The nato is a shadow of what it was now.
If anything, european forces have to connect each other with an integrated EU mission along the old structures of Nato.
As you mention it: Trump is not going to be supportative of the Nato, Britain is busy with itself, Turkey is becoming an antiwest autocracy and germany's army is a joke.
It would also be wise for European nations to ask for requests from other nations if possible, because they're definitely going to need all the manpower they can get to prevent such a sensitive event that could lead to an enormous destruction.
It would also be wise for European nations to ask for requests from other nations if possible, because they're definitely going to need all the manpower they can get to prevent such a sensitive event that could lead to an enormous destruction.
I don't think so. Europe should not make itself even more dependend, it has to become independend.
It is not like it can't. Germany has more than enough money to build up a respectable defensive army together with france which would be enough to react to the hybrid warfare like in Ukraine.
But it has to accept its new leadership role for that and mend relations with france (they are not bad, but also not intimate as they should be).
I don't think so. Europe should not make itself even more dependend, it has to become independend.
It is not like it can't. Germany has more than enough money to build up a respectable defensive army together with france which would be enough to react to the hybrid warfare like in Ukraine.
But it has to accept its new leadership role for that and mend relations with france (they are not bad, but also not intimate as they should be).
Well, it's not really about being dependent on other nations; it's more about unity against a common enemy.
But if this does initiates nations to stand up with a new leadership, then it would be an interesting progress.
Well, it's not really about being dependent on other nations; it's more about unity against a common enemy.
But if this does initiates nations to stand up with a new leadership, then it would be an interesting progress.
I think that we need to strengthen the european core again. Europe is too divided and we have to find a common ground before too many states already are run by rightwing nutjobs. The most important nations here are germany and france, and to a lesser extent spain, italy and poland.
If those nations can find a common ground, the rest are going to follow.
I think that we need to strengthen the european core again. Europe is too divided and we have to find a common ground before too many states already are run by rightwing nutjobs. The most important nations here are germany and france, and to a lesser extent spain, italy and poland.
If those nations can find a common ground, the rest are going to follow.
I think France and Germany will find a common ground. Not sure about Poland tho.
Well, hopefully that is the case. For Russia, this seems like a HUGE opportunity for them to take action.
I think France and Germany will find a common ground. Not sure about Poland tho.
Well, hopefully that is the case. For Russia, this seems like a HUGE opportunity for them to take action.
The most desirable case for me would be the sarkozy merkel duo again. They had good working relations.
Poland is ideologically very anti russia. That is not good because their government consists of rightwingers, but at least they are not suspectible to the propaganda attacks.
This is one of the issues they would, in military terms, be a desirable partner.
However, the biggest problem to solve are propaganda attacks, not the military.
Russia wouldnt dare to attack an EU or Nato state by hybrid warfare unless it can be sure that it has all the important european leaders in the bag.
And it does not, yet.
There is no real solution to the propaganda attacks. other than putin getting deposed and the next guy kindly stopping them. At this point EU and US might just unite to troll russia ruthlessly until they stop. On the other hand a politically unstable russia is not necessarily a desirable scenario. Being that they are russians and all.
The most desirable case for me would be the sarkozy merkel duo again. They had good working relations.
Poland is ideologically very anti russia. That is not good because their government consists of rightwingers, but at least they are not suspectible to the propaganda attacks.
This is one of the issues they would, in military terms, be a desirable partner.
However, the biggest problem to solve are propaganda attacks, not the military.
Russia wouldnt dare to attack an EU or Nato state by hybrid warfare unless it can be sure that it has all the important european leaders in the bag.
And it does not, yet.
Well, that would be good until recently, Merkel is underfire after a picture shows that she's been a Red footsoldier. Don't know much about the details yet, but I think that option might cease to exist.
But at least Poland won't take shit from Russia, it seems. I suppose that'll do, for now.
I guess it depends on how propaganda attacks are resolved. If propaganda attacks credible sources, then it would definitely pose a threat to information that gets passed around (which would start a confusion among the people: who do they trust? And which news are trustworthy?). I know Turkey... forget about that, they've banned social media all because of a political opposition (or something along the line, either way).
There is no real solution to the propaganda attacks. other than putin getting deposed and the next guy kindly stopping them. At this point EU and US might just unite to troll russia ruthlessly until they stop. On the other hand a politically unstable russia is not necessarily a desirable scenario. Being that they are russians and all.
Russia is already not stable anymore.
It looks stable, like all dictatorships do, until frustration errupts.
Russia is in a worse spot than ever, thus it is so mindboggling that the west is afraid of it and just let's it lash out.
They are economically weak with big chances of it getting worse.
