What is the relation to the thread? But yes beside, that most parts of the economy would collapse probably Switzerland would not be affected until a country directly attacks us.
But I assume maby Switzerland would then change laws to allow to send weapons to countries in war.
Neutral countries that can sell arms and other necessities do quite well in war.
At a time when the EU's so called ally is openly plotting to steal territory from an EU nation it would probably be good to have leaders who don't end up volunteering their citizens to fight in a two front war with two different nuclear powers
Europe is also a nuclear power. That is an irrelevant point.
Yes, Russia and the USA each have ~6x the deployed warheads that France has and a much larger land area to attack.
There isn't much point in trying to conquer Europe and blowing the entire continent to smithereens and covering it in toxic dust, first. Russia and the USA are greedy, not insane.
We have no idea if the Russian warheads are deployable, or how many are. The Russians also don't know; they can only play roulette with them. They simply don't have the financial resources to maintain such a large arsenal.
It's mostly the US with the massive, assured capability, at this point.
The geographical size of the countries is not essential, as you would aim at the cities. Europe's population is very spread out, whilst the others cluster tightly along the edges.
Russia is actually the easiest to take out: just point everything at Moscow.
I'm talking about them glassing France specifically. The EU is not in charge of their nukes. That's France's decision. France's nuclear stockpile is almost entirely deployed. Russia and the US have much more in addition (though in Russia's case a lot of the non deployed is in a questionable state.
Nuclear bombs aren't like nuclear waste. About 60k people moved to Hiroshima between the atomic bomb being dropped and Feb 1946.
I don't believe Russia wants to invade western Europe so they wouldn't be as concerned about human/ rebuilding costs like they are in Ukraine.
> Just point everything at Moscow
Then why hasn't this been done yet?
Because you can only do it once.
The idea that everyone is just itching to drop nukes is propaganda for the cowardly, but you can only die one time and it doesn't matter how you died once you're dead, so get over it, already.
So it would be good to be governed by people who aren't champing at the bit for war then (as I suggested many posts ago)?
That would be the EU.
It's the USA and Russia that need perpetual war, just to not have their economies collapse. Not us.
Given the way the EU is desperate to get involved with the never ending war in Ukraine, one suspects that their system is close to collapse if they don't waste another generation of young people on the battle field. Automation and robotics are going to take a lot of entry level jobs over the next decade and Governments are always worried about what will large quantities of idle people do if the Government can't keep them occupied...
