Report by German and French foreign ministers calling for an EU superstate, complete with an EU army, integrated border controls and common taxation.

[bkgirl]

www.corbettreport.com/eu-unmasked-after-brexit-plans-for-full-eu-superstate-revealed/

Didn't take long. :( I am fed up with politicians. This was well known before the EU ref. To not inform is to mislead.

Not if they extend the competencies to defence, according to dh who was seconded to the EUMS, but then, what would he know?

www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/.../EXPO_STU(2016)535011_EN.pd.. ,ight shed some light about what they are thinking.....

...and as we all know there are ways around the Treaties; seem to remember something about bail outs.

That link leads to nothing.

Clearly we don't need the EU's permission to hold referendums.

www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiFhbTW59_NAhUCShQKHV6oAIoQFggbMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.europarl.europa.eu%2FRegData%2Fetudes%2FSTUD%2F2016%2F535011%2FEXPO_STU(2016)535011_EN.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGFV0Y8iha4P3S4N4aQ6ZCz9Op1bw

The thing with the EU is that it needs 28 countries to agree before doing anything and it debates so long over everything that any conspirators would die of old age before they could put their master plan into action.
Which is precisely why they want to move to majority voting, and will.

The idea that they could get organised enough to integrate 28 armies, speaking different languages to even march in the same direction . That's why all the countries plan to keep their armed forces separate, so they can actually be effective
With everyone in Europe effectively forced to learn English this is hardly a problem.
There isnt a young European who hasnt learned at least a little basic English at school. An army run in English would quickly get them up to speed. They only have to understand orders, not Shakespeare!

That is an 82 page document. Would you care to quote the bit or the page number we're supposed to be looking at?

So far the only facts I have read about this is that the Lisbon treaty allows us our power of veto, and when it comes to matters of defence, each member state will remain sovereign in it's defence decisions.

It's a pdf of a document from the Directorate-General for External Policies, Policy Department. The document is entitled: On The Way Towards A European Defence Union - A White Book As A First Step.

Here's the abstract:
ABSTRACT
This study proposes a process, framed in the Lisbon Treaty, for the EU to produce a White Book (WB) on European defence. Based on document reviews and expert interviewing, this study details the core elements of a future EU Defence White Book: strategic objectives, necessary capabilities development, specific programs and measures aimed at achieving the improved capabilities, and the process and drafting
team of a future European WB. The study synthesizes concrete proposals for each European institution, chief among which is calling on the European Council to entrust the High Representative with the drafting of the White Book.

*If you can find the PDF, then the executive summary is interesting, especially as regards chapter 3.

Direct me to the page that says member states will have their power of veto and sovereignty removed over matters of defence - and bear in mind that a proposal in a policy document does not mean it will/can happen.

I am aware that it may not happen, but if you read chapter 3 and p54 5.4.1, it is evident that they are looking for work arounds.

Since Lisbon was ignored with regard to bail outs, why on earth do you think the EU would let it stand in the way of anything it wanted to do?

Ok - this is my last word on the matter:

Full Fact: EU Army

"EU member countries work together on military matters, but the EU doesn't have its own military capabilities. At least a few European politicians do support the creation of an EU army, but that would need unanimous approval."

Unless you work in the EEAS, or the EUMS I shall have to go with the professional opinion of dh and others who work in this arena in Brussels and know whereof they speak.

It will be done obliquely, but with the UK leaving, the competences will be extended into defence, and it will segue into QMV. It won't be within the next year, but the next 5-10, I expect.

It is a really big leap from the Politico article to 'European Army'.

Is there some other link and source to this so called "leak" ...
As said above, conspiricy websites are not worth too much. However, that doesn't mean it is not true.

UTGT
So far the only facts I have read about this is that the Lisbon treaty allows us our power of veto, and when it comes to matters of defence, each member state will remain sovereign in it's defence decisions

I have read the Lisbon Treaty changes 68 matters from unanimity (veto) to majority voting, and its clear that this is the direction of travel. At present what you say is correct about defence but the EU wants to be a full state, an d step by step its moving that way.

I always get confused when 'the EU' is talked about as a person or a state. So what you are saying is that France, Germany, Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, etc. all want to give up their sovereignty to an institution called the EU? Really? You are mad if you think any politician wants that. That people who work day in and out in a European institution are looking at ways to be more efficient and effective propose things, that I can inderstand. That is their job after all. It will never happen though! Never.

Oh, and the original idea came from Churchill

www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html

"It will never happen though! Never."

And your authority to make such a promise is what exactly?

The same as anyone's authority who says that it will happen.

Clearly everything said on here is opinion.

My opinion that it will never happen is based on having lived in 4 EU countries, including Spain and Germany and that there is no appetite for it in any country I have lived in.

Anyway, what is the point of scaremongering like this? The UK is leaving the EU so 'yeay' .

*Ambiorixa8
Glad you acknowledge its just your opinion, and thus inappropriate to express with the certainty of your statement.

Why 'scaremongering'? Because there is eighty years of evidence that the goal of the Eu is to gain the full status of a state. I believe it important that people realise what that would mean, and react with appropriate opposition should Teresa May (I guess it will be her) tries any fudged compromise which keeps us within the Union.

I should live another 30-40 yrs, so I guess I'll see how it turned out.
Still, rather wishing I had settled in Germany not UK, now, though.

The EU was formed 80 years ago and was planning this all along. Who knew?

I find this very confusing.

On the one hand, we are told that the UK leaving the EU might hasten its inevitable demise, we are just jumping off the ship into the last lifeboat before it disappears beneath the waves for good.

On the other, that the EU is robust and united enough to start undertaking plans to create an EU army.

Which is it?

Plans to make an army are last gasps of a failing state? Who knows, the anti-EU types will twist events to whatever bias they have.

What battle are the anti-EU types fighting now? Do they want us not just to leave but to also oppose the EU in future? How does it benefit UK to have an antagonistic relationship with EU -- oh well, that must fit with some ideology, too.

Do they want us not just to leave but to also oppose the EU in future?

It depends what you mean by "oppose". Disagree with its ideology, yes. Keeping our eyes open to avoid the EU being pulled back in, by Brussels or our own politicians, yes.