It seems that Europe is breaking with USA...

[deziloooooo]

According to the following article..most interesting...Europe is going to break from USA and go it's own way to keep peace on the continent...In their minds , when you have a prickly large neighbor such as Russia and a leader like Putin..better to find a way to give in and get along...

In a way I can understand..No one knew how it would turn out in the Ukraine , over 5000 dead already...and while one can't imagine a small insurrection turning into anything really major..then again the first WW started over a simple assassination  of a Duke and a Duchess and over 50 million died  plus just about all the Royal European houses disappearing and untold destruction and the seeds of WW being planted..


america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/2/to-solve-ukraine-crisis-europe-breaks-from-the-us.html
=================================================
"To solve Ukraine crisis, Europe breaks from the US

Merkel and Hollande's conflicted loyalties mark limits of NATO's and Washington's influence

February 11, 2015 2:00AM ET
by John Batchelor @batchelorshow

Secretary of State John Kerry’s remarks in Kiev last week that the United States is considering providing weapons to the embattled Ukraine government of President Petro Poroshenko threatens to ignite a political crisis in Europe that could have profound implications for the U.S.

Not since the end of World War II have the European powers, led by Berlin and Paris, faced such a naked choice of loyalty. Will Europe remain obedient to Washington under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization umbrella of conventional and nuclear forces? Or will Europe decide to go its own way, negotiating its economic and security interests with Russia and its allies independently of the U.S.?"
===================================================
To read complete article click on link above
-----------------------------------------
In a small way it kind of reminds me in a small way I agree, but similar in some ways,  of the splitting of Czechoslovakia  , Sudent Land , "Peace in our times " ..Chamberlain  ..and we know how that turns out...

I guess as long as they don't look to us to pull their chestnuts out of the fire ....again.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

I highly doubt that all of Europe will break from the US. Several of those countries are members of NATO, which the US and Canada also are.

And what European country would want to give that much power to such a large republic as Russia?





www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_52044.htm

[deziloooooo]

Feb 13, 2015 0:43:31 GMT -5 ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ said:

I highly doubt that all of Europe will break from the US. Several of those countries are members of NATO, which the US and Canada also are.

And what European country would want to give that much power to such a large republic as Russia?





www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_52044.htm

I believe when Obama semi threatened Russia / Putin..possible arm the Ukraine, France, Germany wanted no part of that..Not really much we or they could do IMHO, as far as stopping Russia..Ukraine right on the border ... Russia / Putin sending a message to others that no way Ukraine can survive with out being friendly with Russia...no way be allowed to be tied to the West...Sanctions would hurt Russia , they have a major problem right now..oil prices so low..only thing Russia can sell besides arms is Gas, Oil ...but Russians love Putin...so far and Russians seem to be able to suffer a lot..see their history especially when Putin controls the media as he does..makes out all against poor little Russia..citizens are buying it..so far.-

[mroped]

I agree with deminmaine about the stretching of NATO beyond its original purpose. The continuos push to include more members in the treaty seems like a move to isolate Russia.
The alliance has already included countries that provide almost nothing but territory and occasional bridge heads for a quick reply in the event of a russian outburst.

Ofcourse the Europeans are going to try to smooth maters with Putin! They do need the russian gas to survive economically since most of everything in their economies functions/operates on gas from the Russians.

I do believe that the "threat" that the U.S. issued towards Putin was somewhat unwise. You literally can't posibly think about going against the Russians and imply possible invasion or occupation. It can't be done!
Alexander the Great tried it, Napoleon tried it, Hitler tried it; it just doesn't work!

Best is to make it clear to the other involved parties that since they want separation in some way they will have it on the condition that they take care of the problem themselves and in no way, form or shape we are getting involved again.

And since the French are involved in this, I don't see a good outcome. The only thing they are good at is be politicians but when push comes to shove, from a military stand point probably the Albanians could do more than the French.

I still can't understand for the life of me how they ended up on the Alliance at the end of WWII and declared a "winner" alongside US and England.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Feb 13, 2015 0:19:02 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

According to the following article..most interesting...Europe is going to break from USA and go it's own way to keep peace on the continent...In their minds , when you have a prickly large neighbor such as Russia and a leader like Putin..better to find a way to give in and get along...

