[roenxi]

Maybe I'm about to display my ignorance, but until 1990 wasn't Poland under the USSR's umbrella? And the US was all but occupying Germany until ... it is almost possible to make that claim up to today. There are 50k US troops in Germany and 60k in the German army. That and the Southwestern Europeans being broken like twigs after WWII.

I don't think it is the EU that is keeping the peace; I reakoon it is the Haber process + the US more than anything else. Although if it was it is failing IMO, there is a land war in Europe right now that is at risk of fighting WWIII. And everyone is arming up again because of it.

[Sammi]

The Haber process was the single most important thing that brought us WW1 and WW2. War at an industrial scale was suddenly possible because munitions were possible to produce at and industrial scale.

The EU is what changed in Europe.

US "occupation" in Europe after WW2 was weak compared to the influence of the EU. The EU emanates all regulation in Europe. The US certainly didn't create the single market in the EU.

Also the brutal occupation of Easter Europe by the USSR is exactly an example of what the EU peace project is about solving.

[roenxi]

If someone was going to start a fight in Europe after WWII, they had a choice of either attacking in the East and going toe-to-toe with the USSR, or the West and going toe-to-toe with the US. That calculation held for the Germans, British and French too if they wanted to start something.

The common market has probably been a net force for peace, but superpowers staking out areas where they were involved can hardly be brushed aside. After the fall of the USSR it hasn't been 30 years and we see land wars in their former sphere of influence.

Economics doesn't stop armies. We saw in WWII that insane politicians are perfectly capable of destroying everything in sight, economic consequences for their own citizens be damned.

[mycatislenin]

Indeed. You're displaying your ignorance.