Their military is strong, but it does not do them any good.
And politically, they were, at least until recently very isolated.
And Putin is not getting younger. And he cared so that there is noone who could replace him.
What russia wanted was to rebuild an eurasion federation under its leadership, and the EU destroyed that plan with the association treaty with ukraine.
I think that was the moment when Putin had to acknowledge its weakness. Not even their 'brother nation' Ukraine would choose them over the EU (without even being a candidate for getting into it, no less, just for the association, they denied the eurasian federation).
That must have hurt him.
And the seemingly best answer he had was trying his best to destabilize the west, with success.
But we must not forget that nothing has changed: Russia's economy is not better in a world with emerging powers like china and india and less and less focus on oil and gas.
Russia is only scary when you are afraid.
Well, that would be good until recently, Merkel is underfire after a picture shows that she's been a Red footsoldier. Don't know much about the details yet, but I think that option might cease to exist.
But at least Poland won't take shit from Russia, it seems. I suppose that'll do, for now.
I guess it depends on how propaganda attacks are resolved. If propaganda attacks credible sources, then it would definitely pose a threat to information that gets passed around (which would start a confusion among the people: who do they trust? And which news are trustworthy?). I know Turkey... forget about that, they've banned social media all because of a political opposition (or something along the line, either way).
Umm...that news is like 2 years old, isn't it? There is really noone who is not already a conspiracy nut in germany who would think merkel got ties to communists. So, nah, Merkel is going to be the next chancellor of germany. And if not her, it will be a more leftist government (for the offchance of spd grüne and linke having a coalition, which is a BIG offchance since they likely wouldnt even have enough votes, nor be willing).
Yeah, sadly, we can 'forget' about a lot of nations which would have been considered allies not too many years ago.
Russia is already not stable anymore.
It looks stable, like all dictatorships do, until frustration errupts.
Russia is in a worse spot than ever, thus it is so mindboggling that the west is afraid of it and just let's it lash out.
They are economically weak with big chances of it getting worse.
Their military is strong, but it does not do them any good.
And politically, they were, at least until recently very isolated.
And Putin is not getting younger. And he cared so that there is noone who could replace him.
What russia wanted was to rebuild an eurasion federation under its leadership, and the EU destroyed that plan with the association treaty with ukraine.
I think that was the moment when Putin had to acknowledge its weakness. Not even their 'brother nation' Ukraine would choose them over the EU (without even being a candidate for getting into it, no less, just for the association, they denied the eurasian federation).
That must have hurt him.
And the seemingly best answer he had was trying his best to destabilize the west, with success.
But we must not forget that nothing has changed: Russia's economy is not better in a world with emerging powers like china and india and less and less focus on oil and gas.
Russia is only scary when you are afraid.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
Umm...that news is like 2 years old, isn't it? There is really noone who is not already a conspiracy nut in germany who would think merkel got ties to communists. So, nah, Merkel is going to be the next chancellor of germany. And if not her, it will be a more leftist government (for the offchance of spd grüne and linke having a coalition, which is a BIG offchance since they likely wouldnt even have enough votes, nor be willing).
Yeah, sadly, we can 'forget' about a lot of nations which would have been considered allies not too many years ago.
I have no doubt that russia is a dictatorship but that is not quite the same thing as being unstable. Putin enjoys very high approval ratings and has control over the media and government institutions. Unless absolutely everything we know about russia is a lie (which would border on conspiracy theories), then their current situation is quite stable even if they have a crippling economic crisis. Dictators have a way of keeping their masses in check. In putin's case I believe they see him as someone "standing up" to the west and whatnot.
As for putins age... You are way too optimistic. The guy is 64 years old. He could easily have 20 extra years in power. Just look at fidel castro...
As for russia being scary.... You are correct in that their military might is not that relevant nowadays (regardless of how much they like to pretend it is. I wonder how much of a surprise will it be for trump when he discovers this). It's not like it even vaguely compares to that of the US, and the EU, if it got its head out of its ass, could match and surpass them within years. But they are scary because their effect on the world is very real. I don't think "not being afraid" of russia is a healthy attitude considering the stuff they do. Even merely years ago putin went full soviet and had a guy killed. In england.
Umm...that news is like 2 years old, isn't it? There is really noone who is not already a conspiracy nut in germany who would think merkel got ties to communists. So, nah, Merkel is going to be the next chancellor of germany. And if not her, it will be a more leftist government (for the offchance of spd grüne and linke having a coalition, which is a BIG offchance since they likely wouldnt even have enough votes, nor be willing).
Yeah, sadly, we can 'forget' about a lot of nations which would have been considered allies not too many years ago.
