worst of all, we don’t have a European government.

  159. Miguel Cabrita

    Yes it is the time for it. An European Army belongs to the Realm of Fantasy and it is the Foreign Affairs equivalent of the Unicorn, but it is nevertheless a great idea and it should be put in action immediately.

    • Jokera Jokerov

      Are you ready to die for the French interests in a war with Canada oves St. Pierre and Michelon islands? Or in a war with Argentina over the Falklands?

    • George Papadache

      You cannot have the pie and eat it. And would not be that type of army

  160. Marcel Hopman

    It this ever more complex playing field of forces, Europe should able to defend, and if necessary enforce, the values she stands for. We can’t, and should not, rely on the US to do that for us.

    • Yavor Hadzhiev

      I agree Marcel. The EU should follow its own path, and get out of the shadow of the USA.

  161. randomguy2017

    If you want me to even consider supporting any EU idea:

    1)get rid of ALL US influence, CIA, foreign bases, foreign troops, etc
    2)stop the attack on Christian values. Pan Europa had this sorted better.
    3)stop demonizing other Christian nations like Russia, Poland, Hungary. This isnt Cold War anymore
    4)if you want immigration fine, but make sure they are compatable with Christian culture or religion.

  162. jthk

    If EU wants to have its own army representing its own interests, they have to withdraw their membership from the NATO. Otherwise, there will be divided commanding sources, which would handicap the EU army. It is a waste of resources.

  163. Plamen

    EU is two parts. Colonies and empires. West europe is the empires and east is the colonies. Why are they colonies? Our governments are loyal to the west. They make only bad decisions which help the west businesses conquer us. My example is Bulgaria. When we finished communism we were 9 million country and had a big heavy industry. When we became loyal democrats our governmnets sell so big industry for some millions. We have statistics that 30 billion insustry is solled. But not in a way to make people rich. Industry is solled so it can be destroyed and replaced by west european heavy industry. As a colony we have no right to heavy industry. Europran army would somehow allow the empires protect their colonies’s governments which in reality carry out genocides against their own nations. You will burn till the ground one day. Payback will be harsh for you.

  164. jthk

    Throughout the human history, economic security would not be secured without the protection of the army. If EU wants to secure its economic interest, an EU armed force is required. Although in this modern era, we can have economic development through mutually agreed trade arrangement and peaceful negotiation, if military budget has been used for fighting wars which might not actually representing or even harming EU interest, I do not see why we agree to pay for the NATO which appears to be using to fight for a declining hegemony. An army does not necessary to be aggressive and waging unjust war. An army is a defensive force. A powerful army has a deterrence purpose.

  165. jthk

    Without China and other major economies to share damage from Trump trade war, how can EU resist pressure coming from a superpower? When Trump is using a trade war to harm EU economy and at the same time, EU is forced to increase NATO budget. How can EU expect to have a fair fighting? Apparently preparing to wage a war against Iran. If NATO goes to war with Iran, there will be further damage on EU economy. This is just common sense of common people. Why leaders fail to address?

Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

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

More debate series – Towards a European Public Sphere View all

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.