[lysace]

> With European military renaissance and the SAAB gear proving itself in Ukraine

Btw, we just got this news report here in Sweden:

Sweden is giving Gripen jets to Ukraine

https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/vr3znL/uppgift-sverige-...

Aftonbladet is Sweden's largest daily newspaper. They have a fairly strong track record on government and defense scoops.

The supposed announcement is tomorrow morning, local/CEST.

[bluegatty]

They are not likely 'giving' , Sweden just got $90B in locked up Russian money and those 'freebies' are going to come along with a major purchase order.

[lysace]

Unfortunately the EU still hasn't gotten the balls to confiscate that frozen oligarchy money, so no. Just wait, though. Soon you will cry. ;)

[bluegatty]

That's right, but Ukraine got $90B from Europe knowing most of it would come back for equipment purchases. Also - I think that EU is going to try to figure out a way to get that Russian money.

If they can't, then the EU should not exist - literally. It's decisive evidence that the bureaucracy can't even face an existential threat on it's own existence because it can't organize it's own legal concerns.

"We remained lawfully committed to juducial integrity and processes ... as we were exterminated!"

This situation is similar to 'many other things' (capital markets, tech investment, border/migration concerns etc.)

[jpleyden98]

> That's right, but Ukraine got $90B from Europe knowing most of it would come back for equipment purchases.

Thats standard for military aid to other countries. Almost all US military aid to Ukraine was spent in the US for equipment purchases. The benefit for Ukraine is getting the weapons to use in the war, although it's worth noting a decent portion of the military aid will be spent by ukraine on domestic manufacturers.

Also €30 billion is financial and humanitarian aid, almost all of which will be spent in ukraine proper.

> Also - I think that EU is going to try to figure out a way to get that Russian money.

It's already sending the interest on the money to Ukraine, that alone is worth billions a year.

Simply seizing the rest is more complicated and additionally probably not preferable. Keeping the rest immobilised gives europe and Ukraine a substantial bargaining chip in negotiations with Russia when the war eventually ends. Either Russia agrees to concessions to get the money back or it doesn't and it agrees the money can be sent to rebuild Ukraine.

[bluegatty]

It's much more preferable to take the money - and it would have been even much more preferable if Putin knew that from the get go.

In fact - if Ukraine were to have had that $90B 2 years ago, it may have accelerated the situation (though not guaranteed).

This is not 'EU strategy' it's EU crawling out from it's own disorganization.

This is Putin's only great advantage - to take advantage of complacency, bureaucracy, and inability for European nations to react with coherence.

If the EU was organized, Putin wouldn't have been able to make a move, not even in 2014.

The same thing in tech: no cloud, no mobile - and now no AI. These things have real ramifications.

For example, Ukraine's' decisive advantage right now is Starlink - as much as I don't like Musk, and that he has been allowing Russia to use it for years (turning a blind eye, though that is stopped now) - it's now being used by Ukraine to assault 100Km in the rear and could 'turn the tide' of the conflict.

Europe has no 'Starlink' because it's disorganized and complacent - and the Starlink competitor is years away, will be minimal, may never happen.

So even as the technology proves to be 'plainly decisive', the reaction is not strategic or organized.

[fragmede]

Russia and Iran figured out how to jam Starlink.

[mmooss]

> "We remained lawfully committed to juducial integrity and processes ... as we were exterminated!"

The rule of law, including judicial integrity, is their great strength. Corrupt dictatorships never are as wealthy and as powerful. Russia has always been far behind, and is falling further.

[lmm]

> If they can't, then the EU should not exist - literally. It's decisive evidence that the bureaucracy can't even face an existential threat on it's own existence because it can't organize it's own legal concerns.

> "We remained lawfully committed to juducial integrity and processes ... as we were exterminated!"

If you're happy being governed without process or accountability, why not just surrender to Russia? If the EU can't maintain its principles when things get tough then what's the point in having it at all?

[MaxPock]

If Russia is an existential threat to EU, wouldn't it make sense to confiscate that money and declare war on Moscow ? Either that or Russia is not a threat.

[ImPostingOnHN]

> If Russia is an existential threat to EU, wouldn't it make sense to ... declare war on Moscow

No, I don't think that would make sense.

[gostsamo]

confiscating money is much bigger deal than you can imagine. Russia and the EU are not officially at war and just taking money because you can is a serious violation of fundamental rights.

[kakacik]

Yeah rules apply only on one side it seems, russia confiscated western planes, factories etc. worth tens of billions. I'd say eye for an eye is the only strategy mafia state like russia understands. That and rule of stronger, bigger dog fucks weaker, as russia tends to frequently do.

[gostsamo]

yes. that's why people don't trust russian banks and institutions, but trust european ones.

[dlahoda]

Afaik principal was not confiscated.

What is violation of what rights?

[gostsamo]

the gp asked for confiscation and property rights are pretty fundamental. especially if you are acting as a trustee not only for russian money but for many others who are watching how you are doing your job.