491
submitted 8 months ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/europe@feddit.de

Cross-posted from: https://feddit.de/post/10013170

The war in Ukraine is “existential for our Europe and for France”, Mr Macron said in the interview on France 2 and TF1.

“Do you think that the Poles, the Lithuanians, the Estonians, the Romanians and the Bulgarians could remain at peace for a second [in the event of a Russian victory in Ukraine]?” he asked. “If Russia wins this war, Europe’s credibility would be reduced to zero.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 86 points 8 months ago

U.S. conservatives are champing at the bit to see Europe fall to Russia. Action needs to happen now, or the U.S. could have a conservative government that backs Putin. That would be the end of Europe.

We need to join Europe right now in a full-scale defense of Ukraine. Otherwise we are allowing Putin to take Europe simply by threat of nuclear action. We need to strike first, disarm the dictator and repel the Russian invasion. And we need to do it now. The clock is ticking.

[-] MrMakabar@feddit.de 28 points 8 months ago

We need to destroy Russias ability to threaten the EU and remove Putin and any other similar leader from power in Russia. That should be the goal of the EU and not to go into a full scale war with Russia. Seriously Putin is not winning that war. The Russian civilian economy is shrinking fast, Russias war reserves are depleting, oil income is falling, soldiers are being lost on a massive scale with a demogrophics, which does not allow for that, and Russias weapons reserves from Soviet times are falling. Russia has two or three years of full scale war in it. The only thing we need to do is to keep Ukraine in the fight, while destroying as much of Russia as possible.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 19 points 8 months ago

The one thing Russia has able to successfully ramp up production on is basic artillery shells. Analysts are putting their production numbers at something like 3x what Europe is putting out. It’s starting to become a problem.

And that little spineless shitfuck Johnson is doing precisely what Putin wants in this scenario. There is a direct causal relationship between Johnson + the GOP refusing to give anything to Ukraine for months and Ukraine’s recent strategic difficulties. I sincerely hope Johnson is able to experience the tender mercies of Russian captivity someday.

[-] MrMakabar@feddit.de 10 points 8 months ago

Nope, Russia is firing three times as many shells as Europe produces in 155mm. However that includes North Korean shells and smaller artillery calibers. The EU also produces some 152mm and 120mm. Even more importantly the shells are much more accurate.

I’m not sure you understood the gist of my comment. I know the calibers are different, and that the shells the Russians are cranking out are very basic. They’re going for the Soviet approach (just make TONS of shitty-to-mediocre weapons).

[-] sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

Exactly right. Quantity has a quality of its own. Russia tried a US-style rapid combined arms shock-and-awe invasion of Ukraine and fucked it up, so they've reverted to the old school Soviet strategy: throw huge masses of men and materiel into the fight, be relentless and willing to endure huge losses.

The interesting thing is that this is the strategy NATO expected throughout the Cold War, so we should be prepared for it. Granted, NATO was preparing for a Soviet invasion through the Fulda Gap and then across the North German plain, but still, the strategy is the same. NATO always intended to use superior technology and tactics to trade space for time while we mobilized to meet the massed Soviet forces.

The fact that we have allowed Russia to continue this all-out war for two years and STILL haven't adequately mobilized is pretty bad. Macron is right: Europe, particularly western Europe, has lost a hell of a lot of credibility.

France and the UK have lost the most credibility, I think. They were the two main victorious European powers after WW2, as well as being large, rich countries, permanent Security Council members, and nuclear powers in their own right. Germany gets a pass because they are not supposed to have a large military, for obvious historical reasons.

Europe has been too heavily relying on the US to save the day, despite obvious signs that the US is suffering from war weariness, corruption, and very serious internal social divisions.

[-] Arbic@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

The German Bundeswehr has been a quite lacking army with lots of problems with non functional equipment. I wonder if the DDR and BRD had well trained and equipped armies respectively. I'm too young to know about that.

[-] onion@feddit.de 2 points 7 months ago

Yes both sides of the fence were armed to the teeth. TBF though the criteria of how big of an issue a piece of equipment needs to have to be considered inoperational was probably more lax back then

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

NATO without the US can easily easily easily take on Russia. Russia couldn't even invade one of the poorest countries in Europe. UK and France have nuclear weapons. And haven't we already seen what preemptive wars end up as? (And that was when they had no nukes.) Defensive wars suck in a lot of ways, but that's what we're left with.

this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
491 points (97.5% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS