Europe Isn’t Ready for a War With Russia
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 чер 2024
- Join the VisualPolitik community and support us on Patreon: / visualpolitik
The military industry is crucial for any territory that wants to maintain a robust national defense. The U.S. military is undoubtedly the most formidable. The same cannot be said, however, of the European one, which has lagged behind in recent decades.
However, the blocking of military assistance to #Ukraine in the United States, the shadow of Donald Trump lurking, and threats from #Russia and its international allies towards #NATO and, specifically, its European members, is beginning to change the fortunes of this industry in Europe.
Why has the European arms industry stagnated these past decades? How is #Europe trying to revitalize it in a serious way? What reasons would it have for doing so now?
It's almost like Putin is betting on Europe not being prepared
The way the ukraine war is presented in the press is false. Russia said they have no goals of attacking European states just for the sake of it. They are not irrational people. This is Ukraine's conflict with Russia and we should stop intervening and turn this into a proxy war and actually make things worse. Everytime the US did that things turned even worse.
An EU-Russia conventional war would end badly for Russia.. sure they're producing lots of shells but they'd be fighting a 21st century military with mid 20th century strategy. It just about works in Ukraine because Ukraine doesn't have an airforce. The EU however does possess highly advanced airforces which would gain air superiority and overall strategic superiority in any war with Russia.
How can anyone be prepared for nuclear missile strikes!
Don’t think he won’t use them if he feels he’s will lose!
One one hand the left say Putin is pure evil and on the other hand they say he is bluffing about nukes.
Wake up people!!
@@benghiskahn3673 I tend to dissagree, Russians have way more sophisticated weapons than they are using right now in ukraine. Also, mobilising the population for war in europe would be almost impossible politically, because a large part of the population will not agree to it, and massive insurgencies will take place in a lot of countries. Europeans are not the type of people to go to the front lines and die. They are good at being keyboard warriors and sending young ukranians to die, but when the time will come for them to take up arms, i have a feeling they won't be so enthusiastic and they will seek a diplomatic compromise very fast in order to avoid a very ugly war. At the moment NATO is doing everything it can to make Russia lose, but they are failing.. yes... Ukraine is loosing the war with the whole support of NATO behind it, and hundreds of billions of dollars as a war chest. So even strategically, Russia seems to be a cut above. They know what they're doing and people are underestimating them big time. This NATO superioritty complex is a fantasy and it was never proven in practice against a big power. All US and NATO did up untill now was go to poor countries to suck up their oil and resources and kill lesser opponents. They are not an army, they are an organisation of cowards, protecting capital interests at their core.
@@benghiskahn3673your delusions makes me laugh.😂 I don’t blame you, you’ve been propagandised for years to believe that you have some kind of alien technology while Russia is 1000 years behind. 😂 If this is true, how come Ukraine is losing the war with all your supposed ‘game changing’ weapons? 🤣
The loud music attacks me after quite reasonable volume of speach.
Yeah, that's been a problem for this channel for a while now. I don't know why they refuse to change it even after so many people complain about it.
Anyone thinking that Russia can take Europe must be crazy .They can barely manage Ukraine let alone pass Poland .
Врага нельзя недооценивать ☝️
It's not that you need to be ready for war. You need to be ready to do what needs to be done to survive and win.
A a little over $200 billion of the US budget was built spent on weapons development and procurement. The rest was spent on operations, manpower and bases.
these recent videos are poorly researched and are becoming clickbaity, why is that?
$$
Because you don't agree with it anymore
They have to prop up Russia, to get clicks. Make them seem bigger than they are.
@@Plutoboy85 Since when does YT work for Russia? lol
All I see the past 2 years are videos claiming Russia's imminent destruction.
@victorsamsung2921 lol who Saud YT works for Russia?
What I Saud is certain channels prop up Russia's military threat to create content. We all know Russia couldn't beat a combined Europe. Video would be 10 seconds long. So they have to talk about exaggerated hypotheticals to create more content.
Could you imagine Russia trying to fight a 2nd country as it fights Ukraine ?
Let alone the EU.
Ukrainians are just as strong as Russians. It’s like Russians are fighting with each other. Ukrainians are strong and smart but once Russia beats Ukraine Europe is done. They just have know idea what’s it like to fight Russia. They don’t have experience it’s nothing like Africa or some terrorists in deserts.
