cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/22332949
JD Vance said that ‘American power comes with certain strings attached’
You must log in or register to comment.
So… extortion then?
Yes, that’s the word.
Europe is about to experience what africa and south america have been experiencing for decades.
Buckle up.
The difference is that Europe should be more capable of resisting America. We’ll see if that actually happens but given how things have gone before when the EU went after American companies I don’t think they’ll budge easily.
Not when combined with “completely unrelated” tarrifs and psyops from china and russia.
10 years until europe falls.
Not being able to access American sites will allow local competitors to appear. Back in 2005-2010, before Facebook, there were many local social platforms and forums. For example, these are all from Romania.
He’s just being honest about US foreign policy for the last 80 years.
Not even in office yet, and already making threats.
I’d like to see Europe tell Vance to fuck off. I suspect that if Europe gives in now, the Trump administration will make this same threat every time Europe does something he doesn’t like.
Trump will be an unreliable NATO ally anyway, so it isn’t much of a risk on Europe’s part.
Don’t negotiate with terrorists
And this was from September so not even elected yet.
Tbh it kinda sounds like they just want to leave NATO regardless.
I get the same feeling, too. They’re just looking for an excuse to ditch Europe - perhaps as a sacrifice to Putin.
Ofc they won’t SAY that - they’ll talk about “what a fantastic savings it will be, to not spend that money”, and probably they’ll work up gently to the point of sending US citizens to become meat shields like the North Koreans and so many others lately. But at each stage, it will always be what “we” wanted to do - it’s “our” idea to do it, I tell you!?
I wouldn’t be surprised if he pulls the US out of NATO and the UN, since he hates both organizations.
I’d be amazed if he does any of it tbh. Last time he just spent most of it playing golf, and sticking his goofy-ass signature on anything they stick in front of him.
The last thing they want to do is actually deal with the boogeyman issues. If they did that they’ll have nothing to campaign on next time.
Most of this will be spent lining their own pockets.
This is such an optimistic take. I am very concerned they will spend the next 4 years making sure whatever election we have next is more similar to a Russian “election”.
Why wouldn’t they try? They’ve done everything they could so far and face no repercussions, why not go ahead and try to be king? A few people will fret and tut-tut but if nobody is going to do anything it doesn’t amount to much.
Well, Trump specifically may not try because the risk/reward isn’t really good for him.
As it stands, he gets to declare an unambiguous “victory” where he won at life. He got to be president with ultimately a clean sweep of the swing states and the popular vote and served as many terms as he is allowed to serve. Thanks to the rules, he doesn’t need to compete again, and he can stop even pretending to work after 4 years.
Meanwhile, a push to establish him as “dictator for life” might at best buy him another few years in office before his health will fail. Such an effort comes with high risk, of him going down in history as more of a “bad man”, of personal risk for being targeted by violence.
Now JD Vance might be game to make a go of it, he’s got decades left in the tank. Of course broadly speaking there’s a balance of power, with those currently in power relatively comfortable knowing that the vote serves as a nice way to get pushed out of office before people get pissed enough to put you in real physical danger. Plenty of opportunities to be self-serving with a pretty safe retirement should things start going awry. Fanaticism can drive people to go further, but I would like to think a pragmatic person with a sense of self-interest can see the value in a peaceful voting out versus having those same millions of people losing their political voice.
This shit is so naive.
The fact that he’ll spend all his time playing golf or whatever will leave ample room for all his appointees to actually govern. It’s not Trump we should be worried about.
This is so naive. They literally told us exactly what they will do, and it literally has “2025” in the title. We need to listen to them when they tell us what they are going to do.
Didn’t congress make it practically impossible to pull out of nato now?
Republicans will control Congress. I’m sure they’ll be fine rolling anything back.
Do you not understand what the word “dictator” means? He told us what he’s going to be. Congress is irrelevant, and if it continues to exist, it will be to rubber stamp, at best.
If I recall correctly countries can’t withdrawl from the UN without their approval
Problem is though that the un-united dystopia of america could cause issues in the UN
The US pulling out of the UN would allow them to pass all sorts of cool stuff, like recognizing and admitting Palestine and calling for a ceasefire, recognizing the universal rights of children, and condemning the far-right, all of which the US used its veto power to stop against overwhelming support on the other side.
It’s going to be a hell of a long 4 years, for America and the rest of the world. Damn.
They should do this with Sanctions.
