Comments by "Paul Aiello" (@paul1979uk2000) on "Could the EU Form its Own Army? - TLDR News" video.

  1. The EU parliament makes more sense mainly because there is more hands in the pie, at the top end with governments, it's too easy for them to get too emotional or corrupt on these matters whereas in a parliament, more people involved should make that harder. With that said, I do think the EU Commission and President should be merged and just called the EU president, it should also be directly elected by the public, if there is one weakness of the EU it's that it doesn't engage enough with the European people the benefits of EU membership hence why we got Brexit and Eurosceptic movements.
    20
  2. The wariness is because the US tends to be quite an emotional country in the leaders it picks, you only have to see that with Trump but it goes much earlier than that with Bush and 9/11, a lot of policies were done based on emotions and self-interest and not for the greater good, it was around that time when I realized that EU countries need an EU military. But it's not just the US, I think the EU and US would have a close relationship anyway because of it's core shared values, the real threat is the rise of China which I doubt the EU or US on their own will be able to contain in the long run, that's why I think the EU will have to build a strong military to help protest western values.
    10
  3.  @NoName-hg6cc  A federal strong EU would benefit the world a lot, including the US but we should remember, the US is still thinking in terms of being the sole power in the world, that just isn't the case with the EU, China and a rising India. The US is very likely going to need a strong EU even if they don't want that to keep the likes of China and India in check which have more lower standards in many areas. Everything that's going on in Ukraine is likely going to help the EU, especially on military, security and energy matters, it's a wake-up call that's likely going to push EU members to cooperate more and to integrate more, fear is always a good motivater for change and Putin delivered on that.
    5
  4. That wouldn't be the case with an EU military, I mean could you imagine the US military if each US state could decide if they take part, it would be a mess and wouldn't work that well, an EU military would only work with a lot more integration in those areas, in other words, the EU takes care of our defence not the national governments as it is now.
    3
  5.  @Pragmatic_Optimist_MCR  I agree, parliament should be the real power with temporarily power for rare instances that it's needed. The head of state doesn't need to have that power if most power is with the parliament, but either way it should be more directly elected so it more accountable to the people, after all, how many times do you hear Eurosceptics say the EU isn't democratic because the commission isn't elected by the people? it happens all the time. I mean personally, I would be fine with a much weaker EU president and commission with the real power being in parliament, populism would be far less of an issue if the leadership is held to account by the parliament, in other words, the leadership has very little to no power apart from what the parliament gives them. In any case, regardless of what we might think of the public vote, the people should have the ultimate say for better or worse but as I said before, I think it's better if a lot more power is shifted towards parliament over the executive branch as power shared over a lot more hands make it harder to control and corrupt things, it also makes it easier to expose things.
    2
  6. A lot of those issues are not that big of an issue, English as a language is used a lot among Europeans and is becoming more common with the younger generation of people, the rest is just a matter of harmonizing the rules and tech together, getting rid of duplications and merging them together into a stronger overall military for the money spent. I suspect the best way to do it is over time, so gradually over years, maybe even a decade, reduce the national military whiles boosting the EU one, given time it would have the same impact without the shock factor and it's a lot more manageable that way, the only downside is that in the short term it would cost more but longer term it would be cheaper by getting rid of duplications.
    1
  7.  @alexanderlipowsky6055  The EU military should always be for defences purposes unless other countries ask for help, either peacekeeping missions or more direct help, basically, it should be in law where the EU can't invade other countries unless invited by the other country to invade which they are hardly going to do, the US gets it's self into such a mess with getting involved in other countries by creating wars. The truth is, if an EU military does come about, there are going to be a lot of checks and balances put on it by it's members to make sure it's very difficult to abuse it like the US does.
    1
  8. I don't get the logic behind NATO, why would having an EU military be an issue for NATO, the EU could become a member of NATO in a way like the US is, so why is it an issue?, well it's not really, the ones that make it an issue are the ones that don't want it, so Eurosceptics and even the US to a less degree because it's a lot easier to control much smaller countries than it is to control one big one. With that said, I think the US is warming up to the idea that the EU needs to speak with one voice and have it's own military, mainly because the US is going to need all the help it can get in containing the rise of China, the EU is the perfect player that has the muscle to make a difference in the world compared to smaller players like the UK which come across as like a puppet to the US. What Putin is doing in Ukraine is very likely going to boost integration on security, military and energy matters with the EU members, these events like what are going on in Ukraine are a wake-up call for change and it looks like the EU is going to get a big jolt in that over the coming years. Personally, I don't have a problem with the EU having a single voice and military, it's easier to protect our political, economic and social interest if we work together and I don't see a problem with the EU military being part of the NATO organization, it wouldn't weaken it, in fact it would become a lot stronger for it. I think on the EU military front, they should do a collation of the willing, a bit like the Euro where members can join when they feel comfortable in joining, I suspect Germany, France, Italy and Spain would find a way to make it happen, a few other smaller members would likely jump on board but unlikely that all would, the advantage for these members would be military contracts on big projects as they would very likely go to members that are part of the EU military and not the others. Either way, as much as a friend the US is, we've got to realize that the US doesn't have our interest at heart, the US mostly only cares about what goes on in it's own boarders so Europeans are going to have to wake up to that and protect their own interest, NATO is for the most part to project US interest in Europe, an EU military could be a counterweight in NATO to project both EU and US interest around the world. If the EU does go this route, it should be mandatory 2% spending, I don't think they need to do anything like the US is doing as that's just crazy, an EU military at 2% spending would be massive and much bigger than China and Russia combined, I also think the EU countries would need to get rid of a lot of duplications, there is a lot of waste going on with each member having it's own military organization, that could save a lot of money that could be used in building a more advanced, more effective military.
    1