Jump to content

Facts about Europe


Recommended Posts

Forget what is, in Europe at this moment, and lets focus on the Europe that would be, if Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA.


1. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, and they acted like they currently do, THEY WOULD NOT BE IN THE UNITED NATIONS, being as their dues are currently paid by the USA at this point in time.

Which actually means that they probably would be still in the UN, because they would be paying their own dues.

Which means that they wouldn't be so fast to sign off on all kinds of restrictions and resolution which also apply to them and their friends as well.

2. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, they would be working 40 hour work weeks or more, because they would need to, because what they currently have is both not enough, nor sufficient as a leading world power.

And they wouldn't be so fast to drink all time, and even use drugs, because their schools and their roads and their workplaces would be what is important to them.
LIKE what is important to the USA.

3. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would care a whole lot more about how their country is being run, who is in office, and what kinds of things are happening in their country, because they wouldn't want what they have destroyed from within, because it would matter to them, because they are the ones who would be paying for it, and working for it.

4. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would certainly not have free colleges, and free healthcare, that money would be going to the military, because they would need 10 times the military forces that they currently have, to survive Unsheltered, and not carried.

Because everybody wants what everybody else has, that's life.

They're sheltered from life.

 

 

 

P.S.

 

 

The kind of a military forces that they would need, inorder to survive without the USA's help... would be able to turn their current civilization that they have it today, into a puppet state inside of 3 battles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What if, what if, what if?" Axioms of power, wealth, and fame directing 4 axses of interpretation separating events into cartegorical bull sh!t 7 ways and 14 polarizations of the same details.

 

Tradewinds, you are tubular as Fallopian in line of sight and thought. Intersections of tunnel vision cradle to grave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forget what is, in Europe at this moment, and lets focus on the Europe that would be, if Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA.

 

 

1. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, and they acted like they currently do, THEY WOULD NOT BE IN THE UNITED NATIONS, being as their dues are currently paid by the USA at this point in time.

 

Which actually means that they probably would be still in the UN, because they would be paying their own dues.

 

Which means that they wouldn't be so fast to sign off on all kinds of restrictions and resolution which also apply to them and their friends as well.

 

2. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, they would be working 40 hour work weeks or more, because they would need to, because what they currently have is both not enough, nor sufficient as a leading world power.

 

And they wouldn't be so fast to drink all time, and even use drugs, because their schools and their roads and their workplaces would be what is important to them.

LIKE what is important to the USA.

 

3. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would care a whole lot more about how their country is being run, who is in office, and what kinds of things are happening in their country, because they wouldn't want what they have destroyed from within, because it would matter to them, because they are the ones who would be paying for it, and working for it.

 

4. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would certainly not have free colleges, and free healthcare, that money would be going to the military, because they would need 10 times the military forces that they currently have, to survive Unsheltered, and not carried.

 

Because everybody wants what everybody else has, that's life.

 

They're sheltered from life.

 

 

 

 

P.S.

 

 

The kind of a military forces that they would need, inorder to survive without the USA's help... would be able to turn their current civilization that they have it today, into a puppet state inside of 3 battles.

 

 

This is ridiculous. The only nation that realistically would defeat Europe combined is the USA. Lets have a look at some details though:

"4. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would certainly not have free colleges, and free healthcare, that money would be going to the military, because they would need 10 times the military forces that they currently have, to survive Unsheltered, and not carried."

 

So Britain alone needs to spend 600Bn dollars on defence every year? The USA only spends marginally more than that and it would amount to 25% of GDP putting Britain on a war footing greater than America in 1917. This would be insane. It also wouldn't be sustainable. If you think the UK needs to be military capable of spending virtually the same as the USA then I can only assume you believe the USA to be a threat to the UK. In which case this American carrying of Europe is protection from America. Sounds awfullly like a protection racket.

 

To put it into perspective. The level of funding you want to see in Europe would mean Poland spending more on its military than Russia.

 

Would you really want to live in a world where the combined military budget of the EU was five times that of America?

 

" If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would care a whole lot more about how their country is being run, who is in office, and what kinds of things are happening in their country, because they wouldn't want what they have destroyed from within, because it would matter to them, because they are the ones who would be paying for it, and working for it."

 

Sorry what makes you think Europeans don't care how their countries are being run. A greater proportion of Europeans vote in elections than Americans do, so looks to me like Americans care less than Europeans do.

