Turkish Foreign Minister claims Greek islands are Turkish

[Greater Slavic Union]

Problems... such as?


Anyways, Italy and Germany have good armies actually, and Germany is building up its military once again.

France is not small at all. GB is, actually, but GB has always chosen the "Quality over Quantity" way

Turkey aligning with Russia on European issues. That would be a problem.

Elaborate, please...

Problems... such as?


Anyways, Italy and Germany have good armies actually, and Germany is building up its military once again.

France is not small at all. GB is, actually, but GB has always chosen the "Quality over Quantity" way

The German army good?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... ent=safari

The Italian Army is no better. The (very slight) increase in German spending is not going to fix the problem. Rebuilding the German military (the Air Force is just a screwed) will take billions of Euros and decades.

The French Army is only 111,000 and also has equipment shortages.

As far as the British go, well quantity has a quality all its own. You need quality AND sufficient quantity. Though the U.K. is going its own way, away from the EU and is more focusing on its Air Force and Navy. Which is fine, but somebody in Europe needs a big, well equipped army.

Germany plans on having an army ready for war and to face Russia's in 2020. This would imply a huge program of re-funding, true, which Germany is now considering.
"In 2015, as a result of serious NATO-Russian tensions in Europe, Germany announced a major increase in defense spending. In May 2015, the German government approved an increase in defense spending, at the time 1.3% of GDP, by 6.2% over the following five years, allowing the Ministry of Defense to fully modernize the army.[25] Plans were also announced to significantly expand the tank fleet to a potential number of 328, order 131 more Boxer armored personnel carriers, increase the submarine fleet, and to develop a new fighter jet to replace the Tornado.[26][27][28][29] Germany is also considering increasing the size of the army.[30]"
Beside that, Germany does not need to invest so much on the military industry: they only need to exploit the one they already have, which... well, basically supplies Germany, Poland, Canada, Greece, Australia, New Zeland, Italy, and other countries as well.

The Italian Army is very good. We lack good commanders, and should revise our promotions policy, which is awkward, at least, but the Army is good, and we are considering new vehicles and equipments as well.

To answer your last point, well, we are likely to have a European Amry very soon, I think, if everything goes like it is going now.

[Novus America]

Turkey aligning with Russia on European issues. That would be a problem.

Elaborate, please...

The German army good?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... ent=safari

The Italian Army is no better. The (very slight) increase in German spending is not going to fix the problem. Rebuilding the German military (the Air Force is just a screwed) will take billions of Euros and decades.

The French Army is only 111,000 and also has equipment shortages.

As far as the British go, well quantity has a quality all its own. You need quality AND sufficient quantity. Though the U.K. is going its own way, away from the EU and is more focusing on its Air Force and Navy. Which is fine, but somebody in Europe needs a big, well equipped army.

Germany plans on having an army ready for war and to face Russia's in 2020. This would imply a huge program of re-funding, true, which Germany is now considering.
"In 2015, as a result of serious NATO-Russian tensions in Europe, Germany announced a major increase in defense spending. In May 2015, the German government approved an increase in defense spending, at the time 1.3% of GDP, by 6.2% over the following five years, allowing the Ministry of Defense to fully modernize the army.[25] Plans were also announced to significantly expand the tank fleet to a potential number of 328, order 131 more Boxer armored personnel carriers, increase the submarine fleet, and to develop a new fighter jet to replace the Tornado.[26][27][28][29] Germany is also considering increasing the size of the army.[30]"
Beside that, Germany does not need to invest so much on the military industry: they only need to exploit the one they already have, which... well, basically supplies Germany, Poland, Canada, Greece, Australia, New Zeland, Italy, and other countries as well.

The Italian Army is very good. We lack good commanders, and should revise our promotions policy, which is awkward, at least, but the Army is good, and we are considering new vehicles and equipments as well.

To answer your last point, well, we are likely to have a European Amry very soon, I think, if everything goes like it is going now.

Germany might have a good Army in the future, and is making some small steps in the right direction. It does not have one now though.

The Italian Army has major equipment shortages and problems too. Again considering buying better equipment in the future is not the same as actually having it. Hopes and dreams and plans are nice, but are not actual military capabilities.

As far as an EU military goes, you cannot make chicken salad out of chicken shit. Combining poorly equipped armies just makes a bigger, still poorly equipped army. Plus the proposed EU Army is a joint command not an actual unified military.

Sure the EU has the CAPABILITY to build a good military. But having a cabaility is different than actually exercising it.

