Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Tuesday, 28 January 2020

The death of EU-NATO

The election on 8th June 2017 was an utter, unmitigated disaster - May's hubris and rank stupidity had thrown away whatever Brexit majority we had in the House. May of course threw Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill overboard without hesitation; blaming everyone else has forever been her way, but in this case it had some justification. Hill has become decently obscure, but for some reason the 'graph has given Timothy a column, the mere sight of which still raises my blood pressure. I have never read it - and I stopped reading anything by Matthew Parris about three years ago. Life is too short to waste even a few seconds reading anything by men whose judgement is so piss-poor and whose opinions are so deviant as to make the pair of them ink-thieves.

I won't repeat my post of 9th June. It was craven. A few days previously, however, was one of those occasional posts that unaccountably scores big hits; this got almost 3,000 views. It holds good over time and is as true today as it was in 2017.
Germany will never, ever pay more than now for NATO
Many of us will have grown up with the BAOR - either as serving soldiers or like myself as army brats. There was a time when G├╝tersloh, Fallingbostel or Sennelager were more familiar to us than Slough, Reading or Peterborough. The BBC even had a forces radio programme, and knowing at least half a dozen BFPO numbers was par for the course. Well, BAOR disappeared without notice in 1994. The 25,000 remaining troops in Germany became BFG, now down to about 4,000 and scheduled to pull out completely by 2020, almost exactly in line with Brexit.
The change came with the fall of the wall in 1989. Before then, our lads were to play a vital role in forming a heroic but utterly pointless sacrifice in holding up the Soviet advance through Germany to France for about 72 hours. Then we all thought it an essential sacrifice. Now we wonder, why bother? Perhaps France and Germany would be better off under Russian rule. Why shed British blood in their defence?

When Trump abstained from the traditional annual G7 offering of American blood in Germany's defence last week he too must have felt the same. Germany has been financially raping Europe for thirty years, sitting on a vast pile of gold as she threatens, bullies and manoeuvres others to pay for everything, like some nightmare dining partner endlessly disputing the division of the restaurant bill.

Turkey is now a Salafist terrorist nation and belongs nowhere near NATO. In bullying the Netherlands into ignoring the veto of the Dutch people and extending full EU privileges to Ukraine, the EU has just given Putin another poke with a sharp stick. The UK will find it hard to mobilise even 6,500 troops - we need a standing army of 100,000 to put an adequate force in the field. Germany's armed forces are to all purposes entirely useless. Amidst the ruins of NATO (and oh yes it's now finished in all but name*) there's only France to defend the EU.

Merkel may gamble that she'll get away with it, and perhaps she will. But without British and American wealth and blood to pay for it. We're done.

*Also proving the rule that corporations are most likely to fail at the point at which they open a spanking glossy new multi billion dollar HQ


Dave_G said...

I still speculate on the ability of the British Deep State to convince a PM to call an unnecessary election with the convenient outcome of delaying or even giving-in-to the status quo they consider in their best interests.

With even their original 'majority' Parliament would have no excuse but to proceed - delays and diversions would have been transparently obvious - but the EU and TPTB needed breathing space to work their background machinations to get the result either changed or altered to a path more suited to their own benefit. They achieved that by convincing May that a GE was the way forward.

Pure speculation on my behalf though.

r_writes esq. said...

It's a bit like the counterpoint to the Treaty of Versailles.

Indulge the buggers and they will say thanks and then quietly dump on you later on.

Treat them with the contempt that the behaviour encourages, even punish them and they think more carefully before such dismissiveness, even if they do similarly dump on us again.

At least little effort would have been maintained in their indulgence.

No 2%, no cover.

Mark said...

The EU? As they say in Texas, all hat no cattle. No more so when considered as a military power.

At your feet or at your throat as Churchill put it talking about the hun. I'm sure Vlad is aware of this as his hand hovers over the gas switch.

Dave_G said...

Since the fall of Communism has anyone really considered Russia as a credible threat and, if so, on what basis? Certainly not militarily as they haven't done anything outside of responding to outside aggression (in the form of 'defensive' missile emplacements put on their borders etc).

