5 ms·

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.
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      > It is also better for Europe. It's at most convenient.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        Having protected shipping lanes is not just convenient at best. Why be so begrudging. It's an incredible achievement.
  - safety1st 3y ago
    I have to imagine that faced with the choice of US bases scattered across Europe vs Chinese bases, most Europeans would choose Pax Americana. It's probable that under Pax Sinica, you wouldn't even be able to have this conversation. Europe's gratitude toward the American military-industrial complex is not required, the US gets plenty out of the deal. However the only realistic alternative for Europeans is to expand their own, and boy does that come with a lot of downsides.
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      I was just using a very blatant absurd hypothesis to make it clear that nothing about whatever military agreements in between European countries and the US is something to be taken with gratitude (as implied in the original post I was replying to). As someone living in Europe, I am grateful for the EU, and I wish the constituent countries to be more integrated over time. I see no reason to be grateful for the US for its military presence here. They do it for their own benefit, and should definitely leave if the cost to them is too high for whatever benefit it gets. For Europe it's just convenient.
      - ROTMetro 3y ago
        [flagged]
        surgical_fire 3y ago
        Are you implying that the US does not subsidize its existence by taking wealth from outside countries? That it does not project it's behavior and morality on others? It had to be on HN for me to read bullshit this absurd. The nerve on these people.
logdap 3y ago
As an American who opposes military adventurism, I think those bases are a net negative to America because they facilitate such wars. Protecting Europe from Soviet/Russian aggression is well and good, but insofar as those bases facilitated the "war on terror" they have been a disaster for American society. I wish American politicians would not find it so convienent to casually wage war in other hemispheres.

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.
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    > It is also better for Europe. It's at most convenient.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      Having protected shipping lanes is not just convenient at best. Why be so begrudging. It's an incredible achievement.
- safety1st 3y ago
  I have to imagine that faced with the choice of US bases scattered across Europe vs Chinese bases, most Europeans would choose Pax Americana. It's probable that under Pax Sinica, you wouldn't even be able to have this conversation. Europe's gratitude toward the American military-industrial complex is not required, the US gets plenty out of the deal. However the only realistic alternative for Europeans is to expand their own, and boy does that come with a lot of downsides.
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    I was just using a very blatant absurd hypothesis to make it clear that nothing about whatever military agreements in between European countries and the US is something to be taken with gratitude (as implied in the original post I was replying to). As someone living in Europe, I am grateful for the EU, and I wish the constituent countries to be more integrated over time. I see no reason to be grateful for the US for its military presence here. They do it for their own benefit, and should definitely leave if the cost to them is too high for whatever benefit it gets. For Europe it's just convenient.
    - ROTMetro 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - surgical_fire 3y ago
        Are you implying that the US does not subsidize its existence by taking wealth from outside countries? That it does not project it's behavior and morality on others? It had to be on HN for me to read bullshit this absurd. The nerve on these people.

logdap 3y ago

As an American who opposes military adventurism, I think those bases are a net negative to America because they facilitate such wars. Protecting Europe from Soviet/Russian aggression is well and good, but insofar as those bases facilitated the "war on terror" they have been a disaster for American society. I wish American politicians would not find it so convienent to casually wage war in other hemispheres.