Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Europe re-arming

What does "Europe" mean, beyond being part of a greater landmass (and lots of surrounding islands) that includes two other continents*?

On what basis and for what purpose should eg, someone who might have closer cultural and familial ties with another continent, ally with people thousands of miles away for this nebulous concept of ~Europe~?

*Not to mention places such as French Guiana, which is legally part of France even though it's in South America.
 


And to think on such questions as: has there ever been a time when Europe re-armed and it didn't spiral into a European war and beyond? …

The Dreadnaught race ended well, ‘we want eight, and we won’t wait’… Four years of mechanised slaughter and Jutland to show for it.
 
I think Russia’s orientation towards an aggressive posture is quite evident by its ongoing invasion of Ukraine and its attempts
to reassert Georgia, Kazakhstan etc as vassals, its support for political parties which are pro-Moscow throughout Europe, with major success in Hungary and Slovakia , etc. I have no trouble imagining Russian aggression continuing and expanding in Moldova, the Baltics, the Caucasus, and so on

And there would be Putin fan boys on here posting things like ‘Well Kent and Sussex have always been part of Russia’s sphere of influence. People should just recognise that the M25 is the natural Russian border”….
 
We already have a European war, and it's not due to the European re-armament (Moscow might have a different story to tell, but then they always do..). If there isn't a united response, it becomes easier to pick the countries off one by one.
Yeah, but the Russian Federation is not going to invade the countries of Europe one by one.
 
What does "Europe" mean, beyond being part of a greater landmass (and lots of surrounding islands) that includes two other continents*?

On what basis and for what purpose should eg, someone who might have closer cultural and familial ties with another continent, ally with people thousands of miles away for this nebulous concept of ~Europe~?

*Not to mention places such as French Guiana, which is legally part of France even though it's in South America.

** And Saint Pierre and Miquelon which is just a few miles from the Canadian coast.

And Mayotte which is between Madagascar and East Africa.
 
Sacré bleu, zut alors and Ooh la la!

View attachment 466803

The European peoples' bomb!
The snag in this is that, if the doctrine of nuclear deterrence espoused by those in power is valid, then the Republic of France would have to increase its arsenal of nuclear bombs more than tenfold.
 
The snag in this is that, if the doctrine of nuclear deterrence espoused by those in power is valid, then the Republic of France would have to increase its arsenal of nuclear bombs more than tenfold.

No. The French, us ( and till quite recently the Chinese) have all gone for ‘minimum credible deterrence’ with our nukes. With us and the French mostly doing that with the continuously at sea submarines.
The French have a few other bits and bobs in their bucket of sunshine store cupboard. Letting it be known that they have 50 or so new tactical nukes would change the game. I doubt it would take the clever girls and boys at Aldermaston that long to slap together something similar for us. Just so we could say to Putin that if he starts chucking battlefield stuff around we could do something similar but short of turning Moscow into a glass car park.

I’m not sure I think any of this is a brilliant place to be in 2025 TBF. But it might be like when Clem went all in on a socialist British bomb in 1946…
 
No. The French, us ( and till quite recently the Chinese) have all gone for ‘minimum credible deterrence’ with our nukes. With us and the French mostly doing that with the continuously at sea submarines.
The French have a few other bits and bobs in their bucket of sunshine store cupboard. Letting it be known that they have 50 or so new tactical nukes would change the game. I doubt it would take the clever girls and boys at Aldermaston that long to slap together something similar for us. Just so we could say to Putin that if he starts chucking battlefield stuff around we could do something similar but short of turning Moscow into a glass car park.

I’m not sure I think any of this is a brilliant place to be in 2025 TBF. But it might be like when Clem went all in on a socialist British bomb in 1946…
Why do you think that the USA goes to the trouble of maintaining 5,000 nuclear bombs, when it could have only a couple of hundred like the Republic of France?
 
Why do you think that the USA goes to the trouble of maintaining 5,000 nuclear bombs, when it could have only a couple of hundred like the Republic of France?


Because they made a fuckton of money out of it. Declassified Cold War targeting decisions turned out to show they were aiming hydrogen bombs, not just nukes but fusion nukes at empty fields ( or cow pastures in their words) designating them as ‘temporary landing fields’ because they ran out of ‘proper’ targets long before they ran out of H bomb tipped missiles.
 
Because they made a fuckton of money out of it. Declassified Cold War targeting decisions turned out to show they were aiming hydrogen bombs, not just nukes but fusion nukes at empty fields ( or cow pastures in their words) designating them as ‘temporary landing fields’ because they ran out of ‘proper’ targets long before they ran out of H bomb tipped missiles.
The warheads on the French and British bombs are all fusion bombs.
 
