Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
@outlaw
[snip]

... the EU countries could overrun Russia up to Khazan with their armies because they reduced their forces to a level very high above what little forces the Russians have in their Western and Southern (Caucasus) regions.
This is a fact and totally tears apart all the repeated stupid talk and illusions about a supposed European military weakness.
This is a very strange thought pattern.

It has been discussed before that a deterrent - in this case a military one - only has value if the opossing party believes it will be used. There is no chance that EU countries would ever mobilise for such a purpose. European military weakness is clear and obvious not only in its constituted structure but also importantly that it poses no real deterrent to Russian expansionism because it will never be used.

Europe isn't motivated to use more than its left hand's little finger to deal with issues because nobody is even only poking it. The Americans prefer to use their whole left hand, but using a mere little finger only is very different from having no fists.
What is happening is that your Europe is finding a number of good reasons to see Russian actions - the annexation of Crimea and the on-going proxy war in Ukraine - as nothing to be alarmed about. No doubt they are now figuring out how to get out of NATO commitments to those states in the line of fire - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. I suppose Russian annexation of those states not be considered a threat to Europe either.

Europe has no credible deterrent to Russian expansionism without the US and the US is also trying to sneak out the back door to avoid a confrontation with Russia. That is the truth learn to live with it.


There's a huge difference between a multi-ethnic state with ethnicities being concentrated in certain regions and thus able to claim independence and a multi-ethnic immigration state in which immigrants can claim to be a majority at most in parts of some cities. The former is no nation-state, while the latter can be (and is in Europe).
This whole argument is meaningless unless the dates and reasons for migrations are taken into account.