- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
Should France and the UK share their nuclear weapons with the rest of Europe?
You must log in or register to comment.
Yes, they should. Nuclear deterrence has worked very well so far and the US’s nuclear shield played a very important role in keeping the European NATO countries safe from Russia. France and the UK can’t afford to leave their allies vulnerable like that.
Far right is neck in neck with liberals for couple of months now in UK and France according to polls. Both have single mandate voting districts so it’s a tossup if they won’t have their own Trumps few years down the line unless they cancel elections like in Romania. Not a great outlook, not that great of a plan to rely on wishful thinking. Culturally close countries (Nordics, Baltics states, Eastern Europe) should be working on their nuclear programs ASAP.
Le Pen has already said, that she does not support French nuclear sharing with Germany. So really the only real option for Germany to get relibale nukes is to not share them, but own them.
Doubt that’s gonna happen, there would be huge public opposition in Germany
Considering WW2 and nazis getting 20% in the last election, we Germans shouldn’t get our own nukes. It’s fine if we get shared ones from our defense partners, but the moment the nazis take over again, the nukes should be gone or deactivated.
As if it had anything to do with nationality per se. The truth is that people in general just suck, and those who see themselves as exceptional and who seek power at any cost tend to suck the most.
The nazis would not have 20% if we have nuclear weapons. Putin uses cyber war to threatening and scaring the German population. The Germans are scared of being one of Putins target. This anxiety would not be there if we had these weapons. Putin knows he cannot use his nuclear weapons against countries which also own nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, the German population is not really the brightest on earth, because they fell into Putins narrative.
Putin’s internet-based propaganda runs in most Western countries, no matter whether they have a nuclear arsenal or not. They were/are very successful in the US, the country with the largest nuclear arsenal of them all. Fear of Russian nuclear attacks is only a small part of it.
Besides, Germany does have US nuclear weapons stationed within its borders, and until November last year, they would have been at the ready. Yet, Putinophilia was trending nonetheless.
It’s a hot take the nazis are so successful again out of fear of putin. Living in Germany, I don’t get the impression Putin scares anyone here at all. We’re worried about our nation friends who share a border with russia and belarus and that’s the full extend of Putins influence on our emotions.
I think the nazis reached 20% because they are actually nazis. They offer stupid poppulist impossible solutions for common or often entirely perceived as common problems. They managed to unite a big base using social media, making it okay to come out as a nazi again, which before would have got you shunned or even beaten up. Now, all that happens is a few left protesters, who will get beaten by the police, confirming it’s now better to be a nazi.
Living in Germany, I don’t get the impression Putin scares anyone here at all.
That is clearly wrong to be honest.
“Ich habe große Angst vor einem Krieg!” Das antworten 39 Prozent der Befragten des ZDF-Politbarometers im November 2023 auf die Frage, ob sie in Sorge sind vor einem militärischen Konflikt in Europa mit Beteiligung der Bundeswehr. Jeder zwölfte Befragte empfindet sogar “sehr große Sorge”.
Russlands Angriffskrieg in der Ukraine macht vielen Millionen Menschen in Deutschland Angst vor einem Dritten Weltkrieg. Wie eine Forsa-Umfrage vom Montag im Auftrag von RTL und ntv ergab, befürchten 69 Prozent sogar, dass die Nato in den Konflikt hineingezogen wird, weil der russische Präsident Wladimir Putin ein Mitglied des westlichen Verteidigungsbündnisses angreifen könnte
In einer Umfrage des Markt- und Sozialforschungsinstitut INSA im Auftrag der Bild, gaben 46 Prozent der Befragten an, dass ihnen ein möglicher Russland-Angriff auf Deutschland Sorgen mache. Dabei schätzten Linken-Wähler und CDU-Wähler die Kriegsgefahr höher ein als Sympathisanten der neu gegründeten Wagenknecht-Partei und der AfD.
Being worried about war is a different thing than worrying about losing.