EU countries could start by carryng their weight in NATO.
Ukraine war exposed EU as incoherent imbeciles unable to maintain a proper security posture, esp Germany and their Nazis nepo baby regime… Straight 🤡
Vance behavior is out of line but you need to check that bravado that is not support by anything.
Pay for your own defense and help Ukraine properly… This is your fucking war that was caused by German being a Putin’s bitch. Industrial economy relying on a geopolitical adversery for energy while 40k American protect it from Russia for free. Classic parasite behavior.
Mutti merkal so good 🤡
The EU has by now significantly outpaid the US, and out-supported the US in Ukraine. However, for historical reasons, it lacks certain items which Ukrainians badly need (tactical ballistic missiles and anti-missile defense, to bring good examples).
On the matter of aircraft, I should especially emphasize that EU countries have given fighter aircraft, but the US has not. The US is currently attempting to get through the bureaucracy of approving a Swedish AWACS aircraft (with some US components) going to Ukraine.
Educate thyself here, military people use this resource and approve of it:
Removed by mod
I know people in ukraine. They call it north korea.
Russian bootlicker spotted…
You offended a bunch of Germans here. Don’t forget the Americans are sitting in Germany mostly to bomb Syrian kids though, they’re not defending Europe from anything.
You offended a bunch of Germans here.
Maybe they will get in their dense authority bootlicking brains that their political leadership has fumble Germany’s geo politcal posture for benefit of oligarch’s who seed wealth came largely from slave labour during the third reich.
These oligarchs sold German geopoltics our for cheap Russian gas, they obstruct proper policy vis-a-vis Russia because they want a “rapprochement” jfc…
Nahh… instead they get butthurt… me country good 🤡
Pathetic.
In US at least critically thinking people US ourselves for what we are… A global empire with all the bullshit that it entails. Having to dance around German’s sensibilities online…
Get a fucking clue…
Oh dear, spilled koolaid all down your straight jacket
Holding Western stability hostage in the name of the oligarchs, good job voting everyone…
No no no, you see, we showed the democrats by not showing up to vote! /s
uuugh… I made myself sick quoting those jackass fucktards. (I did vote, and screamed until I was blue in the face to get people to vote. About every year.)
The sad part is that that also describes what the Democrats did to get us into this mess.
stfu, leftist extremists had one fucking chance to stop this from happening but they got fucking greedy.
now we all have to pat the price.
You have data to back that up I assume?
Biden had polling in his hands that said Trump would get 400 electoral votes against him on the day he decided to run for a second term. Then he held on just long enough to make certain we would have no primary and be stuck with a candidate who couldn’t shake the stink of his presidency.
Harris lost the popular vote by over 4-million votes. There aren’t that many “leftist extremists” in the whole damn country, and only a small subset of those wouldn’t have voted for Harris.
The vast bulk of those who stayed home were left leaning apolitical normies. Most of the country fits in that group.
A candidate who couldn’t make it to the first primary in her last campaign for this position too! I felt what I could only describe as “meta-unease” about her.
If I felt so unmotivated, how uninspired was everyone else?
Also I think the racial rhetoric from the Dems is turning some Black voters off.
Harris lost the popular vote by over 4-million votes. There aren’t that many “leftist extremists” in the whole damn country, and only a small subset of those wouldn’t have voted for Harris.
You have data to back that up I assume?
Literally did the thing you criticized them for.
Best I could do without a definition for the stupid use of “leftist extremists” with no definition. My point is, there is zero evidence to blame this election on leftists of any stripe.
But if it’s not the leftists fault…
You are delusional
Dunno if it was enough to change the results, but I agree 100%. As a progressive myself: fuck these people.
Removed by mod
childish understanding of geopoltics again
deleted by creator
Old article, btw. This is from Sept 2024. I get that’s what he promised, and while I think he’s a complete asshat, let’s not discount that he and Trump said and will say anything to appear smart, capable, and as if they have a plan.
Time will tell if this actually comes to pass, but I’m not actually going to hold my breath for this one.
Good note, I didn’t notice that in the original post. I edited the title
These autocrats have always wanted to drop NATO.
Let’s not pretend like X is their reason. Supporting autocracy is their reason, and now they’re trying to come up with excuses to get the public onboard.
Yes, but they need to repay the rat elon for all his support during the campaign. This might even be true
These autocrats have always wanted to drop NATO.
