I think many miss the point. I said some time ago that the EU had plans to build an army. I was told by a few that I was talking rubbish. I then repeated what I said after reading an article. Again I was told I was talking rubbish by the usual suspects. Once again, like on many occasions, they were wrong. However, It's not about being right or wrong but being mature enough to say "yeah he was right on that".
But what would be wrong with an EU army?
We have sent on many occaisions "independant" forces to same locations/war zones, where the differences in quality of equipment and preparation of these, has led to very great and real logistics and capability issues, directly consequential to "allied" forces.
Had a Dept. from 2008 - 2011 that was directly responsible for supply to the Norwegian and Danish troops in Afghanistan, visited the Camp Bastian compound and let's just say that ALL European allies there had "step up potentials".
The Brits for example had completely different Artillery MM sizes - often provided by obsolete companies, machinery that was no longer in production and unable to share or loan from other friendly armies.
The "armoured" tanks issue is already well known.
Often, the ordering rationale for consumables by the Norwegains and Danes was questioned - and often it was over ordered taking into account the "loaning" that would go out to the Brits especially.
The simple procurement, logistics and operational efficiency improvements would be daunting.
So again, what would be wrong with the development of an EU army?
Trump has another 6 years to go - suggest we get a move on, wouldn't you?
Or do you prefer your politicos to be always at the beck and call of our "special relationship"?
Oh, and suggest that this would be something half decent to sign up to - whether in or out of EU - or do you accept it OK for our boys to come back in body bags due to a lack of intelligent use of budgets, poor project planners, poor purchasing and Technical Depts? Note, not one of those Depts. are in the firing line!!