Come to Finland. Over 70% of the population is ready to defend the country, according to surveys. We never stopped military service. We still have bunkers, and a larger artillery than France or Germany. There is a reason for that.
What about those who have come via mass legal or illegal immigration? Do they have the required spirit to defend Europe? Do they want to sacrifice their children?
Dinner with friends last wk & we broached this subect - how (or will?) France rearm and recalibrate to new threats. I wish I'd had the knowledge and eloquence of this essay. But that night I did recall a book by a French author, Marc Bloch (sp?), titled "Strange Defeat", about the failure of both the French military and political class in WWII. I would highly recommend as a primary resource in understanding how political will - or lack thereof - affects military and strategic preparation. That, and the corrosive effects of personal ambition and political jockeying within an officer class.
May be equal. From within, will there be enough bodies for military? Will more recent migrants buy into defending the country and its ideals? And will the populous accept sacrifices for greater good (i.e. reallocating any social spending to military spending)?
The public discourse in the UK appears pretty much identical. Ukraine is a problem "over there" which from the UK perspective is viewed as an irritant as opposed to anything more serious. The governing Labour party treats it as an undesirable line item in the budget (less money for hospitals, public sector etc). I don't see anyone with any stature describing the severity of the situation and even beginning to articulate the measures that need to be taken.
"Modern European societies value somewhat flat structures, negotiation, and social equality. Militarization depends on hierarchy, command, and discipline"
Israel is a great example of a flat, raucously democratic and argumentative society with an extraordinary military capability (as confirmed by Hezbollah and the Ayatollahs).
What makes Israel successful is an extraordinary sense of civic responsibility and solidarity, seen, for example, in the 130% response to the military call-up on Oct 7: tens of thousands simply showed up at their units, ready to serve, without having receiving call-up papers.
Europe has nothing like this and will not have an effective military as long as its recruits only move forward after they're kicked in the behind.
I find the diatribe ridiculous. The lack of acknowleding Europe's expansionist drive for a few decades long and the Geopolitical impact thereoff, is dishonest. The role of Europe in Ukraine's maidan, directly leading to the war is again ignored. Supporting the war, and doing everything it can, to scupper peace initiatives, paired with this call to militarize is clear. Europe wants war with Russia. Russia and surrounding countries with riches and vast territory are attrative to expand into. These calls are in preparation of it. The West always create enemies to hide its geopolitical aims. With the US no longer a guarantee via Nato, Europe is using Russofobia to militarize.
Russia wants a multipolar world where Russia is one of the leading powers. That does not fit Europe's agenda. What Europe wont say, is that they need to counter the US. But... Russia and China are currently the "chosen" ones as enemies. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Siria etc etc. all turned into enemies before destruction. France pushing for the bombing of Libya. France active in North African and Libyan wars.
But the threat is not Russia. The threat to Europe is from within and that is ignored and papered over. I think already to late to fix. Long before a war with Russia the "citizens" of France and Europe will turn on each other. It is already happening.
Think rationally for a moment. Why would France want war with Russia. Why?? Germany had a fantastic, reliable trade relationship with Russia and opposed Ukraine joining NATO, why would it want war?? The UK was in absolutely no state to do anything post Brexit, post-Covid and vulnerable to price shocks. Come on almost all of these countries wanted the minimum spent on the military and the maximum spent on welfare, you can hardly pretend they prepared for this conflict 30 countries apparently 'secretly' wanted. Also, you forget this is a clear pattern Russia attacked Estonia, it annexed Georgia, it annexed Crimea, it supported the Donbas War and then it invaded. It's a very obvious pattern to its neighbours.
Russia has been preparing for peer conflict for decades. Why do you think they've invested in hypersonic missiles? They've attached Estonia in '07, annexed Georgia in '08, annexed Crimea in '14, fuelled the Donbas war 14-22, and then made a fuel scale attack on Ukraine. Watch Russian news - go and do it - they are frequently simulating nuclear attacks on Europe. Read Medevdev's tweets. It's all plain as day. Now they are sending drones across the NATO border and doing violent sabotaging operations.
