• magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As an American, I think my government has become WAY too inconsistent and unreliable. We might elect Trump again, ffs. America can’t be counted on to meet its NATO obligations anymore. Too many fascists are in positions of power and sympathize with Putin.

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It benefits everyone to have distributed defense. Work together, but be able to have a basic level of your own defense is vital.

    • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      1 year ago

      As an American, it’s 2023 we should never need weapons. Diplomacy should be the only option.

      • Dr. Bluefall@toast.ooo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately, many of our international contemporaries disagree. And as long as we do, we need something in case diplomacy fails.

      • Airazz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m sure russia would care a lot about your strongly worded letter if they decided to take Alaska back.

        • cloud@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          In the world we live in weapons are never used for defense but mostly for attack. We have even more reasons to ditch weapons in the world we live in rather than in an ideal world where world leaders aren’t corrupted politicians tripping on power

          • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What the fuck are you talking about?

            Ukraine is in a defensive war right now. Afghanistan was in a defensive war with the US, as was Iraq. WW2 most of Eastern Europe was in a defensive war with Germany.

            South Korea was in a defensive war with North Korea.

            Like I guess you’re right if you ignore all of history lol.

            • cloud@lazysoci.al
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You just tricked yourself. If they are in a defensive war like you said then there must also be an attacker. In all the cases you mentioned the faction attacking is armed with way more weapons being used for attack. This highlight exactly what i’m saying, which is that weapons are mostly made for attack not for defense.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              South Korea was in a defensive war with North Korea.

              In the same way the confederacy was in a defensive with the US, that is, sure, but in both cases the north was completely justified on liberatory grounds

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Diplomacy backed by what? “Diplomacy” with no leverage is ink on worthless paper, there needs to be some kind of reason anyone should listen to you.

      • WuTang @lemmy.ninja
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        As an American, , it’s 2023 we should never need weapons

        I fear, It is too deep in your culture and business.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d say more that it’s too shallow in everyone else’s. That’s why we’ve been leaning on them for all the scary tanks-and-bombs stuff.

  • zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Europe shouldn’t let it’s home-grown defence industries languish in the name of strategic cohesion. Europe has no domestic competition to the F-35, no cohesive military procurement strategy that rewards European businesses, and no mechanism to avoid the shitshow of being entirely dependent on US defence contractors for maintenance of key defence infrastructure.

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It also doesn’t have access to nearly as many raw materials as the United States does.

      I wish we’d all just calm down with the military spending, but I also understand when dealing with the USA it’s probably safer to not rely on then(us) to keep their(our) word

      • Grimpen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trump’s presidency certainly showed that the US is one election away from balking. I’m pretty sure that’s Putin’s plan in Ukraine now.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hope they have no competition to the F-35 because everyone’s been saying it’s a piece of shit for the last fifteen years.

      • Cynoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think the situation is more nuanced than that.

        Of course, the F-35 program was an incredibly expensive mess (litterally the most expensive weapon program of all time), because of conflicting specs, data leaks, political infighting, cost overruns which are the stuff of legend, etc… At some moments, there were certainly reasons to think the whole program would collapse on itself like wet tissue paper.

        But there are operational F35 now. 900+ as of 2023, which is 4 time more than the rest of Gen 5 fighters combined. And performance-wise, it is good, especially on the stealth & avionics parts. On the other side, the J-20 is largely unproven (probably a decent design, but not as good), and the Su-57 is a bunch of glorified prototypes.

        Now sure, cost is high, maintenance is time-consuming, availability somewhat below target, but it’s not particularly surprising for high-performance equipment. It may fall short of the ambition of the program on the cost part, but by itself it’s a dangerous and fully operational fighter.

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Anyone that says that has no idea what they’re talking about lol, the F-35 is completely unmatched in terms of multirole aircraft (along with the F-22 for a more fighter-focused role) and likely will only be surpassed with gen 6 aircraft.

