[Akazu]

When asked about his policy towards the EU a few months ago, George W Bush replied that it was "Disaggregation". Such a policy, being totally at odds with the previous, EU-friendly policy of the Cold War, suggests to me a shift from viewing the EU as a stategic friend, to a potential medium-term competitor. Rumsfeld's reference to "Old Europe", and disagreements over the European Rapid Reaction Force further reinforce my impression that the current US Administration views the EU with increasing hostility.

But why? I believe that the US views EU integration and enlargement as steps on the way to another superpower, something that the US intends to prevent. I'm really not sure why Bush is so anti-European, though. Any ideas?

[Nox]

I'm really not sure why Bush is so anti-European, though. Any ideas?

Yes, plenty of them.

First, it is not Bush being anti-European, it is Europe being anti-Bush.

When the President made his first trip to Europe, He let the Europeans know that US foreign policy was going to be what was good for the US. This was a steep deviation from the Clinton/Albright approach which cow-towed to European interests.

You mentioned the EU Rapid Reaction Force. What a monumental joke. This wonderful, powerful, independent, killer force, totally depends upon the US Air Force to get its "Rapid" handle.

The EU is now and always will be a joke and a pipe dream. Take a look at even now the current debate in your country about adopting the Euro. And let's be honest here ... just exactly what advantage will the UK gain by the Euro versus the Pound? Somehow this old Yank thinks it will be an economic disaster for ya'll ... but what do I know?

I will end with an analogy from the history of my own country to show why the EU won't work (I have spoken about this in another topic):

From 1861-1865 we had an internal war known as the Civil War in the North and the War Between the States in the South. Today's PC crowd falsely says that this war was about slavery. It was about whether the State governments were supreme or the Federal Government was. Anyone remember the word ... Confederacy (Confederation) versus Federation? The real point I'm trying to make here was a little speech made by Abraham Lincoln (the President at the time) at a place called Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The speech began with these words: "Four score and seven years ago ...". 87 years after the country was founded, there still was not a unanimity of opinion whether people were Americans first and citizens of their state second, or the reverse.

European countries have histories of multiple thousands of years. Our country didn't even have a full 300 years at that point, and you see how a loyalty to the state (instead of country) developed. So I am now to believe that the Europeans are going to think of the EU first and their country second? Never happen. How many Brits are going to vote for and Irishman (not to mention FROG) to head the EU?

But right now, you guy's can even solve your "Cheese War" for crying out loud.

Nox

[Boondock Saint]

Here is a yanks opinion.

- I think its obvious why a US administration would want europe to remain so decentralized. A centralized europe would only compete on a large scale against the US. It would have a buying power equivelant to or greater then the US, meaning non-US/EU nations would be more inclined to trade with the EU.

- Somehow europe has gone from a bloody battlefield of angst, hatred and warfare to an open minded socialists haven. Perhaps the euros have finally gotten sick and tired of killing one another ... this does not go well for the US ... as arms dealing happens to make the US ALOT of money ... no wars to fight? No arms to deal ... no money to make. Along these lines ... if the EU were united, truely united that is, then odds are all weapons and military equipment would be more centralized ... as opposed to teh Germans having a miltiary, the French having a military, the Italians having a military ... this would save a great deal of resources for the euroes and may strengthen the bond between their nations ... or states if you will.

- Economic competition ... like I said in my first point, the US no longer builds much of anything, nor does the US provide any real service. All teh US does is sell weapons and buy consumer goods ... well ... what happens when someone else wants to move in on our business? What does the US do then?

- Socialism. This is rather heavy in euro policies. An admin like the Bush one really doesnt like that. In fact to most conservatives socialism is a curse word. Automatically you are communist and fascist. Don't ask me how it goes ... An example of this would be the conservatives over here in the US are using the French death rate in the recent heat wave as an argument against state run health care ... no seriously. They avoid all facts and decide to turn a tragic situation into political gains, but I guess thats par for the course for any politician.

Ok, lost my train of thought ...

[Siberian Fox]

The EU in 2004.



(Romania and Bulgaria expected to join in 2007)

The EU is now and always will be a joke and a pipe dream. Take a look at even now the current debate in your country about adopting the Euro. And let's be honest here ... just exactly what advantage will the UK gain by the Euro versus the Pound?

