Lib Dems set out roadmap to re join the EU

[Thomas]

You should be used to people expressing absurd opinions on here by now.

you should know , you are the king of them.

I really miss your political predictions.

[HDQQ]

I did not know that Russia was our ally

You should be used to people expressing absurd opinions on here by now. 

[Borchester]

I was more talking about America Borkie. I noticed they still remain on the war path even now and can't keep quiet for five minutes.

So the US is also invading the Ukraine

[B0ycey]

I was more talking about America Borkie. I noticed they still remain on the war path even now and can't keep quiet for five minutes.

I did not know that Russia was our ally

[Borchester]

Sure, when the aggression is against you. But they aren't the same thing when your ally is the aggressor and you have to align to their geopolitic narrative because your security depends on it.

I did not know that Russia was our ally

[B0ycey]

Fair enough but I would say security and autonomy become the same purpose when someone threatens your independence . 

Sure, when the aggression is against you. But they aren't the same thing when your ally is the aggressor and you have to align to their geopolitic narrative because your security depends on it.

[Streetwalker]

NATO has a purpose SW, so I doubt anyone is going to leave soon. But at the same time its objective needs reevaluation. Macron sees it, I see it and I suspect most of the world sees it too. If the objective is peace, then expansion needs to stop. The Ukraine conflict for the most part didn't need to happen had the defined rules been clear. There is a NATO meeting in June and I suspect Macron will want to redefine what NATO is all about. If it security then what has happened in the last month is counterproductive  to the purpose. Europe currently is less secure not more today. But even if you take all that into account, that still doesn't mean an EU army is redundant. NATO is about security and an EU army is about autonomy. Totally different objectives and as such totally different purposes.

Fair enough but I would say security and autonomy become the same purpose when someone threatens your independence .  

[B0ycey]

I hope they do in a way and leave NATO at the same time . Expanding the EU up to Russias borders dosen't go down to well in Russia as we have seen . ''Poking the Russian bear will end in tears'' or words to that effect was what the EU were warned by a certain British MEP  back in 2014  when the EU were debating Ukraines trade status  . ''Have you taken leave of your senses ? '' He asked , nobody listened as usual and as usual he was right .

The EU's expansionist programme has draged NATO members along with it and the sooner it gets to 'look after itself' the better .

Good luck

NATO has a purpose SW, so I doubt anyone is going to leave soon. But at the same time its objective needs reevaluation. Macron sees it, I see it and I suspect most of the world sees it too. If the objective is peace, then expansion needs to stop. The Ukraine conflict for the most part didn't need to happen had the defined rules been clear. There is a NATO meeting in June and I suspect Macron will want to redefine what NATO is all about. If it security then what has happened in the last month is counterproductive  to the purpose. Europe currently is less secure not more today. But even if you take all that into account, that still doesn't mean an EU army is redundant. NATO is about security and an EU army is about autonomy. Totally different objectives and as such totally different purposes.

[Borchester]

A few years back when I said they wanted their own military you and a few others laughed at me and said it was only a few dreamers in Brussels and would never happen and we are where we are and look what's being discussed.

Anyway somebody told me a joke which just might partly come true.

Putin dies and is sent to hell (with Bush & Bliar)anyway after a good few years of behaving himself he's desperate to see how his beloved Russia is faring,he's given a day pass back on earth and goes off  to Moscow and goes in to a bar.

He orders a drink and starts chatting to the barman,"the Crimea,Donbas and Kyiv are they still ours?"

Yes replies the barman,elated Putin asks how much he owes for the drink

"That'll ten euros sir"

[cromwell]

I hope they do in a way and leave NATO at the same time . Expanding the EU up to Russias borders dosen't go down to well in Russia as we have seen . ''Poking the Russian bear will end in tears'' or words to that effect was what the EU were warned by a certain British MEP  back in 2014  when the EU were debating Ukraines trade status  . ''Have you taken leave of your senses ? '' He asked , nobody listened as usual and as usual he was right .

The EU's expansionist programme has draged NATO members along with it and the sooner it gets to 'look after itself' the better .

