In a recent talk on Neutrality Studies, Michael von der Schulenburg, a German member of the EU Parliament, puts his finger on the irrational core of the block's collective Ukraine-War Psychosis.
Some people would argue that the intention behind the militarization of the EU serves the same purpose as the fake COVID pandemic. The same people claim that the euro has no chance of survival and that the "elites" are desperately looking for an excuse for the event when the Euro is going to collapse without taking the blame. The scapegoats will be a virus and Russia. It is a fact that preparations are being made to replace the euro with a digital currency called CBDC. We live in interesting times.
Russia has no interest in rolling all over Europe, even if it had the means to do so. Russia is being used by EU leaders, as well as Starmer, as a rallying point to keep the ailing EU project trundling along. It may well be 5 times wealthier than Russia, but 40 per cent of its GDP goes on its social services.
Seems to me you are either missing the point, or have an agenda to support Russia.
Putin started this war by invading Ukraine for two reasons; Ukraine's democracy wanted to join with the EU and shun Russia, and because Ukraine had natural resources (food production and fossil energy resources) and sea access that Putin wanted to steal. None of that was the fault of the EU.
The EU has been remiss for decades in relying on America and NATO for its protection, particularly Germany that had never rebuilt it's défenses after WW2. Now that Americans have elected Trump, and Trump is in thrall or under the control of Putin, then NATO is compromised and NO-ONE believes that Putin will stop until he takes all of Ukraine and also the other eastern European countries that were once part of the Soviet block.
The EU can afford to issue bonds for rearming Europe. In fact it can't afford not to, because if attacked by Putin, then its normal business and markets would be disrupted and it would cost even more money not to do so.
If the EU rearms now, with modern weapons and capabilities, such as mass drone attacks over long distances as developed by Ukraine, then the idea is that Putin would not dare attack and, if he tried, he would be quickly overwhelmed. It is not only the obvious best choice, in practical terms it is the only choice.
There is, of course, still Trump and his relationship with Putin that seems to include destroying America and threatening Canada, Greenland and Mexico. Canada is in a similar position to the EU in that it has trusted America for its défenses under NATO, and now finds it's onetime friend to be collaborating with it's enemy. So Canada's rearmament will coincide with the EU's rearmament, with obvious and comprehensive alignments of interests and economies of technology, scale and production.
Lastly, regarding debts. Very few Western countries can ever repay their debts, especially America, and no-one really expects them to. As long as investors are willing to fund the bond issues to rearm, then debt levels themselves are no longer seen as critical. I personally disagree with this notion, but who cares what I think!
Mark Carney has just issued US dollar bonds to start this process for Canada that were 4 times subscribed, so no problem there. I expect a similar response to European bond issues, especially now the American economy is tanking.
So I would say your post is wrong on almost every level. Unless of course all you want to do is undermine confidence in the West on behalf of Putin? Looking at the rest of your posts, with conspiracy theories and bullshit ideas, it seems likely to me.
I think you should try to get this published on the BBC, Guardian, etc. the natural home of spin. Just add one last qualifying tagline: Putin is Hitler (you did manage to squeeze in ‘Ukraine is a democracy’ and they ‘just wanted to join the EU’.. so bravo there).
And no thank you for your unnecessarily long and baseless ‘analysis’ (a.k.a. narrative management). Like I said, you will be welcomed by the msm with open arms. Something to consider..
I take it you have read this? Now why would this come from a very influential think tank responsible for US foreign policy in the years preceding what finally culminated in what we see today? Have a good in-depth read and see what the general gist of the western states' intention was. The question is why did they (the side you so valiantly defend) find it necessary to unbalance and overextend Russia? Is it maybe due to the fact that Russia has natural resources that need appropriation?
Ukraine was steadily militarized since 2014 by the West, this situation did not start on 24 Feb 2022
You are representing completely the western narrative. You are a propagandist of the western mindset. What about the promise not to move one inch to the west, after Germany united. What about Minsk I & II which were setup with a lie, just to arm Ukraine, confirmed by chancellor Merkel and French government Hollander.
The Western Nations lost completely their credibility and integrity.
Shame on them.
They should pay all the cost, regarding the Ukraine war back to Russia.
How many wars did they actually brought up on the Russians. The last period of 100 years it is the third mager war.
Please think about it. Otherwise keep your wrong analysis for yourself.
Long live Russia and their long suffering people, which was always brought upon them from the westerners.
I am glad you ended with the 'Long live Russia' to set the reality of your post.
However, I agree that America pushed NATO to arm Ukraine and propose Ukrainian NATO membership against previous promises. It was wrong, and I hope the future of NATO without the USA (or whatever replaces NATO) will be more balanced and ethical in its dealings with Russia.
All that said, Putin is working for himself and the oligarchs that support him, not for the interests of the Russian people, who have become poorer, and have lost their sons and brothers to the endless wars Putin has fomented. And Putin invaded Ukraine (twice, 2014 for Crimea, and an attempted takeover of the whole of Ukraine since 2022) with absolutely no concern for Ukraine's right to sovereignty, human rights or self determination. There is NO EXCUSE for invasion of Ukraine!
Putin is now faced with coordinated and comprehensive opposition from Europe. If he pushes forward, there will be an European war, that Putin will lose because of overwhelming military force and power. Whatever remains of Russia will fall back into the Soviet level poverty and misery.
If you love Russia, the real Russia, you have to stop Putin from destroying it.
The EU is the WEF's alpha-test for global fascism. It's failing spectacularly.
Putin managed to kill, exile, jail or tame the Russian oligarchs by 2010.
Stop pretending you care about Russian deaths, which are at least a fifth of the Banderans. You do realize Russian Federation incomes are rising?
Russia already had it's military in Crimea so that solves the invasion mystery. The funniest part is Ukraine had about 22,000 soldiers stationed in Crimea, 20,000 of them joined the Donbas militias and took their weapons with them.
"Comprehensive and coordinated"?
Are you unaware of how completely under prepared NATO Europe is?
A decade out NATO Europe may be able to defend itself.
Try this mental exercise; Russian foreign policy wants the US to stay in western Europe, but Russia wants to invade all of Europe, too.
Without a US occupation, NATO Europe will begin fighting NATO Europe. That's how they roll
Seriously? A European war that Russia will lose? Based on what?
On Europe's huge oil surplus? Their huge gas supplies that are necessary to make explosives? Their massive steel industry? Unfortunately none of those apply to Europe. You regurgitate MSM propaganda.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d say you’re a shill but unfortunately I do know people who really think like you, who swallow the long BBC shaft and love it. But that was 2 years ago, when Ukraine still had a sliver of chance.
You write, "The EU has committed itself to enormous military spending, promising funds it does not have. "
The EU is at least five times richer than Russia. No matter how much fancy tap dancing denial distraction any analyst may wish to do.... The money is there.
The question is not whether the EU can afford to support Ukraine. The question is whether the EU will fight if necessary.
Never confuse GDP with wealth. Russia is currently out-producing all of NATO by considerable margins in every category.
The NATO nation with the lowest debt to GDP ratio is Germany, at 60% I think. The rest are well over a hundred.
It's probably not a good plan to continue deindustrializing the whole EU AND re-arming. In fact, it's impossible to do both. And then the EU will need an Army and Navy of a few million. Not going to happen.
The sanctions against Russia did nothing to prevent their economy go from strength to strength. As you say, GDP can be calculated a number of different ways, but whichever way. Russia is doing ok. To put it mildly.
Better than a bell of a lot of other European countries.
Yes. The WEF, EU and NATO believed their propaganda.
There is no shortage of material showing just how large the Federation industry can quickly expand.
In 2010 the decision was made to modernize their weapons industry.
While Raytheon employees were being pulled from retirement to "hand-craft each javelin with love" them there Ruskies were busy mass producing the kornet using robotics.
