• arakhis_@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 hours ago

    This is the funny part US doesn’t stop with the warning, no matter what your action is

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Treat it how we treat “Russia Warns” - this is probably bad for them and they suck.

  • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    9 hours ago

    What are you going to do about it, losers? You’ve lost all sway in the conversation with the shit you’ve pulled. Enjoy the view from your throne of eternal irrelevance that you’ve built for yourself

  • MrSilkworm@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Put tarrifs on American made weapons entering the EU.

    The European sleeping giant must awaken.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Rubio warned that excluding American firms from European tenders would be viewed negatively by Washington—an implicit criticism of the EU’s proposed procurement rules.

    Oh no! If we don’t buy any weapons, they might not want to sell us weapons anymore!

    A Nordic diplomat not present at the Baltic meeting confirmed that US officials recently conveyed their concerns, stating that any exclusion from EU arms purchases would be inappropriate.

    Yeah, the US has recently done just a few things that “would be inappropriate” as well, so I think we’re on good ethical ground here.

  • Lembot_0001@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    ·
    15 hours ago

    But isn’t the EU’s military self-sufficient the thing that the US has been talking about for so long?

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah it’s just so nakedly transparent how dishonest their posturing is about Europe not doing enough on defense.

      Turns out what they actually meant was “our entire economic system is predicated on infinite unending YoY growth targets, and we’ve run of ways to grow, so now you all have to start spending more money on feeding this fucking beast we created”.

      Also this theme of “how dare you take advantage of us all these years” is exactly the kind of talk domestic abusers use.

      • Renohren@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 minutes ago

        The US was far from reaching the end of ways to grow, they just have to keep financing universities and public research then load it up to applied science and VC money…

        They got rid of research. They are getting rid of universities financing. They are emptying the pockets of VCs.

        Oopsy.

    • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      14 hours ago

      They want the EU members to have large armies equipped with american weapons.

      • Bogus007@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        14 hours ago

        And then they build in a switch-off trigger so that when their allies, the Russians, and they will attack us - according to the so called Trump-Putin agreement - they can switch off all the weapons.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Even if a country has a very efficient military, or an ineffective one, “spend 5%!!!”.

        On USA weapons ofc.

        Because spending more needs time to ramp up, relevant, arms production. Or buy from the USA of course.

    • macniel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Yes but they want to make money as well. It’s a conundrum they are too stupid to solve.

      • Lembot_0001@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Maybe some tariffs then? You know, to balance the US-EU weapons trade? How much EU weaponry does the US buy? :)

        • Saleh@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Since war weapons are bought by the government with public money, putting tariffs on them doesn’t do anything. You can only make an effect with tariffs on purchases by private entities. In that sense the EU could put tariffs on weapon parts that European manufacturers buy from the US. I am not sure how big that market is though. AFAIK a lot of EU components end up in US weapons, for instance optics for military vehicles.

          • Lembot_0001@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 hours ago

            putting tariffs on them doesn’t do anything.

            It does! I’m not a lawyer and know nothing about EU law in this regard but in my country, tariffs would effectively raise the US weaponry prices making them impossible to win a tender (not sure if that is correct English terminology) unless they offer something that EU just don’t produce at all or the price is ridiculously high.

            • Saleh@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 hours ago

              You could more easily exclude US products from tenders for security/strategic reasons. That is easier to achieve and more honest.

        • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          Hey, the US can still bid on EU arms programs, but we’ll have to put a 200% tarriff in to balance the trade, because that’s totally how it works.

          Wait, let me check with chatGPT to confirm.

          Yep, that’s how it works!

    • Melchior@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      No, they want Europe to pay for its own defense. That still would include buying US weapons.

      Basically the US was the worlds police until recently. That gave them a lot of global influence mainyl the USD being the global currency. However it also required them to have a massive military and do things like supporting Ukraine, which obviously cost a lot. So they want other reasonable countries to pay for their own defense to keep their costs down. That however always meant still buying US weapons. The problem being that for some like the EU a working defense means less reliance on the US, hence less benefits.

      • skisnow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Basically the US was the worlds police until recently.

        For the most part, only they saw it that way. The very fact that America refuses to recognize the ICC tells you everything you need to know about how good faith their “world policing” actually is.

        What they’ve actually got a history of doing is describing foreign incursions to protect their own economic interests as “police actions” rather than formal declarations of war, in order to ignore various laws and international conventions. America has not been the good guy since 1945.

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    14 hours ago

    We fully support that you want to be independent from us, but you need to buy from us to do it (and still be dependent on us).

    Sounds like a an abusive relationship to me

    • Saleh@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There is still about 100,000 US soldiers stationed all over Europe. It was never about having any sort of equality and mutual respect in that relationship. Previous US administrations just chose to not say this too loudly.

  • zonnewin@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    15 hours ago

    It would be inappropriate to include US companies after the US has shown itself so unreliable. Also, the US should stop meddling in European policy. Get rid of your fascist regime, and we can talk again. Until then, we’d rather talk to Canada.

  • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    13 hours ago

    But maybe Europe simply does not want anymore.

    Maybe this monetary “initiative” has been created exactly for this not wanting American weapons anymore.

  • fox2263@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Well the US used to be the primary supplier. Until a month or so ago. Kind of brought it on yourself yeah?

  • notsure@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    13 hours ago

    if the US were interested in the peace of the world and not its own best interests, perhaps this would be a worthy statement…as of now, fuck helping anyone more interested in themselves as opposed to the greater good…this isn’t 1650, we are a planet of “rational” beings, not individual races defined by arbitrary borders…