Recent posts

#31

Off the Record / Re: The EU thread

Last post by Tamas - Today at 01:43:03 PM

those could run for parliament?

 

#32

Off the Record / Re: US - Greenland Crisis Thre...

Last post by Zanza - Today at 01:40:24 PM

... so the path to taking it seriously is for traitors to get into positions of influence, fuck over Europe (but not enough to permanently cripple Europe), and thus cause the population to take things seriously enough to create the conditions for necessary reform?

Huh? Not sure how that follows from my post.

#33

Off the Record / Re: US - Greenland Crisis Thre...

Last post by Jacob - Today at 01:34:26 PM

... so the path to taking it seriously is for traitors to get into positions of influence, fuck over Europe (but not enough to permanently cripple Europe), and thus cause the population to take things seriously enough to create the conditions for necessary reform?

That's essentially Putin and Trump's assessment of Europe, the only difference is that they seek to actively exploit and increase that weakness rather than remedy it.

#34

Off the Record / Re: US - Greenland Crisis Thre...

Last post by Zanza - Today at 01:24:08 PM

I don't think the problem with Europe is lack of potential capability, but political will.

We obviously have the capability to hurt China, Russia or even the United States. Maybe not to the same level as at least China and the United States could hurt us, but still significantly enough to cause pain and deter.

But there is very little political will to pay the necessary price - mainly due to domestic pressures to continue with the peace dividend. Our populace has grown too complacent - not just in geopolitics, but also in private economic competition. And politicians fear that and are not willing to go against their voters' complacency.

There are some mini steps to actually pay the price (e.g. reintroduction of conscription, some industrial policy to safeguard supply chains etc.). But not nearly enough. I guess it needs to become worse and more tangible for the populace before a need for action is accepted. 

The only thing that could make it even worse is if the sellouts like Bardella, Farage or Weidel take power.

#35

Gaming HQ / Re: Europa Universalis V confi...

Last post by Tamas - Today at 01:23:46 PM

Yeah I saw that. 

The levy changes look like a step in the right direction, but I can already see all the "levies suck" threads being replaced by "regulars suck" ones.

#36

Off the Record / Re: US - Greenland Crisis Thre...

Last post by Jacob - Today at 12:54:41 PM

Yes I've been misattributing it. Not Jacques Delors, but Jean Monnet: "Europe will be forged in crises, and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises".

But as the Bruegel think tank paper on European defence noted in their view Ukraine is the first crisis that has not resulted in further integration. I would only disagree to say that I think their assessment the Eurozone crisis and covid were leaps forward - I think both were stalls at best. So I think that process has broken down since the crash (like a lot in Europe).

Has it not resulted in further military integration?

It is my impression that the war in Ukraine has pushed Europe closer in that area, but maybe that's mainly rhetoric and not actually practical?

I get what your saying - my point is as America's no longer a friend we need some. Russia ain't it. I'm not sure on China either (I think their relationship is close if not quite the "friendship without limits" the've declared). I think we need to look to the rest of the world and I think that means taking on board some of their perspective or imagining how this looks from their position.

As I say - look at Brazil. Lula is pointing out this is the last chance to do a deal with Mercosur and (after 30 years of negotiations) it might get blocked by Europe. Lots of Europeans ahve complained about him not standing up on Ukraine while we've done exactly the same on Gaza and Venezuela. I think we need to engage literally the rest of the world if we're now facing off with the US and Russia and (maybe) China - and that's going to mean putting ourselves in their shoes, caring about their issues.

Agreed. I just think Mercosur and Venezuela matters much more to Brazil than Gaza - so that's where the effort should be focused when engaging with them.

As I say I don't think I agree on China and Russia. I think that relationship is key for both parties - and there are multiple gas pipelines coming online in the next few years which will further cement. What Europe has to offer is a market which is valuable and an industry which can't compete.

Time will tell. There's some momentum to the China-Russia alliance, but I don't think it's permanent.

Fundamentally I don't think Trump, or Russia, or China see Europe as a player - I think they see it as prey. And I'm not sure they're wrong. A bit like China in the 19th century - I think it's rich, weak and ill-equipped for the century its in. Honestly I'm not entirely sure that Trump, Russia and China wouldn't work together to press their advantage (this is again why I think we do need to engage the rest of the world with appropriate humility given all our history and recent indifference).

I agree that Europe is potentially poised to start a Chinese style century of humiliation. However, I think it would be the wrong approach to accept it as inevitable and act as if it is an established fact.

Edit: Just on the European side - the UK and France have been working on a "coalition of the willing" to support Ukraine after any peace deal. It's never been fully clear what it's role would be but I think primarily as a reassurance force in the rear in Ukraine. The key sticking point was trying to get US buy in for air support (which apparently they now have - I am very doubtful that will materialise).

When it was initially floated, the plan was for about 60,000 troops with hopes that multiple European countries would participate with the UK and France sending about 10k each. Ata meeting of European Defence Ministers the Lithuanian Defence Minister was reported to have told her counterparts "Russia has 800,000 troops. If we can't even raise 64,000 that doesn't look weak - it is weak." Other participants described her comments as "strident and inspiring". A report I read from some think tank said that would be difficult to sustain for the UK and France for long. They also estimated the minimum for it to be effective would be 30,000 (again they sketched out what that force would look like).

The news today is that the UK and France are the only countries willing to participate and it's now down to 15,000 (basically 7,500 each). For the UK at least apparently that is going to be a stretch to maintain for any period of time and the briefing is that 15,000 might be optimistic. Rreportedly this would have an impact on the British Army mission in Ukraine helping train and support Ukrainian troops as "we can't be in two places at once". I'm really sorry to say but this is the two most militarily capable European states trying to propose a European solution to something that almost all European countries agree is a strategic priority. The UK and France aren't able to cobble together and sustain much but have something and are willing to try (although as I say I'm very dubious on the actual plan) - but no-one else is even wiling to contribute (I have some sympathy with the Eastern Flank countries who don't want to dilute their border defences). But I think this is the context for conversations about what Europe can do.

That's pretty grim. One hopes Europe is taking appropriate action to remedy this.

#37

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Jacob - Today at 12:28:20 PM

What conclusions should we draw from this?

#38

Off the Record / Re: The EU thread

Last post by Jacob - Today at 12:22:26 PM

those could run for parliament?

 

#39

Off the Record / Re: The EU thread

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 11:54:22 AM

those could run for parliament?

#40

Off the Record / Re: The Shooting Gallery: Poli...

Last post by Syt - Today at 11:39:45 AM

https://apnews.com/live/minneapolis-ice-shooting-updates-1-8-2026

The head of Minnesota's state investigations agency said Thursday that the U.S. attorney's office has barred it from taking part in the investigation into an ICE officer's fatal shooting of a Minneapolis woman.

Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Superintendent Drew Evans said in a statement that after the agency consulted with the Hennepin County Attorney's Office, the U.S. attorney's office and the FBI following the Wednesday shooting of 37-year-old mother of three Renee Nicole Macklin Good, "it was decided that the BCA Force Investigations Unit would conduct a joint investigation with the FBI" and that the "BCA responded promptly to the scene and began coordinating investigative work in good faith.

He said the FBI informed the BCA later Wednesday that the U.S. attorney's office had changed the plan.

"The investigation would now be led solely by the FBI, and the BCA would no longer have access to the case materials, scene evidence or investigative interviews necessary to complete a thorough and independent investigation," Evans wrote.