I don't know why there's worry of Russia attacking a NATO country while they're struggling in Ukraine... It's double speak
@@felipe-vibor This video is just clickbait .
Russia's military is what it is and it sure is not invading the EU anytime soon .
Maybe woke EU is actually weaker than based Ukraine.
@@felipe-vibor Russia is fighting Ukraine, US, UK, EU, CANADA, JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA AND NATO. Oh... don't forget sanctions from all western countries and their allies and yet it is going strong 💪
Funny Russia isn’t ready either
Yes but Russia may have support from China, Iran and Pakistan. Europe on the other hand only has support from the USA, and if Trump wins... forget about it!
Europe is alone whereas Russia can find support from unlikely allies.
I wouldn't underestimate the amount of damage that Russia could do once it has fully shifted to a wartime economy. Ukraine has been able to maintain lines only via great sacrifice, and it has still suffered massive economic and infrastructural devastation.
@@VVayVVard don’t underestimate the strategic reserve of the United States. 3-4% of GDP since WWII. Poland and Finland alone would pose a great challenge for Russia right now, who are you kid here.
@@wr1791 Yes, they could counter the threat, but only following massive devastation, like in Ukraine. Which I assume most countries would want to avoid, hence why they would presumably want better deterrence.
@@VVayVVard the devastation would be different, in that the majority would be in Russia.
Nobody can truly be ready, but as of the last few months I think entirety of Europe is finally waking up.
why i think europe rising again is a threat to usa the most of making eu vassal for 80 years.
France's Th-ales 😂
Somebody was sleeping during math classes.
Europe wasn't ready for war with Germany. When other nations start getting attacked (EU and Nato nations), they will respond. People don't know what they are capable of until they are forced into that situation. As the russo/Ukraine war has shown, russia is not nazi Germany. They are not capable of blitzkrieg tactics. Their military can only move as far as the rail lines allow them. Remember the 40 mile long convoy to Kyiv that literally ran out of supplies?
They are capable of blitzkrieg tactics to an extent. Did you not see how far they got at the start of the war? If that same operation was carried out in the baltics they would have been taken within weeks due to their small size. Russias weakness is supply lines like you said.
True, but it is not that simple. The world is different from 1939. For one, demographics; way less young people for cannonfudder, secondly, the will to fight for your country diminished. Thirdly, people have emancipated and are in their various echo chambers. A common cause like "fight for democracy" is not a given at all now anymore. Fourthly, European countries in 1939 had vastly different economies, relying on semi slave labour elsewhere in the world (colonialism). That gave 1. people, and 2. lots of money and resources.
@@ronaldderooij1774 No they didn't, Britain and France did. Rest of Europe that was in WW2 pretty much had no colonies(dutch being a noteable exception) only with France and Britain did it matter for the war and in France only because it allowed them to fight in exile. At that point the economies were industrialized and based on factories in homelands, Germany had stronger industry btw then both France and Britain individually at the time despite no colonies. Colonies were also a cost at that point due to maintenance of state, infrastructure, social welfare etc etc. And a burden instead of a financial benefit for the overall society and state(private interests benefited though).
@@xxmobstrxx8535 They failed the blitzkrieg attempt. Sure they got far but got cut off and spread to thin before having to run being unable to hold territory.
@@xxmobstrxx8535 The only reason that blitzkrieg tactics enjoyed even minor success at the beginning (and that's debatable) was because of the massive buildup in Belarus, and the already established bridgeheads in Donbass and Luhansk. If they attempted something like that on the Baltics, satellite imagery would pick up the massing of forces. All three Baltics nations enjoy a coastline on the NATO sea (Baltic). The black sea situation plays to russias advantage (or its suppose to) they would not enjoy this type of advantage in a Baltic takeover attempt scenario.
Deterrence = peace.
why is this video framed in terms of what the us has in comparison.
its completely irrelevant.
you have 3 bedrooms. ah but your neighbor has 4. ok, and what.
Only if it works. Problem is, both the Russian and American governments know that if war breaks out nuclear weapons are completely impractical as long as both factions have them, and will therefore never be used. They only threaten to use nukes because the populations don't know.
Exactly. "Prepare fpr war. And get peace". Sun Tzu understood this 2500 years ago. Finally we start to understand it.
What happens when deterrence fails? The deterrence paradox, when deterrence becomes the opposite of deterrence. Then you lack the capability to defend yourself. Deterrence only works if both want to deter, if one state wants to invade them it will do so.
@@Betweoxwitegan That's literally making no sense.
It may happen. Despite what Trump said, I don't see the US not getting involved.
All he’s asking for is Europe to contribute to their defence and not expect the U.S. to always foot the bill
@@reddixiecrat Something that this channel chose not to mention. Their bias against Trump it's plain to see.
@@ministryoftruth8499difficult not to have a bias against that clown
Do you even know what Trump said? He said he would not come to defence of countries not meeting 2% military spending target because it would be unfair for the US to be the only country spending money to defend the EU.
@@springbok4015 Well said.
Europe as a whole could easily defeat Russia
Yh just like Europe tried to defeat Russia in 1919 and they retreated from MotherRussia go learn history kid😂
I respectfully disagree. Europa is suffering from lack of money and industrial capacities. Most of our experienced industrial workers and engineers have been put into social-help-, food-stamp, low-wage- and other programs (keyword: Made in China). My humble self included. Take for example the currently urgent, but unsolvable problem: Ukraine needs 6…8 Patriot launcher batteries to defend against destruction of its energy system, but we in Europe don't have the money to buy these from US defense companies. America can finance itself by printing money, due to the petro-dollar. Europe is not in this situation.
united army of europe would be total domination
@@andreasgregorfrank9057 I hate to burst your myth, but the sad reality is, Europe has never overcome the financial crisis of 2007/2008. Even the largest EU-countries (Germany, France, Italy, Greece) are close to bankruptcy, while the mighty ECB does not provide one single Euro printed money for military spending. Additionally, Europe has not only deindustrialized itself, but also demilitarized, since our leaders believed in the fairy tale, there would be never again a war in Europe. Instead, money has been spent into more bureaucracy, laws and public administration. Consequently, our defense industry has declined. E.g. Diehl Defense Systems only manages to build one single IRIS-T SLM air-defense system per four month. IMHO it would take at least one generation to rebuild the required industrial capacities. Further, we suffer from a strong nationalism. Therefore, no such thing, like a EU-army was founded.
@@JDDC-tq7qm Was that the time that Moscow got burned to the ground?
Yet another reason why we should create a common European Army.
Germany is a nation of surprises when it comes to military conflict - Winston Churchill
Be truthful: trump did NOT say the US wouldn't defend countries who met their 2% obligation.
Sergey chill
Europe and the uk are barely ready for Christmas shoppers traffic 😂
Europe, outside of the Balkans, enjoyed 30 years of peace. In the Early 2000s, there was talk that Europe was in a "post-war" era.
That period is over. However, we should all be grateful that there was 30 years of peace.
How is it only 30 if it's since 1945?
@@dionysise5008 30 years since the end of the Cold War. During the Cold War (1945-1991), there was a real probability of war in Europe.
@@Rob_F8FThen it should be a responsibility to restore that peace.
Peace is never free
Bill Clinton said it best there is no United europe without America
Nobody is ever ready for war, even if they start it. Germans weren't ready in 1939, they at the earliest planned for 1942-43. Russians weren't ready, they aimed for 1941-42. Western Europe of course wasn't ready. Japan wasn't ready. Even the US weren't ready, although they were quite prepared.
The US was prepared only industrially, because when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour the US Army was smaller than Bulgaria. The US raised an army almost out of thin air.
Indeed, the armies that are quick to adapt win wars. It's always the static ones that lose. Ukraine was very flexible and won at the first half. Now Russia is the one being flexible by upgrading simple bombs, drones
@@pedrorequio5515 industry + experience is what makes preparedness.
@@Omaviistheman They were not prepared, the reason the Pacific war lasted so long was because by 1943, the US Navy couldnt field its entire force because they did not have enough supply ships to keep the entire fleet going.
Nobody.. not including the US 😂
Sure Europe spends less on defense than the US but they do spend more on defense than Russia. They have more production and export capacity than Russia, they also have more people and larger economies to martial than Russia does.
