6:30 I'm not a specialist but I think that the allusion of France being the single one having nuclear weapons is due the fact that their nuclear arsenal is their own, it belongs to them while for the UK it is US owned nuclear arsenal so I guess UK can't use it as they wish or aren't fully sovereign on it.

Hi, just a little comment like this, France is the Only nuclear power of EU+UK, because the others members only have US made warhead that they can't use by themself but france make his own nuclear weapon and can use it like they want

not only is France much bigger than the UK, it's also the country with the largest Exclusive Economic zone in the entire world, with 4,514,000 mi². That's why it has to have a good navy, air force and ground force.

A part of the NATO agreement is actually each country meeting a threshold set forth by the alliance of how much of their GDP is to he spent on defense. U.S. foreign military bases aren't meant for large scale defense but for rapid response and support and to act as a deterrence. They bolster a countries own military not take the place of it.

I saw that many have told about UK nukes... but the problem is that UK nukes aren't as independent than french ones. The vector used to launch british nukes are .... americans. French nukes are using french vectors... that make a HUGE difference. Let say.... Hitler bis arrived in power in USA... and now a war between US and UK begins suddenly... UK resist well, USA exaspered by Brits launch 2 or 3 tactical nukes to break through british defenses... no possibility to answer back with nukes for UK. Sure it's a "what if..." ... but I would recall that everyones in 1991 were so sure that the russian bear was definitively sleeping a winter for eternity. When many (in which France) decided to abandon the conscription and to reduce their land army strength because of that, some voices began to say "what if Russians were dreaming awaken that the russian empire can live again, the nostalgy of its ancient greatness etc... most of deciders LAUGHED... we know the result nowadays... Putin is not Gorbatchov nor Eltsine, he is more like Staline and Hitler together. France hasn't this problem even in Theory or in case of USA... It is then understanding that France is the one Putin is attacking the most in words since Macron have told that all possibilities and solutions were on the table. France did have wished to play the diplomatic savor for both sides, letting the door open to Russia (when Macron said we shouldn't humiliate Russia) BUT now that is clear that Putin had fooled and Cheated France to put a stone in the western alliance, Macron said words Putin didn't expect. No one remarked that 500 billions of euros in 6 years for france, it means the equivalent of 6 trillions dollars for USA, it's a colossal effort, superior than any of the other Europeans. You need to combine UK and Germany to have the same investments and efforts in the period 2024-2030. It's important to help Romania, Finland, Poland, Bulgaria, Czech rep, Slovakia and Greece to receive the first "choc". They are the first line of defense of the western democracies. Eastern these democracies, you have the Russians and the Turkish (they're the black duck of Nato, I have absolutely not any confidence in Turkish, they have an integrist islamist dictaro, Erdogan is the little brother of Putin).

thank you for your recognition of what happened in Dunkirk, most people don't know that France had to defend the Netherlands, the UK, Luxembourg and Belgium along with itself in that time. Whilst all these countries gave up in some way or another, France kept fighting.

I am not going to bank on the legendary perfidy of the English for having truncated the original video explaining why France was better prepared. But still somewhere doubt haunts me.

hello, no French bashing? I am pleasantly surprised thank you gentlemen!

with uk, france, germany, italy and spain, greec and others in europe, i think we're safe ^^

Infographics Show is a terrible source to watch military content.

It's important to note that less than a quarter of Nato members actually honor the spending requirements for their own defense...Now you may get why so many are against the idea of Nato and at the very least want these countries to stop freeloading.

lmao the problem is the U.N. is the biggest established alliance on Earth and and they're combined forces are almost non existent. The problem isn't America is supposed to protect them. The problem is Europe has become entirely too complacent that no wars will break out and Britain's military is the best example. Current day the British military is almost in a worst case scenario. Horrendously outdated equipment and there's literally a shortage of soldiers right now

You don't "ramp down" as much as the UK does, however. You either use your military, or lose it. It's like any other muscle.

I hope we stop that mess with Russia and don't go to war

I was raised to believe that WW3 would be over in half an hour and everybody would lose. "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". --Albert Einstein

Just for intel, data network in the army is an old thing, the French army, With Atlas and Cobra we had a artillery and counter artillery and coordination system since the 90's.

UK nuclear strikeforce is in US hands since they need their green light for any nuclear strike. So they are in the same situation than EU countries that have US-controlled nuclear arsenal.

One thing info graphics show got wrong is Taiwan is not in control of the most microchip. Only the most advanced microchip companies like global foundry control most of the microchip but are not as advanced as TSMC

Pakistan also is a nuclear power and friendly with Russia not only Iran ,China or North Koreea

But the true question being, is the blue of the middle chair a hole or a part of the chair ?

we're brothers my beloved rostbeef

Maybe it depends on where in the country you live, but I don't hear a lot of complaints that the US is unfairly taking on the responsibility of Europe's security. If there's a complaint that's repeated often it's that the US spends too much money and time abroad, while our own education, infrastructure, and healthcare systems hover near collapse.

