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

13468913

Posts

  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    Yes I am severely dubious anyone outside of France's equivalent of the Beltway sphere gives much of a shit. I would have to see some polling or closer looks. So far, the ones screaming have been political insiders that I've seen.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    france sees european defense as something that should work even without america, so this is not just about the military contract, like I said. It's about military alliances and strategy, and trust in your allies.

    The story is also getting the top billing in some german newspapers at the moment, this here specifically:

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-sees-crisis-over-submarine-cancellation-le-drian-2021-09-18/
    "The fact that, for the first time in the history of relations between the United States and France, we are recalling our ambassador for consultations is a grave political act that shows the intensity of the crisis today between our two countries and also with Australia," Le Drian told France 2 television.

    "There has been duplicity, contempt and lies - you can't play that way in an alliance," he added.

    He also told the TV Station France 2 that this is putting a strain on the future of NATO and its strategic planning.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    enc0re
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Yes I am severely dubious anyone outside of France's equivalent of the Beltway sphere gives much of a shit. I would have to see some polling or closer looks. So far, the ones screaming have been political insiders that I've seen.

    4 years of Trump have left the people of europe very wary of american fuckery.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    TicaldfjamBlackDragon480
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The Guardian has an analysis on the deal, french anger comes out that they found out on Twitter like everybody else:
    “This is far more than just a diplomatic spat, the withdrawal of ambassadors is the tip of the iceberg,” Peter Ricketts, a former permanent undersecretary at the Foreign Office and former UK ambassador to France, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

    “There is a deep sense of betrayal in France because this wasn’t just an arms contract, this was France setting up a strategic partnership with Australia and the Australians have now thrown that away and negotiated behind the backs of France with two Nato allies, the US and UK, to replace it with a completely different contract.

    “For the French this looks like a complete failure of trust between allies and calls into doubt what is Nato for. This puts a big rift down the middle of the Nato alliance … Britain needs a functioning Nato alliance.”

    Ricketts added: “I think people underestimated the impact that this would have in France and how this would seem as a humiliation and betrayal in a year President Macron is running for election in a very tight race with the far right.”

    This is in a context of the deal being attacked on the Australian press for months thanks to delays and cost increases. So the french diplomatic corps and the Macron administration were shown as particulary incompetent:
    Nathalie Goulet, an opposition member and vice-president of the French Sénat’s foreign affairs, defence and armed forces commission, said the situation was “very disturbing”.

    “Someone should have warned before this breach of contract … I don’t understand this couldn’t have happened overnight,” she said.

    “It’s a failure for industry, intelligence and communication and a public humiliation … and nobody likes to be humiliated, even the French.”

    All of this in an election year. And people think that imperial delusions are unique to the UK.

    yeah this might be catastrophic, honestly. if the far right wins, france will probably exit the EU and NATO and maybe even align with Russia directly

    Edit: if you wanted to design the perfect move to make france re-consider NATO even more than they already have after 4 years of Trump, this would be it.

    The far-right winning is bad, but if we are talking about an EU country aligned with Russia the comparison is what, a Germany that depends on Russian gas to keep the lights on? That threatened to cut diplomatic ties with the US if they got sanctioned by the pipeline?

    Uh huh.

  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    Aldo wrote: »
    Do you have any sources or background articles about actual support of a Frexit in France? There's been a lot of talk by extreme right wing politicians about breaking up the EU, but when it was asked in polls there was never much a movement for it here in The Netherlands. Not all talking points of the fascists resonate strongly with the electorate. France - like most democracies - is not run solely by one political party, so even if FN would garner much support, they could not act on a whim.

