Or just stop being so freaking stingy withholding weapons.
What are they waiting for? The UK to declare war on France? NO, they stockpiled all these freaking arms for Soviet aggression or fascist threats, and now its at their doorstep.
I don’t understand what good Grippens and Typhoons, tanks, missiles sysstems and such do rusting in storage when they could do exactly what they were built to do, right now.
NO, they stockpiled all these freaking arms for Soviet aggression or fascist threats, and now its at their doorstep.
Unfortunately, in Eastern Germany e.g. a large part of the population welcomes the Russians and are totally fine with their aggression, at least according to their election choices.
Remember that occasion where a Danish warship found itself in contact with pirates or Houthis or whoever, and it turned out half the weapon systems are not functional or something?
This is what they don’t want to show. That any military rusts, so the initial moments of those countries’ participating in any war will be full of shame. The first weeks of Russia’s invasion are a good example of such. No, EU doesn’t mean this won’t happen. Yes, defense-related corruption exists everywhere. No, European militaries are not full of supermen somehow magically superior to Russians and Ukrainians.
It’s very simple. The moment that happens, some people may find themselves under scrutiny for clear failures in their area of responsibility. So they resist. This is normal.
NATO does drills and excercises, and I’m sure everything is inspected before its sent. They can just quietly throw away what doesn’t work and dodge that bullet.
And in functioning democracies this well result in a report known to parliament where it gets exposed. You cannot and should not have the executive do things “quietly” in a democracy. Mostly for better, in rare cases for worse.
They can.
Hopefully everyone is holding their breath for another 6-7 days and then we can deliver what’s needed without troubling the US election 😔
Shouldn’t they be in a rush, instead?
They basically have 7 days (or really till January) before NATO could be destabilized and delivering weapons becomes far more complicated.
Removed by mod
Europe (EU?) doesn’t have any boots by design. For the same reason any member is free to do so on their own.
Any resulting conflict with Russia will not trigger the EU’s security pact or NATO’s article 5.
Redeploy frontex from hunting refugees in the med to something useful.
They are a small police force without serious military gear.
More importantly the EU does not have the authority to engage in wars.
Author is a Ukrainian PhD. Far more education than me yet still can’t understand why Ukraine is not in the EU, 30 years after leaving the soviet union.
Now wants the EU to escalate a war, adding her voice to growing calls for escalation from people who will not be doing any of the fighting.
Have you heard of the promises that were made when Ukraine gave up their nukes in 1991? No you probably haven’t, the USA, GB and Russia promised to protect Ukraine…
And you know what, even without that, Europe should, you know, fight fascism at its doorstep.
No! Ukraine had nukes until 1994 and when Ukraine gave them up in the Budapest Memorandum not a single one of the countries agreed to protect Ukraine. Unless by protection you mean calling the UN security council, which both the US and UK did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum#The_Budapest_Memoranda
EDIT: Also the EU is not the US, UK or Russia.
Have you read the article you linked? The memorandum contains several obligations, including respecting Ukraine’s borders.
The article does not talk about the Budapest Memorandum at all. So have you read the article?
Oh no 2 years off.
As I said:
And you know what, even without that, Europe should, you know, fight fascism at its doorstep.
Also nobody agreed to protect Ukraine for giving up nukes. This is the text:
- Respect the signatory’s independence and sovereignty in the existing borders (in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act).
- Refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the signatories to the memorandum, and undertake that none of their weapons will ever be used against these countries, except in cases of self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
- Refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine, the Republic of Belarus and Kazakhstan of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
- Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.
- Not to use nuclear weapons against any non - nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.
- Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments.
Also nobody agreed to protect Ukraine for giving up nukes.
This is irrelevant. We have to do it anyway, no matter whatever they agreed upon 30 years ago.
I see the argument with the Budapest Memorandum everywhere and it is just not true. If it were true, all parties would have broken it, when Russia took Crimea. That would make all the actual security guarantees, which have been given to Ukraine for the time after the war worthless, while questioning NATO and the EU as alliances, with two of the most powerful members not actually delivering the protection they promised. So I find it very relevant to point this out.
Blood for the blood god?
Fuck off. Russia considers itself at war with the democratic world. It’s long overdue the democratic world responds in the only way Russia recognizes: brute force.
If that means active engagement from NATO or even individual nations like Poland or France, then so be it.
I believe the war Russia is fighting against NATO has so far not killed a single NATO soldier, but thousands of Russians. If this is the war Russia wants to fight with NATO, NATO would be stupid not to keep it going. At this point the Soviet era weapon stockpiles are nearly empty, they need to buy shells from North Korea, the Russian economy is pretty much a full on war economy, which means collapse as soon as the war ends, while Russia debt auction run into serious problems and the sovereign wealth fund is running empty.
The only thing the West needs to do is to keep sending aid to Ukraine for another two years or so. That will kill Putin’s Russia. It might even happen earlier.
The strain on Ukraine is immense though, as the article states. Ukrainian men are told to fight. They’re being bundled into vehicles by military recruiters (it’s often vatniks making this point, but that source is a US-government-funded media company).
I would absolutely like for Russia to withdraw entirely from Ukraine, but surely the human cost needs to be taken into account. I don’t think Ukrainians should be forced to fight. And maybe potential soldiers would be more willing to fight if Western support was better than it currently is - Zelenskyy is always requesting more weapons and the West just drags its feet.
You go first.
It’s possible to fight a modern war without boots on the ground.
Nuke these savages, who needs 'em! Right?!
So, World War 3 gets your vote ?
It would hardly be a world war. Who would be stupid enough to join on the side of Russia?
North Korea is already fighting for them, and they also have Hungary, Serbia and potentially USA if Trump wins.
Would you bet your life and the lifes of anybody you know on it? Because this IS such a bet
I’m betting my family that we have to stop russia or it will just be worse. I’m also betting like the civilised world for the exact same reason, demilitarise and denuclerise russia or we’ll all be sorry.
Well… if THAT is a sentiment shared by enough people the world indeed is doomed.
Russia won’t become any less dangerous even if we were to appease to them.
Doomed. Doomed to live in freedom!
Nuke these savages, right!? BOOM, denuclerised!
Lol no, break their back and remove the deadly toys is better.
wOrLdWaR 3!
It mught actually happen if we don’t stop Russia.
Yes it might happen either way. Still not something to gamble lightheartedly. You think in 1914 anyone thought to escalate into a World War over some crown prince being shot in the Balkans?
Escalations always have a risk of running out of control quickly.
It was a mistake not to supply Ukraine with the weapons they needed early on. But as we see now with NK troops, it is considered a major escalation by everyone. Also problem is that at some point war is not about any larger objectives anymore. It boils down to “you killed my comrade, ill kill yours in retaliation”
Well well well who is the one escalating? It’s Russia, it’s always Russia all the time. Who’s next?
They will never stop, until they are stopped.
I think there’s been enough Ukrainian dead. If those countries are Ukraine’s allies, not just partners, then they don’t seem to send enough troops.
