As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[EU]ropean democracies thread

17891012

Posts

  • thatassemblyguythatassemblyguy Technical Debt Janitor he/himRegistered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    In other words, Germany can't be counted as a reliable ally against Putin.

    Thanks for clarifying that.

    And of course that the country with 8 US Army bases doesn't see the point of a National army. Duh.

    I think this is backwards. The US can't be counted on as a reliable ally - see Trump presidency & GOP party (Grand Ole Party Putin party).

    Germany has been walking the tight wire with US backing, and also have the most to lose if Putin goes Crimea but on all of Eastern Europe.

    I'd say that Germany will be a reliable ally against Putin, but also needs guaranteed support before they can stick their necks out - especially as they need to form a new government in the coming months.

    Zibblsnrtautono-wally, erotibot300FencingsaxpainfulPleasanceFANTOMASStarZapper
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited November 10
    Germany can be counted on as ally against Russia 100% if push comes to shove.

    It's just that they rather wish it didn't.

    autono-wally, erotibot300 on
    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    Commander ZoomRedTidepainfulPleasanceKruiteFiendishrabbitZilla360
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Honestly, I think we all would!

    But no one's more aware of that than Putin, and so nationally as well as in person, he's going to keep doing that thing where he stands maybe two inches away and waits for a reaction.

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    GiantGeek2020SmrtnikZilla360
  • ZibblsnrtZibblsnrt Registered User regular
    Yeah, I think the issue is more that the United States can't be counted on in that scenario anymore. If push came to shove tomorrow half of Congress would instantly adopt a pro-Russian line on whatever was going on, and other governments certainly know that.

    Commander ZoomthatassemblyguypainfulPleasance
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    yeeaaahhh... I think what hangs above all this is the dissolution of the American Empire- No one really know how far America is still willing to go to defend its allies, and no one really wants to find out.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    Commander ZoompainfulPleasanceSmrtnikBigJoeMMrVyngaard
  • AldoAldo Hippo Hooray Registered User regular
    I just can't imagine Russia wanting to wage an actual war. Their economy is in shambles, the ruling class is only in power through strongman-tactics and they do not have allies as much as they have a few vassal states left. All goodwill created after the fall of the CCCP with Gorbachev and early years Jeltsin has completely evaporated.

  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Germany can be counted on as ally against Russia 100% if push comes to shove.

    It's just that they rather wish it didn't.

    The problem is that if push comes to shove too quickly, Germany won't be in a position to offer much aid.

    Hell, just insuring what they currently have in their inventory works would be a good start.

    If Germany wishes to be a leader in Europe, they need to be able to defend it. Especially if they consider the US to be unreliable, which after Trump might be fair.

    TryCatchershrykeSmrtnik
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited November 11
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    In other words, Germany can't be counted as a reliable ally against Putin.

    Thanks for clarifying that.

    And of course that the country with 8 US Army bases doesn't see the point of a National army. Duh.

    I think this is backwards. The US can't be counted on as a reliable ally - see Trump presidency & GOP party (Grand Ole Party Putin party).

    Germany has been walking the tight wire with US backing, and also have the most to lose if Putin goes Crimea but on all of Eastern Europe.

    I'd say that Germany will be a reliable ally against Putin, but also needs guaranteed support before they can stick their necks out - especially as they need to form a new government in the coming months.

    Not to defend Trump, but the Ukraine invasion happened in 2014. Obama bungled it by being way too passive towards Russia-which Biden is copying by not sanctioning Nordstream 2.

    Germany didn't issue the construction permit for Nordstream 2 till Jan 2018, They had plenty of time to reverse course.

    There are no consequences for this shithousery so it will continue.

    e: I think the take of "no one knows how far the US will go to defend its allies", while Germany threw a fit over maybe not doing a multi-billion of dollars infrastructure project to further support the #1 industry of the country the US is supposed to be defending from, is a bit fucking rich.

    tinwhiskers on
    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
    thatassemblyguyTryCatcherLanlaornSmrtnik
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Zibblsnrt wrote: »
    Yeah, I think the issue is more that the United States can't be counted on in that scenario anymore. If push came to shove tomorrow half of Congress would instantly adopt a pro-Russian line on whatever was going on, and other governments certainly know that.

    Eh. If push comes to shove the US military industrial complex would love a chance to smack around an actual conventional army. Republican pro-russia stances are entirely self-serving domestic political issues for almost all of them. I don't think they'd put up much of a fight there.

    The thing that's going to stay the US's hand is the same thing that did in Ukraine: fear of a shooting war with Russia getting out of hand.

    LanlaornFencingsaxKayne Red RobeLord_Asmodeus
  • LanlaornLanlaorn Registered User regular
    The ideas presented on this page that the Republican party would be the one to back down from a return to cold war era politics and possible war with Russia are pretty laughable, it'd be perfect 80s Reagan kinda stuff leading up to midterms and the next presidential election.

    Also, ask the Poles if they have more faith in Germany or the United States honoring their NATO obligations. IME the answer is going to be overwhelmingly in favor of the US.

    Frankly the idea that Germany became energy dependent on Russia and has a weak military as some kind of diplomatic ploy is ridiculous, they also have full faith in the US defending them, and know that the Russians do, too, and find a war so unlikely that this isn't a dangerous position to be in.

    I know Trump was rude to other nations on twitter, but let's be real here guys, with Russia and China being openly belligerent to every neighboring country there is no way there will be a " dissolution of the American Empire" while everyone bordering these locally aggressive powers relies on the US military as the only force on the globe capable of deterring them.

  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    The ideas presented on this page that the Republican party would be the one to back down from a return to cold war era politics and possible war with Russia are pretty laughable, it'd be perfect 80s Reagan kinda stuff leading up to midterms and the next presidential election.

    Also, ask the Poles if they have more faith in Germany or the United States honoring their NATO obligations. IME the answer is going to be overwhelmingly in favor of the US.

    Frankly the idea that Germany became energy dependent on Russia and has a weak military as some kind of diplomatic ploy is ridiculous, they also have full faith in the US defending them, and know that the Russians do, too, and find a war so unlikely that this isn't a dangerous position to be in.

    I know Trump was rude to other nations on twitter, but let's be real here guys, with Russia and China being openly belligerent to every neighboring country there is no way there will be a " dissolution of the American Empire" while everyone bordering these locally aggressive powers relies on the US military as the only force on the globe capable of deterring them.

    you sure about that?


    "I'm totally confused" -- Tucker Carlson wonder why the US would be allies with Ukraine instead of Russia, since Russia has more energy reservers. Rep. Mike Turner reminds him that we're supposed to be on the side of democracies. Carlson responds by saying, "I guess"

    Aaron Rupar is a journalist, quoting Fox's white supremacist in chief Tucker Carlson. This sort of thing has been very common out of conservative sources the last few years.

    IncenjucarCommander Zoomautono-wally, erotibot300JragghenSmrtnikGiantGeek2020painfulPleasance
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    "They're fascist authoritarian capitalists, we're authoritarian capitalists, why wouldn't we be natural allies?"

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    autono-wally, erotibot300GiantGeek2020BigJoeMpainfulPleasanceZibblsnrtLord_Asmodeus
  • LanlaornLanlaorn Registered User regular
    So, to be clear, the actual GOP congressman has the hawkish stance I'm exactly referring to but the TV personality trolling for controversy says a ridiculous thing and that's what you choose to believe is the true sentiment of Republican politicians?

    OK.

  • UrsusUrsus Registered User regular
    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    So, to be clear, the actual GOP congressman has the hawkish stance I'm exactly referring to but the TV personality trolling for controversy says a ridiculous thing and that's what you choose to believe is the true sentiment of Republican politicians?

    OK.

    Conservative media personalities carries a lot more weight than some rando congressman.

    ZibblsnrtKayne Red RobeGiantGeek2020NeveronFencingsaxpainfulPleasance
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    In other words, Germany can't be counted as a reliable ally against Putin.

    Thanks for clarifying that.

    And of course that the country with 8 US Army bases doesn't see the point of a National army. Duh.
    Germany has a federal army. Do you mean Germany doesn't see the point of an EU army?

    Zibblsnrt
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    There's somehow this idea that any $ Russia puts into their army is vastly more effective than any $ a European country can spend

    Because Europe together vastly outspends Russia and somehow the assumption is that this wouldn't be enough in any kind of conflict

    Maybe Russians are just supermen

    Aldo
  • ZibblsnrtZibblsnrt Registered User regular
    Russia propagandizes the Super Manly Manliness of its army pretty hard and that convinces a weird number of people that there's actually something different about individual personnel as a result.

    Also they have an absolutely silly number of tanks officially in service. A lot of people just see the five-figure number and don't consider the fact that the large majority of those are painfully obsolete or non-operational (both of which tend to be easier on the budget than super modern gear).

    thatassemblyguyCommander ZoomshrykepainfulPleasanceFencingsaxGiantGeek2020
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Platy wrote: »
    There's somehow this idea that any $ Russia puts into their army is vastly more effective than any $ a European country can spend

    Because Europe together vastly outspends Russia and somehow the assumption is that this wouldn't be enough in any kind of conflict

    Maybe Russians are just supermen

    It's a question of political will. I don't the Russian's are going to push to the Atlantic, Paris or even Berlin. I do think they have the capability to rapidly seize territory, dig in, and hope to bloody Europe's nose enough when they counter attack to make them come to the table.

    Again, were talking about just the EU here. No USA. I remember when France ran low on bombs hitting Libya.

    Add in the fact that the Russian Army is just the Russian Army. In order to match the strength of the Russian army, you need several European armies operating closely with each other, They'll be language barriers, different military traditions and tactics used.

    And the small size of the various European armies is another thing to consider. Some of them cant take many loses before they cease to exist.

    Russia has the advantages of a much lower cost of living. In some ways their dollars do go a lot further than one would expect. They also inherited a lot of old Soviet gear that they can upgrade on the cheap.

    Like France and Germany spend roughly the same about on defense, and I couldn't tell you what Germany fields that France doesn't. They seem to have the same amount of tanks, planes but yet France maintains a Nuclear arsenal and an aircraft carrier. So yeah, sometimes one dollar does go further I guess.
    Zibblsnrt wrote: »
    Russia propagandizes the Super Manly Manliness of its army pretty hard and that convinces a weird number of people that there's actually something different about individual personnel as a result.

    Also they have an absolutely silly number of tanks officially in service. A lot of people just see the five-figure number and don't consider the fact that the large majority of those are painfully obsolete or non-operational (both of which tend to be easier on the budget than super modern gear).

    Even if we just count their more modern vehicles, they have a lot. They have more T-90 tanks than Germany has Leopard 2's.

    Basically, I feel Europe is currently spending the bare minimum they can get away with on defense because they have NATO, and all their defenses are based around NATO. The Baltic States and Poland are probably expecting the US to pull the out if needed. If we take away NATO and US dick waving, can we be sure that say, Spain or Italy will go to war over Latvia? Can the various European armed forces effectively coordinate an offensive outside of NATO's control? Frankly I'm doubtful.

    LanlaornAntinumericTryCatcherGiantGeek2020enc0reKaputa
  • CornucopiistCornucopiist Registered User regular
    Basically, I feel Europe is currently spending the bare minimum they can get away with on defense because they have NATO, and all their defenses are based around NATO. The Baltic States and Poland are probably expecting the US to pull the out if needed. If we take away NATO and US dick waving, can we be sure that say, Spain or Italy will go to war over Latvia? Can the various European armed forces effectively coordinate an offensive outside of NATO's control? Frankly I'm doubtful.

    There is no need to wargame this...
    1) During the cold war we had an order of magnitude more tanks on both sides. This was sort of historical, because already tanks were dead. Helicopters killed tanks. Before helicopters proved in exercises that they killed tanks good, the strategy was to use nuclear arms, in Germany, to kill tanks. You need tens of thousands of tanks to have some survive nuclear warfare, which is part of why we had so many on both sides.

    2) Of course the MBT has remained dead ever since, and warfare has moved on. Significantly, it appears that it is really easy to fuck up an army with an army if you are invading, but it's really hard to occupy with an army. MBTs are useless for occupying anything unless squashing things under their treads is a big part of your plans somehow. This is why no European army is upkeeping their MBT numbers. Anyway, NATO has had a lot of fun and worthwhile hands-on experience with the occupation game in the last two decades. THAT IS THE ENTIRE PAYOFF. There's no point to either invading or occupying and everybody who is not blind knows it.

    3) NATO is worse than useless for defense, because it is a political organization depending on political approval. NATO does not need to be good at defense because Russia really is not a superpower and they cannot afford to invade any more places. Now, Russia likes sabre-rattling just as much as the next guy, and for the same reason: to make the population jingoist and happy. Sure, they have abysmal life expectancy, but they have a lunar program and their tanks can drift! But that only gets you so far until the reality of cost and bodybags starts dominating the debate.

    4)Russia can do whatever the f*ck it wants in Ukraine, and Europe was and remains entirely powerless because Putin is a) a major source of energy for most of europe, b) just stupid enough to think that you can outright bribe European member state leaders and c) totally correct in that assumption. If NATO had more tanks they still would serve no purpose whatsoever because of the success of the unholy alliance of fossil fuel interests and European white power politics. This is a pretty good projection for what Russia might be able to do in other regions; the baltic states in particular, but also ONGOING Kosovo in the heart of Europe (if not in the EU).

    5) If you stop defining 'influence' as military, you might spot a few EU member states where Russia has a disproportionate influence as a source of investments and economic power and where the Russian kleptocracy can influence policy by means of old-fashioned corruption. NATO is, again, powerless. MBTS might be good to roll over Cypriot bank server rooms, but that would piss off the non-Russians customers, too.


    And that's just Russia. There's little info about it, but basically the reason Turkey could pretty much wipe the floor with Greece a few years back was because Italy and France had competing fossil fuel interests in Libya and Italy's ENI sided with Turkey. Since then it seems Turkey got too big for its shoes (Erdogan is considered a bit of a brute in diplomacy) and France and Italy have managed to patch things up (that is, Total and Eni have). So now Turkey is trying to intimidate that Total-Eni alliance on the seas off Cyprus... All of these are NATO members by the way, and Greece is spending whatever post-crisis revenue it can get on military contracts to keep up with Turkey.

    GiantGeek2020
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    so it's back to the Great Game, which was just what the EU was, IIRC, supposed to prevent/mitigate/redirect?

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    so it's back to the Great Game, which was just what the EU was, IIRC, supposed to prevent/mitigate/redirect?

    The EU generally has, or at least muted it to non-megadeath levels of shenanigans. Unfortunately Russia is not in the club and still wants to play.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
    CornucopiistZibblsnrtAim
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    so it's back to the Great Game, which was just what the EU was, IIRC, supposed to prevent/mitigate/redirect?

    I mean, kinda, only now Europe is kinda united?

    I don't think Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Britain, Poland and so on will go to war on each other any time soon, even with the Russian brexit project being this successful.

    A few decades of politics might change that of course, but that's for the future.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    Fencingsax
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    probably not the shooting kind, no, at least not for a while. so that part has worked out, yes.
    but wasn't avoiding or reducing economic war (usually, though not always, less destructive than the other sort) also a goal, with the common market and all?
    I suppose that, barring full unification, there was always going to be some level of politicking and jockeying for position; but it seems to this outsider that the cracks are deepening, and the nations/blocs within the EU are pushing harder, and playing rougher, than around the turn of the century.

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
  • CornucopiistCornucopiist Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    so it's back to the Great Game, which was just what the EU was, IIRC, supposed to prevent/mitigate/redirect?

    The EU generally has, or at least muted it to non-megadeath levels of shenanigans. Unfortunately Russia is not in the club and still wants to play.

    Yeah, war is something you do in other places. If the US isn't pushing for war, the EU tends not not wage war. The EU went to war on Libya because after Obama dropped Israel and the Saudis, Qatar managed to talk the UK and France into it. Again, Italy was besties with Khadaffi (and Assad). France is dependably embroiled in wars in the Sahara, because those are their ex-colonies, but those are pretty much 'police actions'. France also sells weapons to everybody the rest of the EU might want to fight (read up on what joy Exocets have been to NATO). Germany basically went all-in on Afghanistan as the war to prove that they were both responsible Bayerischer central-democrats and ass-kicking badasses who deserve to have a military policy just like the countries who were not once the Third Reich. (It did not go well).
    Now, trade domination, that's the game to play. EU standards are incredibly powerful. If you want to trade with the block, you have to abide with its rules. (No-one told the Brexiters this it seems).

    As for the Great Game, the Germans have been dominating industrially because of their influence on monetary policy, but in general the richest member states get along. The big split is with the poorer eastern member states and their rising fascism (and the Russian influence behind that).

  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Yeah, war is something you do in other places.

    In this century, yes. (So far.) Again, that part of the experiment seems to be working.

    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    GiantGeek2020
  • CornucopiistCornucopiist Registered User regular
    Yeah, war is something you do in other places.

    In this century, yes. (So far.) Again, that part of the experiment seems to be working.

