He would not. Even being a spy on Soviet payroll wasn't considered treason, which is the charge several people in this thread wants to push.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
He would not. Even being a spy on Soviet payroll wasn't considered treason, which is the charge several people in this thread wants to push.
Just jailed then? I must admit, the line between embelishment and truth is a bit vague from this side of the pond.
The earlier we have an EU army the better.
Would probably be on a list, maybe spied on, but no jail or charges. He's not doing anything close to illegal, now or then. McCarthy tried to push for treason charges in general, but that was probably just political rhetoric rather than anything he thought he could realistically achieve.
Not a single person was convicted, or I believe even charged, with treason during the Cold War. You have to be actually at war with someone for treason to apply, and the US wasn't at war with Soviet then and are not at war with Russia now.
Ah yes ... conscription for our kids too
I'm sure you'd be the first to sign up.
What exactly is wrong with the idea of highly motivated and well paid professional EU army to deter bad actors?
This wasn't a critical interview but a terrible joke. What was this Carlson guy idiot thinking of awarding Putin 2 hours to spread his lies and propaganda during prime time.
This idiot must be on Putin's payroll surely or is the worst journalist I ever witnessed.
Imagine giving Hitler such a platform back then during WW2. Totally unthinkable. This guy is more of a traitor than Snowden.
This idiot must be on Putin's payroll surely or is the worst journalist I ever witnessed.
Imagine giving Hitler such a platform back then during WW2. Totally unthinkable. This guy is more of a traitor than Snowden.
The interview ended up being a total disaster so much that the only talking point MAGA / and all the Musk types in the US have going is “at least Putin has a good memory, on the other hand Joe Biden”…
Putin had a perfect opportunity to align himself with all those conspiracy loons, but instead he made himself look totally pathetic rambling old guy.I actually personally don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it and I think I'm probably relatively atypical in the UK for not minding the idea of a genuine USA/Australia style federated United States of Europe in the long run (and did even when the UK was in too).
However, how exactly would an EU army work? Would it be in addition to national armies? If so, who is joining this army and what is its purpose? Or would it replace national armies? If so, again I have no personal issues with that but the foreign policy wants and needs of...say France for instance, as well as what their military does outside of its borders, does not particularly closely align with those of say Malta or Republic of Ireland. So are Irish or Maltese or Swedish pilots going to be conducting strikes in Libya, Syria or the Sahel? Or will the French no longer be able to conduct this type of activity?
Depends really on what the ultimate end goal of the EU is and how much power the individual nation states are willing to give up.
You'd imagine they'd second parts of their national armies to the EU army so that they can train together and focus on complementary capabilities during war? How big such an army woukd actually be is the question I suppose. Most nations probably wouldn't want more than 10-20% of their militaries tied up in an EU army you'd think but perhaps I'm mistaken.
Actually during the last years we have seen more and more real integration between armies and I think it is reasonable to assume that these will grow over time.
Let's take for example the Dutch and German militaries:
The German "1. Panzerdivision" (1st Tank Division) incorporates the Dutch "43 Gemechaniseerde Brigade" (43rd Mechanized Brigade) in its structure. Part of that Brigade is the German "Panzerbataillon 414" (Tank Batallion 414). A quarter of that Batallion actually consists of Dutch soldiers. Who are the only Dutch troops to operate Main Battle Tanks, and actually German ones, the Dutch have a lease contract for those they use.
Similar cooperation exists in the area of special forces (Dutch "11. Luchtmobielen Brigade" - 11th Air Mobile Brigade became part of the German "Division Schnelle Kräfte" - Division Fast Forces), air defence (German "61. Flugabwehrraketengruppe" - 61st Air Defence Missile Group became part of the Dutch "Defensie Grondgebonden Luchtverdedigingscommando" - Ground Based Air Defence Command) and the German "Seebataillon" (Sea Battalion, essentially our Marines/SEALs) is currently integrated into the Dutch marine
I claim Königsberg for Germany based on this logic. I am also quite sure that Sweden could rightfully claim all of Ukraine and Russia, as the first rulers of the Kievan Rus were Swedish vikings.
