this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
940 points (98.4% liked)

World News

31911 readers
580 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SuddenDownpour 26 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I don't like the expansion of NATO, but due to Russia's recent imperialism, Sweden's and Finland's reactions are completely reasonable. A much healthier alternative would have been actually advancing towards an integrated European defense system involving EU members, with a door open to certain neighbours such as Norway, but it's pretty hard to do that when the political groups that could actually promote that alternative are schizophrenically tolerating positions such as "I'm a pacifist, so I'm advocating for my own country's disarmament despite my neighbours starting wars very recently" and "if Ukraine didn't want to get invaded, they shouldn't have sought guarantees against Russian aggression from third countries".

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think Europeans in general psychologically still feel themselves weak without NATO, unable to fill the needs of their own defense.

I've been reading about 1st Indochina war yesterday, so - emotionally biased.

[–] SuddenDownpour 25 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

EU's population: 448 million

EU GDP: 19 trillion dollars

Russia's population: 143 million

Russia's GDP: 1,78 trillion dollars

Simplifying a bit here (I'm obviously taking Morocco and Belarus for granted, assuming that Turkey wouldn't attack Greece, and so on), but it's pretty much a "gotta get our shit together" situation, because there's no reason why we should depend on the US for defense, or anything else.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I assume you meant trillion and not million for those gdp figures? Even then, they're low.

[–] SuddenDownpour 3 points 5 months ago

Fixed, good catch

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

That's about architecture more than resources. "Gotta get our shit together" doesn't negate the fact that shit isn't together yet.

It's good to have resources, but such a situation is still weakness. Only I think NATO in some sense is a contributing factor, and EU frankly too, both not in the least because of all those veto and consensus rules.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I think it's also been a case of "it's nice to spend money on nice things instead of things designed to kill people". Which it is! It's not a non-significant part of why EU's GDP per capita is so much higher than Russia's.

Which is also why fuck Russia. Governments like that make everything worse.

[–] SuddenDownpour 1 points 5 months ago

Completely agreed. The ideal defense spending is 0. The problem is that this is only possible if everyone agrees that military action is not the proper method to solve international conflicts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Why don't you like the expansion of NATO?

[–] SuddenDownpour 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because it includes countries that are routinely looking for trouble, such as the US and Turkey. One of these days Turkey is going to try and drag us into a conflict with Syria or Iran like the US did with Afghanistan.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe it's just me, but it felt like the US fought Afghanistan without much help from NATO.

[–] SuddenDownpour 1 points 5 months ago

Plenty of NATO countries had troops in Afghanistan since 2001 onwards as part of the US-led campaign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participants_in_Operation_Enduring_Freedom