Russian aggression and US isolationism push a once hesitant Germany to invest heavily in defence.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, recently got the all-clear for a massive increase in investment after parliament voted to exempt defence spending from strict rules on debt.

The country’s top general has told the BBC the cash boost is urgently needed because he believes Russian aggression won’t stop at Ukraine.

“We are threatened by Russia. We are threatened by Putin. We have to do whatever is needed to deter that,” Gen Carsten Breuer says. He warns that Nato should be braced for a possible attack in as little as four years.

“It’s not about how much time I need, it’s much more about how much time Putin gives us to be prepared,” the defence chief says bluntly. “And the sooner we are prepared the better.”

  • realitista@lemm.eeEnglish
    23·
    3 days ago

    Their success rate would have been a lot higher if they had known when to stop ;-). I think if the stated goal of defending Europe from Russia doesn’t change that they have a very good chance of success given the numbers they are talking about.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.worldEnglish
      61·
      3 days ago

      I also wonder how much farther their war efforts would have gone had they not wasted time, men, and resources on ineffective warfare like that massive train driven cannon. Its a lot of effort and resources to set up double track rails just to miss most of your shots.

      • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        3 days ago

        Or if they only focused on Brittain and didn’t invade Russia for one, especially with summer gear in winter.

        • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.orgEnglish
          81·
          3 days ago

          The opposite is probably true. The blitzkrieg strategy relied on soldiers being able to fight effectively for days on end without sleep. It definitely isn’t a sustainable way to treat your troops but it was very effective and not possible without Pervitin.

          • tacobellhop@midwest.socialEnglish
            51·
            3 days ago

            That part worked. The resultant addictions didn’t really help. Like the decisions got worse over time, even when it was a pipe dream in the first place.

            • FireRetardant@lemmy.worldEnglish
              3·
              3 days ago

              You’d almost need to take your front line troops after a few days/week of methed up raids and then put them into rehab backline labor positions. Rinse and repeat until you win the war or the troops hold a methed up mutiny.

        • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          6·
          3 days ago

          Generally incompetent leaders who promoted people to positions of power based on their loyalty rather than merit also.

          Just the whole general way they did everything, I’d say.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      4·
      3 days ago

      The crazy thing that still makes my head spin and that I fail to process properly is that Europe would still be under Nazi regime today had they not attacked Russia … despite all the crimes. How do you deal with that? idk

      • Skua@kbin.earth
        11·
        3 days ago

        I’m not sure it would. The Nazi economy was supported by plunder, they had to keep attacking to fund it. They couldn’t get to Britain or America, and they had otherwise more or less run out of Europe.

        I don’t want to imagine the kind of atrocities they could have committed in the time that it would take for them to collapse, but I do think the collapse would have come