Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
So Al Cairns (who is tipped to be a future Labour leader) says we're on a war footing and Europe is now firmly in the crosshairs of Putin, no doubt with Trump's blessing. It all seems depressingly inevitable doesn't it? Is there any way of avoiding it?
(PS new thread because it's bigger than just Ukraine, Trump, UK govt etc)
I've never heard of Al Cairns. Putin has already made it clear he will attack more European countries. He can't be ignored. And the USA can't be depended on.
It does seem that way...there needs to be a huge change in tact and direction from many 'leaders' to avoid this.
I'm just hoping no-one decides to go nuclear - as much as all this fighting is absolutely awful, I do think nuclear is going to be far far worse for everyone.
So if all the leaders could get together and all get a serious talking to and they all change direction, that would be for the best...as long as the direction is peaceful and working together...which will be very hard to do when the tech bros are also trying to muscle in and control stuff to increase their wealth and power.
USA is going to be looking at all the ways it can make money out of everything, so will happily provide arms and services at a cost...if they aren't being attacked on their soil, they are happy to support with whatever they can as it is all sellable. However, I'm not really clear on why they are causing so many fights with their neighbours just now - distraction perhaps?
Crikey, look at me, getting older (daily) so should be getting wiser and I'm posting even more depressing stuff!
Deterrence.
Yeah lets build more nukes. That'll solve it. It's not like we already have enough of them to destroy the world, maybe if we just have a few more everything will be ok. 🙄
I've never heard of Al Cairns.
You've not been paying attention then. He's the poster boy of many labour MPs who are looking past Streeting/Rayner/Burnham. In fact maybe that's why he's suddenly in the news banging his drum. Going to war with Putin as a vehicle to become PM is probably a bit extreme but I wouldn't put it past the modern labour party.
What’s most terrifying is the thought that if Putin does decide to say start bombing Poland, the Americans would do absolutely nothing, which kind of renders NATO pretty much redundant. The post Second World War consensus is now well and truly over
So yeah… we all need to start to spend a lot more money on (none nuclear) arms, whether we want to or not. Trump is actually right about that (in the same way a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day).
I think it was Tim Marshall who said that it’s a long term threat because if Putin carked it tomorrow, what would emerge in his place would doubtless be even worse
What’s most terrifying is the thought that if Putin does decide to say start bombing Poland, the Americans would do absolutely nothing, which kind of renders NATO pretty much redundant.
I'm of the opinion that Trump and Putin have done a backroom non-aggression deal so think you might be right. Putin gets eastern europe, Trump gets the west. It's like 1939 all over again.
Is there any way of avoiding it?
Putin gets taken out, possibly Trump at the same time. Don't ask me how, no idea.
Why get into the costs of a war when it's based on the ideology of one man, the rest around them would rather grow rich and old.
Anyway, not sure why you are doing this to yourself again Daz!
There's a govt defence minister in the news saying we're going to war. It's really not me making it up!
Just looked at the BBC website. Most disturbing headline I saw was this one: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq6008er5zgo
Going to war with Putin as a vehicle to become PM is probably a bit extreme but I wouldn't put it past the modern labour party.
Worked for Tony Blair (if you replace "Putin" with "Saddam Hussein")
Going to war with Putin as a vehicle to become PM is probably a bit extreme but I wouldn't put it past the modern labour party.
Worked for Tony Blair (if you replace "Putin" with "Saddam Hussein")
He became PM in 1997. Iraq was 2003 and influenced him stepping down in 2007.
If you're going to be snarky at least try to be accurate.
Is this the same Russia/Putin that hasn't defeated Ukraine nearly 4 years on from invading, sorry performing a "special operation" it? Even Putin surely isn't stupid enough to think he can win 2 wars by attacking Poland (who have a pretty advanced military vs Ukraine) as well (and who are a NATO country).
TBH I'm surprised there haven't been multiple attempts on Putin's life since the Ukraine invasion... I can only assume whoever is waiting in the wings behind him is an even bigger bellend/psychopath.
Just looked at the BBC website. Most disturbing headline I saw was this one:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/britain-war-footing-russian-nato-west-next-target-5HjdPJn_2/
Yeah lets build more nukes. That'll solve it.