Putin would not have made his move when he did unless he had some serious cards to play. And he is still holding them. Comfortably. He hit Kiev with impunity again yesterday. A little reminder that he can, and will, do as he pleases there. No matter who is in the Oval Office for four years. He’s there for life.
They won’t have to fight. And they know it. It’s grandstanding and hyperbole to have Russia as a supposed threat, and intensify their plastering over the cracks in the Eurozone.
If you take the Turkey bit of what I said seriously, ( although, at this stage, nothing would surprise me), then you need to know it was an attempt at humour. If the conflict between Russia and Ukraine ended tomorrow, with Ukraine getting all it wanted and more, NATO would be disbanded? Starmer would just go back to rebuilding Great Britain? That 800 billion slush fund that was hastily announced after Vance took a torch to the EU heads at Munich would be stopped and that money would instead be spent on health and housing?
It’s all show. The Eurozone, EU, European experiment, call it what you want is dying. Fact.
There you go.. shut up! Haha. I didn’t mention the amount of countries in the EU, or in NATO, so I’m not sure where you are coming from on that score.. it’s irrelevant!
You can boil it down to Germany, France, and possibly the Uk, if you want. Up to you. Of the 44/7, if you include the UK as you say,using Scotland, England, and Walses to bump up the numbers.. there’s Northern Ireland too, but that’s for another day.. how many have power enough to shape policy?
Thanks for the civics lesson. But you know the likes of Greece, Spain, or Italy will toe the EU line, as they are indebted to the big guns to the tune of hundreds of billions since the last economic meltdown.
The Eurozone, and by extension. Europe as a whole is living on borrowed time.
It’s a slush fund for Fond of Lyin’ (a.k.a. Von der Leyen). It’s nothing more than narrative management. Russia fights and the Europeans talk (and throw the Ukrainian suckers to the fire).
Anything that silences discussion or dissenting voices is narrative management. Russia is fighting with one hand behind its back, purposely, as they could have went with all out air strikes a long time ago. Putin will get what he wants, eventually. The last thing the EU leaders want right now is peace. Or, I suppose they could always switch their focus on Turkey, as an imminent threat , and rally together around that cause. Ukraine is not a sovereign state if it cannot defend itself.
Really?? The Brits seem to always be running out of cash to run the country.. and yes, the money theoretically is ‘there’ for Defense spending but then it’s ‘not there’ for other important expenses the state needs to run the whole damn thing.. yours is a very naive way of running even a small business like a hair salon.. also, you have not factored in that even if the money is there you still need soldiers and last time I checked you couldn’t fill a stadium with British troops.. that’s ’cause the Brits think Russia is going to invade them after it’s done with Ukraine.. you’ve been on msm too long and so you’re critical thinking muscle has atrophied..
Exactly how much richer the EU is than Russia depends on how you calculate GDP. There are different ways to go about that, so I picked the most conservative number I've seen.
And the U.S. is richer than the EU bloc still and the trillions it spent on Iraq and Afghanistan.. well, we all know what happened there. By your own logic, Russia, which is poorer than the European bloc, still managed to defeat Ukraine militarily (well, it defeated NATO really as that was always a proxy war..). And all the billions that the Europeans are going to pony up to flush down the toilet in Ukraine will not affect their economies, right? And the young men of France, Britain, Germany will just line up to go fight Russia, right? Are you still enjoying the tap dancing??
I wish I could share Schulenburg’s faith that Europeans will not engage in an all-out war with Russia. I too hope not, but is it not wishful thinking, we are being rational in assuming that Brussels would act practically because they could not afford a war. But they are not practical, they continue to behave irrational.
Excellent comments coming from a very neutral scholar that is pictured by the Swiss Communist Party Facebook profile as the keynote for the Association NO EU - NO NATO.
Because EU brainwashed citizens are meekly bootlickers and obedient cowards to allow to be dragged into another banker's war so the Central planners can get richer and useless eaters will fertilize the land for them.
