Also LOL @ the US being the destabilizing force with Russia.
That is not really true. Some european countries have nuclear forces. France and the UK.
There are also countries who host American nuclear weapons, but they can't arm them without the authorisation of the US Department of Defense. (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Turkey)
Europe as an entity does not have its own nuclear force. (It is hard to even know what that would mean.)
https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj...
A similar dilemma: will the US risk New York to save Paris?
France did not believe that the US would risk New York to save Paris.
So France developed it's own nuclear deterrent.
I leave the rest as an exercise to the reader.
Wtf
Post-95 french doctrine refuse the use of nuke as a tactical weapon, so i guess supply lines or military airports would be the targets of subsequent nukes, but we have generals who grew with the idea of using tactical nukes, and i'm pretty sure the possibility is still studied at St-Cyr.
French will say "we won't bomb Russia, but do you think we can bomb your territory, close to the border, on this train station/close to this airport?" It will probably be refused, until its _really_ needed.
Russia (and US) doctrine of only using nuke if their territory is nuked does not work in an offensive war.
Unless you believe France and the UK would leave the rest of Europe hanging to dry in case of a nuclear exchange, if you think so I'd first question why.
Imagine Russia invades Poland. Will the UK Nuke Moscow? Probably not - because Russia would surely retaliate, on the UK!
Imagine Russia nukes Paris. Does the UK Nuke Moscow? Probably not! For the same reason.
As always, yes minister got it all right: https://youtu.be/3OpsP-gz_00?si=_uKmwkZUbE_fTNCM
But yeah, Poland/East Germany is probably too far away and there will be debates about nuclear sharing.
So the gas money definitely did not go to the army. Now, after the sanctions, on the other hand Russia keeps producing missiles and other things and trades with China.
By the way, Saudi Arabia does have a history of invading Yemen. Not an EU country, but a "military operation".
You are basically saying that despite pre-2022 Russian/European gas trade revenue initial Russian military performance was poor, but since Russian combat readiness improves now (with sanctions in place), the EU might as well have continued trading? Because that is just faulty reasoning; You would need actual data here to draw any conclusions about sanction effectiveness.