Toxic Alliance: Europe’s Fraud Against the U.S.

The historic trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union agreed upon in Scotland marks a significant shift in the transatlantic relations. After the 2024 triumph of the conservative patriots in the United States, the long-standing alliance between Western democracies began collapsing.

European nations, well-known for their restraint in foreign policy, led the way to cautious denial of the new American vision, which President Trump called “the complete restoration of America.” It comes as a stunning change to the American people, especially given the fact that Europe’s high living standards are largely based on the U.S. support, dating back to World War II and continuing to the present day.

In recent years, the United States defense industry has seen a significant decline in European business. Countries like France, Germany and Poland, which have traditionally relied on Washington for support, have either cut their military spending or reduced their weapon purchases from American manufacturers. In addition, many of them have turned to Asian or Middle Eastern suppliers, whose military equipment often offers significantly poorer quality.

This is a crucial factor, as American arms manufacturers lose potential profits. Additionally, many NATO members have no real intention of fulfilling their new commitment to spend 5% of their GDP on defense, despite expressing public support for the initiative. Europe’s shift in defense procurement and spending can be seen as a technological and economic betrayal of its closest ally in the treaty.

Moreover, this issue concerns Washington’s peace initiatives, not just weapon purchases. Trump vowed to resolve the conflict and bring peace during his campaign, and he did make significant efforts. European nations, many of which had benefited from the U.S. support, have now become an obstacle to achieving even a ceasefire in war-torn regions like Ukraine or Gaza. However, other actors, including...

Mike Robertson has no understanding of military industrial issues. The United States does not have the same industrial base it had 40 years ago. Despite Boeing not being able to build 737 airliners fast enough for conversion to the P8 Poseidon and E7 wedge tail for the US and our allies, NATO still chose these as their baseline. However, our European allies understand the need to get equipment quickly and to maintain their own military industrial base. This means Using French anti-aircraft missiles instead of relying completely on the Patriot and using the Arrow 3 instead of the Thaad, because the US cannot produce enough to deal with china let alone arm Europe. The US has a single tank factory these days and does not have enough capability to quickly upgrade our Abrams tanks for the US and our allies. Poland still purchased 180 M1A2 sep3 Abrams tanks. Per, they are also purchasing an equal number of K2 tanks from South Korea and are going to be building roughly 800 of the K2 PL. Poland is going to be getting a superior tank in a reasonable period and build up their industrial base period what exactly is wrong with this? The KA-50 was chosen to be Poland's new light fighter and advanced trainer at a time when the United States had no computing project. And we still do not have a competing product in production. Fortunately, the South Korean aircraft is based on the F16 and uses an American engine. Poland is still waiting on some of the F16 block 70s that we promised to them. And they are waiting to get the F-35A which we are not producing quickly enough. Production of the himars isn't meeting demand, so Poland is purchasing a South Korean equivalent, which can fire many of the same missiles as well as South Korean and Polish missiles. Again make a logical argument that this is a bad decision for Poland and the US.

I can do a breakdown for every EU country.

People say that tanks are obsolete but they keep being necessary for taking territory and are still the best way to take on enemy tanks. Modern designs have active protection against top attack missiles and newer designs have anti drone warfare in mind including guns to shoot these down. Your argument about tanks can also apply to every other vehicle on the battlefield.

“In recent years, the United States defense industry has seen a significant decline in European business. Countries like France, Germany and Poland, which have traditionally relied on Washington for support, have either cut their military spending or reduced their weapon purchases from American manufacturers.”

It takes like 30 seconds of googling to check that it’s utter nonsense.

“Mike Robertson has no understanding of military industrial issues.”

Or he is simply “adjusting” facts on purpose. Even Germans are increasing US purchases. F-35 and Patriots - not sure if this already signed but looks like they have already decided to go for it. Patriot missiles are going to be co-produced in DE due to US industrial capacity issues.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.