- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 6,774
- Reaction score
- 4,105
- Location
- 🇦🇹 Austria 🇦🇹
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
The reason they will not do so is that they spend the money on single payer healthcare systems and other entitlements and rely on US military logistics.Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
The reason they will not do so is that they spend the money on single payer healthcare systems and other entitlements and rely on US military logistics.
Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
More Fourth Reich nonsense from Adolf Land .Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
Do you really want to see the money required to do that shifted from current planned priorities to the MIC? Do you really expect the MIC dependent on US defense-intelligence spending to sit idly by while US spending is slashed using this proposal as justification?About time. Germany, Italy, France, Spain, England, Belgium, greece, Poland, and the rest should be able to combine a force to adequately repeal the ruskies with out having to look over here.
Belgium tried to claim neutrality in WWII. It didn't help them.Excluding neutral countries like Austria, Switzerland, Ireland and Sweden, it would mean ca. 200.000 troops from Germany and Turkey each, 150.000 each from the UK, France, Italy, 100.000 each from Spain and Poland and the rest from the smaller countries.
Finland might join it and NATO too, as recent surveys have shown, maybe even Sweden.
Austria, Switzerland and Ireland might remain militarily neutral for sure, but might contribute financially.
Two great armies within one another's gunsights. What could possibly go wrong?Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
Do you really want to see the money required to do that shifted from current planned priorities to the MIC? Do you really expect the MIC dependent on US defense-intelligence spending to sit idly by while US spending is slashed using this proposal as justification?
Would it not be cheaper and more effective to subject the Putin led oligarchy to the economic treatment Venezuela has been experiencing
after getting serious about negotiating a deal resulting in restoration of Iranian petroleum exports and production and pressuring Israel to
stop offering political and financial refuge to Putin's oligarchs?
Would it not results be quicker by committing to as near as a total economic boycott of Russia as possible than by attempting to build
European forces superiority on the European continent. China's growth is slowing and cannot offset what Europe, Japan, and the U.S. have
the potential to do to Russia, economically? Simply make their exports the imports of last resort and stop assisting Russia's oligarchs, seizing
control of their assets wherever possible and impeding their ability to transact internationally and they may be influenced to solve the world's "Putin problem".
February 18, 2022France to pump €2bn into EDF as energy group grapples with production woes
State-controlled company plans €2.5bn rights issue to redress financeswww.ft.com
" The French government is set to pump more than €2bn into EDF in an effort to restore the state-controlled energy group’s finances, which are suffering due to nuclear reactor outages and production declines just as it gears up for investment in new plants. EDF, which on Friday reported a rise in profits and revenues for 2021, faces big setbacks this year. Its electricity production forecasts have dropped to their lowest point in three decades, with five of its 56 nuclear reactors offline as it inspects flaws in pipe weldings. The company will also shoulder some of the cost of government measures to cap electricity bills for households and businesses this year at 4 per cent — a move that senior managers had argued against, people familiar with the matter said..."
The rise and fall of fracking in Europe - The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com › sustainable-business › sep
Sep 29, 2016 — After years of early hype, shale gas companies appear to have lost hope of an energy revolution in most countries in Europe.
We already have that. It's called NATO. Why do you want to reinvent the wheel?Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
Why would the U.S., aside from Trump, want that?About time for Europe to be100% responsible for their own defense their own freedoms. Let them pony up 100%. You can’t tell me that they couldn’t combine their economic might and become a counter to the ruskies.
On average their healthcare costs those nations close to 50% of what the US spends pp, so I doubt that is the issue. In fact, if they spent the money they are saving (vs the US) on healthcare on extra military they could have huge defence forces.The reason they will not do so is that they spend the money on single payer healthcare systems and other entitlements and rely on US military logistics.
The reason they will not do so is that they spend the money on single payer healthcare systems and other entitlements and rely on US military logistics.
I wonder if any volume and intensity of verifiable facts could ever reduce the thoroughness of LetsGoBrandon's RWE radicalization.On average their healthcare costs those nations close to 50% of what the US spends pp, so I doubt that is the issue. In fact, if they spent the money they are saving (vs the US) on healthcare on extra military they could have huge defence forces.
Yes.
The 600 or so million Europeans living in democratic Europe must create a joint military now and place 1-2 million soldiers and equipment on standby along the Russian/Belarus border from Finland to Bulgaria/Greece, if not in Turkey and the Caucasus countries too.
This would show Putin who has the longer dick.
Those countries all spend a smaller share of GDP on healthcare than the US. They could still afford more military spending if they thought the need arose.The reason they will not do so is that they spend the money on single payer healthcare systems and other entitlements and rely on US military logistics.
You just proved my point. Thanks to the US footing the biggest share of the bill for NATO, those countries can let their own military spending slide.Those countries all spend a smaller share of GDP on healthcare than the US. They could still afford more military spending if they thought the need arose.
It is very that the NATO alliance depends heavily on American input. Take that away and you’d see those countries spend more; even those who are not members benefit peripherally and would be forced to expand their militaries if America was no longer a factor and they still fear Russia.
With the exception of Medicare, Medicaid, and government contributing to the cost of healthcare for the indigent, It's primarily US citizens spending healthcare dollars, all of which has nothing to do with the budgets of nations with single payer healthcare systems. They can in most cases barely afford those systems, however they are only able to due to the US covering the lions share of costs for NATO. If they had to spend seriously for their own defense, they could not afford those bloated single payer healthcare systems.On average their healthcare costs those nations close to 50% of what the US spends pp, so I doubt that is the issue. In fact, if they spent the money they are saving (vs the US) on healthcare on extra military they could have huge defence forces.
Yawn.....I wonder if any volume and intensity of verifiable facts could ever reduce the thoroughness of LetsGoBrandon's RWE radicalization.
Those pacifist attitudes would disappear if they had to seriously budget for their own defense. Even the USA was pacifist in the lead up to WW2. The attack on Pearl Harbor changed that.No, healthcare spending has nothing to do with it.
It has to do with the fact that we Western Europeans have become quite non-chauvinist and pacifist the past 80 years and most of us regular citizens and politicians shiver at the fact of arming ourselves or spend more than 1% of GDP on the military (Russia & US: 4%).
Another thing is that after 80 years and EU integration measures, there still is no USE, because people in the 40+ European countries do not want it and continue to like their nations over a supranational entity.
Ireland may profess neutrality but we’ve been letting the Americans refuel at Shannon for decades and even during the war, we were more allied than axis.Excluding neutral countries like Austria, Switzerland, Ireland and Sweden, it would mean ca. 200.000 troops from Germany and Turkey each, 150.000 each from the UK, France, Italy, 100.000 each from Spain and Poland and the rest from the smaller countries.
Finland might join it and NATO too, as recent surveys have shown, maybe even Sweden.
Austria, Switzerland and Ireland might remain militarily neutral for sure, but might contribute financially.
I agreed with part of it: NATO depends on the US. America depends on the alliance as well for a foothold in Europe to stop it going to shit.You just proved my point. Thanks to the US footing the biggest share of the bill for NATO, those countries can let their own military spending slide.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?