Comments on: The Cost of Retreat

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:44:51 +0000

DubiousD, I think that you have misunderstood me. I didn’t say that the EU has 3.25 million peacekeepers. I was responding to kathie’s point that “Europe has no MILITARY to speak of.”

My point was that the EU currently has a very large military, in excess of 3.25 million.

The US has 1.4 million front-line troops but 2.4 active military personnel, which includes navy and air force etc. The figures I quoted were for active military personnel.

Please don’t confuse soldiers deployed abroad with peace keepers, they are not the same. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan are UN peacekeeping missions.

Even before 9/11 the US and the EU accounted for very few peacekeepers (the US just 885 in Dec 2000, slightly more than Zambia). It has long been a criticism that most UN peace keeping duties are performed by the poor nations, such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Ghana, Jordan and Kenya.

By: DubiousD

DubiousD — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:15:21 +0000

Paul, first of all, the total number of US military personnel is 1.4 million, not 2.4 million.

Secondly, the military employs something known as “rotations”. Soldiers deployed abroad are allowed to come home now and then, even those serving in Iraq. The actual number of US soldiers deployed in the world right now is somewhere in the 500,000 range.

That being said, your numbers for EU “peacekeepers” is probably off too. Even if Sweden did have an armed force total of 500,000, it would be extremely unlikely that all 500,000 would be sent abroad at the same time. In fact, it would be logistically impossible. A better guess would be that only a fraction of Swedes are currently on patrols in any theater right now. The rest are probably stationed stateside.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:39:12 +0000

kathie, I don’t understand the question. 4.5% of troops currently on peacekeeping missions are from the EU. The US accounts for less than 1%.

The United States is ranked 41st in the world for providing UN peacekeepers, right behind Togo and Rwanda with just 321 troops/police currently on UN peacekeeping duties.

The question could be, where are the USA’s 2.4 million peacekeepers?

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:31:16 +0000

DubiousD, it’s not an exact figure, merely the total military personnel of several EU nations. The actual figure is probably much higher.

UK: 250,000 personnel
France: 460,450
Germany: 683,150
Italy: 438,800
Spain: 233,300
Greece: 179,000
Sweden: 500,000
Poland: 295,500

That is just the 8 largest, there are of course another 19 nations in the EU.

By: kathie

kathie — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:03:21 +0000

Paul…….where are the 3.25 million Peace Keepers?

By: DubiousD

DubiousD — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 06:25:22 +0000

Paul, can you primary source that 3.25 million personnel figure for the EU? That’s fascinating if true.

By: Neo

Neo — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:18:51 +0000

It’s been just shy of 1/3 of a centruy since the Viet Nam Conflict ended. Meaning that most folks under 40 don’t have any direct knowledge of the events.

The Viet Nam reference by President Bush may be a double-edged sword, but for Democrats all that is left is the glory of marching in the street (or dreaming of doing it). A return to the hard facts of the conflict and it’s aftermath is very much unwelcome.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:27:12 +0000

I don’t understand what you mean, the EU has largest army in the world after China (which has about 7 million personnel), with 3.25 million personnel. They have more aircraft than anyone other than the US and the world’s second largest navy.

After the US, the EU probably has the second most powerful military in the world.

By: kathie

kathie — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:37:27 +0000

The dems want the war over because the cost is in the way of their socialist AGENDA. They think turning the US into Europe is the kind way to go. Notice, Europe has no MILITARY to speak of.