this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
125 points (96.3% liked)

Europe

1672 readers
276 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Germany's Economy Minister Robert Habeck, who is currently the Green Party's chancellor candidate in the upcoming elections, said that if elected, he would send Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly asked his allies for long-range weapons so that the Ukrainian military can attack Russian logistics centers and military bases far behind the front line and within Russian territory.

But until now, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has chosen not to supply Taurus cruise missiles, saying they could enable Ukraine to also hit targets in the Russian capital Moscow.

[...]

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron reacted to the Russian air barrage on Ukraine, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin "does not want peace and is not ready to negotiate."

"It's clear that President Putin intends to intensify the fighting," Macron said.

He made the remarks as he prepared to leave Argentina to attend the G20 Summit in Brazil.

[...]

The French president, however, said Ukraine's allies "must remain united .... on an agenda for genuine peace, that is to say, a peace that does not mean Ukraine's surrender."

Macron highlighted that his country's priority was to "equip, support and help Ukraine to resist."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] superkret 38 points 1 month ago (4 children)

It's kind of ironic and pretty bitter. The Greens were founded by environmentalists and pacifists.
Their slogan was "never again war, never again genocide"

And both times they were part of a government coalition, they immediately had to decide on an active involvement in a European war (Yugoslavia and Ukraine).
Cause in both wars, "never again war, never again genocide" wasn't an option.
They had to chose one, and they chose to get involved in the war to stop a genocide.

[–] gajustempus 26 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Pacifism doesn't mean you cannot defend yourself or surrender against an attacker.

And that's the whole point here: Ukraine isn't waging a war, they're defending against an invasion.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] jenesaisquoi 18 points 1 month ago

As would anyone with a working brain.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Peter_Arbeitslos 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Is this well known German punctuality in the room with us right now?

[–] elvith 25 points 1 month ago

No, it's still trying to get here with Deutsche Bahn.

[–] Peter_Arbeitslos 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, but the election season.

[–] Peter_Arbeitslos 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Are you talking to you self again?

[–] Peter_Arbeitslos 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wie geht's? Sind sie ok? 🫂

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Peter_Arbeitslos 1 points 1 month ago

Wer sind sie?

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I wish the Greens in my country weren't so utterly useless and simping of Russia.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Be careful what you wish for, the German Greens ditched a good part of their climate policy, they even approved of strip mining away a whole village for brown coal.

[–] Melchior 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In 2023, when Putin shut down gas supply to Germany and Germany needed coal to preserve gas. Also the deal included half of Germanys brown coal power plants to be shut down by 2030, which was all the plants of the company strip mining. Also the village was bought out by the coal company years before the Greens gave the permit to have it demolished.

Just thought the context really matters in this case.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The additional coal from destroying that village wasn't needed for domestic energy supply but for energy export, AKA the coal company's profits. Just thought that the context matters in this case.

[–] Melchior 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Mainly to France, which otherwise would have increased its gas consumption.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And gas is still a lot cleaner than brown coal.

[–] federalreverse 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In the case of fracked LNG that's highly debatable. But even in the case of conventionally-sourced pipeline gas, flaring and pipeline losses are significant and often underreported.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

True, they are far from perfect.

But the Greens where I am are against things like building new solar/wind farms, and against infrastructure that connects this renewable energy stuff to the grid. They're against building any new houses.

They're just a NIMBY party cashing in on people thinking they're actually green.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The German Greens do have enough NIMBYs, too, who at times will happily confuse small localised protection of two stalks of grass with protection of the climate.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I wonder why we built all those weapons, is it for protection against the USA? China?

Can't be against Russia can it now?

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Wow, that was not a headline I was expecting to see. The sentiment has shifted quite dramatically in the past two years.

[–] gigachad@sh.itjust.works 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At least regarding Germany the truth is the Greens have been pushing for more weapons deliveries almost since the beginning of the war. It has been pretty clear that not delivering Taurus is because Scholz decided so.

[–] Bonifratz@lemm.ee 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They were also arguably the only major German party that took the Russian threat seriously before the war.

[–] BatrickPateman@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] hannesh93 3 points 1 month ago

And literally everyone else (besides the Left Party) is attacking him as their main opponent for that, despite the party being #4 in the polls at the moment and the Russian sleeper agents AfD+BSW are threatening to breach 1/3rd of the votes blocking any further changes of the constitution even if all democratic parties agree on it.

I really don't get why the CDU chose to attack the greens over the AfD and how they can seriously consider the scheming FDP as a possible coalition-option...

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago

The Greens started out as a party of (among other things) the peace movement but quickly realised that vulgar pacifism is a) self-defeating and b) gets exploited by war mongers. In short, you gotta stand up to bullies. They very much backed the Kosovo intervention, and generally are in favour of talking softly but carrying a big stick. With friends, while singing Kumbaya, before aiming it at some genocidal maniac. In short scratch the hippie attitude now it's metal.

[–] Melchior 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Really? The Greens are the most hawkish party in Germany, when it comes to Russia.

[–] federalreverse 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Among German parties, the Greens were the most skeptical of Russia for the past ~15 years. But until the war, they were never hawkish. Only days before the war started, foreign minister Baerbock (Greens) said Germany wouldn't deliver weapons. In late January 2022, the government then promised "5000 helmets" (although I think this may have had more to do with the chancellor than the Greens).

[–] Melchior 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] federalreverse 10 points 1 month ago

I'd completely missed that. Seems Habeck was right yet again.

[–] lemmylommy@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Habeck wanted to deliver weapons before the war started.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It was more about the then minister of defence, that's why she was gone.

[–] federalreverse 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Reading her Wikipedia entry, it sounds like she was dismissed for being too much of a Scholz loyalist. And that kind of matches my recollection: She was careful to discuss everything with Scholz and to not cross him, whereas her [suc]cessor just took matters in his own hands and ran with it.

According to a media report, in the discussion about the possible delivery of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, which intensified at the end of 2022, she forbade her ministry from even recording its own stock of Leopard 2 and Leopard 1 tanks, as knowledge of deliverable stocks could potentially have put further pressure on Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz. [DeepL, Wikipedia]


In der Ende 2022 sich verstärkenden Diskussion um die mögliche Lieferung von Leopard-2-Panzern an die Ukraine verbot sie nach einem Medienbericht ihrem Ministerium, den eigenen Bestand an den Panzern Leopard 2 und Leopard 1 überhaupt zu erfassen, da Kenntnis lieferbarer Bestände möglicherweise weiteren Druck auf den Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz hätte aufbauen können.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 month ago

I remembered it wrong. She herself asked for being let go, officially because the constant discussions about her person made it impossible for her to do her job (her statement).

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

TIL: The Green Party has been actively supporting Ukraine for quite some time. I was mostly just thinking of the general atmosphere of political discourse surrounding this topic. Remember that time when it wasn’t even clear that sending weapons is ok.

load more comments
view more: next ›