EU is more populous with a similar GDP to USA. In what fantasy universe of yours could Belarus or Russia without nukes make even a dent in NATO (-USA)?
Let’s just say there has been a marked divergence in investment in defense capability and industry between the EU and the US, historically in general, but especially since 1991 or so.
Things are getting better, but we have lot of ground to cover before we are equal partners.
Doesn’t matter how EU measure up to USA, we are talking about a poor, tiny country and a Russia that is deep into a bloody war against Ukraine. If Russia can’t even beat one of the poorest European countries, how in the world would they threaten EU? Without nukes, it would be a steamroll in EU’s favour.
The illusion of Russia being a military powerhouse that can take on Europe is outdated by several years.
The reason Ukraine has done so well is because they have been trained and equipped by nato since 2014, those efforts were ramped up significantly when Russian actually invaded.
Yes, Europe could likely defend Ukraine but your point falls apart when you realize that Ukraine held Russia off when the USA was dumping money and equipment on them and when one party here stymied those efforts the battlefield shifted.
Yes. Europe could do it, however right now Europe isnt doing it and hasn’t been doing it without the USA being the biggest contributor and leader.
This is not some point of pride of me as a American, I wish we were able to spend more money domestically and I wish we could fight poverty and inequity and our schools being shit with this money. It is simply the nature of the world right now:
Yes, Europe could do it. But they aren’t right now.
EU is more populous with a similar GDP to USA. In what fantasy universe of yours could Belarus or Russia without nukes make even a dent in NATO (-USA)?
Just want to say France and UK have enough nukes for deterrence.
France alone fwiw.
Let’s just say there has been a marked divergence in investment in defense capability and industry between the EU and the US, historically in general, but especially since 1991 or so.
Things are getting better, but we have lot of ground to cover before we are equal partners.
Doesn’t matter how EU measure up to USA, we are talking about a poor, tiny country and a Russia that is deep into a bloody war against Ukraine. If Russia can’t even beat one of the poorest European countries, how in the world would they threaten EU? Without nukes, it would be a steamroll in EU’s favour.
The illusion of Russia being a military powerhouse that can take on Europe is outdated by several years.
The reason Ukraine has done so well is because they have been trained and equipped by nato since 2014, those efforts were ramped up significantly when Russian actually invaded.
Yes, Europe could likely defend Ukraine but your point falls apart when you realize that Ukraine held Russia off when the USA was dumping money and equipment on them and when one party here stymied those efforts the battlefield shifted.
Yes. Europe could do it, however right now Europe isnt doing it and hasn’t been doing it without the USA being the biggest contributor and leader.
This is not some point of pride of me as a American, I wish we were able to spend more money domestically and I wish we could fight poverty and inequity and our schools being shit with this money. It is simply the nature of the world right now:
Yes, Europe could do it. But they aren’t right now.
Unless I’ve missed something, this thread is about Belarus/Russia attacking EU, not about support for Ukraine.
Its an active example of the thing we’re talking about, on /c/ukraine
Example in argument for what though. That EU/NATO is incapable of protecting themselves without the US? It’s not comparable.