Is that what I said?
Anyway, not sure why you are doing this to yourself again Daz!
Deterrence doesn't need to be Nukes. Ways to cripple their economy even more. Cloning James Corden a million times and threatening to unleash them across Russia.
A lot of what he said was focussed around asymmetric warfare. Hence some new developments around cyber, etc. There's probably more in there concerning the black side of defence, intelligence, etc. if HMG are viewing the USA as an unreliable partner there's likely a need to develop further for key infrastructure resilience.
There are some key gaps within conventional defence capabilities though. Just take the AJAX debacle as one example. There is also the pivot for the Army moving out from the shadow of counterinsurgency to a peer threat, that move started a while ago but again gaps in equipment and capabilities need to be filled for that to be fully realised.
Deterrence is just nukes. It's having an integrated defence posture with capability and the will to use it.
If you're going to be snarky at least try to be accurate.
Yes, to be accurate he was of course already PM but the whole Gulf thing, while very divisive in the UK, still gave him the wartime leader stance he was after with President Bush.
Yeah lets build more nukes. That'll solve it.
Is that what I said?
Anyway, not sure why you are doing this to yourself again Daz!
Cloning James Corden a million times and threatening to unleash them across Russia.
As RM says ^^
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
When we're discussing conscription (or similar) and spending more than 3.5% of GDP in 10 years time, then we'll be closer
There's a massive hybrid threat, but that isn't the same thing and it's unclear how to combat it
Yes, Russia could go after the Baltic states and possibly Moldova
Poland is the USAs first line in its missile defence from Russia and they've invested heavily there, so Poland won't be a route into continental Europe IMHO
Is this the same Russia/Putin that hasn't defeated Ukraine nearly 4 years on from invading, sorry performing a "special operation" it? Even Putin surely isn't stupid enough to think he can win 2 wars by attacking Poland (who have a pretty advanced military vs Ukraine) as well (and who are a NATO country
This.
I think Labour are simply enjoying talking up War/defence spending 'cos of their failed attempts to run a country.
We get world war 3 vibes every few months from someone or other.
I don't think it will happen. Makes no sense.
Labour are always going on about this sort of thing.
Plenty of instability to come for sure but that's normal these days.
Spend the money on fixing country instead and let's stop Labour having a Daily Mail meltdown with cartoon strategic maps.
And let's not forget there's been a 'unprecedented times , war footing, axis of evil , new terror threat.' literally every single decade as long as I can remember.
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
Mark Rutte and the head of French armed forces have said as much just recently.
Yeah lets build more nukes.
Not nukes, but having a semblance of a functioning defence force and a readied population is more the answer.
If the school bully knows your likely to put up a fight then they're less likely to try and start one.
Group of German journalists done some digging and found that Russian ships were in the vicinity with the recent drone attacks.
https://www.digitaldigging.org/p/they-droned-back
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
"I don't think war is unforseeable."
(If you know you know.)
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
Because it grabs headlines. And because we (proles) have probably got no idea what shithousery the Russians are up to. But it's not hard to imagine they're up to stuff.
This is the country that has conducted offensive operations on UK soil so it's not like it's out of character behaviour.
And let's not forget there's been a 'unprecedented times , war footing, axis of evil , new terror threat.' literally every single decade as long as I can remember.
How many of those decades have included a totalitarian dictatorship conducting a war of territorial conquest in Europe?
What is your threshold for arming? Bearing in mind the lead time for lots of these gizmos is >10 years...
Worked for Tony Blair (if you replace "Putin" with "Saddam Hussein")
No it didn't.
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
Amazing. Didn't realise you were a defence expert as well as an economics ones. Can't wait to see your hot takes on this topic.
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
Why would you believe what any politician says?
I remember reading this, can't think where though 🤔
He's the poster boy of many labour MPs who are looking past Streeting/Rayner/Burnham. In fact maybe that's why he's suddenly in the news banging his drum.
And let's not forget there's been a 'unprecedented times , war footing, axis of evil , new terror threat.' literally every single decade as long as I can remember.
