this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
207 points (97.7% liked)

Europe

5033 readers
2078 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Germany is at a crossroads when it comes to its security policy — one of the deepest upheavals of the post-War era.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheMightyCat@lemm.ee 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

It would be best if there was an EU wide nuclear program. Not a nuclear sharing program but a nuclear program.

If this is impossible for whatever reason it is up to the member states to develop their own programs.

Russia would never have invaded if Ukraine kept their nukes.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Obelix@feddit.org 17 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I really would like that everybody who is proposing a german nuclear bomb would also explain where Germany should test its new bomb. Bavaria? Mecklenburg? Erzgebirge?

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 week ago

explain where Germany should test its new bomb

Mar-a-Lago

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The obvious answer is to partner with the UK or France and do it in the middle of fucking nowhere, south Atlantic or South Indian Ocean.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Melchior@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago

Something like the Vela incident could work, but seriously nukes are not that complex once you have the weapons grade uranium or plutonium. Everybody knows that Germany can easily produce weapons grade uranium so tests are not needed at all to work as a deterrent.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nesc@lemmy.cafe 15 points 1 week ago

Yes, if they want to be independent.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

~~AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera ...~~

AfD says "hell yeah", but to be honest it's not looking much better in other countries who might extend their nuclear shield (is that even a thing in English?) to Germany. What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA? Lesser of two evils ...

edit: whoops, wrong language. I hope this manual translation gets the point across.

[–] bzah@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 week ago

Yup! In Frankreich wir haben nukes und für defensive Zwecke das sieht gut aus. Aber wenn Lepen oder ihr Hundchen wird Präsident sein, dann tickt das Doomsdayclock noch einmal für alle...

[–] lIllIllIllIllIllIll@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA?

Why pick one when you can have both? Hitler and Stalin used to have a deal until they didn't.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NoxAstrum@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They just had an election where the second most popular party was an extreme-right-wing pack of lunatics. What happens when they win the next election?

You cannot afford to have nuclear weapons when you can't be sure who's going to have control of them.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago

If Putin and the USA already have them, isn't that hypothetical too far off when assessing risk?

There's a strong counter movement to the right. I'd rather have a strong deterrent against Putin than not. It's pretty obvious to me what the more immediate and more realistic risk is.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The article advocates/answers with infrastructure should be prepared so it can be purposed if it should ever be necessary.

There is, however, a third option: nuclear hedging. In this model, a country does not develop nuclear weapons outright but instead builds the technological capacity to produce them if ever deemed necessary.

Most of the comments here seem to discuss the headline instead - whether it should equip.

[–] poVoq@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago

This is what Germany has been doing for decades with its civil nuclear program, but it turned out to be an prohibitively expensive bondoggle and all the nuclear plants have been shut down now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Fucking obviously.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

An EU nuclear weapons programme would be by far preferable, but that requires a common EU foreign and defence policy.

Not having any nukes won't work with the current state of affairs, except for enjoyers of being on the receiving end of nuclear blackmail by an orange muppet, his puppeteer in Moscow, and Winnie the Pooh.

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

First off. Way to make sure everyone “doesn’t look up” re climate emergency. There’s no amount of nukes we can build that are more powerful and can be secured enough against nature’s planned devastation in the next 30 years. But for some reason all this war talk shit is just a welcome distraction.

Second. This is the same like all these governments asking Apple and Signal to build backdoors. Once you have a backdoor, it doesn’t discriminate who passes through it. Build all the nukes you want, all European governments will slide towards trumpism in the next 10 years anyway, as European politics seems to copy USA and is more and more infiltrated by foreign powers (also just like USA). I’m sure all the mini-me Aldofs, Elons and Donalds will appreciate a freshly build slab of nukes to establish their tyranny.

Boy are we stupid. Just smart enough to know we’re a bunch of clothed idiots.

Tldr use a condom

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Tldr use a condom

Instructions unclear, nuclear device now stuck inside condom.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Didn't they just close down all their nuclear power plants because they're too dangerous after Fukushima?

Building nuclear bombs doesn't seem like the next logical step.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You don't have to cool them. Freeer choice of location. I imagine a static good is much easier to safeguard and check.

Most of all, there's cheaper alternatives without a lot of surrounding questions. That's not the case for military deterrent.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

Too expensive for the little benefit. Turkey for example has none, but one of the bigger armies in the Mediterranean and can still project power.

I'd also recommend to talk to Poland and France about this first, if only for historic reasons.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›