American press: Europe is not so helpless without the USA

There is an opinion that Europe cannot defend itself without the United States, but this is absolutely not the case. As Stephen Walt argues in an article for the American publication Foreign Policy, the security of European countries, to a large extent, depends only on themselves.

There is an opinion that if the American military contingent is withdrawn from Europe, the European countries will be in danger. The only threat that can be real, the author writes, is a military clash with Russia, but even here Europe can do without the Americans.

According to Walt, the power of the European armies is quite enough to cope with Russia if it attacks, for example, the Baltic States. In favor of this, he cites the following arguments: the population of Europe is three times larger than in Russia, the average life expectancy in Europe is higher than in Russia, and the aggregate GDP of NATO countries is higher than that of Russia. All this together, as well as military spending, suggest that in the event of a military clash, Europe will independently cope with Russia.

Another argument in the "piggy bank" of anti-American policy, the author calls conventional weapons, which are produced in Europe. He is convinced that warplanes Tanks, surface ships and submarines with which European armies are armed are superior to Russian weapons, and the Russian army itself is a "pale shadow" of the Soviet, which was capable of deploying numerous divisions in the European direction.

At the same time, the author urges Europe not to relax and not rush to extremes. In his opinion, although Europe is capable of dealing with Russia on its own, there is no need to refuse help when it is offered. Walt advocates a gradual withdrawal of Americans from Europe.

Summing up, the author declares that Europe is not so helpless without the United States, but there is no need to break ties with the Americans. Europe must shoulder the main burden of maintaining peace in its region, while not diminishing the role of the United States in defending Western values ​​and democracy.

Comments

[Olgovich]

And WHAT to do with Europe after the capture, WHY to attack it, the author did not answer ...

[Thrifty]

In short, Europe has lost the lessons of history, forgot both Hitler and Napoleon, and the Emperor of the Swedish Carlos! All of them had a complex of overestimated self-esteem, Russia knocked their arrogance off them, the Soviet Union did the same! So, we might get a chance to put their brains in place, if they stayed there, in those Europeans. ...

[Speedy]

Neither Europe nor Russia will attack, frighten each other - please, we have lived like this for 75 years. No one but the United States needs a war in Europe. Well, maybe even ukram ..

[Real Pilot]

this is a military clash with Russia, but even here Europe can do without the Americans.

Sure! In the event of a serious confrontation, the Europeans may well catch Russian missiles with TNW on their territory ...
And the Americans will pretend that there is no need for it not to come down to strategic ones.

[Mountain shooter]

I really don't understand how the average life expectancy affects combat effectiveness? Or aggregate GDP? Modern complex weapons systems have such a LONG production cycle that it makes no sense to switch the industry to a war footing in the turmoil that has begun. What is in the warehouse, so fight.

[Normal]

Europe - The Elusive Joe of Russia. All as Russia can not conquer Europe. Everything is neither how nor how.
Russia is a Terrible Scary for Europe. And with what and with whom else to scare the layman, distracting him from internal problems?
USA - Shining City on a hill, Source of Prosperity, Guardian of World Peace.

[Egoza]

Quote: Normal

USA - Shining City on a hill, Source of Prosperity, Guardian of World Peace.

So the United States hopes that they will shit on the whole world, and Europe will smooth everything, smooth it out ... in short, take the rap for the mattress mats.

[Bshkaus]

To summarize, the author states that Europe is not so helpless without the United States,

Well, no one argues. If we take nuclear weapons outside the brackets, then, in principle, there is still a big question who will bother who. On the one hand, the Russian Federation has superiority in tanks and equipment, psychological readiness to fight. Europe has a developed industry and a mobilization reserve to increase the production of technology.
If at the initial stage Europe succeeds in organizing air defense and disrupting the offensive of the Russian Federation and finding mutual understanding and coherence, then I cannot vouch for a long-term outcome.
I don't accept the argument "not to agree": what if you agree?

