[igorramazanov]

My personal opinion is that, it's because with the previous political and cultural trends, West had (maybe still has) actually quite high chances of collapsing and falling in the long term due to its own indecisiveness, lots of words mixed a lack of actions against coordinated and targeted efforts of Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Belarus, Cuba, China, Syria and North Korea.

I remember national state TV in Russia talking about "we are ready to nuke United States if needed" in 2014 [1].

So, domestically, government made sure people believe that the West is the mortal enemy and we were are already at some kind of cold war since Crimea annexation, it's just West didn't notice, seems like.

Then, there were also artifical immigration crisis at EU borders created by Russia and Belarus.

And many other various hybrid and asymmetrical attacks.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA9mVLomYo8

So, USA recognized the danger and started dismantling the problem piece by piece, to ensure a long term peace and safety of its people. Could it be better organized and coordinated with allies? Probably, yes, but the meaning stays.

[graemep]

If the west collapses it will be because of its internal problems. Inefficiency, bad government, inequality.

I think you are right that the West is complacent about its enemies because it cannot really shake the belief in its superiority that came from winning the cold war and dominating the world in the decades after, I just do not think that is the biggest threat.

[pjc50]

> Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Belarus, Cuba, China, Syria and North Korea.

Putting these all in the same list conflates very different situations.

    - Big actual threat with body count: Russia.
    - Russian proxies: Syria (very lethal, but mostly within Syria, not a "threat to the west", complicated by Daesh and AQ)
    - Nasty autocracy but stable cold war: NK
    - Autocracy, but largely minding their own business and with no real capability to threaten: Cuba, Venezuela
    - Major trading partner: China

> USA recognized the danger and started dismantling the problem piece by piece

Trump era has systematically downplayed the threat from Russia. And let's not forget how many members of Trump campaign staff were jailed due to Russian influence.

[graemep]

Is Russia really a threat? It has a small economy. Its no threat at all to the US, and could be easily be beaten by the European NATO countries. It has struggled to take on just Ukraine with western backing.

China has a far bigger economy and far bigger armed forces. It has a history of aggression and has border disputes with multiple countries.

I strongly suspect that people who downplay the risk from China have not yet internalised the fact that no-white countries are powerful too now.

[pjc50]

The airliner shootdown? The polonium poisonings? Miscellaneous sabotage attempts in Europe? In addition to, you know, the active war.

There's a lot of things that China "might" do but hasn't so far translated into significant violence, beyond the low-intensity border dispute in the mountains with India. Do they have power? Yes. Are they making threats? Other than a war of words with Japan, not really. What is this "history of aggression"?

Between China and the US, only one of those two has made threats to the territorial integrity of Europe.

[jurgenburgen]

> So, USA recognized the danger and started dismantling the problem piece by piece, to ensure a long term peace and safety of its people. Could it be better organized and coordinated with allies? Probably, yes, but the meaning stays.

By becoming part of the problem? Trump threatening to invade Greenland was a wake-up call for Europe. Actively supporting forces that want to tear down democracy in Europe isn’t particularly helpful either.

If we become like China and Russia then why is our civilization in any way better?