[trgn]

Europe is going to come out strong out of this whole mess.

The political unity so quickly after the start of the war was unexpected (and admirable).

Ten years from now, Europeans will drive electric (if they'll drive at all), solar panels will be everywhere, and the continued flex-work-from-home revolution will have created an enormous amount of extra time for everybody. They'll be comfy in their sustainable homes and healthy cities, those few years of inflation a memory only.

It's a tough transition, that eventually every country needs to make, but Europe will be ahead of the rest of the world by miles.

And in the US, 10 years from now, the next gas price spike will again have people start to whine (yet again), we'll still be coughing on fumes when dropping our kids of at their school, the energy grid will continue to be unreliable in face of every minor or major natural disaster, and we'll wonder why nothing really materially has changed (and then blame the government).

[TacticalCoder]

> Ten years from now, Europeans will drive electric (if they'll drive at all)

Most cars sold in Europe aren't electric: only 13%. Average car life in Europe is 11 years or something like that. So, no, ten years from now Europeans won't be all driving electric, far from it. Also something like 2/3rd of all europeans live in suburbs or rural: so, yes, they'll still be driving (or using horses). People enjoying the public transports in cities are a minority.

[sofixa]

> Also something like 2/3rd of all europeans live in suburbs or rural

European Suburb != American suburb. I live in the suburbs of Paris, and i have two regular train lines (as in 15 minutes cadence in off peak times) within walking distance. The vast majority of commuters in and around Paris use public transit, even when they live in small towns of a few hundred/thousand inhabitants (because even those tend to have train stations). Car trips still exist, but there are massive new projects to improve public transit even more (multiple hundreds of km of new metro lines in the suburbs, multiple new tram lines in the suburbs, etc.).

[grnmamba]

Given the current uncertainty that people will be able to heat their homes in the winter, the threat of widespread power outages, and the rising cost of living across the board: No, it won't come out stronger. Once the first blackout hits, support for economic sanctions against Russia will evaporate, and people will demand a return to their previous living standards. The idea of a green fantasyland without cars is fiction.

[sofixa]

The Russophobe Eastern Europeans will absolutely stand by the sanctions. Everything is Russia's fault, they should be made to pay instead of us buckling under their blackmail. Pro-Russian elements in those countries will be loud but are IMHO unlikely to win except maybe in Bulgaria and Hungary (where they are already in power).

Western Europe, we'll see. Germany seems the most likely to crack with their appeasement bullshit and shameless ex-politicians. Fingers crossed they don't.

[timeon]

> The political unity so quickly after the start of the war was unexpected (and admirable).

It was there for few weeks. But soon everyone was blaming others for the situation and not doing enough.

[tomjen3]

The price to drive an electric car has spiked recently.

We are in this shit because of Putins war (75% of the blame), Europes general hatred of having a military (15%, say), and finaly Biden not being willing to use military force directly to stop Russia.

We can't do anything about the first, it will take decades to solve the second, but if Biden was willing to take of the gloves, Donbas and Crimera + a good chunk of Southern Russia could be in Ukranian hands come spring.

Then we could open up for their gas fields and end the problem.

Russia will try to push the narrative that this will mean a direct confrontation between them and NATO, but having seen how they do in Ukraine, this hardly matters.

Yes Russia have nukes, and some of their rockets no doubt work, but this scenarios does not trigger their criteria for use of nukes.

[olegious]

While Russia is for sure to blame for taking the final action by launching the war, let's not pretend the US hasn't been meddling in Ukraine for years across multiple administrations. I'd argue that in fact we can do something about "the first." Ukraine is a proxy war between Russia and the US, one that has been brewing since at least 2008.

Only a fool believes a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO/US is a good outcome or would improve the situation. Also let's not fall into the trap of believing propaganda about military performance from either side, it will take years for an honest assessment to come out.

[frumper]

It doesn't sound right to suggest there are criteria for using nukes. The only thing that needs to happen is someone with them decides to use them and does.

[tomjen3]

>Dmitry Medvedev, a former Russian president, who now serves as deputy chairman of the country's security council, outlined four ways that Russia could be "entitled to" use its nuclear arsenal—even against a nation that is only using conventional weapons.

>Number one is the situation, when Russia is struck by a nuclear missile. The second case is any use of other nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies," Medvedev said Saturday, according to The Guardian. "The third is an attack on a critical infrastructure that will have paralyzed our nuclear deterrent forces. And the fourth case is when an act of aggression is committed against Russia and its allies, which jeopardized the existence of the country itself, even without the use of nuclear weapons, that is, with the use of conventional weapons."

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-lists-justifications-use-nuc...

[frumper]

I don't doubt they have outlined when they will use them, I doubt that I trust humans to always follow a plan. Humans sometimes behave unpredictably, or even irrationally.