In a way I can understand..No one knew how it would turn out in the Ukraine , over 5000 dead already...and while one can't imagine a small insurrection turning into anything really major..then again the first WW started over a simple assassination  of a Duke and a Duchess and over 50 million died  plus just about all the Royal European houses disappearing and untold destruction and the seeds of WW being planted..


america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/2/to-solve-ukraine-crisis-europe-breaks-from-the-us.html
=================================================
"To solve Ukraine crisis, Europe breaks from the US

Merkel and Hollande's conflicted loyalties mark limits of NATO's and Washington's influence

February 11, 2015 2:00AM ET
by John Batchelor @batchelorshow

Secretary of State John Kerry’s remarks in Kiev last week that the United States is considering providing weapons to the embattled Ukraine government of President Petro Poroshenko threatens to ignite a political crisis in Europe that could have profound implications for the U.S.

Not since the end of World War II have the European powers, led by Berlin and Paris, faced such a naked choice of loyalty. Will Europe remain obedient to Washington under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization umbrella of conventional and nuclear forces? Or will Europe decide to go its own way, negotiating its economic and security interests with Russia and its allies independently of the U.S.?"
===================================================
To read complete article click on link above
-----------------------------------------
In a small way it kind of reminds me in a small way I agree, but similar in some ways,  of the splitting of Czechoslovakia  , Sudent Land , "Peace in our times " ..Chamberlain  ..and we know how that turns out...

I guess as long as they don't look to us to pull their chestnuts out of the fire ....again.

It only reminds you of what Hitler did prior to WWII in a "small way?"  Putin did and said pretty much the same things.  Unfortunately, and I know people don't like to hear this, the threat of war is sometimes the only thing that keep certain areas of the world in line.  No, I'm not promoting the idea of war....but I am saying that Putin is likely hedging his bets that countries will let him keep getting away with things because they don't want to go to war.  I don't like it, but sometimes that is the case.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Feb 13, 2015 9:28:09 GMT -5 mroped said:

I agree with deminmaine about the stretching of NATO beyond its original purpose. The continuos push to include more members in the treaty seems like a move to isolate Russia.
The alliance has already included countries that provide almost nothing but territory and occasional bridge heads for a quick reply in the event of a russian outburst.

Ofcourse the Europeans are going to try to smooth maters with Putin! They do need the russian gas to survive economically since most of everything in their economies functions/operates on gas from the Russians.

I do believe that the "threat" that the U.S. issued towards Putin was somewhat unwise. You literally can't posibly think about going against the Russians and imply possible invasion or occupation. It can't be done!
Alexander the Great tried it, Napoleon tried it, Hitler tried it; it just doesn't work!

Best is to make it clear to the other involved parties that since they want separation in some way they will have it on the condition that they take care of the problem themselves and in no way, form or shape we are getting involved again.

And since the French are involved in this, I don't see a good outcome. The only thing they are good at is be politicians but when push comes to shove, from a military stand point probably the Albanians could do more than the French.

I still can't understand for the life of me how they ended up on the Alliance at the end of WWII and declared a "winner" alongside US and England.

I don't know that people give the French people enough credit when it comes to WWII.  The way the German army was set up, I'm not sure too many countries of the same size and military would have been able to stop the Germans from taking over as quickly as they did....and there was still resistance in the country afterwards, which helped the Allies gain a foothold against the Axis armies.

[billisonboard]

Seems like it is about time for another European war. 

This is a list of conflicts in Europe ordered chronologically, including wars between European nations, civil wars within European nations, wars between a European nation and a non-European nation that took place within Europe and global conflicts, in which Europe was a theatre of war.

[deziloooooo]

Feb 13, 2015 7:11:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

One of Europe's issues in all of this is economic- a lot of their natural gas supply comes from Russia. Germany and France both use a lot of it. They are at least as worried about the economic ramifications as they are of anything. Most instability and conflict comes from economic turmoil rather than from purely political heat.  They don't want Putin to shut off the gas.  An irony in all of this is- Putin can no longer afford to.  It is a big game of chicken though, and Merckel and Hollande have more basic concerns in mind than high minded ones. Just My Opinion.