Take a look in the econommics forum, I think there was a discussion in there about the single currency where a link was posted giving the advantages of joining. Needless to say they are too numerous for me to list at this time in the morning

European countries have histories of multiple thousands of years. Our country didn't even have a full 300 years at that point, and you see how a loyalty to the state (instead of country) developed. So I am now to believe that the Europeans are going to think of the EU first and their country second? Never happen. How many Brits are going to vote for and Irishman (not to mention FROG) to head the EU?

Maybe they never will, but that's why the real power in the EU lies with the council of ministers - ie with the nation states politicians. Personally I would be happy to see a federal Europe, although I know that is not the majority view.

But right now, you guy's can even solve your "Cheese War" for crying out loud.

I probably pay more attention to politics than most citizens, and I have never even heard of this. Anything described as a "war" is obviously sensationalist journalism

The EU has not made another war in Europe more likely, it has made another war in Europe unthinkable. That is why the EEC was set up in the first place - Europe has learnt it's lesson from two world wars and it isn't about to make that mistake again. Hell there are still bombed out churches left as monuments all over Europe, and every city in the UK has a war memorial in the centre, it's not like people are going to forget that. Any American who thinks that we are going to have World War 3 in Europe has no connection with reality here. Defence spending has fallen in Europe over the years since the cold war ended, people do not want or have the stomach for a war, it would benefit nobody, the very idea is just rediculous. A war with the USA is more plausable, since the USA makes a handy scapegoat for all our problems

[Boondock Saint]

Oh boy Foxy thats one hell of a map ... one hell of a map indeed!

Do you really think Eire will join with the UK in such a way?

And dont you euros ever get sick of those damn Swiss and thier refusal to join ANYTHING!?!

And whats wrong with Norway? Are they anti-social?

And thats a big gap between Greece and everyone else ...

But ... if anyone thinks the US is one huge beuracracy could you imagine what the EU would be? Lordy lord ...

[Krasniy Yastreb]

^ I envy the Norwegians and Swiss. They have the two finest social systems and infrastructures ever created. They have good reason to stay out of the corrupt lawyers and bankers club that is the EU today.

The Euro-style bureaucracy is terrible though. UK law requires that every EU directive must be followed to the letter, while other countries can completely ignore it. It's a mess...

[Siberian Fox]

Oh boy Foxy thats one hell of a map ... one hell of a map indeed!

Do you really think Eire will join with the UK in such a way?

I don't think that, it is. Ireland has been an EU member for years.

And dont you euros ever get sick of those damn Swiss and thier refusal to join ANYTHING!?!

Switzerland only just joined the UN... I don't think they'll be joining the EU any time soon.

And whats wrong with Norway? Are they anti-social?

Norway voted no on joining the EU a few years ago because they would rather not share any of their oil revenue with the rest of Europe. They probably won't join until their North Sea oil reserves start to run out.

And thats a big gap between Greece and everyone else ...

Cold war. Greece was the only NATO member in the Balklands, hence they were the first country in that part of Europe to join.

[Akazu]

I am now to believe that the Europeans are going to think of the EU first and their country second? Never happen

Well, that may be so, but nationalism has been widely discredited in Europe, and even patriotism is distinctly lacking, especially in mainland Europe. It's no longer considered politically correct to be patriotic - in Leeds a few months ago, someone was waving a British flag, and the police told them to stop it, on the grounds that it could be considered racist. I recently visited the US, and was astounded at how intense the patriotic feeling is there. I'm not saying it's bad - I wish the UK was more patriotic sometimes - just that it's less of an impediment to EU integration that you might otherwise think.

The EU won't work

People say this a lot, but what do you actually mean? In it's current form, it works, sorta. It's currently an economic community designed, as already said, to make a European war impossible. It's done that. It's only just starting to move into the field of a military, political and social union. It's no suprise that the Rapid Reaction Force is almost useless. After all, the US had a very small army for most of it's history up to WW2, and it's first battles with the Germans were fairly unsuccesful. The EU cannot become a superstate overnight, and nor should it be. I'm undecided on the issue of a federal Europe, but I do think that it should move slowly. EU bureaucracy makes this almost inevitable , but anything faster would result in the collapse of anything more than economic union.

