358
submitted 1 year ago by zephyreks@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social 82 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As an American, I think my government has become WAY too inconsistent and unreliable. We might elect Trump again, ffs. America can’t be counted on to meet its NATO obligations anymore. Too many fascists are in positions of power and sympathize with Putin.

[-] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

As an American, it's 2023 we should never need weapons. Diplomacy should be the only option.

[-] drbluefall@toast.ooo 34 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately, many of our international contemporaries disagree. And as long as we do, we need something in case diplomacy fails.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Ukraine trusted diplomacy when they gave their nukes to Russia.

[-] Airazz@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

I'm sure russia would care a lot about your strongly worded letter if they decided to take Alaska back.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] AlexisFR@jlai.lu 6 points 1 year ago

This, just send a couple of hexbear users and watch their governments collapsing!

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Diplomacy backed by what? "Diplomacy" with no leverage is ink on worthless paper, there needs to be some kind of reason anyone should listen to you.

[-] cloud@lazysoci.al 4 points 1 year ago

As a human being i think you have become incosistent and unreliable too. Lean history, see what's happening around you, think with your own brain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That implies you considered me consistent and reliable in the past. I’m flattered.

[-] phillaholic@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

It benefits everyone to have distributed defense. Work together, but be able to have a basic level of your own defense is vital.

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 year ago

Europe shouldn't let it's home-grown defence industries languish in the name of strategic cohesion. Europe has no domestic competition to the F-35, no cohesive military procurement strategy that rewards European businesses, and no mechanism to avoid the shitshow of being entirely dependent on US defence contractors for maintenance of key defence infrastructure.

[-] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

It also doesn't have access to nearly as many raw materials as the United States does.

I wish we'd all just calm down with the military spending, but I also understand when dealing with the USA it's probably safer to not rely on then(us) to keep their(our) word

[-] Grimpen@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

Trump's presidency certainly showed that the US is one election away from balking. I'm pretty sure that's Putin's plan in Ukraine now.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

I hope they have no competition to the F-35 because everyone’s been saying it’s a piece of shit for the last fifteen years.

[-] force@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Anyone that says that has no idea what they're talking about lol, the F-35 is completely unmatched in terms of multirole aircraft (along with the F-22 for a more fighter-focused role) and likely will only be surpassed with gen 6 aircraft.

The SU-57 and practically any "modern" Russian aircraft are complete jokes that will fall apart with 2 seconds of airtime, and the J-20 and a majority of Chinese aircraft are cheap imitations of western (mainly American) technology which although much more capable than Russian aircraft, still fall behind a lot due to the corruption/authoritarianism in the Chinese military & government absolutely crumpling any hope of having actually competitive engineering & building.

European aircraft aren't even worth considering as competition either (although are far superior to the previous 2 nations' mentioned, in most cases). Eurofighters are just another one of the projects European nations had that was plagued by issues from the fact that it was multiple parties with differing requirements/interests/goals trying to develop something. Gripens are less effective budget alternatives to American gen 4 fighters. Etc. Etc.

The combined capabilities in technology, resources/wealth, and pool of experienced/intelligent engineers that the US has at its disposal makes it extremely hard to even dream of touching their capabilities when it comes to aircraft. Even with ground vehicles, the only real competition is Germany... but German armed forces are kind of in a state of disrepair right now, they've really neglected their military. It's really only the defense companies like Rheinmetall and KNDS which can be pointed to as successful currently.

Europe has a long way to go to compete with American military aircraft. Right now the US just has so much more experience and knowledge when it comes to fighter jets & more modern technologies present in said jets. It'd require a lot more investment in aerospace engineering and technology as a whole really, not just when it comes to aerospace. And Europe is currently even more desperate for tech workers than the US atm afaik.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

SAAB can't go toe to toe with American jets, that's true, and not what they were designed for. They'll shoot an SU out of the sky before the SU knows they exist. They're also still the only people to ever get a lock on a SR-71. As an American, I think they make some impressive jets. I even like their cars, but that's a can of heartbreak.