[akarfoxhound]

Bshkaus
The argument is lost in your praises - why should Russia attack? for what and what then should that Europe do with it, what is the goal? And only then accept other people's argumentation.
Or, like the Europeans - a complete detachment from reality and "a serious conversation between men with buckets in a sandbox" in the style: "But if my folder comes here on a tank and how will he give it to your folder! ..."

[Evil543]

The question is, what was that Europe for us? Their migrants will tear them apart without us.

[Egoza]

Quote: Evil543

and that Europe was given to us? Their migrants will tear them apart without us.

That's it! It was still not enough for their migrants to spread across Russia.

[Souchastnik]

It was still not enough for their migrants to spread across Russia.

Well, we have nowhere to do with ours.

[tralflot1832]

The last time we fought with Europe, we didn’t measure GDP, did he lose his memory? And of course Europe will cope on its own, the Germans, as usual, will guard the camps with prisoners of war, Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles with the French!

[Normal ok]

Quote: tralflot1832

The last time we fought with Europe, we did not measure GDP, his memory was lost

This is not true. Without diminishing the role of our army and the heroism of our soldiers, I must note that sometimes World War II is called the war of economies. Germany and Japan even at the end of the war had huge armies of excellent soldiers. But they ran out of resources needed to fight the war. By the middle of the war, the number of tanks, aircraft and ships of the Allies exceeded the number of similar weapons of the Axis countries (not to mention the shortage of fuel, aluminum, tungsten, molybdenum and petrochemical products). At the same time, the gap was constantly increasing quantitatively and qualitatively in favor of the allies.
So the size (of economies) is important too

[Tagan]

Will they ever run out of woodpeckers?

[tralflot1832]

When the woodpeckers run out, other birds will appear, but also on the d!

[Bshkaus]

Will they ever run out of woodpeckers?

You called me a woodpecker?

[KCA]

Deep analytics, however, in one state - Russia, there is an NTSUO, which links all divisions of the army and navy under one command center, how all those European countries will coordinate actions that, in the event of a war with Russia, will not stand aside, pulling their skirts, and want to fight? No way, until they start to communicate, develop tactics and strategy, plan joint actions, they will be strangled one by one like blind kittens

[akarfoxhound]

I was especially touched by the "argument" about the longer life expectancy of Europeans in the topic of conducting hostilities with Russia

[Wedmak]

But it dawned on me: this is how they are hinting that they will immediately surrender and try to outlive us in the occupation. What cunning ...

[Wedmak]

There are several more types of weapons there ... they are scary, almost dead from the graves: a choral howl to infringe on democracy, widespread lies, a separate battalion "very likely" and a division "not excluded", street parades of united .. ummm ... by some criteria, a massive exit of logic beyond the reality of this world.
And what, if anything, to do with this army of European officials is absolutely not clear. They even as prisoners with their screams will peck everyone in the whole area.

[Tagan]

Quote: Bshkaus

To summarize, the author states that Europe is not so helpless without the United States,

Well, no one argues. If we take nuclear weapons outside the brackets, then, in principle, there is still a big question who will bother who. On the one hand, the Russian Federation has superiority in tanks and equipment, psychological readiness to fight. Europe has a developed industry and a mobilization reserve to increase the production of technology.
If at the initial stage Europe succeeds in organizing air defense and disrupting the offensive of the Russian Federation and finding mutual understanding and coherence, then I cannot vouch for a long-term outcome.
I don't accept the argument "not to agree": what if you agree?

You have too many "ifs" that give Europe only a theoretical opportunity to "kick". In particular, the Europeans are not ready to die for the "common cause." They are ready to bite off each other at the first opportunity)))

[Bshkaus]

You have too many "ifs"

Well, life also consists of a huge cascade of "if". Moreover, they do not always go in the sequence that was expected. "If" the article spoke about one European country, there are no questions, the EU is a strong enemy despite a lot of everything.