So,we should send them few thousand VW Polo, Passat and maybe few bwm? Civilian production here is not important. you cant use lines where cars were making to make guns and ammo. and printing money and showing graphs how our economy is doing great is not stoping FABs
Just to put it into perspective we have 500 million people even without russia including ukraine
@ljenjivacutransu VW has a long history producing military equipment as does BMW and Mercedes. VW also owns several companies that specialize in heavy vehicle manufacturing. The gap between commercial truck transport and military truck transport is not a particularly big one. In fact the current big boy producing German military vehicles is Rheinmetall Man Military Vehicles. Man is subsidiary of VW. The thing that matters is Europe and Germany in particular have the infrastructure and know how to produce platform based vehicles by the million and deliver them to any market on the planet. Russia does not. The closest they got was Yugo which was an Italian car assembled in Serbia. Is Germany a military superpower? Absolutely not and neither is Russia.
But the Baltics don't. Even Poland and Finland don't. The big question is, how much is Europe in its current state willing to fight for?
All else being equal, having better and more capabilities is generally going to improve deterrence.
Integrating and coordinating such a multinational force would be tricky
Neither is russia 😂
Well I guess it’s obvious. Russia’s been at war with Ukraine for 2 years so they would have to recover from it first
Far less than they had two years ago, probably 40%-50% less, overall, except for a couple of points, one of which is that their standing army, although not AT ALL well trained, sometimes not trained at all, is VERY large and getting larger by the month.
Another is that they have greatly ramped up their war production of ammo of all sizes and types. Obviously they have gutted their military in several other respects, but having production there from the get go is a fair bit of advantage. The free world will catch up and surpass, even if Russia and China and Iran, etc go hand in hand, but it will DEFINITELY take a while.
I am, of course, not saying that the tin horned dick-tater club have a prayer in the long run, just that having a LOT more production of war materiel up and running doesn't hurt.
@@MrJdsenior That might make sense, with the standing army except the Russian population is less than half that of the United States, 90% of their population lives directly next to NATO in eastern Europe, and they already have a demographic problem. You could write a book on the reasons russia isn't ready either.
@@MrJdseniorthe larger the army gets the more you need to pay your army. Also for every city and village conquered you need solders and administrators to keep the land and that is not cheap
Bro forgot when the Red Army in 1945 had 6 million troops in Western and Central Europe alone 😂
If it's any consolation, I don't think Russia is ready either.
Trump never said he wouldn’t come to anyone’s aid, he said he wouldn’t help any country that doesn’t meet the 2% spending on defence. Luckily for those who don’t spend the 2%, the Baltic countries do, and it those that the Russians would have to go through first. So the US would then have to get involved.
The statement was meant for Germany 🇩🇪 mostly.
@@johndurham6172 true, but it can be equally applied to most other NATO countries.
Трамп никогда не врёт😂
Let me guess, you think a economic union, that has a near 40 to 1 GDP ratio would not be ready. Just how far will Russia get given they could not even take on Poland alone at this point, trapped on the edge of Ukraine by hand me down weapons.
not to mention the EU's 300 million population advantage. 440m Vs 140m.
They also seem to believe Russia would somehow have the right to strike EU's infrastructure... and that EU would do nothing against the ones in Russia.
NATO already knows the Russian infrastructures they would hit early in a conflict to cripple Russia... be it energy facilities, factories, logistic hubs, rails, etc... not to mention the air superiority factor and the control of the Baltic sea
For Russia quantity was quality, now they dont even have quantity. US has both. 😂 People used to forget that US has over two times the Russian population. The same with machines. NATO has over 1000 real 5th generation jet f35, not to mention f22. Russia has just few su57 which is not even a 5th gen fighter.
Russia would get the arses handed to them, but they will do much damage in the short time till their defeat, Russia love attacking cities and other civilian targets. So at the very least, Europe need a massive amount of air defenses.
@@quandmeme9970 The newest version of the SU 57 might be
Centralization / monopolization of defense industry also leads to extremely high prices due to lack of competition.
Then why is production cheap and efficient in Russia and China with State ownership?
@@kabzaify Less bling and glitter.
@@kabzaify It's not all that cheap and efficient. Russia had massive problems with equipment at the start of the war. And quality appears to remain low to this day, especially in terms of precision targeting and other advanced capabilities, reducing practical efficiency.
Wrong analysis, because military industry doesn't have many customers, but a very little number : states. So competition doesn't work the same way.
@@joelgrea6654Still, Soviet union, despite being very centralized state was very persistent to keep at least 2 manufacturers of jets, 2 manufacturers of jet engines, 2 manufacturers of tanks, multiple manufacturers of AA systems... EU cannot become more Soviet than Soviet union ;-) But centralization is surely very profitable.
UK needs to spend more money on defence because usa may not be there to assist all the time and it creates dependence.
Why did you misquote Trump at the end of your video? He said he would not defend European nations that had not met the 2% spending requirement. He did not say he would not defend all of Europe. Sad!
We dont need someone to defend us thank you. We have overwhelmingly crushing advantages over Rus.
Trump should think about paying his own bills...
@@artiefakt4402 EYE ROLL
All of Russia's neighboring countries spend 2% on defense now (even Norway will spend 2% in 2024 despite massive increases in income/GDP). So unless they have invented teleportation, by Trump's word he should defend against any Russian attack. However, since he said that in 2024, either he does not know anything or the 2% does not matter. In any case, just saying that the article 5 might not apply is a massive departure, regardless of how it is qualified.
Trump has too many bills
Germany said: Russia, let's sign a non-aggression pact. Poland: What
Trump didn’t say that
The hypocrisy of the news and even the topics of these videos has become insane.
Things are starting to get scary
trump said he won’t defend any country that doesn’t spend 2%. but every country on russia’s border does so it doesn’t matter
Funny part: when does an occupier becomes an ally?
only problem i got with the vid is that it's putting EU as the key entity, while in real life EU is nearly completely detached from anything military related - it's a NATO & national level where military decisions are made, not EU
Agreed. It's fair to be critical of the state of defense in Europe. But that indeed is mostly a national and Nato matter. The EU is not making any defense decisions. It's mostly about economics. As a Dutch EU citizen I would like the EU step up on defence. France particularly should be at the center of European defense I think.
You have parsed Trump’s statements wrong. What he has said is that he won’t fund states that are behind on military funding. All the states Russia must go through have. He’d protect Poland, Latvia etc. if those fell he wouldn’t protect Germany.
Europe should be able to defend it self and not rely on America for defence so let's stand together as Europe should
its been peace for 80+ years im not surprised war is rising again.
What? Do you know how many people have died in the middle east since 2001?
🤔Stop saying "Europe is not ready for a war..." It may never be ready. Let those that are wise understand.
13:47 Is that Hitler Bin Laden? My god, I thought he only existed in my nightmares. 😂
Europe is stuck in hyper pacifism
Wrong question! Is Russia ready to take on NATO, the strongest military alliance in recorded history?
This video is a bit dishonest about what Trump said about defending Europe.
They omitted him saying that if the country being attacked spent more than 2% of GDP on defense then he would defend them.
Chart at 03:44 says "2022 - 2014 - 2019", what was supposed to be the first year on the chart?
Russia has already lost an assload just in the conflict w Ukraine ALONE. Imagine a conflict w Europe? No.
As I understand it, the EU was always meant to create a single, unified EU Millitary. The EU just kind of stopped half way through it's construction.
Nothing has stopped. Pesco and Csdp grow and solidify.
Just takes time.
what is this, russia is struggling with 1 country and you think russia can handle Nato?
I haven't any content from this channel that made sense so far whatsoever...
NATO finishes Russia in 72 hours
US finishes Russia in 24 hours
That's what I was thinking. Russia is bogged down in Ukraine, but they are going to attack European members of NATO? Sure....
They are in a war economy producing a looot. And numbers seems to matter more than technology, and as we have seen Putin is fucked anyway might as well risk it all and invade another nation in few years... Might as well, we said the same 2 yr ago.. that he would never ever ever invade Ukraine
And here i was thinking that i would never see war durring my lifetime. Seems like it ain't like that anymore. I can already see obligatory military recruting across Europe and i might have to join if it will be obligatory.
Thats a ridiculously low amount of money to build and supply a military
Why would Russia attack NATO? Motive?
Just proves the point that putin talks crap. NATO was is has never been aggressive.
Lol. What do you think happened with yugoslavia and libya? Good job.
@@jhfiyugy8g I was pretty young back then (my memory could be faulty), but I'm pretty sure the war in Serbia was about stopping a genocide against the Kosovo-Albanians. I don't really know anything about the war in Libya, so I can't really comment on that one. But stopping a genocide isn't really being the aggressor.