[-] Cynoid@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think the situation is more nuanced than that.

Of course, the F-35 program was an incredibly expensive mess (litterally the most expensive weapon program of all time), because of conflicting specs, data leaks, political infighting, cost overruns which are the stuff of legend, etc... At some moments, there were certainly reasons to think the whole program would collapse on itself like wet tissue paper.

But there are operational F35 now. 900+ as of 2023, which is 4 time more than the rest of Gen 5 fighters combined. And performance-wise, it is good, especially on the stealth & avionics parts. On the other side, the J-20 is largely unproven (probably a decent design, but not as good), and the Su-57 is a bunch of glorified prototypes.

Now sure, cost is high, maintenance is time-consuming, availability somewhat below target, but it's not particularly surprising for high-performance equipment. It may fall short of the ambition of the program on the cost part, but by itself it's a dangerous and fully operational fighter.

[-] GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I guess it was worth it in the end.

/s

[-] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

We didn't even roll it out for testing at VX squadrons until like 2018, and it's biggest claim to infamy is just being on the R&D line for like 25 years.

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

25 years that's for chumps. FCAS is probably going to take at least 2040 to be ready. Airbus got the contract in 2017, that's 23 years to 2040, and no of course it won't be on schedule.

Regarding the relative tech levels, though, Europe as a whole is simply not at the same schedule as the US. The F35 is replacing F16, F18, Harriers, from the 70s-80s, (which of course got upgrades), while the first Typhoon entered service in 2006.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

What? No. The only people saying that shit are Russian or Chinese talking heads, for obvious reasons.

Anyone else is singing the praises of the f-35. Literally it's biggest issue was with the alignment of its guns being fucky. But these things should never be in position to use guns in the first place.

[-] cloud@lazysoci.al 1 points 1 year ago

If defence industries mean the military complex then every country in the world should let that sector rotten and disappear.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

Europe should have left NATO 30 years ago, when the first cold war ended, and forged its own path, instead of continuing to get its marching orders from the USA. Now Europe is getting lead into a second cold war by them.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

Europeans starting to realize that NATO is a protection racket is pretty funny.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 10 points 1 year ago

A protection racket usually involves paying a potential attacker not to attack.

[-] Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Well this is certainly one flaming hot take

[-] Zimmy@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Lots of euro leaders have said the same over the years. The question as always is, what will you do about it?

[-] Chariotwheel@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Do nothing and blame Germany

[-] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

"Why didn't YOU make an army for us?!"

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

"We tried it ... once ... many people died"

[-] variaatio@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

Well PESCO did get created. Denmark dropped their opt out from CSDP. Stuff like this moves slowly, specially upon there not being single hegemonic leader saying "We do this" and everyone else answering "Yes boss". EU is herding catch and it makes everything move slowly.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Take your bets now everyone, we've got:

  • "stupidly tries to deepen ties with the cyberpunk oligarchy of China",

  • "stupidly try to deepen ties with the impotent Mafia state in Russia",

  • "stupidly try to deepen ties with petro-dictatorships/monarchies in MENA",

  • "immediately double back because they realized that reducing reliance on the US means having to actually uphold their NATO spending requirements at a minimum to replace the US subsidizing their national defenses",

and least likely of all,

  • "actually do anything even remotely productive towards genuinely achieving strategic autonomy as a democratic superpower in the world independent of the US' trajectory."
[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

How can China be an oligarchy if the CCP holds all the power? Billionaires ain't got shit in China, even fucking Jack Ma was forced to step in line.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Tell me you don't know the definition of oligarchy without telling me you don't know the definition of oligarchy.

[-] CheesyFox@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago
[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

And who do you think the CCP is?

oligarchy ŏl′ĭ-gär″kē, ō′lĭ- noun Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.

[-] jray4559@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

Alright, Czech guy, are you gonna put your constituents' money where your mouth is and help build up Europe's defense force? Or are you not gonna change a thing because you know the US will continue to act as the world police?

I think you know which one you'll choose.

[-] Bye@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Colonel sanders

this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
358 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32326 readers
524 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS