Fyi if you do the sums. Germany has taken double amount of refugees as Scotland, as a percentage of their population; And credit to German people for that.
But to be balanced it is 2 times as many, not 8 times.

Immediate countries are most of the time temporary, most of the time refugees will go to the richer nations. The key difference between Germany and UK's refugee numbers has less to do with geography and more to do with how receptive and accommodative the country is to taking in those people. UK is in an abysmal economic state currently, with an expected contraction and less economic growth than Russia (lol-worthy, how tf you end up with lower growth than a country that's in an all out war?) in 2023, so let's be real why their refugees numbers are tiny compared to Germany.

This notion that if Germany would have spent more on the military something would be different is bullshit, there's no evidence for it. Personally I'd rather my country be more like Germany, where it cares for it's economy and citizens rather than send 113 billion in 2022 to Ukraine to extend a bloody war with casualties into the hundreds of thousands, all because we simply HAVE to increase our military sphere and diminish Russia's. I mean here in the US we spent multiple trillions in pointless wars across the globe and how has this benefited me or my neighbor or the middle or lower classes? Not in a single way. Military spending here is entirely parasitic in relation to the tax-payer.

And Spain, Portugal, Greece are doing what's best for themselves and not being dragged wholesale into a war they have no interest in. No derision there, just an observation that at the end of the day this whole song and dance about Germany doing more and being part of the collective and all that nonsense was just a trick to get them to pull the lions share while everyone else (including your country) sends peanuts.

The US is Over Stretched

Russia's expected GDP growth in 2023 is higher than Germany's too. It's because Russia experienced a significant recession last year due to the war and Western sanctions, whereas the UK/Germany did not. Economic growth was high across all major economies ex. Russia in 2022

"was just a trick to get them to pull the lions share while everyone else (including your country) sends peanuts."

Do the research and you'll see the UK is the second behind the US for military aid to Ukraine; For being in an abysmal state economically, your words. The UK is arguably punching above its weight? Or is Germany not meeting its expectations?
It could be both. It can't be neither.
The UK also has its own standalone nuclear deterrent and doesn't rely only on NATO sharing. Probably a factor as why the UK didn't dither in its support for Ukraine; A standalone deterrent is something only the UK and France can really count on. Germany ought to have a larger conventional deterrent for that reason, but they simply don't.
Scholz's new defence minister came out and said it will take us a month to do an inventory of Leopard 2's! That is the manifestation of being asleep at the wheel. Merkle used to style herself as the leader of the free world, too bad that didn't include organizing someone to inventory the available tanks!

Germany has the largest population and largest economy of any European country. Is it a stretch to assume they should contribute to European defence?


"This notion that if Germany would have spent more on the military something would be different is bullshit"

Not something I have stated. Again classic, straw manning. Germany like alot of EU countries have underinvested in defence; This idea of focusing on your economy while a war is raging on the EU continent is laughable. There is a real and literal threat. Its time the EU and the UK were able to protect European values/allies without relying on the Americans.
As for "focusing on their economy"
"In 2021, Russia accounted for 55% of Germany's gas imports"
Jesus christ man.

Nice deflection, lol

I said the UK is getting rattled by strikes cuz the economy is going down the shitter while the govt is sending billions to Ukraine.

What they have in common is that the experts you rely on made egregious errors in all four. It is a poor argument to say that "the experts know what they're doing", because no one should be convinced that that's the case.



So previous errors in judgement (including re: the Taliban a year or so ago) are irrelevant because this is an even bigger foreign policy crisis? How do you figure?



By dropping language focused on the "collapse" of the Russian Federation and an obsession with taking back lands lost in 2014. Russia's goals in the war are still maximalist, the goal is to stabilize Ukraine. I'm not sure where you read that I'm blaming the West for the war, I find conversations on who started what to be very tedious.

Whether they've been liberated or not is besides the point. Russia's influence in the country is centered in the south and east. Sympathizers were critical to Russia's initial seizing of Kherson, and before that to Russia's current presence in Crimea and the Donbass. It goes without saying that the east and south of the country is far more pro-Russian than the west and north. I'm not sure why Ukraine would want to hold onto the Donbass at this point, it will remain a constant source of irritation and remain a vehicle for Russian interference in Ukrainian affairs.

The Russian regime is not going to willingly choose annihilation. They will do everything in their power to prevent it. What about that do you think is controversial?



You need to move beyond the dichotomy of pro-Russian and pro-Ukraine. You can support Ukraine without support maximalist Ukrainian goals. We ignore Russia's nuclear capacity at our own peril. There is a fine line between allowing countries to do whatever they want, and actively pushing a country to go nuclear.

In my opinion, you're too wrapped up in moral considerations to consider this rationally.

"Cuz"

That is one of the more rational and pragmatic comments I have seen from the past year that I started visiting Pard.

This post was edited by Hamsterbaby on Feb 6 2023 10:55am

When in doubt, the Russians will resort to tanks. Psychologically, it's probably hard to get beyond what saved your race from extinction in WW2. And from Ukrainian sources, it sounds like tanks are indeed being prepared for a major mechanized offensive. Gerasimov's specialty is tank warfare.



I agree with this. We need to see what happens through the rest of 2023. If the Biden peace overture story (coming out of Switzerland) is correct, Ukraine refused on the grounds that they would not countenance the loss of territory, and Russia refused because "we're going to win anyway". It's important that Ukraine is able to survive the upcoming Russian offensive, but it's equally important that the West starts to clearly articulate conditions to Ukraine on the future end to the war. Right now, the West has given the entirety of that authority to the Ukrainian government, which is understandably hardline. Crimea should be off the table.