Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 302 posts

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#91

Post by ldng »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #12
throw0101d wrote: post #7

Some folks are arguing even further, "Japan, South Korea, and Poland need nuclear weapons immediately": > The modern world is a place where nuclear-armed great powers, led by authoritarian leaders, often feel the impulse to bully smaller nations. If those smaller nations lack nuclear weapons, they lie prostrate and vulnerable at the feet of the bullies. But if they have nukes, they are much harder to push around. Thi…

I think the collapse of the US as "The World's Policeman", will result in the most nuclear proliferation since the 50s. That alone will make the world a much, much more dangerous place.

It's one thing to want to withdraw orderly, it's another to treacherously backstab your allies.

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#93

Post by JumpCrisscross »

tombert wrote: post #66
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the collapse of the US as "The World's Policeman", will result in the most nuclear proliferation since the 50s. That alone will make the world a much, much more dangerous place.

Makes me wonder if I should get the hell out of New York. Seriously, if someone decides to nuke the US, where would they start? Almost certainly Washington DC and NYC. The US is too big to bomb in its entirety. Maybe I should move to Boise, Idaho or something. I don't think they're going to get bombed, and it seems nice.

> if someone decides to nuke the US, where would they start?

First, nuclear forces: ICBM and IRBM silos and their C2, nuclear weapons storage, strategic airfields and ballistic-missile submarine bases. (This is why nuclear arsenals escalate against each other. The defensive role of missile silos is both deference and to soak up the enemy’s nukes.)

Second, leadership: command posts and communication.

Third, other military: barracks, supply depots, marshalling points, airfields, ammunition storage, tank and vehicle storage.

Fourth, military industry: ammo, tank, APC factories; refineries; railyards and repair facilities. Steel, aluminum and power generation.

Fifth, population centres. (You don’t want to nuke New York if that could have taken out a silo that will flatten a dozen of your cities.)

In summary, somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere :).

https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-91-319fs.pdf page 22

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#94

Post by rKarpinski »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #48
rKarpinski wrote: post #30

> France and Britain are Europe's only two nuclear powers. What about the European power with the worlds largest nuclear arsenal?

> What about the European power with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal? If we’re being pedantic to the point of silliness, we could argue that a significant fraction of Russia’s nuclear assets are outside European Russia [1][2]. And that Muscovite Russia retains significant elements of its Mongol roots relative to the Kievan Rus [3]. [1] https://npolicy.org/interactive-nuclear-atlas/russias-nuclea... [2] https://en…

It's not pedantic, Russia is part of Europe and according to your link has 80% of its population in Europe [1]. The exclusion from the list of European Nuclear powers is incorrect and politically motivated.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Russia

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#95

Post by clivestaples »

picafrost wrote: post #54
clivestaples wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war has been going on for three years with no end in sight. What's the next move? What are your ideas to defeat Russia and take back the areas they've gained since 2014?

The US funded wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for 20 years with no idea what the next move was, no tangible end in sight, and stakes far lower. The so-called threat of weapons of mass destruction was enough to swiftly defeat Iraq's army, topple its government, and start an unprecedented manhunt for its leader. Russia has invaded a neighboring country twice and spent the first two years of the war they started threatenin…

I don't need a lecture on Russia's character. What I was curious to learn from you, or anyone, what could be done differently to defeat them? How would Russia respond if we send more advanced weaponry? Does Ukraine have the men to fight?

I'm getting downvoted but honestly looking for answers.

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#96

Post by p2detar »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #63
LAC-Tech wrote: post #16

The speed at which EU defense integration precedes is dizzying. In only: - one month after the US openly said it won't be the primary security guarantor of Europe - a month and a half after the second inauguration of a NATO sceptical president - three years after the start of a major european land war bordering the EU - 14 years after another US administration formally announced it's "Pivot to Asia" ... a European co…

Macron has been advocating for tighter European collaboration for years, insisting that there should be an integrated European army in 2018 and calling NATO "brain-dead" in 2019. The question is whether other European countries want to be integrated, and thus far the answer has been that they do not.

This is what people outside of Europe do not understand. We are not one country. We are 27 sovereign countries with their own parliament and their own final decisions that must coin a common European policy. This is an immense effort.

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#98

Post by aerostable_slug »

picafrost wrote: post #54
clivestaples wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war has been going on for three years with no end in sight. What's the next move? What are your ideas to defeat Russia and take back the areas they've gained since 2014?

The US funded wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for 20 years with no idea what the next move was, no tangible end in sight, and stakes far lower. The so-called threat of weapons of mass destruction was enough to swiftly defeat Iraq's army, topple its government, and start an unprecedented manhunt for its leader. Russia has invaded a neighboring country twice and spent the first two years of the war they started threatenin…

Because this President campaigned on ending the long wars, which he opposed. I'm not sure where the confusion lies because Trump has been very clear about getting the US out of what he views as foreign entanglements.

I'm not passing judgement on it, just noting that what we're seeing is consistent with his campaign messaging.

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#99

Post by [deleted] »

tombert wrote: post #66
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the collapse of the US as "The World's Policeman", will result in the most nuclear proliferation since the 50s. That alone will make the world a much, much more dangerous place.

Makes me wonder if I should get the hell out of New York. Seriously, if someone decides to nuke the US, where would they start? Almost certainly Washington DC and NYC. The US is too big to bomb in its entirety. Maybe I should move to Boise, Idaho or something. I don't think they're going to get bombed, and it seems nice.

[deleted]

Re: Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies

#100

Post by bad_user »

hagbard_c wrote: post #5
zzzeek wrote: post #2

yeah, they're going to have to build a new NATO-like alliance and go it alone. Seems like it would be a good thing if the EU had some military teeth of their own to give them more leverage in all the Bad Things going on now.

...and before you know it the old rivalries flare up again on who is to be the leader of this fourth iteration of a European empire. Germany versus France, France versus the UK, Germany versus Poland, Italy versus France, a combination of some of these versus one of the others. A 'European army' would be under the control of... the EU? Some new organisation to be specifically created for this purpose? Some committee-…

You can ask these questions about NATO as well, and while USA has been the greatest contributor, in a confrontation with China, it wouldn't stand a chance without its NATO allies.

I know that many like to complain of Europe's bureaucracy, but we're talking about half a billion educated people, with enough resources and with an existential crisis, which we're surely facing, the EU+UK, joined by allies, can be a force to be reckoned with.

The problems EU is facing come from within. We have far right movements as well, aided by propaganda, the pandemic and the immigration waves. The far right are more contained than in the US apparently (due to US having just 2 parties), but it can lead to government paralysis. Seeing the US administration ally itself with Russia to dismember the EU wasn't in my cards.

So, it's going to be an interesting year.

Post reply on HN