3 ms·

Has your ex "moved on" if they regularly threaten to steal your shit, harass you, vandalize your neighborhood and your car? Don't feign innocence. You're not f

Has your ex "moved on" if they regularly threaten to steal your shit, harass you, vandalize your neighborhood and your car? Don't feign innocence. You're not fooling anybody. It is so very obviously not "just lil guy USA chillin' in the corner minding their business and not bothering anybody".

ericmay 1mo ago
Idk, my ex (the EU) keeps coming around asking me for stuff, bothering me, then getting mad when I decide what kind of trade policy I want to have as is my right to decide. But either way, the relationship is irreparable, it's all over, all that stuff so the EU and the online EU folks should just accept the new status quo and stop complaining. I think this comparison has run its course anyway. At the end of the day these relationships are repairable and will be repaired and changed if we all decide to, and no amount of sensationalized doomsaying from people on the Internet will affect that. Trump will be gone, we'll elect some Democrat, they'll do some things, France might elect Marine LePenn, the'll do something, and on and on it goes.
kyboren 1mo ago
Y'all've enjoyed the benefits of the relationship with your ex for so long you've given into the illusion of living in a garden and forgotten that you actually live in the jungle. When something needed killing--and sometimes when it didn't--your ex was always there to do the dirty work. You weren't always happy with what he got up to, but you were always happy to have a seat at the table and a free lunch. Now that he's your ex you suddenly realize: Ain't nobody innocent in the jungle and your ex is a predator, too. If you aren't at the table you're on the menu. I hope that you and epolanski are wrong and ericmay is right. The relationship was better for both of you; I hope it can be repaired. But if it can't, don't expect anything but self-interest maximization.
- dinfinity 1mo ago
  > When something needed killing--and sometimes when it didn't--your ex was always there to do the dirty work. You weren't always happy with what he got up to, but you were always happy to have a seat at the table and a free lunch. "Dirty" is exactly the right adjective here. Former allies and their peoples now see exactly what the USA has been up to for all these decades, perpetually shit-stirring far away from home, securing access to resources, projecting military power and keeping regional powers from sorting themselves out. Looking back at the last century and the current state of the world, an awful lot of theaters and countries would very probably be more stable today if the USA had not spent decades financing factions, propping up regimes and otherwise meddling from the other side of the planet. As for free lunches: the USA military industrial complex has profited heavily off allied countries. Also, the only country ever to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty was the USA. Many allied soldiers fought and died in ridiculous, extremely counterproductive US-led wars. I'm so very, very happy that we mostly decided to say fuck you to the USA when they tried that bullshit again with Iran.
  - kyboren 1mo ago
    You make it sound like the USA is the only actor with agency. USSR then RU, PRC, DPRK--just to name a few--have all been playing dirty. Hell, DPRK is propping up regimes and meddling in European affairs as we chat. Yet European vitriol is aimed at the USA, not DPRK. Funny. Besides, plenty of theaters and countries are absolutely more stable today thanks to US efforts. I'm pretty sure Europeans are largely pleased with the results of a certain American meddling in European affairs a bit over 80 years ago. And I'm personally quite pleased with the results of French meddling in American affairs some 250 years ago. Welcome to the game. > the only country ever to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty was the USA Totally false. It was in fact certain European NATO members and staff who were pushing to invoke Article 5 while US military leaders were dismissive of the idea. The relevant Wikipedia article lays it out pretty well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingenc... "I don't have the time to become an expert on the Danish Air Force". -Gen. Tommy Franks "I think it's safe to say that we won't be asking SACEUR to put together a battle plan for Afghanistan". -Anonymous 'Senior Official' > Many allied soldiers fought and died in ridiculous, extremely counterproductive US-led wars. Well, more than one soldier died, I suppose. But not really that many. Counterinsurgency in the sandbox isn't exactly high-intensity peer-on-peer combat. In any case the contribution was more symbolic than anything; allied forces were not determinative of any outcome. > I'm so very, very happy that we mostly decided to say fuck you to the USA when they tried that bullshit again with Iran. I'll be happy when USA rescinds export licenses this winter for LNG and refined fuels to countries that gave USA the finger but still expect USA to protect their supply lines and sell them the energy they need to survive the winter. Fuck you right back.
    - dinfinity 1mo ago
      Well done proving how the USA is acting like an abusive asshole. Our previous deaths and support don't matter and you'll fuck over your own economy just to hurt us because we didn't want to help you in yet another retarded (unilaterally started!) war. It also makes sense that you compare the USA with North Korea and Russia (whom your dear leader clearly loves). You're partially right: those are terrible regimes as well and they are widely and vocally hated in Europe. To think that Russia who is actively waging war on us isn't just shows your utter typically American self-centered myopic ignorance.