[askort154]

...life expectancy in Europe is higher than in Russia

"Expert" Stephen made the discovery of a new type of weapon - "life expectancy of the population." What a talent!

[mojohed2012]

Americans are trying to inspire EU politicians for a staunch defense! This is understandable, since the forces and means of the United States in the EU are not enough for the 5-fold advantage they need. And what about Europe? But nothing: their politicians and society are sick with tolerance and the growing tumor of BLM-racist-fascist-socialist movements. The French will not go to die for the EU because from WW2 finally broke. In WWI, they somehow survived because of the quality of people and their patriotism - resentment against the Germans, but then - that's it.

[hagen]

There is an opinion that if the American military contingent is withdrawn from Europe, the European countries will be in danger. The only threat that can be real, the author writes, is a military clash with Russia, but even here Europe can do without the Americans.

If the US forces withdraw, there is only one threat that European nation states will become difficult to govern. The deep state's nightmare is Germany's gaining real sovereignty and independence from the United States. NATO's main task is to keep Europe, especially Germany, under the US. The author deliberately diverts the emphasis to negligible threats. This supposedly "existing opinion" (it is not clear where and from whom) is forcibly hammered into the heads of the European electorate so that it does not understand and solicit the true reasons for the presence of US troops on their territories.

[Tagan]

Quote: Bshkaus

Will they ever run out of woodpeckers?

You called me a woodpecker?

Are you Stephen Walt?

[cniza]

At the same time, the author urges Europe not to relax and not rush to extremes. In his opinion, although Europe is capable of dealing with Russia on its own, there is no need to refuse help when it is offered.

In a word - verbiage ...

[Tagan]

Quote: Bshkaus

You have too many "ifs"

Well, life also consists of a huge cascade of "if". Moreover, they do not always go in the sequence that was expected. "If" the article spoke about one European country, there are no questions, the EU is a strong enemy despite a lot of everything.

The EU is rather an inert foreign entity, created not without the help of the United States for better control from the outside. There are a lot of internal contradictions. There are donor countries and there are consumer limyrophs. And nevertheless, these limitrophes with exorbitant ambitions are trying to put a spoke in the wheels of nursing. There are those trying on the role of the beholder. It's not bad to remember the epic with the same vaccination - everyone survives as best he can, even at the expense of others (within the same EU). This is also a matter of life and death.

[rotmistr60]

the security of European countries, to a greater extent, depends only on themselves.

And this is against the background of the fact when the United States requires 2% (with a subsequent increase) of GDP. Somehow then it does not fit with elementary logic. They can do it themselves, but at the same time they are obliged to pay large sums for supposedly collective defense. But then it becomes clear after a direct hint

Europe is capable of dealing with Russia on its own

You can fight with Russia, but without us (USA), if we can help (?).

[rotfuks]

Apparently not everyone in the United States knows that Russia and Europe have coexisted without the United States for at least 1000 years. And surely not everyone in the US knows that Iran was at least 1000 years before the appearance of the US and its satellites. Russia and Iran were already like states at a time when only herds of wild bison and half-naked Indians were running around in the United States. And now some people in the United States really consider themselves the navel of the earth and the main savior of Europe. It's even curious where such moods come from. From lack of education? Inspired by the blockbusters of a famous film studio?

[decimalegio]

Quote: rotfuks

Inspired by the blockbusters of a famous film studio?

There are a lot of good Russian films. Too bad they are not available in Italian

[Reserve buildbat]

"Europe must shoulder the main burden of maintaining peace in its region, while not diminishing the role of the United States in defending Western values ​​and democracy."
That is, this is the message of a geyrope on a journey? They say you fight, and we will smash democracy. Like parasites. "Forward, eagles, and I follow you! I will stand with my chest behind your backs!"
Standing mattress position.

