Europe ‘would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine’

Eeesh... I'm just going to put this link here to a video by which is a detailed analysis on how far Europe has already progressed with its military building and where it will be by 2030. Long story short? Europe is already well down the path top rearming. The video is only 3 days old and it was put together by a popular YouTuber called Perun with a background in defense and data analytics. I's about an hour long but you can jump ahead to parts that interest you. Pint being he gives you numbers and facts. And those facts tell a completely different story to what the usual suspects here are trying to push. They of course won't watch it because ... well facts. The first 14 minutes or so are historic background.

 

Oh yeah? Which ones?

 

They took their sweet ass time. Why should we be impressed?

 

If push comes to shove France and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have nuclear weapons.
Between them there are enough to end the world as we know it, including America (although they are unlikely to be the first target) so there is that.

 

Probably because they're closer to Russia. Also their GDP is lower.

 

Feeling lazy?

Peak Deployments: Europe committed ~195, 000 troops across all wars since WW2 (summing peak contributions to avoid double-counting rotations).

Total Rotations: ~815,150–865,150 troops (including multiple deployments, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq).

For comparison the US helping out in European led wars since WW2

Peak Deployments: ~28,000 troops (mostly Bosnia/Kosovo peacekeeping).

Total Rotations: ~50,000–60,000 (including multiple deployments, especially in Balkans).

Enjoy those facts.

 

Did I say be 'impressed'? No. I simply used the video to point out that all the people here complaining about an alleged 'lack' of European investment in defense are behind the times and need to catch up. What they're apparently so worried about? Was an issue, it's not one now.

And if they'd kept up to date? They'd have been no need to complain in the first place would there?

 

Troop numbers is so last year. Technology is what wins wars. Spending more on military does not increase number of troops

 

enter the AI discussions stage left......it's an interesting conundrum in that introducing the IA component into drone swarms allows for whole swathes of territory to become "hot zones" without the need for humans to do the killing...all you do is have someone designate a certain area and then allow the AI to take overwatch - anything in that designated area then becomes a viable target for the drones with the AI analysing and dispatching the appropriate ordnance. On the flip side you have the argument about the actual use of AI and it's moral component when used in warfare. UAF are making exponential leaps in the use of the AI technology with armed drones (land, sea and airbourne) as on land for example they don't have the quantities of artillery shells needed for area denial; they would rather have the artillery shells but since they don't, they have to go down the AI route which certain comentators find morally questionable....just a thought.....

 

The EU has a population of 450 million. It is simply a lack of political will.

Poland by itself has an armed force of 216 thousand.

 

I dont see that any nation that represses its citizens from being armed is prioritizing national defense. Instead it is prioritizing its own power monopoly at the cost of national defense and fears its own people more than an invasion from the outside. It is unsuitable to rule and knows it.

 

So, two wars that, as you say, "had nothing to do with Europe". That isn't "many", like you claimed.

 

There's nothing alleged about it.

 

The Korean, Vietnam and Afghanistan wars were unrelated to European territory, security, or direct economic interests. That's three out of six. I call that many.

You didn't respond or acknowledge any other points I'm not going to bother talking to any further about this. You're a lightweight debater. And a lazy poster.

 

The only European country that sent troops to Vietnam was Spain and the most they ever had in country was 30 medical personnel. Korea was a United Nations operation.

Before you call someone a lazy debater, you might want to research your own claims first.

You claimed "Europe supported the US in many wars that had nothing to do with Europe since World war II.". You turned out to be terribly incorrect, then you start posting personal attacks.

 

Ouch.

 

Wow! You don't know that @Melb_muser is wrong?...LMAO!!

 

No, my low energy friend.

The debate was “support”. So, from the start, you were wrong. In addition, the Korean War was nominally a UN action, but in reality was an American initiative. Our European friends offered assistance and troops. They also provided technical assistance and troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and a myriad of other conflicts.

By offering typical Trump-like bluster and diminishing the help and assistance Europeans have provided, you have embarrassed yourself. Help yourself and just stop.

 

So what?

Afghanistan?

It's your karma, Bill. ..for your other thousand one-liner troll post.

 

So what? You called me a lazy debater and didn't even research your claims...lol

 

You're still at two wars, my friend...lol

 

And you were wrong again and again. Cripes, Bill, why are you mocking the help that European nations have provided when we’ve needed it? You’re not doing yourself any favors here.

Some other posters plainly don’t enjoy your schtick, but I do. Get off this train.

 

I am? One of us can’t count.

 

Just Iraq was two wars. Add in Afghanistan, Korea, Yemen and Syria to that list

 

Korea was a United Nations operation. Yemen and Syria don't count. Next, you'll be including Rhodesia, Laos and Cambodia...lol