NATO is a terrorist organization led by USA. If any USA rulers want to disband it would be only to com up with a bigger and more evil organization.
So, NATO had a problematic operation, trying to establish (and coordinate the establishment of) guerilla stay-behind troops to use in the event of Soviet takeover - and the operation went especially problematic in Italy during the Years of Lead, where some of those guys associated with right-wing terrorists. The year was 1969 or so.
Basing on this, how do I conclude anything about the NATO of today?
Disclaimer: I was asked to hold an anti NATO speech during a protest event during a NATO summit. Being a moderately honest anarchist, I held a speech denouncing the practises seen in Afghanistan (the year was 2012), but emphasized that collective self defense is a valuable thing to have (a common attitude here in Eastern Europe), and added that if the alliance would bother doing what it says on the sticker, I would support it.
NATO is an alliance of various countries. Some of them aren’t nice or democratic (classic example: Turkey). Mixed bag, and constantly changing. Membership in NATO is not a letter of indulgence for a member state to do anything - allies are obliged to help only if someone attacks a member state. If a NATO member attacks someone else, allies can ignore the affair or even oppose the member (example: Turkey recently bombed Kurdish troops in Syria so sloppily that threatened US troops shot down a Turkish drone).
Removed by mod
“According to several Western European researchers, the operation involved the use of assassination, psychological warfare, and false flag operations to delegitimize left-wing parties in Western European countries, and even went so far as to support anti-communist militias and right-wing terrorism as they tortured communists and assassinated them, such as Eduardo Mondlane in 1969”
Based on this conclude what you want about the NATO of today.
Based on this, I conclude: the NATO of today is a mostly defensive alliance with some taints in its history.
It is currently very busy doing a real job - opposing a conquering dictator named Vladimir Putin.
I wish it luck, as long as it sticks to its declared purpose. If it oversteps, I will revise my opinion.
taints in its history
Ooh, let’s play “find the dark history”! What better way to distract from today’s issues and avoid talking about solutions for tomorrow’s problem!
This is me agreeing with you, to be clear. The description “taints in its history” is so ubiquitous as to be useless. Yes, acknowledging the errors of the past is important to learn from them and improve, but the focus needs to be on that learning and improving.
The NATO has potential to be a force of security. In a modern world, conflict between peers is more destructive than ever and the returns on aggressive action are more strongly affected by the strength of the defense, such a union of forces can discourage attack by making it too unprofitable.
Of course, that requires the union to actually stand united and the potential aggressor to be reasonable and motivated by the state’s prosperity. Neither of those seem entirely guaranteed right now…
Your opinions are certainly grounded in reality at least. It’s refreshing to read something sensible for a change.
Removed by mod
There are a lot of dudes working for the fucking Russians too.
Removed by mod
said a guy living under nato umbrella 🤡
How is that coffee in your posh good? living large?
It is currently very busy doing a real job
Yes i’m sure they are doing a very busy job like they were in their tainted history (false flag operations to delegitimize left-wing parties in Western European countries)
If it oversteps
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Response
“Several of the operations were along the coast in the borders between sea and land, and together with roads and populated areas. Surveillance, patrols, road control posts, vehicle inspection, control of air space, minesweeping, evacuation of civilians, and riot control were important part of the exercise.”
If you are sure about something, then bring evidence of considerable off-label activities.
In response to your response about “Nordic Response”:
Surveillance, patrols, road control posts, vehicle inspection, control of air space, minesweeping, evacuation of civilians, and riot control were important part of the exercise.”
Those are realistic military duties in war time. Every military practises them. Where do you find a fault?
An example from real life: the Ukrainian military has checkpoints on roads near the frontline. Moving with a vehicle, you’d expect to show papers, say a few words and maybe even show transported goods. The purpose? Finding reconnaisance / sabotage groups, which every competent enemy is expected to send. If an opponent doesn’t send recon or saboteurs, they are fools. If a military doesn’t learn how to deter those, they’re fools.
How does one learn? After dry reading in a classroom: one holds an excercise. There’s a home team and an opposing team. The home team checks, the opposing team infiltrates. Both teams report what they achieved, results get compared. If the blue team found the “saboteurs”, good. If the red team “blew up” all bridges and pipelines in the area, people think hard about what they did wrong. If they don’t practise, they don’t get to think hard.
Those are realistic military duties in war time. Every military practises them. Where do you find a fault?
