comment: >
  
  Not a bad idea, it be good for eu countries to have stronger military forces that aren’t nato
context: Europe has to be more self reliant. That doesn't mean forget its alliances, but we have to prepare as though we are alone. >
  
  An improved readiness is clearly needed, but I concur, it does not mean forgetting alliances. I still think EU itself should remain an economic union, but a larger security union is already present as NATO, it's just that NATO is really dominated by US contributions, which is our own fault, and that France pulled out in many ways to do their own thing. >
  
  The Alliance is not something I have to depend on. It's something I have to choose, something I work with. We have to rethink our strategic autonomy," the French President said.
  "Europe should get more autonomy in matters of technology and defense potential, including from the United States," Macron added.
  Recall that earlier Macron promised to supply Ukraine with air defense systems and Caesar self-propelled artillery installations at the beginning of 2023.
  Also, at a joint press conference with Zelenskyy, Joe Biden explained why he opposes providing Ukraine with all the American weapons requested by Kyiv.
  This was reported by the press service of the Danish Ministry of Defense on Wednesday, December 21.
  Government representatives held consultations with parties in parliament and reached a decision to donate DKK 300 million (USD 42.8 million) to support Ukraine.
  The Minister of Defense of the Kingdom, Jacob Ellemann-Jensen, announced that on Monday he had a virtual meeting with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
  "He emphasized the need to maintain support from the outside world. That's why I'm glad that Denmark can make another big contribution to Ukraine's struggle for freedom," the press service quotes Ellemann-Jensen as saying.
  DKK 300 million allocated by Denmark will be directed to the International Fund of Ukraine (IFU) created by the United Kingdom.
  As Ukrainian News Agency earlier reported, on August 11, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced an increase in financial support to Ukraine by another EUR 110 million.
  We also wrote that Denmark sent its military to the United Kingdom to help train servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine as part of the Interflex operation.
  Later it became known that part of the Ukrainian military will undergo training on the territory of Denmark. >
  
  Fwiw, the amount of money in the just passed US budget for Ukraine is 40,000x greater than that from Denmark. France will need to step up.
  Edit: MY MATH IS WAY OFF. ABOUT 1100x. >
  
  Honestly, the problem with Europe in the context of Defense is Germany.  They're the DeFacto leaders of the region but are either too corrupt or too timid to enforce their own region.  
  So, Europeans depend on the US, which fills the power vacuum.  This works great until the US has some domestic issue, gets distracted, and pulls back.  Like 2016-2020.    
  Maybe it's time for a standing EU military. >
  
  Even were Germany not timid, they don't have the budget to be hegemonic the way the US does >
  
  Germany alone doesn't, but the EU as a whole certainly has the economic potential to field a military that rivals the US. They just lack the political will to do so. >
  
  Yes, also every American administration has been reminding Europe that it needs to invest more in its defense industry. The reason why the US defense industry is leading in terms of the weapons provided, is that the US never stopped investing in its defense industry. >
  
  I think respective US administrations want Europe to invest in the US defence industry. >
  
  They should, at this point they will not be as strong, might as well help the US >
  
  They are happy to grift off of American defense spending, in order to provide healthcare to their people. 
  And yet they still look down their noses at us. >
  
  Bit disingenuous, france can afford 2% gdp on defense & healthcare for its people. THe US can also afford healthcare for its people while maintaining its top dog military position.   
  The barriers to increased spending on Defense/healthcare in France/US is a political one, not a financial one. >
  
  France can afford 2% gdp on healthcare and defense only because the US is carrying most of France's defense load. If not for the US, France couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag. 
  And I'm French. >
  
  I'm not sure. Which part is US military is carrying France's defense load?
  The only reason France wasn't spending more is because it felt safe having nuclear deterrence. But 2022 showed its not enough >
  
  Correct. 2022 has shown that only the US has enough. >
  
  Has enough what? >
  
  Freedom units >
  
  France calls for this every year. Germany nods and plays on it's phone. The UK ignores them and runs off after the US, and Italy sleeps through the geopolitical discussion.
  Europe has no geopolitical brain. Europe has no government, for now. >
  
