I’ve been in London for the last month and have heard policymakers react to the wake up call Elon Musk just delivered. The decision of the U.S. to shut off intelligence and throttle the military v…
Didnt germany just buy new fighter jets from the us for billions but without critical map data, with said killswitches, with undisclosed data sent to U.S. and not even the right to maintain them? Absolute crazy.
Germany bought a small number (35) US fighter jets as replacement for the aging Panavia Tornado used as bombers carrying US nuclear weapons as they are not allowed by their allies to have their own.
And they did so alongside ordering more Eurofighters (58 additional ones already ordered, more planned long-term) for all other roles (even ones where EF variants are still to be developed - EW for example which also is covered by Tornados at the moment) exactly for one reason: the alternative would be giving the US all details of the Eurofighter to get them certified for these bombs.
Context matters… and allies (France and UK in particular) are free to find another arangement than forcing Germany to use US equipment to fullfil NATO requirements. Alas… they won’t because… reasons…
In this insane world order created by Trump a lot of countries including Poland, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Germany will need to build their own nuclear weapons soon enough.
Germany bought a small number (35) US fighter jets as replacement for the aging Panavia Tornado used as bombers carrying US nuclear weapons as they are not allowed by their allies to have their own.
This is a very weird claim. If Germany wanted to build its own nuclear bombs, it could withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Germany could also have asked to host French nuclear missiles instead of US nuclear bombs, possibly as part of an EU-wide agreement rather than a bilateral deal.
If Germany wanted to build its own nuclear bombs, it could withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
They could, if there wasn’t a certain piece of paper their own allies (France and UK in particular) forced upon them as a a requirement for German reunification.
The Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany restored the country’s full sovereignty. The positions it reaffirms don’t limit what Germany is allowed to do under other treaties. It doesn’t prevent Germany withdrawing from the NPT. It doesn’t prevent Germany from doing anything that other sovereign states can do.
So you say that one side of the treaty (restoring Germany’s sovereignity) is valid while the other side (Germany’s assurance to never have nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, banning nuclear weapons stationed in former Eastern Germany and so on…) isn’t?
That’s an interesting idea, although one were you might not find a lot of people agreeing. Especially not as the the German side of assurances also includes no territorial claims over any former German areas now belonging to Poland. Do they know that international law is seemingly bullshit and you can just pick which agreements to uphold?
I’m saying your interpretation of the treaty is incorrect. Immediately after the two sentences you quoted is a third one clarifying that the “rights and obligations arising from the [NPT] will continue to apply to the united Germany”, meaning that Germany retains the right to withdraw from the NPT under Article X like any other signatory.
The actual text says the opposite as it continues:
“[…]They declare that the united Germany, too, will abide by these commitments. In particular, rights and obligations arising from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968 will continue to apply to the united Germany.”
Sorry, but reading those two sentences as “we will abide by the renunciation of nuclear weapons, by keeping the right to withdraw from the NPT” is quite frankly insane.
The letter and spirit of the paragraph both seem quite clear to me. The united Germany was to become party to the same treaties as West and East Germany with regard to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The NPT is the legal text of the “renunciation” of nuclear weapons, even though that specific word doesn’t actually appear in the NPT. Germany’s rights and obligations under the NPT are the same as those of all other signatories.
Oh fuck off, as if anyone with a brain needed a reason not to give Germans nukes. Germany has been very happy with not fulfilling NATO requirements for years (decades?), yet that one they sure felt was a priority. Blame anyone for your mistakes but yourself. Planning a vacation in Poland soon?
Letting Germany have the by far biggest army in all of Western Europe for decades as long as the cold war was ongoing: totally fine.
Screaming about Germany needing to demilitarize the moment the soviet union broke down and you don’t need them to defend you anymore: totally sane.
Complaining about Germany not doing enough for their army after forcing them to massively size it down the moment there is a possible threat on the horizon: sure, why not?
Also –just one second after complaining about not enough German military spending–: haha, Germany nazis! Applaud my genius!
If you don’t want to look like a total nutjob, at least be consistent…
Another one that fails to understand the full picture. For every US Dollar spent on NATO, $10.00 returned to the United States. The European Union NATO members combined have more aircraft, soldiers, and armored vehicles than the entire US military. Why the fuck do we need to spend more? There are three categories that we fall behind and those are naval forces, combat experiences and satellites. Thanks to you MAGA fucknuts and following your orders from Moscow and Peking, you lost the cash payouts and our trust. Go piss in the wind and we are going to build a stronger military without you clowns to deter your bosses sitting in Moscow. .
