A French #nuclear umbrella would be a nice stopgap. But it wouldn’t solve the problem.
The pro-Kremlin far right could well be in power by 2027 already. And I doubt any French leader would ever trade Paris for Helsinki.
No. We need our own capabilities.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/02/24/france-to-offer-nuclear-shield-for-europe/
The pro-Kremlin far right could well be in power by 2027 already. And I doubt any French leader would ever trade Paris for Helsinki.
No. We need our own capabilities.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/02/24/france-to-offer-nuclear-shield-for-europe/
Comments
I guess we have capabilities of WMD that are way more powerful, but with a lot less of KABOOM.
I am all for Finland developing a nuclear deterrance. One can quote and challenge me on that. Just a fact said aloud.
Both French and British arsenals are designed to inflict a mortal blow upon Russia. Which isn’t that difficult. Here’s a visualization of population density in Russia:
Tipping the majority in EU parliament would be close to impossible.
Mietin ydinasekonsultin uraa.
Alan kallistua tähän suuntaan.
Northern Europe should already be on their way to developing a joint Nuclear Deterrence Force.
I suspect it will be more dependable than Western Europe's arsenals.
Nations that do not care to protect themselves will disappear or become mere vassal states.
https://bsky.app/profile/jmkorhonen.fi/post/3lionlvli4226
Only weeks after Russia’s full scale invasion of #Ukraine, I and many others started to warn that if this blatant imperialist land grab is not countered effectively, nuclear proliferation WILL result.
Once again.
Yes, this timeline greatly increases the risks of nuclear conflagration. But since others have chosen thusly, I will be damned if I sacrifice Finland or leave her undefended.
En halua ydinaseita maahamme, haluan silti maamme.
About 1/5 (~€16 billion) of that went into the costs of maintaining a nuclear deterrent of 120 operational warheads on SSBNs, and they share many SLBM support structures with the US to save costs.
In fact, we don't necessarily need even nuclear weapons. But what we in my opinion need is a credible capability to build nuclear weapons relatively rapidly.
The problem is you need a unitary and clear chain command regarding nuclear arms otherwise even nukes become relatively irrelevant.