So now tell me. As a responsible leader do you tell your people that it's best just to ignore it and invest in welfare, hoping everything will below over or perhaps tell them that Russia has broken every promise since the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 and make them aware of the reality that we currently have no defence (at all) to mass drone strikes and make sure people understand the reality.
That is not the same as WANTING war. The people wanting war are currently making it.
We Brits have our story. We have also sent 290,000 to Iraq and Afghanistan over 20 years. I used to believe it was part of a common venture which for good or bad, was ungirded by responsibility, loyalty and the (sometimes misguided) courage to do the right thing.
I now understand things different. These conflicts were one-way (US-led, we should certainly not imagine they would reciprocate support for the UK with the Falklands) and consisted mostly of overwhelming force against small opponents. I now realise that since the Korean War the US has actually lost the will to strand up to peers. It avoided it during the Cold War, at the height of US power in wouldn't prevent the Georgia annexation, it was happy to expand NATO when there was no risk, but then balked any perception of conflict with Russia in 2022, preferring to flea the scene rapidly, now the first island chain with China looks lost.
It's going to take a big realignment in thinking among the European powers, who were cowed by a perception of a world dominated by nukes, but as much as the US mocks the Europeans attempting to build a force to oppose Russia and stepping up our military aid - it is the Europeans who are summing up the courage to take on a big nuclear power. Not the US.
Europe is trying to rebuild a military deterrent while publicly pretending that doing so carries no profound social cost. The general stated the obvious, unavoidable truth that effective deterrence requires a society to visibly accept the potential price of using its military. The backlash proves Europe's political class is unwilling to have that honest conversation with its public. This gap between strategic necessity and political rhetoric is itself a critical vulnerability. Russia doesn't assess Europe by its defense budgets alone, but by its perceived will to use force.
Exceptional analysis. The tension between technocratic universalism and the hierachical demands of military culture is something most discussions miss completely. What really stands out is how this isn't just about hardware or budgets but the deeper incompatibilty between a society built on negotiation and one that requires command structures to function under existential pressure.
La Russie rêve de recréer l’ancien empire russe dont l’Ukraine faisait partie depuis le 18 eme siècle . Elle fera tout pour y parvenir.
La situation chaotique en Ukraine, liée au désir de Trump de responsabiliser plus fortement les pays européens au sujet de leurs armées nous amène à la situation de réarmement actuel. Hormis les pays frontaliers de la Russie, les autres ressentent moins l’esprit de guerre car il y a peu de faits concrets qui l’entretiennent. Par exemple, en Belgique, hormis des survols de drones inconnus au dessus de sites sensibles, je ne vois pas de problème actuel avec la Russie. Pour convaincre une population qu’un risque de guerre existe, il faudrait plus d’incidents majeurs. Et je rappelle que dans le passé, personne en Europe de se souciait vraiment de l’Ukraine lorsqu’elle faisait partie du giron russe.
Des gens comme Macron et Steimer , en difficulté dans leur propre pays, jouent peut être aussi la carte de la peur de la guerre pour se donner une existence politique. A voir.
I find the diatribe ridiculous. The lack of acknowleding Europe's expansionist drive for a few decades long and the Geopolitical impact thereoff, is dishonest. The role of Europe in Ukraine's maidan, directly leading to the war is again ignored. Supporting the war, and doing everything it can, to scupper peace initiatives, paired with this call to militarize is clear. Europe wants war with Russia. Russia and surrounding countries with riches and vast territory are attrative to expand into. These calls are in preparation of it. The West always create enemies to hide its geopolitical aims. With the US no longer a guarantee via Nato, Europe is using Russofobia to militarize.
Russia wants a multipolar world where Russia is one of the leading powers. That does not fit Europe's agenda. What Europe wont say, is that they need to counter the US. But... Russia and China are currently the "chosen" ones as enemies. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Siria etc etc. all turned into enemies before destruction. France pushing for the bombing of Libya. France active in North African and Libyan wars.
But the threat is not Russia. The threat to Europe is from within and that is ignored and papered over. I think already to late to fix. Long before a war with Russia the "citizens" of France and Europe will turn on each other. It is already happening.
When your argument was destroyed by Richard above, you just chose to repeat it. Odd. One would almost think you were here to stir up sh*t rather than advance a defensible position.
