Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 1379 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#europe#trade#countries#free#more#war#america#iran#control#spain

Discussion (89 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ragebol•about 4 hours ago
It's still baffling to see the US loose so much face in so short a time.

There is definitely truth that Europe has relied on US defense for too long, but what the US got in return is hard to put into words and economic terms. We bought your tech, culture, defense and so much other stuff.

This rift won't close anytime soon

SXX•about 3 hours ago
And this is a good for EU. In past decades EU lost energy independence and good part of nuclear because croocked politicians that took dictatorships money while feeding same dictator with oil and gas money.

At the same time EU had no proper army to defend itself because dependance on US or a way to supply said army.

4gotunameagain•about 3 hours ago
Conflict with allies is not a good thing for anyone, apart from nationalism.

The dictator now makes more money, so we just lost our cheap gas source, and we buy more expensive oil from others.

pfdietz•about 3 hours ago
The US is teetering on the edge of a financial abyss. These are all just foreshocks.
vr46•about 3 hours ago
They're laughing all the way to the bank, the US has locked Europe into so many long-term petrochem supply contracts courtesy of two energy crises, and the US have stated point-blank that the supplies (of LNG, in this case) are tied to the US-EU trade treaty plus whatever changes the US wants to make.

Same protection racket plus a foot on the brake of the EU's push to renewables.

pjc50•about 3 hours ago
The renewables rollout just keeps going despite the discourse. It does mean buying things from China, which is now the least threatening option.
exceptione•about 3 hours ago

  > There is definitely truth that Europe has relied on US defense for too long,
That wasn't the problem for the USA, on the contrary.

  «The U.S. is lobbying against SAFE because it mandates contractors from the EU/EFTA/Ukraine. One reason why Tusk is speaking candidly about how shaky the U.S. is as an ally: Washington says it wants Europe to arm itself and take its security into its own hands, but then it demands Europe rely on American hardware. You can't have it both ways.
  The U.S. said: "Take over Ukraine's war needs." So Europe did so. Now PURL purchases are being slowed down or are on hold because of America's prioritization of its own requirements for the war with Iran. Talking out of both sides of one's mouth doesn't work anymore, and if Trump wants anyone to blame here, he should look in the mirror. Forfeiting America's security patronage always meant forfeiting our ability to bully and coerce.»
  src: https://xcancel.com/michaeldweiss/status/2047689018683408593
kakacik•about 3 hours ago
Anybody who had the pleasure to go through relationship with mentally unstable person (for the lack of better words, if I had to guess some undiagnosed borderline disorder on a scale 1-2 out of 10 mixed with some childhood traumas) sees nothing out of ordinary - just daily chaos, tantrums, illogical destructive behavior and very little self-control on the other side.

Narcissism adds a curious twist, but of course for the worse.

fabian2k•about 3 hours ago
> But the U.S. has made it clear that it wants to concentrate on the Indo-Pacific and the threat posed by China's powerful military, rather than propping up Europe.

If that were true they wouldn't have wasted enormous amounts of expensive ammunition in Iran.

nolok•about 3 hours ago
One, I feel like the "propping up Europe" is preposterous when europe is buying those things, not getting them for free, just like american weapon delivery to Ukraine have been paid by europe and not free for a long while now.

Two, the US wasting of ammunition in an ill-prepared fight against Iran that has not produced any of the result they claim to want but managed to make things instable for a lot of the world has nothing to do with helping Europe.

m000•about 2 hours ago
There's no real "massive rearmament campaign". This is plain-old war racketeering.

The "defend against Russia" spin of TFA is only smoke and mirrors for the public, to distract from the less savoury activities of Rheinmetall (source of the "news") and their deepening ties with Israel (exports, joint ventures with Rafael, etc.).

yesbut•about 4 hours ago
RobotToaster•about 3 hours ago
>that had never been tried before

Napoleon would like a word.

trick-or-treat•about 3 hours ago
I don't know how many of you are history buffs...
spwa4•about 3 hours ago
The problem with this, historically is that the way Europe's geography works, a number of countries are just not going to fairly share in the burden of defending Europe, while other countries have the ability to tax foreign trade. Ireland is famous for this, and looking at a map, you can see why. Spain, Turkey and Denmark have historically taxed foreign trade.

Additionally a number of countries have "unfair" advantages over others. There are 2 straits that control access to the oceans. Which means Denmark and Norway control free trade routes (land routes are not "free" as in they are taxed) into Germany, Sweden, Finland, the Baltics, and of course Russia. This can't be fixed, and the UK effectively occupies Gibraltar to prevent it.