[Ereria]

What makes the turks like Erdogan is that he is standing upto European and American pressure to be their puppet state in middle east. There is a reason for so much backleash against Erdogan today and it's because if European and American leaders don't like a president in another country, they produce propaganda against them until their citizens agree with them. For that reason I sort of like Erdogan better because he pulled Turkey out of the illusion of being an EU member and is actually trying to make a stronger state. However I don't like how he uses religion to gain votes and we got better options like HEPAR and Osman Pamukoglu. For me whichever party that is a right wing gets my vote, and CHP in Ataturks time was a mix between nationalism and left wing ideology like modernism and equal rights. That's exactly what I want but sadly that CHP doesn't exist today.

I`m gonna elaborate a bit further on that one. The idea that the US and Europe want to "keep Turkey down" is laughable. For almost 10 years straight, Erdogan was showered with praise by almost all Western media for modernizing his country and improving its economy. He was cited as a leader who would make Turkey more transparent and democratic than the old Kemalist nomenclatura. As the man who made peace with the Kurds possible. As the prime example of how Islam and modern democracy can coexist. I remember reading articles that Turkey would have been a better addition to the EU than the corrupt and constantly crisis-ridden countries of SE Europe. All warnings on how Erdogan is an Islamist and a despot-in-the-making were swept aside as backwards, Islamophobic racism by the mainstream media.
The Europeans even applied heavy pressure on the Greek Cypriots in 2004 and urged them to vote for reunification with Northern Cyprus, in order to make Turkey's EU accession easier. Turkey's constant violations of Greek airspace and waters were almost always ignored by the rest of Europe.

The first cracks appeared when the Turkish state used massive violence in order to supress the Gezi Park protests in 2013. There, the European media and governments began to criticize. Guess what? They also do that when "white, Christian" countries like Russia or - to a lesser extent - Hungary or Poland are behaving like despots. They also did it towards Berlusconi and Italy, a core EU member. It has nothing to do with "keeping Turkey and Islam down".
Turkish-European relations became worse when it became apparent that Turkey was establishing mini-AKPs in countries like Germany or the Netherlands with large Turkish communities - parties with ultraconservative and anti-Western agendas. Erdogan actively encouraging Turks in Germany to not integrate and telling them that they will always be Turks first, Germans later, also did not help.
Relations became really bad when Turkey started acting as an agent of chaos in its neighbor countries. In order to achieve his megalomaniac delusion of having his own neo-Ottoman sphere of influence, Erdogan did not even shy down from working with ISIS. Around the same time, he himself destroyed the peace process with the Kurds (something you will no doubt applaud him for). When Erdogan switched his office from prime minister to president and suddenly demanded that Turkey clearly needs a presidential system - something that apparently didn't occure to him during all his years as Prime Minister - it became clear that Erdogan was actively trying to become Turkey's Supreme Ruler for life.
Things became farcical when Erdogan actually started asking that European governments should ban any criticism or satire of him inside their own countries. He also managed to fuck up relations with Russia around the same time - clearly the West is to blame for that too. Or maybe Russia is also racist and wants to keep Turkey and Islam down. Turkey`s opinion on that seems to constantly change, so I`m not sure.

Since the quagmire of a coup that happened this year, Erdogan has dropped the last pretenses of not being a dictator and has pretty much established an one-man-regime. Due to the Turkish economy`s rapid decline - a Western plot too, no doubt - he has considerably increased his hostility towards European countries, even saying that Turkey's current borders are too small and it needs more land (from its neighbors). At the same time, virtually every single public comment of the Turkish government and its various subservient media on the European countries has consisted of nothing but insults, threats, accusations of terrorism (with zero evidence) or all of that together. That Turkey things the bad, mean Europeans are being too disrepectful and hurting Turkey's precious feelings is kinda cute in that regard.
Let me ask: How do you think Western public opinion would react if a European leader would start behaving that way? If Merkel suddenly demanded that Germany must retake land from its neighbors, that all criticism of Germany and herself must be outlawed everywhere, and also that every other country is an enemy of Germany and part of an anti-German plot? Would people be cool with it? Of course not, so why should be cool with Erdogan?

Nobody is asking you to become a Western puppet. Merely that you stop indulging in neo-imperialist megalomania and get your act together.

