142
Of course, because with European countries having their own nuclear deterrence, neither the USA nor the current US government's handlers in the Kremlin can blackmail them into submission anymore.
load more comments
(28 replies)
It's like the US only realized the cost of trump's bullshit after the fact.
NATO made European nuclear ambitions less essential and thus helped reduce nuclear proliferation. When the US threatens that alliance and shows itself to be completely unreliable (does anyone expect donald to launch nukes in defence of Europe?) Then Europe is almost forced to get a European nuclear deterrent.
In the meantime, thank fuck for Charles deGaulle.
We all need to appreciate just how sick a world has to be for "Thank fuck for Charles deGaulle's insistence on nuclear proliferation and testing" to be a sentence literally any decent person would entertain.
not to mention constantly undermines the UN and ends all treaties (if you can even trust any treaties Trump signs, probably not) that aim at reducing nuclear stockpiles. As well as starts illegal wars with countries that don't have nuclear weapons following Putin's example. It's just idiotic.
THAT'S YOUR WARNING-SIGN:
EUROPE NEEDS TO BE CAPABLE OF FIGHTING TRUMP'S US, EVEN AT NUCLEAR SCALE.
TRUMP OPPOSES ANY THREAT TO HIS FUTURE-AGGRESSIONS.
HEED HIS TELEGRAPHING, PLEASE.
_ /\ _
The moment the US used the NATO deterrent as trade leverage, that ship sailed.
That’s an strong argument to pursue this strategy.
If they doesn't want Poland to have its own nuclear weapons, Russian and the USA should put more effort into progressive nuclear disarmement as agreed by treaty:
the NPT non-nuclear-weapon states agree never to acquire nuclear weapons and the NPT nuclear-weapon states in exchange agree to share the benefits of peaceful nuclear technology and to pursue nuclear disarmament aimed at the ultimate elimination of their nuclear arsenals.
Russia stopped participating in START, that agreement officially expired last month, and there has been no new agreement between Russia and the USA tio reduce stockpiles. Trump is chaotic, threatens to invade allies, so there's reason to doubt it would defend NATO allies.
So it'd be logical for Poland to look into building its own nuclear deterrence. The solution is to better enforce the NTP, decrease everyone's stockpile, including Russian and USA's.
Yep, the NPT was never about all other countries just ceding the power that is afforded by nuclear weapons to the countries that currently had them. And NATO's nuclear umbrella indeed played a major part in making that acceptable too. It was supposed to be a two way deal. But it seems nowadays people with nukes have conveniently forgotten that. Trump probably doesn't even understand the first thing about it ofc...
Ok, let's just buy them from France then
Dear Americans, fuck off from our nukes.
This is yet another reason why Europe needs to develop its own independent nukes without any US involvement
France has already its own independent nukes. No need for reinventing the wheel. The umbrella merely needs to be enlarged.
True. And the UK has its own nukes but unfortunately relies on American missiles to deliver them.
Yes it would be good if the umbrella was enlarged, and also European countries could contribute funds and engineers for this potentially Europe-wide nuclear programme
This is a terrible predicament to be in for the north east and center of Europe. All future options are worse than the pre-Trump option. Which one is the least bad, also in terms of other countries' responses? 1 France's umbrella 2 US umbrella 3 Russian umbrella 4 north-east-central europe umbrella?
Why not for the south?
Because the south does not have a dangerous, expansionist neighbor such as Russia.
Without the rest of the EU, the south is nothing. The EU is in this problem together and when it comes to threats, it is not only Russia. The EU has to defend its supply chains and markets globally.
But there is a big chance that expansive Russia is for the most part western propaganda to split the EU from Russia. If Russia's urge for expansion turns out to be exagerated then priorities could be put on other dependencies, like not having own CPU and memory production capabilities.
The second paragraph of your response.... You think that Russia is not expansionist? What about all the countries it has invaded in its periphery?
load more comments
(3 replies)
Abusive spouse "you better not fight back or I'll beat you even worse" vibes.
More countries with nukes is not good, imagine Orban with nukes. But EU owned and managed nukes? Sounds great to me.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
142 points (98.6% liked)
Europe
11069 readers
753 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)
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- 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).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- 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.
- 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.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 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 admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS