this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
858 points (94.9% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6625 readers
542 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because Daddy America and NATO would protect them.
Europe really should have formed its own pan-europa defense organisation during the years that NATO was getting softer.
No it's because we survived 2 VERY destructive world wars in our homes and don't have the stomach for massive military operations anymore.
Add to that the numerous laws and constitutional bans against building militaries too large (supported by America!). Austria constitutionally forced to remain neutral, Finland forced to remain neutral due to Russia, etc.
Do you really no tunderstand why Germany was discouraged and was resistant to building it's military after two fucking world wars it started?
Really?
It's not as simple as you make out. Europe also isn't one country and one law.
Someone in this thread said Americans are reticent to support Ukraine because of pointless wars in the Middle East. Well imagine how fucking reticent you'd be if a massive chunk of your population died fighting wars in your own homes and back yard?
But the EU is kind of one country with one law. It is a federal system, but you can make a federal military structure. And the current European defense structure has been failing for a generation, constantly requiring American involvement and leadership.
And the EU initially started as way to tie together industries tied to defense as a way to keep the peace. At this point, might as well tie together the militaries as well.
The EU isn't a federation or country. It has some federal characteristics but it's nowhere near as unified as the USA.
It's closer to a confederation.
Hindsight sure is sharp. We're a short sighted reactionary species.
In hindsigth, are there strong reasons why european nato members should have invested significantly more in military, than they did?
You have to factor in the length of human life. There isn't a lot of living memory from ww2 anymore. And the ones that are still living are too far gone to have any influence. It's also hard to justify higher taxes in peacetime for weapons that might never be used.
And the ones with living memory of the great wars remember how the buildup of European militaries led to the decimation of the European population. Large armies are costly and so need to do something to justify that cost, this leads to wars, wars inevitably lead to wholesale destruction and death of civilians, why build up again for that to happen.
Unfortunately while Western Europe didn’t build up, the Muscovy focused on expansion after the fall of the union. Now Russia is looking west at a continent not as armed as it should be and backed by an America that is once again isolationist, it’s a return to the status of the 1930s and I don’t see it ending well