This is an interesting change to the face of Europe !

The ground-breaking agreement will even see French generals taking command of the SAS as part of a rapid reaction force.

Nuclear secrets - which have been preserved for five decades – will also be shared under unprecedented plans to merge the testing of warheads.




What makes this even more interesting is that the French President is a 'former' ( yeah, right ! ) Mossad agent.
This has been public information since 2007 when La Figaro first broke the story and it has never been denied. ( Just not covered by the media ! )

Given that it's great to see how the Lisbon Treaty makes no difference to Europe.

Welcome to the New World.

In other news:

Britain has now surrendered to Germany, and shall now be called "Das Fishestein Und Chipesleippe Landdeschleife".

Actually, your all now the United States of Europe.

Just remember to practice your goose stepping and "Seig Heil von Rompuy" and you'll be fine.

This is a comment by the EU regarding democracy and financial reforms.

"However, a top EU diplomat warned that getting all member nations to agree on the actual reforms may be a "mission impossible." So, reportedly, the final deal may be hashed out in secret without any input from the European parliament or "wish-list" political requests from representatives of member states. According to AFP:

The EU 27 are hoping a rewrite can be concluded via a quick and easy procedure that bypasses the European parliament and closes the door on member states who come knocking with wish-lists of their own to re-open chapters of the treaty."

Democracy ( Govt by the People, for the People ) is a thing of the past in Europe today, It's clearly much simplier bypassing Parliament and simply telling people what they will do.

I thought that this was usually called a Dictatorship but I'm probably wrong and it's simply a new way to define democracy.

"Do what your told and shut up, we know best !"

Does this mean we have to remove the red and blue from our flags?

Oh joy, our national security rests with a bunch of surrender monkeys.

This is only showing that the economic poles are shifting and Europe is losing grip to new emerging countries, I think this demonstrate how desperate we are to maintain some kind of military power in Europe. England's nuclear button is under American control for a long time and that's why the French won't share that, like that if the US don't agree France still can do something...

Chirac and Blair had signed some military agreements before which never worked, let see if this will....

Quote :

Britain will surrender testing of nuclear warheads which will be done at Valduc, near Dijon, from 2015. The Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston will focus on developing new technology.

I think this bit is not entirely true, from what I have heard last night, England will build a similar testing lab on their soil...looks like they don't have one atm...

Personally I think that England and France working together (what ever it is) can't be a bad thing for Europe, for too long England has been closer to the US than Europe...

Anyway we're not looking good in Europe!

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

"Das Fishestein Und Chipesleippe Landdeschleife".

Words does look 100time cooler in German.

And economic control is so much easier than having another war.
Third time lucky ?

And it is a far more logical way to rule europe, democracy really doesn't work if you want your trains to run on time.

Quote from JJ72 :

Words does look 100time cooler in German.

Though that means exactly nothing.

This is where you're wrong. It's The fish and chip land-loop.

That'd be the "Fisch und Chips-Land(es)schleife"
(Although translating Fish n' Chips generally makes little to no sense)

... Clearly the joke was over your head I was being facetious, as if England's security was now in the hands of the French, they'd now be occupied by Germany.

Anywho..

Yeah, ignore me, if I'm (like now) in a bad mood, I'm usually being bull-shitty.

So? If it dosen't mean i'm any closer to getting gunned down by an invading army then I don't care. The size of your army is not everything, especially if you only ever use it to fight guerillas thousands of miles from the island the army is supposed to be defending.

Two nations signing a military pact and agreeing to share resources does not automatically mean we are one step closer to an authoritarian super state, except perhaps in the minds of glory hunting conspiracy theorists. Incase you hadn't noticed, we've been signing ententes of all sorts with France and others for over a hundred years. We fought the Great War alongside them along with the commonwealth and the USA, which either nation couldn't do by themselves. We've been reliant on the military power of other nations since about erm... 1914?

I think you're getting more meaning out of this than there really is, but isnt that how modern conspiracy theories work anyway? Find a single coincidence or event and claim its the smoking gun.

Just bring back the V-Force. (Anyone who knows anything about our military will understand.) Back in the day they wiped the floor with any other bomber force in the world. Hell in the heyday we used to sneak into America and simulate dropping nuclear weapons on their major cities Ok I've been reading Vulcan 607

If only the UK wasn't so poor now.

How do you know they wiped the floor? They were never used for their intended role. Often a lot of this military hardware is just a symbol of national pride while at the same time being massive white elephants. Same with Battleships, pretty much useless from any tactical point of view but each nation had to have more, bigger and badder ones. V-bombers are lovely aircraft but they wouldn't win wars.

Quote from 5haz :

How do you know they wiped the floor? They were never used for their intended role. Often a lot of this military hardware is just a symbol of national pride while at the same time being massive white elephants. Same with Battleships, pretty much useless from any tactical point of view but each nation had to have more, bigger and badder ones. V-bombers are lovely aircraft but they wouldn't win wars.

at the time America's best bomber was the B-52 and Russia wasn't much different.

Nuclear bombers were becoming obsolete as they were entering service. ICBMs, particularly submarine launched ones, were the way forward, and the USA and Russia had plenty of them, while our Black Arrow/Blue streak missile programmes were canned after minor sucesses, and we ended up having to buy Polaris and then Trident missiles off the US and basing US missiles here. We poured money into our nice bombers and their shorter range weapons while everyone else moved on. Just one of the many mistakes that has lead to us doing the bidding of other nations.

Ex cold war bombers are lovely aircraft but they were pretty irrelevant as weapons even in their own time.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

... Clearly the joke was over your head I was being facetious, as if England's security was now in the hands of the French, they'd now be occupied by Germany.

Anywho..

i thought it was funny and for a second i thought i could read German.

Frances nuclear programme is well ahead of ours anyway

And frankly i'm glad it is.