EVERYBODY GETS A NUKE! ＼(ﾟ∀ﾟ)／
Yaaay!
Which UK party are you referring to when you say “liberals”?
Labour, Tories. Both keen on free market economics and austerity. If speaking broadly about EU politics then S&D, EPP and RE are just different faces of neoliberalism. All of them aspire to be perceived as centrist just so that their inhumane economic policies are seen as balanced.
And I assume that “far right” is UKIP? So you’re saying that UKIP is neck-and-neck with Labour and Conservatives combined?
Single mandate voting districts produce very unpredictable results when there’s a tie this close. Add few more percent to anyone and things can flip immediately. You might not even need to because polling has become increasingly unreliable when it comes to far right. Some say this is Russian influence but I’m worried that we are simply out of touch with reality.
Right, but I’m just trying to get a feel for how big UKIP support is at the moment - but this sounds like it’s at the level of either Labour or the Conservatives (and presumably Labour, which I think is still far larger than the Convervatives?), right?
Correct. It’s pretty alarming (Reform is mostly ex-UKIP people):
https://bsky.app/profile/europeelects.bsky.social/post/3ljvdnhsfnk2d
https://bsky.app/profile/europeelects.bsky.social/post/3ljnuuefi2y2k
https://bsky.app/profile/europeelects.bsky.social/post/3ljlmhqdjnh2y
And brought the receipts :) Thanks! And ah yes, Reform is the current name, thanks.
Farrage won nearly half of the tory vote. He’s only growing in polling.
How does this pen out? If those weapons are meant to be used defencively, they have to be second-strike weapons.
This means that Germany needs nuclear submarines because everything else could be hit by Russian nuclear bombs in the assumed Russian attack.
Preparing nuclear weapons on fighter jets only helps to make Germany a target.
France and UK rightfully ask for support for their nuclear weapons program but there is no need to be further involved than financing it.
Germany has nuclear-capable subs. There was a whole thing about exporting subs to Israel because they might put nukes on them.
Nuclear-powered is a whole other thing. Type 212s can’t dive as long as nuclear subs but it’s definitely sufficient (18 days is publicly known, they probably can do way more), and on the upside they’re way less detectable than nuclear subs which are loud AF due to being powered by steam engines on angry steroids.
The Dolphin submarines for Israel are built bz Germany, but they are different because they’re are to launch nukes. German submarines aren’t equipped with the same size launch tubes. Germany could build such subs though.
Having Nuclear weapons is making your country (and it’s cities) a target in case of a nuclear war. It can act as a deterrence yes, but it is an all in move.
Oh and better not to give Germany nuclear weapons, you guys learned what they did in the past when they had a little more power than normal.
In case of a nuclear war everyone is a target.
This is not how it works. For example as it is, German cities in a case of war with Russia are not targets, because Germany has not nuclear weapons (like Ukraine, but Ukraine is not a Nato member, so no protection with nuclear weapons from Artikel 5).
I don’t think that’s necessarily true. And surely the Ukraine war shows that nukes are useful for deterrence. Biden was reluctant to give things to Ukraine (tanks and planes) because he feared escalation from Russia - i.e. the use of tactical nukes.
If Ukraine had nukes, maybe they wouldn’t have been invaded.
Looking at the US and Israel I feel like this is a general issue with power tripping people. But looking at our current political climate… I have to agree with you: better keep them away from us :D
UK has American-supplied and maintained nukes so maybe not a great long-term prospect?
No it doesn’t, only the rockets are from a shared pool the war heads are entirely British.
That’s still a problem at least in the medium term, because the US control the supply of spare parts for the missiles.
(I won’t mention the possibility of a remote kill switch, because having that on an SLBM would render it useless by design, I hope the UK ruled that out when buying Trident)
Would a remote killswitch for something aboard a submarine even be technically feasible? Radio waves don’t travel through water very well
The missiles have to travel through the air and even space eventually, after launch.