We should claim Brazil and finally win the world cup.
This got a good chuckle out of me.
Russia will always be our neighbor and it will always be hungry for land (the only thing that keeps such diverse population most of whom living in poverty, is their pride of belonging to a country whose military prowess terrifies everyone. That military prowess can only be tested through war). On top of that no one wants it to go tits up. That's because a fragmented Russia is the stuff of nightmares. Can you imagine were the mountain of nukes they have would go given such circumstances? So Russia will never go away. What can go away is the US's support who have a tendency to occasionally go full isolationist. The US had already made it obvious that their no 1 priority is Asia. The Israeli war vs the Ukraine war showed that given the choice they'll probably choose Israel over us as well. So can we really depend on such partner?
Now what benefits an EU army has
1- An EU army brings loads of smaller armies (Germany 181k, France 118k, Poland 292k etc) under one banner. Thus there's a smaller chance of conscription given this situation.
2- There's a myth that the EU doesn't spend enough money on military. That's silly considering that we are the third highest military spenders and we barely ever at war anywhere (bar the UK but they are not in the EU). The issue is not military spending but waste. To give you an idea the US has 1 main battle tank while Europe has 17. Overall, the US has 30 separate types of weapon systems versus 178 for the EU. Each weapon system is costlier both in terms of actually buying them and its ammo (economy of scale), it needs specialized people to operate and maintain etc. That goes away with a well coordinated EU army.
3- It will make us less dependent on US support which is massive but can be unpredictable especially if nuke threats are involved (will they swap New York for Warsaw, London or Dublin?)
4- It will allow the EU to shape its foreign policy. For example is it within our interests to get bogged down in Taiwan? Can't a deal be made with China were we close our eyes on Taiwan in return of them keeping Russia at bay? China is no friend to Russia. Sure they hate the US more but we're not the US right? Meanwhile shouldn't we have a tougher stance on Israel? Should we always toe in line to the US foreign policy? Are we allowed to think with our heads for once and act accordingly?
5- It will reignite interest from the military industry to invest in Europe. That will bring new business into Europe but it also plays a key role in ammo supply. The Ukraine war is burning ammo like crazy and all European stock (cause of 2) is at a all time low. If there's a war in Europe then we need to be able to produce ammo ourselves.
On top of that and the most important point is that the Russians hate losing. Their country tolerate almost everything but not an humiliating defeat. Thus an organized Europe will keep Putin and his ilk at bay
That's not me saying it but the likes of General Capitini and Graziano.
Aside from America never in a million years allowing such a thing to happen?
https://www.ft.com/content/ad16ce08-763b-11e9-bbad-7c18c0ea0201
NATO is one of the primary ways the US maintains its military, economic and political dominance over Europe. An EU army is not happening, not even now when the US is giving Ukraine the same patented "as long as it takes" treatment it gave the Kurds and the Afghans. It COULD happen one day if and when the major EU countries elect leaders with actual spines who place Europe's interests above America's, but not while these servile lackeys are running the show.
US wouldn't be able to stop it though, it just needs the current core of EU countries to get a lot closer. As above post says, there is already man power in place and enough spending, what needs to happen is more common weapon system and production of those systems and ammo. The EU should be taking the lead in supporting Ukraine and driving the Russians out and should have been far more aggressive from the get go. There is no threat of nukes for defending Ukraine, this war could have been stopped in a few days and Putin would have been taken out or in hiding if we'd just set up a no fly zone or even been serious about putting boots on the ground.
France is a nuclear power.
According to general capitini its not the case anymore. The US had shifted its sights away from Europe and into the Pacific. They would actually applaud an EU army especially if it runs in parallel to NATO. Let's face it, the current situation is border ridiculous. One of the richest continents in the world can't defend itself
Yes...not sure if you meant to reply to me?