  The EU is getting a ridiculous deal. Basically all meaningful investment in R&D in tech, pharmaceuticals, energy and almost any other faucet of research is done by US companies or through US investment public or private. 
  And not only that but their entire defence is entirely handled by the US. They don’t have to invest because they know it’s in the US’ best interest to protect them.
  The EU really gotta start playing on the world field. Their biggest source of power seems to be annoying people with random antiquated ideas on setting the world standard on shit like chargers and GDPR. 
  Getting a committee together with absolutely no experience at all on the shit they legislate on and having them set a world standard on shit they haven’t the slightest about isn’t close to the geo political power we should be wielding. We’re getting carried in every way by the US and all we do is bitch about them. 
  Biden should cut us off like a bitter child. Reduce their military spending, don’t support us in our conflicts. Have us foot some of the western defence bill. Reduce their corporate taxes to bring American companies back from our tax havens. >
  
  Hey that mandated charger shit is good and everyone should follow suit. Iphones having a different plug is so dumb. >
  
  It’s not a bad idea but the amount of attention it got is absurd for something so minor. It’s like the crown jewel of EU accomplishments… >
  
  The crown jewel of EU accomplishments is peace, yet nobody is ever talking about it because they assume it's a given, when before the EU, it really was not. >
  
  Considering whats happening with Russia, sure doesnt seem like peace is a given. >
  
  France and Germany haven't been at war for nearly 80 years, EU did alright. >
  
  As a US person, I am all for this.  Mutuality is a much-needed goal for us all to achieve together in geopolitics today.  Not just when it comes to military matters but also global finance, trade, and so on.
  However.  I'm not sure I would want to follow the plan laid down by the guy who says that everyone needs to spend more time soothing Russia's hurt feelings.  I'm not sure that such a person's vision of security independence is something that France or anyone else should rely on. >
  
  Not to mention that most European countries aren’t doing the minimum required by nato >
  
  Tbf, that was a target agreed in 2014 for 2024. That said, plenty are looking to miss it, but the UK, Poland, Greece, Turkey, and I think the Baltics spend over, while France is spending 1.9% and still seems to be able to use it's expeditionary forces and support it's nuclear deterrent. Germany is really the major issue, though Spain and Italy getting up to French levels would be nice as well. >
  
  
  and still seems to be able to use it's expeditionary forces
  
  Not really no. France lacks the logistics to even move their forces across the Mediterranean into Africa without US help. France needed US logistics and transport to airlift their forces and equipment into Mali when they entered their war there since they didn't have the ability to do it themselves. Really only the UK actually has the ability other than the US to support a small-medium scale war by themselves and even that is not certain anymore since their military is much smaller than it used to be when the Falklands war happened. >
  
  Yeah, that would be great. -America >
  
  Frankly yeah.
  I support Ukraine and how we're supporting them is necessary but I'm sick of US spending on being the world police while y'all spend on enjoying free healthcare. >
  
  Oh god, “the world police.” It’s a superpower, the US defends its interests and supremacy. >
  
  Facts. As Americans, we have to see the benefit of being the biggest kid in the playground. The US throws its weight around whenever someone sneezes the wrong way and that can only be achieved by the massive spending. The deterrence against hostile world powers a massive military provides is beneficial for NATO since they fall under the umbrella, but we can’t forget it benefits us as well. >
  
  NATO countries should all be contributing a certain percent to ukraine too…everyone loves hating on the US but they are always the ones helping out. >
  
  As an American I fully support this. Build some of your own defense infrastructure guys. >
  
  Wasn’t this what Trump wanted in the first place? Either pay up or use your own security. >
  
  Yup, for all his flaws, he was right about this >
  
  Wasnt he threatening to pull out of NATO? It wouldnt surprise me if his handler tried to get him to do that. >
  
  He was. He was wrong about pretty much everything else, but Europe being self sufficient defensively is important, even if his motivations were, let's say "suspect." >
  
  Hurry up with ITER! >
  
  De Gaulle wanted to create a united European military as well….. but only if it was led by the French. >
  
