I'm shocked!
-
I'm shocked! Well, not that shocked.
But i'm more interested how this plays out US-internally; the MIC is probably not too pleased with losing sales because US-produced gear is not trustworthy anymore, and the Trump presidency is not even 10% done yet. The MIC is also the largest employer in the US with around 3 million employees in the Department of Defense alone, not calculating anyone in the private sector. That can't be good for the current admin.
-
System shared this topic on
-
I'm shocked! Well, not that shocked.
But i'm more interested how this plays out US-internally; the MIC is probably not too pleased with losing sales because US-produced gear is not trustworthy anymore, and the Trump presidency is not even 10% done yet. The MIC is also the largest employer in the US with around 3 million employees in the Department of Defense alone, not calculating anyone in the private sector. That can't be good for the current admin.
The elephant in the room is China.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
-
The elephant in the room is China.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
The elephant in the room is China.
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
Now that's an easy one: it's either Usa or China for many topics.
Currently Usa pulls themselves out of nearly anything you can think about. So what would China do? Celebrate days and nights of course.
way to motivate Europe
They need no more "motivation" LOL
-
The elephant in the room is China.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
The mic in the us objects as they are cut out of any deal.
-
The elephant in the room is China.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
These sorts of deals leave out US industrial complex. So they are not interessted. The US military is interessted in cheap weapons as well and scale lowers prices. The MIC wants high European defense spending on US weapons.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
That requires the West to be somewhat united. The way the US deals with Ukraine right now, that is questioned by Europe. The trade war the US started with China, would be a lot easier, if Western "allies" like Europe, Japan and South Korea would help the US by also raising tariffs. However the US actually added tariffs on those "allies". It is clearly not US strategy.
The US wants Europe to spend more money on US made weapons.
-
Is there a more elegant way for the MIC to motivate Europe to create more weapon manufacturing capacities?
These sorts of deals leave out US industrial complex. So they are not interessted. The US military is interessted in cheap weapons as well and scale lowers prices. The MIC wants high European defense spending on US weapons.
If the USA and to an extend the entire West wants to keep their hegemonial power, China has to be contained.
That requires the West to be somewhat united. The way the US deals with Ukraine right now, that is questioned by Europe. The trade war the US started with China, would be a lot easier, if Western "allies" like Europe, Japan and South Korea would help the US by also raising tariffs. However the US actually added tariffs on those "allies". It is clearly not US strategy.
The US wants Europe to spend more money on US made weapons.
These sorts of deals leave out US industrial complex. So they are not interessted.
But the military, the M in MIC, is. The military needs to increase capacity and the easiest way is to make Europe produce their own weapons. They still can't build F35 and other things, so the I can still make enough money.
The trade war the US started with China, would be a lot easier
The USA decouples. There is no intention for an agreement.
The US wants Europe to spend more money on US made weapons.
That's what they say but it can't be the highest priority if they want to have the highest possible production capacities for a war.
-
The elephant in the room is China.
The MIC won't object as long as the parts are also not sourced in China.
Now that's an easy one: it's either Usa or China for many topics.
Currently Usa pulls themselves out of nearly anything you can think about. So what would China do? Celebrate days and nights of course.
way to motivate Europe
They need no more "motivation" LOL
If the choice is between USA and China, does Europe choose China? If there is a US Chinese war, is Europe fighting on China's side?
-
The mic in the us objects as they are cut out of any deal.
The MIC is the military and the industry. If the M needs the increased capacity in Europe, the I has to accept.
-
The MIC is the military and the industry. If the M needs the increased capacity in Europe, the I has to accept.
the MIC is not a single entity. The I part in the US is very big, but they are locked out of the deals in Europe. Thus the MIC in the US objects to this because it hurts them. Things they used to make a ton of money on in the US are things they are not making any money on at all.
-
the MIC is not a single entity. The I part in the US is very big, but they are locked out of the deals in Europe. Thus the MIC in the US objects to this because it hurts them. Things they used to make a ton of money on in the US are things they are not making any money on at all.
As far as I know, the I is only locked out of the additional money that the EU is going to spend. All the regular 2% military spending is free to go to the I.
-
If the choice is between USA and China, does Europe choose China? If there is a US Chinese war, is Europe fighting on China's side?
Europe is gonna delay choosing for as long as they can because both are useful partners for very different things. I can't imagine the EU would be on China's side as long as Xi/the communist party is in charge, but I also don't see them siding with the current US government. Not by a long shot. If current US and Chinese powers go to war they are gonna be trying to wait it out and defend themselves against any threat from any side. The US lost their allies, that is clear as day.
-
If the choice is between USA and China, does Europe choose China? If there is a US Chinese war, is Europe fighting on China's side?
If you read again, you will find that I have not said any such thing.
-
If you read again, you will find that I have not said any such thing.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. If it is either USA or China, and the USA is retreating and China is celebrating, what else do you mean?