Akazu.[/quote]

[Nox]

Maybe they never will, but that's why the real power in the EU lies with the council of ministers - ie with the nation states politicians. Personally I would be happy to see a federal Europe, although I know that is not the majority view.

At best, the EU will be a Confederation. I can't visualize a Federation.

But right now, you guy's can even solve your "Cheese War" for crying out loud.

I probably pay more attention to politics than most citizens, and I have never even heard of this. Anything described as a "war" is obviously sensationalist journalism

I guess this American has to tell a European a little about the news of Europe.

There is a dispute between the French and virtually every other cheese producing country of Europe on the name of the various cheeses.

The EU has not made another war in Europe more likely, it has made another war in Europe unthinkable. That is why the EEC was set up in the first place - Europe has learnt it's lesson from two world wars and it isn't about to make that mistake again.

This is news to me. I had always heard that the EU was about economics.

Hell there are still bombed out churches left as monuments all over Europe, and every city in the UK has a war memorial in the centre, it's not like people are going to forget that. Any American who thinks that we are going to have World War 3 in Europe has no connection with reality here.

Slow down Skippy. I don't know what set you off about another European war, (I hope it wasn't the mockery of 'Rapid Reaction Force') but no one that I read mentioned that. By the way, those 'war memorials' in the UK are not limited to the cities. All the small villages I was in had them too. It was really sad to look at how small a village was and how many names were listed. I'm surprised there were enough Brits to grow up and fight WW II.

Defence spending has fallen in Europe over the years since the cold war ended, people do not want or have the stomach for a war, it would benefit nobody, the very idea is just rediculous.

Yes it has. And that is precisely why the EU has no airlift for the 'Rapid Deployment Force". That is why the US has its troops in Europe's back yard (remember where WW I started). You Europeans blow a lot of smoke. If that EU is so great and wonderful ... solve your own problems first. All the hoopla about the disasters of war, while true, does not negate the responsibility to be prepared for it.

Our next major war will be a war between the haves and the have nots.

A war with the USA is more plausable, since the USA makes a handy scapegoat for all our problems

Thank you for admitting it.

Nox

[Siberian Fox]

I guess this American has to tell a European a little about the news of Europe.

There is a dispute between the French and virtually every other cheese producing country of Europe on the name of the various cheeses.

This is not news to anyone in Europe - every country in the EU has outstanding disputes over EU regulations, not applying free trade laws fairly etc. They are all eventyally resolved, EU bureaucracy moves slowly All EU states like to blow hot air to trumpet their individual interest, and then eventually everyone takes one step back and a compromise deal is reached where every side claims victory. That's just how things work here. That is also why most of Europe was so angry over Iraq - because the USA doesn't do things that way, it doesn't have to compromise on anything, it just does what it likes.

The EU has ... made another war in Europe unthinkable. That is why the EEC was set up in the first place

This is news to me. I had always heard that the EU was about economics.

Yes. Hmm, perhaps that needs explaining...

The precursor to the EU was a steel and coal sharing treaty whos name I forget. The idea was that states in Europe had always gone to war because from Bismark to Hitler war was seen as a legitimate way to expand a nations productive capacity by acquiring access to more resources. But, if one allows each other acccess to those resources anyway then war becomes obsolete - indeed all war would accomplish is destroy the very resources that one would already have access to anyway. Later the Treaty of Rome was signed creating the European Economic Community which was a Free Trade Area with a Customs Union and a central body to regulate everything. So, why have a war today? One can buy anything from anywhere in Europe, live anywhere in Europe, work anywhere in Europe already - there's no point. And as has been pointed out, nationalism here is certainly less than in the USA. World War One and World War Two have kind of given nationalism a bad image (here).

I don't know what set you off about another European war,

Your comparison of EU with the American Civil War.

... the EU has no airlift for the 'Rapid Deployment Force". That is why the US has its troops in Europe's back yard (remember where WW I started).

What you call the "Rapid Deployment Force" is actually just the Franco-German Brigade. It is more of an experiment than anything, after all, do you really think that Europes nations will just merge all their armies just like that? Maybe you do, I don't know, what you don't seem to have a grasp of is that everything in the EU changes very, very slowly. I don't know anyone who takes the Franco-German Brigade seriously as a fighting force, it isn't a replacement for the EU members nation state armies.

As to US troops in Europe, they are not needed here to prevent another world war (as you hint at "remember where WW I started") they are here because it allows the US to deploy them around the world more cheaply and quickly then if they were all stationed in the USA mainland. And you know the only reason the bases were here in the first place was because of the cold war.

You Europeans blow a lot of smoke. If that EU is so great and wonderful ... solve your own problems first.

Would you care to be specific? I'm not really interested in tabloid generalities, that is where forum mud-slinging and flaming starts.

[Nox]

I don't know what set you off about another European war,

Your comparison of EU with the American Civil War.

Not true.

The only point being made about the 'American Civil War', was that 87 years after this country was founded, many people still thought of themselves as a citizen of their State first and a citizen of the US second. The point being for comparison ... Brits will think of themselves as Brits first and EU members second. This is also why I envision the EU as only ever being a Confederation instead of being a Federation.

What you call the "Rapid Deployment Force" is actually just the Franco-German Brigade.

Yes ... true. But if it is indeed as you describe, why give it the inflated title of "EU Rapid Deployment Force"? Is this European bravado?

[ do you really think that Europes nations will just merge all their armies just like that?

No I do not. By the way, did I mention the word Confederation?

what you don't seem to have a grasp of is that everything in the EU changes very, very slowly.

False. I do have the big picture about Europe/EU. It appears to me that many of the EU advocates spend a lot of their time dreaming.

As to US troops in Europe, they are not needed here to prevent another world war (as you hint at "remember where WW I started") they are here because it allows the US to deploy them around the world more cheaply and quickly then if they were all stationed in the USA mainland.

It appears that in an effort to conserve words ... I failed to convey meaning. My point there was that US troops are currently in the Balkans ... a place they should not be. They are there because the Europeans failed to take care of their own problem. I listen to the Europeans poo-hoo the American use of the words 'humanitarian effort' ... but that is precisely what our involvement there is. And don't give me this bit about oil ... it won't float.

As to US troops in Europe, they are not needed here to prevent another world war (as you hint at "remember where WW I started")

False. I did not hint at that. In fact this is totally true:

they are here because it allows the US to deploy them around the world more cheaply and quickly then if they were all stationed in the USA mainland. And you know the only reason the bases were here in the first place was because of the cold war.

You Europeans blow a lot of smoke. If that EU is so great and wonderful ... solve your own problems first.

Would you care to be specific? I'm not really interested in tabloid generalities, that is where forum mud-slinging and flaming starts.

No tabloid. No generalities. Quite specific:

Clean up the Balkans yourselves. I have always been opposed to US involvement there. And with the Soviet threat gone ... I think we have far too many troops in Europe.

Nox

[Siberian Fox]

Clean up the Balkans yourselves.

Well if you had said that at the begining you would have saved us both a lot of time Yes, by all means you are right on that count.

As to all your nit-picks, which I shall not address individually, I was replying to your post with the impression with which you gave me. It is not correct to call a statement false when the premise on which it was based is not the same as that with which you are replying

why give it the inflated title of "EU Rapid Deployment Force"? Is this European bravado?

No, it is because someone had to think up a title that was easier to sell to sceptical parts of pulic opinion than "European Army".

[arcis]

Whenever I see the map of the European Union, I am wondering, if Switzerland will ever join the union?

[Siberian Fox]

I very much doubt it. Switzerland makes a lot of money because of it's famous private banking system that guarantees anonymity. If they joined the EU then they would not able allowed to continue since they would have to conform to the same standards as the rest of Europe. Also it should go without saying that Switzerland prides itself on its neutrality, which could be violated if it joins an EU that hopes to one day have it's own army.

[Krasniy Yastreb]

And despite the fact the Swiss are neutral, their army is proportionally double the size of the UK's. They also guarantee a place in a bunker to every citizen in the event of nuclear war or other armageddon scenario.

I doubt they are prepared to give that up.

(Post 500, yeeeeeah!)

[arcis]

Sometimes it seems to me, that nowadays politics has been degraded to be some mixture of legal, marketing, accounting and human resources department of the major companies of a country.

Regarding the relationship between the US and Europe there is a struggle for the superiority of matter over mind going. Bombs and money over politics and ideology.