Huh, that's odd. Was trying to look for the article, but it may have been an old one. I don't know...
But didn't she lost in some election months ago with her party taking third place or something? I mean, does this really affect the Left in Germany in some way?
I have no doubt that russia is a dictatorship but that is not quite the same thing as being unstable. Putin enjoys very high approval ratings and has control over the media and government institutions. Unless absolutely everything we know about russia is a lie (which would border on conspiracy theories), then their current situation is quite stable even if they have a crippling economic crisis. Dictators have a way of keeping their masses in check. In putin's case I believe they see him as someone "standing up" to the west and whatnot.
As for putins age... You are way too optimistic. The guy is 64 years old. He could easily have 20 extra years in power. Just look at fidel castro...
As for russia being scary.... You are correct in that their military might is not that relevant nowadays (regardless of how much they like to pretend it is. I wonder how much of a surprise will it be for trump when he discovers this). It's not like it even vaguely compares to that of the US, and the EU, if it got its head out of its ass, could match and surpass them within years. But they are scary because their effect on the world is very real. I don't think "not being afraid" of russia is a healthy attitude considering the stuff they do. Even merely years ago putin went full soviet and had a guy killed. In england.
Putins approval ratings are high, so much is true, but his approval inside the people who dont look on him favourably is abysmal.
Gaddafi was also deemed as popular in his country before he was gone.
We also, without even using conspiracies, have to acknowledge that putin closes independend pollsters. His approval ratings might not be as high as people think. In the presidential elections, he got 63% with 65% turnout. And that even tho, if we are honest, he has no real opposition and no real alternative.
For someone controlling all media and being able to shut critics at will, that is not terribly high approval. And there was not even a candidate from the real opposition who could have been voted.
And yes, putin's popularity stems from the thought that at least he is powerful and not weak. That is why he basically had no real choice but to raise hell once he lost to the EU in ukraine. Once he is seen as weak, he is gone.
And well, ya, he can kill a guy alright. That's the ex KGB in him. BUt he cannot reform the economy of his country. What is he gonna do if people shut down the russian propaganda (if necessary by forcing facebook to change their algorithms so that most of the bot propaganda or conspiracy stuff does not show up)?
What is he gonna do now that he wastes lots of money in syria and ukraine (money he does not have), faces sanctions and even without those, is in a big oil and gas crisis?
Even if he gets the whole west to its knees, russia is even by now basically a junior partner to china. They don't take russia serious.
And as far as propaganda goes, that won't work in a regime as censorhappy as china.
Russia is in a bad spot, and no destructive behaviour putin gets through will change that. Vice versa: It hurts russia.
He would have to get insanely lucky and have germany, france and the US have a sustainable russia friendly government at the same time for his actions to even remotely pay off. For now, he has no chance for that in germany (Merkel will get 4 more years).
And if France does not by offchance get le pen into office, that won't be a reliable partner too.
They got trump, but who knows what will happen in 4 years? I see trump heading for disaster, i dont think he will get reelected.
The bad thing is that he can hurt the west. He can do that by a large margin.
But the other truth is that none of it actually benefits russia, but just Putin keeping power. Domestic power. His power on the global scale is very limited by now.
As i said: Economically russia is a desaster and heading for worse.
And politically, even if they get friendly govs in the west, at least half of their former satellites are russia sceptics now and either head for china or for the EU.
The only partner he might get is turkey, and that is a whole other story.
Huh, that's odd. Was trying to look for the article, but it may have been an old one. I don't know...
But didn't she lost in some election months ago with her party taking third place or something? I mean, does this really affect the Left in Germany in some way?
A lot of her parties elections on the state scale (bundesländer) were pretty bad for her party, yes, but that does not matter a lot in the national scale.
If we look at the polls (which in germany are actually reliable, in the latest 3 elections they were almost never off for more than 1,5%), we see this:
Let's assume the WORST for the CDU: 30% from insa (which is probably off because insa has another counting system than the other polls, but let's just assume),
Then the only other party who can get the CDU over 30% votes is the SPD with 22% votes (they need 50% of votes which went to parties who get more than 5% of the votes, so any coalition needs roughly 47% of the vote to reign if no other party falls under 5% which is now over it).
There is no other possible coalition of leftist forces taking that hurdle. The best spd linke and grüne have to offer is 44% (in their BEST polling).
So, while possible, it is questionable whether even if they would decide to do it, they would want to.
The SPD is not very unhappy with the coalition, the grüne at the moment even thinks openly about a CDU grüne coalition and the linke is not able to get rid of its hardliners, which make it hard to have any coalition with anyone.
