5 ms·

>Even if that made sense, or some of these tech giants simply decided to cut their losses and say good buy to the Euro sector I think it would be short-sighted

>Even if that made sense, or some of these tech giants simply decided to cut their losses and say good buy to the Euro sector I think it would be short-sighted decision. Currently European tech scene isn't great, because it is hard to compete with US companies awash of VC money or who are highly profitable and entrenched in the EU market. But if those giants would voluntarily clear positions, competition would have arise and could threaten the giants in the long run - i.e. by offering privacy thanks to coming from EU, where GDPR non-compliance is very expensive. This is similar situation to why USA has such huge military presence in Europe in general. Sure it is expensive and Europeans are sometimes ungrateful, but if they would have left, then in the long run EU would likely got its own unified army and become serious geopolitical competitor on level of China, even if ideologically aligned with USA.

surgical_fire 3y ago
> Europeans are sometimes ungrateful Why exactly Europeans should be grateful? US presence in Europe is something done to serve US purposes. Let's not pretend it sets up military bases abroad out of the goodness of their hearts, to protect the world or any such bullshit.
- soco 3y ago
  There's an entire world outside USA and EU and for EU it's way cheaper (and simpler) to have the US dealing with that - an approach having its plusses and minuses of course, like any compromise.
  - malermeister 3y ago
    Yes, but "grateful" implies a favor being done. It's just self-interest on both sides, Europe doesn't have to be grateful any more than the US has to be grateful to the Europeans for allowing bases on their territory.
    - ROTMetro 3y ago
      I can't wait until Europe pays for it's own defense. I love that Europeans kept empires as long as it was profitable and then just ran away and left America to deal with the issues/conflict borders they created and then have the nerve to criticize the USAs trying to keep the world going, yet Europeans don't even have the morals to ban their corporations from using bribes/kickbacks to get overseas contracts (instead they get to deduct that expense from their taxes).
      - surgical_fire 3y ago
        If it's such an inconvenience for the US to extend their military to beyond their borders, why do they keep doing so? They should just stop doing that if it's such a trouble. Of course, we know they won't, because it serves US purposes. You are just too dense to either see or admit that. Keep pretending that the US is some sort of self-sacrificing entity, just to protect some ungrateful Europeans Across the pond.
        laratied 3y ago
        We do it because we have had the money and military to do so but I think you will see this go in the other direction over the next 20 years. It is hard to see how the money situation does anything but get worse and worse. We are also pretty much at the point of missing military recruitment numbers by 20-25% every year now.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > Why exactly Europeans should be grateful? Just because it's in the US interest, doesn't mean Europe doesn't benefit. And the US is paying. They aren't benefitting. They're providing.
  - malermeister 3y ago
    You think the US isn't benefiting from having their bases on geopolitical prime real estate?
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      I mean they're getting (some of) what they pay for. Europe benefits vastly from international trade being pretty safe, something the US makes a massively outside contribution to. Your underlying premise seems to be that "if the US isn't fully altruistic then no one else is benefitting", which seems to set the US's moral bar through the ceiling, and everyone else's below the floor. I think you need to have a more equal expectation of all sides.
      - surgical_fire 3y ago
        If China provided the same protection instead, would your opinion be the same? If the burden of keeping military presence in Europe is so big, US can always leave. No one is forcing them to project their power beyond their own damn borders. So yeah, I'm not "grateful", nor I see why I should be. I see only a superpower acting in their own geopolitical interests, doing what is better for itself, and no one else.
        robertlagrant 3y ago
        > If China provided the same protection instead, would your opinion be the same? Of course. > So yeah, I'm not "grateful", nor I see why I should be. I see only a superpower acting in their own geopolitical interests, doing what is better for itself, and no one else. It is also better for Europe.
- idkwhoiam 3y ago
  As a European living close to the crazy Ivan I'm grateful for US presence in the region. Otherwise many of us could be sitting in trenches right now
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    "Crazy Ivan" can not even wage a respectable war against one of its former puppet states. As tragic as it is for the Ukrainians, let's not overestimate the capabilities of Russia to be a true menace to the rest of Europe.
    - azmodeus 3y ago
      Not sure if you are aware how small most European countries are: Norway 5.4 Sweden 10.4 Denmark 5.8 Finland 5.5 Estonia 1.3 Lithuania 2.8 Latvia 1.8 Some numbers in millions vs Ukraine 43.79 Russia 143.4
      - surgical_fire 3y ago
        Yeah, this takes a different figure when you consider the EU block as a whole, instead of measuring member states in isolation. Every member state has a binding agreement of mutual protection.
        lesuorac 3y ago
        If the EU is a mutal-defense agreement why are all these EU members trying to also join NATO?
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > If the EU is a mutal-defense agreement why are all these EU members trying to also join NATO? Because mutual defense agreements and other joint security agreements aren’t mutually exclusive, and NATO has an integrated military command and more nuclear powers as members.
        3y ago
- hyperman1 3y ago
  Both Europe and the USA benefit. Imagine a world where the USA wasn't present since 1945. The EU would have needed a lot more weapons, if only because of the USSR. Part of these weapons would be nuclear. Most EU states today are perfectly capable of developing them, the knowledge was already mostly available before WW2. Nobody did, because most of EU history consists of having war with a neighbour, and this scenario with all kinds of A-bombs floating around made every country very nervous. So some understanding was built that nobody who hadn't already done so would develop nukes, and the USA guaranteed they would not be necessary. It's a small miracle things worked out so well as they did.
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    > Both Europe and the USA benefit Then why should Europeans be "grateful"? > So some understanding was built that nobody who hadn't already done so would develop nukes, and the USA guaranteed they would not be necessary. It's a small miracle things worked out so well as they did. Eh, some European countries have nukes anyway
    - hyperman1 3y ago
      You're reading more in there than I wrote. Europeans should not be grateful to the USA. A way of doing things is in use today, making the world a slightly better place for both Europe and the USA, maybe even for the rest of the world. Everybody might be grateful for that, but not towards any specific party. We all gain. Some European countries have nukes anyway, I think it's officially limited to the UK and France. But Germany does not, which would have been unthinkable between world wars. Belgium, my own country, has access to Uranium via Congo, has all know-how as we (oopsie) did teach Iran the necessary tricks, has good enough industry to do the job, and has nuclear reactors. All the elements are there. In fact, it's 99% sure USA nukes are in the country, and if we really wanted, we should be technologically capable of stealing them and remaking them into a usable if less powerfull nuke. The only reason Belgium hasn't any nukes is because we don't want them and do our utmost best not to have them. Now Belgium is one of the smallest and least powerful countries. EU and NATO live here in Brussels because most other countries would become too powerful. If we can build nukes, just about any other European country should be able to do the trick. Meanwhile, the only way the USA can keep Iran and North Korea from having the bomb is because the nations are badly functioning, and there aren't much of them. If 20+ reasonably rich and open European country decided to develop nukes at them same time, there is no way stopping all of them. BUT If that happens, the very next war would be very very ugly, and we all know it. Part of the reason for the existence of the EU is giving us a way to project global power, but another part is that after WW2, European countries had to learn to live together, or we'd make the whole continent uninhabitable. We simply can't afford a WW3, and neither can the USA.

surgical_fire 3y ago

> Europeans are sometimes ungrateful Why exactly Europeans should be grateful? US presence in Europe is something done to serve US purposes. Let's not pretend it sets up military bases abroad out of the goodness of their hearts, to protect the world or any such bullshit.

soco 3y ago
There's an entire world outside USA and EU and for EU it's way cheaper (and simpler) to have the US dealing with that - an approach having its plusses and minuses of course, like any compromise.
- malermeister 3y ago
  Yes, but "grateful" implies a favor being done. It's just self-interest on both sides, Europe doesn't have to be grateful any more than the US has to be grateful to the Europeans for allowing bases on their territory.
  - ROTMetro 3y ago
    I can't wait until Europe pays for it's own defense. I love that Europeans kept empires as long as it was profitable and then just ran away and left America to deal with the issues/conflict borders they created and then have the nerve to criticize the USAs trying to keep the world going, yet Europeans don't even have the morals to ban their corporations from using bribes/kickbacks to get overseas contracts (instead they get to deduct that expense from their taxes).
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      If it's such an inconvenience for the US to extend their military to beyond their borders, why do they keep doing so? They should just stop doing that if it's such a trouble. Of course, we know they won't, because it serves US purposes. You are just too dense to either see or admit that. Keep pretending that the US is some sort of self-sacrificing entity, just to protect some ungrateful Europeans Across the pond.
      - laratied 3y ago
        We do it because we have had the money and military to do so but I think you will see this go in the other direction over the next 20 years. It is hard to see how the money situation does anything but get worse and worse. We are also pretty much at the point of missing military recruitment numbers by 20-25% every year now.
robertlagrant 3y ago
> Why exactly Europeans should be grateful? Just because it's in the US interest, doesn't mean Europe doesn't benefit. And the US is paying. They aren't benefitting. They're providing.
- malermeister 3y ago
  You think the US isn't benefiting from having their bases on geopolitical prime real estate?
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    I mean they're getting (some of) what they pay for. Europe benefits vastly from international trade being pretty safe, something the US makes a massively outside contribution to. Your underlying premise seems to be that "if the US isn't fully altruistic then no one else is benefitting", which seems to set the US's moral bar through the ceiling, and everyone else's below the floor. I think you need to have a more equal expectation of all sides.
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      If China provided the same protection instead, would your opinion be the same? If the burden of keeping military presence in Europe is so big, US can always leave. No one is forcing them to project their power beyond their own damn borders. So yeah, I'm not "grateful", nor I see why I should be. I see only a superpower acting in their own geopolitical interests, doing what is better for itself, and no one else.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        > If China provided the same protection instead, would your opinion be the same? Of course. > So yeah, I'm not "grateful", nor I see why I should be. I see only a superpower acting in their own geopolitical interests, doing what is better for itself, and no one else. It is also better for Europe.
idkwhoiam 3y ago
As a European living close to the crazy Ivan I'm grateful for US presence in the region. Otherwise many of us could be sitting in trenches right now
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  "Crazy Ivan" can not even wage a respectable war against one of its former puppet states. As tragic as it is for the Ukrainians, let's not overestimate the capabilities of Russia to be a true menace to the rest of Europe.
  - azmodeus 3y ago
    Not sure if you are aware how small most European countries are: Norway 5.4 Sweden 10.4 Denmark 5.8 Finland 5.5 Estonia 1.3 Lithuania 2.8 Latvia 1.8 Some numbers in millions vs Ukraine 43.79 Russia 143.4
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      Yeah, this takes a different figure when you consider the EU block as a whole, instead of measuring member states in isolation. Every member state has a binding agreement of mutual protection.
      - lesuorac 3y ago
        If the EU is a mutal-defense agreement why are all these EU members trying to also join NATO?
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > If the EU is a mutal-defense agreement why are all these EU members trying to also join NATO? Because mutual defense agreements and other joint security agreements aren’t mutually exclusive, and NATO has an integrated military command and more nuclear powers as members.
        3y ago
hyperman1 3y ago
Both Europe and the USA benefit. Imagine a world where the USA wasn't present since 1945. The EU would have needed a lot more weapons, if only because of the USSR. Part of these weapons would be nuclear. Most EU states today are perfectly capable of developing them, the knowledge was already mostly available before WW2. Nobody did, because most of EU history consists of having war with a neighbour, and this scenario with all kinds of A-bombs floating around made every country very nervous. So some understanding was built that nobody who hadn't already done so would develop nukes, and the USA guaranteed they would not be necessary. It's a small miracle things worked out so well as they did.
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  > Both Europe and the USA benefit Then why should Europeans be "grateful"? > So some understanding was built that nobody who hadn't already done so would develop nukes, and the USA guaranteed they would not be necessary. It's a small miracle things worked out so well as they did. Eh, some European countries have nukes anyway
  - hyperman1 3y ago
    You're reading more in there than I wrote. Europeans should not be grateful to the USA. A way of doing things is in use today, making the world a slightly better place for both Europe and the USA, maybe even for the rest of the world. Everybody might be grateful for that, but not towards any specific party. We all gain. Some European countries have nukes anyway, I think it's officially limited to the UK and France. But Germany does not, which would have been unthinkable between world wars. Belgium, my own country, has access to Uranium via Congo, has all know-how as we (oopsie) did teach Iran the necessary tricks, has good enough industry to do the job, and has nuclear reactors. All the elements are there. In fact, it's 99% sure USA nukes are in the country, and if we really wanted, we should be technologically capable of stealing them and remaking them into a usable if less powerfull nuke. The only reason Belgium hasn't any nukes is because we don't want them and do our utmost best not to have them. Now Belgium is one of the smallest and least powerful countries. EU and NATO live here in Brussels because most other countries would become too powerful. If we can build nukes, just about any other European country should be able to do the trick. Meanwhile, the only way the USA can keep Iran and North Korea from having the bomb is because the nations are badly functioning, and there aren't much of them. If 20+ reasonably rich and open European country decided to develop nukes at them same time, there is no way stopping all of them. BUT If that happens, the very next war would be very very ugly, and we all know it. Part of the reason for the existence of the EU is giving us a way to project global power, but another part is that after WW2, European countries had to learn to live together, or we'd make the whole continent uninhabitable. We simply can't afford a WW3, and neither can the USA.