web analytics


By ATWadmin On October 26th, 2008

Did you see that John Hutton has become the first defence secretary to back a French plan for a European army, branding those who dismiss it as “pathetic”.

“In a wide-ranging interview with The Sunday Times, he said: “I think we’ve got to be pragmatic about those things. Where it can help, we should be part of it.” His support goes beyond the public position of Gordon Brown, the prime minister, and will antagonise those who believe that further European cooperation will undermine Nato by excluding the United States. Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, has sought to develop Europe’s military structures with new headquarters and rapid reaction forces, each consisting of 1,500 troops from member countries.

So, who will fight and die for the EU? Would you? The prospect of the British Army included amongst the massed ranks of the French and Belgiums may cause Hutton’s heart to flutter – but in truth it is a pathetic idea and the mark of a rabid europhile.

Of course the question of a Euro-army raises a number of interesting questions that Hutton does not answer.

1. Will the citizens of Europe be prepared to PAY the necessary costs for such a major undertaking given existing reluctance to even commit resource to NATO? Higher taxes for a Euro-army strikes me as a unlikely political proposition. The truth is that the US has been underwriting European expenditure on its military for decades and as the US starts to pull back from this, the costs for the Euros will escalate. Given the condition of the European economy, where will the cash come from exactly?

2. Who will the Euro-army fight, exactly? And who will decide? Might it’s remit be more of a  function of  keeping the citizens of Europe under control – in their own interests, naturally?

3. If there is a Euro-army, why retain a National army? Without a national army, without a national currency, without a national defence of foreign policy, what is a nation?

The truth is that Hutton is whistling in the Euro-breeze but at least it lets us see where the Euro-tyrants would like us to go.

19 Responses to “THE EURO-ARMY COMETH…”

  1. Its a great idea, and its going to happen.
    The notion of France or Britain spending zillions on nuclear subs is a nonsense in a world that has so changed in terms of the balance of power.
    Wars of the future will be block wars, unilateralism is dead.

  2. Percy,

    Your endorsement pays eloquent testimony to my point. Thank you.

    I’m looking forward to the Euroweenies accepting the need to crank up taxation to pay for the indulgence. Let’s face it – we NEED the crack Belgium army if we are ever going to succeed. 😉

  3. war by committee/politician it was tride once it was called vietnam

  4. David –

    Points 2 and 3 pretty much sum it up.

    Most EU nations are no strangers to autocratic regimes which use the army to police civilians.

    However this idea is abhorrent to our nation and traditions. Still, what do our politicians care for those?

    Of course, the Armed Forces declare the oath of Allegiance to the Monarch, not to politicians nor to Parliament. Serving an EU force would require the Armed Forces to break that oath – for which the only suitable response would be for the Armed Forces to depose the government.

    Well, this is how it would work if we still had the rule of law and respect for our Constitution.

  5. Amen Pete

  6. Well, this is how it would work if we still had the rule of law and respect for our Constitution.

    If we have a constitution why dont the armed forces swear allegience to that?

  7. David
    I disagree about the taxation increase.
    By all chipping into the one pot we’ll see our military budgets decrease in Britain, which means less tax per head.
    Trident nowadays is just a dumb path for us to take.
    What’s that costing per head per capita?

  8. Forget about us Micks.

    We don’t do ARMY. An army is an aggressive, armed organisation, which is actually means to KILL people just because those misunderstood blokes are wiping out entire countries. Imagine that?

    Sorry, Nicholas We Irish only do DEFENSE FORCES and PEACEKEEPERS. And, even then, not on weekends or Major Saint’s birthdays.

    Irish Defense forces don’t kill people. Sometimes they get killed and that’s because those nasty vicious Israelis and their blood-thirsty bully pals, the Americans, incite the peace-loving Palestinians and the Hezzbolla fellas to fire missiles in defense of their burqa clad maidens.

    Like I said we are a peaceful nation and want absolutely NO part of the European Army and its killing machines.

    If necessary we’ll send Mary Robinson and he United Nations Peace negotiators. They’ll show the world that turning the other cheek and appeasement at any cost is God’s way to a better world.

  9. If Obama wins, y’all better get reddy to man up and defend yourselves.

  10. That last comment of couse does not apply to our British allies!

  11. Charles in Texas , This is one of your British allies and I can tell you that I have already started to polish my ammo , I’ve done my .303 and I am starting on the 7.62mm. Must find the Hoppes No.9 to brush the bores .

  12. Doctor, all the while the Dems here want to slash Defense by 25% and establish a Dept of Peace. Now I’m all for peace, but I think al-Queda has other ideas!

  13. This is an absolute non-starter. The EU cannot agree on anything without months, nay years of discussion.How on earth could they come to an agreement on how to deploy this mythical EU army?

  14. Serving an EU force would require the Armed Forces to break that oath – for which the only suitable response would be for the Armed Forces to depose the government.

    With a BNP president, natch. Which would of course be wet dreamland for Rightworld.

  15. tripper your an idiot the american soldier does swear to protect and uphold the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic!

  16. Troll, Daytripper is refering to the British Army swearung an oath to the British Constitution, not the American.

    "for which the only suitable response would be for the Armed Forces to depose the government."

    Surely an armed insurrection against the legitimate Government of the day is Terrorism. Is Pete advocating Terrorism?

  17. Jimmy in Texas, Why worry over loyalties and other problems. Just contract with Black Water. They can do the whole thing with fewer men, much cheaper and no one gets their feeling hurt.

  18. the trouble is its the british army that will be up front in any conflict, whilst the other nations armies will be in support!

  19. Seamus it wouldn’t be terrorism in the US if you read the federalist papers the ONLY reason for the second ammendment is so that if our government became tyrannicle the citisenry would be armed to over throw it.

    Sorry Trip wrong army!