Of course they were. The United States has never before damaged its own reputation in Europe as much as they did in the last 12 months.
And the same goes for Canada, possibly worse. You don't go around threatening your allies unless you really have plans and that's why you don't elect senile old guys to positions of power.
The same should be said of the senile old women that damage Europe's reputation. That is, if they were actually elected and not appointed by bureaucrats.
Some people in Europe were not that happy when Biden told on public television that the Nord Stream pipeline will be blown up somehow, but luckily the media was good in not talking too much about it and later he listened to his own advisors better about how to communicate.
Russia's invasion ironically strengthened NATO, with more countries joining or feeling the usefulness of it. Somehow the US managed to break down all that good will in such a short amount of time.. I think it's hard to overstate how much more hostile people look at the US the last few years. So much soft power has been lost.
Geopolitical moves like illegally invading a country aren’t necessarily planned to be the one grand thing that weakens the opponent. In particular it strengthening Nato is not necessarily ironic, and it seems like an oversimplification to even suggest it.
There's a difference between "posturing" for show and actually "preparing for war".
They're wise to the fact that "the Stable Genius" isn't going to try anything violent with Denmark/Greenland, but they still want to prevent him thinking about just stealing territory "peacefully."
The US president wanted to start a full on war with Europe over Greenland of all places. And he still might. And some people will still claim I just have "TDS".
Tu as le droit de perdre, mais tu n'as pas le droit de te faire surprendre.
(You have the right to lose, but you do not have the right to be caught off guard.)
And this is, in my opinion, why support at Hormuz shouldn’t even be on the table. How can you possibly hold joint patrols when you were just months ago planning full scale war between each other?
I live very close to one of the USAF's largest European airbases.
While Trump was trolling European leaders about their security posture (by threatening to relieve them of sovereign territory which the US already has extensive access to) the USAF was already moving assets in the opposite direction to the middle east (this was mid-january).
It's fairly easy to work out what's happening if you ignore the orange man and listen to what serious people are saying, what they've briefed on, how they contradict one another, and where the assets are moving.
Obviously European leaders have to pretend to take the orange man seriously, but the reaction in the media was bordering on hysterical.
The United States are not longer an allie nor a friend to to EU.
Under Trump, they have turned into a Terror regiem, ignoring international law, human rights. They have to be international isolated together with Israel. They are the enemy of a free and civilized world!
The billionaire oligarch who put that (stupid) idea in Trump's head is still out there. His son-in-law will probably be the next head of the Federal Reserve.
If the oligarchs don't feel any pushback they'll continue to wreck the US and Europe.
> As a source puts it, the French said: "Would you like more soldiers? You could have them. Would you like more naval support? You could have that. Would you like more air support? You could have that too."
Thank God for the French. I long thought their strong Gaullist stance on sovereignty was a bit silly in today's world, but turns out they were right along.
Europe can't trust any outside powers. Any external dependency can and will be used against us. We used to be wide-eyed believers in international corporation and global alliances, but those are, as it turns out, always a risk and a liability.
I sure as hell am glad the French kept being stubborn enough to build most capabilities in-house, so now we have our own nuclear deterrent, aircraft carrier and fighter jet programs. Imagine if we had gone all-in on American weapons tech! They'd have us, excuse my French, by the balls!
I can see you aren't french, nor know the culture, else you would have known that those were only words. false promise and pretending isn't seens as really bad in france. Words are just words. Foreign naive beliefs about our culture is realy cute.
As a Brit it’s been very obvious CdG was right since the start.
The final straw was almost 50 years ago when Thatcher gave up the UKs space program and satellite plans in favor of giving the money, in cash, to the US.
In return for paying for 1/3 of the keyhole satellite network Regan said we could borrow them when needed.
Then we asked to use them to look at the Falklands and Regan said no.
That was the same period where we traded British missile technology for renting D5s from America. So though we make and own our own nuclear warheads, the delivery systems are American and must be returned to the US for maintenance on a regular basis. Essentially robbing the UK of an independent deterrent.
I am all for unilateral nuclear disarmament but if we are going to have nukes in the current climate they should be entirely homegrown and independent.
The British support of the US military industrial complex doesn’t benefit the UK as it means we have no ability to act alone or in opposition to the US. We are as dependent on resupply as the Israelis.
64 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 105 ms ] threadUsing F35 in this situation is like brining in a billion dollar paperweight to the battle.s
And the same goes for Canada, possibly worse. You don't go around threatening your allies unless you really have plans and that's why you don't elect senile old guys to positions of power.
Some people in Europe were not that happy when Biden told on public television that the Nord Stream pipeline will be blown up somehow, but luckily the media was good in not talking too much about it and later he listened to his own advisors better about how to communicate.
People hated Americans in the 2000s invasion of Iraq. There were popular rock songs about it and students were hesitant to say they were American.
It seems to go in cycles. Next president many will forget.
Such is the power and fickleness of the American system.
This is the source article (in Danish) for the bluesky posts:
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/groenland/danmark-forbered...
They're wise to the fact that "the Stable Genius" isn't going to try anything violent with Denmark/Greenland, but they still want to prevent him thinking about just stealing territory "peacefully."
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/groenland/danmark-forbered...
World tension continues to increase.
While Trump was trolling European leaders about their security posture (by threatening to relieve them of sovereign territory which the US already has extensive access to) the USAF was already moving assets in the opposite direction to the middle east (this was mid-january).
It's fairly easy to work out what's happening if you ignore the orange man and listen to what serious people are saying, what they've briefed on, how they contradict one another, and where the assets are moving.
Obviously European leaders have to pretend to take the orange man seriously, but the reaction in the media was bordering on hysterical.
If the oligarchs don't feel any pushback they'll continue to wreck the US and Europe.
Thank God for the French. I long thought their strong Gaullist stance on sovereignty was a bit silly in today's world, but turns out they were right along.
Europe can't trust any outside powers. Any external dependency can and will be used against us. We used to be wide-eyed believers in international corporation and global alliances, but those are, as it turns out, always a risk and a liability.
I sure as hell am glad the French kept being stubborn enough to build most capabilities in-house, so now we have our own nuclear deterrent, aircraft carrier and fighter jet programs. Imagine if we had gone all-in on American weapons tech! They'd have us, excuse my French, by the balls!
The final straw was almost 50 years ago when Thatcher gave up the UKs space program and satellite plans in favor of giving the money, in cash, to the US.
In return for paying for 1/3 of the keyhole satellite network Regan said we could borrow them when needed.
Then we asked to use them to look at the Falklands and Regan said no.
That was the same period where we traded British missile technology for renting D5s from America. So though we make and own our own nuclear warheads, the delivery systems are American and must be returned to the US for maintenance on a regular basis. Essentially robbing the UK of an independent deterrent.
I am all for unilateral nuclear disarmament but if we are going to have nukes in the current climate they should be entirely homegrown and independent.
The British support of the US military industrial complex doesn’t benefit the UK as it means we have no ability to act alone or in opposition to the US. We are as dependent on resupply as the Israelis.
Obviously that’s great for the US.