How many of those decades have included a totalitarian dictatorship conducting a war of territorial conquest in Europe?
What is your threshold for arming? Bearing in mind the lead time for lots of these gizmos is >10 years...
How many of those decades have included a totalitarian dictatorship conducting a war of territorial conquest in Europe?
What is your threshold for arming? Bearing in mind the lead time for lots of these gizmos is >10 years...
In Ukraine which happens to be in Europe.
Last time I checked he's still doing that one.
Is it any scarier than NK, China, AL-Q have been previously?
No.
And each and every time we've gone though your type of argument.
I'm more worried about the state of the country domestically thanks.
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
You're saying liberals like a war?
We're nowhere near to a "war footing"
So why is a govt defence minister saying that? Should we not believe him?
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
Amazing. Didn't realise you were a defence expert as well as an economics ones. Can't wait to see your hot takes on this topic.
And I'm probably not interested in yours.
Aren't we all here just saying stuff?
I'm not asking you to agree or read them.
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
You're saying liberals like a war?
Yep. Always first to volunteer someone else up.
The same libs will pipe up about being out of money for fixing the country - will crow for plenty of money on defence being spent.
Is this the same Russia/Putin that hasn't defeated Ukraine nearly 4 years on from invading, sorry performing a "special operation" it? Even Putin surely isn't stupid enough to think he can win 2 wars by attacking Poland (who have a pretty advanced military vs Ukraine) as well (and who are a NATO country).
Exactly.
If Putin had been successful in taking over the whole of Ukraine in ten days (or whatever his original goal was) then I think we'd have every reason to worry that he wouldn't stop there. But the fact that four years on they are taking massive losses for tiny gains just shows that they are not the (conventional) military threat that they'd like to think they are.
I can't see Russian tanks rolling into the rest of Europe any time soon.
I'm also pleasantly surprised to find that, despite what must be huge frustration about the slow progress of the war, Putin hasn't resorted to any sort of nukes.
Maybe (once this is all over) they'll have a massive rearmament programme. If so, we'd have to match it. But I'm not sure their economy could stand it.
What is much more likely is that they continue to try to destabilise the West through hybrid warfare, which includes things like supporting far right parties, Trump, Brexit etc. That's the thing we've got to learn to defend ourselves against much better than we are: hostile foreign actors taking advantage of our free speech laws to destabilise our economies and political systems.
However, I'm not really clear on why they are causing so many fights with their neighbours just now - distraction perhaps?
One of Putin's/Russia's opinions is that great powers have a sphere of influence that encompasses neighbouring countries, and they have an unfettered right to do what they want in those countries/that sphere. This is obviously a philosophy that makes Trump indecently excited, and so he's started getting the US to act in a similar way towards its neighbours.
I heard it too.
Always goes down well with liberals.
They love the idea of ignoring the economy, NHS, Schools and crime but they sure do want some ammo.
You're saying liberals like a war?
Yep. Always first to volunteer someone else up.
The same libs will pipe up about being out of money for fixing the country - will crow for plenty of money on defence being spent.
Strangely (there's plenty more on the party website)
The Liberal Democrats’ ‘war readiness’ package includes a new bonus scheme to boost army numbers – putting the British Army in the best possible position to deter a war with Russia. This would involve giving a £10,000, one-off bonus to non-specialist new recruits who complete training and serve for two years. etc.
Didn't realise you were a defence expert as well as an economics ones. Can't wait to see your hot takes on this topic.
War/defence is the main area which supports the MMT narrative so I'm suprised you're so dismissive of rone's economic opinions. I think the explanation of why Cairns is talking up the prospect of war is probably due to the fact that the govt are desperate for economic growth. They can't spend money elsewhere in the economy because it would betray the lie that there is no money to spend. But war is the main exception to the austerity narrative. There is always a magic money tree when it comes to financing weapons and the military, all it requires is the threat. I'm not saying the threat doesn't exist but it seems to be a convenient solution to the protracted problem of stagnant economic growth. The problem is that armaments and armies often become self-fulfilling phenomena.
