Is It Time For A German Nuclear Bomb?
Nuclear Bomb for Germany: Is It Time For A German Nuclear Bomb?
Germany is at a crossroads when it comes to its security policy — one of the deepest upheavals of the post-War era.
Hoffentlich bauen die Schwaben nie eine Atombombe, weil irgendein Minischderpräsident würde sagen "Etz ham mer se bezahlt, etz werf mer se au ab".
I just want to point out, that we are really talking about building nukes again in 2025.
Well, I'm not a big fan of nuclear proliferation but Ukraine gave up theirs and look what happened...
As long as we have imperialistic authoritarian world leaders, we will need ways to keep them at bay, and nuclear deterrence is probably the best one unfortunately...
Yep. I'm really hoping we can build on the nuclear arsenals the non-US West has going already, though.
I wonder if Putin would have bet on them not being used and attacked anyway.
Just like Putin has not used any nuke, there's a huge deterrent to use them at all.
I could definitely see Putin making calculated decisions like that.
Of course Ukraine would have had a stronger stand with them either way.
How else are we gonna get that sweet pu238 for our deep space drones?
We never stopped.
If you think those ones we have now are leftover from the 60s, you are in for a shock.
Who would have known Kim Jong Il would be vindicated
Only those who don't understand the topic. Those of us who study them do not support proliferation.
What study would that be?
The thing is that among the people who have the power to make it a reality are many who don't understand the topic. Politicians and other people in power are well known to not understand the stuff they get to make decisions about.
Yes. The Budapest memo and the US strategic backflip has proved non nuclear powers are deeply at risk.
Europe has French nukes, which are more than sufficient.
At least until the next French election. Not exactly a long-term guarantee. Germany needs its own deterrent.
Europe is not a country and historically the internal cooperation we see today is the extreme exception. Any of the countries could flip at any time for a multitude of reasons, and then what? France just dominates?
The war's been over for a while and they seem to have turned into decent people, but if you think it'll help... 🤷♂️
Everyone seems so willing to break the Non Proliferation Treaty nowadays, it's scary
Non proliferation was possible because of nuclear security guarantees by the US. Those are now worthless.
Pandora's box is open. Thanks Putin. Thanks Trump. EU can't do nothing... We're heading to more war and disorder either way. Not only more new nukes, also higher chances of them being used again which is even more scary.
No need to break it. The treaty can be left within 90 days after giving a notice with a reason. Given that building nuclear weapons takes some time, that seems very possible.
Everyone seems so willing to break the Non Proliferation Treaty nowadays, it’s scary
Non-Proliferation is based on the promise of nuclear powers to defend those who don't have nukes. Since this promise is out of the window thanks to Trump, proliferation is the logical consequence.
Most of the people who saw the results of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are dead. The people who grew up hiding under their school desks waiting for the bomb to drop are old.
The memory of the fear is fading.
I think the fear is very much alive.
If the alternatives are fearing the negative impact potentially imposed vs being imposed upon, most people choose their own safety and security though. Whether that's factual or hypothetical - it's more than not having such a deterrent while the potential aggressor has them.
People are like: let's move a bit closer to the end of the world, seems like a fun event.
No. If anything, EU nukes could be something to consider. But I don't see why Germany specifically should have them. That might lead to calls for every other European country to get them too and that could just as easily be a security risk as an advantage, with single countries possibly "going rogue", like Hungary. In the hands of the EU they should be fairly safe.
EU nukes? Hungary would veto their use even if Russian missiles were raining down on European cities.
Who decides about the use of these nukes? Ursula von der Leyen?
Yeah, "EU" solutions to security just seem so naive. Do we really expect a German national to put their country's security on the line if need be? Long term, what would prevent French, German, Spanish, whatever exceptionalism from rising and infecting EU leadership?
This is a reason why there is a push for an EU military. Right now, there isn't a functional EU body which can launch the nukes.
The article advocates/answers with infrastructure should be prepared so it can be purposed if it should ever be necessary.
There is, however, a third option: nuclear hedging. In this model, a country does not develop nuclear weapons outright but instead builds the technological capacity to produce them if ever deemed necessary.
Most of the comments here seem to discuss the headline instead - whether it should equip.
Germany maintains the uranium enrichment plant and a the ability to turn that into nuclear fuel. That is what is needed to build a simple uranium based nuclear weapon.
That is why Germany set up nuclear power plants, as they were always meant to finance and develop those facilities. Since they are now esteblished there is no reason to keep the power plants around. They are of the wrong type anyway, as they produce very little plutonium, which is the other way of producing nuclear weapons. However Germany still has quite a few institutions being able to built nuclear reactors, if need be.
