NATO Propaganda
I mean Russia‘s ability to invade remains disproven.
No, they lack the ability to successfully invade. They are absolutely capable of killing lots of people
They are absolutely capable of killing lots of people
In the EU? How do they maintain their front against EU air superiority?
Air superiority relies on having sufficient ammo. And if the recent war in Europe has shown us anything, it’s that having just a couple of really good weapons doesn’t really work unless you also have a shitload of other stuff.
While Russia can barely maintain a front against Ukraine, they are more than capable of killing people far behind the front lines.
Like I said, Russia won’t win, they probably wouldn’t hurt us as much as we would hurt them. But they WOULD hurt us.
Like I said, Russia won’t win, they probably wouldn’t hurt us as much as we would hurt them. But they WOULD hurt us.
That’s true for any country. Additionally Russia could even anhilate us with their nuclear weapons. Yet do we have to worry as much and pay as much for defence as our politicians tell us to do? At least the EU starts to publish some numbers.
That’s true for any country
Yes, but Russia is the only one who has shown they’re extremely likely to do so.
Yet do we have to worry as much and pay as much for defence as our politicians tell us to do?
Well if I could predict the future, I would be really stinking rich, and many poor people would be less poor. Unfortunately, here we are.
has shown they’re extremely likely to do so.
What are the signs that it is extremely likely?
Well if I could predict the future
We make the future if we spend on arms instead of health, renewable energy and education. If the risk is overstated it costs lives, just not on the battlefield.
With the US as an open ally they will be more capable
Major nation-states remain amazingly eager to gear up for World War 3, finds every international arms dealer.
I wonder why. The EU combined spends more on defense than China.Maybe—call me crazy—but maybe we should just coordinate that spending and not spend more in the stupidest way possible.
The European court of auditors (ECA) said the EU was much better prepared than before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine of 2022, but achieving its goal of defence readiness by the end of the decade would be difficult.
I’m sure if it became more pressing and necessary, some things would change much more rapidly, just like decoupling from Russia and increased defense spending did.
What is “defense readiness”?
the European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said “readiness 2030” meant “to have rearmed and developed the capabilities to have credible deterrence” and “an industrial base that is a strategic advantage”.
I don’t know. The EU seems plenty deterrent already, certainly to invade, but also economic strength. Could more strength deter someone like Putin? I don’t know, who doesn’t go by reason? Seems like a pretty diffuse definition and goal to call doubt on “the goal” or “readiness”.
Maybe the negative framing is necessary to pressure for an effective military that would be better able to defend and act? What does “defend” mean? There would certainly be damage no matter the strength.
Traditional defense and diplomacy is overrated. Just pack as much drones as you can with bombs, send them to Moscow on autopilot and blame this on software bug.
Depends on who does the invading. Russia or the US? Pfff those losers can easily be beat. China? No clue honestly.
