Comments by "Persona" (@ArawnOfAnnwn) on "Poland vs. France: Can the EU Create an Alternative to NATO? - VisualPolitik EN" video.

This only works cos of the US. NATO is little more than a US military alliance, with European forward bases. The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
22
The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
5
@robertsaget9697 Russia doesn't have the capacity to "devour" Europe. Hell, people are doubting its capacity to even hold Ukraine (against an insurgency, not the initial invasion). The US has little fear of that and, frankly, even western Europe has little fear of that (which is why they're so unwilling to aid Ukraine - they're not in much danger themselves). The US pays that huge bill for Europe for the same reason they paid a huge bill to stay in Afghanistan for so many years - their image (the embarrassing retreat we saw from Kabul last year was exactly what America most feared and spent a decade avoiding). Image is of massive importance to a hegemon, it's practically what hegemony is. In the case of Europe, how often does the US loudly proclaim how Russia and China are isolated? That's not really true - even America mostly fights alone in its wars, the only significant help is provided by the British. The hundreds of thousands of troops the "Allies" deploy are almost all American. But by having the mostly just diplomatic support of other nations, the US can sell itself as representing the world, rather than just itself. It gives it cover and allows it to carry out its foreign policy without appearing TOO MUCH like a hegemon. Even then there's a lot of anti-American sentiment around the world (and not just in Russia and China). If the US were to fight around the world in its own name all the time, then it'll quickly have as bad a reputation in Asia as it does in Latin America already. That's worth a lot to them. And of course besides that, they want these nations on-side as staging grounds i.e. places to plop down their military bases. Which, ironically, are precisely why Russia and China are upset in the first place.
4
@robertsaget9697 I'm afraid you're the one who comes across as delusional here - Russia has very little capacity to roll across Europe. The Germans know this - that's why they're more concerned about gas. The most powerful army in the world just lost to a bunch of guerillas just last year. And you really think Russia can do better?
4
@robertsaget9697 Even if we went with your idea, what does even that have to do with Germany? Just how far do you think Russia could even go that way? Not very far. Hell Russia hasn't even invaded Ukraine yet, and when they presented their demands, it had almost nothing to say on Ukraine. Cos this war itself has nothing to do with Ukraine, but with NATO. And, frankly, it has little to do even with Europe, but with America. Russia's demands are all about NATO expanding. They wanted a deal in the 90s that NATO wouldn't expand, but couldn't get one (don't bother with that 'these are independent nations' crap - it wasn't about them applying, but NATO accepting). They didn't get one, NATO went ahead and expanded (yes, even before Russia invaded anyone - NATO expansion precedes Georgia), and so now they want to put their foot down and demand a treaty for the same. Russia will never be okay with American forces close to its border, as it has no such parity with the US (when Russia did put forces close to the US - in Cuba - the US flipped out, and has punished poor Cuba ever since, even despite global condemnation including from their own allies). Their demands entirely revolve around NATO pulling back to the west. Even under your salami slicing hypothesis the Germans have little to fear, and the French even less. Hence their aversion. This is basically a conflict between Russia and the US, and they'd rather not be involved.
4
@mantis2048 Those allies are just a PR front. America practically fights alone, and always has. They just like using said alliances as a smokescreen to try not looking like a hegemon. And of course, as foreign territory for their military bases.
3
The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
3
@robertsaget9697 "Only to places like China/Russia which fear its own people's revolt more than anything." - lol, you think the US cares about its image cos it fears revolt? You completely misunderstood. Neither do Russia or China btw - surveys clearly show both Putin and the CCP have more popular support than Biden in the US, far more. And yes, those are independent surveys. Hell, the CCP one was done by Harvard, an American university. No, internal stability isn't why hegemons care about their image. Just as it isn't why companies care about their image. Image is itself a term for influence - it's not about keeping Americans happy, it's about promoting your foreign policy without needing to rely on your guns all the time. The US cares about its image for the sake of foreign audiences, including foreign govts. It's part of how you exert power. In this case, the US needs to be able to impose its will on the world without seeming like it's imposing its will on the world. And to do that, they need to make it look like they represent the world, without being constrained by the difficulties of the UN general assembly. Their largely useless allies serve that purpose - they give the US the appearance of being multinational even when their policies are decided in-house. You pretend you're the General Assembly without dealing with the General Assembly. "they won't care as long as you'll stand united by their side on sanctions, defense, and trade." - and why would you do that, if you don't like them? What, cos they're gonna attack you if you don't? Great way to make yourself look villainous. Cooperation is built on that trust, not mere strength. When Trump tried doing things hardball, it wasn't popular abroad, but also wasn't popular with the US' own establishment. There's a reason for that - they knew that he was burning bridges they'd spent decades building, and hated him for it. They knew the value of those bridges wasn't simply in monetary terms as he chose to see it. And the US doesn't annex or hold territory cos it doesn't need to. The days when that was how power was projected are over a century old. Even the USSR didn't do that - they installed friendly govts. too, albeit more obviously loyal ones. The US isn't all that different, just more subtle. You don't need the land, just hegemonic influence. Those friendly govts. ARE the point. Even Russia was happy with Ukraine as long as its govt. was friendly to them. Just as the US fought in Vietnam for a friendly govt. - they never claimed the nation, but killed 3 million people just for their side to be in power. That's modern power projection.
