Archived copy is here: https://archive.is/DqZ6m
The article says this:
“Immediately withdraw from NATO’s integrated command and then, in stages, from the organization itself. Reject the tribute demanded by the United States of 5% of GDP devoted to defense spending,” read France Unbowed’s 222-page program.
However, France under Mélenchon would still provide assistance to European Union countries under EU treaties, the document added
Is Melenchon right? Is it better for the EU to be the organisation of mutual defence guarantees for Europe, rather than NATO?
Not sure why this is even mentioned, he doesn’t have any chance to win
Say you are bought by Putin without saying you are bought by Putin
Lemmy summarise:
- The far right wants to “normalise” relations with Russia and weaken cooperation within, if not leave the EU, thus emboldening Russian aggression.
- The far left wants to abandon any meaningful deterrence and leave NATO, thus emboldening Russian aggression.
Could it be that both get their talking points from the same source, along with their funding…?
Uhm, probably. Both lepen and the far left dude are known to have Russian money connections.
Yeah, the far left (along with the far right) is fully in line with its headquarters in Beijing and Moscow …
Oh yeah, Putin would absolutely love that, so either the guy is intellectually deficient, or he’s paid by Putin. Probably both
Or he wants ordinary people to have food, and schools to have teachers and basic facilities.
None of this is negatively impacted by being a NATO member.
This is suicidal considering he is not the favorite in the polls.
it does insist on the need for a diplomatic solution [in Ukraine]
The far-right has the same idea to drop our pants in front of Putin. We are fucked whoever wins I guess.
Russian traitors left and right. Ukraine can’t destroy that permafrost swamp fast enough
In 10 years? Maybe. Next year? No. NATO is not just US bombs, but logistics, training, communication, theoretical strategy, standards, infrastructure all the boring stuff that makes the collaboration of nations work. The EU can set up something like that, but it takes more time as we basically outsourced it to the US for 80 years.
Leaving and rebuilding would not be cheaper and running an Organisation im parallel would create more friction. Better to take over NATO from inside or turn it into a new Organisation with less us oversight (and funding)
Plus, Canada is in the NATO, not just the US.
Edit: it will also do nothing to fix cost of living and education in France. On the contrary, it will siphon money into the military in France
Normally it is:
divide and conquer
But those want:
divide (yourself) and get conquered (more easily)
I would advise against it, but that is just my opinion.
As a reminder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_and_NATO
In 1966, under De Gaulle’s leadership, France withdrew from NATO’s integrated military command. Nevertheless, cooperation agreements between French and NATO forces were quickly signed, reducing the practical impact of this withdrawal. This cooperation was reinforced under Presidents François Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac, and in 2009, President Nicolas Sarkozy reinstated France into NATO’s unified command.
Leaving the integrated military command is something different than leaving NATO completely.
In the past, France has only done the former while Melenchon now also wants to do the latter.
The far left in Spain also voted to leave NATO (the motion didn’t pass). One of many reasons why I will not vote for them.
I will not vote for their equivalent party in Germany for this reason as well. They are also commonly repeating Russian talking points and don’t want to help Ukraine at all.
This dude wants a wealth tax, but also to get out of NATO. One I really like. The other, I really don’t.
Good luck lowering the GDP spending for defence while leaving NATO at the same time. I understand France is a nuclear power, but it’s less strong than US, Russia or China. Also, how are they gonna maintain all the nuclear arsenal?
The nuclear arsenal is expensive but it was maintained and modernized just fine when we were barely spending 2%, we don’t need to compete against China or the US for it to be sufficient
Not that leaving NATO anytime soon is even close to being reasonable
I saw that you’re actually investing more into your nuclear capabilities tho, like that submarine that was launched earlier this year. Besides that, there’s a lot of stuff that changed in warfare since everyone was spending 2%. And now others have increased their spending as well. It does suck, indeed, but it is what it is.
That submarine was planned for and built under the 2% budget. What wasn’t is the announced warhead count increase, which probably wouldn’t have happened under the previous spending target, going from 290 to an undisclosed number.
Right, I see. Thank you for the insight!
Well, butter my butt and call me a biscuit!
