The REMFs of Europe.

Bootneck

Diamond Member
Aug 6, 2008
3,576
3,007
2,050
England
It's taken years, but finally a member of the British government tells the rest of Europe what a bunch of freeloading parasites they are when it comes to their NATO commitments in Afghanistan!

European members of Nato are "freeloading" on the military sacrifice and commitment of countries like Britain and the United States, John Hutton, the Defence Secretary will say.

In a speech to European and American security experts and diplomats at the Wilton Park conference centre in Sussex, Mr Hutton will suggest that the reticence of some Nato members has left a small group of countries including Britain, the US and Canada to do an unfair share of the fighting and dying in Afghanistan.

He will say: "It isn't good enough to always look to the US for political, financial and military cover. And this imbalance will not be addressed by parcelling up Nato tasks - the 'hard' military ones for the US and a few others and the 'soft' diplomatic ones for the majority of Europeans."

Britain has 8,300 troops in Afghanistan, most based in the unstable Helmand province in the south of the country. Some 139 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since the invasion that drove the Taliban regime from Kabul in 2001.

By contrast, France has sent 2,800 troops to Nato's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, Germany has 3,400 and Italy 2,350.

In addition, the European troops are largely stationed in the more peaceful parts of the country, and "caveats" on their deployment often mean they cannot be deployed on combat missions.

John Hutton says Europeans are 'freeloading' on Britain and US in Afghanistan - Telegraph

Ain't that the truth! But whatever else happens, we certainly don't want any more German troops. Their ROE makes it impossible for them to go into combat so they are nothing more than REMFs.

Time for our EU partners to prove that they are full of something other than hot air and shit!
 
Europe got so used to laying back and letting US troops police the world, they've come to expect that US troops bleed on their bahalf.
 
It is true, it is fucking emberassing for the soldiers who are employed in those armies. Its the damn politicians who prevent the soldiers from doing their job, if it were up to the soldiers they would be much more involved: after all that s were they are trained for. But saidly it is up to politicians who are afraid of casualties because they are bad for their popularity.

I don't understand it also, because of the NATO agreement. Since the war in Afghanistan is a direct result of the 9/11 attack on America, shouldn't all NATO nations be involved then (without restrictions: War)? It is just that not all NATO members are taking a real part in the War in Afghanistan, a lot of them officially have a mission of "rebuilding" it (a humanitarian mission).
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top