    Personally, I'm rather reluctant to doomsay from Australia not honoring agreements --> France joins forces with Russia.

    youre forgetting that russia still very actively tries to influnce other states' elections. this is extremely juicy propaganda fodder, and something that plays very well for the FN. Of course it's a worst case scenario, but I really don't see how this is a good decision from a US standpoint. They should've involved france in a solution instead of very clearly just letting them out to dry.
    I think so too. The French compared it to Trump's hamfisted relations with Europe, and I agree with the comparison, this feels like a Trumpy move on Biden's part.
    Chanus wrote: »
    Aldo wrote: »
    From the article
    The agreement scuppered a multibillion-dollar deal France had signed with Australia.
    So it's about money and not about life and death. The article is very short on details and I wonder how justified France is in their anger. It seems like these kind of massive weapon deals are always a bit contentious.

    i mean

    of course it's about money
    Yeah, I agree with this, but the fact that it's about money shouldn't be used to minimize the issue. A large share of geopolitics and international disputes are directly or indirectly about money; it is a pretty important thing.

    GiantGeek2020
  • GiantGeek2020GiantGeek2020 Registered User regular
    Aldo wrote: »
    Do you have any sources or background articles about actual support of a Frexit in France? There's been a lot of talk by extreme right wing politicians about breaking up the EU, but when it was asked in polls there was never much a movement for it here in The Netherlands. Not all talking points of the fascists resonate strongly with the electorate. France - like most democracies - is not run solely by one political party, so even if FN would garner much support, they could not act on a whim.

    Personally, I'm rather reluctant to doomsay from Australia not honoring agreements --> France joins forces with Russia.

    youre forgetting that russia still very actively tries to influnce other states' elections. this is extremely juicy propaganda fodder, and something that plays very well for the FN. Of course it's a worst case scenario, but I really don't see how this is a good decision from a US standpoint. They should've involved france in a solution instead of very clearly just letting them out to dry.

    I kind of wonder why they did not actually.

    From what I've read this is days before the EU announces their Indo-Pacific policy. And France has been pushing hard to confront China. Unlike Germany which is taking a "lets not have anybody say anything we'll regret later" direction.

    The New York Times article (watch out for paywall, this was my one free article for the year, okay I am joking but only a little) has this statement
    By the time the Biden administration began engaging Australia and Britain seriously about its emerging strategy to counter China, a three-year-old contract worth $60 billion or more for a dozen submarines, to be constructed largely by the French, was already teetering, American officials said. The submarines were based on a propulsion technology that was so limited in range, and so easy for the Chinese to detect, that it would be obsolete by the time the first submarines were put in the water, perhaps as long as 15 years from now.

    There was an obvious alternative: the kind of nuclear-powered submarines deployed by the Americans and the British. But American and Australian officials agreed that if the French caught wind of the fact that the plug was going to be pulled on one of the biggest defense contracts in their history, they almost certainly would try to sabotage the alternative plan, according to officials who were familiar with the discussions between Washington and Canberra.

    So they decided to keep the work to a very small group of officials, and made no mention of it to the French, even when Mr. Biden and Mr. Blinken met their French counterparts in June.

    So I guess the decision was based on "Australia needs these subs ASAP. Not delivered 60 years from now."

    The whole nuclear advanced tech thing is obviously wrong because Australia negotiated for diesel up front. But I could see the cost overruns and construction delays really spooking both the Americans and Australians.

    Heck in a guardian article an Australian source said this.
    It is understood one of the outcomes of that meeting was that France, in a bid to reassure Australia that the project would not be delayed, was going to send Australia a letter affirming their commitment to the timelines and delivery of local content.

    An Australian government source said the letter arrived, but it was late. “If they can’t deliver a letter in time, how the hell can they deliver 12 subs on time,” the source said.

    Still it sounds like it would be a good idea to tap dance pretty hard to soothe French feelings.

    TryCatcherJragghenSoggybiscuitKaputaFencingsaxKayne Red RobeSmrtnik
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    France offered nuclear subs first, in fact, they redesigned their nuclear subs to be diesel especially after australias wished for diesel instead
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracuda-class_submarine_(France)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack-class_submarine

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • GiantGeek2020GiantGeek2020 Registered User regular
    edited September 18
    France offered nuclear subs first, in fact, they redesigned their nuclear subs to be diesel especially after australias wished for diesel instead
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracuda-class_submarine_(France)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack-class_submarine

    Yes, we all know.