Good luck

A few years back when I said they wanted their own military you and a few others laughed at me and said it was only a few dreamers in Brussels and would never happen and we are where we are and look what's being discussed.

Anyway somebody told me a joke which just might partly come true.

Putin dies and is sent to hell (with Bush & Bliar)anyway after a good few years of behaving himself he's desperate to see how his beloved Russia is faring,he's given a day pass back on earth and goes off  to Moscow and goes in to a bar.

He orders a drink and starts chatting to the barman,"the Crimea,Donbas and Kyiv are they still ours?"

Yes replies the barman,elated Putin asks how much he owes for the drink

"That'll ten euros sir"

[Streetwalker]

Well I would rather be able to maintain my own security than rely on another nation. NATO has its uses as a defence pact, but it also comes with problems like the desire of the Americans to encroach on Russia and having to deal with the aftermath when they go too far. So it depends on what you are looking for. Autonomy or cooperation and reliance on someone else's geopolitics just so you can sponge off their nukes for your own security. But even so, it should be said it isn't one or the other. It is going to be both. Nonetheless what I will say is if America becomes an unreliable partner, which kind of happened under Trump, if you have an alternative you can leave NATO knowing you have the means to protect yourself. And given the EU has ambitions and is likely to be a bigger force in the future and who the Americans, Chinese and Russian will correspond with, they should actually be considering their own security more don't you think?

I hope they do in a way and leave NATO at the same time . Expanding the EU up to Russias borders dosen't go down to well in Russia as we have seen . ''Poking the Russian bear will end in tears'' or words to that effect was what the EU were warned by a certain British MEP  back in 2014  when the EU were debating Ukraines trade status  . ''Have you taken leave of your senses ? '' He asked , nobody listened as usual and as usual he was right .

The EU's expansionist programme has draged NATO members along with it and the sooner it gets to 'look after itself' the better . 

Good luck 

[B0ycey]

That trump was flirting was why everyone else stayed at home , Biden on the other hand went home and everyone else came out to play

Ill take the 30 NATO members around the world over Europes 27 (most of which are NATO members anyway ) every day of the week  which begs the question why wouldnt you want a European military force with bells on (NATO) led by the Military might of the world  rather than an EU only one that probably can't agree on who is going to make the bullets .

Well I would rather be able to maintain my own security than rely on another nation. NATO has its uses as a defence pact, but it also comes with problems like the desire of the Americans to encroach on Russia and having to deal with the aftermath when they go too far. So it depends on what you are looking for. Autonomy or cooperation and reliance on someone else's geopolitics just so you can sponge off their nukes for your own security. But even so, it should be said it isn't one or the other. It is going to be both. Nonetheless what I will say is if America becomes an unreliable partner, which kind of happened under Trump, if you have an alternative you can leave NATO knowing you have the means to protect yourself. And given the EU has ambitions and is likely to be a bigger force in the future and who the Americans, Chinese and Russian will correspond with, they should actually be considering their own security more don't you think?

[Streetwalker]

Fat Donald was responsible for the stealth bombing mission in Syria and the killing of Soleimani not to mention his twitter rants with Kim. It is true he didn't start any new wars but was flirting with creating some new ones in any case. And of course he didn't end the wars that was started. Perhaps it is unfair to characterise Trump as a war monger given it seems to be the American way since the 21st century at least. I don't know. But what I do know is the more reliant you are of a single partner, the more at risk you are to their narrative. We should never had entered Iraq, Libya or Syria and Afghanistan should have been a mission to destroy their terrorist training camps than nation building. What people seem conveniently to forget, is all those refugees that we don't want that sail the channel come from the very nations we turned into rubble and America the nation that really want to be part of these conflicts for some bizarre notion of freedom and which serve no interest for the rest of Europe don't have to deal with any of the consequences they cause. Also ask yourself this. How many Ukrainians do they plan on taking in? There are 3 million of them. My bet is none. Which means they are in no rush to end this conflict either.

