Germany is at a crossroads when it comes to its security policy — one of the deepest upheavals of the post-War era.

    • Baggins@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      We never stopped.

      If you think those ones we have now are leftover from the 60s, you are in for a shock.

    • LordGimp@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      How else are we gonna get that sweet pu238 for our deep space drones?

    • NoxAstrum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Only those who don’t understand the topic. Those of us who study them do not support proliferation.

      • M137@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        The thing is that among the people who have the power to make it a reality are many who don’t understand the topic. Politicians and other people in power are well known to not understand the stuff they get to make decisions about.

  • zqps@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    Hoffentlich bauen die Schwaben nie eine Atombombe, weil irgendein Minischderpräsident würde sagen “Etz ham mer se bezahlt, etz werf mer se au ab”.

  • TheMightyCat@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    It would be best if there was an EU wide nuclear program. Not a nuclear sharing program but a nuclear program.

    If this is impossible for whatever reason it is up to the member states to develop their own programs.

    Russia would never have invaded if Ukraine kept their nukes.

  • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    AfD sagt “geil”, aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera …

    AfD says “hell yeah”, but to be honest it’s not looking much better in other countries who might extend their nuclear shield (is that even a thing in English?) to Germany. What’s worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA? Lesser of two evils …

    edit: whoops, wrong language. I hope this manual translation gets the point across.

    • bzah@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yup! In Frankreich wir haben nukes und für defensive Zwecke das sieht gut aus. Aber wenn Lepen oder ihr Hundchen wird Präsident sein, dann tickt das Doomsdayclock noch einmal für alle…

    • Lain@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      What’s worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA?

      Why pick one when you can have both? Hitler and Stalin used to have a deal until they didn’t.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        So far, nuclear deterrence has worked without fail. The soviets had their first successful nuclear weapon test in 1949, Stalin died in 1953 - neither he no his successors ever fired a nuclear weapon at an enemy, despite being in a cold war the entire time until the end of the USSR.

        And frankly, if the German faschists were dumb enough to use nuclear weapons offensively against enemies, I’d assume they would be bombed into oblivion instead of invaded.

        • Kissaki@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          There were proxy wars though.

          Would one have invaded the other without them? I kind of doing it.

          The cold was escalated with the atomic bomb arsenal and proxy wars. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they were necessary or actually effective that was like that.

        • Lain@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’d assume the faschists would gift the nukes to their buddies, or just attack someone else. Afterwards we can still get invaded.

  • Kissaki@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The article advocates/answers with infrastructure should be prepared so it can be purposed if it should ever be necessary.

    There is, however, a third option: nuclear hedging. In this model, a country does not develop nuclear weapons outright but instead builds the technological capacity to produce them if ever deemed necessary.

    Most of the comments here seem to discuss the headline instead - whether it should equip.

    • Melchior@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Germany maintains the uranium enrichment plant and a the ability to turn that into nuclear fuel. That is what is needed to build a simple uranium based nuclear weapon.

      That is why Germany set up nuclear power plants, as they were always meant to finance and develop those facilities. Since they are now esteblished there is no reason to keep the power plants around. They are of the wrong type anyway, as they produce very little plutonium, which is the other way of producing nuclear weapons. However Germany still has quite a few institutions being able to built nuclear reactors, if need be.

      That is also why Germany was fine with US nuclear weapons. Nobody wanted to see Germany have nukes themself, but Germany. Hence that deal. However Germany always had very detailed plans to built nukes, if need be. We are talking about having nukes within a few months, if really pushed hard.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is what Germany has been doing for decades with its civil nuclear program, but it turned out to be an prohibitively expensive bondoggle and all the nuclear plants have been shut down now.

  • Obelix@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I really would like that everybody who is proposing a german nuclear bomb would also explain where Germany should test its new bomb. Bavaria? Mecklenburg? Erzgebirge?

  • NoxAstrum@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    They just had an election where the second most popular party was an extreme-right-wing pack of lunatics. What happens when they win the next election?

    You cannot afford to have nuclear weapons when you can’t be sure who’s going to have control of them.

    • Kissaki@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      If Putin and the USA already have them, isn’t that hypothetical too far off when assessing risk?

      There’s a strong counter movement to the right. I’d rather have a strong deterrent against Putin than not. It’s pretty obvious to me what the more immediate and more realistic risk is.

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Guys, have a kid, buy a house. Smile on your faces. Everything is going to be good.

    You need to feel like you have something for them to be able to rip it away.

  • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    The war’s been over for a while and they seem to have turned into decent people, but if you think it’ll help… 🤷‍♂️

  • 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Too expensive for the little benefit. Turkey for example has none, but one of the bigger armies in the Mediterranean and can still project power.

    I’d also recommend to talk to Poland and France about this first, if only for historic reasons.

  • Tudsamfa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I can barely imagine the shitty world that makes us need the French nukes in our country, what world would there even be that requires a German one instead? If things are that bad, what good would our own nuke do at that point?

    • trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      An EU nuclear weapons programme would be by far preferable, but that requires a common EU foreign and defence policy.

      Not having any nukes won’t work with the current state of affairs, except for enjoyers of being on the receiving end of nuclear blackmail by an orange muppet, his puppeteer in Moscow, and Winnie the Pooh.

  • suoko@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Drop it ! Wherever it’s dropped is probably fine now

  • kingofras@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    First off. Way to make sure everyone “doesn’t look up” re climate emergency. There’s no amount of nukes we can build that are more powerful and can be secured enough against nature’s planned devastation in the next 30 years. But for some reason all this war talk shit is just a welcome distraction.

    Second. This is the same like all these governments asking Apple and Signal to build backdoors. Once you have a backdoor, it doesn’t discriminate who passes through it. Build all the nukes you want, all European governments will slide towards trumpism in the next 10 years anyway, as European politics seems to copy USA and is more and more infiltrated by foreign powers (also just like USA). I’m sure all the mini-me Aldofs, Elons and Donalds will appreciate a freshly build slab of nukes to establish their tyranny.

    Boy are we stupid. Just smart enough to know we’re a bunch of clothed idiots.

    Tldr use a condom

    • federal reverse@feddit.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t love your level of optimism. I all seriousness, I don’t think it’s all quite as predetermined as it may seem at this moment.

      • kingofras@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        My level of optimism is not really lovable, but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong. The correlation between lack of understanding (not to call it naivety or ignorance) and optimism is growing by the day.

        I.e.: for most people in order to survive they will turn more and more towards hopium delivery systems like religions, cults or the deification of powerful people to offset the uncomfortable underlying reality.

        That’s why I think I’m an actual optimist. I see a really amazing future of rebuilding in the next half a century once you nothern hemispherians have finished killing each other and reduce the population levels back to a level where we can feed people off the land without needing petrofertilised agriculture.

        We’re not that special. We’re just an ant hive that managed to find too much food for a while and we grew out of control. Natural laws exist to deal with these events.

        Since the rules of society and safety are always written in blood, I feel they will be pretty good rules after this has all come to pass.

        There’s plenty of resources out there that will show you where we’re heading in terms of climate. It’s not going to be pretty (it already is very ugly but wars are generating more clicks) and it will keep accelerating. We’re less than 5 years away from serious impacts on the global food supply, and while the white folks will still have food security, the diaspora from the famines on other continent will drive more of those whites to vote towards the right.

        Computer models in the 80’s predicted this. Imagine how accurate my AI predictions have become today.

        I do want to say I agree with you that optimism is important. I just think there’s naive optimism and realistic optimism. I’ve picked the latter and that means in my story billions die very quickly. But that’s also best for our environment.