Ukraine

[ootlg]

Feb 14, 2022 13:00:26 GMT flatandy said:

Utter pish, on so many levels. Much of the US defence establishment is desperate to get out of Europe and to have the Europeans pay for their own defence.

So why doesn't it?

[perrykneeham]

Because nobody actually believes that the EU could put together a credible force.

[flatandy]

Half of what Baloo says is true. The EU has never put together a credible force. Also there is a split in the US defence establishment - some want to withdraw from Europe and spend all the money on pork projects for their constituents, but some are still internationalists who believe in the old treaties.

[perrykneeham]

Everything I said is true, but it is perhaps not the whole story.

[mids]

The EU (apart from maybe France) has spent generations suckling greedily at the US military teat. Now that the milk has gone from a creamy gush, under previous governments, to a sour watery dribble under Biden, the EU is left mouthing desperately at the dry, withered nipple of a mythical soft power bosom.

[perrykneeham]

Where us the UN in all this? Oh, yeah, that's another institution with precisely fuckall credibility.

[flatandy]

I'm glad you'd like the UN and EU to have more actual power and more military power and for more and better internationalist solutions to be available.

[perrykneeham]

I wish they had some moral authority. That's some real power.

[flatandy]

I'm glad you agree that its time to invest the UN with real and moral authority rather than just carp from the sidelines and try and undermine it.

[perrykneeham]

It's past time for the UN to have some moral authority. It's a squabbling talking shop.

[bertruss2]

The EU has never put together a credible force.

NATO is the EU's "credible force". The problem is that the Americans are running it to implement their America-first policy. More fundamentally, it's based on the very bad idea of using nuclear weapons if conventional weapons fail to do the job. The agreement on nuclear disarmament in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is not being fulfilled, so the hope of achieving peace peacefully isn't being met.

[ootlg]

"Because nobody actually believes that the EU could put together a credible force."

Doesn't answer my question. At all.

"Half of what Baloo says is true. The EU has never put together a credible force. Also there is a split in the US defence establishment - some want to withdraw from Europe and spend all the money on pork projects for their constituents, but some are still internationalists who believe in the old treaties."

Half doesn't answer my question. What/who is the US defence establishment? Which part of it are the internationalists who believe in the old treaties and why? This sounds like guesswork to me, and does nothing to convince anyone that the US has altruistic reasons for being the main contributor by far to NATO.

link

[perrykneeham]

That just emphasises the point that many EU countries are happy to be passengers and couldn't possibly be relied upon to form a viable defence alliance without the USA and Canada, but also without Turkeye and UK.

[perrykneeham]

Who said that the US had altruistic reasons for underwriting NATO?

[bertruss2]

The UN orders the UK to give up its occupation of the Chagos Islands. Mauritius UN ambassador lands on Peros Banhos atoll and raises the flag of his country. A Chagossian delegation sings their national anthem and the Mauritian prime minister sends a message of congratulation.

Meanwhile, the British PM is footling around, trying to pretend he's Winston Churchill.

[mids]

We'll sell Chagos to Mauritius.

[ootlg]

Feb 15, 2022 8:19:30 GMT perrykneeham said:

That just emphasises the point that many EU countries are happy to be passengers and couldn't possibly be relied upon to form a viable defence alliance without the USA and Canada, but also without Turkeye and UK.

It emphasises your point of course, but flies wide of mine. The US spends $800billion taxpayer money on NATO not as a humanitarian gesture but as a business: $800billion dollars is poured into the US arms industry. It's big business. That's what it's all about. Anyone who believes otherwise is a fool.

[ootlg]

Feb 15, 2022 10:50:22 GMT mids said:

We'll sell Chagos to Mauritius.

Truss'll probably try and sell it to Mauritania.

[perrykneeham]

Does it spend $800B on NATO?

[ootlg]

Check it out.