Live data from Hacker News

European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

defensemirror.com

121–130 of 227 posts

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#121
post #2

There will be a lot more decisions like this one. For the war in Ukraine and anything immediate they will buy American stuff if there is no EU alternative (and for many things there just isn't right now, there are too many dependencies). But the tide has changed, for 'in' it is now to 'out'. It is abundantly clear the USA is no longer a dependable ally, and that it will use all kinds of strings attached to hobble wha…

It is kinda funny that to become "independent" the EU is going to become even more dependent on the USA while saying at some undetermined future point they will be able to pivot to independence (which we all know is never going to happen).

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#122
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I firmly believe people are deluding themselves if they think that without US patronage, Europe wouldn't devolve into its historical norm, a state of internal warfare. The popular narrative suggests a 'United States of Europe' is forming, but this seems like propaganda when you look at the reality, nations are already returning to the historical status quo, prioritizing their own agendas and pulling in separate direc…

Do you really believe Europe would devolve into actual internal warfare, without the US? What about the EU? I believe it has successfully kept the peace ever since its predecessor, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was created - specifically to avoid another war. Your example is very on point: the member states are talking - not fighting - to protect their own interests.

the EU claims credit for the peace

in reality for most of it was the fact the Russians were 50ft away, with American troops as the security guarantee

Russia in 2022 is yet another example of how rapidly despots will discard "entangled trade" for military conquest

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#123
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I firmly believe people are deluding themselves if they think that without US patronage, Europe wouldn't devolve into its historical norm, a state of internal warfare. The popular narrative suggests a 'United States of Europe' is forming, but this seems like propaganda when you look at the reality, nations are already returning to the historical status quo, prioritizing their own agendas and pulling in separate direc…

Do you really believe Europe would devolve into actual internal warfare, without the US? What about the EU? I believe it has successfully kept the peace ever since its predecessor, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was created - specifically to avoid another war. Your example is very on point: the member states are talking - not fighting - to protect their own interests.

I think it's very fair to say the USA is the only thing that has kept the EU together and a weaker or less globally important USA will allow the EU to fracture and fall apart.

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#124
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with your theme, but I think in this case it has less to do with the grenades Trump is randomly exploding and more to do with the E-7 simply being the wrong solution.

In the past it was useful for nations to opt for an American solution even if it wasn’t the most optimal precisely because of America being a dependable and trustworthy ally.

Or more realistically because no one else actually produces enough missile or bullets to shoot. It's like France being such a joke right now suggesting that Ukraine use their missile system instead of the USA's.

Oh France sure how long until you can supply a fraction of what we are buying from the USA? What a decade!?!?! Ukraine won't exist in a decade if we wait and what's that you won't even ramp production unless you can get guarantees from multiple member nations? What a joke.

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#125
post #70
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has more to do with their geography than their disgust no?

I think GP means that Europe didn't intervene when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 and, more generally, has done its best to limit rearmament until now. And we're going to pay for it by having a war against Russia that we might have avoided had we projected more strength. The precedent being France and UK that were so disgusted by war after WWI (and recall that France was the historical biggest warmonger among Western…

I’m Romanian, write this comment from Bucharest, a lot closer to Donbass than both France and UK. If those guys are “disgusted” about Russia then it’s their choice, but they shouldn’t re-create the Crimean War and battle the Russians on our (Romania’s) soil, with the destruction that would accompany such a war. If anything, I’d rather actively choose Russia’s side on this against the West, at least Russia is the devil we know. I’m not alone here in Eastern Europe when it comes to this ideological choice, just look at what people vote (when they’re allowed to do that freely, that is, just look at the Călin Georgescu case).

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, Donald Trump has broken a sufficiently large number of treaties Which?

Iran Nuclear Accords (negotiated by the EU!), Paris Climate Agreement are two that come to mind concerning the EU. There's obviously more, like NAFTA.

