I mean, they actually submitted the idea of removing two national holidays to “save money”. The dishonest part here is “to fight Russia”, even though the next budget is expected to increase the army’s budget.
Oh yeah, it’s to totally send boots in Russia and walk on Moscow of course, we’ve almost done it once, we can do it again!
That’s totally not a big jump to a fantasized conclusion fed to y’all by known Russian propagandists. The author of the article somehow manages to grasp the problem and dishonestly draw wrong conclusions from it.
There are many reasons to increase the Army’s budget. Funneling money to Macron’s friends in the armament industry is one of them, preparing the public opinion for a war that will never happen to justify “sacrifices” and austerity is another.
I don’t think there’s any point in debating about this on .ml anyway. You’ve probably made up your mind about this already.
There are many reasons to increase the Army’s budget. Funneling money to Macron’s friends in the armament industry is one of them, preparing the public opinion for a war that will never happen to justify “sacrifices” and austerity is another.
These are probably also reasons, but you think war with Russia isn’t on the minds of every government in Europe right now? They’re already fighting a proxy war with Russia! At the very least I think this is one of many reasons for increased military funding.
They are already attacking Russia through a proxy. They’ve not been shy about it. They are increasing military spending because they think their proxy is about to collapse and their liege the US is already demanding everyone else step up so they can pivot to China.
Oh. Now I see the problem - you’re still operating with centuries-old thinking. You think “war with Russia” means France launching a unilateral invasion of Russia.
Funding NATO is literally the equivalent of preparing for war with Russia. NATO was formed explicitly to counter the USSR. It was staffed with Nazi officers from the Third Reich on the basis that the Third Reich was 100% dedicated to destroying the Soviet Union and enslaving Russia. When the USSR was dissolved, NATO didn’t dissolve itself, it became an openly aggressive military force launching invasions of several countries under various pretenses.
The idea of austerity for increased NATO funding can only be interpreted as money for war with Russia. Sure, you can pretend NATO is purely defensive but even if that’s the case it’s still accurate to say that France is engaging in austerity to fund a war with Russia, just a defensive one.
The reality, however, is that the West has been hell bent on dominating Russia for over 200 years and the quintessential example of that history is Napoleon’s campaign to invade Russia - one of the deadliest canpaigns in history. And since the Third Reich was also a Western attempt to invade Russia resulting in massive bloodshed, it becomes really difficult to ignore the obvious problem of France funding NATO (remember, originally helmed with handpicked Third Reich officers) as some kind of “just defensive pact” especially when NATO dropped DU bombs on Yugoslavia in its supposed war for humanitarianism, and NATO’s involvement in offensive operations in East Asia.
So you may take issue with the imagined implication that France is going to send an army under the French flag to march on Moscow - I think that’s silly too. But you’re arguing against a strawman.
Not dishonest, but following the jingoistic remarks made by several European leaders plus the current NATO proxy war and economic murder attempt of Russia, it’s at the very least in the cards, lol. The budget could go into Ukrainian drones (it already is, this is just a proposed increase) just like the American budget serves to bomb tf out of Palestine and neighbours. It’s dishonest to say otherwise, come on.
plus the current NATO proxy war and economic murder attempt of Russia
Wow, why would “NATO” do this? Russia hasn’t invaded anyone since 2022201420081999199419791968 1956, that’s such a long time ago, and those Hungarians totally deserved it.
I mean, they actually submitted the idea of removing two national holidays to “save money”. The dishonest part here is “to fight Russia”, even though the next budget is expected to increase the army’s budget.
But who are they increasing the army’s budget for? Just for fun?
Oh yeah, it’s to totally send boots in Russia and walk on Moscow of course, we’ve almost done it once, we can do it again!
That’s totally not a big jump to a fantasized conclusion fed to y’all by known Russian propagandists. The author of the article somehow manages to grasp the problem and dishonestly draw wrong conclusions from it.
There are many reasons to increase the Army’s budget. Funneling money to Macron’s friends in the armament industry is one of them, preparing the public opinion for a war that will never happen to justify “sacrifices” and austerity is another.
I don’t think there’s any point in debating about this on .ml anyway. You’ve probably made up your mind about this already.
These are probably also reasons, but you think war with Russia isn’t on the minds of every government in Europe right now? They’re already fighting a proxy war with Russia! At the very least I think this is one of many reasons for increased military funding.
Funding the army to protect yourself and your neighbours from aggression is very different from funding the army to invade a sovereign country.
I’m not arguing it’s not one of the reasons for increasing the budget, but arguing it’s to attack Russia is just dishonest.
They are already attacking Russia through a proxy. They’ve not been shy about it. They are increasing military spending because they think their proxy is about to collapse and their liege the US is already demanding everyone else step up so they can pivot to China.
Oh. Now I see the problem - you’re still operating with centuries-old thinking. You think “war with Russia” means France launching a unilateral invasion of Russia.
Funding NATO is literally the equivalent of preparing for war with Russia. NATO was formed explicitly to counter the USSR. It was staffed with Nazi officers from the Third Reich on the basis that the Third Reich was 100% dedicated to destroying the Soviet Union and enslaving Russia. When the USSR was dissolved, NATO didn’t dissolve itself, it became an openly aggressive military force launching invasions of several countries under various pretenses.
The idea of austerity for increased NATO funding can only be interpreted as money for war with Russia. Sure, you can pretend NATO is purely defensive but even if that’s the case it’s still accurate to say that France is engaging in austerity to fund a war with Russia, just a defensive one.
The reality, however, is that the West has been hell bent on dominating Russia for over 200 years and the quintessential example of that history is Napoleon’s campaign to invade Russia - one of the deadliest canpaigns in history. And since the Third Reich was also a Western attempt to invade Russia resulting in massive bloodshed, it becomes really difficult to ignore the obvious problem of France funding NATO (remember, originally helmed with handpicked Third Reich officers) as some kind of “just defensive pact” especially when NATO dropped DU bombs on Yugoslavia in its supposed war for humanitarianism, and NATO’s involvement in offensive operations in East Asia.
So you may take issue with the imagined implication that France is going to send an army under the French flag to march on Moscow - I think that’s silly too. But you’re arguing against a strawman.
Not dishonest, but following the jingoistic remarks made by several European leaders plus the current NATO proxy war and economic murder attempt of Russia, it’s at the very least in the cards, lol. The budget could go into Ukrainian drones (it already is, this is just a proposed increase) just like the American budget serves to bomb tf out of Palestine and neighbours. It’s dishonest to say otherwise, come on.
Wow, why would “NATO” do this? Russia hasn’t invaded anyone since
20222014200819991994197919681956, that’s such a long time ago, and those Hungarians totally deserved it.