|
DekeThornton posted:It wouldn't be M+KD+SD, it would be M+KD putting forward a budget that they know SD as well as C and L would accept over an S budget. That way C will get their cost cuts and lowered taxes while being able to claim to not work with SD and SD, who are now much more economically conservative than they were previously, will get a budget that will be in line with their focus on law and order and strict immigration. C most likely know that joining S won't give them any less restrictive immigration policies anyway, and they have nothing in common regarding taxation and labor policies. Hasn't SD promised to torpedo any budget that they can't wring concisions out of? They're going to look bad if they obediently follow an Alliance budget without input.
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:58 |
|
|
Pyromaniac Ida posted:Hasn't SD promised to torpedo any budget that they can't wring concisions out of? They're going to look bad if they obediently follow an Alliance budget without input. Yup, for long three years, ever since they torpedoed their first budget. No they haven't changed their mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
The future is at least not boring. Signed up for military service on Friday. Heading to Malmö tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
DekeThornton posted:It wouldn't be M+KD+SD, it would be M+KD putting forward a budget that they know SD as well as C and L would accept over an S budget. There's no such thing because only a miniscule amount of the things SD actually prioritize can be done trough the budget. They want minister positions and broad legislative changes. Jimmie Åkesson has promised for three long years to vote down anyone which doesn't give him that, and there's no reason for him to be in a rush.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Pyromaniac Ida posted:The future is at least not boring. You poor fool. Wait until they put you on Högvakten and you get to experience boredom to it’s full extent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
They're [Alliansen] going to roll into the Riksdag on the 25th without a plan, aren't they? Maybe just stare at Steffe in an intimidating manner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:You poor fool. My brother did his military service in the mounted royal guard. He seemed to enjoy it (and came out of it a far more well-adjusted human being). Quite remarkable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 09:14
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:My brother did his military service in the mounted royal guard. He seemed to enjoy it (and came out of it a far more well-adjusted human being). Quite remarkable. Being surrounded by weird people consisting of 19-20 year old boys while being bored out of your skull, kinda makes you realize that you want to do better things with your life. Especially as shooting an assault rifle kinda loses its charm after a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 09:44
|
|
|
What's the point of Sweden even having an army. Dismantle it and redistribute the money Wouldn't it be wiser to invest in a nuclear arsenal so we can give the middle finger to the Russians when they inevitably come for our country. And maybe like a stronger national guard type force that can help with natural disasters
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 09:48
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:What's the point of Sweden even having an army. Dismantle it and redistribute the money Real talk: dismantling the cold war behemoth and getting rid of equipment intended for several hundred thousand bicycle-mounted, tractor-towed soldiers with rifles and anti-tank mines was really not such a bad decision, regardless of what the old grumblers might say. However, dismantling all the gigantic civil defense resources was an enormous mistake and we should have maintained conscription if only to put everyone through a three-month civil defense boot camp. Also, yes, cancelling the nuclear weapons program back in the late 1960's was Erlander's greatest mistake. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
So we can finally re-conquer Norway?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 09:59
|
|
|
The armed forces as they stand are a loving joke. We can't repel an invasion. We can't support the civilian authorities in case of an emergency. We can't properly participate in any foreign interventions, UN missions or whatever. We have more artillery generals than we have actual artillery pieces. The politicians need to decide what we actually want to do with our defense forces, then rebuild the armed forces from the ground up with this goal in mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 10:55
|
|
|
Dismantle the military entirely. Get rid of those lovely tanks and jets and soldiers jerking off in bootcamp. The gently caress are we gonna do with them? Skirmish with the Finnish army?? Spend all that surpluss money boosting Civil Defense forces and get some nukes man just get some nukes aint nobody loving with any country that got nukes, period You think Russia would have had the balls to attack Ukraine if Ukraine could delete Moscow from the map?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:01
|
|
|
Replace the scandinavian militaries with a phone number that says "we surrender" in russian when you call it. :glistrup:
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:10
|
|
|
Amp up military spending, enforce the draft and put all those who dont want to play with guns in the woods into sjukvården / äldrevården as civiltjänstgöring Create a strategic deterrent that makes us the geopolitical equivalent of a hedgehog gently caress nato and gently caress russia tia
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:10
|
|
so that means I can be a cheapskate and post about posting instead of having some wit or spending any more on comedy avs for people. Which I'm also incapable of. Comedy.
