Monetary Union-Political Union-What Next?

rumour

We have created a pan european currency.
We are about to create a political union that can only grow.

Where does Europe go next?

I suggest that at some point it will start flexing its muscles, then are we looking at an Army?

prinz

Any reasoning behind your suggestion?

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

We have created a pan european currency.
We are about to create a political union that can only grow.

Where does Europe go next?

I suggest that at some point it will start flexing its muscles, then are we looking at an Army?

We already have a political union.

I imagine at some far off point we'll reach a federal Europe, then the whole thing will implode at some further off point. That's the nature of these things. All states are transitory, history has proven this.

Rb

What's wrong with an Army?

rumour

prinz wrote: »

Any reasoning behind your suggestion?

Well I do not know any country or state of this size anywhere in recorded history that has not developed an army. I think armies generally develope according a the percieved threat, but like political power once in place military power is very difficult to turn off.

However I was more interested in knowing if there are alternatives or if its just inevitable.

robindch

rumour wrote: »

I suggest that at some point it will start flexing its muscles, then are we looking at an Army?

I think a Navy's better.

We can get them to line up just off the cliffs of Moher and have them push Ireland up against the UK, and then the whole lot south a bit for the sun and up against France for the better food and roads.

We'd need to sort out Schengen first though.

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

Well I do not know any country or state of this size anywhere in recorded history that has not developed an army. I think armies generally develope according to the percieved threat, but like political power once in place military power is very difficult to turn off.

However I was more interested in knowing if there are alternatives or if its just inevitable.

There are already 27 armies in the EU.

Why develop a new one?

Diom

OP wrote:

Monetary Union-Political Union-What Next?

Sexual union?
Unholy union?


The sky is the limit.


EDIT::
This post is full of "sarcasm". No voters beware.

prinz

rumour wrote: »

Well I do not know any country or state of this size anywhere in recorded history that has not developed an army. I think armies generally develope according a the percieved threat, but like political power once in place military power is very difficult to turn off.

However I was more interested in knowing if there are alternatives or if its just inevitable.

There are alternatives, we keep our national armies, but cooperate in some areas. No need to start flexing an 'EU muscle', everyone knows the countries that are in the EU and what their capabilities are. The idea that we need to 'develop' an EU army is redundant.

robindch

rumour wrote: »

Well I do not know any country or state of this size anywhere in recorded history that has not developed an army.

Costa Rica has a smaller area than Ireland, but a larger population.

It abolished its army by in 1949 and hasn't had a civil war since.

Diom

Also:

Armies develop before politics. Armies are the power of a people. They enable politics and diplomacy.

Having an army gives you a say. Sad but true.

ei.sdraob

rumour wrote: »

We have created a pan european currency.
We are about to create a political union that can only grow.

Where does Europe go next?

I suggest that at some point it will start flexing its muscles, then are we looking at an Army?

Microchips in all children

View

Diom wrote: »

Sexual union?
Unholy union?


The sky is the limit.


EDIT::
This post is full of "sarcasm". No voters beware.

No, it isn't. Lisbon gives the EU partial competence (with the member states) on Space Policy.

The final frontier here we come...

ei.sdraob

View wrote: »

No, it isn't. Lisbon gives the EU partial competence (with the member states) on Space Policy.

The final frontier here we come...

United Federation of Planets

http://i33.tinypic.com/2rbz41h.jpg

:eek:

Judgement Day

Rb wrote: »

What's wrong with an Army?

Nothing if you don't mind Irish soldiers being killed to fight wars caused by European imperial legacies and to further the cause of European arms manufacturing. Ireland does not have an indigenous arms industry and therefore has nothing to gain from getting involved in European conflicts.

I would suggest that instead of getting involved in a European army it would be more beneficial to the Irish people if at least 50% of the existing army was transformed into a paramilitary police force to regain control of the asylum at home.

rumour

View wrote: »

No, it isn't. Lisbon gives the EU partial competence (with the member states) on Space Policy.

The final frontier here we come...