        The SU-57 and practically any “modern” Russian aircraft are complete jokes that will fall apart with 2 seconds of airtime, and the J-20 and a majority of Chinese aircraft are cheap imitations of western (mainly American) technology which although much more capable than Russian aircraft, still fall behind a lot due to the corruption/authoritarianism in the Chinese military & government absolutely crumpling any hope of having actually competitive engineering & building.

        European aircraft aren’t even worth considering as competition either (although are far superior to the previous 2 nations’ mentioned, in most cases). Eurofighters are just another one of the projects European nations had that was plagued by issues from the fact that it was multiple parties with differing requirements/interests/goals trying to develop something. Gripens are less effective budget alternatives to American gen 4 fighters. Etc. Etc.

        The combined capabilities in technology, resources/wealth, and pool of experienced/intelligent engineers that the US has at its disposal makes it extremely hard to even dream of touching their capabilities when it comes to aircraft. Even with ground vehicles, the only real competition is Germany… but German armed forces are kind of in a state of disrepair right now, they’ve really neglected their military. It’s really only the defense companies like Rheinmetall and KNDS which can be pointed to as successful currently.

        Europe has a long way to go to compete with American military aircraft. Right now the US just has so much more experience and knowledge when it comes to fighter jets & more modern technologies present in said jets. It’d require a lot more investment in aerospace engineering and technology as a whole really, not just when it comes to aerospace. And Europe is currently even more desperate for tech workers than the US atm afaik.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          SAAB can’t go toe to toe with American jets, that’s true, and not what they were designed for. They’ll shoot an SU out of the sky before the SU knows they exist. They’re also still the only people to ever get a lock on a SR-71. As an American, I think they make some impressive jets. I even like their cars, but that’s a can of heartbreak.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We didn’t even roll it out for testing at VX squadrons until like 2018, and it’s biggest claim to infamy is just being on the R&D line for like 25 years.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          25 years that’s for chumps. FCAS is probably going to take at least 2040 to be ready. Airbus got the contract in 2017, that’s 23 years to 2040, and no of course it won’t be on schedule.

          Regarding the relative tech levels, though, Europe as a whole is simply not at the same schedule as the US. The F35 is replacing F16, F18, Harriers, from the 70s-80s, (which of course got upgrades), while the first Typhoon entered service in 2006.

    • cloud@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If defence industries mean the military complex then every country in the world should let that sector rotten and disappear.

  • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hey this is the guy who said that all Russian citizens living abroad should be surveiled and cited Japanese internment camps as precedent.

    “I can be sorry for these people, but at the same time when we look back, when the Second World War started, all the Japanese population living in the United States were under a strict monitoring regime as well,” said the Czech president. “That’s simply a cost of war.”

    He’s probably not doing this in the interests of peace, he’s probably doing it because he wants to launch a race war against the Mongolian horde and the US won’t play ball.

    • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s not advocating Europe separate from the US, but become a military superpower in its own right by having as large a military as the US. I am sure both Petr Pavel and Joe Biden agree on enforcing the “rules-based international order”.

      To think that the EU suddenly wants to ditch the US because they see them as a burden/dangerous is wishful thinking. In fact the only countries willing to do that might be France, because the local bourgeois don’t like to be limited by the US on pursuing their imperialist interests in Africa.

  • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yet on the other hand, he says EU should hurry up at expanding and integrate Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and others. He’s pro-NATO, he just thinks the EU should have more of the muscle. Either that or he’s just entirely full of shit.

    • Matengor@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yet on the other hand, he says EU should hurry up at expanding and integrate Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and others.

      I don’t understand how expanding EU is contradicting the headline. Care to explain?

      • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        EU/NATO are vassals and part of the same empire as America/UK. Basically, they’re all the same side. My point is that if you’re against NATO imperialism, this guy isn’t who you’re looking for. He just wants to be a bit less junior of a partner in the empire.

        Jokes on him and the EU though, they’re even more junior than ever before and getting further vassalized and de-industrialized and dependent on the USA.