The EU has always been a Nazi/Globalist/Deep State project. The Nazis used EXACTLY the same language the EU uses. The EU is simply a Third Reich by other means.
Putin was quite clear in 2008 what the consequences for The Ukraine and Georgia were going to be.
"Cookies" Nuland picking your nation's first post-coup president isn't a sign of a healthy "democracy". Putin had no problem with the Banderan territories joining the EU. He does have a problem with allowing NATO in the territories.
Putin is only going to go as far as The Ukraine's original borders. Lenin's gift.
Someone will need to buy the worthless EU paper and it will take at least 5 years before the EU can begin meaningful production.
To solve a war, you need to understand the root cause
Steve Witkoff, US Special Envoy to the Middle East, unfortunately, has no clue.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, he made several grossly flawed statements.
Firstly, he said "The so-called four regions: Donbas, Crimea, you know the names, Luhansk and there are two others" are the biggest obstacles to resolving the war started by Russia.” Territorial concession is not the hurdle. It would be a strategic mistake. Russia's aim of strategic parity with the US and China is the main obstacle.
Secondly, he falsely claims that "They're Russian speaking, there have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule. I think that's the key issue in the conflict."
The language does not define anyone’s nationality. The people who used to live in the regions – before Russia’s war of aggression and the start of forceful displacement – voted overwhelmingly in support of Ukrainian independence in 1991. Russia has, however, completely changed the demography. Many have become either refugees or internally displaced. There have been no credible and internationally recognised referendums in the occupied territories since 24 Feb 2022. His statement is either a result of ignorance, disinformation or worse still, an attempt to distort the facts.
Thirdly, he argues “The question is, will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories? Will it end up? Can Zelenskyy survive politically if he acknowledges this? This is the central issue in the conflict." This is utter nonsense.
The issue of international recognition of Russian sovereignty over the occupied parts of Ukraine is crucial to international law and the security architecture that has ensured our common security, stability and prosperity since the end of WW2.
Putin sees international recognition of its occupied territories and the lifting of sanctions as a prerequisite for “peace”. Giving in to his demands means undermining international law. It is a signal that “might make right” and serves as an encouragement for other autocracies which consider changing borders with military force. It would not least, ensure that the “peace” will be temporary. Russia will be in a far better position to launch its next assault against Ukraine. It is engaged in an existential war in which it either defeats Ukraine and creates the preconditions for Great Power status or is defeated and remains a pariah state, fully dependent upon China, Iran and North Korea.
This is, therefore, not an issue about Zelenskyy’s political survival. Being the Head of State of a democracy, the decision about territorial concessions is not his to make. The population says no.
It is an issue about Ukraine’s existence. It is a question about international law, global security and stability. It is a question about the imperative of understanding the problem before trying to fix it.
Some people would argue that the intention behind the militarization of the EU serves the same purpose as the fake COVID pandemic. The same people claim that the euro has no chance of survival and that the "elites" are desperately looking for an excuse for the event when the Euro is going to collapse without taking the blame. The scapegoats will be a virus and Russia. It is a fact that preparations are being made to replace the euro with a digital currency called CBDC. We live in interesting times.
Russia has no interest in rolling all over Europe, even if it had the means to do so. Russia is being used by EU leaders, as well as Starmer, as a rallying point to keep the ailing EU project trundling along. It may well be 5 times wealthier than Russia, but 40 per cent of its GDP goes on its social services.
Seems to me you are either missing the point, or have an agenda to support Russia.
Putin started this war by invading Ukraine for two reasons; Ukraine's democracy wanted to join with the EU and shun Russia, and because Ukraine had natural resources (food production and fossil energy resources) and sea access that Putin wanted to steal. None of that was the fault of the EU.
