Donald Trump told the president of the European Commission in 2020 that the US would “never come help” if Europe was attacked and also said “Nato is dead”, a senior European commissioner said.
Multiple news outlets said the exchange between Trump and Ursula von der Leyen at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2020 was described in Brussels on Tuesday by Thierry Breton, a French European commissioner responsible for the internal market, with responsibilities including defence.
“You need to understand that if Europe is under attack we will never come to help you and to support you,” Trump said, according to Breton, who was speaking at the European parliament.
According to Breton, Trump also said: “By the way, Nato is dead, and we will leave, we will quit Nato.”
This is why NATO has begun ramping up defense purchases recently.
Trump has been polling higher recently, and that scares the fuck out of Europe, because they know Trump will at best allow Putin to steamroll the region and, at worst, actively use US resources to help dictatorships expand their sphere of influence, culminating in WWIII.
They’re not willing to wait until that happens.
Very happy to see this comment! But is that not a great thing? What’s your take?
On one hand I understand how important it is to defend democracy in Europe. On the other hand, why is Europe depending on the US for their own defense?
WWII and the Cold War is long past, Europe long rebuilt and healthy. If my neighbor is a raging asshole that may come over and kick my ass, I’m armed. I’m getting my neighbors armed and making sure we’re all trained and on the same page. And fuck the guy 2-miles away with his wavering support. He won’t be in my front yard when the Brown (Orange) Shirts come knocking.
Weird hearing Americans decry military spending (because we’re geographically safe), and also decry Trump for wanting out of NATO, or at least demanding they pay their share.
FFS, the most expensive thing on Earth is a second-rate military. Make a damned choice.
They’re not. That’s kind of a weird thing to say, if you have any understanding of the situation.
The point of NATO is to present a unified front against the ever-present authoritarian threat in the region that’s been ongoing since WWII, and the US as a founding member has spent more on their military by orders of magnitude, so has had an outsized voice in NATO.
If they pull out those resources, that would hurt the coalition because, again, with their military spending being more than ten times the next ten countries combined, they’re the silverback gorilla in the room, and losing that against countries willing to throw their entire population as human cannon fodder into conflicts because they don’t care about human costs would hurt a lot. What happens when Russia decides to reclaim the rest of the countries Putin thinks are rightly part of their federation, because Putin has delusions of becoming an historical tsar? What happens when Trump’s US backs Putin in that effort?
Your few guns will not fix any of this. Your few guns will not even help stave off anything in your own county. That’s never how this has worked. This will be ushered in while you get your groceries and watch Netflix, with no clear enemy to fight, after an authoritarian has been voted in as president, as everything else is just a Tuesday.
I appreciate that you think you can head off the next major fascist regime because you’re armed, but that’s not how this works. You will never have a target to shoot at. You will be just like average Germans in the 1930s, waiting for the moment it has gone too far, and then in the late 40s trying to figure out when that moment actually happened.
e: also, there are no ‘orange shirts’. Your terminology is tres bizarre. It’s Brownshirts or red caps. That’s an embarrassing mistake to make.
I mostly agree with your response, except for chastising OP about the color of the shirt. They start by mentioning brown, then parenthetically say “orange” as an unveiled reference to Trump.
This is because Trump is known to use a LOT of bronzer that turns his skin an unusual orange color. So what OP was trying to do was to relate the brownshirts to the presumed task force that Trump would create if he became a dictator.
It wasn’t about the colour of the shirt; that’s what you took from my comment?
lol okay, my point had nothing at all to do with colours.
Brownshirt == fascist paramilitary force
Redcap == fascist paramilitary force
Orange shirt == ?? Uh, maybe someone who should retake cosmetics finals?
e: Oohh, you’re ai right? That’s something to be proud of I guess. (I’m joking)
deleted by creator
Sorry, I was a bit drunk and mixed up a couple of things in my head. (I didn’t see the usernames and thought I was still talking to the same ‘yes and’ troll.)
I’m a dipshit and should know better than to be online when drunk. That’s my bad.
Nice insult, I guess? Is that the new thing instead of calling someone a bot?
Anyways, I guess the explanation of how OP took the traditional brownshirt and updated it to fit the color that represents Trump in order to propose that his fascist forces could be called ‘orangeshirts’ just kinda flew over your head, huh? It’s ok, maybe you’ll get it somewhere down the line.
No, sorry. I mixed things up in my head and didn’t realise you weren’t the troll I’d replied to, so I was overly aggressive. I was kinda drunk, and I should know better than to be online inebriated. I sincerely apologise.
e: I’ve downvoted myself as penance.
It happens. Apology accepted. You don’t have to downvote yourself, lol.
Thank you for being mature enough to recognize the situation for what it was and to reply with honest self-reflection.
OP knows this deep down. People who cling to guns and control over their personal property do so because they feel out of control as to the big things, and if they are honest they can admit it.
Europe isn’t depending on the US for their defense. The countries in Europe have their own militaries and two - three if you count Russia - are nuclear armed. They just don’t have as high a percentage military spending as the US does. Many of them prioritise stuff like healthcare for their populations.
What an absolutely ignorant take. Pick up a high school history textbook, read it, then form an opinion.
block this guy. Troll of the highest order.
I’m somewhat lost on this issue. I feel embarrassingly ignorant about stuff like wars and defense budgets and NATO, etc. Maybe it’s bc I’m young and probably didn’t pay enough attention to history class in high school, but all this to say, if anybody knows of any good learning materials I’d be really grateful! Especially anything ELI5-style, geared toward people like me who have a hard time wrapping our heads around it.
One thing I’m curious about is just, basically what shalafi asked above. Is it true that the US spends a whole lot more on their military than other NATO allies; and if so, why is that? I understand there might not be a simple answer to a question like that, but I figured it wouldn’t hurt to ask.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget
The USA spends a lot of money on military. Why, that’s a very nuanced question with a lot of answers. Since it’s the reasons are:
Fear mongering
Politicians Funneling money to give their constituents jobs.
Republicans perpetually want to spend more. Democrats can’t cut the budget.
Maintaining global influence
The party of fiscal responsibility. But medicare is too expensive, guise!
It’s funny how the US military is the most expensive military in the world then. You guys spend 10x more money than the next guy.
In fact the only reason your military is “better” at all is simply because of that fact. Maybe you should look up what countries are spending on their military before you make stupid comments like that.
I can see your point, but I’d hardly describe this as “a good thing”.
deleted by creator