    Absolutely. I don't know when this fishing tiff between France and the UK will turn hot, but I really think of that as a 'when' not 'if'. Brexit makes for a formidable case study of how and why an elite that is not delivering on its hubristic promises will use nationalism to deflect criticism, and how a gullible part of the population will just gobble it all up.
    And the same goes for France but with elections rather than Brexit as their excuse.
    Mind you, some Brits remember how their last fishing wars went.

    GiantGeek2020Kayne Red Robe
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    The Guardian brings it's analysis about how the migration conflict has two players, and the second one, Fortress Europe, is very much as morally bankrupt as Lukashenko:
    However odious Lukashenko’s actions, the humanitarian disaster on the border is not the result simply of one nation’s actions. Polish forces, too, have trapped the migrants. Warsaw has imposed a state of emergency, denying migrants food, water or medical aid and refusing journalists access. New laws allow police to ignore asylum requests. Officially, eight people have died in sub-zero temperatures; the true figure is likely to be much higher.

    In her state of the union speech in September, the EU president, Ursula von der Leyen, condemned the regime in Minsk for having “instrumentalised human beings”, a claim echoed last week by the US and European delegates to the UN.

    It’s true that Lukashenko is using migrants as pawns in a cynical diplomatic manoeuvre. But “instrumentalising human beings” is exactly what EU migration policy has been practising, too, for the past three decades. “Fortress Europe” has been created by turning people into instruments of policy, viewing migrants not as living, breathing human beings, but as flotsam and jetsam to be swept away from Europe’s beaches and borders.

    To maintain Fortress Europe, the EU has funded a huge kidnap and detention industry right across Africa from the Atlantic to the Red Sea, from the Mediterranean to beyond the Sahara. The “Khartoum process” is a deal the EU stitched together with countries in the north and east of Africa to detain migrants before they can reach the Mediterranean. States involved include Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and South Sudan, all countries facing civil war and mass famine. The EU has given money to Omar al-Bashir, the former leader of Sudan indicted by the international criminal court for war crimes, and to Isaias Afwerki, the Eritrean dictator whose viciousness outstrips that of Lukashenko. The Janjaweed, a militia that pursued genocidal violence in Darfur, now calls itself the “Rapid Support Forces” and hunts down migrants for the EU rather than rebels for Bashir. Europe’s policies have turned migrants into a resource to be exploited.

    The long and arduous history of European "creative solutions" to demographic issues continues.

  • honoverehonovere Registered User regular
    Social Democrats, Greens, and Liberals are currently presenting their coalition agreement for the next German government.

    Spoiler: if you would like to see great ideas to combat climate change, you're going to be dissatisfied.
    If you think think giving the finance ministry to a neoliberal who doesn't have any background in finance or economy is dumb you're going to be dissatisfied.

    autono-wally, erotibot300
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Yeah the finance ministry is gonna be really bad I think.

    The coalition agreement looks decent so far though.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    I want marijuans tho

  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    Sweden got their first female Prime Minister today. Magdalena Andersson was chosen to lead the Social Democrats, and the vote in parliament didn't reach a majority of votes against her. (Fewer voted for her, but many abstained.)

    This is the eventual result of Stefan Löfven losing a vote of no confidence, then nobody getting more votes than him to replace him, then resigning.

    Chanus
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    I want marijuans tho

    i6g0hgck0ilm.jpg

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    Tarantio wrote: »
    Sweden got their first female Prime Minister today. Magdalena Andersson was chosen to lead the Social Democrats, and the vote in parliament didn't reach a majority of votes against her. (Fewer voted for her, but many abstained.)

    This is the eventual result of Stefan Löfven losing a vote of no confidence, then nobody getting more votes than him to replace him, then resigning.

    PM Andersson has asked to resign as PM.

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
    autono-wally, erotibot300
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    Tarantio wrote: »
    Sweden got their first female Prime Minister today. Magdalena Andersson was chosen to lead the Social Democrats, and the vote in parliament didn't reach a majority of votes against her. (Fewer voted for her, but many abstained.)

    This is the eventual result of Stefan Löfven losing a vote of no confidence, then nobody getting more votes than him to replace him, then resigning.

    PM Andersson has asked to resign as PM.

