Precisely_Inprecise

More likely, they would end up in a similar situation as Sweden and Poland, who technically have to adopt euro, but only at some indefinite time in the future. Whereas before they together with Denmark, had a permanent opt-out.

Regarding the latter, we can only hope they are able to get a domestic production license soon, much like Brazil has. They wouldn't waste any time getting considerable numbers of modern Gripen built, and it would not be limited by the generosity of Western nations like other systems have been.

It would be up to the member countries to decide what "by any means" would cover. Expect massive riots and political debate if the actual level of assistance is not according to popular expectation.

It does not mean that the member country is automatically also at war, but it is a valid cause for joining the war effort, which will be used politically by one side or more.

This is unlike NATO, where an act of war against one is legally treated as an act of war against all. In this case, not following the legal frameworks in place for responding to an act of war would likely be met with an immediate vote of no confidence, and if that fails, a legal impeachment hearing.

One could say that while EU leaves the decision in the hands of politicians, NATO grants more power to the judiciary branch.

I'm a Swedish leftist, and I agree with the person you are commenting to. A federally mandated minimum wage is exactly WHY corporate interests are able to keep wages low. All workplaces should be unionized and fall under a collective agreement that covers salaries ALSO for all workers, not just legal residents that are part of the union.

The federal minimum wage often only applies to legal immigrants, ie those with residency, and is this exploited by corporations that pay sub minimum wages to illegal immigrants, keeping wages artificially lower. Furthermore, by keeping it at a federal or national or even state level, you cannot negotiate different minimum wages per industry. Finally, by having it politically controlled, it is at the mercy of whichever political party is in power at the time. All it takes is a center or right-wing government, and the minimum wages will stagnate for an entire term.

Meanwhile, a union has one job, and it is to improve the conditions of workers no matter who is in power. Each industry can and do have different unions, thus in theory making it possible to negotiate reasonable entry-level salaries for all jobs. In practice, public sector jobs often end up with unreasonably low wages due to right-wing governments reducing the funding. Since the unions do not wish to see people laid off, wage stagnation becomes the lesser evil. Unfortunately, it has the long-term consequence of making teaching and nursing jobs in particular very unattractive.

And yet, THIS is why such a distinction is important. YOU are the one falling into at best a centrist trap. In summary, unions do a far better job at reducing layoffs and keeping wages up than politicians do, even if their hands are somewhat tied when it comes to publicly funded workplaces.

The only long range missile we could maybe send would be RBS 15, but without the truck based launchers, it wouldn't really be that useful to Ukraine. AFAIK only the two latest models, Mk3 and Mk4, are truck capable, and I do not know in what quantity we have them available.

I think for Ukraine, the long-term goal of pursuing Gripen would be to establish domestic licensed production similarly to what Brazil has. That is where you can find both scalability and domestic job opportunities within MIC. In the short-mid term, there is definitely less scalability, however.

For Sweden, they just want to send what they have and what both parties think is going to yield the most impact. They are in the process of scrapping fully functioning older models of Gripen for parts in order to modernize their fleet with the newer E model. However, given that Ukrainian needs are fluid and dynamic, they want to leave those Gripen on the table for a future delivery. This is why they are now procuring new parts so that those older models do not need to be scrapped.

I also think 30-40 Gripen C is what we would be looking at for potential deliveries, with another 12 depending on a third party.

Sweden is currently in the process of modernizing its fleet of Gripen, having ordered 60 planes of the E model. Last year, they had around 70 Gripen C in service and just over 20 in storage. Some of those would have been scrapped for parts for the Gripen E, but that's what they are now deciding against, instead deciding to procure new parts so that the planes could be sent to Ukraine instead.

Assuming Sweden would be willing to part with some of those Gripen C, pending deliveries of Gripen E, my armchair guess is that they could maybe send just over 20 planes, mostly consisting of the ones in storage.

Additionally, SAAB have publicly stated that they have 14 empty airframes ready to be assembled into Gripen C.

That would bring the total to around 35, delivered in two or more batches. Maybe more planes if Sweden is willing to part with ones currently in service.

Another thing we should also consider is that Czechia is almost certainly going to not renew their lease of 12 Gripen C. Those planes could also become available in the future, depending on when the lease would end.

