Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The US Must Pull Out of Germany/Europe
It is abundantly clear that the US-NATO umbrella over Europe has achieved the complete infantilization of the Continent. Lacking the need to do anything serious in terms of core national interest (i.e., defense), Europe has entirely lost the plot.
There is no longer any justification for propping up Germany, or any nation that refuses to invest in its own national defense. Beyond that: the US should not be defending illiberal countries that arrest people for “mean tweets.” If the US pulls out, Europe gets the very sharp shock that it needs if it is going to wake up, defend against Russia, reduce the Nanny State, and deport Muslims.
Truly: the US should leave Europe – for its own good.
Published in General
Yes! How long before the isolationist meme shows up in the comments?
According to Lord Ismay:
Hard enough with the Americans in. Extremely unlikely with them out.
They can’t have it both ways: rail against imperialist colonialism and demand US protect the rest of the world from every new threat. In perpetuity.
No individual, town, state or country is well served by allowing it to never be responsible for its own well being, much less its own survival.
Too bad, but that’s Europe’s problem, not the US’s. Europe has the resources it needs. It should not be sucking down ours.
It is in the US’ interests to keep the Russians out. Germany would be better off buying cheap Russian energy.
Not sure that adding Europe’s economic resources to Russia’s economic resources would be a good thing. If you combine Russia and Europe our military and economic position gets harder to defend.
I love the assumption that Europe is going to roll over for Russia, or that Russia, a nation that has proven incompetent to conquer Ukraine, a nation a fraction of its size, will somehow manage to roll over the rest of Europe. It’s not 1945 anymore. Or 1967. It is not even 1991 anymore.
True, but Ukraine has fended off Russia only because of our help, I think.
Also, nuclear armaments have changed the ability of Russia to wage war as the aggressor.
Bioweapons, nerve gases, and nuclear arms–all of them have made it easier for a small group of people to kill a large group of people.
Not to mention the fact that even if the Russians didn’t win, they could wreak a lot of misery in their attempt.
Has Russia ever conquered a European country? I know the Germans did and the Russians filled in the vacuum after the US beat Germany, but has Russia ever expanded on their own?
We have records going back 2000 years in Europe. In that time there was been war between countries more often than not. It was the policy of Geo. Washington to avoid European entanglements for a reason! If Europe is ready for a lasting peace, then European countries should create a mutual defense treaty and leave us out.
What’s are position in that situation?
I think this was the not-very-subtle subtext of Vance’s speech. However, instead of seeing his remarks for what they were, the newly-elected German Chancellor, and most of the Europe’s Great and Good have chosen to see them for something they were not–an isolationist Trumpian rejection of Europe just because it’s not the United States.
That’s just wrong. I think Trump and company would be delighted to join with, and stick with, Europe, were it still….erm…Europe.
As Britain gets less British, France gets less French, Germany gets less German, and as–it appears–there’s very little backbone or will to push back in any form of nationalist self-interest other than perhaps in Italy and Hungary, I’m not sure why the US should underwrite so much of Europe’s fiscal stability either.
Someone–it may have been Andrew Klavan–made the point that if the US sees a country arresting, prosecuting, and jailing one of its citizens for the sorts of preposterous and risible, made-up, virtue-signaling “violations” of the law we’ve been seeing in the UK recently, why should the US care any more for that country than it does for Communist China? (I know there are those who think the US cares too much for Communist China, but just let the idea percolate for a moment.)
Trump to Europe:
Europe to Trump (channeling Nicholas Cage’s response):
I can’t….
From 1772 to 1795 Russia participated in the three Partitions of Poland with the Hapsburg Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia that eliminated the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Okay, here’s the deal: Russia hates Germany. You cannot apply a strong enough level to that statement. If we leave, Germans have to fill the gap. Russia will be very unhappy about that. Not that I care about their interests, but we’ve seen how Russia behaves, particularly with imagined threats nearby. Confronted with a militarily strengthened Germany…I don’t know.
Russia isn’t near as threatened by us being in Germany as it would be for Germans to be armed and equipped in Germany. No matter, the country is trying to destroy itself and Russia is falling apart anyway, but, of course, that makes things worse, not better.
Why should we care? Mainly because we don’t want the winds spreading the nuclear fallout all over the Earth. Plus, Danube River cruises.
