Washington is unhappy that some European arms programs limit U.S. participation.
  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    11·
    3 hours ago

    Didn’t we (the US) literally stop sharing intelligence with Germany? Like what do you expect?

    • fibojoly@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      1 hour ago

      German bases to close up, the US to leave all material on site as they abandon the country. What’s the ETA on air evac?

  • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.caEnglish
    16·
    6 hours ago

    Weren’t you people whining about how everyone else in NATO wasn’t pulling their weight and you were tired of carrying us?

    • 0x0@lemmy.zipEnglish
      8·
      4 hours ago

      Yeah but they meant stop asking us to do your dirty work and instead buy out stuff and do it yourselves.
      It’s the no-buy part he’s pissed off about.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.caEnglish
    2·
    5 hours ago

    I can’t afford to have a personal employee to do stuff for me, why could I afford a tech prompt to do tech things for me? Why would I want to?

  • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
    28·
    11 hours ago

    “After demonstrating Washington controlled disable switch, US manufacturers surprised at weapon sales drop”

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      8·
      8 hours ago

      The “kill switch” is the logistics pipeline.

      Look at Iran and their purchase and use of F-14s that we sold them before friendship ended. We (arguably) prematurely halted development and use of that airframe, and destroyed the aircraft when they were decommissioned instead of mothballing them, so that they would not be able to be used at spare parts. That’s the example case to compare against here. Granted, the situation and specifics are different, but there are still enough similarities to be a valid comparison point .

      • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
        8·
        6 hours ago

        Right, but it’s not just about end of life lines. Washington said to Europe that if they use their bought and paid for weapons in certain ways the US would block maintenance supplies. For things like the F35, this grounds them immediately as they need service after every flight.

        The US would never allow a foreign government to veto it’s use of weapons. Why should Europe?

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.caEnglish
      6·
      6 hours ago

      Maybe Europe paid attention to US threats to annex Canada.

      No where does it say NATO spending has to be only in the US.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.caEnglish
    79·
    14 hours ago

    Maybe tell Trump to stop being so openly hostile towards his own allies, then. This isn’t a game. If NATO countries can’t trust the US to have their backs, then why would anyone include them in their strategic planning? The US is simply not a reliable partner anymore. Not in trade or defense.

  • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    48·
    14 hours ago

    What a crazy time to be alive. The “slap a tarrif on everything” administration bitching about fair play. Why would EU consider the US over the EU for purchases? Even if we got rid of all the current idiocy, seems like it would be a matter of national security to have local production of matériel.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16·
      14 hours ago

      seems like it would be a matter of national security to have local production of matériel.

      You mean one of the cited reasons for slapping a tariff on everything? You mean other places can prioritize the same thing on their own? No. Can’t be. He’s got the bigliest brain to come up with these ideas.

  • Insekticus@aussie.zoneEnglish
    31·
    14 hours ago

    Well sounds like the current American regime shouldn’t have been cunts to the rest of the world, if you didnt want to get excluded.

    It’s giving “kid doesnt want to share toy, so they take it home and cry when nobody wants to play with them anymore” vibes. Pathetic.