Simly because your view is not nuanced. You see only one side of Geopolitics at play. Russias security concerns for decades are simply whiped off the table as if it does not exist. Ukrains nationalistic rassism prior to the current war, denied Nato’s proven encroachment is denied. The Wests role in the Maidan denied. European leaders currently on a daily basis make calls for war. That you denie. Pushing a war narrative to brainwash Europeans into an unneccessary war. That is denied. Putins statement that he will sign a peace agreement with the EU ignored. You warmongers have no idea what real war is. You dont advocate for peace. War is your mantra. And a simplistic one-sided war cry.
Death knell for the parasitic EU … it can command no loyalty … let’s see what history brings now that DJT has dumped the Ukraine war on Europe … Western Europe without militaries, with their borders wide open … EU still exhausting everybody with their prattle about the weather and net zero!
I think Europe is quite divided in terms of militarization and national defense. Eastern European countries, especially Poland, Finland and the Baltic states, have never trusted Russia. In recent decades, their view has been confirmed by the Chechen Wars, the Russian assaults against Georgia, the 2014 attack on Ukraine and the invasion of Moldova. But Western Europe has ignored all of this for decades, mostly due to economic reasons. Today, the population in Western Europe is incapable of imagining actual confrontation with Russia. Both the far right and the far left are instrumentalizing these fears in the same way ("Russia is not our enemy, it’s America / the European Union!") for their own political agenda, dividing public opinion even more. And of course, there are already countries like Hungary actively supporting China and Russia, sabotaging the EU from within.
Occam's Razor: Europe is not remilitarizing. They are still buying Russian natural gas nearly 4 years into the war!
A few artillery factories in Poland don't count. Most of Germany's expanded defense budget will be rerouted to environmental initiatives or only purely defensive installations -- not increasing "lethality".
Come to Finland. Over 70% of the population is ready to defend the country, according to surveys. We never stopped military service. We still have bunkers, and a larger artillery than France or Germany. There is a reason for that.
What about those who have come via mass legal or illegal immigration? Do they have the required spirit to defend Europe? Do they want to sacrifice their children?
It's best not to worry about them when the other 95% don't have the will to live.
Dinner with friends last wk & we broached this subect - how (or will?) France rearm and recalibrate to new threats. I wish I'd had the knowledge and eloquence of this essay. But that night I did recall a book by a French author, Marc Bloch (sp?), titled "Strange Defeat", about the failure of both the French military and political class in WWII. I would highly recommend as a primary resource in understanding how political will - or lack thereof - affects military and strategic preparation. That, and the corrosive effects of personal ambition and political jockeying within an officer class.
Yes - was just thinking about France in WW2. Glad this essay brings out an issue we don’t think about much in the States.
Are France's greatest threats without (e.g. Russia) or within?
May be equal. From within, will there be enough bodies for military? Will more recent migrants buy into defending the country and its ideals? And will the populous accept sacrifices for greater good (i.e. reallocating any social spending to military spending)?
The public discourse in the UK appears pretty much identical. Ukraine is a problem "over there" which from the UK perspective is viewed as an irritant as opposed to anything more serious. The governing Labour party treats it as an undesirable line item in the budget (less money for hospitals, public sector etc). I don't see anyone with any stature describing the severity of the situation and even beginning to articulate the measures that need to be taken.
"Modern European societies value somewhat flat structures, negotiation, and social equality. Militarization depends on hierarchy, command, and discipline"
Israel is a great example of a flat, raucously democratic and argumentative society with an extraordinary military capability (as confirmed by Hezbollah and the Ayatollahs).
What makes Israel successful is an extraordinary sense of civic responsibility and solidarity, seen, for example, in the 130% response to the military call-up on Oct 7: tens of thousands simply showed up at their units, ready to serve, without having receiving call-up papers.
Europe has nothing like this and will not have an effective military as long as its recruits only move forward after they're kicked in the behind.
