Did…did Vance just call European countries “backwoods”? He couldn’t possibly have, right? He’s not that stupid…right?
Bro, you know he’s fucking dumb af.
He graduated from Yale…
fucking LOL.
Hey bud, I have a PhD from MIT (seriously, I do). I can’t tell you how many fucking morons permeate the halls of academia. A guy in my lab once asked me how to convert a flow rate to a pressure. In a fucking lab at MIT. I had to explain to my own fucking advisor that the bullshit rules of thumb one learns in chemistry class are NOT reliable.
Anyone who goes to one of these universities has a certain degree of intelligence and access to wealth. You can certainly trade a little bit of one for the other but only within limits. And I would be extremely careful just labelling him dumb because he’s a populist.
Why is that stupid? Europeans are dependent on him now. European leaders will demurely congratulate Trump and him on their victory and hope they won’t be hit too hard by what comes next.
To call a bunch of countries that rank much higher than the States on quality of life “backwoods” is a pretty wild statement. The U.S. is the proudly unwiped asshole of the developed world.
-
Facts don’t matter to Trump or Vance. Don’t expect anything in that department. They care about getting ahead or looking like they are.
-
In my reading, Vance didn’t call European countries “backwoods”:
“I’m not going to go to some backwoods country and tell them how to live their lives, […] But European countries should theoretically share American values, especially about some very basic things like free speech.”
My paraphrasing of that would be: “There are ‘backwoods’ countries and I expect nothing of them. But European countries must share our values and need to leave our propaganda platform untouched.”
My reading is:
There are ‘backwoods’ countries and I am not going to be telling them explicitly how to live their lives, they should by default share our values and be doing what we do.
With this reading he is using backwood countries as european countries. With the American Republican party, you can safely assume the most offensive interpretation of their sentences because history shows us that they usually mean it.
-
That’s hilarious. Vance thinks he can control the EU.
Trump has long shared his disdain for NATO – during his first term, he reportedly privately discussed pulling out of the alliance completely.
Which would at this point not be unwelcomed.
It wouldn’t be fantastic, the UK and France can’t project the same kind of power the US does.
Well, true.
But on the other hand, sanity from not being beholden to a demented child-raping fascist is a big bonus.
*alleged demented, *allegedly child-raping …
It’s not like the us would be out of Europe’s lives though, it would be even more obnoxious as there wouldn’t be any shared standards any more
Is the US power projection at the long term benefit of the EU though? The consistent destabilization of the Middle East for instance brought more tension to Europe as people had to flee from the region. EU member states getting dragged into US wars didn’t help our image in the world either.
When it comes to defense, UK and France have enough nukes for effective deterrent. The EU is also large enough to thwart aggression at its borders and buffer zones like countering the Russian invasion of Ukraine, if the EU chooses to develop and maintain a joint defense infrastructure. Unfortunately that was postponed instead of forwarded after Biden won in 2020 and EU politicians went back to the status quo.
“Power projection” isn’t necessary for a strictly defensive alliance.
The fact that a direct attack on one member counts as a direct attack on all members (some of which have nukes) is enough.Unless you’re going to nuke an invading force then many of the smaller or less well equipped NATO member nations are going to rely on the power projection capabilities of the bigger militaries in the alliance, right?
I can’t see how this makes any sense in a geopolitical view.
They aren’t being nice to our oligarch, that isn’t a good enough reason?
So not only declared JD Ottoman-fucker Vance his incompetence and ignorance of global affairs but also admits being on putins payroll.
Your government, bought and paid for.
I’m Glad the Owner of those Websites isn’t now a High Ranking Government Official! THAT would be a HUGE Conflict of Interest!
If that threat is even an option to bluff, then unfortunately NATO will likely be going away no matter what :(
I so hope I’m wrong.
Why? If the US withdraws the rest can stay, the framework exists. It’s a matter of reciprocity. NATO/the EU would just need to expand her nuclear arsenal
Yes the US is absolutely the 500 pound gorilla in the room, but if the US manages to burn their relations with their allies, and stuff like 5 eyes would cease, they are essentially blind. The US operates it’s intelligence network at the behest of countries and relies on information sharing just as much.
And with Iran and a LOOOOONG list of groups and people and countries they fucked over, angered, bombed, etc… the US will not see the next 9/11 coming.
The US has a lot of capabilities, but if a group of radicals manage to hijack several planes and bring down your new York landmark and damage the Pentagon, just imagine what better organized and equipped players can do.
Oh, and NATO operates primarily US weaponry, this also has a reason. If the US withdraws from NATO I think we will see cancelled orders and an orders placed elsewhere… within NATO member states.
“Don’t try to get the government involved in the business of billionaires, unless the government is giving them billions more of taxpayer dollars, or making it illegal to compete with them”
Shame, but now we are gonna block greedy tech megacorps even harder!
Where does the “veto” un your title come from? The US can’t veto shit. And Vance’ quote is to stop support for NATO, not veto.
From the site. I don’t change their headlines.
Ah, but they changed theirs :D
