• iwndwyt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      25 days ago

      Let me get this straight, you’re siding with the enemy occupation? If not, then why would you have a problem with a sovereign nation retaking their own country.

      “A stay-behind operation is one where a country places secret operatives or organizations in its own territory, for use in case of a later enemy occupation. The stay-behind operatives would then form the basis of a resistance movement, and act as spies from behind enemy lines.”

      They leave spies in their own territory when being invaded in order to get their country back. How dare they‽

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    I mean if Europe wants to increase their military funding and move items in house I think that would be a wonderful idea. Because America is not a reliable partner in this at all in the past two decades.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      Sorta, but not really tbh. The US was always intrinsically backstopping the security side of things. Without us in it - and I mean this very seriously - it’s not really a credible threat to Russia or anyone else anymore.

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    It isn’t credible now. It likely won’t exist at all in 4 years. Unless it cedes even more decision making authority to the US and becomes even more of a puppet.

    • tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      Doesn’t all authority already lie with the USA? If we’re going to be real, I mean. I’m sure France thinks otherwise but let’s be real: NATO was always the “Uncle Sam will protect Europe from Russia”-treaty.

      • Miaou@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        France knows this, that’s why it wasn’t in NATO for most its history. This only changed when one of our president needed war crime buddies

  • bouh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    The biggest thing will be all those nato countries who can’t do anything with their US weapons if the US says so.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      If only there was a country in europe that had voiced this concern in the 50s, all of that could have been avoided… Oh wait.

    • ziggurat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      That is only if they want to continue to buy new weapons, not if they intend to male weapons in Europe

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        No. I mean the weapons they have now. F35 for example. If a war happens in Europe, will those planes be useful without US support and authorizations? US can do a lot of harm to Europe with that.

        • ziggurat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          26 days ago

          Yes let me explain my answer I didn’t elaborate properly.

          I think the only recourse the US has if European countries use these weapons without authorization is that the US will not sell more weapons.

          And if Europe continues to intreases it’s weapon and ammunition production like they have the last two years that might not be a deal breaker for Europe

          • bouh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            26 days ago

            I’m not sure Europe can make F35 parts for example, which will not fly for long without it, or ammunitions for various US weapons. I hope it’ll be a wake up call to make and use EU instead.

            • TacticsConsort@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              26 days ago

              Just my two cents as an assembly line guy: Parts on aircraft fall into three categories

              -Big custom fuckoff parts. They’re not high tech but they’re huge and they’re a specific shape so you need a huge, precise and very expensive mould/die/whatever to make them. Anyone with the aircraft and a decent engineer could design a machine to make these parts but they would be left with a smoking crater where their wallet was after getting the mould made.

              -Easy parts. Sure, an aircraft fuel pipe is worth 20k, but the civilian parts are made to higher standards anyways, we can find one no problem.

              -Secret technical complex parts. Proprietary cutting edge stuff, which is frankly just bolted onto already complete aircraft. Obviously you can’t replace it if you don’t even know how it works, but the US doesn’t let that stuff out of their direct control very often anyways.

              Don’t fucking talk to me about engines though, those are a whole different beast

              TLDR: We can totally keep our F35s in the air as long as the parts we’re replacing aren’t the skin panels, the engines, or the Secret Third Thing. And as long as we have the money.

        • Estiar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          25 days ago

          That sword cuts both ways. The F-35 has parts from all over the US and EU. This doesn’t extend to every weapon system, but if the US refuses to support F-35s, their own F-35s would lose support too.

  • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    NATO will be fine. They’ll just have to up their game a bit militarily. If America wants to be insular and wrap a flag of isolationism around them, it’ll hurt in the short term, but after four years of being more independent of Americas tit, its more than likely the US that will find itself less relevant globally.

    Even before this, there was already rumblings, not just in China, but elsewhere, about ditching the american dollar standard and returning to the gold standard. That’s just going to gain momentum as soon as Trump starts trying to wave his mushroom around.

  • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    Good job to all of the fucks who stayed home because of Gaza, thinking that not voting and letting the GOP rise to power would actually help the situation.

    Yeah, because Netanyahu’s extreme right-wing policy was a problem with the US’s left-wing party, right?

      • iwndwyt@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        “Good job to all the fucks who repeated genocide wasn’t that big of a deal lmao.”

        “You lost. You should really shut the fuck up.”

        I don’t think anyone was saying that “genocide wasn’t that big of a deal.” What I repeatedly heard was people rightfully pointing out that the Gaza genocide would be much worse under a Trump presidency. Only bad-faith actors were twisting their words and pretending that that was condoning genocide. You fell for the propaganda… or you’re one of the ones spreading it.

    • NoLifeGaming@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      So you want me to reward holocaust Harris and genocide joe for not doing ANYTHING to stop it? No, I chose to teach them a lesson. Don’t blame us. Blame the dems for not doing enough and putting a shit candidate.

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        No, I chose to teach them a lesson.

        The only lesson you taught them is that the general public wants more right-wing ideas. What you’ve done is teach trans, blacks, and other minorities a lesson, the lesson that they should be beaten and driven out of their country. You’ve taught that women should be submissive, treated like property, like they are in Saudi Arabia.

        Good job. I hope you reflect on your “lesson” in the next four years, as your right to vote is systematical dismantled.

      • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        I’d rather lose my hearing than vision if those are the only two options, despite not actually wanting to lose neither - which is not an option.

        • Nasan@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          26 days ago

          Lose both, then you can shamelessly shift blame rather than risk having to bear any kind of responsibility that comes with using the remaining option.

          These people are as detached from reality as the MAGA crowd if they think they’re taking any kind of moral high road by staying home.

      • perspectiveshifting@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        What lesson exactly? That if the ideal candidate isn’t run, a subset of liberals will pick the worse of two options?

        All that does is teach the conservatives that if they can convince you that the democrat