The EU has been remiss for decades in relying on America and NATO for its protection, particularly Germany that had never rebuilt it's défenses after WW2. Now that Americans have elected Trump, and Trump is in thrall or under the control of Putin, then NATO is compromised and NO-ONE believes that Putin will stop until he takes all of Ukraine and also the other eastern European countries that were once part of the Soviet block.
The EU can afford to issue bonds for rearming Europe. In fact it can't afford not to, because if attacked by Putin, then its normal business and markets would be disrupted and it would cost even more money not to do so.
If the EU rearms now, with modern weapons and capabilities, such as mass drone attacks over long distances as developed by Ukraine, then the idea is that Putin would not dare attack and, if he tried, he would be quickly overwhelmed. It is not only the obvious best choice, in practical terms it is the only choice.
There is, of course, still Trump and his relationship with Putin that seems to include destroying America and threatening Canada, Greenland and Mexico. Canada is in a similar position to the EU in that it has trusted America for its défenses under NATO, and now finds it's onetime friend to be collaborating with it's enemy. So Canada's rearmament will coincide with the EU's rearmament, with obvious and comprehensive alignments of interests and economies of technology, scale and production.
Lastly, regarding debts. Very few Western countries can ever repay their debts, especially America, and no-one really expects them to. As long as investors are willing to fund the bond issues to rearm, then debt levels themselves are no longer seen as critical. I personally disagree with this notion, but who cares what I think!
Mark Carney has just issued US dollar bonds to start this process for Canada that were 4 times subscribed, so no problem there. I expect a similar response to European bond issues, especially now the American economy is tanking.
So I would say your post is wrong on almost every level. Unless of course all you want to do is undermine confidence in the West on behalf of Putin? Looking at the rest of your posts, with conspiracy theories and bullshit ideas, it seems likely to me.
I think you should try to get this published on the BBC, Guardian, etc. the natural home of spin. Just add one last qualifying tagline: Putin is Hitler (you did manage to squeeze in ‘Ukraine is a democracy’ and they ‘just wanted to join the EU’.. so bravo there).
Thank you for your inane contribution.
And no thank you for your unnecessarily long and baseless ‘analysis’ (a.k.a. narrative management). Like I said, you will be welcomed by the msm with open arms. Something to consider..
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_briefs/RB10000/RB10014/RAND_RB10014.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi-8f-sipuMAxX7QUEAHeOxFxYQFnoECEAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw20gfMooZk2oSGu4PL84GLT
I take it you have read this? Now why would this come from a very influential think tank responsible for US foreign policy in the years preceding what finally culminated in what we see today? Have a good in-depth read and see what the general gist of the western states' intention was. The question is why did they (the side you so valiantly defend) find it necessary to unbalance and overextend Russia? Is it maybe due to the fact that Russia has natural resources that need appropriation?
Ukraine was steadily militarized since 2014 by the West, this situation did not start on 24 Feb 2022
The Rand Organisation? Really? Are you quoting this as a source??
😂
Considering that the current failing plan to destabilize Russia came from RAND I believe Remsomm is using RAND as a source.
Crazy, huh?
Steadily militarized since 1993.
You are representing completely the western narrative. You are a propagandist of the western mindset. What about the promise not to move one inch to the west, after Germany united. What about Minsk I & II which were setup with a lie, just to arm Ukraine, confirmed by chancellor Merkel and French government Hollander.
The Western Nations lost completely their credibility and integrity.
Shame on them.
They should pay all the cost, regarding the Ukraine war back to Russia.
How many wars did they actually brought up on the Russians. The last period of 100 years it is the third mager war.
Please think about it. Otherwise keep your wrong analysis for yourself.
Long live Russia and their long suffering people, which was always brought upon them from the westerners.
I am glad you ended with the 'Long live Russia' to set the reality of your post.
However, I agree that America pushed NATO to arm Ukraine and propose Ukrainian NATO membership against previous promises. It was wrong, and I hope the future of NATO without the USA (or whatever replaces NATO) will be more balanced and ethical in its dealings with Russia.
