alt Hacker News> "Trusted". Christ, I guess you subscribe to the Dennis Reynolds "implication" style of coercion. Recall that Denmark readied blood supplies and literally prepared troops for a US invasion. From an ally. "Trusted". Good god.
Yea interesting how they're so much more ready to go fight the US than fight Russia. But if you want to argue there's no trust there then you certainly can't trust our military being in Europe or backstopping NATO so if your goal is to dissolve NATO because of some arguing over, frankly, a lack of European defense investment in an area that is critical to American security (you own it you need to secure it) then well that's up to Europeans to decide.
I'm ignoring all the other stuff because it's boring and uninteresting. No I don't get my news from Twitter. I don't use social media.
> You seem to have missed their point.
No I'm debating their point. There's a difference.
> Suddenly Trump not only heralds Putin and wants to cement his battlefield wins, through his incompetent family reps Kushner (jesus christ) and Witkoff, he continually praises Putin and justifies his aggression, constantly repeating Russia's absurd justifications for this foolish war.
There are two large problems with this.
First, Europe has no ability to engage with Putin, and if Kushner and Witkoff are the people he will see then we should try for some manner of diplomacy even if the people that are sent aren't the ones you would prefer.
Second, while I fully support Ukraine regaining all of the territory it has lost, if Ukraine is unable to re-take the territory and Russia is unable to progress, it's stupid for all these soldiers to just go and die for no reason. If we can stop the war completely, for example, with Ukraine ceding this land, that's up to them but we should at least explore options and try to bring an end to the war.
> Then Trump engages in the same behaviour on behalf of the US, stealing the resources of Venezuela, and openly threatening Cuba. And I guarantee that Trump has repeatedly talked to his drunken halfwit SecWar about invading Canada.
I don't agree with how we've approached Canada.
Venezuela and Cuba are entirely separate things. Happy to discuss why if you want.
> They openly threatened invading Greenland, just because they want it.
It was a dumb negotiating tactic but it's important to us that it is defended to our satisfaction.
> Right now, every capable country should be getting nuclear weapons. Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Brazil, Spain, and on and on.
If you're in favor of nuclear proliferation then sure. But it doesn't include just the "good" countries. It also means Israel gets to ramp up its nuclear forces, Saudi Arabia gets nuclear weapons, Argentina can get nuclear weapons, and anyone else on your naughty list. So we will further double down on a more dangerous world and you're advocating for further breakdowns of international law.
Yea interesting how they're so much more ready to go fight the US than fight Russia.
Ehm, Russia didn't invade Danish territory. The US was threatening to invade Danish territory.
First, Europe has no ability to engage with Putin, and if Kushner and Witkoff are the people he will see then we should try for some manner of diplomacy even if the people that are sent aren't the ones you would prefer.
Putin only wants them because they are weak and can be played.
It was a dumb negotiating tactic but it's important to us that it is defended to our satisfaction.
It was not a negotiation tactic. They already had an agreement for over half a century that they could scale up US military presence as they would like. The US has reduced presence over the years.
Trump wanted to add land like every pathetic little (wannabe) dictator. But the EU showed some teeth suggesting that the trade bazooka could be employed, country moved troops to Greenland (so it wouldn't be a clean invasion without blood). So Trump TACOed out.
If it was a negotiation tactic it is bloody stupid ("art of the deal" I guess). Aside from getting a worse deal then before, as a side-effect many European countries that were planning to buy US arms are now switching to European options.
If you're in favor of nuclear proliferation then sure. But it doesn't include just the "good" countries. It also means Israel gets to ramp up its nuclear forces, Saudi Arabia gets nuclear weapons, Argentina can get nuclear weapons, and anyone else on your naughty list. So we will further double down on a more dangerous world and you're advocating for further breakdowns of international law.
Yes, and that was exactly my point earlier, the Trump and the US opened pandora's box. He disturbed the equilibrium by threatening to leave the NATO/not respecting article 5, by threatening to attack its own allies, by yelling Zelensky out of the White House. This sends ripples all over the world and Europe, Canada, and East Asian countries get the message "we cannot trust the US as an ally anymore", which leads to proliferation and probably more wars. It's very likely that Putin will try some sort of attack on NATO countries soon, just to test how firm Trump's commitments are. This would never have happened if he didn't weaken NATO. It's understandable that Poland gets nervous and wants to be able to MAD Russia.