Last week, I listened to Mark Levin in the subject. Wading through the yelling and heavy breathing, I managed to pick out two points. If I got one or both wrong, I apologize. First, a lot of Americans died defending Europe in WWII. Just look at the cemeteries in France where American soldiers are interred. Levin seemed to think we’d be betraying their memories, ignoring their sacrifices if the US pulled out of NATO/Europe. Second, although I don’t remember him using the term “forward deployed”, it was the idea of fighting them “over there” rather than “over here”. Abandon Europe and it would eventually be the US alone against Russia and China. Take it for what it’s worth.
https://fr.usembassy.gov/policy-history/u-s-france-relations/american-cemeteries-in-france-abmc/
Germany
may beis getting less demographically German, but after seeing those snickering nitwit prosecutors on “60 Minutes,” I’m persuaded the German government is reverting to type.Arresting Britons for silent prayer is vile. Doing so after having been called out for it is evil.
After the US beat Germany? I absolutely agree that Britain and the US played a big part in beating Germany in WW2 but I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that the Russians did as much if not more to beat them. I dislike saying that especially as Russia was Germany’s partner in that conflict prior to switching sides because Hitler foolishly attacked them.
Is this what you think recurs if America is out of it?
At the end of WWII this was true since we had instituted the Marshall Plan to help Europe rebuild so the actual physical defense of Europe could be partly our responsibility, thus NATO. NATO’s role at that time was to defend against any aggression on the part of the USSR which was a combination of several former nations, and such aggression happened in 1956. Everything has changed on both sides so a reconsideration is in order.
No kidding. They cannot replace much of the material they have lost, and will eventually run out of men. As you say, it is not 1945 anymore and only so many from NK and other Russian-allied nations will be sent.
Well, we are in North America. We can draw on the resources of North America, possibly Africa, possibly Australia /New Zealand / New Guinea, possibly South America. Russia, China and Iran can draw on the resources of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
Nah. They’ll gobble up the Baltic States first.
And does that threaten America or Europe?
Well, the Baltics are part of Europe.
Russian troops left Poland in 1993
Russian troops left the Baltic States in 1991
Russian troops left Czechoslovakia in 1991
Russian troops left Hungary in 1991
Russian troops left Germany in 1994
Close to 50 years of Russian military occupation in Eastern Europe after WWII. Nations do not have friends; they do have national interests. The days of two large oceans that protected the United States from invasion, occupation, and the destruction of cities ended with the development of missiles and now internet attacks.
They must be running short of troops. Now they are using expendable North Koreans.
I agree with having to a point. I also agree with iwe. Europe is on a self-inflicted bad path. Like the young adult who won’t grow up living with and depending on his parents, Europe needs to be forced to grow up and earn its way. Only then will it become the ally worthy of our sacrifice. That is the best way to see the relationship Levin envisions.
So Europeans may consider Russia a threat. Americans may not think America is threatened. Americans probably did not consider themselves threatened even when NATO was formed but were willing to help Europe. Circumstances and attitudes have changed.
If threatens cruise ship itineraries. The rest is a rerun.
The Central and Eastern Europeans are tough, but they tend to be broken into little countries that could be picked off individually. Western Europe is morally weak – would they even defend themselves? Who would their Muslim populations side with? Russia is more than willing to fight until the death of the last North Korean or Chechnyan.
Until China takes Taiwan and the high-tech chip foundries.
Today’s idiocy**:
Because nothing says “we’re proud of our history and who we are as a nation” like obliterating any trace of, or any ability to have a rational discussion about, the ups and downs that got us to where we are today. It is quite funny, in some sense, I suppose, that almost five years after the 2020 BLM mania in the US, and after so much of the movement has been exposed for what it was, that there are those in the UK–which was regularly deemed one of the least racist countries in the world before all this nonsense started–who still willingly and enthusiastically embrace and promote it.
This follows the widely-reported stories that one of the first things Brave Knight (because he is one) Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer did when he moved into Downing Street was remove the portraits of William Shakespeare, Elizabeth I, Sir Walter Raleigh and…wait for it…Margaret Thatcher because “[he] doesn’t like portraits of people staring down at [him].” Sorry, Keir, that’s what portraits do. (If it bothered you so much, perhaps you could have had them moved a bit lower on the wall? )
Sounds to me like a first world problem in what’s an increasingly third-world banana republic. I despair.
And I wouldn’t send them any money, either.
** “Today’s idiocy” came after a recent headline, “Immigration judges have repeatedly ruled migrants can avoid deportation despite lies about the risks they face at home,” and another, convoluted, story about a woman who was about to be deported who suddenly claimed she was a member of a group in her native country that would have gotten her persecuted had she gone back. Apparently, everyone knew this was a fake and contrived story. But it worked, as do the rest of them