Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 395 posts

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#81

Post by chrishacken »

pjc50 wrote: post #24
fowlerpower wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really think a NATO ally can be hit? With a land war? You think the Republican Party would need to reassert, the same party that dragged us into two wars in the last 12 years? I have to respectfully disagree.

A "traditional" war? No. A destabilisation? Absolutely. Why bother to send in your own forces when you can get people to fight their neighbours? To be effective, it must be deniable, like the MH17 shootdown. This is more or less what's happened in eastern Ukraine (not part of NATO, but supposedly recieving some safety guarantees when it gave up its nuclear weapons). When the intelligence agencies are openly briefing…

That's a real respectable and credible source you have there.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#82

Post by jerf »

markhahn wrote: post #70

The US is just pouting, and it's shameful. We need adults in the room, being thoughtful, pointing out, for instance, that withdrawing is not a form of strength, and only permits other countries (China) to fill the vacuum. The vote for DT was a nihilistic, anti-establishment moment from a demo that wants change but isn't willing to think about what kind of change.

"withdrawing is not a form of strength"

Umm.... wasn't that almost literally Obama's position? Haven't other countries been filling the vacuum in? Doesn't it make a lot more sense to look at Trump's election precisely as a rejection of eight years of that idea? Aren't we supposed to be very afraid of Trump being a maniac with the nuclear button and using the US military to do crazy things?

Obama wasn't that long ago. I'm astonished at how quickly his policies and platforms have been memory-holed in the service of the need for today's claims.

Obama always had a muscular foreign policy based on the ability of the United States to bring its unique moral rightness and light into the world. We have always been at war with Eurasia.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#83

Post by alkonaut »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #6

Why does NATO still exist? It's existence was supposed to be to counter the Soviet threat. Now the threat is gone and NATO is still around. It shows that the Soviet excuse was just a pretext.

> the Soviet threat. Now the threat is gone

We call it the "russian threat" now. It's the same as the old one.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#84

Post by ethbro »

usgroup wrote: post #21

Am I alone in feeling that the present drama with Trump is doing wonders at educating people broadly about geo-politics, the inter-dependence of global powers and national agendas? I feel it's been an education.

The sad truth is that most US citizen are more educated about the world through where we fight our wars than curiousity / travel / etc.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#85

Post by urbanj »

fowlerpower wrote: post #2

This is somewhat overblown, there was a lot of talk about this as it became clear Trump was about to be elected. Yes Trump is stirring the pot a bit maybe to play Russia against China. Maybe it's to get Europe to spend a little more on NATO so the US doesn't fund the vast majority of that alliance and he can cut some spending there. Whatever the mind set is, not much has changed. The US and all of its allies are stil…

> The US and all of its allies are still allies.

Not to me. I now regard the US as an enemy state. I'll use it for my own purposes, but will do anything I can to reduce its power and effectiveness.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#86

Post by GlennS »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #32
fowlerpower wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that any country in the NATO umbrella being hit would lead to the United States retaliating decisively. President trump would be advised by the generals he knows more than that he has to go in front of the American people and let them know why he has to take the actions he is taking. Sending US troops into Europe. Believe me, there is zero doubt, if NATO is hit its game over. W…

The history of my country (Poland) tells me that military alliances are worth shit when someone decides to call the bluff. The Second World War started with France and Britain failing to fulfil their obligations when Hitler invaded Poland. Somehow I don't expect NATO troops to show up if Russian forces cross the Polish-Ukrainian border.

Wait, what?

Britain and France declared war on Germany two days after it invaded Poland.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#87

Post by wsc981 »

tim333 wrote: post #65

I guess now Putin's got a buddy in the whitehouse the Europeans are going to have to do more stop the red army rolling westwards. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trum...

I find it highly unlikely that Putin would want to invade Europe (this is what you seem to suggest). I do understand the importance of the Krim for Russia, as it has their only southern military harbour. It's not something Russia can afford to lose.

Dutch people should listen to this very interesting interview with Laszlo Maracz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83G10vWamAc

In the interview Maracz explains that the heartland of Eurasia will be very important in future trade. A very good infrastructure is being setup by China and Russia to support this trading network. China and Russia have grown tighter and China in particular won't allow the USA to try the same as it did with Ukraine (i.e.: trying to limit the influence sphere of Russia). I think it's unlikely the USA will want to confront both Russia and China. I think Trump will be wiser in this regard compared to Clinton, who seemed out on a confrontation with Russia (by trying to implement a no-fly zone over Syria).

Regardless of all being said the USA might be fine for the nearby future. Like Laszlo, I don't see a bright future for Europe. I do think Asia will become much more economically prosperous as a result of the trading network that is being setup by Russia and China. As such, I will be emigrating from Europe to Asia in the nearby future (either this year or the next).

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#88

Post by bad_user »

jerf wrote: post #72
wobbleblob wrote: post #61

After the round of elections in France and Netherlands this spring, and Germany this summer, Europe may or may not start disintegrating, depending on the outcome. Ms. le Pen may not win this time, but she will one day. A correctly timed scandal or major terrorist attack in the second round may sink her opponent. Moscow, London and Washington are hard at work with her, to make this happen. When she, or someone like he…

You seem to be operating under the belief that the disintegration of the EU started three weeks ago or something? It's been an ongoing saga for years. I mean, Brexit predates Trump, and Brexit itself is the result of years of pressures. I can see why you'd be so confused by the "strategy" if you think Trump is causing it, but he's reacting to it. And my assessment of the situation is the other way around; there's not…

The Brexit campaign was fueled by lies. The real issue is a trend of anti-intellectualism and xenophobia, which I fear we've seen before, triggered by the great depression and a precursor to WWII.

It's as if, whenever a financial crisis happens, people go dumb.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#89

Post by bluetomcat »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #32
fowlerpower wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that any country in the NATO umbrella being hit would lead to the United States retaliating decisively. President trump would be advised by the generals he knows more than that he has to go in front of the American people and let them know why he has to take the actions he is taking. Sending US troops into Europe. Believe me, there is zero doubt, if NATO is hit its game over. W…

The history of my country (Poland) tells me that military alliances are worth shit when someone decides to call the bluff. The Second World War started with France and Britain failing to fulfil their obligations when Hitler invaded Poland. Somehow I don't expect NATO troops to show up if Russian forces cross the Polish-Ukrainian border.

What the NATO expansion in Eastern Europe really did is that it disarmed these countries from their Warsaw-Pact era arsenal. We were forced to scrap a lot of missiles and reduce military personnel for a hypothetic defense from NATO.

Re: Why Europe Is Warning of Pax Americana's End

#90

Post by drynewton »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #7

While the article is probably correct about a partial withdrawal of the US from the world stage, it is leaving something out: in the USA, the military industrial complex is the largest 'special interest' lobbying the government. We spend almost as much on military as the rest of the world combined. As a US citizen and taxpayer, I am reluctantly for a multi-polar world. The reluctance comes from what I expect to be so…

How does the "military industrial complex being the largest 'special interest' lobbying..." change this? Do you mean that because the complex is always pushing for more military spending that the US will not have a chance to back down on the world stage?

The article did compare the spending of the US military to the spending of the UE so that comparison was drawn at least on a smaller scale.

Post reply on HN