www.bbc.com
russians would have lost millions more or lost to the Germans without the US. The US wouldn't be a country without the French as well.
They were cooked without us
With the millions more dead russians without US supplies there probably would have been another russian revolution and stopped the soviet union
Most of MAGA world I have seen has been anti-engagement with the Houthis and Iran. I think the coalition is a bit messy on ME policy to be honest
www.nbcnews.com
True, the numbers get a little bit convoluted depending on how far back you look, if you count money that is spent on Ukrainian refugee resettlement efforts (about $131B of Europe’s aid contribution), or if you count pledged money that has not actually gone to Ukraine but theoretically will in the future. Generally speaking, The US has spent more in direct military aid for munitions and weapons systems, but Europe has spent more humanitarian aid into Ukraine.
I don’t think this is necessarily a bad idea. If the purpose of NATO is to deter Russian aggression in Europe and our military footprint is starting to shift to the Indo Pacific, it would naturally follow that we vacate SACEUR and have a supreme allied commander from a European power. I think we are definitely overdue for a UCP rewrite and will probably see some major consolidation that makes sense (putting AFRICOM back into EUCOM like it was until 2007, potentially shifting HOA responsibility to CENTCOM, combining NORTH and SOUTHCOM, etc.)Trump admin considers giving up NATO command that has been American since Eisenhower
The move is being discussed as part of a possible restructuring of combatant commands that would help the Defense Department cut costs.
I appreciate the insight. I hang out over here a lot to learn about things like this that I'm not familiar with. I didn't see this posted so I thought I'd see what others thoughts were. I don't like the idea of us voluntarily removing ourselves from power positions in the world, but I'm not super well informed into the nuance of it all.
I’ve stated before in this thread, but I think my opinion is definitely less status quo, but it’s certainly not without its significant cons. I think Toronto pointed out, there are a lot of huge downsides that the average isolationist American doesn’t realize we would incur by withdrawing from the world stage.
What do you suggest the US does to counter China's moves? They have pretty much done whatever they have wanted the past 10 years or so. Wouldn't limiting our footprint around the globe just broadcast that we are no longer interested in force deterrence?
Much smaller force presence in the EUCOM AOR, shrink the size of the Army to support a larger Navy and Air Force, invest the Army’s savings to develop better hypersonic missiles and hypersonic missile defense, shift naval forces to Guam and Hawaii, work out an additional Forward Deployed Naval Forces presence in INDOPACOM (ideally Australia), invest in a CG-Next platform (ideally something like the San Antonio class hull form due to its excess hull capacity for power generation growth to support more powerful Ballistic Missile Defense radar systems than we currently have). Just a couple of spitball ideas.
