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?
leaving NATO is probably a good idea, the US has displayed how unserious it is and can no longer be trusted BUT a better EU solution aligned with Canada etal should be in place first.
but the Ukraine stance is beyond understanding, if France was invaded would they want help from others ? there is no diplomatic solution to a bully, if he takes your lunch money and insists on more, sure ask him to stop but that won’t work and he will need a punch in the nose.
Why he have to be a tankie, I’m very left wing and a pacifist but that doesn’t mean don’t defend yourself, quite the opposite and boots on the ground is the only solution to show Europe is serious about it’s own safety, EU troops along the Belarusian border to free up Ukrainian troopps and show solidarity.
That alternative can be… NATO. If the US flakes out and doesn’t support a conflict like an invasion from Russia, the remaining countries can handle it under the existing structure. That also leaves it in place if the US straightens their shit out
Removed by mod
Yes, Zelenskyy broke the treaty by invading Crimea in 2014 when he was still a comedian 🤡
Removed by mod
@Garfunkel @boonhet
“Crimea was invaded by russia due to the impeachement of the Viktor Yanukovych” - Russia is not Ukraine’s policeman.
“It was […] a means of incentivizing ukraine to reconnect with Russia as an ally” - OK so you’re a bot, right? You invade countries & murder their citizens because you want them as an “ally”! :blobamused:
Removed by mod
@Garfunkel @Hanrahan
I do agree with Sachs in his general view of US hegemony, in Ukraine & elsewhere, but his apparent justification for Russia invading Ukraine has no basis whatsoever imo. If anything, Russia’s belligerence has simply legitimised the Russophobia behind the increased membership of NATO (which has not posed, and constitutionally could not pose, any military danger to Russia).
The increased membership of NATO is something that does not seem true to my eyes, Pierre Degaulle and Miterrand are both pushing for an exit of NATO and entry to BRICS because as I said prior, nato is responsible for dozens of undemocratic regime changes. Most of the global south (which constitues 6.2 billion or about 82-86% of the human population) has been disadvantaged because of these “crusades in the spirit of democracy” (Iran and venezuela being the recent ones, but chile, mexico, indonesia, south africa, etc). Something that also relates to this is the departure of germany from Ostpolitik and the re-emergence of the russia-germany relationship which in my opinion can either be attributed to christian nationalist capital through the western world at the moment or resentment of the german populations due to the loss of both world wars and accords made subsequently (like the treaty of versailles) which disadvantaged germany in the long term.
Isn’t Russia part of Ostpolitik?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostpolitik
42.7 already exists
France is militarily the most powerful country in Western Europe. If they’re getting attacked, none of their neighbours’ help will amount to much.
I don’t know why you were downvoted, this is right. France doesn’t have a “no first strike” policy. If we are attacked we will take down the ennemies with us anyway
The downvoting was for the shortsighted self centric perspective. Yes, France can take down the other side, but is that a preferable outcome to rather staying together in Europe and preventing that scenario to begin with in the first place?