Will there ever be a united european army?
488432
Napoleon practically had a European army. Hitler also came pretty close to having soldiers from all European countries in his armies.\n\nAt the moment the closest to a combined European army is joint operations. Already the Europeans share training facilities, equipment and airbases. \n\nThe European Union is still without a constitution but the last draft left military control to the individual countries in the union.\n\nThe main problem with a combined army will be the different military philosophies. The french always just want to surrender.
69173
No, I´ve never believed in the future of European Union.\nReasons:\n* there are far too many countries in the E.U.\n* these countries are very different (history, values, rich/poor) - so it is very difficult to find compromises\n* every country wants to keep its identity \n* why no common constitution? people in e.g. Slovakia have different needs, problems, et cetera as people e.g. in England\n* people in western europe think the criminality would increase by taking countries like Bulgaria (where even the police drives with stolen cars)\n* people are afraid of taking a country like Turkey into the E.U. (very large country, very many people, very many poor people - richer countries would pay more, borders to countries like Iraq, Iran)\n* farmers in Middle European countries will "die out", because the prizes for agricultural goods decrease (competition with "cheap" countries in Eastern Europe)\n* there are countries which have to "pay" and countries which "get" money. People in the paying countries don´t understand why the should pay for another country
917162
All Europe exept Great  Britain,Ireland , Switzerland, Sweden, Danemark, Iceland, Spain, Portugal, Turkey, half of the USSR, and exept their helping countries, of course. Sad times ...
850676
Nato's Role before :\nprotection against the Warchau block.\nNato's role is quickly changing to a police force in UN missions.  \nAt this moment there are Belgian, British, Canadian, Dutch, French, German, Luxembourg, Tjech, US troops in Afghanistan under Nato command (I think also Spanish and Polish but I'm not certain of these).\nYes, Nato is certainly needed.
769760
Sorry Holly, Liberalism is a failed ideology.  It has been tried in Europe for the past 50 years and has failed.  Most Western European counties are economically stagnant, except for the ones that are in the process of or have reversed their socialized systems.\n\nTheir economies have only stayed stable as long as they have because they have NOT had to spend a dime on defense for the last 50 years.  The US has protected them.  If the US dissolved NATO, and Europe actually had to defend itself.  Every European county would go into a deep recession.
922446
I would like to see a larger army as well. But our troops are the best\nthere are any where.
707623
I think it would be good to split the union especially now since its the 300th anniversary in 2007. I dont want to start arguments about countries which would survive outside of it or which countries support others. It is a myth that England supports the neighbouring countries though. Sure; Scotland for example is given a hefty supplemet every year to look after itself but only from money the UK (NOT England - contrary to popular belief) has earned ie from oil (which is actually Scottish anyway)and tourism - which all nations in the kingdom earn. Please dont continue flaming or anything. I havent said anything to insult anyone and everything I have said is fact. btw Robespierre made the classic fault assuming Wales and Scotland were in England. They are not and never have been, I strongly suggest you don't say that when you are in one of those smaller UK nations. You may be risking your health ;)
785457
Please remember, the most of men were in Europe in the army, just a few were in US, no chance to have just an affaireor cheating. The commitment is the same in all the times, no have an specific time.
714849
If Scotland were independent the United Kingdom would cease to exist. However I think the country could survive if certain conditions were in place but there is no hurry, there will be a time when it is right and it is not now, Europe would have to be more united!\n\nI do like the pathetic way English people try to wind us up, if you are not bothered by us why do you keep going on and on about us!  We are only a small wee country next to your big oh so powerful one. The reality is you know nothing about us but we know everything about you. And if you haven't noticed we have already invaded you and are taking over! Fools
415979
yes as long as they continue to pursue reforms.also,they joined nato in 2004 aligning them with the vast majority of eu members.
956180
That was over 90 years ago and then men who served must be well over 100 years of age. But since it was so long ago, I'm sure the Army's in Europe weren't very organized at the time. And there is little knowledge of who served. But there is less than 50 still living within the US. So I would say maybe around 100 (and that's pushing it!)\nProud Great Grand-Daughter of Cpl. Capo-WWI
1158134
How what works, the world? I doubt it although they may have united to become the EU there is no sense of common history or common cause. I don't see too much cooperation in the EU.
818652
I don't know whether the U.S. has the best Army in the world.  What I do know is there is no Army from any sophisticated Western nation that knows how to fight in an urban/guerrilla enviornment.
581909
I think it is stupid for any country to eliminate their standing military forces. There will always be some country out there wanting what some other country has. England of all countries should know that, with the number of wars they have been direct participants in (as either attacker or attackee).
208187
more is better... is this for a report? :P\ni guess almost each country had his own reasons, some don't want to join, others would like to but haven't been accepted by the members of the union.\nstarting from the west:\nIceland and Norway\nprobably think they are doing fine by their own. especially norway with all the oil it has in the north sea, might prefer to act as an arab emirate rather than joining the EU; Iceland might prefer to keep tighter political relations with north american countries...\nAndorra, Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein and Vatican City\nare very small countries who wouldnt count in the EU, and the members of the Union would hardly give them one single seat in the european parliament. so they have signed different forms of association to the union. they all use the euro as national currency, with the exception of lichtenstein that is realted to switzerland. some of these countries rely for most of their economy in particular banking or taxes legislations, and so they wouldnt like to give them up to join the european legislation. And of course the Vatican City is more concerned in spirituality worldwide than in joining a political entity/confederation/etc...\nSwitzerland\nhas a tradition of neutrality that made it wait decades before joining the united nations. plus all its special banking legislation would have to be changed to fit the european one and this would have serious consequences on its economy.\nCroatia\nis planning to join the union, but it still has to meet the economic conditions to be accepted by the other members. negotiations are being held to fix a date for the entrance in the union.\nRomania and Bulgaria\nhave been accepted and are likely to join in 2007, if everything goes the right way\nAlbania, Serbia, Montenegro, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia\nare probably willing to join but it will be a long time before they meet the economic and legislative requirements, \nBelarus, Moldova, Ukraine\nare more or less in the same condition of the above balkanic countries, plus they have to get rid of the grip of Russia's influence, that is strong especially in Belarus, but also in the other two countries, that have a considerable (and politically unresty) Russian minority\nTurkey\nis negotiating the entrance to the Union, sponsored by the US, it probably meets the economic requirements, but it has some problems with human rights and the respect of the rights of minorities such as the Kurds, plus it has to clear its position regarding the Armenian genocide (that France and Germany are stressing upon) and Northern Cyprus\nArmenia, Georgia and Aerbaijan\nare really far from the heart of the EU, too close to Russia and the MIddle  Eastern influences, and not in good economic and social conditions to even think to plan to join in a short time...\nok, enough!the entrance of countries such as Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Russia have been sometimes discussed but its more fantapolitics than reality!though nobody knows if one day we will discuss the admittance of Japan :P
684326
EU will not go to war with US even after their military is fully realized. First, you must think of EU as a kinder garden full of bad kids who do not like each other. They will need to resolve their internal disputes first. Second, EU stands to loose too much by going to war with US. US supports EU in many ways like tourism, big business, and intellectual property. Third, US spends more on the military than the entire world combined indicating that EU will have to somehow match that.\n\nI hope this reasoning helps.
838813
I have not seen one, but the British Army does have a soldier support web site. I linked it below for you. Thanks for your support.