ChuckeRearmed
Member
Except Canada has been leaning that way for years. And USA administration has done nothinh to prevent that, becoming more and more unamerican just like a lot of western countries.
Last edited:
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Monitoring the situation in Iran
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
ForAcademicPurposes
Member
What the actual F
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I can largely agree with you about that because, historically speaking, such developments are inherently slow and difficult. They should be measured in centuries, not years.
However, the Bush administration still decided to get involved by invading and establishing a significant occupation force. Once that happened, the U.S. assumed responsibility for determining the outcome. I don't think any "magical" transformations would have been possible, not at all, but that doesn't mean numerous and avoidable mistakes weren't made in the process.
It certainly didn't help when everyone's attention rather quickly wandered off to Iraq. Arguably, that led to the worst of both worlds: not enough was invested to consolidate a new status quo in Afghanistan and yet it was still too much of a drain for the American public to tolerate in the long run. That's part of why I called it "half-assed" above. Therefore, leaving was painful yet necessary and the return of the Taliban was seemingly inevitable.
Last edited:
Meicyn
Member
I'm sorry man, but it's evident that you don't fundamentally understand the problem. You may have glanced over the article and thrown some smartass commentary, but this stuff is deadly serious to me.
When you're dealing with an adversary, you have your own technology stack pitted against theirs. NATO has artillery, Russia has artillery. NATO has fighters and bombers, Russia has fighters and bombers. NATO has soldiers, Russia has soldiers. Great. But NATO forces don't have an answer to current battlefield realities with regard to drones. They know about drones and have some idea about them, but they haven't really grasped the severity of the situation. Drones are a force multiplier that go beyond merely augmenting a military unit. This is why there is so much emphasis on those ten Ukrainians.
From the same article:
Article: Estonian officers said the purpose of the drill was to force partners to confront vulnerabilities before a real conflict does. The findings suggest that while NATO has studied Ukraine's battlefield experience, many of its armies have yet to fully internalize the operational consequences of drone-driven war.
Estonia gets it. As do a handful of other European countries, primarily the ones in proximity to Russia. But my previous post is with regard to the EU as a whole.
By the way, I didn't say they destroyed two entire battalions either. War is not about killing your enemy, it is about defeating them. The distinction is important, because wiping out entire battalions when there isn't a clear military objective in mind is a waste of resources. The objective for the drone operators was to make those two battalions functionally irrelevant, and they accomplished that in mere hours. Actually, let me quote it again since you're downplaying it:
Article: According to the WSJ, the results were stark. In one scenario, NATO formations attempting an offensive maneuver were quickly identified and neutralized in the simulation by small adversary teams operating reconnaissance and strike drones.
Using Ukraine's Delta battlefield-management system, a group of around 10 Ukrainians mock-destroyed 17 armored vehicles and conducted dozens of simulated strikes within hours.
This is a massive problem. You don't see the seriousness of ten Ukrainians rendering two entire battalions as combat ineffective in mere hours? This kind of vulnerability needs to be addressed, with immense haste. Russia may go bankrupt by this summer if current trends continue, but who knows what the future may hold? Downplaying the seriousness of this situation is part of why the EU is collectively still twiddling their thumbs.
-----
No, he was talking about the lack of capabilities in general, including nukes. Here's the exact quote:Rutte was talking about lack of nuclear arsenal in many countries and I agree - Europe should arm itself with nukes to have the ultimate deterrent against Russia.
And all armies are weak vs. drones compared to Russia and Ukraine, drone warfare is a new thing that started and developed since 2022. That's why changes to NATO armies are happening:
Poland signs contract for anti-drone system in wake of Russian incursions
notesfrompoland.com
Article: Without the U.S., defending Europe would cost a fortune, he added. "For Europe, if you really want to go it alone … forget that you can ever get there with 5 percent," Rutte said, referencing a pledge by NATO allies to ramp up their defense spending to 5 percent of GDP by 2035. "It will be 10 percent," he argued, and cost "billions and billions of euros" to replace America's nuclear deterrent.
The billions and billions of euros would be the expense for the nuclear deterrent angle i.e. more nukes and ballistic missile defense, separate from the 10% annually on defense spending just for the ability to have a fully capable standing Army on par with what the US brings.
Also, just want to note that I recognize that Poland takes the situation a lot more seriously. Just like Finland does as well, and a few others. Being in proximity to danger definitely helps with the political climate internal to those nations. But I see countries like Italy and Spain just taking their geographic locations for granted, at the detriment of their fellow EU members. They had to be dragged, kicking and screaming the entire time, just to reach the 2% baseline expected of them as NATO members.
