If the cited “hundreds of billions” or even the rumored actual number (700 billion) really comes to pass, heck, even if it was just half of it, the EU would have done legitimatelly something unfathomable. I guess the rumors around the US withdrawal from the baltics is the real kicker, not Ukraine. Because while one is a “geopolitical” play, the other is a true existential threat.
Man, the US is really willing to have the EU of all people rearm themselves. Crazy how the Trump administration is throwing away soft power build for decades out of sheer ignorance / maliciousness.
LabClear6387 on
Newsweek is magarazzia shithole.
CeymalRen on
If this happens all the soft power of the US in Europe is gone.
I still dont get it. They were finishing of Russian armies with a fraction of their defence budget and not losing a single American. Why would they want to give up both the influence and gains?
nimdull on
It’s a late step in a good direction. Now time to ask the hard question. How to convince Europeans to join the army.
Gostodecarne on
Inflation incoming, poor people rekt again.
whooo_me on
And if it happens, Trump will take credit for making it happen.
Still, you can’t build a foreign policy trying to work around one man’s ego. The support has to happen.
roamingandy on
They should offer Ukraine the deal Trump wants them to take. Half their rare earth minerals and metals with all, or most of, the profits going towards funding an EU army which they are a core part of, and provides Ukraine concrete security guarantees.
Zelensky would bite their hands off, given that the alternative is handing it over to a Putin-backed Trump for a deal that likely isn’t worth the paper its signed on and wouldn’t be suggested at all if it wasn’t signed off as fitting with Putin’s plans.
morbihann on
Should have been the case 3 years ago. Better late than ever.
Stop relying on US for anything.
LeftTailRisk on
Prepares, Discusses, Considers, Proposes, etc.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
ezaquarii_com on
700B for Reihnmetall, but only until 2047?
PrimaryInjurious on
Finally. All it took was Trump being an idiot and Europe partially got its shit together.
classicjuice on
Now let’s hope we actually go through with this and can actually spend this money internally on equipment procurement and support our own European military industrial complex.
Redditforgoit on
Hundreds of billions is a lot of money. I am guessing the $300bn seized Russian funds will pay for much of it, now that they are openly talking about going after the eastern members of the former alliance known as NATO.
Heroic_Capybara on
I remain skeptical about what this entails, but if it’s true that this will be hundreds of billions then fucking hell, well done.
SpringRollsAround on
Fucking about time. Let’s see it through.
whyme_grr on
Come on, let’s go!
c10250 on
Many NATO countries, especially in Europe, consistently fail to meet the defense spending target of 2% of GDP, which they agreed upon to ensure collective security. The UK, once a top contributor, used to allocate a much larger share of its budget to defense, but over time, its military spending has been reduced due to shifting priorities and economic pressures. Meanwhile, countries like Germany and Italy have been criticized for not pulling their weight, relying heavily on the U.S. military for protection. It’s a bit ironic when Europeans, who often make fun of the U.S. for its lack of universal healthcare, seem to forget how much of America’s budget goes into defending their security. While Americans struggle with healthcare costs, they also bear the lion’s share of NATO’s defense spending, raising questions about the fairness and burden-sharing within the alliance. This has created growing resentment among many Americans, who are increasingly frustrated by the lack of reciprocity. The constant mockery of America’s shortcomings, particularly in terms of healthcare, without acknowledging the outsized role the U.S. plays in global defense, only deepens the sense of injustice and strain in the relationship.
If the U.S. were to cut its defense spending to the agreed-upon 2% of GDP, the savings would be astronomical. The U.S. currently spends around 3.5% to 4% of its GDP on defense, which amounts to over $700 billion annually. Reducing this to 2% would free up hundreds of billions of dollars—funds that could be redirected toward essential domestic issues, like funding universal healthcare. This shift could allow the U.S. to invest in healthcare programs that would provide coverage for all Americans, a move that could ease the burden of healthcare costs on individuals while improving the overall health system. The irony, of course, is that the U.S. is subsidizing global defense while struggling to address critical domestic needs. Many Americans see this as a misallocation of resources, and as resentment grows, the calls for change become louder. If NATO allies truly want a fair and sustainable partnership, it might be time for them to pull their weight, allowing the U.S. to focus more on improving life for its own citizens.
kenypowa on
should have done this three years ago.
FoundationNegative56 on
Now that what we need to see!
Livid-Language7633 on
About fucking time Europe stepped up.
US has given over 97 billion.
ProductGuy48 on
Shut up and take my money 💶
FollowingRare6247 on
Can European domestic production be increased at a quicker-than-natural pace? The faster it is, the sooner/more Europe stops depending on the US. Even beyond Trump’s first 4 years of his 2nd presidency.
22 commenti
If the cited “hundreds of billions” or even the rumored actual number (700 billion) really comes to pass, heck, even if it was just half of it, the EU would have done legitimatelly something unfathomable. I guess the rumors around the US withdrawal from the baltics is the real kicker, not Ukraine. Because while one is a “geopolitical” play, the other is a true existential threat.
Man, the US is really willing to have the EU of all people rearm themselves. Crazy how the Trump administration is throwing away soft power build for decades out of sheer ignorance / maliciousness.
Newsweek is magarazzia shithole.
If this happens all the soft power of the US in Europe is gone.
I still dont get it. They were finishing of Russian armies with a fraction of their defence budget and not losing a single American. Why would they want to give up both the influence and gains?
It’s a late step in a good direction. Now time to ask the hard question. How to convince Europeans to join the army.
Inflation incoming, poor people rekt again.
And if it happens, Trump will take credit for making it happen.
Still, you can’t build a foreign policy trying to work around one man’s ego. The support has to happen.
They should offer Ukraine the deal Trump wants them to take. Half their rare earth minerals and metals with all, or most of, the profits going towards funding an EU army which they are a core part of, and provides Ukraine concrete security guarantees.
Zelensky would bite their hands off, given that the alternative is handing it over to a Putin-backed Trump for a deal that likely isn’t worth the paper its signed on and wouldn’t be suggested at all if it wasn’t signed off as fitting with Putin’s plans.
Should have been the case 3 years ago. Better late than ever.
Stop relying on US for anything.
Prepares, Discusses, Considers, Proposes, etc.
I’ll believe it when I see it.
700B for Reihnmetall, but only until 2047?
Finally. All it took was Trump being an idiot and Europe partially got its shit together.
Now let’s hope we actually go through with this and can actually spend this money internally on equipment procurement and support our own European military industrial complex.
Hundreds of billions is a lot of money. I am guessing the $300bn seized Russian funds will pay for much of it, now that they are openly talking about going after the eastern members of the former alliance known as NATO.
I remain skeptical about what this entails, but if it’s true that this will be hundreds of billions then fucking hell, well done.
Fucking about time. Let’s see it through.
Come on, let’s go!
Many NATO countries, especially in Europe, consistently fail to meet the defense spending target of 2% of GDP, which they agreed upon to ensure collective security. The UK, once a top contributor, used to allocate a much larger share of its budget to defense, but over time, its military spending has been reduced due to shifting priorities and economic pressures. Meanwhile, countries like Germany and Italy have been criticized for not pulling their weight, relying heavily on the U.S. military for protection. It’s a bit ironic when Europeans, who often make fun of the U.S. for its lack of universal healthcare, seem to forget how much of America’s budget goes into defending their security. While Americans struggle with healthcare costs, they also bear the lion’s share of NATO’s defense spending, raising questions about the fairness and burden-sharing within the alliance. This has created growing resentment among many Americans, who are increasingly frustrated by the lack of reciprocity. The constant mockery of America’s shortcomings, particularly in terms of healthcare, without acknowledging the outsized role the U.S. plays in global defense, only deepens the sense of injustice and strain in the relationship.
If the U.S. were to cut its defense spending to the agreed-upon 2% of GDP, the savings would be astronomical. The U.S. currently spends around 3.5% to 4% of its GDP on defense, which amounts to over $700 billion annually. Reducing this to 2% would free up hundreds of billions of dollars—funds that could be redirected toward essential domestic issues, like funding universal healthcare. This shift could allow the U.S. to invest in healthcare programs that would provide coverage for all Americans, a move that could ease the burden of healthcare costs on individuals while improving the overall health system. The irony, of course, is that the U.S. is subsidizing global defense while struggling to address critical domestic needs. Many Americans see this as a misallocation of resources, and as resentment grows, the calls for change become louder. If NATO allies truly want a fair and sustainable partnership, it might be time for them to pull their weight, allowing the U.S. to focus more on improving life for its own citizens.
should have done this three years ago.
Now that what we need to see!
About fucking time Europe stepped up.
US has given over 97 billion.
Shut up and take my money 💶
Can European domestic production be increased at a quicker-than-natural pace? The faster it is, the sooner/more Europe stops depending on the US. Even beyond Trump’s first 4 years of his 2nd presidency.