There’s no need to look for self interested Machiavellian reasons (that happen to align with your own political obsessions) why politicians across Europe now need to talk about increasing spending on our defences from this point forward… it’s much more simple than that… Putin has given them no choice but to stop clinging on to the “peace dividend”. That period in European history is over for now. And Trump is hammering that point home. It can’t be ignored or wished away by anyone in any government in any European country.
That LibDem policy was exactly what went through my head when someone mentioned conscription. There’s so much that can be done before getting anywhere near conscription. We’ve deliberately cut the professional forces right back, and will need to begin a process of reversing that.
It can’t be ignored or wished away by anyone in any government in any European country.
Bit confused because when I started this thread I was taking Cairns' comments at face value, but some on here who seem pretty clued up about war and defence issues say we're not on a war footing or under the immediate threat of a major war as suggested by Cairns and Rutte. Which is it?
If you just watch 10 mins of any Kremlin TV outlet, you'll soon understand that enemy no1 in Europe is the UK. Not NATO, not Ukraine - they've very careful to only ever talk about getting rid of the "neo-Nazi" govt in Ukraine. It's the UK. They blame the UK for espionage, for propaganda, for training Ukrainian troops, for supply weaponry, for sabotaging peace talks, everything.
We are, as far as the Russian are concerned, already at war.
It can’t be ignored or wished away by anyone in any government in any European country.
Bit confused because when I started this thread I was taking Cairns' comments at face value, but some on here who seem pretty clued up about war and defence issues say we're not on a war footing or under the immediate threat of a major war as suggested by Cairns and Rutte. Which is it?
Who really knows? None of us here are sat on the intelligence briefings to truly know the picture.
With my legacy knowledge, I know enough to know it won't be great.
And sadly there are some who think it's all hyperbole.
He may be speaking from a political perspective in terms of spending and resourcing capability. The military being on a war footing is a very different thing and I'm not hearing anything out of the ordinary, if I were I'd be very concerned. So it may be helpful to separate the two out.
One is an input, the other an output.
The same libs will pipe up about being out of money for fixing the country - will crow for plenty of money on defence being spent.
I thought there was general agreement across most of Europe that increased military spending is a must given the threat of Russia on one side and the threat of US withdrawing support for Europe on the other.
Slowoldman - I agree, it seems pretty obvious why. However reality isn't a reason to stop certain people throwing the term 'libs' around as if it offends others more than the negatives it says about the user.
We cannot trust the us anymore, and putin is pretty clear in what he wants. She his armies haven't done well in ukraine, but I personally want a deterrent rather than see more countries drawn into conflict. Or if it happens I want the f###ers annihilated at the borders
Amazing. Didn't realise you were a defence expert as well as an economics ones. Can't wait to see your hot takes on this topic.
Here's my hot take from my armchair of ignorance.
We are being prepared for war, but not a conventional or nuclear one. An information one, we already have vast amount of complete shite posted across every social media platform. The Russians will pile on even more feeding whatever causes the most division, doesn't really matter what it is just get the populations angry at each other, blame the left, centre, right, minorities, doesn't matter so long as you're constantly attacking them.. Then bribe the most corrupt, pro authoritarian options, assuming the Americans have left any room in their pockets stuffed full of cash.
. I think the explanation of why Cairns is talking up the prospect of war is probably due to the fact that the govt are desperate for economic growth.
I think it's because the Russians have poisoned people in the UK, ran groups committing arson in the UK, seek to destabilise UK institutions and companies, conduct offensive reconnaissance on sensitive UK, and EU infrastructure, have attempted to blow up UK and EU aircraft through the use of bombs in parcel post, seek to disrupt passenger aircraft with drones and lots of other stuff. But who knows it may all be a mmt thing.
^Yup, use authoritarian nationalism to split the west then mop up the more useful/resource rich bits of eastern Europe. Maybe the then have another go at the stans/Caucasus.
If you just watch 10 mins of any Kremlin TV outlet, you'll soon understand that enemy no1 in Europe is the UK. Not NATO, not Ukraine - they've very careful to only ever talk about getting rid of the "neo-Nazi" govt in Ukraine. It's the UK. They blame the UK for espionage, for propaganda, for training Ukrainian troops, for supply weaponry, for sabotaging peace talks, everything.
