EU signs defence pact

Catfish · 11-16-17, 10:37 AM

^ i think that Trump's desire was to let the EU's members invest more money in the NATO, not to let the EU create its own army.

Which certainly ignores the point that the US invests in European security and NATO, for their own strategic reasons – not altruism.

Skybird · 11-16-17, 12:02 PM

Trump did not think. He just saw: "US cuts investment in Europe - less moneyspent oj others - my voters at home happy." There was no strategic reasoning from his side, regarding NATO. Its all about keeping is fanboys pleased.

The strategy of the US in Europe in past decades was multi-layerd. Keeping the Russians out, was dominant intention, but also: complain about Ezuropeans beaing so low on defense spendings - while enjoyng this weakness as an excuse to remain in ciontorl of NATO and heaivly committed i coutnries that not alwys were so welcoming at all. Much of thos ecomplaints during the cold war, was theatre play. In reality one liked the Europeans beogn so weak - you must not share control of NATO, and they cnanot afford to throw you out.

I assume however for a wider part of the US public, it was more on the surface a perception: Europeans weak, and we muts pay for them. The rest of the above description, got cut.

Its true, Europeans do too little. Too much hot air, too much pathic words and oaths about Nibelungentreue. Fact is the nATO treaty does not mandatorily demand any nation to come to thr rescue of any other, it leaves a very wide escape hatch open. One of which I am convinced some states would have made use of, if the cold war would have turned hot.

Thats why I want the Europeans to strengthen their defemse and inside NAOT, so to meet the Americnas finally on sam eey elevel, so that they can demand a more mutual sharing of command authorities at top levels, and have more influence on decision building. Right now, America has little reason to take the Europeans serious - why should it? Europe cannot even take care of rumbles in its own backyard like former Yugoslavia. How much less if the Sowjets would have attacked back then!

11-16-17, 10:37 AM	#1
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,767 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ i think that Trump's desire was to let the EU's members invest more money in the NATO, not to let the EU create its own army. Which certainly ignores the point that the US invests in European security and NATO, for their own strategic reasons – not altruism. __________________ >^..^<)))>{ All generalizations are wrong. Last edited by Catfish; 11-16-17 at 11:04 AM.*

11-16-17, 12:02 PM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,645 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Trump did not think. He just saw: "US cuts investment in Europe - less moneyspent oj others - my voters at home happy." There was no strategic reasoning from his side, regarding NATO. Its all about keeping is fanboys pleased. The strategy of the US in Europe in past decades was multi-layerd. Keeping the Russians out, was dominant intention, but also: complain about Ezuropeans beaing so low on defense spendings - while enjoyng this weakness as an excuse to remain in ciontorl of NATO and heaivly committed i coutnries that not alwys were so welcoming at all. Much of thos ecomplaints during the cold war, was theatre play. In reality one liked the Europeans beogn so weak - you must not share control of NATO, and they cnanot afford to throw you out. I assume however for a wider part of the US public, it was more on the surface a perception: Europeans weak, and we muts pay for them. The rest of the above description, got cut. Its true, Europeans do too little. Too much hot air, too much pathic words and oaths about Nibelungentreue. Fact is the nATO treaty does not mandatorily demand any nation to come to thr rescue of any other, it leaves a very wide escape hatch open. One of which I am convinced some states would have made use of, if the cold war would have turned hot. Thats why I want the Europeans to strengthen their defemse and inside NAOT, so to meet the Americnas finally on sam eey elevel, so that they can demand a more mutual sharing of command authorities at top levels, and have more influence on decision building. Right now, America has little reason to take the Europeans serious - why should it? Europe cannot even take care of rumbles in its own backyard like former Yugoslavia. How much less if the Sowjets would have attacked back then! __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.