Comments by "VisibilityFoggy" (@VisibilityFoggy) on "Could the EU military conquer the UK?" video.

The only issue I see here is Australia. I'm sure they would provide some level of support, but given China's aggression in the Pacific, it would not be wise for them to move the bulk of their military to another continent to fight for Britain. It's a much shorter ride from the US and Canada. My guess is that the U.S. would start by escorting supply ships under the American flag to Britain. If the EU attacks any of them, there's your casus belli.
2
@cricketman1322 - I believe India uses their Mirage 2000s as attack/strike planes rather than air superiority fighters. So while they are multirole by manufacturing standard, there is a strike variant that is used by India, which is harder to defend against light, fast fighters like the F-16. For this role, the IAF uses the Su-30MKI. That said, the Mirage 2000 has really aged poorly. Brazil is selling off its entire M2000 fleet and going with new Saab Gripen-E fighters. As for the Rafale, they are excellent planes but they're not going to do well against any fifth-gen fighter like the F-35. They do not have the maneuverability of something like the Su-30/35, which is pretty much the only factor that gives those planes a chance in the first place.
2
Perhaps they're Englishmen in their 20s and 30s who are patriotic and love their homeland more than an elitist trading bloc run by corrupt politicians.
2
@50shekels - They do? Nobody I knew who ever served in the British military thought so. The U.K. still does, however, maintain a decent degree of power projection, employ very high-tech platforms, has an excellent intelligence service, and (this is often overlooked) personnel who have mostly seen war already in Iraq and Afghanistan. Plus they have access to a ton of American ELINT assets by treaty and contract.
2
@cricketman1322 - Yeah, I don't see a lot of attack/strike aircraft getting through the UK's air defenses, unless they use a ton of escorts, which just puts more pilots at risk and thins the fleet for operations elsewhere.
1
It wouldn't be an invasion, but they would definitely take back some territory. Granted, they'd lose Kaliningrad in the process since it would be overrun by EU forces. Also, I imagine Finland would be readying for another Winter War instead of fighting with the British for no reason at all.
1
Actually, it sounds like Ireland gets the worst of it...
1
Most of my international dealings are in Spain and South America. I've been to France and the UK on short trips but have never traveled in the chunnel. Who benefits to a greater extent from it? I assume the other side would destroy it, although there may be a gentleman's agreement, even in war, to shut it down but not destroy it, as someone would ultimately get stuck with the bill of rebuilding it when the war ends.
1
I had this thought, too. Not China, but Russia. Does the U.S. tell Russia they can have their pick of Baltic states that fight against the U.K.? Simply adding the U.S. to the picture instantly changes the result. The addition of Russia turns it into a absolute turkey shoot.
1