Where do i find a fault in conducting vehicle inspections and riot control at peace time, from an organization with a shady past involving false flag operations, psychological warfare and assassinations aimed at delegitimize left-wing parties.
Dunno buddy let me keep thinking
An example from real life: the Ukrainian military has checkpoints on roads near the frontline. Moving with a vehicle, you’d expect to show papers, say a few words and maybe even show transported goods. The purpose? Finding reconnaisance / sabotage groups, which every competent enemy is expected to send. If an opponent doesn’t send recon or saboteurs, they are fools. If a military doesn’t learn how to deter those, they’re fools.
The ukrainian military also have checkpoints in the west border to make sure any male between 18 and 60 doesn’t leave the country so that they can be forced into war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobilization_in_Ukraine
How does one learn? After dry reading in a classroom: one holds an excercise. There’s a home team and an opposing team. The home team checks, the opposing team infiltrates. Both teams report what they achieved, results get compared. If the blue team found the “saboteurs”, good. If the red team “blew up” all bridges and pipelines in the area, people think hard about what they did wrong. If they don’t practise, they don’t get to think hard.
To me this sound like military rhetoric coming from a military man. You self defined yourself as being a moderately honest anarchist, i suggest you to keep doing your anarchist readings and re-read the works of Emma Goldman and Errico Malatesta.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-preparedness-the-road-to-universal-slaughter
As if the US and a whole lot other countries are not doing Psy-Ops and other behind the scenes actions. pulling strings on the world stage.
Yeah dude! Tell them! Also tell them what was the normal operations at the time! And what are Russia and China doing today!!!
You wanting the same thing JD Vance wants should trigger a warning in your brain before you say anything else.
I said that NATO is a terrorist organization not that i want something
I like how you say this and your instance is “sh. It just works”
what about it?
As a European, i say, “Please go ahead.” While I like the idea of Nato, I want my politicians to be forced to take action in creating an eu Military and not rely on Nato for defence.
Also out of curiosity, will you guys be deporting immigrants like Elon Musk? Who invalidated their visa.
Something tells me he’s not going anywhere.
We laugh at this, but I suspect someone on trumps team has seen this and thought " OMG it’s so easy!"
Well of course, we know that reading comprehension isnt strong in the MAGAhole sphere.
Y use word. Picture eazy, make sence.
Can Canada apply to join Europe?
Pretty please svp
I think we have one free chair left after UK, so…
imagine if trump seized everything he can from him and deported him for being immigrant
And then you get idiots that will tell someone that is not American : “uh why do you care so much about our election, it’s not your country”
Well yes your (vice) president is starting to extort the rest of the world before even starting his mandate…
An NATO without the US would be better for the whole world although I know that it’s not Vance intention
Very much this.
Just look at the TPP. The US tried to write the rules and the rest of the partners said, “No.” The US said, “Screw you guys, we’re going home!” and stormed off in a snit assuming the deal would fall apart without them but it didn’t and it ended up being better without the US imperialist bullshit. Then, US farmers realized that they were getting fucked because the US wasn’t part of the deal ([1], [2], [3]) and the US came back demanding to be let in and the US imperialist bullshit restored to the agreement. Once again the partnerd said, “No”.
Let’s let the US leave whatever they want to leave, renegotiate everything without them, then only let them return under the new terms. The world will be a much better place in the end.
EDIT: Trump ordered the US to withdraw from the TPP because the partners wouldn’t be bullied into accepting one-sided andi-competitive, anti-consumer protections for US industry and a dispute resolution process that favoured the US but that the US would ignore when it lost.
This is the absolute weirdest thing about Trump’s governance to me: how sometimes he ends up doing good things for terrible reasons, like when the US redeployed from Syria.
Also, we draw lines on maps and build borders but the environment doesnt care where pollution & emissions originate, everything spreads everywhere in the end.
And there are countries littered with US air bases. Like the one only a few miles from here that regularly houses bombers.
Not too long ago, this would be a career-ending display of corruption.
Yup.
In case anyone hasn’t noticed, the goalposts for norms have significantly shifted in the last decade. This is historically how it always begins.
Buckle up. Protect yourself.
Yes, and if called out, they say it happens for freedom of speech, which is absurd given that the richest man on earth provides the infrastructure and has a large presence on the platform himself.