  • Zimmy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lots of euro leaders have said the same over the years. The question as always is, what will you do about it?

    • variaatio@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well PESCO did get created. Denmark dropped their opt out from CSDP. Stuff like this moves slowly, specially upon there not being single hegemonic leader saying “We do this” and everyone else answering “Yes boss”. EU is herding catch and it makes everything move slowly.

  • spiderkle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Petr is Captain-Europa you can’t change my mind. This absolute chad of a man was an army GENERAL and also worked as Chairman of the NATO Military committee. He is now president of a European country and it looks like he’s the right person for the job to coordinate and implement the new defence-strategy for the whole EU. We need more people like him.

  • WuTang @lemmy.ninja
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    10x yes! Not only that, their reliance on US cloud and their interferences in UA/RU war for the US interests.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      For US interests… ya, Russia taking whatever country it wants in eastern Europe is only on the US interest. Has nothing to do with anyone else. NATO is all Nazis or something amirite?

  • jray4559@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Alright, Czech guy, are you gonna put your constituents’ money where your mouth is and help build up Europe’s defense force? Or are you not gonna change a thing because you know the US will continue to act as the world police?

    I think you know which one you’ll choose.

  • t�m@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m supposed no one is actively adding the us into the EU

          • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yugoslavia. Also a lot of eastern europe was coerced into joining the EU and NATO, and adopting bourgeois parliamentary democracy (IE capitalist dictatorship), and it wrecked a lot of their social welfare programs. They were forced to do so under threat of economic and military attack, because they can see what happens to countries that don’t accept the western model.

            • nxdefiant@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yugoslavia was engaging in some high crimes of their own. The whole thing was a clusterfuck on the NATO side of things, but Yugoslavia was hardly blameless.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Take your bets now everyone, we’ve got:

    • “stupidly tries to deepen ties with the cyberpunk oligarchy of China”,

    • “stupidly try to deepen ties with the impotent Mafia state in Russia”,

    • “stupidly try to deepen ties with petro-dictatorships/monarchies in MENA”,

    • “immediately double back because they realized that reducing reliance on the US means having to actually uphold their NATO spending requirements at a minimum to replace the US subsidizing their national defenses”,

    and least likely of all,

    • “actually do anything even remotely productive towards genuinely achieving strategic autonomy as a democratic superpower in the world independent of the US’ trajectory.”
  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Europe should have left NATO 30 years ago, when the first cold war ended, and forged its own path, instead of continuing to get its marching orders from the USA. Now Europe is getting lead into a second cold war by them.

  • tallwookie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    can the EU afford to reduce its reliance on American defense? like, seriously - they’d have to increase taxes and reduce a lot of the socialism. cant imagine that’d go over well

      • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can really tell when people are from America when they don’t know the difference between socialism and social welfare.

          • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            To put it simply: socialism is a specific political theory and social welfare is government assistance for basic needs (what basic means can vary from country to country, of course. There isn’t a country in Europe these days that is socialist. Now, socialism as a movement and as a political theory had influence on the European welfare states, but that doesn’t make them socialism.

            The misconception in America stems probably from people like Bernie Sanders that call themselves socialists and praise the social welfare systems of Europe, somewhere this merging in the minds of many Americans as synonyms instead of two distinct things.

      • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        To push back on this a little, the US did intentionally create an international division of labor after WW2, where europe and the countries it just defeated (Germany, Japan, Italy) would let the US handle the war industry / being the world’s cop / capitalist enforcers, so they could focus on consumer products, and serve as anti-communist bulwarks with high standards of living.

        European countries do save value by letting the US handle most of their defense, that they can then allocate to social services.

        Of course the majority of value, and their social welfare programs, still come from unequal exchange / a tax on imports on goods produced by super-exploited global south proles.

    • marsokod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Defense money is not lost, it pays people within your country. And you can even decide whether it goes to big corps or small companies.