REASON No 142 FOR BREXIT: The EU is a war magnet


Mogherini is but one sign of EU alignment with War

I must say, I think we of the School Leaver tendency in the Brussels Academy 6th Form have missed a trick thus far on the real trade deficit from which the EU suffers: the War and Peace import/export paradigm.

Slog’s Law states quite clearly that whatever Brussels-am-Berlin can claim, they will do: the truth is entirely incidental to this aspiration. And one of their strongest selling points is “the European peace dividend” that has been “a result of” its formation. Allegedly.

Poor, tired old Labour still clings to this piece of the wreckage, convinced that the Eurotania will right itself in a minute or to – because it takes more than one torpedo to sink a ship. Allegedly.

It’s actually a very simple calculation to make, by asking four questions:

  1. How many wars in Europe have we stopped?
  2. How much war have we imported?
  3. How much war have we started?
  4. How much war have we exported?

The answer to Q 1 is easy: none. After 1949 (when the USSR got its own bomb) war with the Soviets was a non-starter because of mutually assured destruction (MAD), and non-nuclear invasion of Western Europe by the USSR was deterred by the US nuclear presence. Following the Soviet collapse, several wars followed in quick succession as a result: the Yugoslav splintering started the Bosnian War (1992 – 1995). The same cause triggered
the Kosovo War (1998-1999), starting a third wave of unrest in Kosovo during 2004 and only ending with an uneasy peace in 2013. NATO and US diplomacy did 95+% of the peace-making: the EU failed to influence any outcomes or stop the conflicts.

Question 2 is a more difficult thing to assess, but the overview would be ‘more and more’. As a result of lax border controls over many decades, backing up the US Middle East policy,  and ignoring the obvious ramifications of half the world’s sovereign nations bombing Syria into dust and rubble, the EU has without question imported Jihadist guerrilla war into the EU. The UK itself must not shirk its own unique level of idiocy in this regard: Blair made us a target, and that resulted in 55 deaths as early as 2005.

But the Syria/Iraq/Turkey fallout is (potentially) of a different magnitude in the EU as a whole. It is hard to see the Paris attestats and Belgian train atrocities as anything other than war…regardless of where the main responsibility may or may not lie. And NATO member or not, my view (held since 2010) that Erdogan is a duplicitous closet Islamist has gradually become a mainstream opinion.

The reaction of Brussels-am-Berlin (to lick Recep all over, kowtow to his odious blackmail, and offer carte blanche for his own home-grown terrorists to travel at will in the EU) does not inspire confidence in there being any semblance of a rethink by Merkel or Juncker about border controls. Mainly, it promises that more and more religious warfare will be imported directly thanks to EC laxity in the immediate future. In the end, this could wind up provoking a civil war between France, Hungary, Poland and Romania on the one hand, and a NATO-backed Turkish-Germanic alliance on the other.

Almost without need of a segue,  this brings us neatly onto the third question: how much war have we started?

My view would be that the EU (through its close links to NATO) has actually stimulated a New Cold War that’s getting hotter all the time. Quite the maddest bit of spineless Imperialism yet demonstrated by the unelected Commission was the decision first, to get inveigled into the extremist politics of Ukraine (as part of blatantly obvious CIA insurgency), and then second, to offer advantageous loans to get Ukraine out of its Russian debt…..when Ukraine is not even in the EU, let alone the eurozone. No help for ezone member Greece beyond more onerous debt piled upon unrepayable debt; lots of cheap help for a non-EU bunch of crypto-fascists busy chasing out a freely-elected Moscow loyalist.

As a direct result of this completely unjustified meddling, Putin was handed the chance on a plate to annex Crimea ‘democratically’, and get his access to the sea back again.

Putin’s was a geopolitical war in this case. But there is also civil war….often the military façon that produces the greatest brutality, most widespread infrastructural damage, and highest death rates. Time after time in this still only 16-year-old century, the result of being in the Euronaut camp has been the rise and rise of political extremes and self-determinatory nationalism. In Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, England and France, controlling EC disciplinarianism has led to divisive developments. It still remains highly possible that both Greece and Spain could slip into civil wars between misguided recherché Communist utopianism, and various degrees of regional and neo-Nazi self interest.

But the fourth question is the most open-and-shut case of clear guilt one could imagine. Thanks to both its geopolitical adherence to NATO and its export of arms to trouble centres on a grand scale, the EU now stands – including the USA – as the greatest exporter of regional and oppressive wars in history.

The EU exports more arms, munitions and grand scale military hardware than the US. Germany is one of the largest EU exporters of arms to the Middle East and North Africa region. Other key customers include South Africa, Greece, Turkey and other NATO partners, as well as Asian and Latin American countries. France’s key customers include Singapore, UAE, Greece, other NATO partners, the Middle East and North Africa region and Francophone countries. France supplies arms to countries where there is a substantial risk that they could be used to commit serious human rights violations. For example, it supplied weaponry and munitions to Libya under al-Gaddafi, ammunition and armoured vehicles to both Egypt and Chad, and munitions to Syria between 2005 and 2009.The UK is consistently ranked third, fourth or fifth globally, along with France and Germany, in terms of the annual value of its conventional arms exports. It sends vast amounts to India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and other NATO partners. It is also a major exporter to other countries in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as in sub-Saharan Africa.

