6 ms·
>Recreating NATO (and dissolving decades of institutional investment) and calling it the EU Army and then excluding the United States from backing you up just d
by jdhn 5y ago
>Recreating NATO (and dissolving decades of institutional investment) and calling it the EU Army and then excluding the United States from backing you up just does not seem like a smart idea.
Why is that? I personally would love to see an EU army formed with no backing whatsoever from the US (this would probably mean that NATO would have to be dissolved).
- t-3 5y agoDo you really want to have to worry about the US acting as an enemy? Our policy has always been "if you aren't with us, you're against us."
- jdhn 5y agoThen that's something that will have to be accounted for. Personally, I'm tired of paying for Europes security and want us out of there as soon as possible.
- sofixa 5y ago> Do you really want to have to worry about the US acting as an enemy That's already on the cards, as Trump so helpfully demonstrated. Also, the US cooperates with Japan, SK and other countries without them being in NATO, so I don't see why they'd consider an EU Army as an enemy if they're strategically alined - and if they're not, it won't change anything because the Americans will do whatever they want anyway. So yes, all for an EU Army that doesn't rely on the US.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Also, the US cooperates with Japan, SK and other countries without them being in NATO The US has bilateral treaties in which the US undertakes NATO-like commitments to Japan and South Korea, and bilateral or multiteral (e.g., AUKUS, Rio Treaty) agreements with US-outward or mutual defense provisions with others, sure. Are you imagining a similar relation with the EU replacing NATO, and, if so, how is that substantively different from just keeping NATO?
- lenkite 5y ago> That's already on the cards, as Trump so helpfully demonstrated. How did the US act as an "enemy" under Trump precisely ?