Yes, and if called out, they say it happens for freedom of speech, which is absurd given that the richest man on earth provides the infrastructure, (soon) influences the legislative rules and has a large presence on the platform himself.
God I hate Earth.
Earth is lovely, it’s humanity I struggle with.
Humanity is lovely, it’s politicians I struggle with.
What a coincidence that Elon Musk paid 100+ million for their campaign
Cool, no more need for American military bases in our countries then. Or sharing intelligence with them. Or propping up their arms industry.
There’s still that little issue of building up your own. Most EU countries have been demilitarizing for 30 years more and more, with the strategy being “it’s a new world without wars, and also big daddy USA will protect us, and if not them, then Britain and France will”. Britain has done an exit, and France alone is kinda lazy.
Most EU countries have been demilitarizing for 30 years more and more, with the strategy being "it’s a new world without wars, and also big daddy USA will protect us,l
That’s not the Europe I see now and sounds like a US President trope. I would agree that post-Cold War that was the case, but I’d say in the last decade at least, it’s not.
But, genuine question as I’m open to being wrong, saved this is an area that interests me, do you have sources for this?
Yeah, the person above isn’t being accurate at all.
While here in the UK we rely heavily on the US for control of Trident, the US dropping NATO support would just require additional defence spending and closer alignment with Europe. If Trump is bought by Russia, Putin would see this as a Very Bad Thing, and would want to keep the US in the fold because even with the US NATO would likely steamroll Russia.
The Trump dynamic is somewhat problematic, should it fester elsewhere in Europe. Globalisation was an important trait to maintain for the US, whereas most populist movements move towards buying local or supporting national interests above all else. Europe is largely self-sufficient, even in defence, so Trump would probably cut off huge numbers of imports/exports just to prop up Elon’s shitty cars.
Putin has been working to dismantle NATO for a long time though. Whether he is right or wrong, he clearly feels that the US pulling out of NATO is in his interest.
the british military slashed budgets considerably after 2008. we’ve maintained special forces and we decomissioned our last carrier before its replacement was ready. we’re back up to 2 carriers now but dont have enough planes to put on them.
we have virtually no stockpiles of artillery and our land forces are small.
From an entirely selfish perspective, the UK has very few threats militarily, unless the French decide to invade again.
Empire is long dead and it is an island, this ain’t wrong… Remaining colonit don’t justify too much posture anyway.
Russia have demonstrated the ability to carry out chemical weapons attacks on mainland UK soil.
if a full on exchange we would be out of air defence ammunition very quickly.
The Skripal thing? No amount of tanks or missiles can stop espionage.
Nah. It’s a trope all right.
“For 20 years” is fine.
Britain has in no way done an exit. Going out of a trade and economic union has nothing to do with their military commitments.
To defense as part of NATO - yes.
People in Sardinia are going to be happy about this
That would work, if the EU hasn’t been sleeping on their defense, and relying on Daddy USA to protect Europe
This is why billionaires shouldn’t exist.
The other thing I need to mention is that is that Elon Musk is far from the only billionaire with a massively disproportionate influence on elections and society. Or even the biggest. He is just the biggest attention whore of them all.
Democracy voted for this, apparently
It’d be messed up for the government to do this even if he wasn’t a billionaire though. End corporations in bed with government.
The Republican vice presidential nominee and Ohio senator claimed in an interview with YouTuber Shawn Ryan that a top EU official had threatened to arrest the billionaire [Musk] if he allowed former President Trump back on X.
“So what America should be saying is, if NATO wants us to continue supporting them and NATO wants us to continue to be a good participant in this military alliance, why don’t you respect American values and respect free speech?” Vance asked. “It’s insane that we would support a military alliance if that military alliance isn’t going to be pro-free speech. […]
“I’m not going to go to some backwoods country and tell them how to live their lives,” Vance added. “But European countries should theoretically share American values, especially about some very basic things like free speech.”
The US ranked 26th in the world when it comes to free speech, with several members of the European Union higher up the list, according to the 2024 Global Expression Report.
If anyone is interested these countries are ahead of the USA from 1-25: Denmark Switzerland Sweden Belgium Estonia Norway Finland Ireland Germany Iceland Portugal Austria New Zealand Canada Argentina Spain Czech Republic Italy Latvia Costa Rica Uruguay France Dominican Republic Netherlands Vanuatu
Insult Musk on Twitter, wait until posts are censored, sue X for not having freedom of speech. How’s that for American values?