Didnt germany just buy new fighter jets from the us for billions but without critical map data, with said killswitches, with undisclosed data sent to U.S. and not even the right to maintain them? Absolute crazy.
Germany bought a small number (35) US fighter jets as replacement for the aging Panavia Tornado used as bombers carrying US nuclear weapons as they are not allowed by their allies to have their own.
And they did so alongside ordering more Eurofighters (58 additional ones already ordered, more planned long-term) for all other roles (even ones where EF variants are still to be developed - EW for example which also is covered by Tornados at the moment) exactly for one reason: the alternative would be giving the US all details of the Eurofighter to get them certified for these bombs.
Context matters… and allies (France and UK in particular) are free to find another arangement than forcing Germany to use US equipment to fullfil NATO requirements. Alas… they won’t because… reasons…
In this insane world order created by Trump a lot of countries including Poland, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Germany will need to build their own nuclear weapons soon enough.
This is a very weird claim. If Germany wanted to build its own nuclear bombs, it could withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Germany could also have asked to host French nuclear missiles instead of US nuclear bombs, possibly as part of an EU-wide agreement rather than a bilateral deal.
They could, if there wasn’t a certain piece of paper their own allies (France and UK in particular) forced upon them as a a requirement for German reunification.
“The Governments of the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic reaffirm their renunciation of the manufacture and possession of and control over nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. They declare that the united Germany, too, will abide by these commitments.”
The Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany restored the country’s full sovereignty. The positions it reaffirms don’t limit what Germany is allowed to do under other treaties. It doesn’t prevent Germany withdrawing from the NPT. It doesn’t prevent Germany from doing anything that other sovereign states can do.
So you say that one side of the treaty (restoring Germany’s sovereignity) is valid while the other side (Germany’s assurance to never have nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, banning nuclear weapons stationed in former Eastern Germany and so on…) isn’t?
That’s an interesting idea, although one were you might not find a lot of people agreeing. Especially not as the the German side of assurances also includes no territorial claims over any former German areas now belonging to Poland. Do they know that international law is seemingly bullshit and you can just pick which agreements to uphold?
I’m saying your interpretation of the treaty is incorrect. Immediately after the two sentences you quoted is a third one clarifying that the “rights and obligations arising from the [NPT] will continue to apply to the united Germany”, meaning that Germany retains the right to withdraw from the NPT under Article X like any other signatory.
The actual text says the opposite as it continues:
“[…]They declare that the united Germany, too, will abide by these commitments. In particular, rights and obligations arising from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968 will continue to apply to the united Germany.”
Sorry, but reading those two sentences as “we will abide by the renunciation of nuclear weapons, by keeping the right to withdraw from the NPT” is quite frankly insane.
The letter and spirit of the paragraph both seem quite clear to me. The united Germany was to become party to the same treaties as West and East Germany with regard to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The NPT is the legal text of the “renunciation” of nuclear weapons, even though that specific word doesn’t actually appear in the NPT. Germany’s rights and obligations under the NPT are the same as those of all other signatories.
Rheinmetall and their stupid investment associated with the F-35 played a big role in the decision to accept the flying maintenance pig.
Oh fuck off, as if anyone with a brain needed a reason not to give Germans nukes. Germany has been very happy with not fulfilling NATO requirements for years (decades?), yet that one they sure felt was a priority. Blame anyone for your mistakes but yourself. Planning a vacation in Poland soon?
Sure, mate…
Letting Germany have the by far biggest army in all of Western Europe for decades as long as the cold war was ongoing: totally fine.
Screaming about Germany needing to demilitarize the moment the soviet union broke down and you don’t need them to defend you anymore: totally sane.
Complaining about Germany not doing enough for their army after forcing them to massively size it down the moment there is a possible threat on the horizon: sure, why not?
Also –just one second after complaining about not enough German military spending–: haha, Germany nazis! Applaud my genius!
If you don’t want to look like a total nutjob, at least be consistent…
Another one that fails to understand the full picture. For every US Dollar spent on NATO, $10.00 returned to the United States. The European Union NATO members combined have more aircraft, soldiers, and armored vehicles than the entire US military. Why the fuck do we need to spend more? There are three categories that we fall behind and those are naval forces, combat experiences and satellites. Thanks to you MAGA fucknuts and following your orders from Moscow and Peking, you lost the cash payouts and our trust. Go piss in the wind and we are going to build a stronger military without you clowns to deter your bosses sitting in Moscow. .