[rmbyrro]

Yea, some of the points have merit, but it's a bit biased. The conclusion that Europe will move away from the US is dubious. I think most likely it will bring them all closer together. We're seeing even peoples in Finland and Sweden now in favor of joining NATO.. .

[beachwood23]

> most likely it will bring them all closer together.

You are right, in that this will most likely be the short-term action. NATO / EU will be more tightly bound to the US out of necessity. But necessity does not engender gratitude and goodwill - usually it precipitates resentment and struggle. That is why in the long term, I predict poor relations between NATO / EU.

Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.

[orteam]

I'm not sure EU will resent the US. Why do you think so? By that logic Russia will start resenting China and try to decouple real soon. EU needs US for the nuclear umbrella. Their nukes are not enough for MAD equilibrium with Russia. Also, a weakened Russia that defers to China is actually very good for the West. It is not so great for China posturing either, as China is perceived as standing alone against a unified West.

[rmbyrro]

Especially because Russia was the only strong ally China had. Now all their allies are weak. And they're surrounded by hostile powers.

Russia military reputation was severely damaged. Not saying they're not dangerous, but certainly not as much as many imagined.

One of the main causes is the massive corruption in their military. China suffers from the same internal issue. No one can say whether the levels of corruption are similar, but it casts a dark shadow over China's military trustworthiness.

NATO, on the other hand, has proved capable of successfully supporting a weak country against a much greater military power without even stepping foot in battle.

Maybe the most important contributions from NATO (by NATO, read 80% the US) was in strategy and tactics. If they just had sent weapons without good strategy and tactics, the outcome would have been different.