Furthermore, there is just no likeable candidate in the SPD who could become chancellor. Gabriel is liked far worse than merkel. And gabriel is not the type of guy to let anyone else reign if his party is the strongest, not even someone from his own party.
And the only green who would be liked enough to compete with merkel lately said that he hopes she stays chancellor.
The AfD is, politically, not socially, irrelevant here.
They have noone to have a coalition with, and their will get into parliament in the strength of any other opposition party (about the strength of greens and linke).
Also, by now, there is infighting again in the AfD. We might see a further decline in their popularity if petry (the leader) gets weaker.
The AfD only saw a rise in popularity with the refugee crisis and petries emerge.
The refugee crisis is not as big of a topic as before anymore and except for petry, there is noone in the party who even could pretend to be a rational and competent human being (run of the mill rightwingers with no idea what they talk about whatsover, which is in fact even seen that way by lots of people who vote that party)..
Merkel is not stupid enough (if she wants to reign more, she seems tired of it but probably sees the duty right now) to let any scandal destroy the way things are now. Without the refugee crisis, her party would probably still be at 40% and its numbers are in fact in a slow upward trend since some time.
In my opinion, there is simply no way arround merkel as the next chancellor if she goes for it.
This is an if, but a small one.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
Now, for all the people who told me that the hacks were definitely not from russia and Trump is not putin's pet:
Seated next to Simonyan at the dinner and just two seats away from Putin himself was perhaps the most intriguing example of how the Russians have gone about recruiting disaffected members of that establishment: a rugged-looking man in a tuxedo who less than 18 months earlier had been head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s powerful in-house equivalent of the CIA. Michael Flynn, now a private citizen after a reportedly disgruntled retirement, was not there to gather intelligence. His attendance at the RT gala, before which he also gave a talk on world affairs, appeared to inaugurate a relationship with the network—presumably a paid one, though neither Flynn nor RT answered queries on the subject. Flynn now makes semi-regular appearances on RT as an analyst, in which he often argues that the U.S. and Russia should be working more closely together on issues like fighting ISIL and ending Syria’s civil war. “Russia has its own national security strategy, and we have to respect that,” he said in one recent appearance. “And we have to try to figure out: How do we combine the United States’ national security strategy along with Russia’s national security strategy, despite all the challenges that we face?”
At a moment of semi-hostility between the U.S. and Russia, the presence of such an important figure at Putin’s table startled current and former members of the Obama administration. “It was extremely odd that he showed up in a tuxedo to the Russian government propaganda arm’s party,” one former Pentagon official told me.
Putins approval ratings are high, so much is true, but his approval inside the people who dont look on him favourably is abysmal.
Gaddafi was also deemed as popular in his country before he was gone.
We also, without even using conspiracies, have to acknowledge that putin closes independend pollsters. His approval ratings might not be as high as people think. In the presidential elections, he got 63% with 65% turnout. And that even tho, if we are honest, he has no real opposition and no real alternative.
For someone controlling all media and being able to shut critics at will, that is not terribly high approval. And there was not even a candidate from the real opposition who could have been voted.
And yes, putin's popularity stems from the thought that at least he is powerful and not weak. That is why he basically had no real choice but to raise hell once he lost to the EU in ukraine. Once he is seen as weak, he is gone.
And well, ya, he can kill a guy alright. That's the ex KGB in him. BUt he cannot reform the economy of his country. What is he gonna do if people shut down the russian propaganda (if necessary by forcing facebook to change their algorithms so that most of the bot propaganda or conspiracy stuff does not show up)?
What is he gonna do now that he wastes lots of money in syria and ukraine (money he does not have), faces sanctions and even without those, is in a big oil and gas crisis?
Even if he gets the whole west to its knees, russia is even by now basically a junior partner to china. They don't take russia serious.
And as far as propaganda goes, that won't work in a regime as censorhappy as china.
Russia is in a bad spot, and no destructive behaviour putin gets through will change that. Vice versa: It hurts russia.
He would have to get insanely lucky and have germany, france and the US have a sustainable russia friendly government at the same time for his actions to even remotely pay off. For now, he has no chance for that in germany (Merkel will get 4 more years).
And if France does not by offchance get le pen into office, that won't be a reliable partner too.
They got trump, but who knows what will happen in 4 years? I see trump heading for disaster, i dont think he will get reelected.
The bad thing is that he can hurt the west. He can do that by a large margin.
But the other truth is that none of it actually benefits russia, but just Putin keeping power. Domestic power. His power on the global scale is very limited by now.
As i said: Economically russia is a desaster and heading for worse.
