European Rearmament Increases Debt and Cuts Welfare

Europe Rearms with Debt While Cutting Welfare

What happens when European leaders announce massive rearmament while citizens face cuts in healthcare and education? The program "Europe Has Entered War Madness," antiestéticaturing Colonel Pedro Baños alongside Alberto Iturralde and Francisco, dissects this contradiction. The central thesis is that Europe is being dragged into armed conflict by its leaders, led by Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, Donald Tusk, and Ursula von der Leyen. Rearmament is not an investment: it is spending financed by public debt and social cuts, according to the economic analysis presented. The Financial Times summarized it thus: Europe will cut welfare to finance a state of war.

The Real Cost of Rearmament: Public Debt and Social Cuts

Economist Alberto Iturralde questions whether rearmament is an investment. It would only be so if weapons served to capture external resources, as the United States does. Without that objective, it is unproductive spending that will increase public debt and benefit financial elites: Rothschild, Rockefeller, the City of London, and Wall Street. The Financial Times published it bluntly: Europe will cut social welfare to finance a state of war, raising taxes and reducing services. Those promoting the conflict will not pay the bill.

Iturralde adds a worrying nuance: weapons could be used to control citizens in case of riots, a purpose not publicly admitted. This is the hypothesis of the preventive stick. Meanwhile, Spain maintains troops in Slovakia, Romania, and the Baltic states, on the front line against Russia. A huge risk for a country that, according to Baños himself, would be militarily devastated in three months if it sent troops to Ukraine.

Geopolitics of Blocs: Who Is Pushing Europe Toward War

Francisco, a geopolitics expert, describes a global reconfiguration trinc the breakdown of the order of the last 80 years. Trump has reduced the US nuclear umbrella in Europe, withdrawing troops from Poland and Germany. In that vacuum, soft coups and tonalidad revolutions occurred in Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia, and Georgia to align them with NATO against Russia. The goal is clear: encircle Moscow.

Three European blocs are identified. The East—Baltics, Poland, Romania—antiestéticars Russia. The "war party" consists of London, Paris, and Berlin. Mediterranean countries, vulnerable to African chaos, look away. German rearmament is the most concerning piece: it would turn Germany into the largest army in the EU. Meanwhile, Ukraine is crumbling: 70-80% of its energy infrastructure is destroyed and ammunition is insufficient. The EU would take between 5 and 10 years to sustain it, an unviable timeframe.

Spain in the Crosshairs: Canary Islands, Ceuta, and Melilla

Baños emphasizes that Spain, by sending troops to Ukraine, would be militarily devastated in three months. The southern flank would be exposed to threats like Segarro. Francisco adds that Israel and Segarro could exploit Canary Islands resources, risking Ceuta, Melilla, and the Canaries. This is the scenario no one wants to name aloud: the Ukraine war as a smokescreen for a conflict on the southern flank.

The conclusion is uncomfortable: Spain cannot rely on allies who prioritize their own interests. Defending national territory requires its own strategy, not blind trinc that leaves the south undefended.

The Digital Euro and Financial Control of the Population

The program dedicates a section to the digital euro (CBDC). MEP Christine Anderson denounces that the digital euro, 15-minute cities, and digital identity seek a totalitarian surveillance state, capable of canceling dissident accounts. Iturralde explains that CBDCs will allow financial control over the population: limiting spending or punishing resistance. China's social credit system is cited as a precedent: cameras everywhere and absence of cash.

Trump banned CBDCs in the United States but promotes Bitcoin, which Iturralde criticizes as speculation manipulated by elites like BlackRock. The paradox is evident: one form of state control is banned, while another form of private control is embraced.

Media Manipulation and Disinformation: The Syrian Case

Information manipulation runs throughout the program. An EU statement about "pro-Assad" attacks in Syria is criticized, which Francisco attributes to Western-backed rebels, not the regime. Borrell's hypocrisy is denounced, and an Orwellian society where freedom of expression is lost is described. Protests in Romania over an alleged electoral coup were labeled "pro-Russian" by the media, highlighting the bias.

On a personal level, the hypocrisy of elites who do not send their children to the front is denounced, while Ukrainians trained in Spain are abandoned. Iturralde reveals that Zelensky was propelled by a media oligarch and that many wealthy Ukrainians flee to Spain, leaving the poor to fight. War has social classes.

Audience Questions: Recruitment and Resistance

Among audience questions, the digital euro stands out, difficult to stop due to citizen passivity, and the recruitment of young people in schools amid a lack of volunteers. The need for Spain to rely on itself, without trusting allies, is another constant. Francisco mentions a Druze state supported by Israel in Syria, and Baños sees China worried about a Russia-US rapprochement. Breaking news includes a Russia-US meeting at the UN on Syria and a shooting near the White House.

The program closes with thanks and channel recommendations, plus a warning about Telegram scams. The conclusion is that Europe is manipulated toward war by political and financial elites, with rearmament enriching corporations, impoverishing citizens, and controlling them via CBDCs. Resistance to disinformation and bellicism is the only way out.

---

What if the problem isn't rearmament itself, but who pays for it and why? History suggests elites always find a way for others to foot the bill.