I don't know where the EU gets off claiming it's the reason for peace. I don't know why the EU fears US intervention and pushes for EU armed forces. It all sounds suspicious to me like the EU are lying for propaganda in an economic war.
Self aggrandisement. When you want your own palace but you have nothing to contribute towards one, you make stuff up.
Basically, because nato implies a vasalization of Europe in regards of exterior policy. So it's self evident that Europe will try to defend its interest, which for years no longer align with the American ones. It is just a logical step.
They never aligned with the American one. America stopped Hitler. It has not been forgiven for doing so.
Half the French and half the Poles loved Hitler. Even some in the UK. America and the UK pissed them all off massively. Ended their global socialist dreams. America and Britain have promoted their system of politics, liberalism, world wide. Unfortunately, Europe's great contribution to world politics has been socialism. Which lies in opposition to liberalism. We stopped it in it's tracks. And since then we have kept it contained in the North. We are resented for this. They wish this interference to end.
Number one. The Soviets stopped Hitler, not the USA. Second, you self importance os over the roof. No one cares about Hitler. It cares about refugees, job stability, etc. You are a full fledged wehraboo.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum", if you want peace, prepare war. Both UK and France have nukes, one got nukes from the USA, the other one developped themselves. For the french, clearly no.
Yes, the French have been at loggerheads over American hegemony all along. Strange for a country so closely connected with America. Modelled on America. But there you go. Pride is a funny thing. I was pleased to see the French deployed with Trump off Korea this week. Good effort the French. We will support you again, wherever you next ask us to.
Because american speak the language of our "traditionnal ennemies". By the way, their is no hatred anymore for British, their is still defiance. And for north korea, I'm rather glad my country wasn't involved in the gigantic iraqi disaster, I hope we don't make any mistake.
Honorary Legionnaire. France was involved alright. I don't think anything will happen in North Korea. But after Frances deployments in Timbuktu and Libya, I'm glad to see you willing to pay back the support you received in those campaigns. I know you chaps aren't deeply committed to NATO, but it's good to see reciprocity from an ally. Who is Frances "traditional enemies"? Us? You speak our language too. The whole world does. Get over it.
When I speaks about "traditionnal ennemies", I'm speaking about the fact we were in conflit for thousand years with the british. No, I don't think that american are ennemies, I would rather consider them as dangerous friends. To pay back USA, I think we should rather help massively the USA during disaster like Katrina.
Which in turn will earn you their own charity next time you have a national disaster. You will find allies in battle somewhat harder to come by than people who will donate to a relief fund, in my opinion.
When vasalisation means peace with a country who freeed you from the Nazis who isn't trying to rule you like Putin, what's the problem? If Europe had an army and someone could pickup the phone and ring its central command, what language would it use? What country will vote for its leaders who deploy it?
with the English not the British http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/The-Auld-Alliance-France-Scotland/
Your first paragraph is wrong in so many levels. You are basically saying that anyone that does not submit will be attacked. That would be reason enough to stand and fight. That imperialistic way of thinking is really dangerous. Personally I don't think this is true, and I hope so. Then, Putin is a nobody (OK, I am exagerating). Just because Russia is the favorite distraction for the US does not means that Rusia is a threat to Europe. Rusia does not have the means to supose a threat to Europe, it does not have the reasons to oppose Europe, and even have some interests in common. In the second paragraph, you commit a second mistake. Europe dies not have an army. Well.l, that is not true. If we exclude USA (because there isn't any country in Europe with that capabilities, nor the reason to do that), European countries have some of the most powerful armies in the world. Do you think Indonesia, India or whatever could mop the floor with France? Europe has small overdeveloped countries with low growth expectancies. Countries like Germany, because of historical reasons, have no say in international politics outside Europe, and other countries (like the US) would like to continue to be so. The second point, us the objective of a strong army. Why Belgium needs a strong army? That money could be invested in more money to maximize the country growth. Anyone expects Belgium to declare war on China over Tibet? A strong army can be disuasory or used as a power projection tool. By economic size, only three countries can do that. Germany (explained before), France and UK. Both already do power projection. UK has one of the three most powerful fleets in the world. France extends it's military might in a lot of African countries. So, while I am not saying that maybe some marginally increments would be good, your affirmation is nonsense. Second, English I sued because of the old colonial English Empire. Not because of the US, sorry. And the last question: I don't understand it. My English is not that good. I don't know what the second part references to, or deploy what.
You forgot to mention Russia. Russia has the biggest army in Europe. Because of historical reasons German has no say over other countries inside Europe. Not outside. Inside. It's us they mass murdered. The US is Britain's old colonial empire. It's success is a significant factor in the dominance of the English language worldwide. I would suggest to you that the capital of that Empire has moved from London to Washington.
I did mention Russia, though. And as I said, Europe and Russia aren't enemies. They aren't friends, but they mutually bear each other (disdainfully). They have too many objectives in common. Their strengths aren't different enough. The future danger based on potential is not enough to warrant preemptive strikes. And remember that Italy plus France has bigger military spending than Russia. Let alone adding more countries. Russia is not the urss, as some people tend to forget. Second, you can tell me what say has Germany outside Europe. Put me some examples, if possible, please. And who are you referring as "us"? Third, yes, USA bring the strongest country in the world by a mile length sure helped. And like you said, it's significant. However, success of English is based on the demographic sector. English occupied a lot of countries with a lot of population. The USA, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, a lot of African countries... . So all that makes that outside Chinese it's the most spoken mother tongue in the world. If we count people with decent understanding, it's clearly first. Indeed, usa played an important part, but the pivotal part is historical. And of course Washington is now the center of the Anglo-Saxon world. It is more that that. It is the capital of the world. Until China arrives, though.