Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
Neither was a threat to us. Moreover, what Americans never seem to get is that their involvement in Bosnia was first and foremost about doing something together for the sake of doing something together.
Wasn't a threat to whom? Maybe not Germany, but it's hard to argue that a civil war in the Balkans wasn't a threat to Italy and bordering nations. Could Europe simply ignore what what's happening on their doorstep, or even in the foyer?


It's similar with Libya; the European forces weren't even involved enough to move some fighters to forward airfields in Southern Sicily - no wonder that additional aerial refuelling etc was required.
The reasons more fighters weren't deployed to southern Italy had to do with airbase capabilities. The bulk of tacair went to Aviano for a reason.

Regardless, European military leaders recognize there are significant gaps in European capabilities that make it very difficult for them to conduct operations like Libya and Bosnia/Kosovo. It's not just a question of "doing something together."



On the other hand, Europe is being defended by two European nuclear power with SSBNs, faces no serious military in its South and a still weakened and rotten Russian/Belorussian military in its East. Even the quickest check of numbers reveals that we're dominating our periphery with a vast military superiority without taking into account a single U.S. soldier.
I don't think there's any question that Europe is able to defend itself from invasions and such (and to deter the same). What's at question is Europe's capability to utilize military force in Europe's near-abroad to defend Europe's interests and there European capability is lacking.