Log in

View Full Version : Franco-German/American rift



LeonardoDaVinci
12th February 2003, 01:58
Well, following France, Germany and Belgium's blocking of the NATO initiative to protect Turkey, the already deteriorating relatioship between the two European countries and the US has hit a new low.

In my opinion, this marks a new chapter of interntional politics. Back in the cold war days, the Americans and the French (who were always deeply distrustful of each other) dealt with each other to counter the perceived threat from the East. Nevertheless, since the collapse of the USSR the balance of power has evidently shifted towards an America which has become increasingly unilatral and self-centred.

I believe that the reasons behind the franco-german intransigence stems not only from the blatant fact that US has yet to come up with a conclusive evidence incriminating Iraq. But there is an underlying motive behind their insubordinate behaviour, and that is a genuine fear that the US is inexorably getting out of control without the counter threat of a rival super power.

Germany and France have always formed the backbone of the European Union, and it is they who have made the most positive steps towards making that dream a reality. Germany and France have also pressed for the creation of a pan-European rapid-reaction military force which can respond to crises outside its borders without direct American involvement.

France proposed the creation of a rapid reaction force around the embryo European military unit, Eurocorps, which was created in 1993. The Eurocorps was originally a Franco-German brigade but has been widened to include units from Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain. The unit is based in the French city of Strasbourg with a Belgian general as commander and can call on 60,000 troops for its operations.

Furthermore, since the inauguration of the EU Germany has been and continues to be its leading financial contributor, vastly outspending other European members.

The Franco-German vision of a single federal EU superstate stems not from an ideallic vision to create a a harmonious post-modern state which perpetuates the ideals of Locke an Hume, but rather a pragmatic realisation that only a single Europe with a common market, and a common defence strategy can possibly stand a chance to counterbalance the US's global hegenomy. And I believe that although the French, Germans and Russians for that matter are more concerned with their long term strategic interests rather than any altruistic desire to help third world countries, it is nevertheless paramount that a united and committed Europe does evolve and develop the necessary means to challenge an increasingly power-mad America.


(Edited by LeonardoDaVinci at 12:28 pm on Feb. 12, 2003)

CheViveToday
12th February 2003, 03:57
Yes, yes, I understand what you are saying. I took a class last year about European history from a brilliant teacher. He showed us how the history between the several countries of Europe was always a balance of power. Countries would form and break alliances, constantly trying to keep one, or a few countries from becoming all powerful. Your theory is very interesting, and rings very true. Hmm...What could this all mean?

Kapitan Andrey
12th February 2003, 05:54
Germany, France and Russia must cooperate a new alliance(against the u.s.a.)!!! :)

F**K bush and blair!!!

Angie
15th February 2003, 13:33
France and Germany have my full support. Full support.

deimos
15th February 2003, 19:02
they've also my support.But not because I am against the war. If france and germany have a common foreign policy, the whole union will have one...In some years. Lets hope that the USE will be reality in some years.

Dr. Rosenpenis
15th February 2003, 20:55
I salute France and Germany on their actions. Creating a succesful financial market independent from the US is very important. This may lead to certain alienation of the United States and a step toward their collapse.

Latin America
16th February 2003, 03:29
They do have my full support, is good there are nations that are not agree with USA! France and Germany have my support!

Pete
16th February 2003, 06:27
Although I support the Anti-war movement, we must remember these are bourgeosie capitalist countries. What's to say they won't try and take America's place after a while. A rebirth of Euro-centicism would damage the world order. If they unite let them unite under a Red flag or let them stay seperate!

CheViveToday
16th February 2003, 06:34
Very good point Pete. Perhaps we were all a little to eager to rally to their cause, due to the fact that they share our beliefs of "Anti-War". It's good they are against the war, but what are their TRUE motives?

Pete
16th February 2003, 06:52
SAY NO TO A CAPITALIST WAR; SAY NO TO A CAPITALIST PEACE

Dr. Rosenpenis
16th February 2003, 19:49
I don't think that uniting Europe would bad at all. I simply don't believe that the Europeans will be as ego-centric as the Americans are now that the world economy rests with them. It is better that they unite and threaten America's reign than be seperate and unheard. Someone needs show America that they are not so great.

Besides, Europe is already far more socialy advanced than the US.

Non-Sectarian Bastard!
16th February 2003, 20:45
I am afraid that if Europe units, 2 superpowers will excist wich will fight each other, I am especially worried about the financiel area, both powers trying to get the cheapest, bestest product to the costumer and get resources (like oil, wood, etc). I am afraid that the country's not united in the alliances will undergo some heavy exploiting, to survive in the Captalist battle both powers will use resources and manpower from the "new third world", ofcourse for really low payments, wich will only worsen the current situation.

Pete
16th February 2003, 22:27
It will be easier to fight the fracticous Europe of today then a united Europe.

Dr. Rosenpenis
17th February 2003, 04:22
Quote: from CrazyPete on 4:27 am on Feb. 17, 2003
It will be easier to fight the fracticous Europe of today then a united Europe.

Meybe, yes, but a united Europe would cause the alienation of the US, and its colapse.

Dr. Rosenpenis
17th February 2003, 04:28
Quote: from CCCP on 2:45 am on Feb. 17, 2003
I am afraid that if Europe units, 2 superpowers will excist wich will fight each other, I am especially worried about the financiel area, both powers trying to get the cheapest, bestest product to the costumer and get resources (like oil, wood, etc). I am afraid that the country's not united in the alliances will undergo some heavy exploiting, to survive in the Captalist battle both powers will use resources and manpower from the "new third world", ofcourse for really low payments, wich will only worsen the current situation.


I you are reffering to the US and Europe, you may be right. It could be the beginig of a new cold war. Perhaps not what we want, or is it? I will have to look into this.

Pete
17th February 2003, 15:28
I believe that the US will collapse from internal forces very soon anyways. Look at them, for the last almost 100 years they have had an external threat to keep their politics alive. Soon the people will realize that their country is just an empty shell with the name "Freedom" labelled where only they can read it.

deimos
17th February 2003, 15:51
It will be easier to fight the fracticous Europe of today then a united Europe.
What do you mean with that?Do you mean that a revolution is more difficult in a united europe?
If you meant that, I disagree with you.
The european bourgousie is already united, but the european worker unions aren't.
In a united europe also the worker movement will be united.