  And then their next best idea to stop a Pact invasion was to turn West Germany into a nuclear wasteland, no wonder people said no in the first place >
  
  When Macron says "Europe" he means "France". >
  
  How about starting by contributing 2% of GDP to the military, as required by NATO. >
  
  That was a commitment made in 2014 for 2024. France spent 1.9% iirc in 2021. UK, Poland, Greece, Turkey, and some Baltic states I think spent over 2%. France probably will hit the target by the allotted time, they spent 2% in 2020 but it's possible it dipped due to recession. >
  
  The 2% marker has stood for a long time. France has failed consistently to fulfill its commitment. >
  
  The 2% goal set for the year 2024, yes. >
  
  Wrong. The 2% mark has stood for a long time. That France doesn't fulfill it until some time in the nebulous future is but "merde." >
  
  I think he's less interested in Europe getting less dependent on America, and more in Europe getting more dependent on France
  "Independent" Europe is Europe that buys everything from France >
  
  Well, not reslly. France buys it's engines from Germany (and quite a lot of Europe buys from Germany makers, Germany's issue is shit procurement, not lack of military industrial base). Sweden and the UK also have quality arms (and often cooperate), and Poland has been making deals with Korea to make them a big manufacturer as well.
  The issue is France wants a united European army, which if France was to be a member, would require France to head, since they don't really trust others intentions with their troops historically. It would also require a lot more centralisation than member states might suffer, given the EU still has issues with Eurosceptism that might resurge if major reserved powers leave their countries. >
  
  The time for a European army is over. It's clear you need an overwhelming force to deter Russian aggression. Bigger the better. NATO should be looking to incorporate Japan, South Korea, and Australia, not a reduction in size. >
  
  NATO is limited by treaty to North Atlantic nations, you are only obligated to defend territory in North America and Europe. It already doesn't defend the British overseas territories outside of those areas like the Falklands or French Guyana, there is no incentive for countries outside those areas to join. Australia does have agreements with the US, Japan, and India through QUADs and Anglo-American support through the AUKUS agreements. I think the UK also has deals with Japan. The far east is covered by bilateral deals with the US, UK, and other countries because much of NATO is focused purely on local total defence (Finland, Poland) and won't really be geared to cooperate and coordinate on the other side of the world. >
  
  While Macron's doing the talk, Poland's doing the walk. >
  
  What? and rely on France and Germany who at the start of the Russian invasion dragged their legs in supporting Ukraine. At the end of the day, if I lived in an ex-soviet country, the US (and the UK for that matter) are far more reliable allies as they have shown themselves as being willing to defend other European countries, no questions asked. If France wants Europe to be less reliant on the US, they need to show that through their actions and lead by example. They're a huge military power ffs. They need to show a willingness to co-operate with other European weapons projects from a position of partnership, not superiority. I mean look at the FCAS project. France spent ages trying to get all the manufacturing in their country, trying to leave Germany in the dirt. >
  
  The French and the Germans have been saying this since after Iraq invasion in 2003 yet perused a foreign policy and military spending that left Europe completely unprepared to deal with Russia
  I would assume the US is thinkng talk is super cheap.   show up with receipts. >
  
  About damn time. It's ridiculous the world gets annoyed when America acts like the world's policy but then anything bad happens suddenly it's everyone else depending on America to do something. 
  You can't have it both ways. Hopefully European countries will start living up to their agreements and pay what they agreed to for their defense funding.
  Everyone points out the US spends a ton on defense funding but they do that in part because they have to pick up everyone else's slack. Obviously there is more to it than that, but that is definitely part of it. >
  
  Agreed except for the “everyone” part. Plenty of people all over the world dont rely on the US military. Europeans on thd other hand.. >
  
  Yeah and just a couple of days ago he stated that Russia needs security guarantees and Ukraine needs to negotiate with Russia. WTF!
  If Europe continues to rely on France and Germany for "security" and "energy" solutions they may as well sign annexation to Putin. Or become another Hungary. EU needs to listen to Baltic States and Eastern European countries that experienced firsthand Russian "generosity". France and Germany are a way too compromised by Russian influence and money. >
  