That certainly would be more productive than an army. I'm in favor of that.

ei.sdraob

rumour wrote: »

That certainly would be more productive than an army. I'm in favor of that.

by voting NO to lisbon

you ensure that Ireland does not participate in scientific projects

such as EUROATOMs ITER fusion reactor project which promises cheap unlimited power from water

and if and when this technology is developed we are left behind

/

rumour

ei.sdraob wrote: »

by voting NO to lisbon

you ensure that Ireland does not participate in scientific projects

such as EUROATOMs ITER fusion reactor project which promises cheap unlimited power from water

and if and when this technology is developed we are left behind

/

This has nothing to do with Lisbon,the premis is that Lisbon is in existence. please canvass somewhere else.

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

There are already 27 armies in the EU.

Why develop a new one?

Indeed I see no reason, that does not preclude the idea. If your intent was to create a superstate it is the missing link.

All I think it would take is some fear tactics and it comes into existence. We will all need it or at least be convinced that this is the case.

Rather like the invasion of Iraq.

I guess given that Lisbon is almost an inevitability control of where we go next is important.

rumour

prinz wrote: »

The idea that we need to 'develop' an EU army is redundant.

Really where is that evident from? Certainly Irelands army is redundant and cannot protect us, that however would be a strange position for the new europe to adopt.

Look what happened in Georgia last year,
look at what's happening in Afghanistan.
Why does Iran feel the need to develope nuclear missiles.
Why was G Bush so keen to get missiles in Poland.

An inter european war does seem inconceivable to me but that does not make an army redundant.

Rb

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

There are already 27 armies in the EU.

Why develop a new one?

I can see quite a few benefits in a fully integrated European army actually

Judgement Day wrote: »

Nothing if you don't mind Irish soldiers being killed to fight wars caused by European imperial legacies and to further the cause of European arms manufacturing. Ireland does not have an indigenous arms industry and therefore has nothing to gain from getting involved in European conflicts.

I would suggest that instead of getting involved in a European army it would be more beneficial to the Irish people if at least 50% of the existing army was transformed into a paramilitary police force to regain control of the asylum at home.

If soldiers don't want to run the risk of being killed, perhaps they should re-consider their position on joining the army in the first place. There's already plenty of Irish soldiers involved in foreign armies, particularly the french foreign legion as far as I understand...does that bother you? That they exercised their free will to join an army and run the risk of being killed?

At the end of the day, if China turned around tomorrow and decided that it was time to invade Ireland, we'd be relying on our fellow member states to step in and protect us. We should all be in it together. Wars do happen and being part of a big European military project could only benefit Ireland imo.

prinz

rumour wrote: »

Really where is that evident from?
An inter european war does seem inconceivable to me but that does not make an army redundant.

Because most of the countries are already in organisations like NATO, the WEU etc. Each country has it's own armed forces and would put them to use should the situation arise. The idea of a new created EU "army" is redundant. The creation of battle groups, RRF's etc for deployment in peace keeping etc is not.

truthisfree

Rb wrote: »

I can see quite a few benefits in a fully integrated European army actually



If soldiers don't want to run the risk of being killed, perhaps they should re-consider their position on joining the army in the first place. There's already plenty of Irish soldiers involved in foreign armies, particularly the french foreign legion as far as I understand...does that bother you? That they exercised their free will to join an army and run the risk of being killed?

At the end of the day, if China turned around tomorrow and decided that it was time to invade Ireland, we'd be relying on our fellow member states to step in and protect us. We should all be in it together. Wars do happen and being part of a big European military project could only benefit Ireland imo.

You got me in stitches with that one, China invade Ireland? :pac:
I think China has it's eye on somewhere else!

rumour

Diom wrote: »

Also:

Armies develop before politics. Armies are the power of a people. They enable politics and diplomacy.

Having an army gives you a say. Sad but true.

That is why I started the thread, it appears to be the missing link if Europe is to deliver on its new constitution. Europe is a big market but it is also pretty low on much needed natural resources which other makes us bottom of the list in terms of pecking order.

We will carry no economical weight with the likes of Russia, China or USA if we are not prepared to arm ourselves.

