[OC] World collective security arrangements for the United States, China, and Russia, with each's share of world GDP.MyaheeMyastone t1_j0608d5 wrote
Reply to comment by GrimeOfTheAncients in [OC] World collective security arrangements for the United States, China, and Russia, with each's share of world GDP. by MST3KTFCCTRT
It must be nice to be a small European country with free healthcare and generous welfare policies without having to contribute anything towards defense spending.
Literal continents rely on the US defense mechanism
SHODANs_insect t1_j064mdk wrote
That doesn't necessarily mean much, though. There are states in the US that are bigger recipients of federal funds than contributors of federal funds. There are many ways to carve up populations to indicate that some people are getting a free ride.
The disappointing thing about the US is that it has the capacity to retain its current military spending and provide universal healthcare and more generous welfare policies - and it doesn't.
never_rains t1_j065fnr wrote
When it is the whole continent of Europe getting a free ride on US defense spending it becomes a problem. The problem was known but not acknowledged. Now even the Finnish PM accepts that European security is too dependent on US. Germans aren’t spending enough to defend themselves. UK has a decent navy but there army is too small to offer any challenge. French might be the only one doing enough in terms of land army.
SHODANs_insect t1_j065qcg wrote
>When it is the whole continent of Europe getting a free ride on US defense spending it becomes a problem.
What's the problem, exactly?
Because a moment ago it was that European nations could afford universal healthcare and generous welfare. The US can currently afford the same but chooses not to.
Are you moving the goalposts to another problem?
leela_martell t1_j07gyd9 wrote
Many "small European countries" have conscription. Every fifth person in my country (that has generous welfare policies) is in the army reserves and has completed at least 6 months of military service. It's just a different way to contribute.
The US has the money but most of its citizens don't have to go to the army.
MyaheeMyastone t1_j09hfan wrote
Yeah and that’s nice to have standing armies but large standing armies are not the name of the game anymore. It’s all about military tech, rockets, vehicles, etc. None of the countries conscripting are contributing even close to the amount the US does.
The sole reason these people are conscripted is so that they can learn how to use the equipment that we have developed for them
leela_martell t1_j0b5vqn wrote
My country paid 10 billion to the US for F-35s alone recently, you do understand that you’re getting money for that military tech? Yes the US military industry is big, but that is how the market works. I also use an Apple smartphone. 🤷🏻♀️
That doesn’t mean Europe isn’t too reliant on the US, cause we are, but us small countries are often punching well above our weight compared to the bigger European countries.
Anyways, the US is still the only Nato country to have ever invoked Article 5. So I guess your allies aren’t completely useless to you
GrimeOfTheAncients t1_j08m61s wrote
Good old propaganda cool aid that line....
I bet you're talking about Europe vs the Big Bad Russian Bear right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
UK alone is spending more than the Big Bad Bear. France and Germany combined dwarfs the Big Bad Bear's expenditure.
Look at graph 5 of https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/3/pdf/220331-def-exp-2021-en.PDF
It's clear that NATO allies expenditure is disproportionately large compared to the threat it's facing.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments