3 ms·

OK, I looked at [1]: >While Gates never outlined what he actually meant by “demilitarization”, the U.S. Department of Defense and most analysts use the phrase

OK, I looked at [1]: >While Gates never outlined what he actually meant by “demilitarization”, the U.S. Department of Defense and most analysts use the phrase when referring to the European countries’ tendency to reduce the size of their armies, navies and air force personnel and delay updating their military hardware. However, European “demilitarization” also includes the cultural reorientation of most EU nations away from militarization and an overly international activism. Thus European “demilitarization” is also a matter of attitude rather than merely a question of expenditure on military forces and hardware. There's some academic smoke-blowing for you. But let's make it simple: 2% of GDP to be spent on defense. They've agreed to do it, but until Ukraine they just refused. Was there some help from the US that they were missing? https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/07/20/how-european-countries-stand-on-2-of-gdp-defence-spending https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/07/20/how-european-c... Oh look, here's Germany coming in at 1%: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293562/expenditure-on-military-defense-as-gdp-share-in-the-european-union-eu-27/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293562/expenditure-on-m...

Kukumber 4y ago
> There's some academic smoke-blowing for you What do you mean? please go straight to the point > But let's make it simple: 2% of GDP to be spent on defense. They've agreed to do it, but until Ukraine they just refused. Was there some help from the US that they were missing? The US wants Europe to fund NATO, not to become a sovereign military super power, and even less an independent economy that commerce with Russia/China That's what i mean by demilitarization of Europe, you are not militarized if you do not defend your sovereignty, you are a vassal who protects the interest of an Empire that is not yours https://i.imgur.com/FBysSrf.png https://i.imgur.com/FBysSrf.png you see right, that's the US
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  I can't even follow your statements here. They agreed to help fund NATO, which is defending them against Russia. Then they reneged. What is this analysis missing? Obviously the US wants a Europe not dominated by Russia. So should you.
  - Kukumber 4y ago
    What do you mean by "help fund NATO, wich is defending them against Russia", they were commercial partners, cheap gas, France could sell their cars and their big retailer had fun over there, ESA was collaborating with their space agency on interesting missions, and the Silk Road would have helped unite Europe/Eurasia/Asia to become the biggest economy and super power on the planet The US should have been happy for Europe Who said buying Russian oil was bad? Why the US can dictate what the EU should/shouldn't do? I thought they were sovereign I can't follow your statements here > Obviously the US wants a Europe not dominated by Russia. So should you. Wrong, the US wants a weak Europe that it can dominate, just like they want a weak Russia, a weak China and a weak Middle East As for me, i wan't nothing but apocalypse, so you are far off in your expectation
    - AlbertCory 4y ago
      The last paragraph obviates anything else I would need to say. Maybe you would have been (or actually were) happier in the old East Germany.
      - Kukumber 4y ago
        To gauge your interest, whether you hold any more arguments or not Whether i live on mars or not doesn't change the facts on the planet earth
  - m000 4y ago
    *was defending them against USSR. Russia has neither the military or the political clout of the USSR. NATO would have probably already been dismantled, if that wouldn't sink the US military-industrial complex.
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > Russia has neither the military or the political clout of the USSR. NATO would have probably already been dismantled If not for its post-Soviet utility in the Balkans and elsewhere; its been more active in the post-Soviet period than during the Cold War.

Kukumber 4y ago

> There's some academic smoke-blowing for you What do you mean? please go straight to the point > But let's make it simple: 2% of GDP to be spent on defense. They've agreed to do it, but until Ukraine they just refused. Was there some help from the US that they were missing? The US wants Europe to fund NATO, not to become a sovereign military super power, and even less an independent economy that commerce with Russia/China That's what i mean by demilitarization of Europe, you are not militarized if you do not defend your sovereignty, you are a vassal who protects the interest of an Empire that is not yours https://i.imgur.com/FBysSrf.png https://i.imgur.com/FBysSrf.png you see right, that's the US

AlbertCory 4y ago
I can't even follow your statements here. They agreed to help fund NATO, which is defending them against Russia. Then they reneged. What is this analysis missing? Obviously the US wants a Europe not dominated by Russia. So should you.
- Kukumber 4y ago
  What do you mean by "help fund NATO, wich is defending them against Russia", they were commercial partners, cheap gas, France could sell their cars and their big retailer had fun over there, ESA was collaborating with their space agency on interesting missions, and the Silk Road would have helped unite Europe/Eurasia/Asia to become the biggest economy and super power on the planet The US should have been happy for Europe Who said buying Russian oil was bad? Why the US can dictate what the EU should/shouldn't do? I thought they were sovereign I can't follow your statements here > Obviously the US wants a Europe not dominated by Russia. So should you. Wrong, the US wants a weak Europe that it can dominate, just like they want a weak Russia, a weak China and a weak Middle East As for me, i wan't nothing but apocalypse, so you are far off in your expectation
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    The last paragraph obviates anything else I would need to say. Maybe you would have been (or actually were) happier in the old East Germany.
    - Kukumber 4y ago
      To gauge your interest, whether you hold any more arguments or not Whether i live on mars or not doesn't change the facts on the planet earth
- m000 4y ago
  *was defending them against USSR. Russia has neither the military or the political clout of the USSR. NATO would have probably already been dismantled, if that wouldn't sink the US military-industrial complex.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Russia has neither the military or the political clout of the USSR. NATO would have probably already been dismantled If not for its post-Soviet utility in the Balkans and elsewhere; its been more active in the post-Soviet period than during the Cold War.