Russlands satanisches Versagen öffnet der NATO die Tür zum Umdenken

Submission Statement: “Russia’s supposedly city-ending Satan missile failed to launch when tested, leaving a huge hole in the ground. What should the West conclude?” Doug Livermore discusses the failure of Russia’s Sarmat 2 intercontinental ballistic missile test, which reveals significant weaknesses in its military capabilities. This incident undermines Russia’s perceived nuclear deterrent, prompting NATO to reassess its own strategic posture.

They could have chosen another name for this missile. Something like pootin blaster, atomic vlad dunno

This is important to consider. Nuclear war remains one of the paradoxes guarding against an all out WW3. Credible defence requires credible deterrence, something this East Atlantic wing of NATO needs to consider more closely. Hopefully in cooperation with the US. While I believe our European politicians have realized we the people want and need a credible military, the penultimate deterrence of thermonuclear second strike capabilities is important. Myself am from a small nation of NATO, but I am starting to see the benefits of an independent EU-NATO nuclear capable force.

While I am ever grateful for our American friends and the protection through unity y’all have provided – I am concerned. I have full understanding of the Euro-sceptic wing of American politics – as we did free ride militarily for 15-20 years – but the current polarization in America deeply concern me. I hope the trans-Atlantic friendship stays forever more, as they have been the coolest friend-boss we’ve ever had, but the Trump administration did show we cannot depend solely on them. This in turn has put cracks in the belief in the American nuclear umbrella, which is why we let them make decisions for us these last 70 years. In other words, while from 1990-2016 it stayed more as a patron-client-relationship, it will soon be more a friend relationship or equals.

This is why I am leaning more towards the EU these last few years. I want a credible European defence, and I want a nuclear capable EU. Without this, we might need rather to create a national nuclear breakout capability to a bare minimum timeframe.

This is latter part is to explain the rationale from a small vulnerable developed nation. I don’t want us to be nuclear capable, but if need be I would order their production and second strike routines if it meant the survival of my nation, my people, and our freeedom if I could. I want nothing less than life and liberty, and I am in no illusion the Russians wouldn’t walz over us given enough time.

If the US could credibly guarantee the extention of their umbrella, I will be happy to do a dance every once in a while for them and buy American. But I will not gamble with our right to life and liberty.