Because they made a fuckton of money out of it. Declassified Cold War targeting decisions turned out to show they were aiming hydrogen bombs, not just nukes but fusion nukes at empty fields ( or cow pastures in their words) designating them as ‘temporary landing fields’ because they ran out of ‘proper’ targets long before they ran out of H bomb tipped missiles.
Yep, the corporate welfare of the military industrial complex is almost unique in being beyond the ambition of neoliberal state consolidation. Even last year about 45% of our MoD procurement was from "non-competitive" sources.
 
Yep, the corporate welfare of the military industrial complex is almost unique in being beyond the ambition of neoliberal state consolidation. Even last year about 45% of our MoD procurement was from "non-competitive" sources.


Ah, good old British Aerospace / Airbus Defence….
 
So Starmer's decided we need to spend a chunk more on the military. Denmark, of all countries, is splurging on the military. Germany is chomping at the bit.

The threat is considered to be Russia, and specifically Russia when the US isn't there to back us. And it does seem possible Russia wouldn't stop at Ukraine.

This is a thread to record what's happening, but also to ponder the wisdom of it all. And to think on such questions as: has there ever been a time when Europe re-armed and it didn't spiral into a European war and beyond? And if someone assassinated Putin would it save us all a lot of expense and trouble, or is Russia truly set on expansionism?
Hateful though the concept is, what other choice does Europe have?

Regardless of who takes over from Trump, the current admin has proven beyond any doubt that the US is now, at best, an 'unreliable partner' and the old assurance of the Americans wading in to help should NATO's Article 5 be invoked has been irreversibly undermined. What 'Western' and specifically, European powers have witnessed in the past month is a former ally and cornerstone of the military alliance that has largely helped to keep Europe free of major wars for the past 80 years turn around and threaten a NATO European state and made annexation overtures towards another non-European NATO state.

The breathtaking arrogance and myopic contempt that the Trump admin has displayed towards the US's closest allies is showing no sign of slowing down and it's highly likely that the next target for their disruptiveness is breaking the NATO alliance. So, in the event of that happening, what's to replace it? Eastern European states are rightly worried that an assertive Russia may want to start taking land -whether by 'salami-slicing' areas with a majority ethnic russian population, or by wholesale invasion. Russia may have the economy of Italy but it still has a significant proportion of the former USSR's nuclear forces and a shitload of mothballed vehicles and aircraft that they can dust-off and use. When people were mocking Russia a while ago for fielding tanks from the 1950's, Ukrainian soldiers were rightly saying 'any tank is a danger when you don't have the means to take it on'. Europe's reliance on American defensive guarantees for the best part of a century has left the continent in a militarily vulnerable position -the various nations do not have massive stockpiles of weapons and materiel that they can bring to bear at short notice. Likewise, the 'credible deterrence' of the French and British nuclear weapons stystems is miniscule compared to Russia's (a few hundred vs several thousand and no long-range capability as that got handed-off to the US). A significant number of the continent's defence contracts are being fulfilled by American defence contractors and not domestic ones which, again, leaves the continent somewhat exposed.

I hate the fact that we are now looking at a period where European powers once again start tooling up. I had hoped the post cold war dividend would extend to finally getting rid of nuclear weapons altogether but that never fucking happened, did it? It's a fucking shite state of affairs but this is the world we have inherited and now that the foundation of European security has been found to be built on sand, what else are the Europeans to do?

Also, assassinating Putin is a fucking stupid idea for very obvious reasons.
 
There does seem to be a certain sad inevitability about it and not just in Europe but in SE Asia as well I can see increasing co-operation between Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan etc as well.
Russia is of course our most likely short term enemy but the way that the USA is going at the moment we probably should give at least some thought to the possibility we may end up fighting them instead.
There is no chance that the UK or Europe will ever be at war with the US. Despite all the current bluster, we can already see the inevitability of the capitulation to Trump and the America first approach that will continue, possibly disguised, under any US government that will follow.
 
There is no chance that the UK or Europe will ever be at war with the US. Despite all the current bluster, we can already see the inevitability of the capitulation to Trump and the America first approach that will continue, possibly disguised, under any US government that will follow.

Just out of interest, do you know why the White House is painted white.
 
The Dreadnaught race ended well, ‘we want eight, and we won’t wait’… Four years of mechanised slaughter and Jutland to show for it.
Was worse than that...

We maintan a Royal Navy that can beat the next 2 largest navies combined....what we need now is a class of ship that renders all other ships redundant.
Ya good idea! Ve vill now race you!
 
Back
Top Bottom