These are more incorrect emotional claims. Withdrawing from an agreement (all three of your examples) is not the same as reneging or “breaking” the agreement. The US has not withdrawn from NATO; meanwhile, it has proactively withdrawn from agreements it does not wish to be in any longer. That actually bolsters the case that nothing has changed w/r/t article 5.

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#127
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China might be a threat to the US, but I don't see it being a threat to Europe. The fact that Americans are abandoning us in our struggle with Russia in order to pick a fight with China makes it hard to see them as reliable allies.

Well maybe European countries should have considered that before spending the last 3 decades shrinking the size of their military. Germany's military chief was ringing the alarm bells in 2023 about their inability to defend their own borders, and that was before Trump came back to power. This is the wealthiest country in Europe. Germany's GDP is twice that of Russia. EU GDP is 8.5 times larger than Russia. Yet even i…

While I wouldn't argue that Russia is richer than Germany, I think GDP is a rubbish figure - at least it clearly doesn't translate to anything I would consider meaningful.

For example, can the person of today afford a higher standard of living than one of 20 years ago - unclear, food has become disproportionately more expensive, housing cost has by far outpaced the wage growth, tech has become cheaper, but big-ticket items like cars are proportionally not cheaper.

From this, the person of today is poorer in tangible terms.

Did the infrastructure improve? - some, but I'd say it was a (sub)linear improvement in absolute terms - we certainly didn't build as much stuff as we did in the mid to late 20th century, and what we built before was the more important stuff, so the new stuff has marginal utility.

Did European industry and technology improve? I'd say in terms of relative importance, we regressed - there are huge gaps in European technological capability for which only foreign options exist - this didn't used to be the case.

Were there some big ticket innovations like Concorde or the Moon Landing or whatever - clearly no, the world seems to have lost its appetite for these kind of hugely ambitious projects.

This 'number go up' style capitalism is clearly not to the benefit of the individual, but I can't for the life of me think who does it actually benefit.

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#128
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well maybe European countries should have considered that before spending the last 3 decades shrinking the size of their military. Germany's military chief was ringing the alarm bells in 2023 about their inability to defend their own borders, and that was before Trump came back to power. This is the wealthiest country in Europe. Germany's GDP is twice that of Russia. EU GDP is 8.5 times larger than Russia. Yet even i…

None of this addresses why we should see China as a threat at all. We thought y'all had our back - why should we have yours now that you've shown your true colors?

I'd like to know why you think the US doesn't "have Europe's back"? Short term disagreements on priorities are expected when there's resource contention. NATO is still very much a thing.

Why do you think a rising China is concerning to the US, but not to Europeans?

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#129
post #17
post #10

> The decision follows the withdrawal of the U.S. from the joint AWACS replacement program in July 2024, which left the initiative without its strategic and financial foundation. Is this implying that USA was paying for it previously? It sounds like they're blaming "noise polution", but also that they're not getting the planes for free anymore?

No. Europeans were paying for theirs but, once US backed out of their own purchases, the cost per unit rose sharply and was no longer sustainable.

Europeans were blown off, when America unexpectedly pulled out like a Boeing door.

Re: European Nations Decide Against Acquiring Boeing E-7 Awacs Aircraft

#130
post #2

There will be a lot more decisions like this one. For the war in Ukraine and anything immediate they will buy American stuff if there is no EU alternative (and for many things there just isn't right now, there are too many dependencies). But the tide has changed, for 'in' it is now to 'out'. It is abundantly clear the USA is no longer a dependable ally, and that it will use all kinds of strings attached to hobble wha…

> It is abundantly clear the USA is no longer a dependable ally An extreme and inaccurate statement. The US is still party to NATO Article 5, meaning the blood of our young people is pledged to be shed to defend, say, Estonia. That has not changed. What has changed is the US has become more realistic and up front about the limitations of its reduced military. It’s not healthy, for the US /or/ Europe, to indulge the i…

>The US is still party to NATO Article 5, meaning the blood of our young people is pledged to be shed to defend, say, Estonia. That has not changed.

A treaty is only as good as its enforcement, and if the USA declines to uphold their obligations, who is going to force them?

Post reply on HN