3 ms·

Yes, maybe after your response, I put the word 'world' in scare quotes = "world" thinking about this exact issue. Other thoughts were 'known world,' 'visible wo

Yes, maybe after your response, I put the word 'world' in scare quotes = "world" thinking about this exact issue. Other thoughts were 'known world,' 'visible world'... but those don't translate to today. I need to set my profile's delay number higher to allow for more comment editing time.

saubeidl 1y ago
But I think that's exactly the point - we only need to care about "our world". Conflicts in Asia shouldn't be our problem, as an example. We should stop the US from dragging us into quagmires in the Middle East, etc etc. What matters is that we have peace at home and the strength to preserve it. The rest shouldn't be up to us.
- consumer451 1y ago
  I hear what you are saying, and I respect it. However, what happens when some group threatens to shut down a major global shipping route that the EU relies on? What happens when imperialism spreads near our borders, but not yet across them? Do we wait until the final moment to mobilize? That seems like horrible planning. In the period between WW II and Iraq II, the USA used soft and military power to keep basic world order (country borders) and commerce running. It was the enforcer of the post-war Rules Based Order. This was a good thing, that I believe we all took for granted. Even the USA has now taken that for granted. That historical period is now officially over. What/who will fill that void of global stability?
- ivandenysov 1y ago
  That was the case before long range weapons of mass destruction became a thing
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    We have those, too. MAD works.
    - consumer451 1y ago
      Who is "we" regarding a nuclear deterrent in the EU? France? That's not "we." The EU countries who really need a nuclear deterrent: Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia do not have any MAD. If the EU is invaded in those countries with traditional weapons, what will be our response? Certainly not MAD.

saubeidl 1y ago

But I think that's exactly the point - we only need to care about "our world". Conflicts in Asia shouldn't be our problem, as an example. We should stop the US from dragging us into quagmires in the Middle East, etc etc. What matters is that we have peace at home and the strength to preserve it. The rest shouldn't be up to us.

consumer451 1y ago
I hear what you are saying, and I respect it. However, what happens when some group threatens to shut down a major global shipping route that the EU relies on? What happens when imperialism spreads near our borders, but not yet across them? Do we wait until the final moment to mobilize? That seems like horrible planning. In the period between WW II and Iraq II, the USA used soft and military power to keep basic world order (country borders) and commerce running. It was the enforcer of the post-war Rules Based Order. This was a good thing, that I believe we all took for granted. Even the USA has now taken that for granted. That historical period is now officially over. What/who will fill that void of global stability?
ivandenysov 1y ago
That was the case before long range weapons of mass destruction became a thing
- saubeidl 1y ago
  We have those, too. MAD works.
  - consumer451 1y ago
    Who is "we" regarding a nuclear deterrent in the EU? France? That's not "we." The EU countries who really need a nuclear deterrent: Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia do not have any MAD. If the EU is invaded in those countries with traditional weapons, what will be our response? Certainly not MAD.