We are, as far as the Russian are concerned, already at war.
I've seen that were "the main bastards" a few times, but it seems to be Germany that gets attacked more.
I can't see Russian tanks rolling into the rest of Europe any time soon.
No, nobody will roll their tanks into Europe. Tanks are so yesterday. How much is a tank vs drone?
I'm also pleasantly surprised to find that, despite what must be huge frustration about the slow progress of the war, Putin hasn't resorted to any sort of nukes.
That's why "rolling" tanks into Europe does not make sense. Both sides know that tanks are costly and the result is poor.
Maybe (once this is all over) they'll have a massive rearmament programme. If so, we'd have to match it. But I'm not sure their economy could stand it.
"once this is all over"? Not in another 6 to 7 years time (I've predicted this as a 10 year war) and all will suffer economically.
What is much more likely is that they continue to try to destabilise the West through hybrid warfare, which includes things like supporting far right parties, Trump, Brexit etc. That's the thing we've got to learn to defend ourselves against much better than we are: hostile foreign actors taking advantage of our free speech laws to destabilise our economies and political systems.
That is a one sided perspective. You don't need foreign actors to destabilise the economies or political systems, the incompetent politicians are already doing that themselves.
I think it's because the Russians have poisoned people in the UK, ran groups committing arson in the UK, seek to destabilise UK institutions and companies, conduct offensive reconnaissance on sensitive UK, and EU infrastructure, have attempted to blow up UK and EU aircraft through the use of bombs in parcel post, seek to disrupt passenger aircraft with drones and lots of other stuff.
Indeed. Isn't it now taken as a given that it was Russia that was behind the cyber attack that shut down Jaguar Land Rover, which actually put a notable dint in the countries GDP? I think we can expect a lot more of that kind of thing.
Bit confused because when I started this thread I was taking Cairns' comments at face value, but some on here who seem pretty clued up about war and defence issues say we're not on a war footing or under the immediate threat of a major war as suggested by Cairns and Rutte. Which is it?
Mark Rutte is talking about preparing for something that might happen in five years
That isn't the same as a "war footing", it's merely sensible precautions because the "rules-based" world order is changing
Knowing politicians as we all do, if the current US Admin puts more responsibility on Europe for Europe's defence then no future US Admin will apologise, refund us and take the burden back. And rightly so
Europe has been content to let the US (and more recently Ukraine) shoulder the burden with some EU countries providing little, some hiding behind the others and others taking Russian energy products to both use and re-export.
That has to change
The US thinks it can milk the rest of the world to fill it's own pockets and needs put back in it's own box. If they want isolationism, let them have it. IMO all non-US NATO members should, en-masse, leave NATO and immediately form a new pact. Give the US 3 months to decommission their European bases and remove their weapons.
The "new" strategic defence partnership needs to scale up joint-domestic weapons production, and perhaps even be prepared to buy-in from elsewhere. Licensed production of <shudder> Chinese </shudder> systems? The mere thought of £/E/$ flowing to non-US manufacturers will fill Don's diaper to bursting point.
While we're at it we need to step up with some plausably deniable operations. What's that? The Yantar has sunk on dark and stormy night? Don't know anything about it, Comrade.
The key is, Europe and the non-US West need to act decisively, together, with a clear long-term plan. The US have shown themselves to petulant and unreliable Allies and the arse-kissing has to stop.
Just take the AJAX debacle as one example.
I still think we should have sent them to Russia to display "balance" between them and Ukraine. Ukraine gets stormshadows and Russia gets afvs which have about ten minutes to be effective before they take their own crew out.
Just take the AJAX debacle as one example.
I still think we should have sent them to Russia to display "balance" between them and Ukraine. Ukraine gets stormshadows and Russia gets afvs which have about ten minutes to be effective before they take their own crew out.
Vibrate them into submission.
I think it was Tim Marshall who said that it’s a long term threat because if Putin carked it tomorrow, what would emerge in his place would doubtless be even worse
I'm no expert but my gut suggests that when Putin goes there is no obvious succession. The resulting vacuum/infighting will make Russia focus inwards and reduce the expansionist threat.
