Du bist Schlussmachnachrichtschreiber?

How can Europe protect itself against the USA?

China, with far more production capabilities than EU, prepares to protect itself from America. At some point, how can Europe defend against that army?

The only realistic and useful defence spending is against Russia.

At some point spending on defence cuts into the budget for progress. How much defence spending is enough that we don’t need more?

“climate factor” which could reduce the value assigned to eligible assets pledged as collateral, depending on the extent to which an asset can be impacted by these uncertainties.

Vor dem Einschlafen? Die Tage gab es ein Meme mit der Wahl zwischen Schlafen und Pissen. Manche Null Motivation ist normal, wobei dein Kommentar weitere Situationen erwähnt.

Akzeptanz ist der erste Schritt zur Veränderung. Du könntest deiner Psyche mal unironisch mehr Aufmerksamkeit, ‘wie ich es liebe’, geben. Vielleicht ist da ja ein Wunsch, den die Psyche sich nur nicht traut zu äussern.

Apparently misattributed to

https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Henry_Kissinger

There has been a widespread misconception that China operates a nationwide and unitary social credit “score” based on individuals’ behavior, leading to punishments if the score is too low. Media reports in the West have sometimes exaggerated or inaccurately described this concept.[4][5][6] In 2019, the central government voiced dissatisfaction with pilot cities experimenting with social credit scores. It issued guidelines clarifying that citizens could not be punished for having low scores and that punishments should only be limited to legally defined crimes and civil infractions. As a result, pilot cities either discontinued their point-based systems or restricted them to voluntary participation with no major consequences for having low scores.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System

Please don’t hold back. What are the advantages?

3. It is incredibly sad to see the Americans blackmail a long-standing and key global ally. This will take generations to repair.

“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”

You could have known.

But the tariffs were discussed in Davos. I don’t believe that they had real negotiations now. The rates were agreed on months or even years ago.

What matters to me is that we accept the Russian threat as a justification for too many things.

Austria doesn’t need to justify its wish to join NATO

This was about all citizens and the abuse of fear, not Austria.

being member of NATO absolutely does grant you access to military elements that you otherwise wouldn’t have.

The war will not reach Austria first. No need for those elements. They join earlier due to article 42.

something strange is happening thanks to the Russian threat

It isn’t strange at all. Russia waging its open war of aggression in Europe is pushing Europe into NATO. Absolutely don’t need to be a genius to be able to grasp that.

It is strange if there are no security benefits but a bunch of additional obligations.

transformed its economy to a total war economy, hence cannot afford to stop and also is hellbent on “taking from Europe whatever they think is theirs”

There it is, the first argument for why Austria should be worried.

but don’t you worry, because there still is another country between you and the warzone’ is either rational or very convincing.

In bad faith. Article 42 makes Austria a participant of the war the moment Russia attacks one country of the EU.

Austria could join Nato to be part of a unified command hierarchy. That would make sense. Joining to be more protected if they have to fight long before the war reaches their border doesn’t make sense.

An elephant in the room is something that everybody knows but nobody mentions. In that sense the war is no elephant.

Austria can do whatever it wants. I just don’t buy the argument that the war in Ukraine had changed the Austrian security situation to the point that they have to join Nato. They can join because they feel threatened but usually some rational strategic reason should exist. I am asking for that reason but I only receive evasions.

Of course I can accept whatever they decide. What matters to me is that we accept the Russian threat as a justification for too many things. Surveillance measures will be increased more than necessary and no majority will object.

In this case there is no security benefit to Austria and yet the argument is accepted. We can look at a map and see that Austria will already participate in the war due to article 42 before the front reaches them so joining Nato does nothing but accepting the US as the top commander.

So despite everybody being worried about Trump something strange is happening thanks to the Russian threat: Trump is about to be accepted as their commander in war.

That’s not the elephant in the room. I am openly asking about a scenario that threatens Austria. In other words, I want to know how the front can reach Austria.

Don’t make it personal. These comments have nothing to do with how Austria will decide.

We can argue independently about the Russian threat to Austria.

That’s a side issue and I have accepted the explanation. It doesn’t proof anything about the Russian threat to Austria.

Just in case that it is not a language thing, I haven’t claimed that they must not apply (in the sense of not allowed to apply). I only stated that they are invited.

Stop pro-Russia trolling and get a life.

That’s the main issue. An argument against the Russian threat is seen as fighting for Russia. I think there is some threat but it is extended beyond reasonable to corrupt our democracies. If we cannot separate between reasonable and unreasonable we will end up with all our freedoms taken.

In this case the threat of Russia is no reason for Nato membership. And yet the argument is accepted by the majority. To me that looks dangerous.

You wrote that all answers are in the article. I only care about that Austria is not directly threatened by Russia so that they could continue being neutral.

Yes, but we should care if they are manipulated.

Where is a proof? Comments discuss strawmen but none explains how Russia threatens Austria.

The article states that the Russian threat makes giving up neutrality necessary. But how can Russia conquer Austria? So the article only provides a superficial answer.