That is also why Germany was fine with US nuclear weapons. Nobody wanted to see Germany have nukes themself, but Germany. Hence that deal. However Germany always had very detailed plans to built nukes, if need be. We are talking about having nukes within a few months, if really pushed hard.
This is what Germany has been doing for decades with its civil nuclear program, but it turned out to be an prohibitively expensive bondoggle and all the nuclear plants have been shut down now.
I really would like that everybody who is proposing a german nuclear bomb would also explain where Germany should test its new bomb. Bavaria? Mecklenburg? Erzgebirge?
explain where Germany should test its new bomb
Mar-a-Lago
Even untested ones would act as a deterrence. Not to the same effect, but almost.
I propose Saxony /s
Something like the Vela incident could work, but seriously nukes are not that complex once you have the weapons grade uranium or plutonium. Everybody knows that Germany can easily produce weapons grade uranium so tests are not needed at all to work as a deterrent.
Germany should test its new bomb.
Berlin, obviously. If you time it right, the test will be indistinguishable from a normal New Year's Eve to the general public.
They just had an election where the second most popular party was an extreme-right-wing pack of lunatics. What happens when they win the next election?
You cannot afford to have nuclear weapons when you can't be sure who's going to have control of them.
It would be best if there was an EU wide nuclear program. Not a nuclear sharing program but a nuclear program.
If this is impossible for whatever reason it is up to the member states to develop their own programs.
Russia would never have invaded if Ukraine kept their nukes.
It's impossible because the EU is only slightly more cohesive than Europe was before WWI...
EU only exists because member countries saw the need for an economic power to contend with the US post-WWII. It's not like States in the US - each country is there only so long as they feel their interests are being met.
The mere thought of Brexit occuring should've been a warning shot - everyone took to castigating Britain instead of examining why it could even be an idea, let alone actually happening.
Your entire comment is wrong.
Brexit happened because the EU is not only limited to trading.
Also... "Only slightly more cohesive" ? France and Germany were having skirmishes and ready to start a war years before WWI actually started. Germany didn't shoot a Rafale yet, I think we're doing OK
The beginning of the EU started to keep France from trying to invade the Saarland again.
EU only exists because member countries saw the need for an economic power to contend with the US post-WWII. It’s not like States in the US
I'm pretty sure the US was very involved in the process of establishing more union and collaboration in Europe.
You wrote "only exists because". Did you man "only still exists because"? But then the post WW2 comment doesn't make much sense.
The US also did a lot of economic support. So which time frame are you referring to?
AfD sagt "geil", aber wenn wir ehrlich sind sieht es in den anderen Ländern, unter deren nuklearen Schutzschirm wir uns stellen könnten, nicht viel besser aus. Was ist schlimmer, eine AfD-Regierung mit Atombombe oder eine russische oder vielleicht amerikanische Invasion? Pest oder Cholera ...
AfD says "hell yeah", but to be honest it's not looking much better in other countries who might extend their nuclear shield (is that even a thing in English?) to Germany. What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA? Lesser of two evils ...
edit: whoops, wrong language. I hope this manual translation gets the point across.
Yup! In Frankreich wir haben nukes und für defensive Zwecke das sieht gut aus. Aber wenn Lepen oder ihr Hundchen wird Präsident sein, dann tickt das Doomsdayclock noch einmal für alle...
What's worse, a German far-right government with nuclear bombs or Germany being invaded by Russia or maybe the USA?
Why pick one when you can have both? Hitler and Stalin used to have a deal until they didn't.
So far, nuclear deterrence has worked without fail. The soviets had their first successful nuclear weapon test in 1949, Stalin died in 1953 - neither he no his successors ever fired a nuclear weapon at an enemy, despite being in a cold war the entire time until the end of the USSR.
And frankly, if the German faschists were dumb enough to use nuclear weapons offensively against enemies, I'd assume they would be bombed into oblivion instead of invaded.
Yes, if they want to be independent.
Guys, have a kid, buy a house. Smile on your faces. Everything is going to be good.
You need to feel like you have something for them to be able to rip it away.
Fucking obviously.
please dont
An EU nuclear weapons programme would be by far preferable, but that requires a common EU foreign and defence policy.
Not having any nukes won't work with the current state of affairs, except for enjoyers of being on the receiving end of nuclear blackmail by an orange muppet, his puppeteer in Moscow, and Winnie the Pooh.
Didn't they just close down all their nuclear power plants because they're too dangerous after Fukushima?
Building nuclear bombs doesn't seem like the next logical step.
