politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is why NATO has begun ramping up defense purchases recently.
Trump has been polling higher recently, and that scares the fuck out of Europe, because they know Trump will at best allow Putin to steamroll the region and, at worst, actively use US resources to help dictatorships expand their sphere of influence, culminating in WWIII.
They’re not willing to wait until that happens.
Very happy to see this comment! But is that not a great thing? What's your take?
On one hand I understand how important it is to defend democracy in Europe. On the other hand, why is Europe depending on the US for their own defense?
WWII and the Cold War is long past, Europe long rebuilt and healthy. If my neighbor is a raging asshole that may come over and kick my ass, I'm armed. I'm getting my neighbors armed and making sure we're all trained and on the same page. And fuck the guy 2-miles away with his wavering support. He won't be in my front yard when the Brown (Orange) Shirts come knocking.
Weird hearing Americans decry military spending (because we're geographically safe), and also decry Trump for wanting out of NATO, or at least demanding they pay their share.
FFS, the most expensive thing on Earth is a second-rate military. Make a damned choice.
They’re not. That’s kind of a weird thing to say, if you have any understanding of the situation.
The point of NATO is to present a unified front against the ever-present authoritarian threat in the region that’s been ongoing since WWII, and the US as a founding member has spent more on their military by orders of magnitude, so has had an outsized voice in NATO.
If they pull out those resources, that would hurt the coalition because, again, with their military spending being more than ten times the next ten countries combined, they’re the silverback gorilla in the room, and losing that against countries willing to throw their entire population as human cannon fodder into conflicts because they don’t care about human costs would hurt a lot. What happens when Russia decides to reclaim the rest of the countries Putin thinks are rightly part of their federation, because Putin has delusions of becoming an historical tsar? What happens when Trump’s US backs Putin in that effort?
Your few guns will not fix any of this. Your few guns will not even help stave off anything in your own county. That’s never how this has worked. This will be ushered in while you get your groceries and watch Netflix, with no clear enemy to fight, after an authoritarian has been voted in as president, as everything else is just a Tuesday.
I appreciate that you think you can head off the next major fascist regime because you’re armed, but that’s not how this works. You will never have a target to shoot at. You will be just like average Germans in the 1930s, waiting for the moment it has gone too far, and then in the late 40s trying to figure out when that moment actually happened.
e: also, there are no ‘orange shirts’. Your terminology is tres bizarre. It’s Brownshirts or red caps. That’s an embarrassing mistake to make.
I mostly agree with your response, except for chastising OP about the color of the shirt. They start by mentioning brown, then parenthetically say "orange" as an unveiled reference to Trump.
This is because Trump is known to use a LOT of bronzer that turns his skin an unusual orange color. So what OP was trying to do was to relate the brownshirts to the presumed task force that Trump would create if he became a dictator.
It wasn’t about the colour of the shirt; that’s what you took from my comment?
lol okay, my point had nothing at all to do with colours.
Brownshirt == fascist paramilitary force
Redcap == fascist paramilitary force
Orange shirt == ?? Uh, maybe someone who should retake cosmetics finals?
e: Oohh, you’re ai right? That’s something to be proud of I guess. (I’m joking)
Sorry, I was a bit drunk and mixed up a couple of things in my head. (I didn’t see the usernames and thought I was still talking to the same ‘yes and’ troll.)
I’m a dipshit and should know better than to be online when drunk. That’s my bad.
Nice insult, I guess? Is that the new thing instead of calling someone a bot?
Anyways, I guess the explanation of how OP took the traditional brownshirt and updated it to fit the color that represents Trump in order to propose that his fascist forces could be called 'orangeshirts' just kinda flew over your head, huh? It's ok, maybe you'll get it somewhere down the line.
No, sorry. I mixed things up in my head and didn’t realise you weren’t the troll I’d replied to, so I was overly aggressive. I was kinda drunk, and I should know better than to be online inebriated. I sincerely apologise.
e: I’ve downvoted myself as penance.
It happens. Apology accepted. You don't have to downvote yourself, lol.
Thank you for being mature enough to recognize the situation for what it was and to reply with honest self-reflection.
OP knows this deep down. People who cling to guns and control over their personal property do so because they feel out of control as to the big things, and if they are honest they can admit it.
Europe isn't depending on the US for their defense. The countries in Europe have their own militaries and two - three if you count Russia - are nuclear armed. They just don't have as high a percentage military spending as the US does. Many of them prioritise stuff like healthcare for their populations.
What an absolutely ignorant take. Pick up a high school history textbook, read it, then form an opinion.
block this guy. Troll of the highest order.
I'm somewhat lost on this issue. I feel embarrassingly ignorant about stuff like wars and defense budgets and NATO, etc. Maybe it's bc I'm young and probably didn't pay enough attention to history class in high school, but all this to say, if anybody knows of any good learning materials I'd be really grateful! Especially anything ELI5-style, geared toward people like me who have a hard time wrapping our heads around it.
One thing I'm curious about is just, basically what shalafi asked above. Is it true that the US spends a whole lot more on their military than other NATO allies; and if so, why is that? I understand there might not be a simple answer to a question like that, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget
The USA spends a lot of money on military. Why, that's a very nuanced question with a lot of answers. Since it's the reasons are:
Fear mongering
Politicians Funneling money to give their constituents jobs.
Republicans perpetually want to spend more. Democrats can't cut the budget.
Maintaining global influence
The party of fiscal responsibility. But medicare is too expensive, guise!
It's funny how the US military is the most expensive military in the world then. You guys spend 10x more money than the next guy.
In fact the only reason your military is "better" at all is simply because of that fact. Maybe you should look up what countries are spending on their military before you make stupid comments like that.
I can see your point, but I'd hardly describe this as "a good thing".