I dunno why people lump China together with Russia. Their livelihood is entirely dependent on their good relations with west. If anything happened they would either want to be outside of it or support west out of necessity

They forgot to count german, austrian and russian soldiers in the british number of soldiers.

US citizens never authorized or pushed for military bases all over the world. A Government and it's citizens are and have become separate in many cases.

I thought the blokes were looking stunned by the UK video yesterday,, so here's the proof! Haha! And then hearing that the French are more prepared, geez!! Brexit strikes again!

Tanks and armored vehicles come in AFTER the A-10s have removed all thermal signatures with AGM-65D's (IR mavericks) .

Finland is in NATO now

“France is the only nuclear power in the EU.” “What about us?” “We’re not in the EU.” “Oh yeah, oopsie.”

The production of "Chips" relies on a logistics chain that spans the globe, involving countries not necessarily friendly towards China and her ambitions. Disrupt access to a single raw ingredient or proprietary technology, and integrated circuit production in Asia is dead.

Reatcion a View to kill film 007 e canzone sia dei Duran Duran E poi di Grace Jones nel film May Day

Whether the US were part of NATO or not, they would spend the same amount of their GDP on defence. the whole "paying for other NATO countries" rhetoric is completely flawed, because they're not paying other NATO countries anything. If anything, NATO countries are the one paying the US for F-35s etc.

About the early conversation @3:15 the UN, which comprises most European nations, has a stated minimum gdp % towards defense that all countries involved in the UN organization are mandated to spend. I believe it’s 2% of that country’s gdp. While America has gone well above and beyond only a couple European nations have done so. President Trump back in 2018 stated that the other nations need(and still do) to pull their own weight otherwise those same nations are basically looking at the US and demanding it to look after them. Also from the social aspect a lot of Americans are sick of sending money, materials, and troops to certain areas of conflict only to have most European nations(mostly those who don’t pony up their minimum defense %) moan and complain about the US’s involvement. It’s those facts(the US being the primary contributor to the UN and NATO as well as the near constant bad mouthing of the US) that gets on Americans’ nerves. Most of us anyway. Edit: Just because America has a base somewhere does NOT automatically mean she needs to be involved. It’s entirely circumstance based. Example: if a genocide is being committed then yes absolutely we need to be involved in helping end it. However, if the local powers-that-be are fighting and clearly don’t need aid then no we do not need troops there. I’m sure there are tons of more reasons but to just relegate your position to: oh, they have a base there so the US needs to ramp things up is just nonsensical.

I can tell he's biased. He repeats that lie about Trump. While not saying he wanted a base in Poland!

The readiness "problem" is BS we have an army ready at any time , look at the video of what france did in Mali, we have a really fast acting military, much faster than the US

There are jokes about the French surrendering with that title.

What makes people think that taiwan's chip factories wouldn't be destroyed by the allies if China sets foot on Taiwan. I don't know why this channel ignores that it's so obvious.

Without the US's logistics, no European nation would be able to fight a real war. Even in the Falkands War Britian needed the US help logistically. Most of Europe has built their militaries to work as another arm to the US military. I will never have an issue with military spending as long as it's not items such as golden toilet seats. Yes i will acknowledge that there are things we could fix to make having the same military force we currently have but at a lower price. I dont believe that the world will ever know true peace. It would be nice if all our allies split the "policing" equally, sometimes it's easier to unite people under one larger umbrella vs getting a bunch of smaller umbrellas to move together. The US's "policing" of the world is so far from perfect that it's laughable, but it has been better than nothing. Also gives me some sense of security knowing it's the US's umbrella.

God, we're so fucking based it's not even funny anymore.

Just remember that France has seemed powerful before and then it didn't happen that way. It's not about dog in the fight, it's about the fight in the dog.

I don't know how old these videos are but I've been hearing that Poland has the strongest military in Europe

great so that's were our money is going.... instead of public transportion, or more money for hospitals. cool 👍

Hopefully the u.s in 2024/2025 will leave nato when we get a good president in office

Videos that count and compare the number of planes, tanks, ships, etc., are disingenuous. Example, when stating how many fighters France Vs UK has, quality isn't mentioned. The UK has more than 30 F35s. These planes would completely outmatch any thing the French currently have. BTY, I am not from the UK. I am going to agree to disagree. There is a reason EVERYONE is buying the F35 and not the Rafale.

Surrender

France’s ww3 plan: spend money on building up its military….then surrender on day 1 🏳️😂