Comments by "Nigel Johnson" (@nigeljohnson9820) on "A strong Poland needs a strong Europe, Tusk warns" video.

  1. An example of EU double think, nationalism poses a threat to Poland's independence, but following the orders of the EU is good for independence.
    14
  2.  @TheMalarz1989  what is the purpose of defence if it is not about preserving a country's sovereignty. It appear from your argument that your defence is to give away that which you are protecting. There is a difference between sovereign independent countries cooperating for mutual benefit in areas of common interest and simply handing sovereignty to some federal organisation. The recent actions of the EU show that Poland must obey it's EU masters or risk penalties.
    4
  3.  @redberries8039  and control of your justice system. Can't retire your old judges.
    3
  4.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  so basically you are saying don't bite the hand that feeds you. So the EU is keeping Poland as a pet.
    2
  5.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  why, because it takes the most from the EU budget? Seems Poland has sold its sovereignty on the cheap, ironic that you should be celebrating your freedom from the German Austrian axis, when 100 years on they have so much control of your country.
    2
  6.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  your choice of example does your case no favours. To justify an EU army based on Hitler's military ambitions is particularly stupid, and rather crass given the date. I would also point out that he lost. The real reason the EU army is being advanced is for the benefit of the French. Macron is using French military strength to justify his claim to lead the EU. The French also have a large munitions industry, that will benefit for lucrative arms contracts from other member states and EU grants for military R&D. Brexit has given the French a unique position of being the only nuclear armed state in the EU, but they are backward compared with the US, Russia, and maybe even China. In the post WWii world of mutually assured destruction, it was the willingness of the US to use nuclear weapons in Europe that ironically kept Europe safe for seventy years. It was the freedom from providing for its own defence that gave the German economy its power after the war. Paying for your own defence puts a huge strain on a countries economy, as is also demonstrated by the post war boom in the Japanese economy. The EU army is going to be a major liability for the EU, consuming increasingly greater amounts of its GDP. The French only want the army for symbolic reasons, with the intention to use it in small police actions in Africa securing access to natural resources, where asymmetrical Warfare ensures a minimum of EU casualties. The real danger if like you they begin to believe in their own hype and decide to confront the military forces of one of the big blocks, such as the Russians. If the EU had already established an army during the Ukraine crisis, the EU might already be involved in a shooting war with the Russians. Do you really think the French will be willing to make themselves a nuclear target in defence of Poland? A deterrent is only of value if the enemy really believes their opponent is prepared to use the weapons at their disposal. The French will only be willing to use its nuclear power in the last ditch defence of France. Make no mistake any shooting confrontation with one of the big piwers would quickly escalate to a nuclear exchange.
    2
  7.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  on the contrary, they must be increasingly worried about an ill-advised military adventure, as those who control the EU beging to believe in their own hype. He lack of an army has saved it being sucked into a number of the world conflicts. Do you really want to be involved in wars instigated by the French. The Germans know how much money they have saved by being so reluctant to be involved in many of the world's conflicts. The French display no such inhibitions, maybe because they were so humiliated during WWII.
    2
  8.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  it is not the EU that protects you, it is NATO. NATO will not make you a statement a federal union, or impose a federal government. NATO does not issue rules and directives or decide you immigration policy.
    1
  9.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  NATO pre dates the EU. It is not an army it is by definition a treaty organisation, an agreement by independent sovereign nations to come to each others aid in the event of an attack on one or more of them. Attack one you attack all. NATO is an insurance policy against foreign agression. It is NATO that has kept the peace in Europe, not the EU which is a late comer to the party. The EU is more of a protection racket, it started as a common market trading association between independent sovereign states, it is evolving into a super state with imperial ambitions. It is perfectly possible to have NATO without the EU. The EU army will be a joke for decades to come, it is far to weak to free any real defence against any of the big power blocks. Its function is symbolic, an attempt to show the EU super state has come of age. If you are swapping the EU army for NATO you really are reducing your home insurance.
    1
  10.  @bca-biciclindcuaxel7527  did you not just post a message about escaping from the Russian yoke. Now you want them to join the EU. It will serve you right if the EU allows the Russians to annexe Poland or maybe the EU will simply decide to combine Poland and Russia into the same province of the EU.
    1