[paul3390]

the population of Europe is three times that of Russia, the average life expectancy in Europe is higher than in Russia, and the aggregate GDP of NATO countries is higher than that of Russia.

Aloizievich thought the same way at one time ..

[decimalegio]

It's okay to quarrel between neighbors. We had the 100 Years War, the Napoleonic Wars, the First World War and the Second World War. But in the end we are all Europeans, having quarreled, we reconcile and love each other again. I know that Russia does not want to invade other European countries, although some keyboard players dream about it every night. Russia worries that no one pokes their nose into the countries that it considers to be the backyard. Like the United States and Central America. However, I urge these warriors dealing with computers and sofas not to think that the invasion of Europe is a tourist trip from which they will return with photos and souvenirs.

[isv000]

Do you know the origin of the name of the cafe "Bistro"?

[decimalegio]

I read that this dates back to the Russian occupation of Paris after the Napoleonic wars

[Dali]

Quote: Decimalegio

However, I urge these warriors dealing with computers and sofas not to think that the invasion of Europe is a tourist trip from which they will return with photos and souvenirs.

1) All the same, you do not know history very well. If you are not aware, then I remind you, then I remind you that Hitler put almost the entire industry of Europe in the service of Germany, and a huge part of the USSR's industry at the beginning of the war was either destroyed or evacuated and began to work for good only a year later, as the war was already going on.
By the way, do you know that General Electric supplied products to Nazi Germany almost until the end of the war? So you don't need to scare us with your potential, those who are already scared ...

2) And then there was no easy walk, even at the end of the war in Europe.
3) It is very possible that we will no longer be at war with Christian Europe (ordinary Europeans, like us, also do not want war), but with Islamic-radical Europe. This is where everything goes. She described an entertaining possible development of events in her book "Notre Dame Mosque" - the events take place in Paris in 2048. See the English translation link, The Mosque of Notre Dame:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1944241043?ref_=sr_1_1&qid=1447520716&sr=8-1&keywords=mosque+of+notre+dame&pldnSite=1

Well ... you have already been told that this time they will fight with what they have, and not with what your Europe, in principle, can do. And if it comes to nuclear weapons, Europe will certainly have no one to fight with. It will be dangerous to live on the territory of Europe, not only to fight.

Yes, and maybe we are still couch warriors, but our ancestors were not couch warriors at all. But your Europeans fell under Hitler, not even really resisting, so you certainly can't talk about a tourist trip.

[decimalegio]

Didn't I understand in what part of my speech you brought out my ignorance in history? Translator power. However, if you love a story, don't remember only the one that suits you. The First Northern War or the Livonian War (1558-1583), the Crimean War (1853-1856), the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) The First World War (1914-1918). There are no invincible nations, so don't try to scare you with memories of World War II. When I spoke about the couch warriors, I did not mean the Russians specifically. But there are many people who sit quietly at home and talk about war and strategies. Available in the USA, EU, and also in Russia. I do not intend to win hearts and minds, but if you are still convinced that the world is the world of 1940-1945, that Germans in one respect, Italians in another, your problem. I know that Russians are not a bunch of atheist communists who eat children what children eat

[Knell wardenheart]

No, well, a purely hypothetical thought is correct - if suddenly we were impatient to conquer Europe, we would be faced with superior democracies, a highly developed rear, a high culture of production, partisanship in Eastern Europe, problems with the functioning of our economy in the event of the mobilization of forces sufficient for war, occupation, the protection of our own borders, the reserve and production of weapons, as well as the import substitution of products that we are now purchasing abroad. For 140 million people, this would be a heavy burden.
So, if only, maybe we would have got bogged down somewhere on the borders of Germany or on part of its territory, and once we got stuck we would have missed the initiative and lost in terms of demography and industrial potential - that is, in terms of time in total.
The USSR had enough (ground) forces and a convenient foothold for a dash "to the English Channel" - we are inferior to it in all respects.
However, it is not entirely clear why we should "attack Europe" - the EU regularly buys our resources and sells us technologies, the real gain from taking the same Baltic would not be compared with the costs and potential of restrictions, neither economically nor politically. So it's all fantasy ..

