8 ms·

The US should have pulled out of NATO a long time ago but empires of even that sort are hard to give up. The EU is more than capable of providing for their own

The US should have pulled out of NATO a long time ago but empires of even that sort are hard to give up. The EU is more than capable of providing for their own security and perhaps having to do it all would make some wavering member states understand that they are truly all in it together.

pexaizix 8y ago
There's no way the US will pull out of anywhere. Gotta keep the war machine rollin'
- dba7dba 8y ago
  I disagree. Sure, there's profit motive. But 80 years ago, US population was extremely against any kind of military involvement overseas, and funding of US military reflected it. But turns out even if we don't want war, there's always someone/something like Hitler, Putin, Communism etc etc. And due to the size/location of US, US is forced to take a role overseas.
- mc32 8y ago
  For odd reasons, the Dems and neocon Repubs are the ones wanting to remain in these alliances and engagements whereas the current admin wants to withdraw.
jplayer01 8y ago
I don't understand where any of this comes from. The US has profited greatly (financially, strategically, (geo)politically) from basically owning Western Europe as a base of operations in that part of the hemisphere. It wasn't an act of generosity to form NATO. It was a calculated plan to ensure America's global hegemony, from which we've all benefited (for better or worse).
- SuoDuanDao 8y ago
  The justification for OP's position I've heard, and must say it kind of makes sense, is that the US's major benefit to running the empire was having a lot of nations buying its exports. But the US is no longer a net exporter, so the benefits of being the global hegemon are similarly in decline.
  - tobias3 8y ago
    Theoretically being a importer is even better. You get valuable natural resources, goods, services and labour in exchange to green paper with $ on it (or database entries in banks). One just has to distribute the gains to keep the population satisfied (which military spending does, albeit inefficiently).
  - Armisael16 8y ago
    The last time the US was a next exporter was in 1980: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NETEXP https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NETEXP What changed? NATO was pretty popular in 1985, as I recall.
  - polotics 8y ago
    The justification you may have heard less, is that the US hegemony maintains the place of the dollar as the world's reserve and exchange currency. This is where the real power lies. For example the owner of the reserve currency can export its inflation to the rest of the world...
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      "This is where the real power lies. " No, it is not. The petrodollar or seignorage as the basis for economic supremacy is conspiratorial. The US essentially guarantees the safety of Europe because they had to given the situation after WW2. Europeans consistently under invest on this issue largely because they know the Americans won't fail or back down. And FYI, US bases in Europe do not guarantee any kind of petrodollar anyhow. The response that 'America is the one that wins by protecting everyone' is factually incorrect and borderline hypocritical because it hides the fact that Europeans are absolutely not doing what they need to do to ensure integrity of their own nations. Without US led action - the Baltic states would have already been grabbed by Russia, and Ukraine would be 100% politically controlled by Russia, if not occupied. Poland would again be 'the buffer'. The EU has a gaping hole in this sense - they are a massive, federated economy who cannot defend themselves with some bad actors nipping at their heels. China is very rapidly developing the ability to project hard power at least thousands of km away from it's land, at least in the S. China sea and beyond. Certainly with the objective of swallowing Taiwan, and maintaining supremacy throughout East/South Asia. For what it's worth. The Euros need to do their part and coordinate defence of their own borders, right now they are behind in this area.

pexaizix 8y ago

There's no way the US will pull out of anywhere. Gotta keep the war machine rollin'

dba7dba 8y ago
I disagree. Sure, there's profit motive. But 80 years ago, US population was extremely against any kind of military involvement overseas, and funding of US military reflected it. But turns out even if we don't want war, there's always someone/something like Hitler, Putin, Communism etc etc. And due to the size/location of US, US is forced to take a role overseas.
mc32 8y ago
For odd reasons, the Dems and neocon Repubs are the ones wanting to remain in these alliances and engagements whereas the current admin wants to withdraw.

jplayer01 8y ago

I don't understand where any of this comes from. The US has profited greatly (financially, strategically, (geo)politically) from basically owning Western Europe as a base of operations in that part of the hemisphere. It wasn't an act of generosity to form NATO. It was a calculated plan to ensure America's global hegemony, from which we've all benefited (for better or worse).

SuoDuanDao 8y ago
The justification for OP's position I've heard, and must say it kind of makes sense, is that the US's major benefit to running the empire was having a lot of nations buying its exports. But the US is no longer a net exporter, so the benefits of being the global hegemon are similarly in decline.
- tobias3 8y ago
  Theoretically being a importer is even better. You get valuable natural resources, goods, services and labour in exchange to green paper with $ on it (or database entries in banks). One just has to distribute the gains to keep the population satisfied (which military spending does, albeit inefficiently).
- Armisael16 8y ago
  The last time the US was a next exporter was in 1980: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NETEXP https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NETEXP What changed? NATO was pretty popular in 1985, as I recall.
- polotics 8y ago
  The justification you may have heard less, is that the US hegemony maintains the place of the dollar as the world's reserve and exchange currency. This is where the real power lies. For example the owner of the reserve currency can export its inflation to the rest of the world...
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "This is where the real power lies. " No, it is not. The petrodollar or seignorage as the basis for economic supremacy is conspiratorial. The US essentially guarantees the safety of Europe because they had to given the situation after WW2. Europeans consistently under invest on this issue largely because they know the Americans won't fail or back down. And FYI, US bases in Europe do not guarantee any kind of petrodollar anyhow. The response that 'America is the one that wins by protecting everyone' is factually incorrect and borderline hypocritical because it hides the fact that Europeans are absolutely not doing what they need to do to ensure integrity of their own nations. Without US led action - the Baltic states would have already been grabbed by Russia, and Ukraine would be 100% politically controlled by Russia, if not occupied. Poland would again be 'the buffer'. The EU has a gaping hole in this sense - they are a massive, federated economy who cannot defend themselves with some bad actors nipping at their heels. China is very rapidly developing the ability to project hard power at least thousands of km away from it's land, at least in the S. China sea and beyond. Certainly with the objective of swallowing Taiwan, and maintaining supremacy throughout East/South Asia. For what it's worth. The Euros need to do their part and coordinate defence of their own borders, right now they are behind in this area.