And politically, even if they get friendly govs in the west, at least half of their former satellites are russia sceptics now and either head for china or for the EU.
The only partner he might get is turkey, and that is a whole other story.
Well, yeah, but his approval among people who don't like him is not relevant here. If the majority of the population sees him favorably then that is what matters. That's how two bit dictators with brutal authoritarian regimes work. Even two bit dictators with merely authoritarian regimes can roll with that comfortably. As for the economic disaster.... Dictators aren't impeded by those. They thrive in those. Sure, there are things they find annoying but they can comfortably ride the "It's the west fault" wave for years. And russians seems to have an astounding ability to tolerate hardship along with an inability to give a fuck which at least at first might be enough to hold putin in power for a long time. If there is a tipping point it's years away when putin actually looses his popularity AND there is a meaningful opposition. Which he might stave of by merely murdering them.
As for trump's reelection.... I wouldn't rule it out. He made it to president after all. Remember reagan? That hollywood actor whose presidency was filled with scandals, some of which dabbled in mild treason? The guy who destroyed mental health care. The guy who crushed unions. The guy who was seen by foreign leaders as a dumb and/or ignorant. The guy who fired 13000 air traffic controllers and it took a decade to train people and get the whole thing back on track. The guy was ignorant of foreign and domestic affairs (which as far as any reasonable person can tell is all of the job). The guy basically embarked on a feel good presidency that raised america's self stem without there being much substance to it. And the guy currently is remembered as the best thing since Jesus. Maybe even tied with Jesus. A trump reelection is entirely possible (Which is why it's idiotic that the left's stance at the US so far seems to be "let's give this tiny orange overtly racist man a chance". The left should have started working towards impeding everything trump promised from the second it seemed like hillary might not win the presidency).
It really does depend tho. If Trump and his administration has been a complete disaster and there has been a better Democratic Candidate, then I can see him losing his re-election.
Then again, it really does depend if Trump remains as President, assuming he does some stupid shit that'll cost him his position.
Well, yeah, but his approval among people who don't like him is not relevant here. If the majority of the population sees him favorably then that is what matters. That's how two bit dictators with brutal authoritarian regimes work. Even two bit dictators with merely authoritarian regimes can roll with that comfortably. As for the economic disaster.... Dictators aren't impeded by those. They thrive in those. Sure, there are things they find annoying but they can comfortably ride the "It's the west fault" wave for years. And russians seems to have an astounding ability to tolerate hardship along with an inability to give a fuck which at least at first might be enough to hold putin in power for a long time. If there is a tipping point it's years away when putin actually looses his popularity AND there is a meaningful opposition. Which he might stave of by merely murdering them.
I disagree there. It does not take a majority to get you unthroned.
There were revolutions started by as few as 15% of the population.
Thing is: Putin rides that thing for years already. Russians are very patient, sure, but the problems get worse.
For now, they get poorer, alright. But we will see what happens when their actual standard of living is diminished by a big margin.
That will take some time, but i see big problems for putin on the horizon. He plays the 'west is guilty' card as everybody else, but how will he play it if he succeeds in russiafriendly western governments? Russians are not stupid. At some point he will have to explain them why the youth cannot find jobs inside russia and why old people cannot afford to live.
Lots of the effects are mitigated for now, but he cannot do it forever.
As for trump's reelection.... I wouldn't rule it out. He made it to president after all. Remember reagan? That hollywood actor whose presidency was filled with scandals, some of which dabbled in mild treason? The guy who destroyed mental health care. The guy who crushed unions. The guy who was seen by foreign leaders as a dumb and/or ignorant. The guy who fired 13000 air traffic controllers and it took a decade to train people and get the whole thing back on track. The guy was ignorant of foreign and domestic affairs (which as far as any reasonable person can tell is all of the job). The guy basically embarked on a feel good presidency that raised america's self stem without there being much substance to it. And the guy currently is remembered as the best thing since Jesus. Maybe even tied with Jesus. A trump reelection is entirely possible (Which is why it's idiotic that the left's stance at the US so far seems to be "let's give this tiny orange overtly racist man a chance". The left should have started working towards impeding everything trump promised from the second it seemed like hillary might not win the presidency).
I dont see the left having that stance in liberal media tho. And it should not be, i agree on that.
He wasted any goodwill he might have had from me by giving the breitbart guy a job.
I exspect him to do a much worse job than bush domestically (and he was not horrible in that).
The Iraq war is one thing, lots of americans initially supported it and bush's reelection was just one year,
At that point, many americans didnt realize the scale of the iraq war failure yet.
That is a whole different thing if you screw up hard domestically with tax bullshit or by taking the popular parts of obama care away.
