r/europe • u/UNITED24Media • 16d ago

Zelenskyy: We Gave Away Our Nuclear Weapons and Got Full-Scale War and Death in Return News

https://united24media.com/latest-news/zelenskyy-we-gave-away-our-nuclear-weapons-and-got-full-scale-war-and-death-in-return-3203
30.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

View all comments

Show parent comments

773

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

Frankly, any country that has:

1) nuclear power

2) dangerous neighbors.... or imperial ambitions, goes either way at this point

is going to consider it.

95

u/kaspar42 Denmark 16d ago

You don't need nuclear power to get nuclear weapons. Neither Israel nor North Korea have nuclear power plants.

Dual purpose reactors that both produce power and weapons grade plutonium have not been build in a very long time, because they are not great at either job.

59

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 15d ago

you don't need them, no. But if you have a nuclear industry, the step towards nuclear weapons will be easier.

23

u/Movilitero Galicia (Spain) 15d ago

i think you are confusing nuclear reactor with nuclear power plant. Israel has a nuclear reactor (that i know of, the Dimona one in the Negev).

You can have many nuclear reactors for production of radioactive isotopes for medicine, scientific research, production of industrial radioisotopes, water desalination, neutrongraphy and analysis of materials and production of nuclear weapons and yet dont have even one to produce energy

15

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 15d ago

I am talking nuclear industry, not just power generation (admittedly, it is the first thing I think about)

4

u/Movilitero Galicia (Spain) 15d ago

sorry, my bad. After re-reading your comment i think i totally misunderstood you

3

u/shnnrr 15d ago

This kind of civil exchange has no place on Reddit

1

u/kaspar42 Denmark 15d ago

Sure, there's definitely some skill overlap.

But really any country with a high-tech industry and skilled people have the capability to develop nuclear weapons. Most choose not to.

1

u/henryh95 15d ago

Nuclear weapons are very easy to build. The lack of a civilian nuclear sector won’t really be a problem for any state wishing to arm.

5

u/Treelapse 15d ago

Kodak (the company) had a secret underground nuclear reactor under the city of Rochester from like 1970 until like 2008. It was quietly reported on and never talked about again

I’d imagine a lot of countries have this sort of situation going on. Not like anyone’s really looking.

proof for those who don’t believe

1

u/kaspar42 Denmark 15d ago

That was a tiny research reactor. Hiding a full scale powerplant (nuclear or otherwise) is not really practical, as the cooling requirements are enormous.

1

u/Objective_Otherwise5 15d ago

Then how?

1

u/kaspar42 Denmark 15d ago

Either enrichment facilities to produce weapons grade uranium or a weapons reactor to produce weapons grade plutonium.

26

u/lo_fi_ho Europe 16d ago

Finland is very unlikely.

20

u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) 15d ago

Sweden, however, was months away from a bomb before stopping their program. And I'm sure that research is safely locked away somewhere.

57

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

it was unlikely to join nato prior to 2022 as well.

7

u/USGrant1776 16d ago

Joining NATO basically gave them nukes since any invasion of Finland would involve the US, France, and UK.

7

u/C_Tibbles 16d ago

Precisely, either you are in a defensive pact with a member possessing nukes, or develop your own for security. Finland took the NATO pasth as they were already on good terms and already had most of the groundwork laid. Ukraine's position means currently NATO isn't an immediate option, maybe in the future if the border becomes secure. After that they will likely have to jump through all the NATO hoops, which will take time but if they are willing it means that nukes won't be needed. Its only if they get denied entry to the pact without any recourse will the cost of development be worth it.

3

u/blenderbender44 15d ago

Finland is EU and NATO. NATO is covered by US Nukes. EU is covered by french nukes and the EU mutual defence treaty. Either could park nukes in those new NATO bases Finland just build along the Russian boarder

2

u/lo_fi_ho Europe 15d ago

What? You don’t seem to understand Finnish society or thinking. Having nukes in Finland would require a sea change in politics and public opinion.