The idea of my kids having to go to war is absolutely terrifying.
Europe has been content to let the US (and more recently Ukraine) shoulder the burden
Its a tad more complicated than that lazy hard right view.
Its a relationship which has been largely beneficial to both sides given how much of the European spend went to the USA and also meant the US didnt have Europe as a potential rival.
There is the lazy spend comparison but that ignores how much of the US spend is about its interests elsewhere as in Europe and also how much of the US spend is providing basic social security options eg GI bill/VA hospitals etc.
Can I say I saw the thread title and had a flashback to the start of the Covid thread
The idea of my kids having to go to war is absolutely terrifying.
I certainly don't relish the the thought of anyone's kids going to war.
I wish this country had better political masters and our political culture was more mature and responsible.
Although I'd do it all again if the knees were willing. I certainly miss the clowns, the circus, not so much.
I think we can expect a lot more of that kind of thing.
Careful now.
Putin gets taken out, possibly Trump at the same time. Don't ask me how, no idea.
Throw Nige in the mix as well?
If I was Vlad, things escalate and I really wanted to turn the screw on us, I'd sink an LNG tanker and a couple of container ships headed for the UK.
Europe has been content to let the US (and more recently Ukraine) shoulder the burden
Its a tad more complicated than that lazy hard right view.
Speaking of "lazy", at least use the full sentence for context 😉
Its a relationship which has been largely beneficial to both sides given how much of the European spend went to the USA and also meant the US didnt have Europe as a potential rival.
Only more recently. Some European countries have only just reached the old 2% GDP. Many still use Soviet weapons
There is the lazy spend comparison but that ignores how much of the US spend is about its interests elsewhere as in Europe and also how much of the US spend is providing basic social security options eg GI bill/VA hospitals etc.
The same NATO counting rules apply to every member and they all do it
Here are a couple of lines from a fellow hard-right observer (some describe him as a Nazi)
“Europe needs to step up … to secure real energy independence. You can’t keep buying gas from Moscow while also expecting security guarantees, help and backup from the Americans. That’s just wrong.”
“All European countries must be willing to spend as much on security as is truly needed, not just as much as they’ve gotten used to during years of neglect. If it takes 5 percent of GDP to cover defense, then so be it, 5 percent it is"
President Zelensky, Davos 2025
Ways to cripple their economy even more. Cloning James Corden a million times and threatening to unleash them across Russia.
Two war crimes don't make a right!
Yeah lets build more nukes. That'll solve it.
Our subs probably have enough to take out most Russian strategic positions, and as we usually know where the Russian’s subs are, because one of ours is close to them, it would be a dumb idea.
europe has relied on the US for a long time, but that's at the behest of the US to a large extent and has allowed them to maintain/increase their influence. obama and other former presidents have said that europe needs to step up and pay for it's own defense. seems reasonable and also would reduce our reliance on the US. we need to get our defense shit together quickly. if it was just a question of injecting more money in to the economy then health, education, and housing pay back significantly better than defense. the very idea that the government won't do that because it's visible or obvious is bollocks. we've (some time ago) been spending on that stuff at the expense of defense spending because the US has been picking up the bill. in return they've been fleecing us on the high street and in digital services.
We (the west) pussyfooted around Putin for too long, far too many fell for the 'NATO are the expansionist haddies, dont upset russia etc etc' nonsense
Putin rightly saw this as weakness and now with a completely supine trump in power he will keep on pushing and taking land to rebuild the old ussr
Crumbs, the ends the United States of America will go to further it's own interests ...
Beggars belief.
Our subs probably have enough to take out most Russian strategic positions, and as we usually know where the Russian’s subs are, because one of ours is close to them, it would be a dumb idea.
I think you may be overestimating our ‘at sea’ capability…
Europe has been content to let the US (and more recently Ukraine) shoulder the burden
Let's not forget that it suited the US as well, they'd much rather fight WW3 in Germany, than Indiana. That was the rather awful bargain of NATO after all. We don't care that you don't spend money on defence, we'll supply you weapons, and have bases all over the place, in return if shit goes south, it'll be in your back-yard, not ours.