You don't have to cool them. Freeer choice of location. I imagine a static good is much easier to safeguard and check.
Most of all, there's cheaper alternatives without a lot of surrounding questions. That's not the case for military deterrent.
Production of a bomb and a nuclear reactor involve different things.
First off. Way to make sure everyone “doesn’t look up” re climate emergency. There’s no amount of nukes we can build that are more powerful and can be secured enough against nature’s planned devastation in the next 30 years. But for some reason all this war talk shit is just a welcome distraction.
Second. This is the same like all these governments asking Apple and Signal to build backdoors. Once you have a backdoor, it doesn’t discriminate who passes through it. Build all the nukes you want, all European governments will slide towards trumpism in the next 10 years anyway, as European politics seems to copy USA and is more and more infiltrated by foreign powers (also just like USA). I’m sure all the mini-me Aldofs, Elons and Donalds will appreciate a freshly build slab of nukes to establish their tyranny.
Boy are we stupid. Just smart enough to know we’re a bunch of clothed idiots.
Tldr use a condom
I don't love your level of optimism. I all seriousness, I don't think it's all quite as predetermined as it may seem at this moment.
My level of optimism is not really lovable, but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong. The correlation between lack of understanding (not to call it naivety or ignorance) and optimism is growing by the day.
I.e.: for most people in order to survive they will turn more and more towards hopium delivery systems like religions, cults or the deification of powerful people to offset the uncomfortable underlying reality.
That’s why I think I’m an actual optimist. I see a really amazing future of rebuilding in the next half a century once you nothern hemispherians have finished killing each other and reduce the population levels back to a level where we can feed people off the land without needing petrofertilised agriculture.
We’re not that special. We’re just an ant hive that managed to find too much food for a while and we grew out of control. Natural laws exist to deal with these events.
Since the rules of society and safety are always written in blood, I feel they will be pretty good rules after this has all come to pass.
There’s plenty of resources out there that will show you where we’re heading in terms of climate. It’s not going to be pretty (it already is very ugly but wars are generating more clicks) and it will keep accelerating. We’re less than 5 years away from serious impacts on the global food supply, and while the white folks will still have food security, the diaspora from the famines on other continent will drive more of those whites to vote towards the right.
Computer models in the 80’s predicted this. Imagine how accurate my AI predictions have become today.
I do want to say I agree with you that optimism is important. I just think there’s naive optimism and realistic optimism. I’ve picked the latter and that means in my story billions die very quickly. But that’s also best for our environment.
Too expensive for the little benefit. Turkey for example has none, but one of the bigger armies in the Mediterranean and can still project power.
I'd also recommend to talk to Poland and France about this first, if only for historic reasons.
Drop it ! Wherever it's dropped is probably fine now
I can barely imagine the shitty world that makes us need the French nukes in our country, what world would there even be that requires a German one instead? If things are that bad, what good would our own nuke do at that point?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing
Germany already has nuclear bombs
Doubtful, given Trump's displayed reluctance to honour a defence treaty.
Those "German" nukes are a handful of US nukes for use by Germany under NATO's nuclear sharing policy, when approved by the US. With that orange muppet in the White House, Germany really hasn't any nukes it can count on, especially not for deterrence against the orange muppet's puppeteer in Moscow.
Nuclear sharing is the worst of both worlds. You make yourself a certain target, but you cannot exercise control over the weapons. It's turning MAD into SAD (self assured destruction)
Germany has a really high chance of having a fascist party in government in four years. So the answer is a fucking resounding NO.
Nukes are only useful if you are at the point where you want to end the world. Germany should focus peace where possible and the equipment needed to end wars in their favor when peace is not an option. They can't deliver Ukraine the tanks, artillery shells, and and so on needed, so adding nukes to their plate is just diverting their interests. If they want to do more airplanes or air defense would be much better to invest in than nukes. (I'm not sure what Germany as in either of those categories)
Germany should focus peace where possible and the equipment needed to end wars in their favor when peace is not an option.
Well, nukes are doing exactly that.
You are confusing can't and won't, Gemany and a few other countries have ability to produce a lot of weapons and armor, they really don't want to do it and corporations that make weapons also don't want to do it. So they obviously can produce more, but it would cut into profits on one side, and requires minimal effort and political will on the other.
Discussing nukes requires nothing and generates news, win-win.
No 🤦
... or maybe, have some of French // British nuclear weapons in Germany and under its control ? ... to stabilise a "MAD*" equilibrium ?
::: spoiler *MAD
Mutual auto destruction (at Wikipedia)
:::