Thanks it helps with spacing

The turks are feeling left out and being used as the PKK, which is considered a terrorist organization by Turkey, EU and USA are being supplied by, and theres even proof of it, european nations and the USA. Also making denying the armenian genocide which I don't want to discuss in this thread like France did also is being aggressive against Turkey. The reason Turkey has behaved in a hostile way against their neighbours and europe is because of decades of mistrust towards them. European nations was never gonna accept Turkey in EU and if Turkey actually had been accepted into EU in the 90's, turkey wouldn't be in this situation today. While countries like Poland and Hungary had some hardship coming into the EU, they had realistic goals for them to reach to come into EU. Eu demanded much more from Turkey for being a member. Leaving Cyprus or admitting to armenian genocide would be political suicide in Turkey and no one is gonna do that. I don't have much more time to write that more but my point is Europeans are looking down on Turks as savage muslims and nothing you say will change my opinion on that, however I understand that EU wants to be cautions with accepting Turkey and I respect that, but the Turkish population has grown tired of trying to please Europe because they means leaving our own culture and identity behind and becoming assimilated, which a large part of the population (rural) don't want.


And if you think Erdogan and Putins relations are strained because of that incident you are mistaken in my opinion. If Turkey were to leave/be kicked out of NATO they would probably be a part of the Russia-China alliance and that's the reason it will never happen. Americans value Incirlik too much, and Turkey is one of the few countries in NATO with a respectable military. Turkish state won't stop their hostility/neo ottoman dreams until they feel they are being treated as an equal in European politics. That's because Turkey has an increasing demand for energy sources and income and if they can't gain it by EU membership they will probably look outside their borders to grab sources of income and energy supply.

[Yorkers]

I sincerely hope the Europeans realize that Erdogan like most bullies, respects only force.

Not that I particularly care about Erdogan, but if he proves to be a threat, there is a 100% possibility that the Europeans will do the most whining about him while Americans go die in another bullshit war to solve their problems.

They couldn't even handle Milosevic, how will they possibly handle Erdogan?

[Trumpostan]

Germany plans on having an army ready for war and to face Russia's in 2020. This would imply a huge program of re-funding, true, which Germany is now considering.
"In 2015, as a result of serious NATO-Russian tensions in Europe, Germany announced a major increase in defense spending. In May 2015, the German government approved an increase in defense spending, at the time 1.3% of GDP, by 6.2% over the following five years, allowing the Ministry of Defense to fully modernize the army.[25] Plans were also announced to significantly expand the tank fleet to a potential number of 328, order 131 more Boxer armored personnel carriers, increase the submarine fleet, and to develop a new fighter jet to replace the Tornado.[26][27][28][29] Germany is also considering increasing the size of the army.[30]"
Beside that, Germany does not need to invest so much on the military industry: they only need to exploit the one they already have, which... well, basically supplies Germany, Poland, Canada, Greece, Australia, New Zeland, Italy, and other countries as well.

The Italian Army is very good. We lack good commanders, and should revise our promotions policy, which is awkward, at least, but the Army is good, and we are considering new vehicles and equipments as well.

To answer your last point, well, we are likely to have a European Amry very soon, I think, if everything goes like it is going now.

I very much doubt that voters in these countries will swallow huge cuts in healthcare, welfare, education and benefits spending in order to fund the military like we do in the US. The only reason German and French weapons industries even exist is to sell.

Also I am very sceptical that anyone would give control of armed forces up to a fundamentally undemocratic entity like the EU.

[Novus America]

Germany plans on having an army ready for war and to face Russia's in 2020. This would imply a huge program of re-funding, true, which Germany is now considering.
"In 2015, as a result of serious NATO-Russian tensions in Europe, Germany announced a major increase in defense spending. In May 2015, the German government approved an increase in defense spending, at the time 1.3% of GDP, by 6.2% over the following five years, allowing the Ministry of Defense to fully modernize the army.[25] Plans were also announced to significantly expand the tank fleet to a potential number of 328, order 131 more Boxer armored personnel carriers, increase the submarine fleet, and to develop a new fighter jet to replace the Tornado.[26][27][28][29] Germany is also considering increasing the size of the army.[30]"
Beside that, Germany does not need to invest so much on the military industry: they only need to exploit the one they already have, which... well, basically supplies Germany, Poland, Canada, Greece, Australia, New Zeland, Italy, and other countries as well.

The Italian Army is very good. We lack good commanders, and should revise our promotions policy, which is awkward, at least, but the Army is good, and we are considering new vehicles and equipments as well.

To answer your last point, well, we are likely to have a European Amry very soon, I think, if everything goes like it is going now.

I very much doubt that voters in these countries will swallow huge cuts in healthcare, welfare, education and benefits spending in order to fund the military like we do in the US. The only reason German and French weapons industries even exist is to sell.

Also I am very sceptical that anyone would give control of armed forces up to a fundamentally undemocratic entity like the EU.

Military spending in the US is NOT the cause of health, education or welfare problems. In fact we spend more on health than many European countries. Spending money does not mean spending it well.

Europe need only spend 2% of GDP on defense and spend it well. The US only spends 3.4% (in comparison, in the 50s the US spent 8% and still did fine).

