[atmosx]

A common misconception - often echoed on this site - is that NATO allies and the U.S. operate on equal terms. They don’t. If the U.S. wants to sell 100 F-35s to European nations, it will happen.

Even today, with all this talk around NATO, there’s a massive U.S. military presence at NATO bases across Europe.

These forces are, in effect, under U.S. control, stationed in countries like Germany and Italy. And if Germany suddenly decided it wanted them gone - well, it’s not their call.

TL;DR: Life on the empire’s periphery might be comfortable, but you don’t get to choose your enemies - and you still have to pay your dues, or else.

[Propelloni]

That's a fantasy, unless you think Germany is occupied by the USA. But that's not the case. Occupation ended in 1954, since then the USA military is stationed in Germany (and Italy) due to contracts. This so called deployment contracts have been confirmed in 1990, when Germany became a sovereign nation again. I know, the current USA is not big on "rule of law" anymore, but even a bad deal maker should understand that there is not much to win in a war over bases they get for free now. (I'm not saying that maintaining those bases is cheap, but that's more on how the USA runs military bases than anything else.)

I find it refreshing, however, that the "we are the evil empire now" idea is getting out of the closet. Call a spade a spade.

[atmosx]

> I find it refreshing, however, that the "we are the evil empire now" idea is getting out of the closet. Call a spade a spade.

“Good” and “evil” are moral constructs that haven’t played a meaningful role in documented geopolitics since at least the 4th century BC.

There’s a well-known quote often attributed to Hastings Ismay that captures NATO’s original purpose. I won’t paste it here as it might come off as a bit harsh, and I’m not trying to drag this discussion out further.

> That's a fantasy, unless you think Germany is occupied by the USA. But that's not the case.

Circling back to Germany—I honestly can't think of a more humiliating moment for any NATO member than this[^1]. Sure, Mr. Biden was more aesthetically pleasing than Mr. Trump but take a moment to consider the symbolism and the signals sent to ally nations. Regardless of media narratives, the events of September 26, 2022, marked a turning point that fundamentally altered Germany’s economic path and future. It was a hostile act on a massive scale, and its consequences are undeniably real for the country.

[^1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8

[Propelloni]

> “Good” and “evil” are moral constructs that haven’t played a meaningful role in documented geopolitics since at least the 4th century BC.

I'm showing my age here, sorry. It is a play on something Ronald Reagan said about another empire.

[amenhotep]

Evidently you don't know much about humiliating moments for NATO members.

[rat87]

I think what altered Germany and the EU path was the full scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. It humiliated German politicians and their decades long policy of trying to appease and cooperate with Russia. Biden and Obama were right to warn them about over reliance on Russia

[mcv]

> They don’t. If the U.S. wants to sell 100 F-35s to European nations, it will happen.

How do you imagine that will work? The US may have to lower the price more than they can afford to. Some countries have already cancelled their F-35 orders. You can't force someone to buy what they don't want.

[Cthulhu_]

The F-35 was sold to us as an important multi billion business deal, with lots of European companies being promised to be subcontractors or technology partners; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... has a good overview of how much was involved. Basically, you scratch my back, we'll scratch yours kind of deal.

In hindsight, the project was (as expected) over budget etc. I wish our government(s) had given that money to European fighter jets instead. There's a chance the US will remote disable the jets that have been put into service now, or withold service / spare parts.

[mcv]

If the US withholds parts or services to European countries, that would certainly be an interesting twist, considering the Dutch government used this arrangement as a reason why they couldn't withhold parts to Israel despite the ongoing genocide. Had Netherland decided otherwise, the US might use that as a precendent. Or maybe they'll just set the precedent regardless.

[chgs]

> You can't force someone to buy what they don't want.

The opium wars would disagree

[JumpCrisscross]

The United States using military force against the home territory of a NATO member basically guarantees Chinese troops and weapons in Canada and Mexico. We would (deservedly) force the world to ally against us as we’d have proven ourselves to be an expansionist menace.

[dfadsadsf]

Even serious discussion of Chinese soldiers in Canada or Mexico is clear casus belli and surefire way for those countries to be occupied. Chinese soldiers on the border is existential to US and when dealing with existential risks countries tend to put funny concepts such as UN charter or human rights aside.

Canada is absolutely indefensible with no strategic depth or ability to get new supplies. Mexico is harder to occupy but their military is a joke and again easy to block all external supplies. Very doable.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Even serious discussion of Chinese soldiers in Canada or Mexico is clear casus belli and surefire way for those countries to be occupied

Which is why military alliance discussions aren’t conducted in public. The series of announcements would be e.g. Xi visiting Ottawa for trade talks and then announcing that Canada is under its nuclear umbrella.

> Canada is absolutely indefensible with no strategic depth or ability to get new supplies. Mexico is harder to occupy but their military is a joke and again easy to block all external supplies

Which is why they’ve sought external security guarantees. Now that America is threatening invasion, its security guarantees are diluted. So you need someone else; the only option is China (unless the EU beefs up).

[mcv]

I don't really think China is an option either. Maybe for the west coast, but I really don't think they can do much for the eastern half of Canada. Though EU+China might do it.

Problem is, China might be happy to see the US invade Canada, because then they can finally take Taiwan. And that's the real danger of Trump's foolish aggression: by weakening American's alliances, he's giving China more space to assert itself and take what they want.

[chgs]

Perhaps the us should consider this before it talks about invading nato counties.

[ben_w]

> Even serious discussion of Chinese soldiers in Canada or Mexico is clear casus belli and surefire way for those countries to be occupied. Chinese soldiers on the border is existential to US and when dealing with existential risks countries tend to put funny concepts such as UN charter or human rights aside.

Talk of the Chinese being invited in by Canada or Mexico is precisely as much of a casus belli as Ukraine saying "please let us join NATO so Russia won't invade us!". Canada already has reason to fear invasion regardless, as Trump keeps talking about annexing them.

It didn't work out well for Russia, which is currently experiencing in Ukraine much what the US itself experienced in Vietnam. Or indeed in Cuba (Bay of Pigs) the year before the nuclear missiles which were much closer to a real casus belli.

[computerfriend]

The people wanted the opium.

[ggm]

The implications are that non financial or indirect financial leverage would be used to make you "want" to complete purchase.

[benterix]

Well that period seems to be ending right in front of our eyes.

[Sabinus]

It's only been months of the Trump admin and already the imperial attitudes are coming out. It's 2025, not 1900. Converting the US into an empire isn't going to go as well as you think it will.

[neor]

Saying that military action is not off the table to take Greenland is literally insane.

Greenland has always been an ally, if for safety reasons the US needs more military presence on the island they could have just asked for it and it would most likely have been approved.

There is zero reason to use force, but if the US would take such steps I wouldn't be surprised if Europe starts replacing the dollar as reserve currency. This could trigger other nations like China to follow. This move would hurt the US economy way worse than the current trade war does.

[rat87]

Those massively military bases exist to protect Europe. The countries can of course choose to tell soldiers to fuck off but now is not a particularly good time for that. The real danger is that Trump abandons our allies because a dictator flattered him