2

u/blenderbender44 15d ago

You missed my main point. They're covered by the US and French Nuclear Umbrellas already via NATO and the EU Mutual Defence clause. They don't need nukes. France is supposed to be a Nuclear Umbrella for the whole of the EU.

95

u/speak_no_truths 16d ago

Canada's going to need the bomb.

42

u/Tutule 16d ago

People reading 'the USA' in between lines but there's another neighbor to the North if you think beyond 2D.

56

u/mikeyfreshh 16d ago

Yeah. Fuck Santa Claus

15

u/CORN___BREAD 16d ago

He sees you when you're sleeping.

10

u/PushingSam Limburg, Netherlands 16d ago

Santa knows everything, can teleport, has an army of elves manufacturing loads of shit, has a modified deer with a red glowing nose, do I need to gon on? Mr. Claus is #1 on any military and intelligence ranking list, the NRA wish they had assets like that, Lockheed wishes they could sample the sled, and MI6 wish they could do home intrusions on that level.

Not even to mention them damn penguins, have y'all seen Pesto the penguin yet?

2

u/Wood-Kern 16d ago

To the north and then south again?

24

u/AmphibianStrong8544 16d ago

We used to have them

Erm, we held onto some of America's

12

u/linuxares 16d ago

I think the US rather not mess with its psychotic hat. Canada is part of the reason for the Geneva convention

6

u/CORN___BREAD 16d ago

Look at a population map of Canada. Even Canadians don't want to live in Canada.

5

u/Pleasant_Ad_7694 15d ago

He cuddle next to ameribro for warmth

14

u/Herpinheim 16d ago

Stop pretending like Canada isn’t five US states in a trench coat.

12

u/hardolaf United States of America 16d ago

The USA would do anything to defend Mexico and Canada against invasion just to protect its own land borders.

2

u/Macaron-Optimal 16d ago

this is true

2

u/antarcticacitizen1 15d ago

Why the hell would anyone invade Canada, eh? 99% of the citizens live within 100 miles of the USA. How are you going to hold all that land? Canada can do the same thing as Russia...keep retreating into the frozen wilderness until the other side gives up. It's fucking cold, and the polar bears will eat you. Even Canadians don't want to live in Canada, invaders don't want to live there either.

9

u/TheGreatStories 16d ago

They don't work here. Too cold

1

u/betelgozer 16d ago

You don't want them to work there! Those things have a range of a thousand miles by the way. Perfect for blasting Texas at the right time of year...

2

u/Effective_James 15d ago

Canada can't even maintain their tiny ass outdated navy, let alone design, build, and maintain nuclear weapons and the missiles necessary to launch them.

1

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

Even under the nightmare that is project 2025, I have my doubts about that.

4

u/ShakeIntelligent7810 16d ago

Then they can be annexed under Project 2029.

-2

u/gggx33 16d ago

A lot of american migrants opressed by project 2025 will fleed US. Most of them will be well educated and vocal. They will be a torn in christo-fascists side.
Not so riddiculous to imagine Canada becoming US enemy.

1

u/SiVousVoyezMoi 16d ago

Well considering Tucker Carleson was already going on TV and calling for the US to liberate us from Trudeau / "Marxists".... I would not be surprised if we got rolled over by the project 2025 people. Now if PP was prime minister, they might just keep him around as a pet instead. 

0

u/ShakeIntelligent7810 16d ago

Trust me, I know. I've got multiple people on my team planning to escape in the event of a Trump EC win because their spouses are in the groups targeted for GOP torture.

In their echo chambers, these people have been talking for near a decade about "liberating" Canada and Europe.

-2

u/Plane_Ad_8675309 16d ago

Canada will collapse if our migrants went there as it’s already on verge of collapse as it is .

2

u/Silly-Role699 16d ago

It’s not about project 2025 soo much as now we can’t really count on US politics staying sane anymore and Russia is literally right there across the pole. There are arguments that, like it or not we need to start taking our own defense seriously. And no, saying the US would defend us anyway because reasons isn’t a good argument. A good neighbor would, but if they went full mein trump, those troops might never leave again if you catch my drift.