All that said, Putin is working for himself and the oligarchs that support him, not for the interests of the Russian people, who have become poorer, and have lost their sons and brothers to the endless wars Putin has fomented. And Putin invaded Ukraine (twice, 2014 for Crimea, and an attempted takeover of the whole of Ukraine since 2022) with absolutely no concern for Ukraine's right to sovereignty, human rights or self determination. There is NO EXCUSE for invasion of Ukraine!
Putin is now faced with coordinated and comprehensive opposition from Europe. If he pushes forward, there will be an European war, that Putin will lose because of overwhelming military force and power. Whatever remains of Russia will fall back into the Soviet level poverty and misery.
If you love Russia, the real Russia, you have to stop Putin from destroying it.
The EU is the WEF's alpha-test for global fascism. It's failing spectacularly.
Putin managed to kill, exile, jail or tame the Russian oligarchs by 2010.
Stop pretending you care about Russian deaths, which are at least a fifth of the Banderans. You do realize Russian Federation incomes are rising?
Russia already had it's military in Crimea so that solves the invasion mystery. The funniest part is Ukraine had about 22,000 soldiers stationed in Crimea, 20,000 of them joined the Donbas militias and took their weapons with them.
"Comprehensive and coordinated"?
Are you unaware of how completely under prepared NATO Europe is?
A decade out NATO Europe may be able to defend itself.
Try this mental exercise; Russian foreign policy wants the US to stay in western Europe, but Russia wants to invade all of Europe, too.
Without a US occupation, NATO Europe will begin fighting NATO Europe. That's how they roll
Seriously? A European war that Russia will lose? Based on what?
On Europe's huge oil surplus? Their huge gas supplies that are necessary to make explosives? Their massive steel industry? Unfortunately none of those apply to Europe. You regurgitate MSM propaganda.
4 subscribers, no profile, no picture....
And supporting Russia.
Byeee!
The EU is a circus of clowns without an audience apart from the occasional idiot hijacked into the tent to clap and cheer like yourself.
Did you cut and paste this crap from a BBC chat show?
And you don’t even have the guts to put your actual name to it, in the finest traditions of EU accountability and courage.
Says a bot with 2 subscribers and no posts!
Your blocked!
Holy smokes: propaganda, the post.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d say you’re a shill but unfortunately I do know people who really think like you, who swallow the long BBC shaft and love it. But that was 2 years ago, when Ukraine still had a sliver of chance.
Unfortunately, reality bites.
Are you a part of that #nafo propaganda machine?
1 subscriber, one post, no name or profile or picture, and so obviously a bot. Fuck off!
You write, "The EU has committed itself to enormous military spending, promising funds it does not have. "
The EU is at least five times richer than Russia. No matter how much fancy tap dancing denial distraction any analyst may wish to do.... The money is there.
The question is not whether the EU can afford to support Ukraine. The question is whether the EU will fight if necessary.
If not, then the money is meaningless.
Never confuse GDP with wealth. Russia is currently out-producing all of NATO by considerable margins in every category.
The NATO nation with the lowest debt to GDP ratio is Germany, at 60% I think. The rest are well over a hundred.
It's probably not a good plan to continue deindustrializing the whole EU AND re-arming. In fact, it's impossible to do both. And then the EU will need an Army and Navy of a few million. Not going to happen.
The sanctions against Russia did nothing to prevent their economy go from strength to strength. As you say, GDP can be calculated a number of different ways, but whichever way. Russia is doing ok. To put it mildly.
Better than a bell of a lot of other European countries.
Yes. The WEF, EU and NATO believed their propaganda.
There is no shortage of material showing just how large the Federation industry can quickly expand.
In 2010 the decision was made to modernize their weapons industry.
While Raytheon employees were being pulled from retirement to "hand-craft each javelin with love" them there Ruskies were busy mass producing the kornet using robotics.
Who could have guessed?
