EU nuclear bomb

Featured photo: Wet dreams | © Sammy-Sander from Pixabay

Currently the last shit among politicians with less education! In addition to the USA, we currently have the United Kingdom, France and Israel, which have their own nuclear warheads. Among other things, Germany also “has” nuclear warheads through nuclear sharing.

However, we have to assume that both the United Kingdom and Israel now rely on US warheads (development and production), which actually makes a lot of sense!

We must also assume that the French warheads have long since become obsolete and are more than urgently in need of modernization. According to serious sources, the French government estimated a good 20 billion euros in an initial tranche years ago and we can assume that the modernization (i.e. replacement) of the existing warheads alone would cost a good 100 billion euros. Among other things That's why the French have been looking for a partner who wants to embark on this adventure for years. I'm deliberately talking about an adventure here, as the British have now taken a different path and are sharing in the costs of the Americans.

Years ago, the Americans also expected a good $100 billion for the upcoming modernization of their warheads. We know from the French defense budget that the “stockpiling” of warheads alone costs an additional 3 billion euros annually.

And so we do the math for an EU nuclear bomb, which would have to be even more numerous than the French one. Calculating conservatively, we have to assume that annual maintenance alone will cost 5 billion euros, but probably, because many chefs will have a say, annual costs will be 10 billion euros! In addition, there would be the development and production of the first atomic bomb, which we should target with 200 billion euros. After that, the 100 billion euros already mentioned would be due again at least every 20 to 30 years.

Then we would actually have our own nuclear warheads.

What the politicians in question are not telling us is that we also need the uranium deposits, which we would have to secure, and the corresponding infrastructure for the development, construction and testing of the warheads, including new nuclear power plants, production and disposal operations.

Whatever the politicians in question are not telling us, we also need the weapons carriers and the infrastructure required for them, which, conservatively calculated, would cost us several hundred billion euros, which would also cost us more than just a one-time cost.

What the politicians in question are also not telling us is that we also need space-based reconnaissance and command resources, without which nuclear deterrence cannot work - let us assume that our politicians will not detonate any dirty bombs on site in Europe either. to turn the world into Armageddon.

That's why the British took the only sensible path of ever closer cooperation with the USA and sharing costs!

Our politicians will certainly go their own way.