• magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    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.

      • Dr. Bluefall@toast.ooo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        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
        22
        ·
        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
          ·
          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

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              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

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

      • AlexisFR@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This, just send a couple of hexbear users and watch their governments collapsing!

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        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.

    • 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.

  • zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    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
      14
      ·
      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
        ·
        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
      8
      ·
      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.

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        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.

      • 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.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        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
          ·
          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.

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

        What? No. The only people saying that shit are Russian or Chinese talking heads, for obvious reasons.

        Anyone else is singing the praises of the f-35. Literally it’s biggest issue was with the alignment of its guns being fucky. But these things should never be in position to use guns in the first place.

    • 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.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    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.

  • Zimmy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    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.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    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.”
    • zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      How can China be an oligarchy if the CCP holds all the power? Billionaires ain’t got shit in China, even fucking Jack Ma was forced to step in line.

  • jray4559@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    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.