Friendship with US ended. Now France is my best friend.
I don’t like it, but it’s necessary because Europe needs to have trustworthy defense capabilities.
and we clearly can’t trust USA anymore.An own nuclear deterrent unfortunately is a necessary evil in the face of hostile nuclear powers. The alternative is to become vassals or, even worse, colonies to those hostile nuclear powers.
Unfortunately Norway has become a vassal of France. And that’s possibly worse.
I can’t even imagine how deranged a person would have to be to actually believe that.
You must absolutely be trolling.You believe Norway has nuclear capabilities and can independently act militarily as a nation against a nuclear power?
Which one of us is ‘deranged’?
You. 100% you.
OK I take that as a statement you actually believe it, which is very far out there.
Of course I know they don’t have nukes. And so do everybody else. It has been Norwegian policy, and this is actually a change of that policy.
But having an ally is not being a vasal. Is France being a vassal to Norway for doing what Norway want? Or for buying oil from Norway? Am I a vassal of Germany for driving a German car.
Where does you logic start on being a vassal, and where does it end?
I seriously doubt you have the slightest clue on that yourself.
How is the weather in Peterburg?
I’m sorry but why do you “people” think that anyone arguing for nuclear proliferation is a Russian bot? And why are you too much of a fucking cowardly bitch to just make the rule-breaking claim directly instead of couching it behind 2012 era agitprop?
You were not talking about nuclear proliferation in the comment I was responding to, but made the ridiculous claim that Norway turned itself into a vassal of France. Following up towards another poster with a smear against “French people”. That said, I take back my comment towards you in respect of the rules. Maybe you should take back yours too.
I am not sure if that agreement can be called “nuclear proliferation” when it does not change the number of nuclear war heads, does not spread nuclear war heads to another nation nor does it give any additional government control over nuclear warheads.
I was, you assumed otherwise. Norway submitting to France’s ‘protection,’ means they must always agree with France, they cannot ever go against France, otherwise they’d lose protection.
That’s being a vassal state. Vassal states are and were states not powerful enough to defend themselves, so they sought protection from Empires that felt it would be too costly to conquer them but still needed some of their resources.
Nuclear proliferation is the solution to prevent vassal states, and have an actually independent Norway. Unless you’re a nuclear power, you do not have an army. You do not have any form of defense. It does not matter what you do, you are under the vassalage of a nuclear power. Picking France over Russia is fine, I guess, but the effect will always be the same.
I see, I did indeed misunderstand you.
So you are arguing really for proper nuclear proliferation with Norway getting its own independent nuclear capabilities like France. The only small country having nuclear capabilities is Israel, and they surely pay a hefty price for it and are extremely dependend on the support of another major power nonetheless, probably more than Norway is dependent on France, even after this deal.
If France renegades on that deal, the worst thing that happens to Norway is being in the situation form before that deal.
Ukraine has no nuclear warheads and is bombing a nuclear power heavily (defending against its aggression), damaging a lot of its strategically important oil and gas industry btw. A nuclear deterrent is a strong power but it is not the only way to exert hard power, nor does the lack of having nuclear weapons make a country necessarily easy prey.
How is that worse than being a vassal of the US?
Have you seen french people?
Yes, I have worked with them, talked with them, etc. Great people. As a Norwegian I have a lot more culturally and politically in common with the French. I’d rather live in a vassal state to a modern liberal democracy over the underdeveloped turd reich.
That’s irrelevant, because of course no European country is a vassal of France.
And not of Germany or UK either.It can be argued that we were voluntary vassals of USA in some regards, because we trusted USA. But that trust has been so thoroughly broken, that all European countries are now clearly breaking free of American dominance.
But for more than half a century the Pax Americana was mutually beneficial. USA has now broken that, and prefer to go it alone instead of having strong allies.
This is not a given outcome. Ukraine is not a nuclear power and are not becoming a vassal of Russia.
UK has vowed to retaliate proportionally if Russia attack Ukraine with nuclear weapons.
So Ukraine is somewhat protected by allies. Otherwise who knows what that maniac Putin could do?Also your example proves the point, be cause Russia attacked Ukraine because they thought it would be easy, because the Russian military was supposed to be superior to Ukraine.
If Ukraine had an obviously strong defense it would have been unlikely that Russia would have attacked Ukraine.
Having a strong defense is unfortunately necessary because of how the global situation is. And that includes the ability to retaliate with nukes.First time I’ve heard of that, where did you hear this? Searching the web yields nothing.
My example contradicts your point. You don’t have to have nuclear weapons to avoid being a vassal or colony. Ukraine is managing without, and what’s more interesting is that Russia can’t even use nukes against Ukraine to win the war. So in a sense not being a nuclear power gives some protection.
I have to admit I can’t find it myself, all I get is stories about “unpreparedness by the UK” and Russian threats against NATO and EU and UK.
But this came out years ago it may have been while Boris Johnson was still PM.
Boris Johnson was also out with very early warning to Russia about devastating effect to the Russian economy from sanctions.[The closest I can find is this:
https://youtu.be/38wK5l80TS4?t=37Clearly Putin has been send some sort of warning, where Boris states We send a message to Putin on nuclear, and he heard that message.
Maybe the statements about proportional response is an interpretation?
My example contradicts your point. You don’t have to have nuclear weapons to avoid being a vassal or colony.
I still disagree, because the reason Ukraine can do that, is that Ukraine has multiple allies that have nuclear weapons.
With strong allies you obviously don’t need to be a vassal of anybody.
Ukraine is getting really really strong on their own accord now, but still it can never be a match to nuclear weapons. And without the backing from nuclear powers of Ukraine, who knows if Putin could get the idea to use nukes against Ukraine?
I think Putin could be crazy enough to do it, and I definitely think Trump could too. Trump has no moral limitation. The only limitation for him is what he thinks he can get away with. And I think Putin is very similar.
So what happens when RN takes power next year?
What’s gonna happen? The people who are against this deal and against the interests of their own nations will be overjoyed and Norway can terminate the agreement if France does not honour it.
If people vote for Putin’s men and women, they’ll get what they voted for. Such a deal won’t make much of a difference then.
France is one of five countries permitted under international treaties to possess nuclear weapons, and one of nine that actually do
🤨
Most treaties froze nuclear weapons to the original five.
Israel, North Korea, India, and Pakistan all developed their nuclear weapons after these treaties were signed.
Charles de Gaulle is rolling in his grave laughing. “See, told ya!”
