Amazon.com Widgets

European Defense Force: Should the European Union have its own standing army?

  • One large army is better than lots of smaller ones that is the basis of any nation and an argument for political union

    In order to be taken seriously as a world player, two things are taken into account the economics and military strength. Europe has the most devolopment packed into a small space than anywhere else in the world and we squander it on petty nationalistic romanticised dreams of the past when the age of Europe's empires is over each nation cannot go it alone anymore and have the wait needed to negotiate with the other big players in the world. We have the potential to be the biggest superpower on the planet with a federal system based of the US that solves all of the issues surrounding national sovereignty as the individual states would have control over health welfare and a lot more. But more importantly we would be one of the largest nations on the planet with one of the largest populations and to top it of it is actual land that you can use not just permafrost that is most of Canada and we would have the largest single market on the planet and individual stated would be responsible for their own budgets and then once that had happened we would be able to have a EU army like the US army and it would be able to stand up to Russia and anyone else and we would be able to combat the rise of the East which has been causing most of the troubles with the decline of European industry and to top it all of it is in the US interest and NATOs interest because even though it sounds nicer to have a large number of armies in NATO one large EU army would be so much better for the alliance because then the US could fully pivot to Asia and we could support them in that navy wise but the EU army could actually defend Europe with little US help which is what they want and we can remain they best of friends because why not. Finally, the biggest reason is one European nation would elimate so many ineffecencies that we would be able to improve anything that we want be it the military or fixing the economy more people pooling into a bigger pot always brings more benifit to everybody if it's done in the right way after all that is the concept of government in the first place with taxes and all however political and economic union first in the form of federalism first then EU army otherwise EU army will be a failed half measure that is filled with petty politics of the individual nations like the failure of the Euro having monetary powers and not fiscal powers which is why it failed however setting tax policy and enforcing it has always been the marking point of a state so fiscal powers would have required full on poitical federal union and that is ultimately what Europe needs also when I say based of the US its not a carbon copy

  • Europe should have a standing army

    I think Europeshould have a standing army.The European Union should have a standing army to be able to fully defend itself from any invasion or attacks wheter it be by land sea or air.I think they should as it would be let more integration be aloud. Hopefully they make a standing army.

  • Less expensive, more efficient, more democratic, more peaceful. What's not to like?

    The USA went through the very same discussion over 200 years ago in the federalist versus anti-federalist debate. It turns out federalism is just better.

    A centralized federal government can maintain a standing army much more efficiently than a collective of loosely allied coalition members. In terms of expense, less internal borders mean less ground needs defending. In turn, this means less soldiers and materiel are needed to defend the EU. Also, a centralized army means the burdens of common defense are ensured to be spread out in a fair distribution.

    Having a European Army would mean more cooperation and consolidation between individual European nations. This would erase the possibility of war in Europe, and promote further feelings of brotherhood and amiability between fellow Europeans, further reducing differences and potential conflicts.

  • If The European Union Wants an Army They Should Have One

    There is no reason why the European Union should not have an army since every other nation does. While they are more of a collection of nations, that is how the United States really started, and just as the US figured out the best way to move forward, the European Union must do the same. The only people that should be involved in the decision of whether or not to have a European Union army should be the member nations,

  • Used for the worse

    Mainy army's are being used to advocate power in other regions. If the EU would have an army this problem would only get bigger. It will be used to pressure other nations across the globe with immense power. This will only create a more frightening world then a less frightening world. More destabilisation would come from it.

    Besides the EU does not need an army. Russia has trouble beating one of the great nations in Europe let alone the entire EU and the UN. Also if such a war would come then the world is pretty fcked due to nukes. More/better cooperation between nations would be adviced. Yes, it will be more expensive but peace is worth it.

    Posted by: Izen
  • Used for the worse

    Mainy army's are being used to advocate power in other regions. If the EU would have an army this problem would only get bigger. It will be used to pressure other nations across the globe with immense power. This will only create a more frightening world then a less frightening world. More destabilisation would come from it.

  • Used for the worse

    Mainy army's are being used to advocate power in other regions. If the EU would have an army this problem would only get bigger. It will be used to pressure other nations across the globe with immense power. This will only create a more frightening world then a less frightening world. More destabilisation would come from it.

    Besides the EU doesnt need an army. Unless china was in the place of turkey. There is nothing that threathens the EU. I am all for more cooperation between countrys to keep the borders safe but not at the cost of world peace. I also agree that it will cost more but it will serve a better purpose. At this point an all out war with rusia or china would mean the distruction of the world besides that russia would already have a hard time beating 1 of the top nations in Europe. Let alone the entire EU and NATO.

  • No No No

    Our soldiers fight for us not the EU!
    We need the freedom to choose when and where all of our forces are deployed and that it is always in our interest.
    Imagine a situation where our troops are in a war we voted against and is not in our interest, they would potentially be fighting against us.

  • No, it would be too expensive.

    No, the European Union should not have its own standing army, because a standing army would be expensive. It would be hard to reach a consensus on when force should be used. Having an army would be costly, and it would hardly ever be used. It would create a great amount of red tape that would create needless expense for member states.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.