@@Danjen3ifyAnd the russians say they are stopping kiev's genocide of ethnic russians in donbass.
@jhfiyugy8g lol xd. Let's figure out what is UN, NATO, NATO member.
@@jhfiyugy8gkiev is a city, how is it killing people? With the military? Are u serious?
13:42 ---> and this is one of the potential roots of the problems. i m pretty sure that in most eu countries, if citizens where allowed and encouraged to posess weaponry and train with it (and for the public sector to only take care of providing collective heavy platforms, such as vehicles, planes, ships, etc) the continent would probably represent a much tougher target than it currently is (as it is harder to push into a territory where everyone is armed to the teeth + has extensive training, than in a territory where no one is neither trained nor armed)
No. We certainly don't want American style weaponization of the populace. It is fine to give the training, and later, if needed, to call on reservists and give them the arms. A well trained and motivated disciplined force is a thousand times more effective than a bunch of rabble with "2nd amendment" weapons.
I'm not very sentimental about Europe at large but I do respect the UK.
It is the most faithful and reasonable ally the US has in Europe.
I hope the US comes to UK's defense if it is ever attacked by any adversary.
Säkkijärven polkka intensifies.
Jääkärimarssi.
As first strike matters more and more I become more worried…
I see a general trend of Europeans starting to collaborate more on military development. An example of this is the FCAS 6th gen fighter program. I think this might be the thing that revitalizes the European arms industry, as it lets the countries pool resources and know how together to create better military hardware.
The main problem is that people have forgotten the holocaust brought by Hitler and his Nazis. They think modern conflicts won't go that far while Putin actions those last decades point towards that goal.
Putin would never go that far. The Holocaust happened because the Nazis had a specific hatred against certain groups, especially the Jews. Not even their fascist allies did anything about the Jews before the Nazis forced their hands.
Putin is plenty bad, of course. He's already guilty of several war crimes against Ukraine. If WWIII happened and Russia had a strong army they wouldn't cause another Holocaust (I very much doubt they would use nukes), but millions of civilians would die before it was over.
We are going to have a very, very rude wake-up call.
j'aime votre analyse !
When is the last time Denmark fought a war
Russia is struggling against one of the poorest countries in Europe, which has no Navy whatsoever and hardly any planes.
I agree Europe is woefully unprepared, however, Russia doesn’t seem very capable especially at a time when their population is declining.
The gullible
Wrong assessment. They are winning and have plenty of poor people to send to the front. How long you think that comfortable europeans would tolerate thousands of daily casualties for anything that isn't a defense of their individual borders? Western armies ( u.s notwithstanding )don't have material for high intensity combat and that's a fact. Russia attacked because we're not ready.
If it wasn't for western/NATO/UK/EU help since 2014 then Ukraine wouldn't stand a chance . Basically it's been all of the above vs Russia since this war began apart from NATO hasn't had boots on the ground in combat roles. Russia are close to victory and NATO know this. This is why you have nations talking about conscriptions and the French talking about sending troops to Ukraine
@@markcooke8396no, it hasn't it's literally been just Ukraine using other people's hand-me-downs and an allowance. Russia's Navy Is arse its Air Force lackluster and its Army, well its army is the worst I've seen.
Where are you getting this info? Western media. Propaganda
I am confused here. On one hand Russia is losing heaps of its amed foces non stop in Ukraine, can barely move to front line, but yet Russia might attack NATO. What gives?
I hate to tell you this but Russia isn't ready for war with the NATO either!
seems like Uncle Sam has target to meet
The Ukrainian weren't ready and there holding their own just fine. The question is if the Europeans are ready to deal and negotiate with Putin as needed, something you rightly pointed out at the beginning.
Does that include chicago
I think it gives waaay too much credit to russia, russia doesn't even have the AMMO production to hold in its line in Ukraine and have to import waste amounts from Iran and North-korea. EU alone will easily hold total air supremacy. Virtually stopping any russian supplyline to the front, it doesn't really matter what the state of the EU army is even in, the russian army is exhausted, moral is low, people are deserting en mass in Ukraine, and the EU won't keep fighting on its own territory, mayor russian cities like st. petersburg will fall, and so will the russian leadership when faced with internal pressure,
Is that why despite Ukraine receiving substantial aid from the combined West it still losing ground while Russia is advancing steadily but keep underestimating the Bear
What about sending an expedition corps to the Wolga? 😅 I Wonder if Russia was ready to deal with that..? 🤫😎
WELL, THEY BANNED THE SONY COMPANY AND INSTAGRAM
Excellent video and analysis. Are your shirts provided by a sponsor?