Putin would not have made his move when he did unless he had some serious cards to play. And he is still holding them. Comfortably. He hit Kiev with impunity again yesterday. A little reminder that he can, and will, do as he pleases there. No matter who is in the Oval Office for four years. He’s there for life.
They won’t have to fight. And they know it. It’s grandstanding and hyperbole to have Russia as a supposed threat, and intensify their plastering over the cracks in the Eurozone.
Eurozone? (22 countries). Or the European Union? (27 countries). Or Europe? (44 countries). Or Europe plus the UK? (47 countries).
If you can't get the basics right, and have no idea whatbyou are talking about, probably better to shut up. Don't you think?
If you take the Turkey bit of what I said seriously, ( although, at this stage, nothing would surprise me), then you need to know it was an attempt at humour. If the conflict between Russia and Ukraine ended tomorrow, with Ukraine getting all it wanted and more, NATO would be disbanded? Starmer would just go back to rebuilding Great Britain? That 800 billion slush fund that was hastily announced after Vance took a torch to the EU heads at Munich would be stopped and that money would instead be spent on health and housing?
It’s all show. The Eurozone, EU, European experiment, call it what you want is dying. Fact.
There you go.. shut up! Haha. I didn’t mention the amount of countries in the EU, or in NATO, so I’m not sure where you are coming from on that score.. it’s irrelevant!
You can boil it down to Germany, France, and possibly the Uk, if you want. Up to you. Of the 44/7, if you include the UK as you say,using Scotland, England, and Walses to bump up the numbers.. there’s Northern Ireland too, but that’s for another day.. how many have power enough to shape policy?
Thanks for the civics lesson. But you know the likes of Greece, Spain, or Italy will toe the EU line, as they are indebted to the big guns to the tune of hundreds of billions since the last economic meltdown.
The Eurozone, and by extension. Europe as a whole is living on borrowed time.
Seems I was right with my first comment.
Yeah. You’ve mastered the art of counting. Well done. You don’t agree that Germany and France are the big guns then?
It’s a slush fund for Fond of Lyin’ (a.k.a. Von der Leyen). It’s nothing more than narrative management. Russia fights and the Europeans talk (and throw the Ukrainian suckers to the fire).
Anything that silences discussion or dissenting voices is narrative management. Russia is fighting with one hand behind its back, purposely, as they could have went with all out air strikes a long time ago. Putin will get what he wants, eventually. The last thing the EU leaders want right now is peace. Or, I suppose they could always switch their focus on Turkey, as an imminent threat , and rally together around that cause. Ukraine is not a sovereign state if it cannot defend itself.
Really?? The Brits seem to always be running out of cash to run the country.. and yes, the money theoretically is ‘there’ for Defense spending but then it’s ‘not there’ for other important expenses the state needs to run the whole damn thing.. yours is a very naive way of running even a small business like a hair salon.. also, you have not factored in that even if the money is there you still need soldiers and last time I checked you couldn’t fill a stadium with British troops.. that’s ’cause the Brits think Russia is going to invade them after it’s done with Ukraine.. you’ve been on msm too long and so you’re critical thinking muscle has atrophied..
What I actually said was....
The EU Is at least five times richer than Russia.
Don't take my word for it, look it up.
Exactly how much richer the EU is than Russia depends on how you calculate GDP. There are different ways to go about that, so I picked the most conservative number I've seen.
And the U.S. is richer than the EU bloc still and the trillions it spent on Iraq and Afghanistan.. well, we all know what happened there. By your own logic, Russia, which is poorer than the European bloc, still managed to defeat Ukraine militarily (well, it defeated NATO really as that was always a proxy war..). And all the billions that the Europeans are going to pony up to flush down the toilet in Ukraine will not affect their economies, right? And the young men of France, Britain, Germany will just line up to go fight Russia, right? Are you still enjoying the tap dancing??
I wish I could share Schulenburg’s faith that Europeans will not engage in an all-out war with Russia. I too hope not, but is it not wishful thinking, we are being rational in assuming that Brussels would act practically because they could not afford a war. But they are not practical, they continue to behave irrational.
