Summary

European officials are preparing a multibillion-dollar defense package to bolster regional security and support Ukraine, announced by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock at the Munich Security Conference.

The package, potentially valued up to 700 billion euros, will fund military training, arms deliveries, and security guarantees amid concerns over Russian aggression and diminishing U.S. contributions to NATO.

The move follows calls for Europe to boost its own defense spending while U.S.-Russian talks, which exclude Ukraine and Europe, on ending the Ukraine conflict continue.

  • NotLemming@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 days ago

    I think we should give a nuke to Ukraine. One would be enough to stop all this BS.

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, I heard that. But I think that Ukraine couldn’t actually use the nukes so they were of limited use, like maybe they could have been repurposed or something. But yeah no doubt about it, Ukraine got screwed and now they’re finishing the job. I hope they sell their resources to anyone else, China or North Korea before they let Russia or the US have them.

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 days ago

      Them not being involved in the peace talks underlines again how indispensable nuclear weapons are, sadly.

      The DSA playing hopscotch with whose ally they are underlines how worthless a shared nuclear umbrella can be.

      So a grim lesson for Ukraine, Europe, Taiwan and pretty much any country with any border tensions, or anything another aspiring imperialist might find desireable: Get nukes, own them yourselfes, or risk being thrown aside or being steamrolled. Trump undoing decades of existential anti-proliferation work in mere days.

              • notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I thought you put it together already. Hamas’ willingness to sacrifice Palestinians is only second to IDF. They’d drop that bomb without hesitation if that meant the final defeat of Israel.

                • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I think your analysis might be the silliest thing I’ve ever seen. A nuclear bomb in both nations’ hands is the only thing that is going to end this war. It’s called ‘Mutually-Assured Destruction’.

                  But thank you for response.

                  • notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    the only thing that is going to end this war. It’s called ‘Mutually-Assured Destruction’.

                    The IDF wouldn’t drop a bomb on their own citizens because their prime ideology is jewish supremacy, plus they have the military might without it. Hamas, OTOH would have no qualms about it. I can’t figure out if you are sarcastic here, but mutual destruction is exactly what would happen, so if you’re saying that nuclear annihilation is the only way to stop this war, then you might be right, but generally that’s the least favorable outcome.

        • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          The limited military capabilities of Palestinians has restrained Israel’s actions.

          If you say so.

          How should Palestinians use that nuke?

          They shouldn’t use it, per se.

          Just make threats with it, like most countries do. Having a nuke is a deterrent.

            • daltotron@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I mean, if you’re assuming the worst, a nuclear strike could pretty much wipe israel almost entirely off the map. With a more conservative and realistic positioning, you know, one singular, small nuke, probably sourced from somewhere else, then you’d still be looking at probably 20,000 people dead or injured if it were to hit the downtown of any city. You know, ten times the amount of october 7th. That would be a huge international incident, especially seeing as how the nuke would have to be provided by some other foreign government, which means that there could be a chance of a probably unpreventable follow-up attack at almost any time. It would be a pretty big deal, even if they were credibly threatened. I mean, that’s part of why Iran isn’t allowed to have a nuclear program.

    • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      One won’t be enough. If they use it, Russia will at least hit the whole frontline with tactical nukes, maybe wipe out a city or two. That means Ukraine can’t use it, making it as valuable as a paperweight. For credible nuclear deterrence a country needs a few dozen nuclear weapons and more than one delivery method.

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Noone who has nukes can use them, but that’s not the point. Just the threat is enough. One nuke with enough juice to get it to Moscow would be enough. I’m pretty sure if any country ever used a nuke, the whole world would explode.

        • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          The threat needs to be credible though. One bomb is not enough because it could be destroyed in a first strike without fear of a second strike.

          One bomb won’t make it to Moscow. Air defense will take down a single attacking missile or plane.