  I believe this is a reason why eastern Europe is skeptical and doesn't want the US to go anywhere, per se. >
  
  This, USA is one of the most reliable ally in this region. Macron is speaking for himself, not for whole of Europe. >
  
  Macron doesn’t actually care about Russia because this time around they aren’t sharing a border with the country that might invade Europe. They’ve got enough buffer states between Russia and them. Sell weaponry to all of them by replacing the US are chief arms dealer in Europe to get rich, and you get plenty of free weapons test data and advance notice should Russia move your way. >
  
  As an American, yes I agree. Fund your respective armies. >
  
  "Europe should get more autonomy in matters of technology and defense potential, including from the United States," Macron added.
  Macron is trying to sell his nation's arms exports. He mainly cares about to which supplier the funds are going to, not the extent of the funding. If his nation's products aren't seen as go to as America's, he'll market his as the local option and pressure others to buy local. >
  
  Shit on the US all you want, but we’re juggernauts when it comes to our industries. Buy local all you want, but the US has everyone beat for decades to come. >
  
  Then France and Germany need to step up instead of trying to appease dictators like Putin and waiting for Americans or British to actually provide muscle >
  
  We’re speaking about France here. >
  
  meant as a friendly jab at all parties involved >
  
  The irony is that France doesn’t even meet the 2% of GDP commitments >
  
  Macron is still pissy about those subs >
  
  there were same talks 2-3 years ago when Trump was president. anything changed? >
  
  Man this dude is still salty about that Submarine deal isnt he lol >
  
  Australia pulled the plug and sided with their cousins.
  Then Poland buys Korean panthers, and heavy guns.
  Bad time to be a western european mil complex salesman. >
  
  Well when you've got German's offering to send vehicles but the ammunition for them vehicles is being blocked by a 3rd party country like Switzerland is it any wonder why >
  
  This is just the French weapons for export narrative.  Nothing would make us Americans happier than for Europe to meet at least it’s 2% defense budget target ( or more) and provide a proper deterrent to their own continent.  In the great game, America needs to more aggressively pivot to the east to deter the real authoritarian threat…China.  If Europe could handle its business, US could send 2 more carrier groups to Pacific along with another 8 attack subs a a few boomers.  Watching Europe is like watching a someone purposely hurt themselves over and over again.  The energy policies, lack of even basic defense (Mostly Germany here), strategic blunders and just a common sense that lacks on these matters.  A stronger more sustainable Europe is in the free worlds interest…America would love to see increased growth, productivity and a rise of living standards amongst the group.  For all our bickering and competition commercially, the west and the free world experiment is a new one and as Reagan so brilliantly said - peace comes through strength.  Tyrants are tempted when they think they have opportunity…ie Europe and Germany energy situation.  I mean we have a hot, imperial, wipe a country from history war in continental Europe in the 21st century.  It’s like gross incompetence that even led us here. >
  
  Goddamn, this was perfect. >
  
  With Russia exposed, who is in the region that can match the EU? Seems what they lack is unity on the action to be taken. >
  
  I think the Russian Ukrainian war has shown the lack of alignment and cohesion between certain NATO countries and how fragile it really is. I’m not sure who would take Macron’s foreign policy advice, though - seems like he’s trying to anoint himself as Merkel’s successor. This is the guy who behind the scenes was singing tunes for Ukraine to give up their land right away and criticized African countries for staying neutral, while he’s spent a lot of time cozying up to MSB. >
  
  America has only been asking this for over a decade. >
  
  Yes, I'm sure everyone in Europe agrees.
  Until you ask who's going to pay for it >
  
  Hopefully Americans don’t take this the wrong way. In all honesty we should hope for the stability of our allies. Them needing us less also means that in worst case scenarios we can count on them more. 
  At least that’s this dumb redditor’s take… >
  
  Nah it makes sense. We'd still be allies, but the way I see it, he's just saying they want to start pulling their own weight more. >
  
  Yeeee western solidarity seems to have never been stronger. Which is a good thing. We need our Allies strong. Strong Allies, strong deterrents. >
  
  Bah, would be more credible if Macron would show more backbone. Relative to it’s size Frances support of Ukraine has been dismal. 
  Also Macrons limp wristed take on Putin and Russia are not helping. >
  
  Won't happen, the EU just isn't interested in spending tons of money of military R&D. they've proved that for 70 years now by slowly lowering funding and not making much in new tech. 
  To be fair, it's difficult to find motivation to dump tons of money on it when a primary ally is already spending far more and in generaly willing to sell the better tech >
  
  Did de Gaulle possess him? If you wanna reduce it, help to reduce Russian threat more by helping Ukraine more . >
  
  Yes I agree. I feel his policies towards the US are rather De Gaulle ish. The anger over the submarine fiasco and his reaction And the whole revival of the French speaking quarters of north America.. And his whole “ I will tell America exactly what I think.” Although he really did try to stop Putin from invading early on. >
  
  *team america theme song* >
  
  Lick my butt and and suck on my balls >
  
  Fuck yeah! Freedom fuck yeah! >
  
  Strangely the US is in favor of this as well.
  It's almost like we don't have imperial ambitions and would love for our friends to be able to stand up for themselves a bit better. >
  
  *We want to shift our focus to containing china and securing global semiconductor supply.  
  Europe is now of second-tier geopolitical importance to the United States. >
  
  Even without that, we would still prefer them to be self sufficient. Better to have strong allies. >
  
  I don’t understand Macron. He says Europe should reduce it’s dependence on the US concerning security matters but at the same time the French can do nothing about the Russian invasion of Ukrainian. >
  
  They actually can but Macron will not be able to explain why french solders die in this war. >
  
  Seems to me after recent announcements from Macron that he has gained couple of millions of benefits from Ruzzia and now preparing Europe for annexation by Putinists.
  Recent ideas from Macron:
  1) We should be open for negotiations with Russia.
  What it most likely will lead to: Ukraine will most likely give up it's land. We in East Europe (Estonian here) know that any "peace" with Russia is only as long as they will regain the strength to attempt something new. But they will not stand by their word. Democracy and the rule of law is NOT their game. So if we play by these nice rules, we will lose.
  2) Europe must not rely on USA in defence.
  What it means: We will piss USA off and will be sooner or later on the hook by Russian covert enterprises or energy once again. And next time if Ruzzia wants to grab some land, there will be no Uncle Sam to help us out.
  If Macron has NOT got any benefits from Russia, then he is just very naive (and unlikely to be a leader of European country). So it probably is the scenario 1.... Sad-sad times for europe. >
  
  Lol until the French get into trouble again, retreat, and wait for the US to save them again. >
  
  Please can Europe do this so the US can stop spending so much on military for the whole world and so we can have healthcare like you all? >
  
  I mean....sure....go for it but the fact remains that EU has said that before and can't seem to do it. 
  Also, Macron and Germany want to appease a lot more than they want to secure. So I don't think it'll work out in any of their favors UNLESS they actually follow through and beef up their defense spending. Which they won't..... >
  
  There’s a whole list of lower priority issues that Europe can’t even agree on. I agree with you, this isn’t gonna happen. Especially with France and Germany seeming to want to lead it. >
  
  
  Especially with France and Germany seeming to want to lead it.
  
  The only problem for now is that the Germans don't want it.
  The day there is a deal between France and Germany to build such supra national army, this will happen. >
  
  Germany knows, they will never use it. Why make an Army, when you will never use it to defend East Europe... its much easier to sell them out.
  Politics need to change in both Germany and France, before this talks become real. >
  
  No one would trust Europe to do that Macron. It says a lot that Eastern Europe would go to the likes of the US and UK first for help other the rest of Europe.
  Western Europe failed Eastern Europe miserably. Ukraine would have been Russia now without the likes of the US.
  Also, this is Macron wanting Europe to buy French mostly. >
  
  YES! The US should not be doing Europe’s security work for them. European efforts alone should be enough to kick Russia’s ass in Ukraine . That fact that the US is doing more for Ukraine than the rest of Europe is embarrassing for Europe