As a political threat the Russians are helped (encouraged) by the craven stupidity/idiocy of EU policies anyway but, militarily, the Russians have only ever been used to progress MIC spending - note the excuses for developing an EU Army.

NATO has only ever been a cover for US expansionism.

2% of GDP is (approx) £60bn - We're aghast at the waste of £52bn (lol) on a one-off HS2 but seem resigned to spending more on a repeatedly annual basis for what? Invading Syria? Libya? Iran?

Like Trump espouses (but doesn't seem that keen on implementing - maybe not entirely in his hands...) bringing the troops home and defending our own borders instead of projecting 'authority' in countries that don't want us there would be more palatable to the public?

JPM said...

Turkey, like the UK, is now a terribly divided nation. It is unfair to imply that it is unified under any title such as Salafist.

Just like us, it has its anti-Enlightenment obscurantists who want to drag back the country in time. Fortunately, in Turkey's case, there has been an encouraging reaction against them of late.

That moment is on its way in the UK too.

Dave_G said...

Yeah.... rejection of the 50p in your change will 'bring the country down'....

DiscoveredJoys said...

Curiously enough the national business I used to work for was divided into 'Areas' and consolidated later into larger 'Districts' and we used to say that any Area Manager or District Manager who had a new Area or District office built or bought would soon after lose their job.

Clearly there are some cases (fire, flood, customer requirements etc) where a new building is required but often it is a sign that the organisation has been diverted by the concerns of the employees rather than the customers.

Which brings us back to the EU. Is it driven by the concerns of the elite rather than the general population? And the French and German elite in particular? I'd say so.

John in Cheshire said...

Winston Churchill understood the Germans; he said the Germans are either at your throat or at your feet.

And just like muslims they are going to hate you no matter what you do so it's best they fear you. That's my thought, not Mr Churchill's.

Mark said...

Oh it's "us" now is it?

JPM said...

I'd say that fifty million people who did not vote Leave are entitled to the odd "us" now and then, Mark.

Mark said...

So that 50 million you fetishise (your "us", which includes millions who are too young to vote of course) includes "anti-establishment obscurantists"

So remainers want to "drag back the country in time". Thanks for admitting that out you utter tool!

Trying to equate this country with Turkey (makes a change from nazis I suppose). Puerile trolling trying to provoke a response (hint: trolling like lying. Far better if it has a kernel of truth)

This response to your liking?

DiscoveredJoys said...


"I'd say that fifty million people who did not vote Leave are entitled to the odd "us" now and then, Mark."

Hyperbole yet again. It undermines your position - unless of course you crave attention, any attention. Extending the imaginary franchise to babes in arms and others not entitled to vote means nothing. In any case more people voted to Leave than voted to Remain.

Span Ows said...

JPM 08:09 "Turkey, like the UK, is now a terribly divided nation.

Turkey is divided, much in the way that Iran is. The UK is no more 'terribly divided' than it has ever been. Yes there is a narrow section of vocal Remoaner whiners to add another dmension to the divisions.

"Just like us, it has its anti-Enlightenment obscurantists who want to drag back the country in time."

I know, and the irony is that they call themselves 'progressives'.

JPM said...

Whatever, enjoy waving your sparklers, and pulling those imaginary toilet chains with alternate arms on Friday, guys!

Mark said...

We will and when we pass you with your begging bowl we'll be VERY careful not to put any 50ps in it.

Anonymous said...

JPM said @ 13:31

'Whatever, enjoy waving your sparklers, and pulling those imaginary toilet chains with alternate arms on Friday, guys!'

Do you know you've got 'loser' written all over your comments, mate?. Piss poor adult is what you are, meaning grown up but holding no apparent wisdom for your age. We vote and the result stands: because it has to. However for you a permanent and perpetual tantrum because you lost. Not a good look is it. Do yourself a favour and look more closely at the reasons why you lost and when you've finished that look at the reasons why on the whole people don't like politicians.


Anonymous said...

If only President Drumpf would call the EU bluff and pull out of NATO, it would be the funniest thing he could possibly do.
Pull out of NATO; mutual defence pact, but NOT a political or trade alliance
Offer NATO 2.0:mutual defence alliance PLUS free trade alliance NOT a political alliance
Then watch as the EU disintegrates.