The article is dated September 2026 and aligns with pamphlets being delivered here in Ireland too. It’s not preparation for war necessarily but for things like fuel shortages, weak supermarket supplies, etc.
The article is interesting because it’s common sense stuff but also the kinds of things that are easily forgotten.
It’s not specifically for war, but for any disruption the society might have. We’ve had winter storms which cut power for few days, wildfires or floods can leave you stranded for a while, a lot of snow might cut roads and so on. Being generally prepared to be self-sufficient for few days just makes sense. On a bigger scale it also helps rescue workers if everyone isn’t in immediate crisis after 24 hours without working infrastructure.
The pamphlet they’re showing isn’t even new, it was posted years ago.
This type of stuff scares the crap out of my wife. She listens to too many doomer podcasts then talks about how we should move somewhere safe only to name a country that is far more dangerous than France.
What countries has she suggested?
When we first started dating in 2014 she really wanted to go to El Salvador or Colombia or Venezuela. Things have changed quite a bit in 12 years, and I wouldn’t call them dangerous compared to France now.
An I misunderstanding what you’re writing? Those all sound more dangerous than France to me.
I work with a lot of internationals. I think those countries are more dangerous, but my colleagues and other contacts have told me that things have improved to the point that they are all similar. I haven’t ever looked into it. It could be a feelings thing: they live here and read the sensationalist headlines and assume France is more dangerous than their country of origin.
When the hell was El Salvador or Colombia ever safe?
The guideline here has always been to be self-sufficient for three days. I aim for seven.
Having a few water jugs has come handy when water pipes have burst. They usually fix it within 24 hours, and have water trucks out way before that. But it’s still nice to be able to boil your potatoes for dinner and have your morning coffee without any additional hassle.
I’ve got an alcohol camping stove and a couple of liters of fuel for it. It was cheap and doesn’t go bad.
Been in a number of natural disasters. Two weeks is a more realistic number than 3 or 7 days.
Threat of war. OK, let’s think this through. The three threats I could think of are
- Russia intensifies its attacks. Threat of conventional war low, threat of attacks to critical infrastructure high. Effects would be localized and short-term. I rate this highest, because it’s currently underway.
- Donnie Darko presses the big red button. If this happens, all bets are off and who knows how long the go bag lasts. I rate this low.
- European civil unrest. Enabled by Russian shaping of public opinion, see first point. Possible, but I have faith in the resilience of a continent where most people don’t want yet another world war. Low Risk.
It’s always better to be safe than sorry, but I wouldn’t overstate the risk of all out war or unrest.
Please don’t insult Donnie Darko (movie character).
It’s Donald “Tent Pegged” Rump or Drippy Diaper Don or whatever you can think of.
where in the world do three bullet points qualifiy as “thought through”?
In that part of the world where quantity is not quality. But if you do have your own thoughts, then feel free to share them. That’s what we’re here for.
A Russian attack is actually far more likely than you realise; There has been numerous signs of Russia prepareing for a direct attack on NATO. Now it won’t be an all out invasion the goal will be to keep things murky enough were it’s clearly an act of war but be easy enough to justify not getting involved. Their idea is that if once article 5 is invoked and enough big members refuse their obligations NATO will break and they can pick off members as they like.
Now the US under dumb donnie is very likely to ignore their legal obligations to their NATO allies and if the Russians have enough of their hooks into enough NATO members they might be able to engineer enough inaction to pull it off.
You have to understand that they genuinely believe they are fighting a proxy war against NATO in Ukraine and that in order to turn things around they have to beat NATO and that a lot of their internal propaganda is about how they could beat NATO in a fight (like claiming they could destroy England with a tsunami causing nuclear torpedo)
But European leaders know what game is being played here. Which is why the drone attacks haven’t resulted in article 5 being invoked. But if Russia overplays their hand they could end in a conventional war with all of Europe. And their cards are hitting the table soon.
Russia doesn’t have the means for conventional war against NATO. If they did, the war in Ukraine would look much different. The current asymmetric attacks will increase, I am sure. But nothing to warrant Article 5. That would play into Putins hands and the Europeans know that.
Possible, but I have faith in the resilience of a continent where most people don’t want yet another world war.
I’d say they care more that they don’t want to personally experience war again, they have no problem allowing a “world war” to happen if it’s mainly in the global south.
Are we? I’m only a sample of « the Europeans » but I absolutely don’t want any more war be it in the south or elsewhere. Who the fuck are you to say that we don’t have the minimum moral standard to wish peace unto others?
Because yall seem fine with putting Ukraine through the grinder, and your comfort is dependent on violence in the global south at this time (same situation as the US). I do hope you personally are not one of these people, but it certainly seems like a majority of you. The contastant rightward shift of electeds is a strong indicator.
I’m pretty sure that you style of ostracising is partially what is driving fellow persons to further polirize themselves.
I’m curious to know where you’re from to allow yourself to be such a judge….
the water wars will start soon
Greece-Turkey-Cyrpus-Israel
In Germany too, there is an advertisement campaign in my area.
It’s interesting it’s coming out a bit everywhere at once: are the people in charge assuming a conflict is imminent?
Russia is intensifying its attacks on Europe. Drones at airports and other infrastructure are becoming more and more common. If Ukraine continues to push at their current rate Putin may get desperate to save face and he may try to make it so it doesn’t look like he was defeated by Ukraine. He would provoke a NATO response so he could tell Russians that he was right and NATO was always against them.
Wonder if the humans living “paycheck to paycheck” will find a way to stop making bad decisions and save
All across Europe?
Let me spare you a click: Dutch households, December 2025.
Clickbait
and Sweden
And France. I don’t know why they’re lying like that.
They did their due diligence by clicking even deeper from this article, into this article linked from the post article:
European leaders prepare public for ‘intensified threat’ from Putin
https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-vladimir-putin-nato-drone-attacks-europe-leaders-warning/
