[sofixa]

No no, the remarks were pretty damn fucking serious.

And the fact that the US could elect such an unserious and demented criminal, twice is proof enough that there is a lot to worry about. Who's to say who will be next? Or after that?

[palmotea]

> No no, the remarks were pretty damn fucking serious.

Trump says a lot of things. It's foolish to take every outrage seriously. It's pretty clear it's just a tactic of his (albeit a dumb one).

> And the fact that the US could elect such an unserious and demented criminal, twice is proof enough that there is a lot to worry about. Who's to say who will be next? Or after that?

Ok, then. If you're serious: kick the US out of NATO. Increase military spending, go it alone. Really treat the US as a non-ally.

Or, you know. Wait for him to leave office or die (he's 80!), and write the Democrats and tell them to get their fucking house in order. Trump didn't win so much as the Democrats were utterly incompetent.

[andrew_lettuce]

This completely ignores the very real, very serious damage he's doing right now, and the doors he's opening for future leaders. Discounting the dumb things he says is very dangerous. His words could lead to oh, I don't know - an insurrection?

[calgoo]

it takes time to build up an army, we are not a unified Europe. I think both are happening at the moment - We are building our military, we are taking over "supporting" Ukraine as Trump is stepping away from that. And im sure there is some hope that the US will go back to the way it was.

Imagine you outsourced your entire company to a third party company and only have a few managers around. Then, you need to move all that support from the 3rd parties back in-house. Its not a task that is easy to do, and if we also take into account the required factories etc that need to be built to support, that takes even more time.

Its something that is happening, we are building new trade agreements with countries around the world, excluding the US. We are working on our own defense packs, and eventually if the US decides to leave NATO, or we form our own alliance, then that will happen.

[mctaylor]

And Trump was elected with the support and influence of the very cadre of oligarchs running much of silicon valley: Elon Musk, Alex Karp, Palmer Luckey, etc., etc.

Elon Musk (not Trump) is actively still weaponizing algorithmic control of X to try to destabilize US "allies". Larry Ellison is doing the same thing with a whole swathe of media companies and TikTok.

The issue is the authoritarianism and patriarchal narcissism of an American-centered global elite who have gotten so used to "winning" they began to think it was God-given right and not something they'd achieved because their winning had (broadly speaking) been in everyone else's interest.

Now that their mindset has shifted to win at all (read: everyone one else's) cost(s) - do you REALLY think that everyone is going to blindly keep following? For how long?

[sofixa]

> Trump says a lot of things. It's foolish to take every outrage seriously. It's pretty clear it's just a tactic of his (albeit a dumb one).

And he has also acted on a lot of the things he has said. It's foolish to ignore him.

> Ok, then. If you're serious: kick the US out of NATO. Increase military spending, go it alone. Really treat the US as a non-ally.

What? It's not possible to expell a country from NATO as per its charter. And European countries are increasing military spending, by and large buying, in that order, domestic, European, major NATO aligned suppliers (most notably South Korea), and the US only when there is no choice (so F-35 and munitions/replacements for existing systems). And of course this ignores that current European military capabilities are plenty for European strategic autonomy.

> Or, you know. Wait for him to leave office or die (he's 80!), and write the Democrats and tell them to get their fucking house in order. Trump didn't win so much as the Democrats were utterly incompetent.

I don't think you're getting it. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The trust with the US is irreversibly broken and not getting repaired in the decades to come. The American political system is broken beyond repair, and even the opposition to the current wannabe fascist regime are not campaigning to change anything about it. This means that regardless of who's in power next, even if they're the best thing since sliced bread, there is no guarantee the following elections won't bring another bout of wannabe fascists threatening to invade their allies.

There is no going back from that without major political reform in the US and years to earn back trust. AKA not happening. Even the opposition, even the most radical opposition, venerate American political institutions as the works of deities that can only be slightly changed, not replaced wholesale. And, from the outside, the whole system - how elections are done (you need proportional representation, term limits, no janky districts), representative structures (flat two seat per state senate doesn't work anymore, house of representatives having skewed and fixed numbers doesn't either), judicial system (political appointments and elections, and for life appointments, do not work), supreme court (political appointments and for life appointments do not work), etc are overdue by decades for serious structural reforms.

[palmotea]

>> Trump says a lot of things. It's foolish to take every outrage seriously. It's pretty clear it's just a tactic of his (albeit a dumb one).

> And he has also acted on a lot of the things he has said. It's foolish to ignore him.

Did he invade Greenland? Bomb Canada? Those are the specific outrageous things he said that we're talking about here. As far as I can tell, he created his outrage and distractions there, and moved on.

> What? It's not possible to expell a country from NATO as per its charter.

So what? You're claiming the alliance is irreparably broken, who cares about the text of a treaty?

Just do it, put your money where your mouth is.

> I don't think you're getting it. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. The trust with the US is irreversibly broken and not getting repaired in the decades to come.

I don't think you get it, either: how long can you maintain that attitude without the irritant (the 80-year-old person that is Donald Trump)?

Also, you're acting all outraged, but present in your messages (but unacknowledged) are other and more tangible violations of trust, like European countries shirking their military spending commitments and letting their militaries decline to disrepair, because they expected the US to defend them forever for free.

[sofixa]

> So what? You're claiming the alliance is irreparably broken, who cares about the text of a treaty

The alliance is broken, yes, and everyone is treating it as much. Kicking the US out, other than being impossible, will only piss off the petulant children.

> Did he invade Greenland? Bomb Canada? Those are the specific outrageous things he said that we're talking about here. As far as I can tell, he created his outrage and distractions there, and moved on

He was damn close to attacking Greenland, so much so that various European nations felt the need to send soldiers there to show they're commited to defending it. It doesn't matter that he didn't actually do the absurd.

> I don't think you get it, either: how long can you maintain that attitude without the irritant (the 80-year-old person that is Donald Trump)?

Geopolitical priorities and alignments take years to shift. So does military procurement. Once the US is no longer reliable, it will take years of reliability before there is a chance to mend the relationship.

> Also, you're acting all outraged, but present in your messages (but unacknowledged) are other and more tangible violations of trust, like European countries shirking their military spending commitments and letting their militaries decline to disrepair, because they expected the US to defend them forever for free.

I'm sorry, but that is just pure grade A American bullshit. It's insulting to everyone's intelligence to spout such nonsense. Various European countries spend to various extents. Nobody, is getting protection for "free". They're all pitching in to different levels (some like Poland, France, UK, definitely more than others). And the US was getting plenty in exchange, most notably bases to run their famous and intimidating logistics. The US definitely loses more out of losing those than European nations that have the British and French nuclear umbrellas if it push came to shove.