• plyth@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    only against ones that don’t.

    For now.

    And if you look at India and Pakistan, it’s not true anymore.

    India and China had also battled, but with fists, to avoid escalation.

    In any case it is a catch 22. Developing a star shield will hold the EU back in robotics, AI and microelectronics to a point that nothing will be left to defend.

    But the US are contemplating to use tactical nukes against China, with the idea that China wouldn’t escalate to strategic nukes to avoid their complete destruction. So nukes alone won’t deter, at least not the US.

    Don’t forget that the US already control the politicians and, with their social networks, also the votes. There won’t be war between the US and the EU because the US will get what they want. But the EU will fight when the US asks for support. No nuke can prevent that participation.

    • 73ms@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      India and Pakistan only proves that nuclear states can still end up in conflict between each other. Nukes being in the calculation is very likely to still incentivize de-escalation between the two of them just like your example of India and China.

      Both Russia and (still to lesser extent for now) USA are now adversaries of Europe and we can’t afford to have adequate deterrence for both. Having to engage in wars against one of those would set Europe back far more than developing a nuclear capability at home.

      You’ll find no agreement with me about Americans controlling European politicians beyond what is caused by precisely the fact that we’re dependent on them for our defense and in no insignificant part because of the US nuclear umbrella. When it comes to things like social networks I’m definitely all for moving away from that to European digital sovereignty.