Should NATO be folded in favor of a European Union unified command?

[Greyblades]

Well there you have it then. Our global network of bases and our military industrial complex's love of world-shatteringly expensive programs are what we get out of NATO. I said it like its a bad thing, you said it like its a good thing.

...I think the originator of your love for stupidly expensive millitary programs is less NATO membership and more your politicians owning the companies recieving the stupidly expensive millitary contracts. Without NATO they'd just make up different excuses.

[Greyblades]

Oh totally. And NATO ( or rather the Global Force, including our NATO commitments) are like enabling friends to a drunk.

Without Nato they'd just make up different excuses and they dont seem to be lacking in those. *cough*iraq*cough*

Your government will do it either way, 'rather we enable you to pay for our collective defense than not enable you and watch you fund another stupid invasion all by your lonesome.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yeah, well my tank is better than your tank.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yeah, well my tank is better than your tank.

Actually, my tank is better - or at least I'm more likely to live through being shot by you than vice versa.

[Kadagar_AV]

Right.. because being ranked 4th or 5th matters a whole lot when the comparisons look like this:

Attachment 12759

Speaking of Neocons, even our misguided crusade to lower the global price of oil benefits Europe more than us (or would have, rather)

Yes GC, it matters a whole lot.

First of all, because of what our most recent recruit here, Flavius Aetius said. No country feels good when left on its own. You NEED friends.

Secondly, look at the chart you posted. Sure Italy alone can't do much. Sure Germany alone can't do much. But when you start to add up all of these countries, you will see that they out-budget places like China and Russia.

You don't need our help in newbie bashing, you need our help when you meet an actual opponent.

Subtract the COST of taking USAnians to fight Russia in Russia, and now again compare it it with the staple in regards to having an already established defensive line, where your allies will do most of the bleeding, paying for themselves.

If you think the US has invested in Europe because you are the cowboys in white hats, you are mislead.

My last point would probably be that that chart shows a wartime nation (USA) compared to... Well... The rest. Don't mistake Europe's half-arsed support in Iraq or Afghanistan to what Europe's support would be if it actually came to a WWIII.

oh, and as a PS: That we get better oil deals is because we have better diplomats. US also gains from this in the long run. USA is the bully in the schoolyard, Europe is USA's friend who come in afterwards, pat the victim on the back, and go "Don't worry, you don't have to give him your lunch money. Just give me half and I will make sure he doesn't harass you."

Did I just compare USAnian international politics to a school yard bully? Hmm, I think I just did

[drone]

...I think the originator of your love for stupidly expensive millitary programs is less NATO membership and more your politicians owning the companies recieving the stupidly expensive millitary contracts. Without NATO they'd just make up different excuses.

I think you have that backwards.

[Greyblades]

I think you have that backwards.

Actually I think it goes both ways. Either a politician gets bribed, with campaign contributions or a cushy retirement job, or the politician props up a company they own a large share of with the intent to sell at the peak. Either way the results are generally the same.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...I think the originator of your love for stupidly expensive millitary programs is less NATO membership and more your politicians owning the companies recieving the stupidly expensive millitary contracts...

I think you have the ownership statement reversed.