As for "NATO funding", I guess what you meant from that is military spending. Perhaps a lesson has been learnt now that Europe on the whole should have kept up. But that doesn't detract from my point anyway. Whether the spending goes towards an EU project or a national project, the money needs to be spent on defence. But the only thing I will say is if you pool your money together you get more for less. So again, we come full circle back to why it makes sense to have a cooperative army and not 27 individual small armies. And that leads me to my final point for why it will happen in any case. We are entering the age of superpowers and if Europe want to keep up with America and China, it needs a f**king Army. It is already the largest Economy on the planet, they may as well act and behave to the potential they have.

That trump was flirting was why everyone else stayed at home , Biden on the other hand went home and everyone else came out to play 

Ill take the 30 NATO members around the world over Europes 27 (most of which are NATO members anyway ) every day of the week  which begs the question why wouldnt you want a European military force with bells on (NATO) led by the Military might of the world  rather than an EU only one that probably cant agree on who is going to make the bullets . 

[B0ycey]

I believe the last few Presidents ,Trump was probably the most vocal about said that Europe needed to up its game and contribute more to the NATO budget . Maybe it wouldn't be so top heavy as you put it if they got more involved . The whole purpose and strength of NATO is its unity ,all for one and all that . Having Von Der Leyen poking her nose in wanting run the blue flag up the pole and tell the world the EU has been keeping the peace in Europe is something we dont nor never have needed .

The EU should keep to things like banning Scotlands seed potatoes and digging wells in Romania and leave the big boys stuff to those who know what they are doing ,that being NATO .
Trump was  a safe pair of hands  ,I dont recall him bombing anyone  which is pretty rare for recent Presidents

Fat Donald was responsible for the stealth bombing mission in Syria and the killing of Soleimani not to mention his twitter rants with Kim. It is true he didn't start any new wars but was flirting with creating some new ones in any case. And of course he didn't end the wars that was started. Perhaps it is unfair to characterise Trump as a war monger given it seems to be the American way since the 21st century at least. I don't know. But what I do know is the more reliant you are of a single partner, the more at risk you are to their narrative. We should never had entered Iraq, Libya or Syria and Afghanistan should have been a mission to destroy their terrorist training camps than nation building. What people seem conveniently to forget, is all those refugees that we don't want that sail the channel come from the very nations we turned into rubble and America the nation that really want to be part of these conflicts for some bizarre notion of freedom and which serve no interest for the rest of Europe don't have to deal with any of the consequences they cause. Also ask yourself this. How many Ukrainians do they plan on taking in? There are 3 million of them. My bet is none. Which means they are in no rush to end this conflict either.

As for "NATO funding", I guess what you meant from that is military spending. Perhaps a lesson has been learnt now that Europe on the whole should have kept up. But that doesn't detract from my point anyway. Whether the spending goes towards an EU project or a national project, the money needs to be spent on defence. But the only thing I will say is if you pool your money together you get more for less. So again, we come full circle back to why it makes sense to have a cooperative army and not 27 individual small armies. And that leads me to my final point for why it will happen in any case. We are entering the age of superpowers and if Europe want to keep up with America and China, it needs a fucking Army. It is already the largest Economy on the planet, they may as well act and behave to the potential they have.

[Borchester]

I believe the last few Presidents ,Trump was probably the most vocal about said that Europe needed to up its game and contribute more to the NATO budget . Maybe it wouldn't be so top heavy as you put it if they got more involved . The whole purpose and strength of NATO is its unity ,all for one and all that . Having Von Der Leyen poking her nose in wanting run the blue flag up the pole and tell the world the EU has been keeping the peace in Europe is something we dont nor never have needed .

The EU should keep to things like banning Scotlands seed potatoes and digging wells in Romania and leave the big boys stuff to those who know what they are doing ,that being NATO .
Trump was  a safe pair of hands  ,I dont recall him bombing anyone  which is pretty rare for recent Presidents

True.

Trump was and is a common, big mouthed git and that was fine by the average voter. They wanted lower taxes and no foreign wars and Dirty Donald delivered on both.

This Scottish seed potato lark is a load of bollocks, the idea being that the aphid population is lower in Scotland than anywhere else. Of course it is. Scotland is a bloody sight colder than anywhere else and the aphids die of the pneumonia. But when they come south it is put your feet up and enjoy the sunshine weather and they suffer as much as any other spud.