Sorry, did I miss the war the UdSSR forced on us in between 1944 and its end? Or Russia until 2014? When was the last time a European country was invaded by a foreign nuclear power? Or the last time a NATO member had their air space repeatedly violated by armed planes and drones?
I’m either misunderstanding you or the Danish PM. So I suppose, even though that would be her job, convince me: Why would the ongoing impotent flailing and blustering of an economically severely strained aggressor and their continued reasonable hybrid effort against your/my/one’s nation be “more dangerous” 2025 than in 2022, 2023 or 2024 and thus warrant a policy change compared to those years? Policy changes that, mind you, wouldn’t even more than tangentially affect nations that are currently facing actual attacks.
Because this ‘flailing and blustering of an economically severely strained aggressor’ is now turned against us and reaching a level where NATO member have been forced into opening fire already.
is now turned against us and reaching a level where NATO member have been forced into opening fire already
Is it? If flying around 4-digit dollar value amounts of material in border regions can dominate headlines and political discourse for the whole region while there’s an actual hot war going on nearby, then I guess that was a bargain investment for Russia. Because this is the message that I’m hearing: “Stop wasting resources on propping up Ukraine, worry about your own safety” *[scary ghost noises] - and I don’t think it’s reasonable to spread that message to the European population.
I’m either misunderstanding you or the Danish PM. So I suppose, even though that would be her job, convince me: Why would the ongoing impotent flailing and blustering of an economically severely strained aggressor and their continued reasonable hybrid effort against your/my/one’s nation be “more dangerous” 2025 than in 2022, 2023 or 2024 and thus warrant a policy change compared to those years? Policy changes that, mind you, wouldn’t even more than tangentially affect nations that are currently facing actual attacks.
Because this ‘flailing and blustering of an economically severely strained aggressor’ is now turned against us and reaching a level where NATO member have been forced into opening fire already.
Is it? If flying around 4-digit dollar value amounts of material in border regions can dominate headlines and political discourse for the whole region while there’s an actual hot war going on nearby, then I guess that was a bargain investment for Russia. Because this is the message that I’m hearing: “Stop wasting resources on propping up Ukraine, worry about your own safety” *[scary ghost noises] - and I don’t think it’s reasonable to spread that message to the European population.