    Edit: My apologies, I thought it had been mentioned multiple times in the thread but it really hasn't come up. It has been mentioned pretty clearly in most of the news stories, but it actually hasn't come up in thread.

    I mentioned that the Australians negotiated up front for diesel. But to anybody who hasn't read the articles, TryCatcher posted the relevant bits.

    Honestly the going nuclear part has really pissed off a lot of Australian anti-nuclear folks.

    Which always seems stupid to me. Because you know the alternative was diesel.

    A video pointing out why objections to nuclear power are pretty poorly thought through.

    GiantGeek2020 on
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    France offered nuclear subs first, in fact, they redesigned their nuclear subs to be diesel especially after australias wished for diesel instead
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracuda-class_submarine_(France)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack-class_submarine

    That Guardian article has the Australian version of that story:
    The Australian version of the story is that the French nuclear-powered option requires complex work midway through the life of the submarine, meaning it would have required a more advanced domestic nuclear industry. The gamechanger was the US and UK willingness to share their technology.

    Dutton defended the government’s decision on Friday, saying in Washington that Australia “looked at what options were available to us” and “the French have a version which was not superior to that operated by the United States and the United Kingdom”.

    “In the end the decision that we have made is based on what is in the best interests of our national security and the prevailing security and peace within the Indo-Pacific,” Dutton said.

    But, at the end, as PM Morrison puts it:
    Morrison told 3AW radio on Friday he understood the French government’s disappointment. “That is entirely understandable and reasonable and we’ll just have to work through that.”

  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    I mean, at the end of the day, if things were spiraling the way Australia thought and they wanted the deal sooner, I kinda get why things went down.

    Still a giant dick move for Oz and USA to not tell France ahead of time, though. I'd be more angry at Oz, though, as it should have come from them.

  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    Between the sub deal, the Afghanistan withdrawal, and a host of other issues; I think the EU in general, and Germany in particular, need to wake up to the fact that free-riding on American military protection comes with significant strategic costs.

    It is my opinion that the EU needs to heavily develop an independent military capability. And I think the U.S. would welcome it too.

    JragghenAntinumericautono-wally, erotibot300JusticeforPlutoGaddezTicaldfjamBlackDragon480shryke
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Nothing can be really made of the Afghanistan withdrawal in regards to US reliability because the government folded so quickly and in a way that no one foresaw. I'd wager the intel communities for European members were assuming a similar timeline to what the US had assumed for the government lasting. As in that they would have a few months to clear shit out. Hell, I'm pretty sure you'd see a similar mess of people trying to flee last minute even if the government lasted months more. I'd even go as far as saying that if we switched out Afghanistan for some other country and they were being taking over by someone in the same shit ballpark as the Taliban, you would still see a huge mess.

    TryCatcherFencingsaxGaddezshryke
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    I’m not talking about American reliability when it comes to Afghanistan. I’m talking about the fact that our European allies were completely bound by the U.S. timetable and strategy.

    The German government for example had to admit to its people that the German army was incapable of operating independently of the Americans in Afghanistan. It literally couldn’t even provide options to its government.

    Kaputa
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    I’m not talking about American reliability when it comes to Afghanistan. I’m talking about the fact that our European allies were completely bound by the U.S. timetable and strategy.

    The German government for example had to admit to its people that the German army was incapable of operating independently of the Americans in Afghanistan. It literally couldn’t even provide options to its government.

    Well, Germany has EIGHT US Army bases, so they don't see a point for their own army and that's reflected on their budget and preparation.

    And let's be honest here: Nobody, specially in Europe, actually wants Germany to have a functional army.

    Kayne Red RobeStarZapper
  • ChanusChanus Just venting, Not seeking solutions. Registered User regular
    i really wish the conversation were less about how everyone needs to be building up their own armies

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    AldohonovereShadow DemonlonelyahavajakobaggerPreciousBodilyFluids
  • asurasur Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    I’m not talking about American reliability when it comes to Afghanistan. I’m talking about the fact that our European allies were completely bound by the U.S. timetable and strategy.