Excellent comments coming from a very neutral scholar that is pictured by the Swiss Communist Party Facebook profile as the keynote for the Association NO EU - NO NATO.
So long for neutrality!
Because EU brainwashed citizens are meekly bootlickers and obedient cowards to allow to be dragged into another banker's war so the Central planners can get richer and useless eaters will fertilize the land for them.
Let them die, then. Idiots. Ukraine is a dictatorship, much like the current E.U.
The EU has always been a Nazi/Globalist/Deep State project. The Nazis used EXACTLY the same language the EU uses. The EU is simply a Third Reich by other means.
Only one word from me in France - idiots.
Yes, that also seems to be in line with Trumps devaluing the dollar. And push for crypto. Centralised banking. Crash, shock and awe.
von der Lying must go.
The EU has not decided this. The unelected globalist has.
I am not aware that Canada has an enemy. Please tell me which nation Canada has declared a war upon.
What you are trying to say is Canada and the EU will be manufacturing little at prohibitive costs.
In probably less than a year those bonds will drop in value. That means the next round of bonds issued will have much higher yield.
Why would Canada issue bonds in US dollars? Debt levels are never critical until buyers stop buying the debt.
Putin was quite clear in 2008 what the consequences for The Ukraine and Georgia were going to be.
"Cookies" Nuland picking your nation's first post-coup president isn't a sign of a healthy "democracy". Putin had no problem with the Banderan territories joining the EU. He does have a problem with allowing NATO in the territories.
Putin is only going to go as far as The Ukraine's original borders. Lenin's gift.
Someone will need to buy the worthless EU paper and it will take at least 5 years before the EU can begin meaningful production.
To solve a war, you need to understand the root cause
Steve Witkoff, US Special Envoy to the Middle East, unfortunately, has no clue.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, he made several grossly flawed statements.
Firstly, he said "The so-called four regions: Donbas, Crimea, you know the names, Luhansk and there are two others" are the biggest obstacles to resolving the war started by Russia.” Territorial concession is not the hurdle. It would be a strategic mistake. Russia's aim of strategic parity with the US and China is the main obstacle.
Secondly, he falsely claims that "They're Russian speaking, there have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule. I think that's the key issue in the conflict."
The language does not define anyone’s nationality. The people who used to live in the regions – before Russia’s war of aggression and the start of forceful displacement – voted overwhelmingly in support of Ukrainian independence in 1991. Russia has, however, completely changed the demography. Many have become either refugees or internally displaced. There have been no credible and internationally recognised referendums in the occupied territories since 24 Feb 2022. His statement is either a result of ignorance, disinformation or worse still, an attempt to distort the facts.
Thirdly, he argues “The question is, will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories? Will it end up? Can Zelenskyy survive politically if he acknowledges this? This is the central issue in the conflict." This is utter nonsense.
The issue of international recognition of Russian sovereignty over the occupied parts of Ukraine is crucial to international law and the security architecture that has ensured our common security, stability and prosperity since the end of WW2.
Putin sees international recognition of its occupied territories and the lifting of sanctions as a prerequisite for “peace”. Giving in to his demands means undermining international law. It is a signal that “might make right” and serves as an encouragement for other autocracies which consider changing borders with military force. It would not least, ensure that the “peace” will be temporary. Russia will be in a far better position to launch its next assault against Ukraine. It is engaged in an existential war in which it either defeats Ukraine and creates the preconditions for Great Power status or is defeated and remains a pariah state, fully dependent upon China, Iran and North Korea.
This is, therefore, not an issue about Zelenskyy’s political survival. Being the Head of State of a democracy, the decision about territorial concessions is not his to make. The population says no.
It is an issue about Ukraine’s existence. It is a question about international law, global security and stability. It is a question about the imperative of understanding the problem before trying to fix it.
Written by Hans Petter Midttun.