3
@robertsaget9697 Now you're just sliding into angry & incoherent subjective supposition. You seem to think everyone who doesn't see things like you do is dumb - you've already leveled that insult at several people here by now. We're done here - your views are every bit as shaped by your own biases as you imagine everyone else is. Hell, your answers now are effectively amounting to 'that's just what they do cos they're bad'. Standard demonization rhetoric. And apparently everyone who thinks differently is a "fool" or a "bot". Typical ad hominem tactics. Keep stewing in your own wrath if that's what you want. You're not making yourself any more convincing. If you want to keep buying into a standard black and white picture of the world, where the bad guys do bad things just for the evulz, be my guest. Cya!
3
@robertsaget9697 Lol, you're so bad at this. It's like you imagine we're in voice chat, where you can just pretend I said whatever you want and try to sell it to people by screaming loud enough. xD We're in text fool. You can make up whatever you want, it doesn't hide my words. Go back to gaming and try your troll tactics there. That's probably your only skill too, just annoy your opponent into rage-quitting lol! So lame.
3
@notforgotten3685 Ironically, you're making an equivalent argument as to what the Russians and Chinese could make against multicultural democracy itself. You favor the US cos they're decisive and committed and quick to act - exactly the kinds of virtues autocratic societies like theirs have often been praised for. Of course, there's also criticisms of their nations for the downsides of such natures - which pretty much also apply to the Americans leading NATO. And that's not just a theoretical observation - for instance, the US went ahead with its invasion of Iraq despite a lot of global condemnation and, as was confirmed later, without any nukes to supposedly justify it. Europe wasn't so keen on the idea. Which is a showcase of the very weaknesses of such a "strong and decisive" leader, and the virtues of the more careful and considered approach Europe represents. By submitting to America being the solution, you're also inherently accepting the virtues of the 'strong states' side of the argument, effectively praising the nature of the very enemies you're turning to America to fight.
3
The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
3
The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
2
@mmlas8683 France is known for one surrender, that was both preceeded and suceeded by more military prowess and success than any other European nation. And they're ranked higher than the UK in the Global Firepower Index, the highest in Europe!
2
@bogumiljanowskiweb That's unlikely to get anywhere. Putin has around a seventy percent approval rating, and that's when its down from a peak near ninety. Even more importantly, you don't have anyone to use to win hearts, as none of his opponents are particularly popular. By contrast, Biden has around a forty percent approval rating. As for allies, only about a fifth of Russians have a positive view of the US - and that result is from 2018 (didn't find a more recent survey, but you can guess it'll be even worse now). So there's no basis for any alliance. Putin may be an autocrat, but he's an autocrat with the support of his people. While Biden is a democrat with the support of just above a third of his people.
2
@bogumiljanowskiweb Bruh, are you people daft?! Those ratings aren't election results, they're independent international surveys. This is done with countries all over the world, but you people concoct every dumb idea you can think of to deny reality. And it doesn't matter what explanation you want to dream up for why Putin is popular, the fact is that he is. This isn't even controversial - even western media accepts that this is the case. Only idiots like you who think you "know how putin trols think" (and apparently can't even spell correctly) imagine otherwise. And if you're at all curious as to WHY putin could be popular, learn some history - specifically that of his predecessor. Loved by the west, hated by Russians to this very day - Yeltsin.
1
The Americans have their own interests that don't necessarily coincide with that of Europe. The main reason they keep humoring Europe is in order to keep up the pretense that they represent the worlds' interests. Europe is essentially America's PR product.
1