Its a continent. There has been an invasion on 2nd poorest country in europe and isnt a part of Nato. The world doesn't consist of continents defending itself, but sovereign countries.
I perhaps misunderstood your point. I thought you meant a eu army vs Russia wouldn't mean confrontation between nuclear powers.
Ah no, was saying there wasn't a real threat despite Putin's bluffing
How would that differ from a nato intervention which includes the Us and the UK?
It wouldn't, I think that could also have happened and Putin would have backed down. He knew that wouldn't happen though as he's been testing our response for ages. It was probably a stronger response than he thought (given it seems like he thought we'd just let the invasion happen) but, even forgetting the US and UK, if the EU had just said 'no' and immediately mobilised armies, navies, airforces etc. I have no doubt his bluff would have been called and there wouldn't have been any bloodshed.
Actually nothing is wrong with it
Except Europe isn't ready for it.
Let's just forget about the trillions of Euro it will cost and aren't available. The Euro already was an huge mistake how it was introduced.
Our politicians thought the common currency will eventually lead to the political unity of Europe. In reality the opposite happened. The Euro caused a lot of frictions, envy and disunity between it's members.
Lesson learnt you can't do the second step before achieving the first, which would be a federal state of Europe.
Same would happen with an United army of Europe. Endless discussion where the weapons will be purchased, who will be in charge and who had to contribute how much.
So it's a nice idea but nothing more than a pipe dream. At least for the time being.
Well maybe it will be America (Trump) actually pushing Europe's hesitant and reluctant leaders to finally come up with a vision and of course act accordingly.
Frankly i think your most likely right. However especially since post vietnam, Iraq v1 and v2 and Afghanistan, soldiers and their families dont want to throw away their lives in a foreign war. My half brother is a veteran of the first gulf war and it destroyed him. And even though the nuclear threat might very reasonably be a bluff, im not sure the countries in the zone want to find out not to mention the massive lack of popular support in western democratic countries. If it was a attack on their own countries, its different, however personally dying for Ukraine is different.
100% it's hindsight being wonderful talking, I was super scared at the time of Putin being a nutter and nuking someone. Now looking back, particularly seeing the limitations of the Russian army, even if it had been a conflict, i think it would have been very one sided and political pressure in Russia would have seen the end of Putin.
Isn't land one of the last things Russia would need? After they are biggest country in the world by some margin.
Considering their birth rates they need a massive influx of immigrants
Russia and Ukraine have the two biggest armies in Europe. Russia is currently deploying 400k in Ukraine, 40k of which were in Avdiivka alone. Do you know how large the UK army is? Around 70k. Sure technology help to a point but this war had proved that war is a marathon not a run. What's the point of having the best military systems if they end up running out of ammo and there's a waiting list of 18 months+ to get more? That's what is happening with, for example, the Himars.
Europe solely depends on the US for military protection and that despite the US had made it ample clear that its priority lie in the Pacific then in Israel. That's crazy. The tragedy is that the EU genuinely spends huge amount of money in military. Yet that money is largely lost in waste. The US has 30 military systems that it needs to supply with ammo, learn how to use and maintain. Do you know how many military systems the EU have? Over 170. How on earth that is even sustainable!
Stalin wasn’t even able to create meaningful and lasting settlements in Siberia by force. The land must be habitable. Huge parts of Russia aren’t or barely are. Ukraine on the other hand is. And it’s incredibly fertile.
I am referring to military victories that often comes with land. The typical Russian can't care less of his standard of living. What they care about is that he lives in a country that can terrify the crap off its neighbors. That notion needs to be tested to be proven true which is exactly what the Russians had been doing since the Czars
You cannot possibly quote the numbers of military personnel without mentioning that Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe stuck in a literal existential fight for their existence and sovereignty. If Britain, Germany, France, Spain and Italy were threatened ww2 style in this era the numbers would skyrocket.