I find the diatribe ridiculous. The lack of acknowleding Europe's expansionist drive for a few decades long and the Geopolitical impact thereoff, is dishonest. The role of Europe in Ukraine's maidan, directly leading to the war is again ignored. Supporting the war, and doing everything it can, to scupper peace initiatives, paired with this call to militarize is clear. Europe wants war with Russia. Russia and surrounding countries with riches and vast territory are attrative to expand into. These calls are in preparation of it. The West always create enemies to hide its geopolitical aims. With the US no longer a guarantee via Nato, Europe is using Russofobia to militarize.
Russia wants a multipolar world where Russia is one of the leading powers. That does not fit Europe's agenda. What Europe wont say, is that they need to counter the US. But... Russia and China are currently the "chosen" ones as enemies. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Siria etc etc. all turned into enemies before destruction. France pushing for the bombing of Libya. France active in North African and Libyan wars.
But the threat is not Russia. The threat to Europe is from within and that is ignored and papered over. I think already to late to fix. Long before a war with Russia the "citizens" of France and Europe will turn on each other. It is already happening.
Think rationally for a moment. Why would France want war with Russia. Why?? Germany had a fantastic, reliable trade relationship with Russia and opposed Ukraine joining NATO, why would it want war?? The UK was in absolutely no state to do anything post Brexit, post-Covid and vulnerable to price shocks. Come on almost all of these countries wanted the minimum spent on the military and the maximum spent on welfare, you can hardly pretend they prepared for this conflict 30 countries apparently 'secretly' wanted. Also, you forget this is a clear pattern Russia attacked Estonia, it annexed Georgia, it annexed Crimea, it supported the Donbas War and then it invaded. It's a very obvious pattern to its neighbours.
Read the comments of EU leaders and tell me again they dont want war.
Russia has been preparing for peer conflict for decades. Why do you think they've invested in hypersonic missiles? They've attached Estonia in '07, annexed Georgia in '08, annexed Crimea in '14, fuelled the Donbas war 14-22, and then made a fuel scale attack on Ukraine. Watch Russian news - go and do it - they are frequently simulating nuclear attacks on Europe. Read Medevdev's tweets. It's all plain as day. Now they are sending drones across the NATO border and doing violent sabotaging operations.
So now tell me. As a responsible leader do you tell your people that it's best just to ignore it and invest in welfare, hoping everything will below over or perhaps tell them that Russia has broken every promise since the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 and make them aware of the reality that we currently have no defence (at all) to mass drone strikes and make sure people understand the reality.
That is not the same as WANTING war. The people wanting war are currently making it.
Context which you deny makes any debate impossible. All conflicts have two sides, always.
We Brits have our story. We have also sent 290,000 to Iraq and Afghanistan over 20 years. I used to believe it was part of a common venture which for good or bad, was ungirded by responsibility, loyalty and the (sometimes misguided) courage to do the right thing.
I now understand things different. These conflicts were one-way (US-led, we should certainly not imagine they would reciprocate support for the UK with the Falklands) and consisted mostly of overwhelming force against small opponents. I now realise that since the Korean War the US has actually lost the will to strand up to peers. It avoided it during the Cold War, at the height of US power in wouldn't prevent the Georgia annexation, it was happy to expand NATO when there was no risk, but then balked any perception of conflict with Russia in 2022, preferring to flea the scene rapidly, now the first island chain with China looks lost.
It's going to take a big realignment in thinking among the European powers, who were cowed by a perception of a world dominated by nukes, but as much as the US mocks the Europeans attempting to build a force to oppose Russia and stepping up our military aid - it is the Europeans who are summing up the courage to take on a big nuclear power. Not the US.
Europe is trying to rebuild a military deterrent while publicly pretending that doing so carries no profound social cost. The general stated the obvious, unavoidable truth that effective deterrence requires a society to visibly accept the potential price of using its military. The backlash proves Europe's political class is unwilling to have that honest conversation with its public. This gap between strategic necessity and political rhetoric is itself a critical vulnerability. Russia doesn't assess Europe by its defense budgets alone, but by its perceived will to use force.
Right now, the will is in question.
Exceptional analysis. The tension between technocratic universalism and the hierachical demands of military culture is something most discussions miss completely. What really stands out is how this isn't just about hardware or budgets but the deeper incompatibilty between a society built on negotiation and one that requires command structures to function under existential pressure.