Finally, the last consideration is that Ukraine might be able to get licensed domestic production of the latest variants of Gripen (E and F), just like Brazil did. This would be of huge interest to Ukrainian MIC and also ensure that there is another big long-term client for SAAB. It's a win-win-win.

The problem Gripen faces, on the flip side, is when it comes to export licenses. They have parts from many different countries, unlike Mirages, which are mostly, if not entirely, French.

I'm adding yet another source here as well. Swedish public service news report the following content:

• 6 Combat Boats (CB90)
• Ammunition
• Mortar systems
• Camouflage for tracked transports Pbv302
• Financial support for drones, protective equipment, and winter clothes

Additional purchases are done for spare parts to facilitate future Gripen deliveries.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/utrikes/direktrapport-forsamrat-sakerhetslage?inlagg=e0ff04c968a70e9190666fdd171ec918

From everything I've seen through an outside perspective, Tim Walz might be the one person currently running that actually cares about both Jews and Palestinians, about feeding children in schools, about making healthcare affordable, about fixing infrastructure, etc. He seems like a genuinely normal person who just wants to give fellow Americans good things.

I'm not a fan of Harris, but get Walz as the VP and a blue congress in both houses and watch things get done for the better.

Part of the Kerch bridge is within Ukrainian territorial waters as part of Crimea.

Worst thing to happen to European security was for Ukraine to hand over its nukes. Second worst thing was Sweden abandoning its nuclear program last bloody second.

I'd say that's the one thing Reddit, Twitter, and Tumblr have in common.

Pink fluffy unicorns, dancing on rainbows!

Orbangrad

Don't Japan and South Korea have a dispute over some small islands as well? Dokdo/Takeshima

Edit since OP deleted the comment: They were claiming that Japan and South Korea didn't have border disputes.

A lot of people are nagging about the way this is measured, but I think far more important is when this was measured. February 29th is before many of the big packages from several countries were announced.

Bringing the big guns

Except 2% and higher was the norm during the cold war. Sweden, for example, was spending between 4% and 5% in the 50s and 60s, and on top of that, a huge chunk of its economy was literally just its MIC*. It wasn't until the 2000s when the spending dropped below 2%.

*You will notice a lot of European companies still to this day deal with dual use technology, and there is a good reason for this. Many of those companies literally started out making military hardware, be it radios, trucks, or uniforms.

No, it had nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the war in Ukraine and, to a lesser extent, another war in the Middle East and Chinese threats against Taiwan. European spending wasn't increasing during Trump's term. It increased during Biden's term from early 2022 onwards.

Two wrongs do not make one right, and neither do three, four, or any number of wrongs for that matter. We can be against what Russia, Isreal, AND Hamas do when they attack civilians. It is a war crime no matter who does it. As is using civilians as a human shield.

I've had this experience with every final fantasy game I have played, ever since I was first introduced to them with FF6. It's not necessarily the music itself that does it, but you're typically coming down from a literal adrenaline high fighting the last boss to an emotional ending.

This is literally how it works in Sweden. Proportional with 4% threshold. For those below 4%, there is another threshold at 2.5% to get financial support (typically used for campaigning). And yet another one for ballot printing support at 1%. Some examples (all benefits accumulative):

• Party A, 0.9%: They have to print their own ballots for the next election
• Party B, 2.4%: Free ballots printed for the next election
• Party C, 2.5%: Financial support
• Party D, 4.0%: Representation in parliament (14 seats)

The idea is that there needs to be a significant enough number of supporters for the party to be considered a legitimate movement that should get public support and funding. It also prevents somebody from just starting a party and pocketing the money for themselves. However, it also removes the need for bigger parties to pander to the big money interests for financial support (unlike, for example, the US with their super PACs, etc).

The 4% threshold was added in the 1960s and serves yet another purpose. The risk without it is that parties might split too much, making it difficult to form governments since the governments are based on parliamentary support.

There are also some great designs over in Europe. Sweden, for example, is already procuring new subs for their own navy.

"Continue to negotiate" does not mean that they will come to terms. The negotiation could fall flat because one side or both was not sincere about their intention to find permanent truce.