Also, the NATO Alliance will survive this just fine.  Again, imo, a bigger threat to the NATO alliance is expanding it's membership beyond it's original purpose, but that is a different topic.  This little dustup is just a disagreement among friends, hardly as disturbing as say de Gaulle's ouster of American troops from France years ago.  As long as Europe and the US share common interests the Alliance will do just fine.  As soon as they don't it will be heaped on the dustbin of history.

Regarding the Gas and oil...I agree with you..Russia has turned off the spigot before but not sure how many of you know that here has been a hugh discovery of Gas, some oil too...but mucho gas in the Med off of Israel..supposedly a pipe line being built to a refinery in Egypt where it would be whatever..think cooled and put on special ships  to go where ever..Israel already useing some of it...believe Jordan is also going to be supplied...and I guess they are looking to sell more .. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With a name like Leviathan, it has to be big
In 2010, Noble Energy and its partners found something in Israel's offshore region that the country had been looking for since the oil embargoes of the 1970's; its own hydrocarbons. You might say that the company and the country found more than they could have hoped for. The Tamar and Leviathan fields are estimated to have as much as 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which is enough gas to supply Israel for decades even if it were to convert all of its energy consumption from coal and oil to natural gas -- with enough left over to export. Noble Energy estimates that this gas field and the planned export projects could net the country more than $130 billion in energy savings and government revenue from gas royalties."

[mroped]

Nobody in Europe stood a chance in 1939 when Hitler started rolling the "Blitzkrieg" but to fold with the speed and acuracy that the French did that was unthinkable.
Polands government sent its troops against tanks with just rifles and swords and made a point by sending in the famous mounted troops the "Hussars"(or something like that) in full ceremonial dress. The point is that they didn't just give up like the French did.

All European countries had history, art and heritage to deffend but none of them used it as an excuse to give up. The French did!
And DeGaulle, was the biggest joke as military commanders goes; he was more a politician on the look out for the glory than a general commanding troops. He was intentionaly marginalized in the ranks because of his political aspirations display versus military strategy and thinking. For the same reason, Eisenhauer kept him out of the loop in regards to Normandie; they didn't tell him untill the day before the invasion and he still managed to blurt the information over the radio. That brought heavy casualties on Omaha beach specifically.

There is a standing joke so please treat it as such! It goes this way:

" Military strategy studies show that would take an estimated 200,000 marines to deffend NY City in the event of a conventional military confrontation( no nukes, drones etc). The question is how many troops would take to deffend Paris?"

At that question- how many troops would take to deffend Paris?- I will take aswears. The numbers don't have to be exact, just a range would be fine, is just an estimate, a guess.

Any takers?

[deziloooooo]

Feb 13, 2015 10:21:25 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

deziloooooo -

I'd heard something about that gas find, but know little about it.  Wouldn't it be ironic if Israel became a major energy player.  

It seems that is what is happened..I believe US oil/Gas  people are involved in getting it out and just the other day I read a blurb that Greece, Israel, Cyprus and Egypt are going to be doing military maneuvers
in conjunction of having to possible defend the area against possible threats...Turkey supposedly sending a search vessel to the area and Israel recently purchasing three new frigates or some kind class vessel  also partially because of this find.

[deziloooooo]

Feb 13, 2015 10:59:08 GMT -5 mroped said:

Nobody in Europe stood a chance in 1939 when Hitler started rolling the "Blitzkrieg" but to fold with the speed and acuracy that the French did that was unthinkable.
Polands government sent its troops against tanks with just rifles and swords and made a point by sending in the famous mounted troops the "Hussars"(or something like that) in full ceremonial dress. The point is that they didn't just give up like the French did.

All European countries had history, art and heritage to deffend but none of them used it as an excuse to give up. The French did!
And DeGaulle, was the biggest joke as military commanders goes; he was more a politician on the look out for the glory than a general commanding troops. He was intentionaly marginalized in the ranks because of his political aspirations display versus military strategy and thinking. For the same reason, Eisenhauer kept him out of the loop in regards to Normandie; they didn't tell him untill the day before the invasion and he still managed to blurt the information over the radio. That brought heavy casualties on Omaha beach specifically.

There is a standing joke so please treat it as such! It goes this way:

" Military strategy studies show that would take an estimated 200,000 marines to deffend NY City in the event of a conventional military confrontation( no nukes, drones etc). The question is how many troops would take to deffend Paris?"