 

"1. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, and they acted like they currently do, THEY WOULD NOT BE IN THE UNITED NATIONS, being as their dues are currently paid by the USA at this point in time.

Which actually means that they probably would be still in the UN, because they would be paying their own dues.

 

Which means that they wouldn't be so fast to sign off on all kinds of restrictions and resolution which also apply to them and their friends as well."

 

Some evidence America is paying the UN dues of all European nations. European nations do act in their own interests during the UN though but yes restrictions on trade in an embargo hurts both nations, of course.

 

US military spending far outstrips that needed for defence of the USA, but that is the price America pays to be a superpower. Other than Germany European nations are third rate powers at best, they don't need to spend the same amount and couldn't afford to even if they wanted to. America has a significantly bigger population than any European nation and Europe does contain two nuclear powers, there is little direct threat any nation even the USA can realistically pose to a nuclear armed nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is ridiculous. The only nation that realistically would defeat Europe combined is the USA. Lets have a look at some details though:

"4. If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would certainly not have free colleges, and free healthcare, that money would be going to the military, because they would need 10 times the military forces that they currently have, to survive Unsheltered, and not carried."

 

So Britain alone needs to spend 600Bn dollars on defence every year? The USA only spends marginally more than that and it would amount to 25% of GDP putting Britain on a war footing greater than America in 1917. This would be insane. It also wouldn't be sustainable. If you think the UK needs to be military capable of spending virtually the same as the USA then I can only assume you believe the USA to be a threat to the UK. In which case this American carrying of Europe is protection from America. Sounds awfullly like a protection racket.

 

To put it into perspective. The level of funding you want to see in Europe would mean Poland spending more on its military than Russia.

 

Would you really want to live in a world where the combined military budget of the EU was five times that of America?

 

" If Europe wasn't being sheltered and carried by the USA, they would care a whole lot more about how their country is being run, who is in office, and what kinds of things are happening in their country, because they wouldn't want what they have destroyed from within, because it would matter to them, because they are the ones who would be paying for it, and working for it."

 

Sorry what makes you think Europeans don't care how their countries are being run. A greater proportion of Europeans vote in elections than Americans do, so looks to me like Americans care less than Europeans do.

 

"1. If Europe wasn't being Sheltered and Carried by the USA, and they acted like they currently do, THEY WOULD NOT BE IN THE UNITED NATIONS, being as their dues are currently paid by the USA at this point in time.

Which actually means that they probably would be still in the UN, because they would be paying their own dues.

 

Which means that they wouldn't be so fast to sign off on all kinds of restrictions and resolution which also apply to them and their friends as well."

 

Some evidence America is paying the UN dues of all European nations. European nations do act in their own interests during the UN though but yes restrictions on trade in an embargo hurts both nations, of course.

 

US military spending far outstrips that needed for defence of the USA, but that is the price America pays to be a superpower. Other than Germany European nations are third rate powers at best, they don't need to spend the same amount and couldn't afford to even if they wanted to. America has a significantly bigger population than any European nation and Europe does contain two nuclear powers, there is little direct threat any nation even the USA can realistically pose to a nuclear armed nation.

You're obviously a much better source than the OP on this subject, but I do think he makes some good points. Obviously, we only have a military our size because it's in the USA's own interest, it's our interest to encourage trade between countries and protect the seas.

 

But.. Europe does take advantage of that. Sure, they can defend themselves.. But look at Libya, and how all of a sudden the French were all for American intervention in a Muslim country. Hmm.. Wonder if it had anything to do with how much of their oil comes from Libya? So, the USA is really fortunate because of our position in the world, we take advantage of it, just like Europe takes advantage of their position in the world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libya was a weird one, France I am pretty sure would have acted without America, provided America made it clear it approved. That said you do have to remember the reality, Europe can't act in a military matter that the USA doesn't approve of. Suez proved that and the power differential is more extreme now than it was then. Britain didn't even attempt to retake the Falklands until it was sure America wouldn't object by having America contribute a token gesture (offering a ship without crew that Britain could not have practically used). I really don't think you can hope to understand American-European relationships without understanding the Suez disaster.

 

Yes there is benefit from American military power ensuring that the world is relatively peaceful. The reality is that for much of the 19th century America similarly benefited from British dominance at sea making trade substantially cheaper than before. The benefit certainly wasn't so great though (partly because British military dominance was much more limited than American dominance is now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...