La Russie rêve de recréer l’ancien empire russe dont l’Ukraine faisait partie depuis le 18 eme siècle . Elle fera tout pour y parvenir.
La situation chaotique en Ukraine, liée au désir de Trump de responsabiliser plus fortement les pays européens au sujet de leurs armées nous amène à la situation de réarmement actuel. Hormis les pays frontaliers de la Russie, les autres ressentent moins l’esprit de guerre car il y a peu de faits concrets qui l’entretiennent. Par exemple, en Belgique, hormis des survols de drones inconnus au dessus de sites sensibles, je ne vois pas de problème actuel avec la Russie. Pour convaincre une population qu’un risque de guerre existe, il faudrait plus d’incidents majeurs. Et je rappelle que dans le passé, personne en Europe de se souciait vraiment de l’Ukraine lorsqu’elle faisait partie du giron russe.
Des gens comme Macron et Steimer , en difficulté dans leur propre pays, jouent peut être aussi la carte de la peur de la guerre pour se donner une existence politique. A voir.
I find the diatribe ridiculous. The lack of acknowleding Europe's expansionist drive for a few decades long and the Geopolitical impact thereoff, is dishonest. The role of Europe in Ukraine's maidan, directly leading to the war is again ignored. Supporting the war, and doing everything it can, to scupper peace initiatives, paired with this call to militarize is clear. Europe wants war with Russia. Russia and surrounding countries with riches and vast territory are attrative to expand into. These calls are in preparation of it. The West always create enemies to hide its geopolitical aims. With the US no longer a guarantee via Nato, Europe is using Russofobia to militarize.
Russia wants a multipolar world where Russia is one of the leading powers. That does not fit Europe's agenda. What Europe wont say, is that they need to counter the US. But... Russia and China are currently the "chosen" ones as enemies. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Siria etc etc. all turned into enemies before destruction. France pushing for the bombing of Libya. France active in North African and Libyan wars.
But the threat is not Russia. The threat to Europe is from within and that is ignored and papered over. I think already to late to fix. Long before a war with Russia the "citizens" of France and Europe will turn on each other. It is already happening.
When your argument was destroyed by Richard above, you just chose to repeat it. Odd. One would almost think you were here to stir up sh*t rather than advance a defensible position.
It is a bot...
Simly because your view is not nuanced. You see only one side of Geopolitics at play. Russias security concerns for decades are simply whiped off the table as if it does not exist. Ukrains nationalistic rassism prior to the current war, denied Nato’s proven encroachment is denied. The Wests role in the Maidan denied. European leaders currently on a daily basis make calls for war. That you denie. Pushing a war narrative to brainwash Europeans into an unneccessary war. That is denied. Putins statement that he will sign a peace agreement with the EU ignored. You warmongers have no idea what real war is. You dont advocate for peace. War is your mantra. And a simplistic one-sided war cry.
Death knell for the parasitic EU … it can command no loyalty … let’s see what history brings now that DJT has dumped the Ukraine war on Europe … Western Europe without militaries, with their borders wide open … EU still exhausting everybody with their prattle about the weather and net zero!
I think Europe is quite divided in terms of militarization and national defense. Eastern European countries, especially Poland, Finland and the Baltic states, have never trusted Russia. In recent decades, their view has been confirmed by the Chechen Wars, the Russian assaults against Georgia, the 2014 attack on Ukraine and the invasion of Moldova. But Western Europe has ignored all of this for decades, mostly due to economic reasons. Today, the population in Western Europe is incapable of imagining actual confrontation with Russia. Both the far right and the far left are instrumentalizing these fears in the same way ("Russia is not our enemy, it’s America / the European Union!") for their own political agenda, dividing public opinion even more. And of course, there are already countries like Hungary actively supporting China and Russia, sabotaging the EU from within.
Honestly, they made their bed and now they can sleep in it. The gall is rather amazing.
Occam's Razor: Europe is not remilitarizing. They are still buying Russian natural gas nearly 4 years into the war!
A few artillery factories in Poland don't count. Most of Germany's expanded defense budget will be rerouted to environmental initiatives or only purely defensive installations -- not increasing "lethality".