    The German government for example had to admit to its people that the German army was incapable of operating independently of the Americans in Afghanistan. It literally couldn’t even provide options to its government.

    What other choice do they have? Forming a military that can operate independently around the world is crazy expensive and none of the countries want to spend that much. Relying on other countries in the EU to form a whole is maybe better, but Brexit has shown that it could breakdown in a single vote.

  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    Between the sub deal, the Afghanistan withdrawal, and a host of other issues; I think the EU in general, and Germany in particular, need to wake up to the fact that free-riding on American military protection comes with significant strategic costs.

    It is my opinion that the EU needs to heavily develop an independent military capability. And I think the U.S. would welcome it too.

    I agree on everything but the bolded. The US wants an EU with a capable military that is 100% acting in US interests

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    GiantGeek2020thatassemblyguyBlackDragon480shrykepainfulPleasance
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    enc0re wrote: »
    I’m not talking about American reliability when it comes to Afghanistan. I’m talking about the fact that our European allies were completely bound by the U.S. timetable and strategy.

    The German government for example had to admit to its people that the German army was incapable of operating independently of the Americans in Afghanistan. It literally couldn’t even provide options to its government.

    Well, Germany has EIGHT US Army bases, so they don't see a point for their own army and that's reflected on their budget and preparation.

    And let's be honest here: Nobody, specially in Europe, actually wants Germany to have a functional army.

    I don’t think that’s true anymore: in America, in the EU, and I think it’s even starting to change in Germany.

    I think the current model of relying on “America, help us” for defense is coming to an end.

    autono-wally, erotibot300GiantGeek2020painfulPleasance
  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    I’m not talking about American reliability when it comes to Afghanistan. I’m talking about the fact that our European allies were completely bound by the U.S. timetable and strategy.

    The German government for example had to admit to its people that the German army was incapable of operating independently of the Americans in Afghanistan. It literally couldn’t even provide options to its government.
    Libya was another example of this, in that despite its proximity to Europe and the fact that the war on the Libyan government was more of a European priority than an American one, they were nonetheless heavily reliant on US air power during that conflict, to the point that they probably wouldn't have attempted Gaddafi's overthrow if the US wasn't on board.

    enc0re
  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    ...is there any reason for any French person who isn't a death merchant to give a rat's ass about this?

    I think the issue more than just losing an arms contract is the French are seeing one of their worst foreign policy fears come true. Three anglophone nations negotiating in secret a deal to redefine the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific and they found out about it on twitter.

    You have to see this from the French perspective. They aggressively seek to defend the existence of French culture and the status of France as a power that influences global politics. Being ganged up on and excluded by the English speaking world is one of their worst fears and that is why you're seeing this scale of reaction.

    The French are trying to make it as clear as possible that the cost of excluding them isn't worth paying.

    enc0reGiantGeek2020Kaputaautono-wally, erotibot300AntinumericBlackDragon480shryke
  • GiantGeek2020GiantGeek2020 Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    ...is there any reason for any French person who isn't a death merchant to give a rat's ass about this?

    I think the issue more than just losing an arms contract is the French are seeing one of their worst foreign policy fears come true. Three anglophone nations negotiating in secret a deal to redefine the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific and they found out about it on twitter.

    You have to see this from the French perspective. They aggressively seek to defend the existence of French culture and the status of France as a power that influences global politics. Being ganged up on and excluded by the English speaking world is one of their worst fears and that is why you're seeing this scale of reaction.

    The French are trying to make it as clear as possible that the cost of excluding them isn't worth paying.

    Thank you for the analysis. This was a huge piece of a missing puzzle for me.

    The French are terrified of becoming irrelevant. Of being a backwater nobody country who nobody listens to or cares about.

    And this would be absolutely their worst nightmare. 3 powers in the region deciding, "Yeah. France has nothing to really contribute."

    Of course now I want to do a meme with "Do you hear that Mr. Macron? That is the sound of ... inevitability."

  • DrascinDrascin Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    ...is there any reason for any French person who isn't a death merchant to give a rat's ass about this?

