For examply by increased range: Weapons that shoot down rockets/drones before they hit can protect a city or region.

a war is always more expensive

Call the Kremlin/White House/Zhongnanhai, I think you’re onto something there.

“Diplomatic Solution” is only viable if rulers care about pre-war military economics. Authoritarians don’t always do that.

“Conventional” weapons make a defensive war less deadly to civilians and more expensive for the other side.

MAD only works if all sides have nuclear anxiety and the existence of nuclear weapons doesn’t rule ballistic weapons out of existence, especially for countries without nuclear weapons (see Ukraine). I’m not advocating for nuclear proliferation here.

The equilibrium of MAD (as in “The only way to win is not to play”) might be relevant for countries with nuclear weapons (i.e. Russia, USA, China), but telling the Ukraine defense that “The only way to win is not to play” is insulting and privileged.

Germany does not intend to test how far Russia is going with ballistic weapons and cannot rely solely on the power of MAD’s equilibrium from France, NATO or USA.

The country I live in tries to be prepared for war and so do many countries in Europe.

I and my in-group have a lot to lose when countries like Russia, USA or China expand their influence onto Europe, by indirect, hybrid or direct intervention.

European society is already split enough, it doesn’t need further authority (from outside).

You are just naive in thinking that querfronts can prevent a war.

I never said that I think weapons prevent wars.

Wars with erratic actors like Putin cannot be prevented, because certainty of peace is built on trust, but Putin cannot be trusted.

deleted by creator

I see your attempt of derailing, but I’ll play the game.

How does appeasement prevent a war? It didn’t work for the First or Second World War.

Just because you might call yourself militant doesnt mean that you need to querfront with all militants. Militancy is simply a tool.

I’m not sure how long he long he can keep on doing that though. History is full of rulers who smart at first, but burnt out over the time, AFAIK. It doesn’t seem sustainable psychologically.

Software would be more useful if every end-user program has both GUI and minimal CLI modules, as in Dolphin vs cp, mv etc.

Why?

GUI: Year of the Linux smartphone

CLI: Automation, scripting.

German politicians meanwhile: Let’s scrap plans to build less gas heating.

Maybe those who still build, sell and buy gas heating in Germany should use the Z already.

Until we have more information from/about them, I’d say this is baseless speculation.

as in?

Remember the egg door-to-door begging?

Too expensive for the little benefit. Turkey for example has none, but one of the bigger armies in the Mediterranean and can still project power.

I’d also recommend to talk to Poland and France about this first, if only for historic reasons.

No. It is a warning that the US regime isn’t under diplomatic influence towards rule of law in reasonable amount of time for individuals. It’s not a cop out, because rule of law in the USA is obviously not enforceable from the UK.