None of this is easy to dispute. The idea that the EU has prevented war and promoted peace is risible. It is inextricably linked to the armed colonialism of the United States…and Mogherini the Mad (pretty much an overt NATO agent these days) is busy building a euroarmy. The EU is a catalyst for armed violence: we would be better off, in every way, out of it.

Yesterday at The Slog: The Hangethics & Shanghigh Bank of Cocaine (HSBC)

22 thoughts on “REASON No 142 FOR BREXIT: The EU is a war magnet

  1. “NATO and US diplomacy did 95+% of the peace-making” – peace making, or bomb dropping? The US used its proxies as usual… [Currently suffering a “database error” thanks to a few dark hands, no doubt?]

    As to Britain, it won’t stop fighting wars just because it leaves the European Union. It wasn’t the EU that tried to foist the Dodgy Dossier on the Houses of Parliament… It wasn’t the EU that got Britain to help the US in Afghanistan. The British government is corrupt enough that anybody with enough money can get what they want. The EU is there to get the laggardly democracies in Europe to stump up some soldiers.

    The European Union is to achieve a similar level of corporate freedom in the remaining democracies in Europe!! TTIP will be brought in so that corporate money can achieve in Europe what it can already by off the shelf in Westminster.

    As to Britain’s arms exports to the rest of the world, I doubt for one moment that the situation would be any different outside the EU.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. While I agree with the general thrust of your argument, the founding principle of the EU wasn’t so much as stopping war in Europe as stopping Franco-German wars which, in fairness, had a long, repetitive history of happening. From the fall of Rome onward, really. Although it should be pointed out that the 1945 settlement together with the division of Germany made further Franco-German warfare unlikely in the short to medium term.

    Most of the post 1945 war was proxy warfare between the USA and the USSR, each trying to limit (in terms of territory, influence, economics, culture, etc, etc) the other strategically. After the Russian collapse it has been the USA who are almost entirely the warmongers for their own, largely hidden, ends, dragging in a usually somewhat unwilling Europe with the exception of the UK typically gunge-ho for any aggro. And do not forget that Libya was a French initiative.

    On balance I do not see Europe wishing to indulge in war at this time, but tied as it is to the US, there is little chance of meaningfully avoiding at least some involvement, especially with jihadi problem.


  3. My mind goes way back to the criminal “Westminster vote” for action against Damascus.
    The BS false flag chemical attack and the excellent way that situation was headed off at the pass.
    Then F the EU. Then the Maidan massacre. Then the attempt at distracting Russia by disrupting E.Ukraine.
    The “annexation of Crimea”, democratically or otherwise, was never a thing. Ever.
    I see Sevastopol and think , come on now you lot, what’s that over there. Gibraltar?
    The European Union is playing host to a theatre of War. NOW. People should understand this.
    Team GB is so totally part of this, it is embarrassing.
    Bilal was locked up three weeks ago but was given a leg up from his mafioso and head chopping mates.
    So I am EU out….X.
    Trouble is, they’re over here already.
    The Cameron/Osborne vassal/lap dogs, that is.
    I just hope that EU out….X, has the same impact as the Damascus/Westminster result and provides some additional wiggle room for some hero to get us out of this mess.
    Some chance.
    Fu*k US hegemony.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Because a) the EU has a record of starting conflicts and it is usually left to NATO to resolve them, and
    b) the EU cannot be trusted to have its own armed forces.


  5. “Erdogan is a duplicitous closet Islamist “
    Whilst clearly duplicitous, his aims/beliefs are fairly clear if one looks at his earlier pronouncements –

    “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…”
    These words earned him a conviction and jail-term in 1998 for inciting religious hatred.
    “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it”
    He also said Turkey’s membership of the European Union is a “necessary and useful step”. Step to what?

    His Islamic credentials might be challenged by purists when looking at his new Presidential Palace costing $615 m. and four times the floor space of Versailles (allegedly to escape cockroaches) ………….. Muhammed allegedly opposed creating buildings on a grand scale:- “Truly the most unprofitable thing that eats the wealth of a believer is building” and “Every expense of the believer will be rewarded except the expense of the building”.


  6. @Gemma. There’s little doubt that Europe is at war. Hollande and Valls have confirmed that themselves.

    …… and kowtowing to Erdogan !

    This is a war of Europe’s making.

    One has to cast the mind back to Troy to recall the last time an enemy was invited in with open arms.