[decimalegio]

I admire your analytical skills

[isv000]

Wars with the scale of offensives have sunk into oblivion, indeed - we have no interest in going and conquering some lands - then they need to be reclaimed, the population assimilated, infrastructure rebuilt, including our own territories ...

[isv000]

Well, why exhibit "numerous divisions" at the European theater? To clear the territory after the "high-precision and unmanned" one, there are enough detachments of local patriots at the peacekeeping commandant's offices ...

[decimalegio]

relax, an imprecise and nuclear answer would come to your head

[isv000]

In this case, a warm answer will come to your head, and it's good if you see a light at the end of the tunnel ...

[decimalegio]

I will go to Russia as a tourist with my family. It is you who are raving about stripping Europe by patriotic detachments after applying "high-precision and unmanned" means on it. So, I tell you again: if you haven't already, grab a hoe, pen, or other useful tool and find a job. Create a family, raise children and pray for a peaceful death in your bed, surrounded by loved ones. Do not think that you are the hero of a movie who survived a nuclear hell. Hello.
YA

[isv000]

On the contrary, I objected to the author on the issue of his numerous divisions and simply noticed that in modern warfare there will be high-precision strikes, and yes, I am against the war and I do not want my youngest son, a soldier, to apply his skills in practice, and my grandchildren have lost grandfather ...

[decimalegio]

Sorry, but I'm not Russian, and the automatic translator has changed the meaning of your words. I apologize again

[isv000]

Welcome to Russia! I wish you a good rest. If you are in Nizhny Novgorod, I will show you the city. And I strongly advise you to visit Crimea - and you will have a great rest and see many beautiful places ...

[decimalegio]

I am not in Russia, I live in Italy, but when I can return to travel, I will go to Russia. The first idea is a classic trip with my wife and daughters, so destinations are a must (Moscow and St. Petersburg). Then I have a dream, but I will be able to fulfill it together with my brother, to break through the Trans-Siberian Railway Moscow-Vladivostok. But my wife, a holy woman, is holding me back by using her love for my daughters. In the meantime, I read a lot thanks to the Russia Beyond website. I like the section on cooking, I have already tried making hodgepodge and pickle

[isv000]

Try borscht!

[decimalegio]

After hodgepodge and pickle, I'll try borscht. But the heat has begun in Italy, now it is 23 degrees, and the soups are not ideal, it would be better to have a ducal lemonade. I'll try it after the summer. Thank you

[isv000]

Not. You can eat borscht cold and, I assure you, it will be a revelation for you, do not forget sour cream ...

[decimalegio]

I am a culinary enthusiast so I try everything. I tried to make sour cream goulash, and I didn't like it. Do not be offended, but you can make borsch without cream

[decimalegio]

Who put less. Were you offended by the idea of ​​making borscht without sour cream?

[decimalegio]

Who put less. Maybe you don't like the Duchess's soups or lemonade ??? If you prefer a different recipe, please tell me. I'll try to do it

[NF68]

If only someone else would have to fight with Europe.

[decimalegio]

In a hypothetical film, I would put China as the enemy. But you can't make out around

[NF68]

Quote: Decimalegio

In a hypothetical film, I would put China as the enemy. But you can't make out around

They are far from each other. And the contradictions between them are not as serious as between China and the United States.

[isv000]

And the Chintsy are guilty of what?

[decimalegio]

copy everything and have restaurants that you don't eat well

[Dali]

Quote: Decimalegio

In a hypothetical film, I would put China as the enemy. But you can't make out around

And not in a hypothetical version, the enemy has long been dominating you in Europe.

[Dali]

Quote: Dali

And not in a hypothetical version, the enemy has long been dominating you in Europe.

And this is not China.