Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "Australia scraps French submarine deal" video.

As if Aus wasn't a nuclear target prior to that lol
6
@trezapoioiuy 1) Okay, but France doesn't want that, it wants French interests to BECOME European interests; so why would you expect or even want other European countries to just subserve their interests to France on the vague hope that it would be better than one European country getting snubbed? And it IS getting snubbed; this entire episode was at most Australia not being polite in announcing the deals cancellation while France gets all pissy in response. This is hardly a case of France getting screwed, at least deliberately. Also, the EU didn't stop any war; Europe did not have the capacity to wage war on other European countries because 2 superpowers were essentially steering them. The USSR and US tamped down on European wars, and now its the US alone doing so; with the EU essentially being a US brain project. 2) That's fair. But US States are content with US foreign policy; the same cannot be said for European countries with each others' policies. You can't push for more centralization without solving that, and France trying to claim that this snub = Europeans being snubbed will only make the entire thing look more unattractive.
4
@trezapoioiuy What the heck is "anti-Eurpoeist" talk? I don't think that is a thing. And well yeah, this is all from our opinions; but my opinion is pretty mainstream about France, I think. The Americans would prefer Europe unite so it wouldn't have to be babied; but also prefer its more equal instead of France or Germany calling all of the shots. And I doubt China cares. Russia is all for it, as it perceives France as a possible country to work with...and shill for it in the name of some vague anti-Anglo alliance. Which explains Eastern/Central Europe's unwillingness to rely on France, yeah? Believe what you want, but this obviously seems like French propaganda rather than actually something good for Europe.
4
@trezapoioiuy "next time it can be someone else" That logic works for every big power. Including France. Like, France deliberately screwed Italy in Libya when it deposed Ghaddafi while Italy was trying to get investments there, among other things; but you seem A-OK when its France screwing others, huh? You cry "European solidarity" when French interests are on the line, but when you screw others its "just business". Maryland is a literal State of the US Federal authority. No matter how you argue it, Maryland doesn't and can't have a foreign policy independent from other US States. That is not the case for France, Italy, and Poland. The EU is not a country, and if France keeps trying to frame EU interests as French interests, it never will be. Especially since French distrust is so poignant both in the Northern Europe and Eastern/Central Europe.
3
@BuckBuckle Imagine being so insecure that you think being mixed-race is even a bad thing. Geez. Anyway; I never said that the US did it out of the kindness of its heart -but it totally could have just screwed Europe permanently as a series of puppet states rather than help them get back onto their feet. No country acts out in pure charity, but how they act out when achieving their interests generally allows for claims of moral superiority. I hope you're not acting like the US foot the bill as recompense for Europe possibly being in the frontline? Because that's rather disingenuous; the US did so out of necessity, not out of some skewed sense of exchange. US forces were mostly there as a guarantee of support if war did break out and to keep the Soviets from getting any funny ideas. Remove US forces and Europe would either have to submit, or get overrun -or just get subverted over time once nukes were in the picture ala Communist subversion. It was the US' enlightened self-interest, basically. The US isn't shitting anything, it never once expected that war would devastate Europe; and the circumstances behind US troops being deployed in Europe has changed drastically. But the issue is that Central Europe generally can't trust Western Europe to support them if irregular Russian troops moved in; as Western Europe does not feel the sting of present Russian imperialism as it did when it was a next-door neighbor. So either the US can withdraw and leave Central Europe's integrity in serious question...or it can keep the status quo. Either way, this was never an equivalent exchange. This was the US bending over backwards for decades; which was fine -circumstances and all that. But times have changed. If Europe can maintain the trade routes from Europe to Africa to the Middle East; this would significantly cut down on US expenditures without at all compromising the US' reach. The US can return if shit hits the fan using European bases, rather than just using US bases on European soil. In no realm does the US so benefit from this arrangement that Europe can just chill and do jack all while playing moral purity test as they benefit from US Hegemony.
3
@trezapoioiuy "European interests" Except this isn't European interests -this was French interests. You can't just frame every French issue a "European issue" when the other countries are barely effected by it. France and Italy were on opposite sides of the Libyan conflict, which side was "European interests" then?
2
@_Athanase_ I ain't worked up over this. I'm just stating my opinion; in that I'm very surprised at how far France took this. It makes them look bad, I am really curious about how they thought this would look. France's geopolitical interests aren't stymied militarily whatsoever, so idk what you're talking about. They lost out of a lucrative deal, but its military has not been cut down in the Pacific at all.
2
@_Athanase_ Eh. Fair enough.
2
Eh, tbf; it's not like the French can be trusted at all either. Barring a few exceptions, most of Europe trusts the Americans way more than the French.
2
@MyOrangeString Russia isn't threatening Europe, but it sure as hell is threatening its eastern half. Which is why they don't trust Western Europe to help if shit hits the fan.
2
@Deep Claymore China is unlikely to be a superpower at all at this rate; it has burned too many bridges and snubbed too many countries.
2
@JoeSmith-sl9bq France would not have held the line against Germany without the UK, and it was US joining in WW1 that pushed Germany into reckless assaults on fortified position to not allow US reinforcements to aid the beleaguered Entente lines. So while WW1 wasn't critical, at least for the US, it definitely ended the war quicker. And teh USSR would have never pushed Nazi Germany back to their own territory without US Lend-Lease, nor without UK assisstance in that endeavor. Plus, yeah, I can't believe how hard this Anti-"Anglo" (Americans don't even believe they're this so this is just a French thing, really) streak is going that you'd prefer literal enslavement from the USSR as "winning the war". The USSR win was impossible without the US and the UK, but even if they did win by some miracle and with completely shattered supply lines; feeding off of grass or something since they're so far from home -France and the rest of Western Europe would NOT win WW2. USSR would.
2
@trezapoioiuy Well, no, it really is "just France" in this case. The EU would have gone ahead if France did not stop the process, but no other European country is actively helping them with this.
2
@lawrenceweston922 No, they really don't. Besides, "towing the US line" is in of itself not a negative thing. But yeah, these countries have their own interests and do their own thing.
1
@kentershackle1329 You realize that the US already has tech-sharing agreements functioning properly with the UK, right? To the point that the US can't sell nuclear subs without UK approval; and vice-versa. Australia is just being added on to it.
1
@mexicomax77 You literally can't know any of that, and if anything Aus going for the French deal when the UK-US deal was infinitely superior in terms of tech sharing would prove that AU was a puppet of France rather than anything. But then again, not being a puppet of France must mean being a puppet to the US, in French eyes. 🙄
1
@kentershackle1329 I have no idea what Aus will do with it; but they will get the tech to do with what they will. The technical knowhow is perhaps more important than anything else. Plus, you know, the support of a far better ally than France.
1
@_Athanase_ No European country barring, I think, Germany actively took France's side on this. Most either kept quiet or like the Danes, took the US side. So let's not act like Europe was united behind France.
1
@a.b.6233 The US would bitch and moan, but wouldn't be a prick and retract its ambassadors. Also, that's supposing the French actually stole it via underhanded methods, which France does quite often to the US anyway. France next to China steals the most US tech and the US just ignores it because...allies.
1
@a.b.6233 Oh, they do. They also don't bitch and make a ruckus when they catch their allies doing it to them; because that would make them a hypocrite. Turns out France doesn't care about that, though.
1
@_Athanase_ "Lack of transparency" And what right does France have to transparency between other countries? Australia had the right to cancel, and did. What Denmark said, I believe, was that the US didn't do anything wrong and France's actions against it was kinda ridiculous. Dude, your perspective on this is entirely French. You see the US jumping over smaller states, while you're ignoring the fact that it wasn't even the US that sought this deal and it was not their responsibility to tell France anything. More to the point, France is not a small state itself, and has "jumped over smaller states" too. So why would any European country support a big state being "jumped over" (not really) by another big state in the first place? Especially when that small country has far more ties to the US than France does? You forget about the Northern European countries and their interest in the Arctic; which the US covers. So yeah, from a Danish perspective, there is no reason in helping France try to frame this all on the US when France is just "another bully" so to speak.