    I think the issue more than just losing an arms contract is the French are seeing one of their worst foreign policy fears come true. Three anglophone nations negotiating in secret a deal to redefine the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific and they found out about it on twitter.

    You have to see this from the French perspective. They aggressively seek to defend the existence of French culture and the status of France as a power that influences global politics. Being ganged up on and excluded by the English speaking world is one of their worst fears and that is why you're seeing this scale of reaction.

    The French are trying to make it as clear as possible that the cost of excluding them isn't worth paying.

    Probably doesn't help that, after the UK doing what it's been doing, and the past four years of american clusterfuck, a LOT of citizens in a lot of European countries are getting increasingly fed up with the anglosphere's tendency to assume that deals only apply to them when they want to. So if France wants to spin this in their favor to look like the aggrieved party, they have very fertile ground to do so.

    Steam ID: Right here.
    mrondeauBlackDragon480
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    edited September 19
    This isn’t simply about being irrelevant in the national pride sense. It’s about the credibility of France in the Indo-Pacific region. France has territory there. National defense is game theoretically about credibility. AUKUS has diminished France’s ability to protect that territory. And they did so apparently without giving a warning to their ally.

    I don’t blame AUKUS for going in that direction. Australia’s interest are much better served by the new deal. But Europe has to come to terms with the fact that it is no longer the red hot center of American geopolitics. And that means being 100% reliant on America is strategically costly.

    Put yourself in Germany’s shoes for example. As a matter of prudential responsibility, you must consider unlikely contingencies such as: “What if the Americans were to leave?” There currently is no answer to that scenario.

    enc0re on
    painfulPleasance
  • JusticeforPlutoJusticeforPluto Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    i really wish the conversation were less about how everyone needs to be building up their own armies

    The alternative is the US continues to have a larger than necessary voice in European security concerns, or convincing nations like China and Russia to demilitarize a bit.

  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    I could be wrong but it seems like no other EU country has voiced even mild annoyance with the US, UK or Australia over this.

    FencingsaxTryCatcher
  • AldoAldo Hippo Hooray Registered User regular
    I'm reading about Germany keeping quiet because they had also cancelled a military contract from France.

    Mojo_JojoTryCatcherAntinumericKayne Red RobeDark Raven XknitdanKamarPolaritietinwhiskersCommander Zoomjakobagger
  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    Hahaha that's excellent.

    MarathonAntinumericTicaldfjamLanlaornCommander Zoom
  • CornucopiistCornucopiist Registered User regular
    The French have presidential elections coming up.
    Last time round, Macron was elected by left-leaning voters. Socialists as we call them here, soc-dems for you 'Muricans. Remember that as it will become important in a bit.
    Macron is not a socialist. He's a neoliberal who basically removed pensions, holidays, and the mandatory onion a day - under much protest!- with the promise that this would bring JOBS. Did I mention protest? There was a lot.
    He did not bring JOBS. The French economy is not doing bad, but neither is there a day and night difference, like you would expect if the sun itself came down and took on the form of a youthful enterprising politician who illuminates all and engenders springtime.
    Now you have to understand that the political French left is like the Palestinian resistance in 'Life of Brian'. It's main raison d'être is to deem the rest of the left part of the spectrum not good enough. Unsurprisingly, they can back this up with solid evidence. The only reason (moderate) left French voters voted for Macron was because the complicated French election systems ends in a showdown, and it was between Macron and Marine Le Pen. Marine Le Pen is not literal Hitler, but for the French left she kind of is. Again, it was not the right wing voters who voted in Macron, it was socialists opposed to Le Pen.
    Since then Macron has trampled a lot of the social rights the French took for granted, and again not given a lot of improvement in return. Instead, he has made the French police state even worse, appointed ministers who do shit like saying students with short dresses are not 'republican' enough, and in general nudged the French federal government all the way over to a millimeter left of Le Pen.
    So what then separates Le Pen and Macron?
    Le Pen can walk into a factory without looking ridiculous. Macron cannot show his face around blue collar people (or students) without suffering humiliating YouTube-able taunts and attacks.
    Macron is now starting a new front in attacking crime, hoping that getting results in especially Le Pen's stronghold of Marseille. It's inevitable that this will be a racist shit show.
    Needless to say I wouldn't bet on the French left bailing Macron out a second time. He needs the centre-right vote.