Freedom of speech only applies against the government. Private companies are free to throw you off their platforms for any reason or no reason at all.
Vance doesn’t know that
Well if he isn’t already, it’s only a matter of time before Musk is part of the government (ugh goddammit I want to vomit), and I would not put it past them to attempt to make X some kind of “official” government app. Tons of money for Musk, and the US government now controls the data of hundreds of millions of users, as well as complete control over what is and isn’t shown on the site.
See how easy it is to come up with this shit? Fascism is easy mode for amoral sociopaths.
Also threaten to pull broadcast licenses for any news agency that looks at you with squinting eyes. Yay freedom of speech.
So, the US wants to lose the only influence it actually has on Europe?
I say go for it.
40k Us troops to stationed in Germany alone to defend Europe from Russia who is slaughtering ukrianians… Instead of you know…
Sure US has no influence…
How do you think it costs US taxpyer?
Oh nooooooo! The poor tax payer helping secure the planet he lives on. How tragic!
Must be nice being a German when Americans pays for your shit.
Fucking parasites.
Yeah because a magic border makes it so that things don’t affect all of us. Isn’t that wonderful?
I legit don’t understand how anyone can think so small.
If a fire starts in a city where everyone has your attitude, how long before it all burns down?
Whether we like it or not, borders aren’t magical lines that protect us from the damage done behind one of those lines. Humanity is responsible for the wellbeing of humanity. No silly little line is going to change that.
Imagine the consequences we’d still be suffering (yes, we. All of us) if the US hadn’t joined in WWII.
I honestly don’t understand how anyone can think of their fellow humans as parasites. We’re all in this together. One big ego with enough support can destroy all of our lives and throw us back into the dark ages.
We have thousands of years of history to guide us. Look into it.
Sure, but it’s not the US’s job to protect the world. I’m a US citizen, and I’m not a fan of us spending ~5x vs Germany on defense, especially when Germany is such an economic powerhouse in the EU.
I would really like to cut defense spending, but for that to happen, other NATO countries need to increase their defense spending. I absolutely think we should stay in NATO (for the reasons you stated), but NATO is supposed to be an alliance, not a set of countries protected by the US. Yes, it’s in our interest to protect the EU, but it’s also in the EU’s interest to protect the US. We should have each other’s back.
No, they don’t. The US military spending far outpaces any other country. The US spends more than the next 10 countries combined! You don’t “need” that much spending, but your GDP is happy for that extra trillion every year that some day will trickle down for sure wink wink.
In summary, your rhetoric is pure propaganda of conservative talking points, unfortunately.
It’s really not.
While I agree we need to drastically reduce military spending, that decision has consequences. We’d need to shut down foreign bases, reduce naval presence around the globe, and increase our reliance on reserves instead of standing military. If we do that, that’ll embolden other countries (like China, Iran, and Russia) to fill that void unless other partners step up.
Military spending (and deficit spending in general) is a major issue I’m concerned about, and I’m unhappy with both major parties here. I like Trump’s pressure on the EU to step up their part, but I don’t like his increases to military spending. I like Biden’s and Harris focus on social programs instead of military spending, but I don’t like their lack of cuts. Neither party is actually interested in turning swords into plow shears, they just court the military industrial complex differently.
We need to increase taxes and cut spending, yet both parties seem to do the opposite.
Removed by mod
solid understanding how european security works right here ;)
The US WANTS to be in those bases because it gives them a lot of soft power in foreign relationships, and a base to project power in the part of the world.
If the US gives up NATO, you can also kiss goodbye to any sort of influence on the European countries decision making, as well as any resemblance of military logistic in that part of the world (as well as any sales of military equipment to European countries as it’s starting to happen, with many countries investing in their own military industrial complexes). This is why in the past 50 years, regardless of the party, every single US president supported NATO regardless of spendings. It took a moron to say they want out
The US WANTS to be in those bases because it gives them a lot of soft power in foreign relationships
I’d say that military bases within European countries is the definition of projecting hard power. If 40 000 soldiers in a military base are called ‘soft power’, what’s hard power then? Nuking the city?
40k really isn’t that many, especially when it comes to war. That said, those bases can likely handle a lot higher population, which would rapidly increase in wartime.
Removed by mod
After war in urkaine started why did germany authorize +7k surge?
Asking for a friend…
So much cope and denial in this thread haha
pathetic
Sure that’s not corrupt at all.