Hell, contributions to Ukraine's defense are a separate allocation and the disparity is stark. Denmark is spending almost 3% of their GDP supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia. Meanwhile Italy and Spain combined has allocated less of their GDP towards the effort than Japan. JAPAN. We're dealing with the largest major conflict in Europe since WW2 and Japan is contributing more to Europe's survival than numerous European nations.
Bilateral aid to Ukraine by country GDP 2025| Statista
Denmark and Estonia had the highest ratio of bilateral support to Ukraine to donor GDP as of February 2025. Poland ranked eighth by GDP share of aid to Ukraine.
www.statista.com
Ah yes, the Jewnihilator.
Last edited:
ForAcademicPurposes
Member
Fixed.
TheAtomicPile
Member
Looks like somebody is itching for a new round of tariffs.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
In case of Starmer he probably is waiting for a black bag
Smiggs
Member
How's the general mood over there among your friends and family regarding all this military buildup?
Zathalus
Member
ASML, Airbus, a dozen automotive companies, SAP, LVMH, Nestle, Siemens, Shell, Roche, Nova Nordisk, plus plenty more.
European companies do just fine in hard industry, pharma, energy, luxury goods, automotive, shipbuilding, arms manufacturing, aerospace, and precision manufacturing.
Europe lacks in major Semiconductor and cloud computing. Its a stupid internet meme that Europe doesn't produce brought on because the EU dares to impose rules and fines on companies that do business in its market, something the USA is completely unable to even bother doing anymore. The amount fined against American companies over the past decade is less than a percent spent on public budgets by EU member states over the same period.
The first clue would have been that Europe is America's largest trading partner, bit hard to be that if you didn't produce anything.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I am talking about the EU regulation. They don't produce, just there to fine companies and collect for their welfare states.
0neAnd0nly
Member
LimanimaPT
Member
"Everyone that doesn't like my Supreme Leader Trump is far left."
The embodiment of the meme!
winjer
Member
Sorry to be that guy, but the Maginot line was never meant to be impenetrable.
It was stated officially that it's goal was to last 30 days. Enough time to hold the Germans, to mobilize the French army.
And it would have worked if French General Charles Huntziger had not abandoned the line, exposing the whole front.
To this day, there is a bit of an argument about whether he was just very incompetent, or a traitor who let the Germans through.
He also was a part of the Vichy government, who collaborated with the Nazi regime.
Zathalus
Member
Why would the EU regulations produce anything? European companies produce plenty, the EU regulations are there to enforce compliance with local laws. Some stuff has been overregulated, that is true, hence some laws have been paired back, but with anything the EU does the process is slow. The EU, by design, has to answer to all member states. And the amount collected is rather trivial when looking at the EU and member states budget.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You cut off the entire sentence I wrote and are shifting the conversation solely on EU states.
They collect off the fat of American companies without producing a thing other than overregulation to feed off said fat. I said what I said.
0neAnd0nly
Member
Nobody claimed that.
You made a claim. A ludicrous one at that. And then compared the US to NK/ Russia.
And you speak of the US like you aren't American. Which is fine, I just hope with that hubris that you aren't from one of those countries supporting Russia in the war by buying their oil
Control F "Supreme Leader" in here, and find how many people have said that. You are seeing Boogey-men of your own projections, friend.
Zathalus
Member
Why on earth would the European Commission, tasked with regulation, legislation, and the like produce anything? The FTC doesn't produce anything either, because the that is not the function of the agency to do so.
The European Commission budget over the past decade has been well over two trillion dollars. Member states bring that into the tens of trillions. Fines leveled against all American companies over the past decade comes to roughly twenty-five billion dollars. Less than 0.05% of the larger total.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
The comment is called a backhand. I'm not asking them to produce, and NO SHIT THEY DON'T. That's the point of the smarmy comment.
Just another (of many) welfare/taxation funnels. To the point they will use "patent troll" like tactics to achieve their fining goals of the future.
Last edited:
SirKicksalot
Member
My Sky Cards collection is booming with all these military transports flying above me lately. To the Middle East and back, all day and all night.
War preparation tracked in real time in Pokemon Go for planes is peak cyberpunk dystopia.
War preparation tracked in real time in Pokemon Go for planes is peak cyberpunk dystopia.
Tams
Member
I wish I'd known about this earlier. I live under a flight path and some pretty rare planes occasionally pass over.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
As long as the profit motive exists for war, I'm not confident that those in power have our best interests in mind when it comes to that topic, especially when it coincidentally comes at a time when their polling is bad and when they need to distract from bad press in other areas.
Wag the dog - Wikipedia
Similar threads
- Locked