5 ms·
NATO's time has come and gone. Europe needs to defend itself against Russia. It's not like they lack the resources; the only thing they lack is the will. No one
by sverige 10y ago
NATO's time has come and gone. Europe needs to defend itself against Russia. It's not like they lack the resources; the only thing they lack is the will. No one wants a strong German military because that has always led to catastrophe in the past, but maybe it's time for them to re-arm. I mean, what are the odds that they'll produce another megalomaniac?
- gambiting 10y agoPretty good I would say. At the moment a lot of Germans are pissed off at Merkel for "letting so many immigrants in", so I wouldn't be surprised if they elect someone who is very much right-wing next time and supports deportations or even worse. I'm pretty sure that in years after WW1 people were saying that odds of having another war in just 2 decades are extremely slim. And yet.
- pmalynin 10y ago"I'm pretty sure that in years after WW1 people were saying that odds of having another war in just 2 decades are extremely slim. " Well -- there was the whole "politicians lost the war" thing and general bitterness about the Rhineland.
- threeseed 10y agoMegalomanic ? Sure. The US chose Trump as the Republican nominee. But another Hitler or similar dictator. Not possible.
- enkephalin 10y agothis is the kind of thinking responsible for history being allowed to repeat itself.
- vsl 10y ago> NATO's time has come and gone Europe is defenseless without NATO. All EU countries, with the exception of UK (yes), Greece (historically strong army because of Turkish threat) and Poland (rich experience with Russia) fail to meet NATO requirements on army spending. EU armies are disfunctional and barely able to provide symbolic support for the US Army in operations (remember Libya? EU couldn't sustain a few days of air-only operations). It may very well be that NATO is done. But if it is, it's because of EU members that lack any will to defend themselves. So how do you expect EU's own defense to be any better than NATO backed by USA's might (politically ambiguous as it may be these days)? Again with the exception of Poland, whose EU-hated government is serious about defending the country, but that's too little, too late.
- return0 10y agoThis wil become an argument in favor of a euroarmy.
- vidarh 10y agoMeanwhile France is one of the most military interventionist countries on the planet, with forces on the ground in a dozen countries or so. Europe were "barely able" to provide support for the US because there's huge political opposition to get dragged into US interventions.
- hardlianotion 10y agoThese operations are tiny, much like the Uk's.
- Strom 10y agoEstonia also meets and always has met NATO spending requirements [1], because of a long history of war with Russia. It's a national priority and was the #1 issue discussed even in the 2015 elections. [1] http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defense-spending-two-charts/116008/ http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defe...
- GunboatDiplomat 10y agoEurope can't even bomb Libya without US help. I don't want to hear how NATO is obsolete when we're deploying a couple brigades to the Baltics and Eastern Europe because Europe is militarily a nullity.