|
Ah yes, the feared "swedish military" We will be the bane of Putin
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:13
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:Dismantle the military entirely. Get rid of those lovely tanks and jets and soldiers jerking off in bootcamp. The gently caress are we gonna do with them? Skirmish with the Finnish army?? “Get some nukes” Haha like that is cheaper What is this weird defeatism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:14
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:aint nobody loving with any country that got nukes, period
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:14
|
|
|
Retarded Goatee posted:Amp up military spending, enforce the draft and put all those who dont want to play with guns in the woods into sjukvården / äldrevården as civiltjänstgöring We could increase our defence spending tenfold and we'd be the geopolitical equivalent of a hedgehog. This is not a simile. An actual hedgehog. If Putin comes knocking we'd have all the chances of an actual, snuffling, cute hedgehog when it comes to repelling an attack.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:17
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:Ah yes, the feared "swedish military" You are highly overestimating russian capabilities and also underestimating the swedish armed forces. But sure, i’d like for åland to be fortified in a finnish-swedish effort and Gotland to receive extensive SAM and ship missile defenses, as well as underground bunker networks. The defense budget needs expansion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:19
|
|
|
Beeswax posted:We could increase our defence spending tenfold and we'd be the geopolitical equivalent of a hedgehog. This is not a simile. An actual hedgehog. The only thing we need to defend against is occupation from små gröna män Fear against russia just means you’ve swallowed propaganda from a failed state that can barely do incursions in syria and ukraine at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:23
|
|
|
Well, nuclear proliferation concerns and challenges aside (they are mostly insurmountable), it's fair to say that scandinavia as a whole might be better served geopolitically with a mutual defence alliance more than what NATO is. If let's say Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland (and maybe Iceland?) had a mutual military organization I do think that would enable us to put up a realistic defence against our most realistic aggressor. Sure. It would probably be beneficial in general for the scandis to integrate and cooperate closer in other areas as well, both economic and political. As a bloc, the scandis would be a much more significant geopolitical force and we do have a lot of strengths we could mutually benefit from. However, Russian military doctrine calls for the tactical use of nuclear weapons and in a total war scenario they'd just nuke our defences and roll on through. Probably render Scandinavia useless to them, but can't make an omelette etc. So that's what they'd do if they didn't think that conventional military action could do the job. Assuming Russia would ever do something like that for some reason. So in real terms, yes we'd need nukes to be double plus "safe". I'm still not convinced that would be both possible and a good idea. I do still think Scandinavia as a whole should maybe rethink the Kalmar Union thing a bit. We have the industry to develop and use our own military equipment with supplements from NATO which is great from a self-sufficiency and an economic perspective, it'd probably make for more specialized and effective equipment as well. And then, when it inevitably blows up politically we can have our loving islands back from the greedy danes and Jemtland og Herjedalen back from the thieving swedes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:32
|
|
|
The experience of Afghanistan and Iraq has taught us that the single most dreadful force to be faced by an attacker is angry bearded guys w/ small arms and DIY-bombs Looking forward to the era of living in Jukkasjärvi and taking pot shots and the aggressor
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
Lima posted:Replace the scandinavian militaries with a phone number that says "we surrender" in russian when you call it. Glistrup's idea should be updated with an offer for some discounted F-35s.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:37
|
|
|
Retarded Goatee posted:The experience of Afghanistan and Iraq has taught us that the single most dreadful force to be faced by an attacker is angry bearded guys w/ small arms and DIY-bombs SD keeps harping on about mass immigration and radicalised youths, but this whole time the Government has just been playing 4D chess, insulating us against the russians.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
The problem with the Swedish Armed Forces isn't really the budget. You could pour five times as much money into it and not get much more back. The problem is that no-one in the political area has any idea what we're supposed to do with the Armed Forces, and the generals in the Armed Forces are all busy trying to keep their tiny part of it alive. Forget the "one week defense". The Swedish Armed Forces wouldn't survive 48 hours against any realistic opponent (read: russia). Our only hope would be the national guard going to ground and waging an ISIS style guerrilla war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:43
|
|
|
Retarded Goatee posted:The experience of Afghanistan and Iraq has taught us that the single most dreadful force to be faced by an attacker is angry bearded guys w/ small arms and DIY-bombs
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:44
|
|
|
Retarded Goatee posted:The experience of Afghanistan and Iraq has taught us that the single most dreadful force to be faced by an attacker is angry bearded guys w/ small arms and DIY-bombs Tag mikrobryg-IPAen og den hjemmebyggede cykel væk fra en skægget Vesterbro-hipster, og så skal du bare se løjer!