It would be preferable if we could avoid this but does anyone see a way around this?

phantom_lord

Judgement Day wrote: »

Ireland does not have an indigenous arms industry and therefore has nothing to gain from getting involved in European conflicts.

Ireland actually has a number of firms that rely on the arms industry for a significant part of their turnover.

Judgement Day wrote: »

I would suggest that instead of getting involved in a European army it would be more beneficial to the Irish people if at least 50% of the existing army was transformed into a paramilitary police force to regain control of the asylum at home.

lol wut

moogester

It seems others are also thinking along the lines of a European Army

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/4689736/Blueprint-for-EU-army-to-be-agreed.html

It may well happen & if it does i'd imagine Ireland will be expected to play its part.

rumour

prinz wrote: »

Because most of the countries are already in organisations like NATO, the WEU etc. Each country has it's own armed forces and would put them to use should the situation arise. The idea of a new created EU "army" is redundant. The creation of battle groups, RRF's etc for deployment in peace keeping etc is not.

Those groups NATO etc are disfragmenting extensions of an older order established after the second world war. Those institutions protected the security interests of the United States first, Europe second.

Who will defend this new Europe, are we to call on the USA again? Ireland does not of course think on these sort of strategic terms, hell this country can't even see 18 months in front of its nose, but the UK France Germany Spain Italy have collectively thousands of years of strategic thinking and i expect they will be called upon to deal with these questions when the economics get difficult. I doubt they will call on Ireland:pac:

But I guess they'll all be sold as peace keeping forces which of course are not redundant, sounds much better than an army.

Rb

truthisfree wrote: »

You got me in stitches with that one, China invade Ireland? :pac:
I think China has it's eye on somewhere else!

China was just an example, plucked from the air. The island is a good resource for attacking other countries from though.

truthisfree

Sarrkozy has already called for a 360,000 strong army for the EU that will have an intervention stratgedy as part of their make-up.

I honestly do not want us to end up like the US with "our" troops in a war like Iraq or Afghanistan.

rumour

moogester wrote: »

It seems others are also thinking along the lines of a European Army

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/4689736/Blueprint-for-EU-army-to-be-agreed.html

It may well happen & if it does i'd imagine Ireland will be expected to play its part.

Well another piece of timely information from the telegraph who are of course not aware that a referendum is happening here. Anyway much of that is common knowledge but you won't hear it reported in Ireland. Personally I think its inevitable because we now have created the european superstate with a constitution.

prinz

rumour wrote: »

Who will defend this new Europe...

The armies we have How long does it take for this to sink in?

truthisfree

Rb wrote: »

China was just an example, plucked from the air. The island is a good resource for attacking other countries from though.

Ah RB in all honesty, who would invade us? our very strategic position is also our protection, If anyone came near us the US and the UK would be in like a shot. They would not want this country in the hands of a superpower like China or Russia at any cost.

No need to build that bunker.

Purple Gorilla

Didn't the German Constitutional Court say that there can't be an EU Army because it is one of the areas which has to remain the exclusive competence of member states? It said that an EU Army would invalidate basic law and a referendum would be required which would mean a transition into an EU Federal State?

truthisfree

prinz wrote: »

The armies we have How long does it take for this to sink in?

Prinz, Sarkozy has drawn up plans for an army with 360,000 men, oops, and women! they are to have intervention capabilities! I have always been proud that the EU was not like the UK and US with it's seemingly continuous wars going on. That will end, as sure as I am tapping on this keyboard.

rumour

prinz wrote: »

The armies we have How long does it take for this to sink in?

Europe cannot be defended by a bunch of 27 uncoordinated armies turning up to do battle, Braveheart style!!!

Command structures are required and have been since the beginning of recorded history. Loyalty is a prerequisite I mean we can't have SIPTU coming in and balloting for a strike. You cannot achieve these things by your methods.

That is the most convincing argument I've heard yet to put Ireland really at the fringes of Europe.

prinz

truthisfree wrote: »

Prinz, Sarkozy has drawn up plans for an army with 360,000 men, oops, and women! they are to have intervention capabilities! I have always been proud that the EU was not like the UK and US with it's seemingly continuous wars going on. That will end, as sure as I am tapping on this keyboard.

