Is it time to join Nato

saabsaab

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121982802#Comment_121982802

We should arm the Cork fishing fleet!

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121982285#Comment_121982285

Bar the Ukraine mission, the ramp up time for each of the other missions was a farce…. you know why… because everyone had to agree then deploy, that's what makes it a talking shop… If you also read my post, you will see I mentioned Denmark only want in now so they have input to security on their neighbours boarders.

highpitcheric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992468#Comment_121992468

And so we move into the nitpicking phase.

Lets do the same for nato, its main power tied up in a knot by internal Russian influenced corporate interests, and /or the changing tides of Israels mess.

The US (and thus nato) doesnt care about any overriding standard as was the case initially, now its just about this quarters numbers.

Europe can only rely on Europe.

Looking to an increasingly isolationist America is foolish. Fxxk them. And Russia. Europe first.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995583#Comment_121995583

Unfortunately empirical evidence isn't nitpicking… fully agree Europe should be relying on themselves, but currently no one is in unison bar the Baltic and Nordic states, who lack the compelling influencing skills on other states/worldwide without France/Germany.

Not to mention the clusterfuck of trying to integrate with the UK…. technically, there is nothing currently in place except some unilateral agreements and the over arching NATO agreements, since Brexit.

highpitcheric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121996811#Comment_121996811

Exactly what empirical evidence have you presented?

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121997513#Comment_121997513

me? nothing.

EU however has tons of it. Especially when it comes to defence.

highpitcheric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998506#Comment_121998506

Right, so you say EU common defense is a talking shop.

Then get shown csdps deployments which show it gets missions complete.

Then the goalpost shifts to yeah but theyre too slow because they talk before taking action.

Then the evidence shows this unfortunately, then actually there is no evidence.

Great.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121999568#Comment_121999568

Goalposts haven't shifted at all… you project you're familiar with EU defence missions, yet clearly overlook the numerous criticisms of them, particularly in response time and then pull the "there's no evidence"…. get off the stage :-D

majority of missions you mentioned have been the EU response to already established co-coalition missions, usually led by the American's, but, in the case of the Piracy mission, there has been middle east interfaces….

It's easy to copy an already established mission, it's easy to meander slow time into a deployment, it's easy to meander back out of it while it's still ongoing and call it a success. All while posturing in Brussels "we're so great".

Operation Sophia is a case study on how the EU does this copy and paste approach time and time again, and also how not to approach a Humanitarian aid mission, using an anti piracy template.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09662839.2020.1845657

If you are just copying what you've done before, whether it works or not, you are a talking shop.

The EU are currently terrible at any proactive security. This is a known fact and something adversaries are taking full advantage of.

highpitcheric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121999887#Comment_121999887

Right, and whos the adversary?

Russia. A laughing stock. 700 days to get past Avdiivka.

Youre all about critisizing the EUs failings, and those failings might be something worth talking about if the adversary wasnt the Benny Hill of the worlds militaries.

Piddling around in their golf carts, and their newest turtle tank blyat-mobiles. Desperately looking for a new angle.

Just clocking up the losses, at a ratio which would be comic if it werent so tragic. This is in a country where they have control of the air.

Were Russia the force which they were rumored to be for so long natos continued existence might still be justified.

If Russia was not preoccupied getting slapped around by Ukraine, EU countries might actually need to be able to quickly manifest as one massive entity, but as it stands Finland/Nordefco or Poland would smash Russia.

EU common defense is growing its ability to act as one, not that its even particularly needed.

Nato meanwhile, is being led by an increasingly weird and self obsessed US, a country so in bed with Russia (the same adversary which concerns you) that theyre officially asking Ukraine to lay off attacking Russian oil production.

Merriam Webster dictionary;

talking shop; a place where people talk about doing things but do not actually achieve anything

EU diplomatic office;

Currently, some 3,500 military personnel and 1,300 civilian personnel are deployed around the world. Since the first CSDP missions and operations were launched back in 2003, the EU has undertaken over 40 overseas operations, using civilian and military missions and operations in several countries in Europe, Africa and Asia. As of today, there are 24 ongoing EU CSDP missions and operations, including 13 civilian, 10 military and 1 civilian and military initiative

Does that look like a talking shop to you.

No, it doesnt.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122000835#Comment_122000835

Adversaries, there's many… You've harped on about EUFOR missions and yet you come to conclusion that it's only Russia?

That's some fantastic mental gymnastics.

You can bark on about people in places and missions in x,y and z…. it still doesn't take away the fact that 99% of EU missions are:

-reactive

-slow

-usually a copy of an existing coalition mission

Diplomats have their part to play, but harping on about thousands of pen pushers in a hotspot, doesn't exactly meet the need of an offensive posture.