It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

German Rearmament

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
Good ignore me ignoramous now begone. Sie Werden nicht beleidegend Deutschland.


As a sidenote: With 3 spelling and one grammar error, wrong sentence structure and syntax in a five-word sentence, I hardly believe the member Stratrf_Rus speaks german as a first language at all. Just sayin` ...

Anyway:


Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus

Originally posted by paraphi
Why do you believe Germany should go nuclear?

Regards


Mainly its more practical in today's world that a strong Germany allied with the anglican world guard against Russia and the Middle East if not China and etc.


Its not exactly "practical" for Germany to invest huge sums to become a nuclear member of a "world guard" that hasnt done too much good apart from keeping the Soviets at bay, hmm?

Especially since none of the three "threats" you mention are military threats against Germany.


That and I'm German and tired of that degrading society.


Hmm, never knew some nukes could change the dynamics of a civilian society. Thats great, finally we found a second purpose for those hangar queens!



Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I believe Germany should go Nuclear. If so, what systems would be viable for ICBMs, Bombers, SLBMs, and the BMD in the Russian fashion (nuclear warheads on long ranged SAMs).


We already have all the delivery methods we could ever use or need: they are called aircraft.


Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
As for affordation? $10 billion a year should cover build-up and maintanence and I hate to say it but if there weren't so many turks in the country unemployment would not be so high.


Funny, and I always thought our world-record taxation and mismanaged integration of East Germany were the main reasons. But now that you said it, it MUST be have been the Turks forcing german companies to outsource manwork to cheaper nations!



And finally how can Germany NOT afford a Nuclear weapons program when Russia has approximately 1/10th the economy of Germany?


By deliberately opting AGAINST wasting money on any domestic WMD programs and -stockpiles? There´s no way to say that we may never need nukes... but SHOULD there ever be a situation where they may be necessary, we can have them in due time... and we dont need them ONE MINUTE earlier. Until then, NATO article 5 is the best nuclear weapon AND missile defense one could think of.

*************************


Originally posted by stumason
Germany already has a large standing Army, with some good kit. Granted, it is made up of National Servicemen, but they certainly don't need to "re-arm" as they already are.


If by "national servicemen" you mean the conscripts, that is outdated info. only ~23% of the Bundeswehr are draftees nowadays, and the number has been declining for years.

*************************

But still, regardless of the fact that nuclear weapon weapons are completely unnecessary for Germany, there is nothing that Germany militarily has done and that other European nations did not do over the course of recent history; so there is also no special reason why Germany should not be ALLOWED to have nukes. Any other opinion basically is "Victor politics".




posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
To get to your initial question (as crazy as it is). . .
For Germany to use nukes, they'd probably be the victim of a first strike.
They're proximity to Russia kind of rules out nuclear armed bombers/aircraft. Russia would have already wiped out the fields or have air superiority. This would be the cheapest route though.

Submarines are best in terms of having a survivable platform, but then you'd either have to arm diesel subs with nukes (not very ideal), or start up a nuclear propelled sub class as well (cha - ching $$$).

Germany doesn't really have vast spaces for mobile missle launchers. They'd probably be hijacked by radical skin heads, radical islams, radical tree huggers, or some radical or another.

I would go with a couple token hardened ballistic missle launchers. After all it really be just to make a statement. I would also set aside room for snack bars and hotels for all the peace activists to use. Charge the protesters admission and tax the vendors, the nukes will almost pay for themselves.



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus

Originally posted by Strangerous
I never mentioned the war in relation to jews being taxed - you just invented that as you were exposed as a liar.

So Germany needs all these arms to defeat the UK and dominate Europe??

Wow! You really have no shame do you?

Ignored from now on.

Good ignore me ignoramous now begone. Sie Werden nicht beleidegend Deutschland.

My goals are to liberate Germany and thus Europe from the US protectorate she has become. This is only possible with a significant Nuclear arsenal. All the other toys are for force projection in order to protect Germany's and Europe's economic assets abroad. Something that can be mitigated by cooperation among all European nations.


even though i do, in some way, understand (and agree to) your quote about Europe turning into a US protectorate , i don't see why Germany should get nukes, todays world is rather about having less nukes than more

PS. nothing personal but let me correct your German, the correct spelling/syntax :
Sie werden Deutschland nicht weiter beleidigen.

greetings from the microscopic Grand-Duchy of Luxemburg



posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I believe Germany should go Nuclear. If so, what systems would be viable for ICBMs, Bombers, SLBMs, and the BMD in the Russian fashion (nuclear warheads on long ranged SAMs).


Obviously, you don't follow the news carefully. Britain, the Netherlands and France have all three a law which allows their airforces to shoot down a commercial liner if it could safe more people (WTC).

In Germany such a law was suggested as well but failed to pass as it would be an offensive action which is, according to the German constitution, not allowed.
World war two plays is an important factor why this law did not pass.

German politicians were furious about the suggestion for such a law, and so were army officers. Do you really think they would pass a law which allows them to possess nuclear weapons, imagine the head lines? ''Will Germany be responsible for world war three?''

Besides, why would Germany need nuclear weapons, elaborate your ridiculous standpoint please.

Should a non European Union state decide to attack Germany, do you think the other member states wouldn't intervene?



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join