Comments by "peabase" (@peabase) on "What the US presidential election means for Europe | DW News" video.

  1. Thank you for asking, but we Euros can walk and chew gum at the same time.
    2
  2.  @frank-ko6de  Statistica says 2.8% of GDP. But tell me, how much is 3.5% divided by two? Is it more, equal to or less than 2%? Let's test your basic math skills. By the way, you didn't even try to contest my logic. You contested my source.
    2
  3. No, why? Haven't you heard about the looming trade war between the EU and the US? Keep up with the news.
    2
  4.  @ladyofwinterfel8143  That begs the question if the US truly meets its 2% of GDP contribution to NATO. If you study US military doctrine carefully, it's questionable, to say the least.
    2
  5.  @frank-ko6de  Reading comp is tough. I explained very carefully to you that US military doctrine calls for the ability to fight two major wars (and some minor ones) at the same time. In the light of this, it's only fair to halve US defence expenditure in order to arrive at the share it spends on NATO. So 1.75% is below NATO's 2% target, innit? You must be a Trump voter, right? If you're old enough to vote, that is.
    2
  6. Forever president? President for life? What are you striving for, a banana republic?
    1
  7.  @wtfdidijustwatch1017  Good for you, but your hapless compatriot, the OP, is ostensibly incapable of concurrent ambulation and mastication.
    1
  8. Why are you here?
    1
  9.  @おす-qz7kp  So, if we Euros started liking the NFL and the "World Series", then you'd turn away from them? I think it would make a great prank if we were to pretend for a while that we did.
    1
  10.  @おす-qz7kp  Duh, you suggested that whatever we Euros like, you disapprove of, and go for the opposite.
    1
  11.  @おす-qz7kp  Duh, our Eurocrats are duly elected. Crack a book about democratic governance. It's painfully clear that you've fallen by the wayside.
    1
  12. You raise an interesting point. US military spending amounts to 2.8% of GDP. While that appears to be clearly above the NATO 2% limit, US military doctrine prescribes that the USA must prepare to fight two major wars and some minor ones simultaneously. That suggests the 2.8% must be halved, since NATO's "area of responsibility" is limited to the North Atlantic Ocean and its adjoining countries. You do the math, as they say.
    1
  13.  @mapogocoalition4534  Rather, we'll see newly-formed countries such as Ingria, Amberland, Karelia and Chechnya appliying for both EU and NATO membership. Like Ukraine, they'll want to stave off the unwelcome attentions of a greatly-diminished Russia Moscovia.
    1
  14. Zelenskyy may be a comedian, but Trump is a clown. It's not the same difference.
    1
  15.  @frank-ko6de  Elsewhere in this comment section, I asked you a simple math question: 3.5% divided by 2, is that a) more than 2%; b) equal to 2%; c) less than 2%? You do have basic math skills, right? Come on, you can do it!
    1
  16. Germany scored an own goal by overly relying on Russian gas. Naively, Germany thought that the Russian tiger would lose its stripes while trading with Germany. It didn't realise that Putin probably never cracked a book about economics. So, Pootie-Poot confused interdependence with dependence. Oh well, Germany will rebound. Russia? Probably not. What is "ge-globalization [sic]"?
    1
  17. All members benefits. France in particular has benefited greatly, having just overtaken Russia as the second-biggest arms exporter globally. I hope Macron remembers Putin with a gift basket. Come to think of it, Macron should send two baskets: one for triggering an arms race, the other for effectively pulling out of the global arms market.
    1