Im perplexed how europe hasn't prepared for the very war NATO was created to be ready for. I dont know about you but I sure as heck have a defense plan just walking out of my house to do errands.
Thank G-d for that!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't France have one of the biggest defense industries globally? I'd assume that would make them an outlier considering what was covered in the video.
Like Russia isn't prepared for war with Ukraine.
Is that Rob Zombie in white dungarees at 13:45?
While I agree on several points, I will not on the idea that all of Europe have been sleeping. Poland and Finland provide good examples of countries that never let down their guard and have started to build up their defence to a significant degree. This while countries like Germany and Sweden fit your description very well. They practically dismantled the armed forces to a bare bone minimum before they got a hard kick on their sleeping cradle.
Some important hardware have indeed been imported, since I mentioned Poland the K2 Panther tanks from S. Korea certainly is such an example. Cooperation between Ukraine and other countries on weapon production is however already in place, also on armed vehicles such as the production of Hägglunds CV-90.
Loved this video.
As an American the preference is to say to Europe just buy from us over here predominantly. While we don’t send troops or Americans into harms way. It’s Bette to use the banking and manufacturing capacity here to fight Russia, China, et. al. While letting regional powers help curtail threats.
This likely can’t hold up forever but to me is the preference.
I wish people would not conflate European with EU. They are not the same thing. BAE Systems is a British company and Britain is in europe but not the EU. Besides, the extent to which it can be called “British “ is moot, considering its global operations, personnel and shareholders.
We dont like war . But we are way too good at it 😂 .
If policies in Europe where friendlier to civilian arms you could have more free market benefits, as it is most of that just feeds the US(there is local demand but its scope is limited) us itself could enjoy similar benefits if we expanded the application of the 2nd amdment. So even if not deployable weapons enthusiasts do contribute to national security.
To sum up what your trying to say is that europe didn't see Russia coming for Ukraine and China lurking
The West watch the Russian invasion build up in Belarus a few months before Putin invaded . You can not secretly build up a invasion force to take over a country in modern Satellite times .
This guy should do a video on how the UK civil service spends tax money.
There would be no WW3.
Is Airbus or BAE sponsoring this?
For those of us that see the future these days are impotent terror.
"They will rely on the US for their defense, given the opportunity they had to achieve economic and military independence in the 90s and 2000s with the formation of the EU and the euro. However, they missed out on that chance, unlike China, which thrived despite its economic challenges during that time."
The US won't do anything because RUS has allies like China, Iran, North Korea, Belarus for example.
Why should Americans pay for a European war. Get your own EU army.
Great video
But mate, Thales is pronounced: Tal-les.
Frankfurt School. Understand who is doing this to us and what is their endgame.
The United States has specific set sides to purchase weapons from international partners. Many weapons systems may be American, but the component parts are source globally. The United States also does a lot of joint production all over the world.
Such joint procurement project won't work. Just see how Euro-fighter jet or A400M airlifter project ended up. Not failure per se, but unsatisfactory and too expensive.
u remember hirosima
“You can be friends with Russia - it is generous, you can cooperate with Russia - it is honest, you can ask from Russia - it is generous, Russia can be deceived - it is gullible. But you can’t fight with Russia-she’s invincible!” (A.V. Suvorov)
Very good report. Hard good look. I say it start, but first must respect each as new people. United Europe! You forgot your season in the sun and glory. Fallow Poland, agree not just on business but on common wealth of freedom
True.
But Russia is also is not Prepared for War with Europe.
And in Direct Conflict. Europe would be the Massive Favorite to Win if a War broke out right now.
What's happening that this might occur soon
Does anybody remember when Trump was talking about this exact issue and the German delegation was laughing making fun of him
Is Russia, Ukraine war opens Europe 🇪🇺 eyes?
ru isnt ready for war with Europe, and air superiority is key here
Crazy.
Who is talking about the starting wars.
ye
Russia is in no condition to fight anyone at the moment