ericmay 1mo ago

Idk, my ex (the EU) keeps coming around asking me for stuff, bothering me, then getting mad when I decide what kind of trade policy I want to have as is my right to decide. But either way, the relationship is irreparable, it's all over, all that stuff so the EU and the online EU folks should just accept the new status quo and stop complaining. I think this comparison has run its course anyway. At the end of the day these relationships are repairable and will be repaired and changed if we all decide to, and no amount of sensationalized doomsaying from people on the Internet will affect that. Trump will be gone, we'll elect some Democrat, they'll do some things, France might elect Marine LePenn, the'll do something, and on and on it goes.

kyboren 1mo ago

Y'all've enjoyed the benefits of the relationship with your ex for so long you've given into the illusion of living in a garden and forgotten that you actually live in the jungle. When something needed killing--and sometimes when it didn't--your ex was always there to do the dirty work. You weren't always happy with what he got up to, but you were always happy to have a seat at the table and a free lunch. Now that he's your ex you suddenly realize: Ain't nobody innocent in the jungle and your ex is a predator, too. If you aren't at the table you're on the menu. I hope that you and epolanski are wrong and ericmay is right. The relationship was better for both of you; I hope it can be repaired. But if it can't, don't expect anything but self-interest maximization.

dinfinity 1mo ago
> When something needed killing--and sometimes when it didn't--your ex was always there to do the dirty work. You weren't always happy with what he got up to, but you were always happy to have a seat at the table and a free lunch. "Dirty" is exactly the right adjective here. Former allies and their peoples now see exactly what the USA has been up to for all these decades, perpetually shit-stirring far away from home, securing access to resources, projecting military power and keeping regional powers from sorting themselves out. Looking back at the last century and the current state of the world, an awful lot of theaters and countries would very probably be more stable today if the USA had not spent decades financing factions, propping up regimes and otherwise meddling from the other side of the planet. As for free lunches: the USA military industrial complex has profited heavily off allied countries. Also, the only country ever to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty was the USA. Many allied soldiers fought and died in ridiculous, extremely counterproductive US-led wars. I'm so very, very happy that we mostly decided to say fuck you to the USA when they tried that bullshit again with Iran.
- kyboren 1mo ago
  You make it sound like the USA is the only actor with agency. USSR then RU, PRC, DPRK--just to name a few--have all been playing dirty. Hell, DPRK is propping up regimes and meddling in European affairs as we chat. Yet European vitriol is aimed at the USA, not DPRK. Funny. Besides, plenty of theaters and countries are absolutely more stable today thanks to US efforts. I'm pretty sure Europeans are largely pleased with the results of a certain American meddling in European affairs a bit over 80 years ago. And I'm personally quite pleased with the results of French meddling in American affairs some 250 years ago. Welcome to the game. > the only country ever to invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty was the USA Totally false. It was in fact certain European NATO members and staff who were pushing to invoke Article 5 while US military leaders were dismissive of the idea. The relevant Wikipedia article lays it out pretty well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingenc... "I don't have the time to become an expert on the Danish Air Force". -Gen. Tommy Franks "I think it's safe to say that we won't be asking SACEUR to put together a battle plan for Afghanistan". -Anonymous 'Senior Official' > Many allied soldiers fought and died in ridiculous, extremely counterproductive US-led wars. Well, more than one soldier died, I suppose. But not really that many. Counterinsurgency in the sandbox isn't exactly high-intensity peer-on-peer combat. In any case the contribution was more symbolic than anything; allied forces were not determinative of any outcome. > I'm so very, very happy that we mostly decided to say fuck you to the USA when they tried that bullshit again with Iran. I'll be happy when USA rescinds export licenses this winter for LNG and refined fuels to countries that gave USA the finger but still expect USA to protect their supply lines and sell them the energy they need to survive the winter. Fuck you right back.
  - dinfinity 1mo ago
    Well done proving how the USA is acting like an abusive asshole. Our previous deaths and support don't matter and you'll fuck over your own economy just to hurt us because we didn't want to help you in yet another retarded (unilaterally started!) war. It also makes sense that you compare the USA with North Korea and Russia (whom your dear leader clearly loves). You're partially right: those are terrible regimes as well and they are widely and vocally hated in Europe. To think that Russia who is actively waging war on us isn't just shows your utter typically American self-centered myopic ignorance.