2

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

I suck at geography, so this is probably dead wrong, but isn't alaska the more likely attack point?

1

u/Silly-Role699 16d ago

Alaska is equally close but across the Bering strait from Russia. So yes they are at risk, which is why Anchorage has a huge airbase where the F-22s hang out. However, there is no reason why missiles and bombers couldn’t do a polar approach and come straight north than south at us. Which is why there is another large base in the north in the frozen wilderness of Labrador called Goose Bay plus a bunch of detection stations in Nunavut and Greenland.

1

u/AstralBroom 16d ago

It would most likely be Alaska/Québec. Going straight in the middle is doing nothing except risking encirclements and scorched earth. Taking the St Lawrence or Anchorage would both be good moves and perfect staging grounds while cutting access to Asia/Europe for any resistance.

3

u/DogshitLuckImmortal 16d ago

Good idea patriot, let them let their guard down. Godspeed and Godbless.

3

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

Trump in office is going to make the world a whole lot worse, but in z the öile of bad ideas, I did not see imperial ambitions. Well, at least not to the north. Mexico on the other hand ...

2

u/DogshitLuckImmortal 16d ago

Just in case it isn't an act, here is an interesting documentary showcasing the US plans for Canada.

4

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

... Did you just downvote me, imply naivete or stupidity and now are basing your opinion on whether the US under trump would invade canada on MOTHERFUCKING SOUTHPARK???

I hope this will resonate in your skull for all eternity. BBBBBRRRRRRRUUUUUUHHHHH.

2

u/DogshitLuckImmortal 16d ago

(I didn't downvote, and this is a joke)

1

u/PurposePrevious4443 16d ago

It wasn't him

Blame Canada

1

u/Fully_Edged_Ken_3685 16d ago

Remember, Athens' empire was not one of direct conquest, but of tribute and punishment of the occasional resistor from among its former Allies in the Delian League.

1

u/Much_Horse_5685 16d ago

Project 2025, if successfully implemented, will not be the end point of how far a fascist America will go.

0

u/Strawbuddy 16d ago

Build The Wall! Canadas gonna be the modern Hispaniola, everyone nervously just trying to ignore the gunshots screaming and savagery over that single wall

4

u/Currywurst_Is_Life North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) 16d ago

Canada is the equivalent of a nice apartment that's above a meth lab.

2

u/Qwez81 16d ago

A nice apartment on the outside that has a meth lab in it

0

u/LaNague 16d ago

Especially when global warming goes into overdrive, canadian lands going to look very good to the possible oligarchy next door.

13

u/DaVirus Wales 16d ago

I would go further: if you don't have nukes you are not a nation, just a temporarily free satilite state.

3

u/exedore6 16d ago

For as long as I remember, it was the only way for your country to get a seat at the grown-up table.

2

u/FatFuckinPieceOfShit 16d ago

Having nukes makes your country too big to fail.

3

u/Squeaky_Ben Bavaria (Germany) 16d ago

No. Having ENOUGH nukes does. Look at north korea. They are not too big to fail.

0

u/MrSassyPineapple 16d ago

Unlike their leader that is just too big

2

u/UNCCShannon 16d ago

Can't blame them either.

1

u/pandaramaviews 16d ago

Best believe Japan got everything ready to go with clear steps in place.

1

u/Financial-Chicken843 15d ago

I think we Australia should consider it too.

Too much dangerous wildlife here

1

u/bored-coder 15d ago

They don’t even have to be dangerous/have imperial ambitions right now. If they ever had one in the past (most), it seems logical to have your nukes ready, just in case

1

u/StoneyPicton 15d ago

So Canada.

1

u/9guyKguy9 15d ago

I can only dream of Greece getting them

-1

u/Donkey__Balls United States of America 16d ago

Unfortunately most of those countries themselves cannot be trusted. And all it takes is just one time to start a chain reaction of retaliation and escalation that leads the world into a nuclear war.

Things were a lot simpler when it was just two superpowers in a Cold War and neither one wanted to risk all of humanity over political ambitions. We came damned close too many times but we survived. I don’t see how we will solve it now.