I saw Edwin Starr perform an acapella version of that song live in a nightclub in Hereford. As you can imagine it somewhat changed the energy of the night.
Our subs probably have enough to take out most Russian strategic positions, and as we usually know where the Russian’s subs are, because one of ours is close to them, it would be a dumb idea.
I think you may be overestimating our ‘at sea’ capability…
There's a change brewing. The accession of Finland to NATO and agreements with the US in 23/24 opened Rovaniemi and Sodankylä up to NATO forces for both training and scalable forces according to threat levels. There are more remote areas accessible too
Russia's major nuclear sub bases around Murmansk are now within ATACMS range, which is a problem for Russia because most subs in a fleet are in port at any one time. Russia can't move the bases further east because the sea freezes
...and it's taken me writing this far to remember where I read this...
https://thebulletin.org/2025/12/the-looming-missile-crisis-in-the-arctic/
Europe has been content to let the US (and more recently Ukraine) shoulder the burden
Let's not forget that it suited the US as well, they'd much rather fight WW3 in Germany, than Indiana. That was the rather awful bargain of NATO after all. We don't care that you don't spend money on defence, we'll supply you weapons, and have bases all over the place, in return if shit goes south, it'll be in your back-yard, not ours.
I absolutely agree, but Europe has sat too far back for too long and now there's a mad scramble to catch up.
Had Europe got on with it in 2014 then we wouldn't be in this mess. Europe cannot support itself, let alone Ukraine without US assistance. This from February, but you can go back the fall of the Soviet Union with examples of where Europe needed to wake up to the changing of the 40 years (then) rules-based world order that guaranteed peace
Sir Keir Starmer has said any Ukraine peace deal would require a "US backstop" to deter Russia from attacking its neighbour again.
Speaking after a hastily convened meeting with European leaders in Paris, he said a "US security guarantee was the only way to effectively deter Russia", and vowed to discuss the "key elements" of a peace deal with US President Donald Trump in Washington next week. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn4z4w3v5y8o
Amazing. Didn't realise you were a defence expert as well as an economics ones.
I mean, he didn’t even post any acronyms.
The rules based world order which I grew up under seems to be gone It was always undermined by vested interests, the powerful countries and groups manipulated and sidelined it's institutions such as the UN . I wonder if we in the UK are now experiencing what it's like when your country is one of vulnerable ones rather than one of the "empire builders".
I think it was Tim Marshall who said that it’s a long term threat because if Putin carked it tomorrow, what would emerge in his place would doubtless be even worse
I'm no expert but my gut suggests that when Putin goes there is no obvious succession. The resulting vacuum/infighting will make Russia focus inwards and reduce the expansionist threat.
The idea of my kids having to go to war is absolutely terrifying.
There is no succession plan. Putin won't allow it. He is approaching Hitler in the bunker levels of delusion. He is terrified of death and poisoning hence his self-isolation.
We can the help Ukrainians fight against Russia or we can wait 5 years and end up doing it ourselves, even more bloodily.
Our experts above predict Russia-Ukraine war will last 10 years. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 and it's 2025 now...
"You won't see tanks rolling into Europe". Ukraine is Europe and that's exactly what happened...
"Putin won't invade another country". Putin is delusional and has already invaded Georgia and Ukraine, and occupied Moldova...
And Chechnya
And sadly there are some who think it's all hyperbole.
I don't think it's hyperbole, but I question the motives of Cairns and others like Rutte who are talking it up. To quote Rutte, "We must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured." Is that not hyperbole? It's pretty unambiguous, not to mention terrifying. I've got no problem with leaders being honest and telling people things are not going to be as easy as they have been for the past few decades, but this sort of scare-mongering seems extremely irresponsible. Or is it simply a case of 'we want more money out of you so we're going to terrify you into handing it over'?
And Chechnya
Chechnya is a good example of Putin’s absolute indifference to bloodshed and destruction. He has only become more extreme in the last 25 years.
I should probably have said that Putin continued the occupation of Moldovan territory.
People who think that conventional wars don't happen any more may want to examine what happened in Armenia recently...or, y'know, Ukraine right now.