Germany decides to leave history in the past and prepare for war
-
I see your attempt of derailing, but I'll play the game.
How does appeasement prevent a war? It didn't work for the First or Second World War.
wrote 12 days ago last edited byYou are just naive in thinking that weapons can prevent a war.
-
Counter question: What does prevent your stuff from getting stolen all the time? Your ability to lock your door and a state-operated police and judical system that oversees the adherence to laws or the sign over your open door that everyone can come in an take your stuff unpunished?
wrote 12 days ago last edited byYes a state judical system, but not you holding your neightbor at gunpoint, but that is basically what militarism is advocationg for on an international level.
If you will you contradicted your 2nd part of your post with the first one.
-
This article is about Germany rapidly increasing defence spending, and also the fact that they're considering conscription. I also found this interesting:
A recent YouGov poll showed that 79% of Germans still see Vladimir Putin as "very" or "quite" dangerous to European peace and security. Now 74% said the same for Donald Trump.
Thoughts?
wrote 12 days ago last edited byWhat da fuq? No! Don’t they learn anything from last century?
-
~$ sudo apt assessmentwrote 12 days ago last edited byI hate it here
-
You are just naive in thinking that weapons can prevent a war.
wrote 12 days ago last edited byYou are just naive in thinking that querfronts can prevent a war.
I never said that I think weapons prevent wars.
Wars with erratic actors like Putin cannot be prevented, because certainty of peace is built on trust, but Putin cannot be trusted.
-
Every part of the world has a history of imperialism. Europe just happened to be the part that developed the tools to do it on the biggest scale, and the continent eventually burned itself down with them
China has had several of the biggest empires in history. So has India, so has Iran. Peru was once the seat of one of the biggest empires, and so was Mongolia. The Songhai and Mali empires were enormous. Ethiopia, the one part of Africa that kept outside conquerors out the longest, was itself a massive empire. Tonga once subjugated most of the other Pacific Islands.
The European empires inflicted a horrific amount of suffering, and they aren't completely gone. The mindset that created them, unfortunately, has been present in just about every society for all of history
wrote 12 days ago last edited byWell worded!
-
You are just naive in thinking that querfronts can prevent a war.
I never said that I think weapons prevent wars.
Wars with erratic actors like Putin cannot be prevented, because certainty of peace is built on trust, but Putin cannot be trusted.
wrote 12 days ago last edited bySo your solution is just to lay down and die (pobably litteraly)?
-
So your solution is just to lay down and die (pobably litteraly)?
wrote 12 days ago last edited byThe country I live in tries to be prepared for war and so do many countries in Europe.
I and my in-group have a lot to lose when countries like Russia, USA or China expand their influence onto Europe, by indirect, hybrid or direct intervention.
European society is already split enough, it doesn't need further authority (from outside).
-
Yeah keep eating up the propaganda of how air defense, submarines and ships -that carry the aforementioned air-defense- (about 90%+ of all military deliveries to Israel) are used to genocide Palestinians and is totally not defense against actual hostile neighbours.
PS Also actual stuff classified as "weapons" in those military deliveries of the last years consist (after striking of training ammunition and some explosives for testing purposes in military development) one single order. One. That was for anti-tank weapons.
wrote 12 days ago last edited byI get what you're trying to say, but the thing about submarines is that you need them as a third element of the triad.
-
As an Alsatian, I just hop they keep the AFD in check for the foreseeable future !
wrote 12 days ago last edited bySeeing what's been going on since the election I don't have high hopes
-
This time one right side of the history. Let’s hope.
wrote 12 days ago last edited byHey, we were on the right side last time too... politically
-
I have many friends here in eu talking about Europe getting militant as a bad thing. I'm not for escalating conflict in any way, but would like to hear some alternatives.
wrote 12 days ago last edited byIt's a difficult topic but I believe the voices against it are just as important as the voices for it to keep it in check.
-
I'm not really sure that we Germans have decided that.
wrote 11 days ago last edited byWe havent left the past behind us. We embrace it and make sure this wont happen again!
-
This article is about Germany rapidly increasing defence spending, and also the fact that they're considering conscription. I also found this interesting:
A recent YouGov poll showed that 79% of Germans still see Vladimir Putin as "very" or "quite" dangerous to European peace and security. Now 74% said the same for Donald Trump.
Thoughts?
wrote 11 days ago last edited byWell, in reality its only a step back into the 80s when the Bundeswehr was quiet well armed, and one shouldn't forget that the conscription was only put on hold in 2010 and never really abolished.
-
This article is about Germany rapidly increasing defence spending, and also the fact that they're considering conscription. I also found this interesting:
A recent YouGov poll showed that 79% of Germans still see Vladimir Putin as "very" or "quite" dangerous to European peace and security. Now 74% said the same for Donald Trump.
Thoughts?
wrote 11 days ago last edited byGermany is pretty confused. They continued doing lucrative business with putin even long after he invaded Ukraine for the first time, but now they are arming against him. If they could only have stopped themselves from funding the russian military for decades then maybe they wouldn’t need to be funding theirs now.
Hopefully those soldiers won’t be deployed to build nord stream 3 in a couple of years.
-
Germany is pretty confused. They continued doing lucrative business with putin even long after he invaded Ukraine for the first time, but now they are arming against him. If they could only have stopped themselves from funding the russian military for decades then maybe they wouldn’t need to be funding theirs now.
Hopefully those soldiers won’t be deployed to build nord stream 3 in a couple of years.
wrote 11 days ago last edited byYou could say Germany isn't unique though. The US is also split between those who want to be friendly with Russia (Republicans) and those who don't (Democrats).
With Germany I guess Merkel believed that business ties with Russia would persuade Russia to not threaten Europe, but now that theory has been disproven, so Germans seem to be more supportive of the idea of cutting ties with Russia and boosting Germany's defence spending.
-
The country I live in tries to be prepared for war and so do many countries in Europe.
I and my in-group have a lot to lose when countries like Russia, USA or China expand their influence onto Europe, by indirect, hybrid or direct intervention.
European society is already split enough, it doesn't need further authority (from outside).
wrote 11 days ago last edited byEurope doesn't exist anymore after WW3.
-
Europe doesn't exist anymore after WW3.
wrote 11 days ago last edited byMAD only works if all sides have nuclear anxiety and the existence of nuclear weapons doesn't rule ballistic weapons out of existence, especially for countries without nuclear weapons (see Ukraine). I'm not advocating for nuclear proliferation here.
The equilibrium of MAD (as in "The only way to win is not to play") might be relevant for countries with nuclear weapons (i.e. Russia, USA, China), but telling the Ukraine defense that "The only way to win is not to play" is insulting and privileged.
Germany does not intend to test how far Russia is going with ballistic weapons and cannot rely solely on the power of MAD's equilibrium from France, NATO or USA.
-
Is international law propaganda now? I've only heard Zionists say that. Are the headlines of UN health workers found buried with their hands tied behind their backs propaganda?
"Israel has a right to exist" is one of the biggest red herrings in political discourse. It's phrased to portray an abuser as a victim.
Israel does not have the right to do what it's doing now according to international law. Peaceful protestors in Germany have the weight of heavy handed policing coming down on them for this subject alone, exclusive of other subjects. Even a meeting with Francesca Albenese turned nasty - not at the hands of the group, but the German state.
There's more to just weaponry to a genocide, and Germany is complicit. So next time you're pontificating about facts, don't forget to include all of them. And check your definition of "propaganda".
wrote 11 days ago last edited byIs international law propaganda now?
No international law is international law.
The international court is interpreting international law.
Crying about Germany's support of a genocide while the Internation Court of Justice (and thus international law) disagrees -and lists factual reasons for their decision- however is a lie.
What do you call a lie spread to further your agenda again?
-
Yes a state judical system, but not you holding your neightbor at gunpoint, but that is basically what militarism is advocationg for on an international level.
If you will you contradicted your 2nd part of your post with the first one.
wrote 11 days ago last edited byNo, there isn't a contradiction in the argument. There is one in reality: There is no independent authority (police force/judical system) making countries accountable for breaking the law. We tried to build something comparably up but on the judical side of things but those still lack the ability to enforce their rulings.
So it boils down to "fortifying your door" and being able to defend it against the few people really determined to tear it down.