    Well, I guess that explains this expression while being applauded.

    https://v.redd.it/zf2cqqhani181

  • EchoEcho ski-bap ba-dapModerator mod
    Tarantio wrote: »
    Sweden got their first female Prime Minister today. Magdalena Andersson was chosen to lead the Social Democrats, and the vote in parliament didn't reach a majority of votes against her. (Fewer voted for her, but many abstained.)

    This is the eventual result of Stefan Löfven losing a vote of no confidence, then nobody getting more votes than him to replace him, then resigning.

    PM Andersson has asked to resign as PM.

    We've reached some sort of "fuck around/find out" singularity event horizon, where the fucking around and finding out are happening simultaneously.

    Commander ZoomGiantGeek2020HonkCaptainBeyondboogedyboo
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Echo wrote: »
    Tarantio wrote: »
    Sweden got their first female Prime Minister today. Magdalena Andersson was chosen to lead the Social Democrats, and the vote in parliament didn't reach a majority of votes against her. (Fewer voted for her, but many abstained.)

    This is the eventual result of Stefan Löfven losing a vote of no confidence, then nobody getting more votes than him to replace him, then resigning.

    PM Andersson has asked to resign as PM.

    We've reached some sort of "fuck around/find out" singularity event horizon, where the fucking around and finding out are happening simultaneously.

    Soon they will find out before they even fuck around. People will be sitting there going "Oh god, what am I going to do to deserve this?".

    autono-wally, erotibot300
  • UrsusUrsus Registered User regular
    So Andersson resigned since the Environmentalists (MP) left the governing coalition, and according to norms the PM resigns when a coalition party leaves. Got dang Greens always ruining shit right?

    Well, MP left the coalition because the Center party abandoned their "principles" and voted for the M-KD-SD budget, allowing the rightwing budget to pass. To compare the budget alliance to American politics:
    M - Moderaterna (transl. moderates)- Business side of the GOP
    KD - Kristdemokraterna (transl. christ-democrats- religious nutcase side of the GOP
    SD - Sverigedemokraterna (transl. sweden democrats)- Nazi shitwizard party aka "Trump" GOP.

    So in the end the Greens left because they have standards and refuses to give in to the SD shitwizards, and the rightwing budget passed since the centrists don't (or totally do, sware-on-me-mum, just happens to capitulate to the right whenever possible).

    The problem for Sweden now is that rightwing budgets never work, all it ends up with is a further erosion of the welfare system with nothing to show for it.

    Commander ZoomAldoHonk
  • EchoEcho ski-bap ba-dapModerator mod
    Ursus wrote: »
    So in the end the Greens left because they have standards and refuses to give in to the SD shitwizards, and the rightwing budget passed since the centrists don't (or totally do, sware-on-me-mum, just happens to capitulate to the right whenever possible).

    As I said elsewhere, C has been coasting on the "center" part of their name for way too long, they're buying into the myth that they're neither left nor right, it says so right in the name! Thus they are immune to what they themselves call "outer edge parties" like V on the left and SD on the right. Not that this apparently stops them from throwing their towel in with M-KD-SD and vote on their budget. But they're centrists!
    The problem for Sweden now is that rightwing budgets never work, all it ends up with is a further erosion of the welfare system with nothing to show for it.

    And then we get another lap on the merry-go-round of "why would the left wreck our economy like this?"

    HonkJragghenautono-wally, erotibot300
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I’m very concerned about the future given the last decade+ of politics.

    I feel like the social democrats have just been doin palliative care trying to keep the welfare destruction gang away from power as long as possible, while abandoning more and more ground along the way.

    Just a slow erosion of safety nets, and once deregulated and privatized there’s no changing it back.

    Erosion of confidence in politics too, just a total flatline after all the bullshit games this year. Not an election year but fourth PM term this year by the end of this week?

    And then long term the people like me will still have private insurance, five pension accounts, afford to live where there are good schools. I’ll still vote V but 9 out 10 me’s won’t.

    PSN: Honkalot
    JragghenAbsalon
  • EchoEcho ski-bap ba-dapModerator mod
    • V (left party): "We think it would be nice if pensioners don't have to eat cat food."
    • SD: "We're literally founded by Nazis."
    • C: "These parties are the same, also we'll vote for SD's budget, and V are extremists and we demand they never have any power."

    I seriously want C to just... go the hell away. They're chaos agents, just doing random shit and constantly siding with the right, despite claiming that they're oh so centered.

    Honk
Sign In or Register to comment.