tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post3345424988652119540..comments2024-03-27T20:37:08.065+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: The role of robustness in deterrenceUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-43968257273615822012018-05-27T09:05:34.040+02:002018-05-27T09:05:34.040+02:00Absolutly agree here with chris, that the main pro...Absolutly agree here with chris, that the main problem far beyond our military robustness is in truth the robustness of our civilian part of the society. Our western tm societies, and especially germany are extremly vulnerable in this part. And i agree that at the moment that civilian part cannot be defended.<br /><br />One way to improve here would be to strengthen the civil defence very much and to create stocks of vital ressources / spare parts etc and to create civilian structures which would work on without electricity. Because the main achilles heel is imo the electricity. Our societies and especially germany are not prepared in any way to exist further only a few weeeks without electricity even in only some parts of the country. An enemy attack on this weakness would therefore lead to an fast collapse of our society perhaps even in days.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-46848010306393243342018-05-27T01:26:47.796+02:002018-05-27T01:26:47.796+02:00That our deterrent has worked so far is not entire...That our deterrent has worked so far is not entirely certain. If the potential enemy was not inclined to invade or take other military action against NATO because peace better serves their objectives at the moment, or he is simply waiting to build capabilities to ensure a quicker, less costly victory whilst hoping for more gaps to appear in our alliance, it would appear outwardly the same to most of the inhabitants of Western Europe. It is not hard to find huge potential savings simply by avoiding incredibly expensive, desperately vulnerable kit and the infrastructure to base it. It seems to me that we could spend a lot less than we do now and yet render Western Europe very uninviting indeed to invade. However, the political will would need to be there to take the necessary measures and political will is often much harder to find than cash.Chris Werbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12401452513193996839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-48907275765699138602018-05-26T21:36:23.654+02:002018-05-26T21:36:23.654+02:00Keep in mind we live in peace. So evidently what w...Keep in mind we live in peace. So evidently what we have is enough deterrent so far.<br />My interest is rather on making the deterrent more efficient (cheaper), not better. There's little if any to be gained through military expenditures beyond keeping the peace.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-56834958072641270862018-05-26T15:21:14.173+02:002018-05-26T15:21:14.173+02:00I don't know if you have been following discus...I don't know if you have been following discussions over on tank-net, but I have been making the point about the pointlessness of basing our conventional defence on non survivable systems and infrastructure for years now. Where I woukd take it a step further is that vital civilian infrastructure here is essentially impossible to defend. We therefore need a survivable conventional deterrent to dissuade Russia from holding it at risk as a bargaining chip in a possible future crisis.Chris Werbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12401452513193996839noreply@blogger.com