Macron to open debate on extending French nuclear protection to European allies • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by chronid » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 3:28 AM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #249

chronid wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was effectively uniform foreign policy between the US and its allies for the last thirty years, even under the first Trump presidency, and this included at least a certain degree of interventionism (first Iraq war, Yugoslavia...) which solidified international institutions (differently from the second Iraq war and Afghanistan, which weakened them). Even if they didn't agree, EU nations and Canada at least sent…

I'm not sure why you keep saying "surprised". I'm not surprised. But it's not the case that EU nations and Canada sent their soldiers to die in Iraq; France in particular sided with Russia to block the Security Council from authorizing military action, leading to substantial tensions with the US and widespread disapproval from the public on both sides. European demonstrations against the war remain one of the largest…

> But it's not the case that EU nations and Canada sent their soldiers to die in Iraq

They did, not all of them but many did. On Canada I may be wrong, sure. I believe even Ukraine has KIAs in Iraq.

> France in particular sided with Russia to block the Security Council from authorizing military action, leading to substantial tensions with the US and widespread disapproval from the public on both sides. European demonstrations against the war remain one of the largest mass movements in history.

The Iraq and Afghanistan wars broke the model the US and EU had been trying to push until that moment, alienating the south of the world from it and providing certain countries with a justification for their future actions. France had the right of it in the UN assembly.

People were angry back then for similar reasons they're angry and shocked now, and once again it has to do with expectations.

I also don't believe the Iraq war alone is not really enough to deny the alignment between EU and US foreign policy in the last 30 years or so anyway. You won't have complete agreement with 30 nations involved ever.

> But the North Atlantic Treaty simply does not contain a promise to align foreign policy in this way.

I think this in your original comment highlights your surprise at what those people believe, or at least your not understanding it?

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

#252

Post by qingcharles » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 3:42 AM UTC

rich_sasha wrote: post #207

EA-3167 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without in any way indulging in the delusion of a united Europe, in which Germany is willing to subordinate itself to France, one thing is worth saying: The UK does have a nuclear arsenal, but it's essentially leased from the US.

I wonder how it works in practice. I share the scepticism that the UK can fire these independently. But then, from a purely technical PoV, you'd imagine these missiles can be fired: - from underwater, away from radio reception - as a second strike weapon, i.e. with command centres destroyed So here's the dichotomy. If these assumptions hold, then the UK must be able to fire the missiles independently - they seem to w…

You make a good point about them being underwater and having to function offline.

I could see them having some sort of DRM "license key" that only gives, say, a 90 day window before it has to be renewed for the missiles to function.

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

#253

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:07 AM UTC

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.

Idaho National Lab (the leading center for nuclear energy research and development) is 200 miles from Boise. Not a direct hit but still not fun.

https://inl.gov/

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

#254

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:10 AM UTC

quackscience wrote: post #124

tombert wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

New Yorker here. Last year one of my meditation teachers here in the city casually mentioned that in some sects of Tibetan Buddhism there's a prophecy of some sort of catastrophic global event between 2026 and 2032, and a former monk friend of his advised him to leave NYC by 2030. From some casual googling it seems like the text is "The Light That Makes Things Clear: A Prophecy of Things to Come". I'm a non-believer…

My personal 'unknown wisdom' conspiracy is that there's some knowledge about UAPs which is why politicians are being so weird. Rubio/Vance going from calling Trump a nazi to joining him. I know it's just they're shitty people, but part of me would rather it's some secret UAP knowledge.

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

#255

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:17 AM UTC

Aloisius wrote: post #240

palata wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> though they ultimately chose to denuclearize under the Budapest Memorandum in exchange for security assurances. That the US and the UK (and obviously Russia) did not honour, did they?

It has been honored by the US and UK. The only obligations it imposes, besides not attacking Ukraine, is to seek UN Security Council action should Ukraine be nuked. I don't know why people keep trotting it out like it's a comprehensive defense pact.

That isn't the American Secretary of States opinion:

https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns...

Nor is the US currently 'honoring it' clear from a direct reading of the langauge:

https://bsky.app/profile/igorsushko.bsky.social/post/3ljnqjm...

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

#256

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:18 AM UTC

ssssvd wrote: post #188

palata wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> though they ultimately chose to denuclearize under the Budapest Memorandum in exchange for security assurances. That the US and the UK (and obviously Russia) did not honour, did they?

It had been honoured — or at least not directly violated — for 20 years. And in international affairs, 20 years is "forever." Between 1918 and 1938, how many treaties were signed, broken, rewritten, and ignored by how many powers?

Man so many American's about to be relieved they can stop honoring their 30 year mortgagee.

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

#257

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:19 AM UTC

arandomusername wrote: post #87

onepremise wrote: post #9

Given that the Trump administration aligns itself with Russia and North Korea, the EU will need it. The US convinced Ukraine to scrap their nukes as they promised they would come to Ukraine's aid if needed. Trump is basically exploiting the situation to gain access to their natural resources. He's also telling them to let Russia keep the territory they stole when they Invaded Ukraine. Yes imagine that, Russia startin…

> The US convinced Ukraine to scrap their nukes as they promised they would come to Ukraine's aid if needed No they didn't. There was never any promise like that.

The current United States Secretary of State disagrees with you:

https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns...

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

#258

Post by _DeadFred_ » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 4:21 AM UTC

arandomusername wrote: post #232

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Negotiating with Putin does not violate "to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine" because it's not enforced America negotiating with Putin on the future borders of Ukraine absolutely disrespects its sovereignty (by not including them) and borders. The proper role, if we wanted to directly mediate, would have been making it clear to Kyiv that the resource roll was done while i…

Again, it doesn't because America is not deciding for Ukraine. America negotiates a deal with Russia, then sends the deal to Ukraine and it's up to them to take it or leave it. Just because you don't like how the negotiating is done does not mean that US is disrespecting Ukraine's sovereignty.

https://bsky.app/profile/igorsushko.bsky.social/post/3ljnqjm...

'to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind;'

The US is making any support contingent on a peace agreement that Ukraine doesn't want because it doesn't want to give up it's land.

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

#259

Post by insane_dreamer » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 5:27 AM UTC

TheAlchemist wrote: post #73

For several reasons, France is uniquely positioned to be the leader of Europe. Nuclear arms, a lot of nuclear energy, defense industry, food independence. All of this thanks to Charles De Gaulle, who insisted that France must be autonomous in most important domains. With hindsight, this was extremely important. Without France's nuclear energy and arms, Europe would be in a very very bad position right now.

Also, crucially, France has no US military bases

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

#260

Post by saguntum » Thu, Mar 06, 2025, 5:42 AM UTC

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 French discussions of extending nuclear deterrence over Europe are meant to dissuade nuclear proliferation vis a vis Poland and maybe Germany. The US nuclear umbrella via the NATO alliance once served that purpose. Now, France is trying to contain nuclear proliferation.