Spain (I'd say Spain and Morocco, but really ... Spain) controls sea access for all Mediterranean countries, from Italy to Georgia, Algeria to Greece. France (and Morocco) being the major exceptions to this. This can't be fixed, and is currently blocked by what is effectively an international force. Spain is not happy with this.

Turkey controls (and intends to tax) trade routes into all the black sea countries, which is most of Eastern Europe.

Oh and UK and the Netherlands, for reasons that are slightly less obvious, control free trade into Belgium.

In addition to this, most countries do not have the resources they need. Not even to survive. And even most countries that could be self-sufficient, aren't (cough Germany, really, WHY????). Really only France is somewhat close to self-sufficient. Specialization, on a country level, is a necessity in Europe, most countries do not have access to free trade routes and are utterly dependent on trade, in other words: they have to pay to survive.

Essentially the situation is simple: all European countries, except France. Spain, UK and Portugal (and, yes, Ireland) COULD get themselves into a secure position, but haven't (and so if it came to it, it would be very hard to do in a short time). So all these countries have good reason to attack each other.

So the question with getting Europe's armies weapons is: the natural situation is that they'll try to destabilize Europe rather than stabilize it, because that is in most countries' direct economic interest. Historically, they ... you can say Europe was more peaceful than places like the areas of the ottoman empire, for example. But that should not be confused with peaceful in an absolute sense. In fact, the last 80 years or so have been remarkably peaceful, with America guaranteeing access to international trade. Well, I'm sure Russia would counter "guarantee access? You mean control access", and yes, that's been done.

Unfortunately it's very clear that America's power, especially measured relative to other countries, is waning. Meaning America is still far more powerful than, say, Turkey. But it used to be easily 100x more powerful. Now ... it looks more like 10x. Opposing Turkey will be a huge effort for the US, far more than the Iran war will be. US's deal, the Pax Americana, was that America would simply guarantee free trade routes with it's military for everyone, in fact, that's what the Iran war is really about (free trade for everyone behind Hormuz). In exchange, US gets the dollar. Many nations, most obviously Iran, but Turkey, Indonesia, China, Somalia, ... have all taken steps to tax the trade routes they control, which will over time create an untenable trade situation for a very large number of countries.

The situation for Germany in the long term is a simple choice: they can either pay, or attack. We all know what their historical choice has been, as soon as you have a somewhat prolonged economic crisis. Germany is not alone in this, in fact all of Eastern Europe is more or less in the same situation. A decent chunk of those countries are arming themselves (for example, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, and Finland have all given hints they're building a nuclear force)

The problem with America weakening is that the US wants free trade, because that directly benefits the US greatly, whereas most other factions want to control trade instead. Turkey, Iran, China, Indonesia, even Spain's current government if we're honest and others want to (go back to) taxing other countries. Historically they have succeeded at this, but it resulted in constant wars.

pjc50•about 3 hours ago
Rather odd nineteenth century outlook that doesn't mention the European Union.
dbg31415•about 3 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j20voPS0gI

Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,

But that couldn't happen again.

We taught them a lesson in 1918

And they've hardly bothered us since then.

eru•about 3 hours ago
Nah, it's mostly the Prussians. Those Bavarians and Austrians and other southerns are too jolly.
RobotToaster•about 3 hours ago
Nobody has ever heard of an Austrian starting a war.
wolfi1•about 3 hours ago
you certainly don't know how belligerent the Hapsburgs were
sajithdilshan•about 2 hours ago
This feels like the 1920s all over again. Germany is riddled with structural and economic failures, yet instead of addressing them, politicians are pivoting toward a war footing. The economy has been trapped in a cycle of recession and stagnation since the pandemic, but the current political response is to debate cuts to social benefits and tax increases. This is compounded by a self-inflicted energy crisis, shutting down every nuclear power plant has destabilized the energy market for the rest of Europe. Meanwhile, the AfD is polling at nearly 30% nationwide. History may not repeat itself, but it is definitely rhyming.
lostlogin•about 2 hours ago
If we’re comparing Nazis, can we include both sides of the Atlantic?
customguy•16 minutes ago
Why would I care what others do or don't do, know or don't know, like or don't like, when it comes to Germans serving other right-wing extremist Germans talking points and votes on a silver platter, because they cannot be arsed to actually read and take seriously the accounts and warning of historians who lived through those times? I can't even figure what point you think you are making.
sajithdilshan•about 2 hours ago
I wasn't comparing Nazis but the reality. Maybe that's your narrative