> JDG wrote: > > > >In other News, the Post has also reported (sorry couldn't find the link), > >that the US will basically be giving up on envouraging its NATO allies to > >maintain a respectable level of military spending. > > > Alberto Monteiro > > IMHO, this is a good thing. The last times that Europe spend > a large part of their money into military spending it only caused > devastating European Wars. >
What he said. And doing so will - actually WILL - raise tensions in Europe. France and Germany have, for the first time in hundreds of years decided to cooexist peacefully. Russia can cut back as it must do because it can see that noone (spelt Germany) is building up a force capable of invading Russia. Poland and Belarus and Ukraine etc also do not have to build up militarily because they can see that noone (spelt Germany and Russia) is likely to use them as battlefields. Europe has no need to spend anything like what the US spends. But then, I've argued that the US has no need to spend anywhere near what it currently spends, let alone what it plans to. The sooner ALL nations start spending for their own border defence, and limited (with a capital L) protection of external interests, the better. Frankly, if not for the US being a democracy, I'd tend to worry about the US military buildup even more as it absolutely reeks of Germany 1933-39: not the philosophy, but the extent, and the intrinsic belief that whatever the US wants to do should be done. Brett