1
@_Athanase_ France literally does it all the time to their allies, wut? France steals and spies on US tech while proclaiming "allies don't do that" when the US was caught out. France has screwed the US and Italy before, and TRIED to screw Eastern Europe by selling Russia ships while they were being threatened by Russia. What world do you live in that France doesn't do what France, even at the cost of allies? Heck, I read of when France was selling Argentina equipment WHILE Argentina was making war with the UK. You claim not to be a supporter, but you ignore France literally doing the stuff you're claiming the US has wont to do and supporting an EU that essentially mimics French interests. It really sounds like you are emulating France as some sword of European independence...which they're not. No more than the US is. No, I can 100% say that the US did nothing wrong. It did not actively seek to bomb this deal, and Australia approached the UK and then the US for a better one. If the US approached France, it would have literally been spitting in Australia's face. It was Australia with the deal, and yet France with their strange Anglo obsession turned this on the US. Which, tbh, is prolly the point; Macron is trying to paint this as a "US vs Europe" thing when in reality this was a "France and Australia" thing to push for more European integration. Based on US bashing, I suppose. Being embarrassed on the international stage is really not an excuse for this, nor is anything you mentioned. Its called being an adult. Words of retaliation was a given, withdrawing ambassadors which in history has only occurred when countries are either about to go to war or flat-out are considered enemies is when that occurs. Its stuff like this that makes me wonder if the US should just be treating France as a rival at this point. A foreign ministry can do whatever the heck they want; but lets not act like they're 100% honest and aren't portraying their country's interest even if its is a complete lie.
1
@clementl.9566 US was already aiding the UK and the USSR long prior to actively joining WW2. The fact it did that at all when it wasn't allied to any of the Allies at the time and it was in a conflict very far from home speaks more of the US than it does France; which had every interest in shutting down Germany due to its proximity. And no, the USSR did not have the means to support or maintain their troops far from their industrial heartlands; they would have been beaten back when they were overstretched. It was UK/US supplies that maintained their troops pushing into Western Europe. The USSR would not be "liberating" anything west of Poland, besides; according to the "liberated", I doubt France would have wanted Soviet liberation. Why exactly should Americans die for the French? What mindset do you have that dictates that American MUST die for you? They weren't allied at the time, and Franco-American relations were shot when the French demanded that Germany suffer after WW1 in Versailles. From an American perspective, France made its bed and lied in it. The fact they even agreed to leave France as a "victor" nation when the literal government capitulated to Nazi Germany was a privilege, and yet French like you act like the US should have bent over in pretzels for France when it never once in its entire history did for the US. Yes, even the vaunted "French aid" in the US Independence war only came after the Americans proved themselves against the British and won several victories. So cry me a river. The French obsess over "Perfidious Albion" but the Americans have far more reason to be wary of France than vice-versa. The US had France at its mercy, but chose to help elevate it again. When France lorded over the early US, it tried to extort it and kidnapped sailors for its wars. Btw, random Americans did indeed fund the Nazi Party; random people from across the world did. Including French civilians. What matters is state governments and their actions, not random civilians.
1
@travistucker1033 Payback for French backstabbing of Italy in Libya, I suppose. "Do as I say, not as I do" -the French
1
@starwarzchik112 Idk how that'd work since in WW2 the US wasn't allied with Western Europe at the time, but this time they are...so any "late comers" would have to have just flat-out ignored their alliance agreements lol
1
@smal750 French, much like Russians, have a habit of labeling common sense as some sort of hate against their nation and people. It's impressive how brainwashed with a "besieged" mentality such prideful people have.
1