IIRC correctly Sarkozy did a lot of talking about the EU and the military, I think personally it was tiny-man syndrome. Most of his suggestions were quickly ruled out by other European leaders, political and military. Do you have a link for thie 360,000 member army? All I can see is a call to create a number of Rapid Reaction Corps (i.e. with intervention capabilities to prevent things like Srebrenica from happening), important to note that these RRF are not under EU central control, but are under the control of the countries who make up each group.

rumour

Purple Gorilla wrote: »

Didn't the German Constitutional Court say that there can't be an EU Army because it is one of the areas which has to remain the exclusive competence of member states? It said that an EU Army would invalidate basic law and a referendum would be required which would mean a transition into an EU Federal State?

That is my understanding also, but I doubt a referendum will get in the way of that.

I don't know the truth or not to the telegraph article (which is suitably timed for an Irish audience) but this path to an EU army is well underway.

prinz

rumour wrote: »

Europe cannot be defended by a bunch of 27 uncoordinated armies turning up to do battle, Braveheart style!!!

Command structures are required and have been since the beginning of recorded history. Loyalty is a prerequisite I mean we can't have SIPTU coming in and balloting for a strike. You cannot achieve these things by your methods.

That is the most convincing argument I've heard yet to put Ireland really at the fringes of Europe.

What are you talking about? SIPTU? There are command structures, alliances, pacts, combined exercises etc.

rumour

prinz wrote: »

What are you talking about? SIPTU? There are command structures, alliances, pacts, combined exercises etc.

And where is the one for the 27 states of Europe? Who is in command?

Judgement Day

rumour wrote: »

And where is the one for the 27 states of Europe? Who is in command?

NATO? With what's left of the Brits and the US doing the donkey work.

Scofflaw

Judgement Day wrote: »

Nothing if you don't mind Irish soldiers being killed to fight wars caused by European imperial legacies and to further the cause of European arms manufacturing. Ireland does not have an indigenous arms industry and therefore has nothing to gain from getting involved in European conflicts.

Erm, not quite the case:

Part of our alleged 'neutrality' means that fully fledged weapons systems cannot be manufactured in the 26 Counties. So, for example, Timoney Armoured Personnel Carriers) cannot be produced here in Ireland. Professor Timoney, a one-time employee at Alvis, a British company that makes tanks, designed the Timoney APCs, and the company transfers the technology to others to produce under licence. So, for example, the Kuwaiti armed forces run about in the Vickers Valkyr, which was produced under licence in Belgium in conjunction with Vickers, using Professor Timoney's designs.

But although Ireland cannot produce the fully fledged weapons system here, that doesn't mean that components of weapons systems can't be manufactured. In 2000, 1,155 individual export licences for military goods were issued by the Department of Enterprise. Components went to Africa, the Middle East, Asia and continental Europe.

In addition, 37 global licences were issued. A global licence gives a company licence to export a particular product for a year, whereas the individual licences are to a specific consignment. It's hard on the basis of global licences to find out what went where and might have helped to kill whom. But that is the arms trade. Big bucks and heavily camouflaged.

Ireland's recent success in software has undoubtedly been an attraction in the field of digital technology, which, as Jane's Defence Weekly points out, is "the next generation of military software". According to Magill magazine, Dublin based GeoSolutions produces an "electronic Battlefield Management System", which allows a commander to track his troops' movements. Iona Technologies sold communications security software to a US agency "responsible for designing and maintaining the US army's nuclear arsenal".


IDA help

Ireland is especially well placed to subcontract into this highly specialist multi-billion dollar market. Partly as a world leader in electronic engineering and information technology, but also precisely by virtue of our neutrality. As a recent investigation in Magill magazine pointed out, "the IDA in the US uses Irish neutrality as a marketing tool". In the last few years, the IDA has given at least Û48 million in aid towards US multinationals that produce components for fighter aircraft and other war machinery.