[Trumpostan]

I very much doubt that voters in these countries will swallow huge cuts in healthcare, welfare, education and benefits spending in order to fund the military like we do in the US. The only reason German and French weapons industries even exist is to sell.

Also I am very sceptical that anyone would give control of armed forces up to a fundamentally undemocratic entity like the EU.

Military spending in the US is NOT the cause of health, education or welfare problems. In fact we spend more on health than many European countries. Spending money does not mean spending it well.

Europe need only spend 2% of GDP on defense and spend it well. The US only spends 3.4% (in comparison, in the 50s the US spent 8% and still did fine).

You are aware that the Federal Government hides a lot of military spending in other department's budgets?

[Uxupox]

Military spending in the US is NOT the cause of health, education or welfare problems. In fact we spend more on health than many European countries. Spending money does not mean spending it well.

Europe need only spend 2% of GDP on defense and spend it well. The US only spends 3.4% (in comparison, in the 50s the US spent 8% and still did fine).

You are aware that the Federal Government hides a lot of military spending in other department's budgets?

Source?

[Novus America]

Military spending in the US is NOT the cause of health, education or welfare problems. In fact we spend more on health than many European countries. Spending money does not mean spending it well.

Europe need only spend 2% of GDP on defense and spend it well. The US only spends 3.4% (in comparison, in the 50s the US spent 8% and still did fine).

You are aware that the Federal Government hides a lot of military spending in other department's budgets?

I guess it depends on what you count as military spending, (DOE and VA for example) but military spending is regardless low by historical standards. And we still spend more on health and education than many European countries. So point still stands, the military budget is not the problem. The problem in the US is not a lack of spending on health, education or welfare, just that we do not spend the money very well.

See this on education for example.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opini ... .html?_r=0

[Genivaria]

Military spending in the US is NOT the cause of health, education or welfare problems. In fact we spend more on health than many European countries. Spending money does not mean spending it well.

Europe need only spend 2% of GDP on defense and spend it well. The US only spends 3.4% (in comparison, in the 50s the US spent 8% and still did fine).

You are aware that the Federal Government hides a lot of military spending in other department's budgets?

And how exactly do you know this?

[Connori Pilgrims]

I guess it depends on what you count as military spending, (DOE for example) but military spending is regardless low by historical standards. And we still spend more on health and education than many European countries. So point still stands, the military budget is not the problem. The problem in the US is not a lack of spending on health, education or welfare, just that we do not spend the money very well.

There will be substantial domestic opposition to buildups of military spending in most of Western Europe even if it could be guaranteed that improved Western European militaries wont take away from their precious welfare states. Western European populations are so anti-war and passive-aggressive that while they will feign concern over any perceived threat (be it from Putin, Erdogan or ISIS) I do not have any expectation that they will actually do any action that would seem militarist or aggressive (even if just by boosting spending), even if it is perfectly rational to do so.

The pathetic state of the German Bundeswehr was accelerated when they abolished conscription, because less Germans want to join instead of making bratwurst or hi-end cars. Even France, the country with arguably more ambition and experience with terrorism, willingly slashed their defense and intel budgets in the Sarkozy years (before the string of deadly attacks last year and this year), and Hollande hasn't done much to reverse the trend.

[Novus America]

I guess it depends on what you count as military spending, (DOE for example) but military spending is regardless low by historical standards. And we still spend more on health and education than many European countries. So point still stands, the military budget is not the problem. The problem in the US is not a lack of spending on health, education or welfare, just that we do not spend the money very well.

There will be substantial domestic opposition to buildups of military spending in most of Western Europe even if it could be guaranteed that improved Western European militaries wont take away from their precious welfare states. Western European populations are so anti-war and passive-aggressive that while they will feign concern over any perceived threat (be it from Putin, Erdogan or ISIS) I do not have any expectation that they will actually do any action that would seem militarist or aggressive (even if just by boosting spending), even if it is perfectly rational to do so.

The pathetic state of the German Bundeswehr was accelerated when they abolished conscription, because less Germans want to join instead of making bratwurst or hi-end cars. Even France, the country with arguably more ambition and experience with terrorism, willingly slashed their defense and intel budgets in the Sarkozy years (before the string of deadly attacks last year and this year), and Hollande hasn't done much to reverse the trend.

True, the problem is not a lack of capability to rebuild European militaries, which certainly could be done.
The problem is a lack of will, and that what should be done, will not be done.

Erdogan knows this. He knows Europe is too weak in will to stand up to him much, and he will take advantage of this. Well more than he already has.
Europe is only weak, because it lacks the will to be strong. Not from lack of resources.