    So the question is; will Macron have succeeded in convincing the French right wing voters that he's as French or more French than Le Pen? I think that's the biggest reason why France is writing letters as if it's an Olympic sport.

    As to the security and international cooperation angles, sure, but remember when France was embarrassed because it was selling warships to Russia just when the EU wanted to boycott Putin?

    GiantGeek2020AldomrondeauTryCatcherStyrofoam SammichBlackDragon480
  • honoverehonovere Registered User regular
    Aldo wrote: »
    I'm reading about Germany keeping quiet because they had also cancelled a military contract from France.

    I don't remember the details, but I think Germany and France were recently (last few years) working on a new military export agreement because the German parliament had blocked some weapon exports that had German manufactured parts in it but were mainly French end-products that the French wanted to sell

  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Le Pen is obviously horrible but permanently propping up a terrible neoliberal isn’t an optimal solution either.

    PSN: Honkalot
    Styrofoam Sammichjakobagger
  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    Is it beyond the realms of possibility for another party to get their shit together and mount a challenge to Macron?

    Smrtnik
  • honoverehonovere Registered User regular
    edited September 20
    How are the regular French conservatives doing anyway? I heard Michel Barnier of Brexit negotiation fame was throwing his head in the ring? With the twist being that he's running on a eurosceptic platform

    Meanwhile one week to go in Germany. Federal elections next sunday.
    ygrjbk4xmw0w.png

    honovere on
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Couldn't Macron like run a on being pro-mask and pro-vaccine because assholes like Le Pen would probably oppose them since the global conservative movement is a bloody death cult? Or is there a chance that she isn't as dumb as the typical western charlatan. Hell, would that even be an option for someone on the left in France use to get into the final round of French elections.

  • BogartBogart Gonna Be A Man In Motion Registered User, Moderator mod
    I think the idea is that Macron isn't great himself and something better than either Macron or the fascist would be preferable. Macron will probably beat Le Pen if that's the final contest in the presidential election, but it's not a super great choice.

    MillLord_Asmodeus
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    No French presidential candidate has more than 25% positive views by the public.
    All of them are as unpopular as GW Bush in his last year, or worse.

    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
    Aldo
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Hahaha wow

    PSN: Honkalot
    JragghenMillTicaldfjam
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    honovere wrote: »
    How are the regular French conservatives doing anyway? I heard Michel Barnier of Brexit negotiation fame was throwing his head in the ring? With the twist being that he's running on a eurosceptic platform

    Meanwhile one week to go in Germany. Federal elections next sunday.
    ygrjbk4xmw0w.png

    In retrospect I'm glad the CDU chose Laschet over Söder, cause Söder might have actually done a lot better

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    SanderJK wrote: »
    No French presidential candidate has more than 25% positive views by the public.
    All of them are as unpopular as GW Bush in his last year, or worse.

    Well, somebody has to win.

    Like, eventually.

  • GiantGeek2020GiantGeek2020 Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    SanderJK wrote: »
    No French presidential candidate has more than 25% positive views by the public.
    All of them are as unpopular as GW Bush in his last year, or worse.

    Well, somebody has to win.

    Like, eventually.

    Isn't the tag line of this election whoever wins we all lose?

  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    This isn’t simply about being irrelevant in the national pride sense. It’s about the credibility of France in the Indo-Pacific region. France has territory there. National defense is game theoretically about credibility. AUKUS has diminished France’s ability to protect that territory.

    They really haven't. The US will continue to defend NATO interests, and in any East-West shooting war it seems impossible to believe the Australians wouldn't align with the French, regardless of who built their subs.

    uH3IcEi.png
    JusticeforPluto
Sign In or Register to comment.