Data Device Corporation (DDC) in Cork is one such company producing electronic components. The IDA gave it Û3 million. DDC components go into the 'nerve system' of the Apache, Euro fighter and Rafale attack helicopters. Apache helicopters have had a high profile in the Israeli war against the Palestinian people. Other DDC hybrid products go into missiles, radar, sonar, secure communications and night vision equipment, and DDC has full MIL-STDS certification. This certificate means the products meet the requisite standards of the US military programmes.


AfrI's list

Action from Ireland (AfrI), which over the past few years has played a major role in the attempt to expose the largely hidden but growing involvement of Ireland in the arms trade, wrote to a number of listed companies in Ireland with MIL-STDS approval standards. The list includes DDC in Cork, Analog Devices in Limerick, which produces components for US fighter aircraft, and Schaffner Intepro Systems, also in Limerick one of whose customers is the RAF.

It has long been known that Cork is a base for a number of armaments industries. Best known of these is MOOG Ltd (Ire) which according to Jane's International Defence Directory, produces 'gun stabilisation systems', turret stabilisation systems and electrical equipment for wheeled armoured vehicles. The company makes electronic controllers for a range of tanks and anti-aircraft guns, including the Bofors L-70 Air Defence gun, which are known to be part of the ordinance of the Indonesian armed forces.

Also in Cork is The National Micro-Electronics Research Centre at University College Cork, which although anxious to explain to AfrI's enquiries the 'non-military nature of its activities, has clients heavily involved in the arms trade, including British Aerospace, GEC Marconi, Thomson CSF, Thorn EMI, Moog and DDC.

Tax Free Zone

Shannon Tax Free Zone hosts a number of the companies listed, including Befab Safeland LTD, whose products include 'Runway arrestors capable of arresting the full range of military aircraft', which it supplies to air forces across the world, and Westinghouse Electric Systems and Logistics Ltd, which supplies Bus Analysers, which are a vital part of modern military aircraft.

There are several other companies in Clare, like Essco-Collins in the tiny village of Kilkishen. The parent company has 80% of the world's market in radomes, the round covering for radar antennae systems. Their customers have included Mexico, Egypt, China, and a deal through US arms giant, Boeing, which was bound for Saudi Arabia; a deal, through the Italian firm, Alenia, where the final destination was the Turkish Armed forces; and another for the Middle East brokered through French military giant, Thomson-CSF.

Judgement Day wrote: »

I would suggest that instead of getting involved in a European army it would be more beneficial to the Irish people if at least 50% of the existing army was transformed into a paramilitary police force to regain control of the asylum at home.

I'm not entirely certain what you mean by that, but it does sound extraordinarily sinister.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Judgement Day

Scofflaw - thanks for you thoughtful response. I am well aware that a few Irish companies are involved in a fairly minor way in the international military industrial complex - I'm a regular Phoenix reader since the rag mag started. However, when compared to the likes of British Aerospace, Marconi, British Nuclear Fuels, Boeing etc.etc. Ireland's contribution is miniscule compared to Britain's. The British population therefore have an obligation to fight wars as their economy allows the production and export of arms to anybody with enough money to buy them. The morality of sacrificing their own poorly equipped soldiers to fight in these wars may be questionable but that is a matter for the British people.

As regards my comment about a disbanding about 50% of the Irish army to turn them into a paramilitary force to retake the asylum - perhaps paramilitary is an unfortunate word in the Irish context and what I meant was something like the Spanish Guardia Civil or the Italian Carabinieri.

In the national context law and order has broken down in Ireland and, despite the retirement of the IRA, the army still has to provide protection for the money convoys all over the country. Indeed, it is something of a tourist attraction in DG when the whole town is brought to a standstill once a week by heavily armed troops, jeeps, and garda cars. It could almost be marketed to visitors like the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace!

All I am suggesting is that clearly the gardai are not up to the job on their own and a new paramilitary force would be. Other than maintaining stability at home why does Ireland need a defence force at all as in the event of a serious threat we would be totally dependent on the UK/NATO?

Sorry for taking this thread way off topic.