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:44
|
|
|
Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark should make some nukes together A nordic nuclear defense initiative. France, a country of 66 million, has 300 atomic warheads Scandinavia got 25ish million, so we could get at least a couple dozen, ya know?  If we're gonna spend any money on some sort of defensive military it only makes sense to spend it on a nucear arsenal like France did. If the world goes to poo poo and the superpowers start messing around with the world, the only countries with a say or hope of defense will be those with nukes
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:49
|
|
|
Serious post: the best deterrent is having your unsinkable carrier which the russians might eye smack dab between like 5 nato nations Aint nobody ever going to let that slide
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:53
|
|
|
Russian occupation would allow for some kick-rear end iconography and/or naming conventions to be stolen from the conflicts in the mideast too. Join me and VÄLFÄRDSMARTYRERNAS BRIGADER in our campaign to wage urban guerilla warfare against Ivan, vice-chairman post goes to whoever can cook up a kick-rear end kebab kiosk-level icon mashup between Kalles Kaviar-Kalle and the Hezbollah logo
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:00
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:The problem with the Swedish Armed Forces isn't really the budget. You could pour five times as much money into it and not get much more back. The problem is that no-one in the political area has any idea what we're supposed to do with the Armed Forces, and the generals in the Armed Forces are all busy trying to keep their tiny part of it alive. Forget the "one week defense". The Swedish Armed Forces wouldn't survive 48 hours against any realistic opponent (read: russia). Our only hope would be the national guard going to ground and waging an ISIS style guerrilla war. Griped was already designed around being maintained in a decentralized manner on makeshift airfields. With a bit more work the entire armed forces could help prolong a war against an occupying power. Nevermind the possible nato help which would come from the norwegian border and this conflict isn’t as open and shut as russia today readers itt would have you believe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:04
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:If the world goes to poo poo and the superpowers start messing around with the world, the only countries with a say or hope of defense will be those with nukes
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:07
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Well, nuclear proliferation concerns and challenges aside (they are mostly insurmountable), it's fair to say that scandinavia as a whole might be better served geopolitically with a mutual defence alliance more than what NATO is. If let's say Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland (and maybe Iceland?) had a mutual military organization I do think that would enable us to put up a realistic defence against our most realistic aggressor. Sure. It would probably be beneficial in general for the scandis to integrate and cooperate closer in other areas as well, both economic and political. As a bloc, the scandis would be a much more significant geopolitical force and we do have a lot of strengths we could mutually benefit from. I believe there was some effort towards such a thing right after the Second World War, a missed opportunity if you ask me. Norwegian oil, Swedish industry, Danish... sausages? Whatever. It would have been an economic and political power of some significance, probably have a geopolitical role in the Cold War years sort of like a bigger and stronger Sweden. There was briefly a joint Norwegian-Swedish nuclear program back in those days, too. Sure it would have born fruit. (Norway was actually the sixth country in the world to get a working fission reactor up and running.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
Groke posted:Norwegian oil, Swedish industry, Danish... sausages? Frømænd. Fremen. Are we fighting Finns or Russians, here?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:12
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:That's absolutely not how it works. If the canned sunshine starts flying, anyone nuclear-capable is getting a few counter-force hits just to be sure. In a proper large-scale nuclear war everyone loses anyway and the only way to "win" is to make sure you die right away instead of having to linger in the aftermath. I believe the real argument is that having a nuclear capability will protect you from having your lunch money stolen & your head shoved into the toilet bowl by non-nuclear means. Like, Borduria may be ruthless and have a stronger army than Syldavia but if the Syldavians have a few nukes and the Bordurian regime believe they're willing to use them in extremis, then invasion is averted and peace will continue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:15
|
|
|
Groke posted:I believe there was some effort towards such a thing right after the Second World War, a missed opportunity if you ask me. Norwegian oil, Swedish industry, Danish... sausages? Whatever. It would have been an economic and political power of some significance, probably have a geopolitical role in the Cold War years sort of like a bigger and stronger Sweden. The benefits are almost too many to mention. Norway could spend its useless fighter plane money on buying into and pumping up swedish fighter plane development and procure sensible fighters adapted to our specific region, instead of wasting it on the crap F-35. We could produce quality ammunition and missiles in Norway, Finland has the heavy industry in cooperation with norwegian R and D to make terrifying fast defense ships for Østersjøen and Norway could really use more ships to patrol our waters, around our arctic interests and islands, Denmark could use some help around Greenland and Iceland... well... Even outside the realm of just military crap we have a lot more to offer each other that we really don't because we're not at that level of solidarity today. Imagine a joint danish-swedish-norwegian R&D on nuclear utilization of thorium fuel to produce and combine low-cost nuclear power generation with Norway's excess Hydro power to permanently decarbonize our power grid and provide cheap excess power to domestic industries. This isn't unfeasible in the least. There's more political interest in doing so than economical interest, sure, but I am extremely loving tired of politicians making decisions that mostly lead to more money for the 1% and don't take long term views at all (I am sick and loving tired of the oil fund bullshit protectionist thought because the oil fund will 100% be sucked away into rich rear end in a top hat bank accounts as loving soon as the right-wingers can manage it. Better spend it on political cooperation, investing in our neighbours and infrastructure/research before that can happen. IMO.).
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
Groke posted:I believe the real argument is that having a nuclear capability will protect you from having your lunch money stolen & your head shoved into the toilet bowl by non-nuclear means. Like, Borduria may be ruthless and have a stronger army than Syldavia but if the Syldavians have a few nukes and the Bordurian regime believe they're willing to use them in extremis, then invasion is averted and peace will continue. loving Bordurian ne'e-do-wells man edit: this made me hit up wikipedia and Syldavia actually had a nuclear program in the fifties. Who knew!
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
E:nm
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:58 |
|
|
Reminder that the F-35 simulator is the most expensive and realistic flight simulator constructed to date. It destroys itself spontaneously with fire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:30
|
|