At that question- how many troops would take to deffend Paris?- I will take aswears. The numbers don't have to be exact, just a range would be fine, is just an estimate, a guess.

Any takers?

When the Germans surprised the Allies...the Brits as well as the French, by sending their tanks through the Argonne forest..thought impassable for armor , they split the allied forces..out flanked them and true the way the French and allies used their armor , had a big part to play in the conquest of France.  Also to consider..the French as too the Brits had suffered such hugh  losses in manpower in the first WW..generation lost ...French did not have the stomach for another go like that so soon...just 21 years later..

[billisonboard]

Feb 13, 2015 10:59:08 GMT -5 mroped said:

Nobody in Europe stood a chance in 1939 when Hitler started rolling the "Blitzkrieg" but to fold with the speed and acuracy that the French did that was unthinkable.
Polands government sent its troops against tanks with just rifles and swords and made a point by sending in the famous mounted troops the "Hussars"(or something like that) in full ceremonial dress. The point is that they didn't just give up like the French did.

All European countries had history, art and heritage to deffend but none of them used it as an excuse to give up. The French did!
And DeGaulle, was the biggest joke as military commanders goes; he was more a politician on the look out for the glory than a general commanding troops. He was intentionaly marginalized in the ranks because of his political aspirations display versus military strategy and thinking. For the same reason, Eisenhauer kept him out of the loop in regards to Normandie; they didn't tell him untill the day before the invasion and he still managed to blurt the information over the radio. That brought heavy casualties on Omaha beach specifically.

There is a standing joke so please treat it as such! It goes this way:

" Military strategy studies show that would take an estimated 200,000 marines to deffend NY City in the event of a conventional military confrontation( no nukes, drones etc). The question is how many troops would take to deffend Paris?"

At that question- how many troops would take to deffend Paris?- I will take aswears. The numbers don't have to be exact, just a range would be fine, is just an estimate, a guess.

Any takers?

One, to wave the white flag.

[mroped]

Feb 13, 2015 11:14:47 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

Feb 13, 2015 10:59:08 GMT -5 mroped said:

When the Germans surprised the Allies...the Brits as well as the French, by sending their tanks through the Argonne forest..thought impassable for armor , they split the allied forces..out flanked them and true the way the French and allies used their armor , had a big part to play in the conquest of France.  Also to consider..the French as too the Brits had suffered such hugh  losses in manpower in the first WW..generation lost ...French did not have the stomach for another go like that so soon...just 21 years later..

All other countries in Europe went through WWI and had massive losses. Granted not as big numbers as the French did but still! Yet, all others at least showed willingness to stand against the natzi machine. Excluded are those that allied themselves with the Germans.

[mroped]

"One to wave the flag!" 

Good ode enough for a guess but unfortunately wrong. 
Im waiting for a few more answer before I " unveil the truth"! 

[mroped]

My point about Poland was not about how it ended but about the fact that them, and a few other countries made a stand with no resources and hope but they did it anyways because they believed in defending themselves to the last resort.

The French Maginot Line was a bunch of holes in the ground peppered with sharpened sticks. That would have worked in the 1400 not in the aftermath of WWI when some of the war machinery was introduced.
Luckly for the French, the Brits tried to help them make a stand. Although futile, their attempt to hold the German invasion bought them enough time to organize on the island and put up a real fight.

[zibazinski]

I wouldn't trust US, either. 

[mroped]

I apologiaze for being unclear about the French soldiers and their approach to defending themselves.

The French soldiers are in no way cowards or gutless. They are simply soldiers and follow orders as they should but when leadership lacks any kind of vision or strategy but is caught up in furthering personal agenda, that's what you get: massive casualties and no positive results!
At the time, all or most French generals were out to gain public attention. They wanted notoriety more than victory against an invasion. It was a sure shot at presidency if you were part of the military because of the tought that a military man will defend the country and the story of WWI won't repeat itself.

Does anyone here believe that american troops could not kick Al-Qaeda and its members to kingdoms come? But no! We can't let soldiers do their jobs, the politicians decide the moves and outcomes of things.... And sometimes the financial gains dictate the outcomes!

[zibazinski]

Um, my Dad was in WW2 and he had plenty to say about the French and the Arab soldiers.