  7. Good article JW.

    I may have a couple of quibbles re. the cause of the Balkan break-up, and the statement that “… Putin was handed the chance on a plate to annex Crimea ‘democratically’, and get his access to the sea back again.” Putin already had access to the sea via a lease of the Sebastapol base. I’m not sure he would have wanted to take on the responsibility of Crimea if his hand had not been forced by the Nuland/Kagan/Pyatt coup. After all, he did not acquiesce to the request of the natives of the Dombass to reabsorb the former eastern areas of Russia into the Russian Federation.

    Excellent comments from all above.

    I’m not sure the problem is the EU itself, but rather the U.S. control of the German, French and U.K. political elites. France briefly escaped the clutches of the US/NATO deep state under DeGaulle, but is now back firmly under its control. The existence of the EU may streamline the coordination of policies in the interests of the US hegemon, but I do not think it is the cause itself.

    Article from Zerohedge that seems relevant to this debate.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. @quercus

    “Because a) the EU has a record of starting conflicts and it is usually left to NATO to resolve them,”

    Care to elaborate?


  9. I’ve come to think of Kosovo/Serbia/Bosnia as Ukraine lite.
    Similarly, events in Cyprus as Greece lite.
    NATO and US, Balkan diplomacy? Mission accomplished, more like.
    So do me a favour. Please don’t wear bright coloured t-shirts or wave umbrellas when I’m about.

    The Donbass is by comparison, currently a wobbly plate of jelly, or a custard pie.
    The US has a finger in it.
    Ukraine and Turkey are in effect the buns of a Crimean sandwich.
    There will be war.


  10. @Peter C

    “I’ve come to think of Kosovo/Serbia/Bosnia as Ukraine lite.”

    Me too. Especially having read about the actions of MI6 during the Balkan conflicts. The dismemberment of Yugoslavia was the beginning of the Neocons’ assault on post-Soviet Russia. It is clear from Stephen Dorril’s excellent book on the SIS, that elements of the U.K. intelligence establishment were opposed to the NATO demonisation and bombing, as they had forged strong links with Tito and the Serbian partisans during WWII, knew the background and were aware that a lot of the US/NATO propaganda was groundless.

    The Saker and Russia Insider have had some good articles on the background to the Balkan conflict that have revealed just how much I fell for the NATO line at the time.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. The Warsaw Pact Forces, consisting of the satellite State armies of the former Soviet Union,disbanded in 1989. The reason for NATO’s existence ,no longer applied from that date.
    Gorbachev came to an agreement with Bush Senior that NATO would not take one step toward the East to threaten Russia’s borders.This was the Budapest Agreement, never codified unfortunately. Gorbachev was naive.
    Bill Clinton,set about, with the assistance of the EU to expand NATO with the former Soviet satellite States, right to the borders of Russia. Ukraine is but the latest aggression against Russia.
    NATO is Washingtons proxy army in Europe as is ISIS in the Middle East.
    Yugoslavia and the illegal bombing of Belgrade was the beginning of the neo-con wars on Russian sysmpathiser states.
    A missed opportunity for peace in Europe was lost when the US proceeded to loot and plunder the Russian State with the ‘shock doctrine’ economics of the so-called Harvard Boys’.
    World domination is the goal of Washington and looting by US Corporations, using regime change, the US dollar reserve currency,petrodollar andTTIP, are all part of the toolbox of domination.
    The IMF and World Bank are but Washington attack dogs using the Financial weapon of debt to subdue and loot a country.
    It is noted that recently Radovan Karadzic received a term of 40 years at teh Hague for genocide during the Bosnian Serb War.
    If their was any justice in the World,he should be sharing his cell with Tony Blair, George Dubya,Bill Clinton,John McCain et al.
    The victors not only write the history, they also adjudicate in their corrupt Courts on who can be found gulty.
    The Court of Public Opinion does not differentiate between victor and vanquished or their villainy and a day of reckoning is long overdue for those despots.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Chris,

    yes! The EU is at war… but at whose behest??? Not that of a European government, though… see my previous comment if you want to understand WHY the EU is at war and who is telling it to do so.


  13. Anybody ever see Jason and the Argonauts, when “those who would be gods” could kill through moving pieces about to machevellian creation of disasters.

    The world sure feels like that nowadays.


  14. The Donald just suggested that the US should exit NATO. Sometimes the common sense of the common idiot is right. To his credit he is neither a neoconservative nor a neoliberal. On the other hand neither were Mussolini or Nero. At any rate the exit NATO balloon simply cements the fact that he will never be president. A fact most won’t or can’t understand but all here surely will.


  15. I don’t agree at all. Whatever its shortcomings, the EU hasn’t been invading countries, orchestrating false flag terrorist events and trying to wreck the economies of rivals as the US has.
    It is the usual bully’s trick of trying to project their own wickedness on to others, in the hope some of the mud will stick.
    The CIA is campaigning against the EU because it wants a warring, impoverished and hostile Europe so Americans can take over again.
    I’ll be voting to stay in the EU.


  16. @TOM

    You’ll be submitting to TTIP if you do – and that’ll mean rule by major USA corporates… If you think that is a good idea then you have my sympathy…

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s